Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
05/16/2023 - Work Session - Meeting Materials
SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WORK SESSION May 16, 2023 Tuesday 3:00 PM Council meetings are held in a hybrid meeting format. Hybrid meetings allow people to join online or in person at the City & County Building. Learn more at www.slc.gov/council/agendas. Council Work Room 451 South State Street Room 326 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 SLCCouncil.com 3:00 pm Work Session Or immediately following the 2:00 pm Redevelopment Agency Meeting 7:00 pm Formal Meeting Room 326 (See separate agenda) Welcome and public meeting rules In accordance with State Statute and City Ordinance, the meeting may be held electronically. After 5:00 p.m., please enter the City & County Building through the main east entrance. The Work Session is a discussion among Council Members and select presenters. The public is welcome to listen. Items scheduled on the Work Session or Formal Meeting may be moved and / or discussed during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance or availability of speakers. The Website addresses listed on the agenda may not be available after the Council votes on the item. Not all agenda items will have a webpage for additional information read associated agenda paperwork. Generated: 15:34:08 Note: Dates not identified in the project timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. Item start times and durations are approximate and are subject to change. Work Session Items Click Here for the Mayor’s Recommended Budget for Fiscal Year 2023-24 1.Informational: Updates from the Administration ~ 3:00 p.m. 15 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. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Recurring Briefing Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a 2.Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget: Police Department ~ 3:15 p.m. 60 min The Council will receive a briefing about the proposed Police Department budget for Fiscal Year 2023-24. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 16, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 18, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 16, 2023 and Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD 3.Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget: Proposed Compensation for City Employees ~ 4:15 p.m. 20 min The Council will receive a briefing about the proposed Compensation budget, which accounts for personnel and payroll costs, for Fiscal Year 2023-24. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 16, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 18, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 16, 2023 and Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD 4.Tentative Break ~ 4:35 p.m. 20 min. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - n/a Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a 5.Ordinance: Salt Lake School District Signs ~ 4:55 p.m. 20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance to allow pole signs on school properties. Public and private schools are located in various zoning districts around the City, and not all of the zoning districts permit freestanding pole signs. The signs are used to educate the community about activities at the school. Petitioner: Paul Schulte representing the Salt Lake City School District. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 16, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, May 16, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, June 13, 2023 6.Ordinance: Downtown Building Height and Street Activation Text Amendment Follow-Up ~ 5:15 p.m. 30 min. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning text of various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to building heights in the Downtown Plan area. This proposal includes amendments to the following zoning districts: D-1 (Downtown Central Business District), D-2 (Downtown Support), D-3 (Downtown Warehouse), D-4 (Downtown Secondary Business District), G- MU (Gateway Mixed-Use), CG (General Commercial) and the FB-UN1 and FB-UN2 (Form based districts). Additionally, the proposed code revisions aim to accommodate growth and respond to new development pressures, while developing standards for public spaces. The Council may consider modifications to other related sections of the code as part of this proposal. Petitioner: Mayor Erin Mendenhall. For more information on this item visit https://tinyurl.com/downtownbuildingheights FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, April 4, 2023 and Tuesday, May 16, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 4, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, April 18, 2023 and Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, June 6, 2023 7.Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget: Justice Court Department Written Briefing - The Council will receive a written briefing about the proposed Justice Court Department budget for Fiscal Year 2023-24. The Justice Court handles misdemeanor criminal citations, small claims, traffic citations and traffic school for moving violations. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 16, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 18, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 16, 2023 and Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD 8.Board Appointment Interviews for the Sister Cities Board ~ 5:45 p.m. 10 min The Council will interview the following candidates prior to considering their appointment to the Sister Cities Board: •Ricardo Becerra •Ronald Joe Zeidner •Ahimara Suarez FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 16, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, May 16, 2023 Standing Items 9.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair Report of Chair and Vice Chair. 10.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director - - Report of the Executive Director, including a review of Council information items and announcements. The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to City Council business, including but not limited to scheduling items. 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 (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; f. discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and g. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 1:00 p.m. on Friday, May 12, 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. Administrative Updates May 16, 2023 www.slc.gov/feedback/ Regularly updated with highlighted ways to engage with the City. Community Engagement Highlights Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canBallpark NEXT / RDA Ballparknext.com Planning slc.gov/planning www.slc.gov/feedback/ Updates Thriving in Place •45 day comment period open •Closing June 26th Ballpark Next •Voting is open! •Open until May 25th 1700 South Resurfacing •300 West to 900 West •Comments being solicited City Creek Water Treatment •City Creek closed to traffic from site 16 from May 18 -24th Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canMayor’s Office slc.gov/mayor May Community Office Hours Location Date Time Café on 1st May 19 9am-11am Jolley's (1300 S & 1700 E)May 22 3pm-5pm Glendale Library May 24 4:30pm-6:30pm www.slc.gov/feedback/ Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canMay Events These events are a collection of City Sponsored, ACE events, and publicly permitted events. Event Date Location Sabores de Mi Patria/Flavors of My Homeland Workshop Series 5/17-9/27 Wasatch Community Gardens' Campus Acoustic Music Strolls on Jordan River Parkway 5/18 Jordan River Parkway Living Traditions Festival 5/19-5/21 Washington Square IFSC Climbing World Cup 5/19-5/21 Pioneer Park Sugar House Rocks Concert Series 5/19 Monument Plaza 2023 Queer Spectra Arts Festival 5/20 Publik Space IMPACT Black Women Experience 5/26 The Edison House SLC Track Club & Deseret News Spring Series 5K (Race 1 of 3)5/27 Memory Grove Park HRC / Winter Overflow Utilization •May 8th-12th: HRC's: 100% Rapid Intervention/ EIM •EIM- Occupied Vehicles 700 S Bangerter Hwy •42 HEART-tracked camps •RIT locations: o VOA Outreach Engagement: 8 o RIT Site Rehabilitations: 12 (+17) Resource Fair: Friday May 12th 9:30 - 12:30 @ Library Square Taufer Park Block Party: Saturday May 13th HEART + Central City CC Kayak (Bicycle) Court: May 19th- @ Sugarhouse Park, Fairmont Park/ Hidden Hollow Homelessness Update for more information contact: Salt Lake Valley Coalition to End Homelessness (SLVCEH) endutahhomelessness.org / salt-lake-valley Utah Office of Homeless Services (OHS) jobs.utah.gov/homelessness/ index.html CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL BUDGET STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY24 TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke Budget and Policy Analyst DATE:May 16, 2023 RE: Fiscal Year 2024 Police Department Budget BUDGET BOOK PAGES: Key Changes 59, Department Overview 221-226, Staffing Document 299-301 ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Police Department is funded by the General Fund as well as various federal and state grants. The total FY2024 General Fund budget for the Police Department is proposed to be $110,976,812 which is a $6,999,770 or 7% increase over the FY2023 budget. Most of the change is due to increased compensation of existing employees and new FTEs. The proposed budget includes a net increase of 11 new FTEs of which four are not sworn officers for a total staffing level of 761 FTEs (a 1.5% increase over the number of FTEs in the FY2023 budget). This includes 589 sworn officers, 152 civilian staff and 20 authorized but unfunded early hire police officers to mitigate turnover fluctuations. Note that 72 of the sworn police officers work at the Airport (six are new FTEs proposed in this budget). The Airport Fund fully reimburses the General fund for those positions. See Additional Info section for a summary of the Police Department budget and staffing levels from FY2013-FY2024. The Department leadership shared the following top priorities that informed the FY2024 budget proposal: -Optimizing departmental resources using technology, -Expanding an alternative response model to public safety [Civilian Response Team], -Continuing to build community relationships, and -Expand recruitment, retention, and hiring. KEY ELEMENTS OF THE FY 24 PROPOSED BUDGET $150,000 for New License Plate Recognition Program The Department currently owns four vehicle mounted license plate recognition cameras from two different vendors as part of a pilot program. The FY2024 $150,000 request would allow 50 license plate recognition cameras to be leased and placed around the City. The resulting data is allowed to be retained for nine months under state law. The data may be retained for longer when used as evidence in a criminal investigation. The Department provided the following description of the program: “License Plate Recognition (LPR) technology is a system that uses cameras and software to capture and read license plate information from vehicles. The system typically includes one or more cameras mounted on a stationary object, such as a pole or a patrol car, that captures license plate information of passing vehicles. The LPR system then uses software to analyze the information and extract the license plate information, which is then checked against a database of known or wanted vehicles. LPR technology can be used for a variety of law enforcement purposes, including identifying stolen or wanted vehicles, detecting unregistered or uninsured vehicles, and tracking the movement of suspects or vehicles of interest, such as amber alerts.” Project Timeline: Briefing: May 16, 2023 Budget Hearings: May 16 and June 6, 2023 Potential Action: June 13, 2023 Page | 2 $7.3 Million Increase for Personal Services The proposed budget includes a $7.3 million (7%) increase for personal services which reflects 14 line items summarized in the table below. It’s important to note that the total cost for personal services is $103.3 million, which is 93% of the total Police Department budget. As of March, 41 or 7% of authorized and funded sworn officer positions were vacant and there were 24 police officers are leave for a variety of reasons currently (e.g., FMLA, military, paid administrative). In Budget Amendment #5, the Council approved $4.3 million from ARPA and $1.2 million from General Fund Balance for one-time retention bonuses and ongoing hiring bonuses to help the Department reach full staffing of sworn positions. The Administration is in the process of implementing this bonus program. Additional Info section for more on current and historic staffing levels in the Department. The proposed budget increases the use of Funding Our Future dollars by $808,935 over the FY2023 adopted budget to a new total of $13,016,903. The additional funds are for several personal services items. These are subtotals of many items in the table below. Funding Our Future would continue to cover the salary and benefits costs for 27 police officer FTEs, 25 civilian FTEs (half of which are social workers), the Civilian Responder Program, and body worn cameras. $1,365,082 for 11 New FTEs The new positions are detailed in the three groups below. All the positions are proposed to be funded for nine months recognizing the time it typically takes to hire. $1,820,109 is the combined annual estimated cost for all the positions. The difference of $455,027 would need to be included in the FY2025 annual budget. -$917,361 for six police officers working at the Airport funded for nine months. The total annual cost of the positions is estimated to be $1,223,148. This would bring the total number to 72 of police officers assigned to the Airport. Note that the Airport enterprise fund fully reimburses the General Fund for the Police Department’s costs providing public safety services. Demand for these services has increased because the new international airport is larger, handles more passengers, and crime reports have gone up annually the past four years. -$283,455 for four Civilian Responder Specialists funded for nine months. The total annual cost of the positions is estimated to be $377,940. This would bring the total number to 16. The program is managed by a sworn police lieutenant acting as the director. The FY2023 annual budget funded 12 of the positions for six months to allow time for the director to develop the program, go through the hiring process, and complete trainings. Note that creation of a civilian responder program was a recommendation from the Council’s operations audit of the Police Department in 2021. At the time of publishing the Department Pe rso n al Serv ic e s I t e m A m o u n t 5 % Sala r y Pr o po sa l 4 ,1 82 ,2 0 3$ Six Ne w Po lic e Offic e r s at I nte r na tio na l A ir p o r t 9 1 7 ,3 6 1$ Co nt r ac t u al Pay I nc r e ase fo r Sh ift Diffe r e nt ials 7 0 0 ,0 0 0$ A nnualiza tio n o f Pa r t ially Funde d Po sitio ns 6 2 5 ,7 3 9$ Po lic e Ov e r time Re v e nu e Offse t fo r Ev e nt s a nd Co ntr ac ts 4 83 ,2 9 6$ I ns u r anc e Cha ng e s 2 9 7 ,84 4$ Fo u r Ne w Civ ilian Re spo nse Pr o g r am FTEs 2 83 ,4 5 5$ Ne w I nt e r nal A ffair s Se c o nd Dir e c t o r FTE 1 6 9 ,2 6 6$ Bas e to Ba se Change s 80 ,1 85$ CCA C Ma r ke t -b ase d Sa lar y A dju s tm e nt s 7 4 ,1 88$ A nnualiza tio n o f No n-r e p r e se nt e d Emp lo y e e s NFP A d ju st me nt s 2 8,87 4$ Me r it Ch ange s 8,3 3 1$ Pe ns io n Change s (5 1 ,3 5 3 )$ End o f City 's Re q uir e d Co st Shar e fo r 2 0 2 0 Fe d e r al COPS Hir ing Gr a nt (4 5 0 ,0 0 0 )$ T OT A L 7 ,3 4 9 ,3 89$ No t e : th e to t a l is $2 6 6 ,2 0 8 m o re t h a n t h e p e rso na l se rv ic e s c o st inc re a se sh o w n o n pa g e 2 2 4 o f t h e Bu d g e t Bo o k. Th e s e a re m o stly o ne -tim e c o st s suc h as e q uip m e nt a nd v e h ic le s plu s o ng o ing fu nd ing fo r fue l Page | 3 was compiling call diversion metrics for the program such as calls for service by type, number of diversions away from a sworn officer response, geographic areas of focus, special events staffed, etc. o The types of calls for services that can be diverted to the program are expected to change as the program is implemented, expanded, and community needs evolve. The committee identified a dozen call types eligible for a civilian responder deployment instead of a sworn police officer which are: abandoned vehicles, animal problems, cold burglary without suspect information or evidence, found property, illegal fireworks, illegal dumping, noise disturbances, notification of DV releases, evidence pickup – videos, traffic hazards, VIN inspections, and traffic control including special events. o The Council’s recent operational audit of the Department estimated 20 civilian responders would be needed to meet the level of demand based on calls for service two years ago. The program staffing level needed changes with the total calls for service received and the types of service the Department identifies for diversion to the civilian responders. o The Administration is working on a cost justification study for the new Police Civilian Response Team special event staffing fee. It’s expected to come to the Council later in FY2024 and would need to be added to the Consolidated Fee Schedule. -$164,266 for one investigative sergeant working in Internal Affairs funded for nine months. The total annual cost of the position is estimated to be $219,021. There are currently three investigative FTEs for all complaints filed against the 750 FTEs in the Department. An additional position is requested to improve the timeliness of investigations. Almost 200 complaints were filed and investigated in FY2022 that were of a serious nature. Additional lower-level complaints are also handled by Internal Affairs. At the time of publishing: o The Mayor’s Recommended Budget also includes $5,000 related to the position for equipment and may be in the IMS Fund. o The Chief of Police plans to present this new FTE to the Racial Equity in Policing Commission for feedback. Shifting Capital and Software Expenses Out of Police Department Budget (-$730,610) reduction in capital and software expenses because these are proposed to be shifted to the Information Management Systems (IMS) Department budget as part of centralizing these types of costs across City departments. Council’s Operational Audit of the Police Department Recommendations (See Attachment 4 for the Department’s status updates on the 46 individual recommendations) The Department reports of the 46 individual recommendations in Matrix’s final report that 29 are done. The other 27 are in progress, have not begun, or need additional resources (such as the Civilian Responder Program proposed for expansion in the FY2024 annual budget). Pending Annual Award from State Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation Grant The City applied for and received $2.75 million in FY2023 for 12 new police officer FTEs including vehicles and equipment and a subaward to Volunteers of American for a business and community liaison focused on the downtown and Central Ninth neighborhoods. The annual award is not guaranteed and subject to appropriation by the State Legislature. The Administration expects to apply for grant funding annually to cover these costs. The FY2024 application is requesting police officers in addition to the 12 mentioned above. The General Fund would need to cover costs if the State grant is not awarded to the City to fully cover the costs. The police officers focus on serving the neighborhoods hosting the Geraldine King Women’s Resource Center and the Gail Miller Resource Center. The full funding request also includes 239 hours of overtime. $2.6 Million Holding Accounts for Public Safety Reform and Carryforward Remaining Amounts In recent years, the Council created two holding accounts for implementing recommendations from the operational audit of the Police Department by Matrix Consulting, the Racial Equity in Policing Commission, and the public. The combined balance of the two holding accounts in Non-departmental is $2,623,192. The holding account lapses to General Fund Balance at the end of each fiscal year, so the Council has repeatedly reappropriated it in the annual budget. The holding account had several names with the same themes over the last few years: Diversifying public safety response models and implementing recommendations from the Council’s audit, REP Commission, and the public. Or Public Safety Reform holding account for short. Page | 4 Increased Calls for Service and Improving Response Times The Department has made progress to address prolonged staffing shortfalls since 2020. The performance measure (see Attachment 2) tracking response time for priority one calls (the most serious) improved from 12:46 minutes in 2022 to 10:23 as of April 23 YTD for FY2023. The Department provides monthly public updates on response times and provided the below color-coded table on May 3. It’s important to note that these are cumulative response times from when a call is received to when an officer arrives on scene. POLICY QUESTIONS 1.Metrics for Civilian Responders and Other Alternative Response Programs – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration what metrics are available for these programs and what outcomes should be tracked, such as calls for service by type, number of diversions away from a sworn officer response, geographic areas of focus, and number of special events staffed. 2.Status of Three New Police Facilities – The Council may wish to ask the Administration for a status update on three new police facilities funded in FY2023 and what the public could expect for each. Note that funding for the lease of these facilities is in the Community and Neighborhoods Department’s budget. Additional funding may be needed to fully meet the FY2024 lease and utilities costs which is being confirming at the time of publishing. a. Relocation and expansion of the Community Connections Center (social worker program office), b. North Temple Substation, and c. Downtown Central Precinct 3.Implementing Recommendations from Operational Audit (See Attachment 4 for status updates on individual recommendations) – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration how the FY2024 budget implements some recommendations from the audit. The Council may also wish to schedule a separate briefing to review the status of recommendations and discuss next steps with the Administration. 4.Staffing and Timeliness of Internal Affairs Investigations – The Council may wish to ask the Administration would the additional investigator FTE sergeant proposed in the FY2024 budget fully meet the needs to timely investigate all complaints both lower-level and more serious such as use-of- force and misconduct? This would bring the total number of investigators for Internal Affairs to four which handle all complaints for the 761 FTEs in the Department. The Council may also wish to ask what other benefits could be expected from increasing Internal Affairs staffing such as reducing the length of officer leave time, identifying training improvements, getting information to other entities faster including the public, District Attorney’s Office, and the city’s Police Civilian Review Board and responding to complainants, etc. Page | 5 5.Prolonged Hiring Challenges for Social Worker Program – The Council may wish to ask what additional resources could help the program reach full staffing. As of April there are seven vacancies out of the 22 positions in the program. Some of the challenges to reach full staffing include applicants withdrawing midway through the hiring process, failure to pass a background check, and the shortage of mental health professionals in the local market. In FY2022, the Council added 12 FTEs to the social worker program. The Department is seeking to partner with the University of Utah’s College of Social Work for program internships. Note: The FY2024 budget for the Fire Department adds 4 social workers to the Community Health Access Team (CHAT). The Council may wish to discuss ways in which the two departments can collaborate on hiring challenges in this area. ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. Police Department Budget and Staffing Summary FY2013-FY2024 Council staff prepared the below chart and corresponding data table to provide a summary of the Council approved budgets, total staffing, and annual changes since Fiscal Year 2013. SLCPD is proposed to have a total of 761 employees of which 589 are sworn officers, 20 are authorized but unfunded early hire police officers and 152 are civilian staff. This would be an increase of 11 more FTEs. The chart shows that the Police Department budget increased every year except FY2021 when the Council moved funding for the Social Worker program into Non-departmental and created two holding accounts also in Non-departmental using $3.1 million from the Department’s budget. During the same time two staffing level decreases occurred; first there was a reduction of four FTEs from 2013-2014 which were clerical civilian positions and then a reduction of three FTEs from 2016-2017 which were vacant civilian positions the Department no longer needed (accountant, IT supervisor and technician) because other City departments were handling these functions. The Police Department had significant staffing increases over recent years which were: -10 from 2017-2018: increase early hire authorized (but unfunded) police positions from 10 to 20 to help smooth staffing volatility from retirements and turnover -55 from 2018-2019: 27 new police officers, 13 new civilian positions and the City made permanent 15 existing police officers that were paid by a federal grant -91 from 2019-2020: 23 new police officers, transfer of 66 Airport police officers into SLCPD and two Airport civilian positions -Net increase of nine FTEs in the FY2022 budget from hiring 12 more social workers, an in-house mental health clinician and a data analyst while the Emergency Management Division with five FTEs moved to the Fire Department -Net increase of 30 FTEs in FY2023 which included 12 FTEs creating the Civilian Response Team, 10 FTEs creating the Violent Crimes Unit, one Special Victims Unit detective and several civilian positions 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 $- $20,000,000 $40,000,000 $60,000,000 $80,000,000 $100,000,000 $120,000,000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 SLCPD Budget and Staffing Fiscal Years 2013-2024 $ Amount # of FTEs Page | 6 Note: FY2023 is adopted and FY2024 is proposed budget figures, the rest are actuals B. Status Update on Body Worn Cameras Software Upgrades In the FY2022 annual budget the Council approved $349,692 ongoing funding for a bundled software package called Officer Safety Plan 7+. The FY2024 Non-departmental budget continues this funding level. Some of the software upgrades were necessary to implement elements of the body worn camera ordinance and provide further transparency, accountability, and operational capabilities to the Police Department. The company Axon provides body worn cameras, other hardware, and software to the Department. Four software features were identified as especially useful improvements to the Department which are listed below along with implementation status. A fifth feature called Signal automatically activates body worn cameras when a holster sensor is triggered by a firearm being drawn. This feature is on hold while the manufacturer addresses functionality issues. Performance – provides monitoring and reporting about usage of body cameras at the individual, squad and department levels which would allow analysis to determine compliance with some ordinance requirements. Also includes a randomizer tool for selection of videos to be audited. -The Department is currently working with Axon on setup and then the audit squad will customize the software Respond+ – provides live streaming of body worn camera video feeds to enhance operational capabilities during an incident. Also shows a map of all cameras currently recording and last known locations once a camera is turned off which can be valuable information during an incident. -The Department is currently finalizing policy and working on education for use Transcription and Redaction – provides a transcription service for body worn camera and other videos (such as interviews). The transcription can be used to prioritize which videos should be reviewed such as identifying key words or phrases to trigger a review. -Fully implemented and being regularly utilized Citizen for the Community – provides a public-facing portal for residents to submit potential evidence to the Police Department which can be especially helpful for large-scale incidents and when someone wants to anonymously share information. -Fully operational and the public relations team is in the process of implementing C. Revised 2022 Crime Control Plan Update (See Attachment 3 for the plan) The Department issued this plan in response to increasing crime rates experienced in 2020 which was part of a national trend of increasing crime rates since the pandemic began. The plan was revised in November $ Amount Y ear Ov er Y ear % Change # of FT Es Y ear Over Y ear % Change 2013 54 ,807,84 1$ -537 - 2014 55,225,240$ 1 %533 -1 % 2015 58,677,194$ 6%533 0% 2016 60,744,7 16$ 4 %558 5% 2017 64 ,1 74 ,695$ 6%555 -1 % 2018 67 ,255,827$ 5%565 2% 2019 7 4 ,428,837$ 11 %620 1 0% 2020 82,37 7 ,074$ 11 %71 1 1 5% 2021 7 9,097,332$ -4%71 1 0% 2022 83,37 0,502$ 5%7 20 1% 2023 1 03,94 4 ,583$25%7 50 4% 2024 1 1 0,976,812$ 7 %7 61 1% Fiscal Y ear Budget T otal Staffing Page | 7 2021 and again in October 2022. Several of the program goals were recently approved by the Council like the Violent Crimes Unit and take-home vehicle ordinance amendment. Others were included in the FY2023 budget and have new funding requests in the FY2024 budget like expanding the Civilian Responder Program. The strategies and status of each is summarized in the below table from page eight of the plan: D. Increasing Mandatory Officer Trainings In recent years the number of mandatory training hours for City police officers increased. All officers in Utah must complete the State Division of Peace Officer Standards and Trainings’ (POST) 40-hour basic course covering tools, legal landscape, and certifications. The City’s mandatory trainings are in addition to POST’s mandatory training. The Council requested and funded several additional trainings for City police officers including: 4 Hours for Fair and Impartial Policing/Implicit Bias 16 Hours for Arbinger “Mindset Drive Behavior” 16 Hours for Blue Courage “Nobility of Policing” leadership development 40 Hours for Crisis Intervention Training or CIT Other trainings include de-escalation, working with survivors of sexual assaults, body cameras, working with individuals that have autism or neurological disorders, electronic warrants and citations, and tasers Additional specializing trainings include Public Order Unit trainings and SWAT trainings E. Annual Report on Code R Kit DNA Testing A report on processing of sexual assault evidence kits (a.k.a Code R Kits) during the previous calendar year is required to accompany the Mayor’s recommended budget per Salt Lake City Code, Chapter 2.10 Article V DNA Testing. Below is a table comparing figures since 2014 (first year data was required to be reported). Sometimes kits are not sent to a qualified lab because the incident occurred in an outside jurisdiction or are deemed restricted after the victim requested it not be tested at this time. The total increase of sexual offenses reported from 2014 to 2021 represents a 45% increase however the increase was greater in some years like 2017-2019. This may represent an increased willingness of sexual assault survivors to report crimes to police as the stigma around sexual offenses lessens in society and resources increase to support survivors. Page | 8 Comparison of Annual Reports on Code R Kit DNA Testing by Calendar Year F. New Unmanned Aircraft System or Drone Policy (See Attachment 5 for the policy) The Department developed a drone use policy after incorporating feedback from outside stakeholders, such as the American Civil Liberties Union or ACLU, who were invited to provide feedback on the draft policy. It was finalized and implemented prior to deployment of drones. The Department is proceeding with ordering drones for testing and police officer training. The policy is expected to be added to the Department’s policy manual which is a publicly available document. The Department currently has eight drones for deployment in the field and seven for training. The resulting data collected from drones is retained for 30 days. Data is retained for longer when used as evidence in a criminal investigation. ATTACHMENTS 1. Summary Comparison Budget Chart 2. Department Performance Measures 3. Revised 2022 Crime Control Plan 4. Status Update of Recommendations from Council's Operational Audit of the Police Department 5. Unmanned Aircraft System Drone Operations Policy 610 ACRONYMS CCC – Community Connections Center CIT – Crisis Intervention Training FTE – Full-time Employee FY – Fiscal Year GRAMA – Government Records Access and Management Act LCSW – Licensed Clinical Social Worker POST – Peace Officer Standards and Training PSB – Public Safety Building SLCPD – Salt Lake City Police Department TBD – To Be Determined YTD – Year to Date M e t ric s 2 0 14 2 0 15 2 0 16 2 0 17 2 0 18 2 0 19 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 1 2 0 2 2 2 0 2 1-2 2 % C h an ge Se x u al Offe nse s Re p o r t e d 5 0 9 5 89 6 9 5 7 85 84 1 84 1 6 9 8 7 3 6 80 5 9 % Co d e R Kit s Re c e iv e d b y SLCPD 1 3 7 1 7 9 1 9 7 2 3 4 2 1 0 2 2 5 1 9 2 2 0 2 2 1 1 4 % Co d e R Kit s Se nt t o a Qu a lifie d La b 87 1 7 9 1 9 7 2 2 3 1 9 7 1 9 3 1 84 1 9 3 2 0 1 4 % Co d e R Kit s Eligib le and Up lo ade d t o CODI S*N/A N/A 1 2 0 1 3 3 3 5 2 3 9 -2 5 % Ca se s Sub m it te d t o Dist r ic t A t to r ne y fo r Sc r e e ning 1 0 7 1 5 5 1 7 0 2 1 1 2 7 0 2 6 1 2 0 1 2 1 3 2 1 3 0 % Ca se s Wh e n V ic t im De c line d to Pr o c e e d 86 1 1 1 1 1 9 1 1 2 1 3 4 1 4 9 1 3 7 1 1 5 1 5 5 3 5 % *No t e : CODI S is t h e Co m b ine d DNA I nd e x Sy s te m u se d b y law e nfo rc e m e nt a nd manage d b y th e FBI CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 ATTACHMENT I SUMMARY COMPARISON BUDGET CHART *Note that capital expenditures are budgeted at zero for FY2024 because the costs were shifted to the Information Management Services (IMS) budget to centralize related costs across departments. FY 2 0 2 3 -2 4 Pro p o s ed Do l l ars % Offic e o f the Ch ie f 3 0 6 ,1 7 2 ,3 7 0$ 7 ,2 5 6 ,5 6 4$ 9 ,6 4 3 ,4 3 1$ 1 1 ,1 9 4 ,1 1 2$ 1 ,5 5 0 ,6 81$ 1 6 % A d m inist r atio n Bu r e a u 1 3 1 1 0 ,3 5 7 ,5 5 6$ 1 1 ,89 5 ,2 6 4$ 1 3 ,9 2 2 ,0 0 7$ 1 3 ,1 7 8,6 7 3$ (7 4 3 ,3 3 4 )$ -5 % Po lic e Fie ld Op e r at io ns 1 2 2 2 2 4 ,9 4 9 ,1 2 8$ 2 3 ,9 2 3 ,82 6$ 2 9 ,0 2 1 ,1 2 6$ 3 2 ,6 7 1 ,1 4 9$ 3 ,6 5 0 ,0 2 3$ 1 3 % Po lic e Fie ld Op e r at io ns 2 2 0 8 1 9 ,0 9 0 ,7 2 2$ 1 8,0 2 2 ,1 89$ 2 1 ,5 0 1 ,4 85$ 2 6 ,3 4 0 ,6 7 0$ 4 ,83 9 ,1 85$ 2 3 % I nv e st ig ativ e Bu r e au 1 7 0 1 9 ,9 3 4 ,7 1 1$ 2 0 ,9 83 ,1 3 3$ 2 9 ,888,9 9 3$ 2 7 ,5 9 2 ,2 0 8$ (2 ,2 9 6 ,7 85 )$ -8% T OT A L S 7 6 1 80 ,5 0 4 ,4 87$82 ,0 80 ,9 7 6$10 3 ,9 7 7 ,0 4 2$110 ,97 6 ,812$ 6 ,9 9 9 ,7 7 0$ 7 % Prop osed Budget Compa rison by Division Div isio n FT E s FY 2 0 2 0 -2 1 A c t u al s FY 2 0 2 1-2 2 A c t u al s FY 2 0 2 2 -2 3 A do pt e d Diffe ren c e FY 2 0 2 3 -2 4 Pro po se d Do l lars % Pe r so na l Se r v ic e s 7 7 ,0 5 3 ,4 1 8$ 7 5 ,6 1 4 ,6 7 4$ 7 5 ,9 0 6 ,1 6 2$ 9 6 ,2 6 3 ,6 1 9$ 1 0 3 ,3 4 6 ,80 0$ 7 ,0 83 ,1 81$ 7 % Op e r at io ns and Mainte na nc e 1 ,1 5 2 ,6 3 5$ 85 9 ,888$ 1 ,6 1 9 ,9 6 6$ 2 ,82 8,5 7 5$ 3 ,0 4 0 ,4 84$ 2 1 1 ,9 0 9$ 7 % Ch a r ge s and Se r v ic e s 4 ,1 7 5 ,2 2 6$ 4 ,0 0 9 ,5 2 3$ 4 ,4 4 2 ,2 83$ 4 ,82 9 ,84 8$ 4 ,5 89 ,5 2 8$ (2 4 0 ,3 2 0 )$ -5 % Ca p it a l Ex p e nd it u r e s*(4 ,2 0 4 )$ 2 0 ,4 0 2$ 1 1 2 ,5 6 4$ 5 5 ,0 0 0$ -$ (5 5 ,0 0 0 )$ -1 0 0 % T OT A L S 82 ,3 7 7 ,0 7 5$80 ,5 0 4 ,4 87$82 ,0 80 ,9 7 5$10 3 ,9 7 7 ,0 4 2$110 ,97 6 ,812$ 6 ,999 ,7 7 0$ 7 % Op era t i ng Budget Comp arison De p art m e n t Bu dge t FY 2 0 19 -2 0 A c t u als FY 2 0 2 0 -2 1 A c t u al s FY 2 0 2 1-2 2 A c t u als FY 2 0 2 2 -2 3 A do p t e d Differe n c e CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 ATTACHMENT II DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE MEASURES *Note: the Council added 12 social worker FTEs in FY2022 **Note: this performance measure refers to the time for a crime lab technician to travel to the crime scene. The Department used a different calculation method for 2018 to start the clock at time from the officer requested rather than the technician is on the way Pe rfo rm an c e M easu re 2 0 18 A c t u al 2 0 19 A c t u al 2 0 2 0 A c t u al 2 0 2 1 A c t u al 2 0 2 2 A c t u al 2 0 2 3 St at u s 2 0 2 4 T arg e t R esponse Tim e: the m ean averag e police response tim e for priority 1 ca lls for serv ice from the tim e the ca ll w as receiv ed to the tim e the first officer w as listed on scene 10:51 1 0:1 3 1 1:37 1 2:55 12:4 6 1 0:23 As of April 23 <10:00 Social Work & Hom eless O utreach: 200 referrals per qua rter for services, jobs, housing, education, benefits, substa nce abuse or m ental health trea tm ent* 1,97 2 1 ,751 1 ,089 1 ,361 1,951 2,4 97 Y TD 200 I nternal Affairs: R ev iew all cases of officer inv olv ed critical incidents for referral to training unit for im provem ents in training 100%1 00%TBD 100%100%1 00%1 00% Prov ide y outh outrea ch serv ices a nd participate in a gang free edu ca tion program m onthly 1 2 1 2 TBD 12 1 2 1 2 1 2 Crim e Lab: Mainta in officer w a it tim e for priority 1 cases a t 20 m inutes or less** 21 :4 2 m inutes 22:01 m inu tes TBD 23:09 27 :02 Pending 1 2022 CRIME CONTROL PLAN THREE YEAR UPDATE 2022 CRIME CONTROL PLAN THREE YEAR UPDATE VISION STRENGTHENING COMMUNITIES, PROMOTING SAFETY, EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES 3 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N CHIEF’S MESSAGE Addressing the safety of Salt Lake City starts with an acknowledgement of the women and men of the Salt Lake City Police Department. No matter their assignment or rank, they come to work committed to strengthening our neighborhoods, promoting safety and expanding opportunities for the community. From the department’s newest officers to our most seasoned, our police department is comprised of people who embody our mission of serving as guardians of our community to preserve life, maintain human rights, protect property, and promote individual responsibility and community commitment. Everything the Salt Lake City Police Department does is geared toward strengthening our community and building and maintaining relationships. For Fiscal Year (FY) 2023, the Salt Lake City Police Department is authorized 750 total full-time employees. Of those, 594 are sworn members of law enforcement. The department continues its recruitment and hiring efforts for sworn members as well as its professional staff, including social workers and records clinicians. The department’s budget for FY23 increased 24.7% from FY22 to $103,944,583 million. In 2020, the Salt Lake City Police Department launched its first Crime Control Plan (CCP) to address violent crime. The department’s CCP continues to evolve and build upon the years prior. We account for our successes and study our areas of opportunities. Since 2020, substantial time and effort has gone into reducing violent crime in the city, yet more work is needed. The 2021 CCP had four overall goals: lowering crime, improving response times, filling funded and unfunded sworn positions and continuing to build community relationships. The department approached its 2021 goals through short-, medium- and long-term strategies. I am proud of the work we have accomplished in the last two years. Cities across the United States are continuing to grapple with a surge in violent crime, including gun violence and murders. In Salt Lake City, we are pushing forward with new strategies to help ensure the city’s future safety for all, including those experiencing homelessness. The SLCPD is engaged in a comprehensive and collaborative approach with many stakeholders to address criminal activity and livability issues. Officers enforce the city’s no camping ordinance, but they first prioritize education and work compassionately to provide people resources and advocacy to encourage and support lasting behavioral changes. However, public safety is unique. The criminal justice system today remains much more complex than it did even five years ago. The achievements and failures of the criminal justice system often get placed on law enforcement. To truly embark on a crime reduction plan that will be successful, SLCPD needs support from local government and our community. That is why we continue to rely heavily on our partnership with the United States Attorney’s Office in Utah to support Project Safe Neighborhoods. This program is key to coordinating resources and identifying and arresting the most violence-prone individuals within our community. As a police department, we are committed to relying on data more than ever to focus our attention and resources on crime. The backbone of this year’s CCP is the partnership between the Salt Lake City Police Department and the University of Texas at San Antonio and the department’s continued and expanded use of Stratified Policing in collaboration with Dr. Roberto Santos and Dr. Rachel Santos. The geographic concentration of violent crime in Salt Lake City is consistent with a large body of literature describing urban crime, particularly violent crime, as a phenomenon primarily occurring in a few small geographic areas. That is why our approach to reducing violence will focus heavily on hot-spot policing; problem-oriented, place-based policing; and focused deterrence. Simultaneously, we continue incorporating the well-researched principles of stratified policing to improve policing services, reducing crime and the harm caused by offenders and maintaining our positive relationship with our community. MIKE BROWN 4 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N CONTINUED FOCUS AND IMPACT AREAS STAFFING CRIME REDUCTION CALLS FOR SERVICE COMMUNITY LIVABILITY COMMUNITY-BASED POLICING HOMELESSNESS 5 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N TIMELINE AND STATUS JANUARY 2021 Iteration #1 of the Salt Lake City Police Department’s Crime Control Plan (CCP) is published. GOAL To drive overall crime below the five-year average benchmark and to impact violent and property crime in targeted areas that have been identified as spiking. STATUS:ü Ongoing Achieved Not Completed OBJECTIVES PROGRESS: • Implement a data-driven, comprehensive approach to address people, places, and behaviors impacting violent crime. Achieved and ongoing. • Increase clearance rates and solvability of violent and property crime.Ongoing. • Improve coordination and communications within the department and with external partners. Achieved and ongoing. • Optimize departmental resources using technology.Achieved and ongoing. 6 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N NOVEMBER 2021 Iteration #2 of the Salt Lake City Police Department’s Crime Control Plan is published. GOALS FOR CRIME CONTROL PLAN #2 Lower crime. STATUS:ü Ongoing ü Achieved in part Not Completed Improve response times. STATUS:ü Ongoing ü Achieved in part Not Completed YEAR TO DATE CITY-WIDE CRIME January 1 – October 2, 2022 Violent Crime: Down 4.5% Property Crime: Down 10% Total Crime: Down 9% PRIORITY 1-3 RESPONSE TIME AVERAGES 7 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N Fill funded and unfunded sworn positions. STATUS:ü Ongoing Achieved Not Completed Continue building community relationships. STATUS:ü Ongoing ü Achieved Not Completed SEPARATIONS 77 MONTH TRENDLINE - JULY 2016 THROUGH OCTOBER 01, 2022 Se p a r a t i o n s COFFEE WITH A COP PAY-IT-FORWARD PIZZA WITH THE POLICE KAVA EVENT HISPANIC HERITAGE FESTIVAL BIKE REGISTRATION 8 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N STRATEGIES PROGRESS: • Develop the SLCPD Violent Criminal Apprehension Team (V-CAT).Achieved and ongoing. • Expand recruitment efforts.Ongoing with future budget consideration. • Continuous lateral hiring.Ongoing. • Implement Civilian Response Team (CRT)Ongoing. • Introduce hiring incentives to include signing bonuses and retention bonuses. Ongoing with future budget consideration. • Submit budget amendments (FY22) for additional funding.Achieved. • Work with SLC911 Director to expand the current SLCPD Call Diversion Program.Ongoing. • Work with the Salt Lake County Sheriff’s Office and other criminal justice stakeholders on jail release issues.Ongoing. • Work with the Salt Lake County District Attorney on the “High Utilizer Program.”Ongoing. • Fill funded and unfunded sworn positions.Ongoing. • Assess through strategic planning to increase the authorized staffing of the department.Ongoing. • Continue Project Safe Neighborhoods commitment with federal partners. Achieved and ongoing. OCTOBER 2022 Iteration #3 of the Salt Lake City Police Department’s Crime Control Plan is published. GOALS Reduce violent crime in Salt Lake City’s most violence-prone areas and among the most violence-prone offenders. Reduce aggregate levels of reported violence city-wide. STRATEGIES • Continue the strategies outlined in the second edition of the Salt Lake City Police Department’s Crime Control Plan. • Implement the Salt Lake City Police Department’s strategic plan to address violent crime in collaboration with the University of Texas at San Antonio. • Continue and expand upon the department’s use of Stratified Policing in collaboration with Dr. Roberto Santos and Dr. Rachel Santos. 9 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N VIOLENT CRIMINAL APPREHENSION TEAM (V-CAT) CONCEPT PLANNING EXECUTION IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR COMPLETE In FY23, the department will implement a Violent Criminal Apprehension Team (V-CAT). The team will be comprised of one sergeant and nine officers. Members have been selected and the department anticipates moving the selected officers into their positions in November 2022 as the funded positions graduate from the academy and become available for field work. Funding of the V-CAT is possible through a COPS Hiring grant and city matching funds. The objective of the V-CAT squad will be to specifically address violent crime patterns and repeat violent crime offenders in Salt Lake City. V-CAT will create targeted responses to identify, apprehend and prosecute individuals within our community who engage in violent conduct. The V-CAT will have a citywide span of management and will work with division commanders to address violent crime issues. IMPACT AREA 10 NEW OFFICERS ADDED TO SLCPD AUTHORIZED STAFFING LEVEL 10 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N RECRUITMENT, HIRING AND RETENTION CONCEPT PLANNING EXECUTION IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR COMPLETE Like police agencies throughout the United States, the Salt Lake City Police Department has struggled with a staffing shortage. As of October 3, 2022, the department is down 41 sworn police officers. In 2022, the SLCPD announced it would provide a $5,000 hiring bonus for lateral officers. Competition for lateral officers in Utah and throughout the United States is enormous. Police agencies in California, Washington, Oregon and New Orleans, among others, have implemented $30-40,000 hiring bonuses paid over time. The SLCPD will continue to work with city administration to seek authorization and funding for increasing the department’s hiring bonus for all new sworn employees, recruitment, as well as retention bonuses. In October 2022, the city hired a dedicated recruiter for the police department. The intention is to broaden the scope of recruiting for SLCPD police officer and professional staff positions. IMPACT AREA 11 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N COMMUNITY REESTABLISHMENT AREAS CONCEPT PLANNING EXECUTION IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR COMPLETE In mid-2020, the SLCPD – as part of our commitment to providing high-quality and community supported police services, launched a formalized and extensive downtown community reestablishment and crime mitigation effort to clean-up the illegal camps, get people inside and into needed services, enforce city and state laws, and to deter criminal activity and illegal camps from re-establishing. Initially, the department’s focus areas included: • Rio Grande Street – 200 South to 400 South • 500 West – 200 South to 400 South • 300 South – 500 West to 600 West • 600 West South Temple • 600 West – 1000 West to North Temple In 2021, the department expanded reestablishment areas to include • 300 South Main Street • 200 East 200 South • 800 West North Temple • Liberty Park Department overtime makes it possible to staff these additional patrol shifts. The department anticipates continuing these shifts into 2023, pending budget approval. These overtime shifts have allowed officers to increase their presence in the community and have a great impact on public safety. For example: while working an overtime shift, a SLCPD officer stopped a female near Taufer Park. The officer confirmed the woman had felony warrants. During a search incident to arrest, the officer located a loaded handgun and a distributable amount of drugs in the woman’s possession. SLCPD continues to assist the city’s Rapid Intervention Team and TIME SPENT BY MITIGATION OT OFFICERS THIS YEAR: 12,333 Hours FELONY ARRESTS: 216 MISDEMEANOR ARRESTS: 192 12 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N the Salt Lake County Health Department on camp abatements. It is the responsibility of the SLCPD to serve as an assisting agency during an abatement. Another recent success can be found around 300 South and Main Street. Earlier this year, many of the businesses were concerned with the aggressive panhandling occurring in the area. Business owners reported people congregate in front of their storefronts and some of the people experiencing homelessness would engage in illegal drug dealing and use. After holding several meetings with these businesses, working in conjunction with the department’s District Community Liaison Officer (DCLO) for Central Division, the department’s BCEO, and other city resources, the Office of Mayor Erin Mendenhall devoted additional city resources in the area so people experiencing homeleness could obtain an identification, help getting a job, clothes, and food. The collaborative work done by the SLCPD and Mayor’s Office has helped improve the cleanliness of that area, and the department continues to receive positive feedback from business owners. IMPACT AREA 13 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N BUSINESS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OFFICER CONCEPT PLANNING EXECUTION IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR COMPLETE In April 2021, the SLCPD successfully launched its Business Community Engagement Officer (BCEO) position. This sworn member of law enforcement is assigned to the SLCPD’s Central Division and reports to the Division Commander. The officer serves as a direct point of contact for business operators and owners. All the BCEO’s working hours are dedicated to building and maintaining relationships with downtown businesses and coordinating with the business community’s law enforcement needs. When the BCEO is not contacting a business or in a community meeting, they will be doing property checks at local businesses that have expressed concerns. This position puts the detective out into the community on a regular basis. A recent example of the success of this program can be seen with the reduction of crime in the entertainment district along Pierpont Avenue in downtown. In early 2022, the area was inflicted with numerous incidents of violent crime including a stabbing, shooting and multiple aggravated assaults. After sitting down with the business owners in the area, SLCPD put together a collaborative and holistic plan to help mitigate the violent crime. The plan included hiring off-duty officers to block the road around midnight to keep cars from cruising up and down in front of the entertainment venues. Officers worked between the hours of 11 p.m. and 2 a.m. on Pierpont to increase the police presence. The business owners also took steps to mitigate crime and the potential for crime to occur. The work of the department and business owners has significantly reduced the number of issues the businesses on Pierpont Avenue have had to deal with. Pending budget authorization, it is the intent of the department to expand the BCEO program to the Pioneer and Liberty patrol divisions as staffing and resources allow. This type of direct, business-to-police liaison has strengthened the department’s relationship with its business community in the downtown core. IMPACT AREA 14 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N CIVILIAN RESPONSE TEAM CONCEPT PLANNING EXECUTION IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR COMPLETE As previewed in 2021, the SLCPD has made significant progress implementing a Civilian Response Team (CRT) to handle low-level calls for service. These low-level calls can be addressed either via telephone or by sending a police specialist instead of a sworn officer to handle the case. This system allows sworn officers to remain available for high priority calls for service. The intent of this program is to augment and enhance the current police response service within the city through diversity in response teams, like the current co-response model with social workers. Similar models across the country have shown great results to help divert those non-hazard, low-level calls for service from going out into the field. In the FY23 budget, the City Council funded the creation of the Civilian Response Team consisting of 12 non-sworn responders and one Lieutenant to establish and oversee the program. It is anticipated this program will be operational in spring 2023. The CRT is intended to be a public safety response to low-hazard, non-emergency police related calls-for-service. This is a recommendation from the Matrix Operational Audit and has been funded by the city administration and legislative body. The CRT will provide support by responding to telephonic case reports and select in-person requests during high call-volume times and days of the week. The CRT employees will typically not work with an officer – instead they will be developed as an independent response service that supports the police response. For example, the team may be used to block traffic and take reports on certain calls for service. The CRT will be an added program to the SLCPD repertoire of services offered to SLC residents, businesses, and visitors. 15 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N Adding the formal leadership to the development team will be a critical component to a successful outcome. The steering committee determined that the oversight must be a sworn position due to the complexity of the overlap of traditional police work with a new civilian response model. A sworn Lieutenant position will provide continuity, consistency, experience, and proven leadership with response operations within the city. The department has had success with this type of leadership model in the past. The CRT is expected to be operational in spring 2023. IMPACT AREA 16 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N TELEPHONIC CALLS FOR SERVICE CONCEPT PLANNING EXECUTION IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR COMPLETE In October 2021, to divert additional low-level, non-hazard calls for response from the field, the department launched a program expanding our ability to take and process telephonic calls for service. This was necessary due to low staffing levels. The SLCPD is using overtime funding for this program and will explore requesting the appropriate budget to continue funding it. To sustain this responsiveness, additional and ongoing funding will need to be considered. Typically, the most common calls for service handled by phone include unwanted persons, citizen assist, and suspicious persons. Without this program, most, if not all, of those calls for service would have been dispatched to patrol officers out in the field and thereby keeping them held down on a call and unable to be out proactively patrolling or available for a high priority, in-progress emergency. Notably, the SLCPD has seen great improvement in the “Hold Times” for telephonic call for service, as outlined below. Month Calls Handled by Phone Average Hold Time October-21 428 0:57:22 November-21 693 0:43:32 December-21 928 0:14:12 January-22 665 0:19:49 February-22 942 0:31:09 March-22 1404 0:39:10 April-22 1708 0:41:14 May-22 1828 1:04:07 June-22 1480 1:29:19 July-22 1872 1:01:49 August-22 2303 0:56:30 September-22 1412 0:27:22 IMPACT AREA CALLS HANDLED AND AVERAGE HOLD TIME FOR TELEPHONIC POLICE RESPONSE 17 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N CALL DIVERSION AND EXPANDING ONLINE REPORTING CONCEPT PLANNING EXECUTION IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR COMPLETE The SLCPD recognizes how critical it is to provide an immediate response to all levels of calls of service. The department is in the process of exploring an automated process that will send text messages to the person calling 9-1-1, keeping them updated on the status of their call. This technology will be integrated into the department’s computer assisted dispatch protocol and will give the department the ability to communicate any potential response delays. For example, if an officer responding to a lower priority call for service is diverted to a higher priority call, this new technology would inform the person of the situation and allow them the ability to file an online report, if applicable. This technology can allow the department to solicit feedback from the initial 9-1-1 caller. The department continues to work with the executive leadership at SLC911, a separate city department, to implement policies and procedures related to expanding both call diversion and online reporting. It is the department’s goal to explore technology and funding resources that will allow online reporting kiosks to be placed throughout the city. Recently, the SLCPD paired up with a local resource center and PRIORITY 1-3 RESPONSE TIME AVERAGES OCTOBER 2021 - SEPTEMBER 2022 18 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N established a crime reporting room within the center to allow users to file online reports, such as theft reports, because the department continuously saw an increase in calls for service at that location that did not need an in-person response. Because of the collaboration, which included outreach and training, calls for service at that location decreased by half. The department will increase its presence at resources centers with its Homeless Resource Center squad. IMPACT AREA 19 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N SALT LAKE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT A STRATEGIC PLAN TO ADDRESS VIOLENT CRIME INTRODUCTION The attached addendum sets forth the department’s strategic plan for reducing violent crime in the City’s most violence-prone areas and among its most violence-prone offenders. To accomplish this, the department will implement and analyze evidence-based and problem-solving procedures that reduce crime and change the department’s culture from being reactive to proactive. The plan acknowledges that violent crime – as seen in other cities – is geographically concentrated to a relatively small number of places. For example, from June 2021 – June 2022, 12 addresses accounted for approximately 11% of the City’s reported violent crime. Further, it is well known that a small proportion of offenders account for a large portion of criminal activity1. To address the criminal activity occurring within Salt Lake City, the SLCPD will utilize a well- established and researched model of hot-spots policing. Through this process, the Salt Lake City Police Department will increase police visibility at and around addresses where violent crime is concentrated. The hot-spots model utilizes the “problem analysis triangle.” The triangle explains that crime occurs when a motivated offender and a victim (person) or target (place) come together at a particular time and place. For police, by removing one element of the triangle “systematically can prevent multiple crimes in the long term2.” The department will also focus on Problem-Oriented, Place-Based Policing. Where hot-spots policing is done in the short term, Problem-Oriented, Place-Based Policing is a mid-term solution that will have the department leading and coordinating with other city agencies to identify and improve the conditions that contribute to violent crime at crime-prone locations. As an example, the department’s Pioneer Patrol Division identified an area prone to violent crime. A solution required better lighting to be installed. While the department has no ability to install or improve lighting conditions on its own, the division commander worked with the city to address this issue with the appropriate city department. As the department’s violent crime reduction strategy continues to expand, the department, in conjunction with the mayor, will develop a working group of key stakeholders from local government to address crime and its causes at violence-prone places. Finally, part of the department’s longer-term strategy to reduce violence will involve a focused- deterrence model. This approach aims to change the behavior of high-risk offenders through a combination of deterrence, arrest, community involvement and the provision of alternatives to violence. This is a holistic, resource-intensive process involving multiple law enforcement and community partners, including federal law enforcement agencies and the United States Attorney’s Office. Under this model, the department will continue its involvement in Project Safe Neighborhoods. 1 Clark, R. V., and Eck J. (2005) 2 Santos and Santos (2022) 20 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N RECENT EXAMPLES OF THE SLCPD’S STRATEGIC PLAN TO ADDRESS VIOLENT CRIME All three Salt Lake City Police patrol divisions have an identified focus area. In the three identified focus areas referenced below, SLCPD worked with the department’s crime analysts to identify crime patterns and to increase police visibility at or near those locations to deter violent crimes. • The Pioneer Patrol Division focus area border is from 200 North to South Temple and 700 West to 1000 West. • The Central Patrol Division focus area border is from 200 South to 400 South and 200 West to South State Street. • The Liberty Patrol Division focus area border is from 1300 South to 1500 South and 200 West to South State Street. AUGUST 2021 TO AUGUST 2022 COMPARISON • The Pioneer Patrol Division focus area saw 33% fewer violent crimes in August 2022 when compared to August 2021. • The Central Patrol Division focus area saw 28% fewer violent crimes in August 2022 when compared to August 2021. • The Liberty Patrol Division focus area saw 71% fewer violent crimes in August 2022 when compared to August 2021. SEPTEMBER 2021 TO SEPTEMBER 2022 COMPARISON • The Pioneer Patrol Division focus area saw 11% fewer property crimes in September 2022 when compared to September 2021. • The Central Patrol Division focus area saw 18% fewer property crimes in September 2022 when compared to September 2021. • The Liberty Patrol Division focus area saw 11% fewer property crimes in September 2022 when compared to September 2021. CITY-WIDE VIOLENT CRIME SEPTEMBER 2021 COMPARED TO SEPTEMBER 2022: • Down 12.8% CITY-WIDE PROPERTY CRIME SEPTEMBER 2021 COMPARED TO SEPTEMBER 2022: • Down 14.9% RESPONSE TIMES: September 2022: 10m:24s September 2021: 14m:14s August 2022 - Priority 1 - 11m:27s September 2022 - Priority 1 - 10m:24s Improvement: 01m:03s Priority 1-3 Overall Average August 2022: 40m:33s Priority 1-3 Overall Average September 2022: 29m:08s Improvement: 11m:25s 21 20 2 2 CR I M E C O N T R O L P L A N THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK. SEE NEXT PAGE FOR UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO VIOLENT CRIME REDUCTION PLAN Salt Lake City Police Department Violent Crime Reduction Plan Michael R. Smith, J.D., Ph.D. Rob Tillyer, Ph.D. Brandon Tregle, J.D., Ph.D. & Mike Brown Chief of Police i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This document sets forth Salt Lake City’s strategic plan for reducing violent crime in the City’s most violence-prone areas and among its most violence- prone offenders with the goal of reducing aggregate levels of reported violence City-wide. As of August 2022, violent crime in Salt Lake City has decreased by 3.6% year-to-date compared to the same period in 2021. However, when viewing crime statistics over a more extended period, violent street crime1 increased approximately 20 percent over the past two years, driven primarily by an upsurge in aggravated assaults. In Salt Lake City, as in most cities, violent crime is geographically concentrated to a relatively small number of places. The geographic concentration of violent crime in Salt Lake is consistent with a large body of literature describing urban crime, particularly violent crime, as a phenomenon primarily occurring in a few small geographic areas. For example, from June 2021-June 2022, 12 addresses accounted for roughly 11% of the City’s reported violent crime. Together, those addresses recorded eight or more crimes of violence apiece during this time period. In any city, violent crime is caused by a combination of social, structural, and environmental conditions, many of which are outside the direct control of the police. As the social and economic fallout of the Covid 19 pandemic continues to put pressure on public services and the criminal justice system, policy-makers at the state and local levels must be cognizant of the role that well-intended policies can have on crime and violence. Long-term solutions to violent crime in Salt Lake City will require strategic policing and a commitment from policy-makers and the community to address the underlying conditions that contribute to violent victimization, including homelessness, urban blight, and decay. Thus, the successful execution of this plan will require active participation, cooperation, and investment by a wide-range of stakeholders in Salt Lake City, including City leadership, multiple city agencies and departments, federal and state government and law enforcement partners, community and faith-based organizations, non- profits, research partners, and community members themselves. 1 As used here, violent street crime refers to the Part I violent offenses of murder/non- negligent manslaughter, aggravated assault, and robbery and does not include family violence-related offenses or sexual assaults. ii A strategic plan to address rising violent crime is a necessary first step to reducing violence and victimization. Evidence from other cities that have successfully reduced violent crime shows the following factors as integral to success: • Clear communication and reinforcement of this plan by the chief and SLCPD leadership team • Buy-in and commitment from line officers to implement the strategies • Engagement and support from City leaders • A willingness to evaluate and modify current legal and social practices as needed to address the underlying challenges that facilitate and contribute to violent crime • Alignment between all components of the criminal justice system • Community support • Consistent, honest, and ongoing evaluation of the implementation and impact of the plan • Broad recognition that violent crime is a community problem and not only a police responsibility. Hot Spots Policing Drawing from a substantial body of research on the positive impacts hot spots policing can have on reducing violence, this plan begins with a short-term focus on substantially increasing police visibility at and around addresses where violent crime is concentrated and prioritizing street-level deterrence of potential offenders in these areas. The strategy is evidence- based and relies on increased police visibility rather than generalized “stop and frisk,” zero tolerance policing, or other dragnet tactics. Based on crime analysis and mapping, iii the SLCPD will assign officers to be highly visible at hot spot locations identified by crime analysis as the most violence-prone and at times when violence is most often reported. Pre-post implementation data on crime, arrests, and calls for service will be tracked at and around the targeted hot spots, and violence-prone locations will be reviewed and adjusted every 60- 90 days. Problem-Oriented, Place-Based Policing In the mid-term, the SLCPD will lead and coordinate with other city agencies on a problem-oriented, place-based policing (POPBP) strategy designed to identify and ameliorate the underlying conditions that contribute to violent crime at crime-prone places. Place-based strategies addressing physical and social disorder are an effective, evidence-based approach to improve criminogenic conditions, reduce fear of crime, and encourage greater, pro- social use of public space. During the first six months of implementation, initial violent places will be identified using crime analysis and local police knowledge and intelligence. A POPBP Board and working group made up of stakeholder government agencies (e.g., Building Inspections, Civil Enforcement, Youth & Family Services) will be used to design tailored, place-based strategies to address crime and its causes at violent places. Traditional police enforcement efforts (investigations and arrests) will be coupled with civil enforcement, nuisance abatement, environmental design changes, and disorder-focused efforts (graffiti abatement, trash clean up, abandoned vehicle removal, weed/brush removal) and other efforts to alter the criminogenic nature of the targeted places. Again, pre- and post-implementation data will be tracked in and around the targeted locations and adjustments made, if needed, to the strategy based on data trends. As crime declines in the targeted areas, new places will be identified and brought into the strategy. Focused Deterrence The longer-term strategy to reduce violence will involve implementation of a focused deterrence model in Salt Lake City. First designed and implemented in Boston in the 1990s, focused deterrence strategies have proven successful in reducing violent crime in several cities where they have been applied and evaluated. The goal of focused deterrence is to change the behavior of high-risk offenders through a combination of deterrence, arrest, community involvement, and the provision of alternatives to violence. A key feature of most successful focused deterrence strategies is the clear communication to gang members and other violent offenders of the risks associated with iv continued criminal activity and the alternatives available to them under a robust suite of counseling/mental health, substance abuse, education, and job-related services made available to them within the strategy. Focused deterrence is a holistic, resource-intensive process involving multiple law enforcement and community partners, including federal law enforcement agencies and the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Initially, the SLCPD will work with research partners, city leadership, and other stakeholders to prioritize offenders for focused deterrence interventions. The nature of those interventions may vary according to the problems identified and at- risk populations implicated (gang violence vs. drug markets). The support and partnership of social service organizations, including city agencies, non-profits, and community-based leaders and groups, is necessary and will be sought. A careful evaluation of the implementation and impact of this strategy will be designed and carried out by academic partners at the University of Texas at San Antonio to facilitate modification and/or replication of the strategy to address additional at-risk populations as progress is made. 1 NATURE OF THE PROBLEM Salt Lake City is a mid-sized city and with a residential population of approximately 200,000, swelling to a nearly 400,000 daytime population. Moreover, visits to the urban core of Salt Lake City have surged to 155% of their level one year before the COVID-19 pandemic, and continued residential population growth is rapid (Semerad, 2022). Salt Lake City is served by a police department with a current strength of approximately 530 officers.2 The Salt Lake City Police Department (SLCPD) is tasked with controlling violent crime while responding to calls for service, investigating property crimes, and providing for the overall safety of the citizens of Salt Lake City. SLCPD is committed to working with other city agencies and the community to reverse an increasing trend in violent crime over the past two years. While violent crime has decreased in 2022 compared to 2021, overall street-level violent crime3 in Salt Lake City has risen approximately 20 percent in 24 months from May 2020 through May 2022. May 2022, for example, saw 109 violent street crimes reported compared to 93 the previous May (see Figure 1 below). FIGURE 1: OVERALL VIOLENT STREET CRIME TREND, JUL 2019-MAY 2022 NFV: Non-Family Violence This increase suggests the need for a police-led, but community-wide response to tamping down violence and arresting and aggressively prosecuting violent offenders in the short term and a comprehensive set of public safety solutions in the longer term. To be effective, 2 The SLCPD has an authorized strength of 593 officers and is short-staffed based on operational strength by about 24%. The department is actively trying to recruit and hire additional officers in a challenging police labor market. 3 Figure 1 below reflects Part 1 violent street crimes only - murder/non-negligent manslaughter, aggravated assault, robbery – and does not include family violence-related offenses or sexual assaults. 2 those solutions should address the social and physical disorder and fear of crime associated with an increasing homeless population living on the streets of Salt Lake City. Compelling research evidence suggests that reducing physical and social disorder will contribute to an overall reduction in crime in targeted places (Braga et al., 2019). In Salt Lake City, as in most cities, violent crime is geographically concentrated in a relatively small number of places. During the past 12 months, just 12 of the most violence-prone addresses within the city accounted for roughly 11% of all reported violent street crime. This geographic concentration of violent crime is consistent with a large body of literature describing urban crime, particularly violent crime, as a phenomenon primarily occurring in a few small geographic areas or locations. Similarly, research indicates that a relatively small number of offenders (5%) account for the majority of violent crime. These two facts suggest that carefully-tailored, place-based and offender-focused strategies will be the most efficient and effective at reducing violent street crime. However, to be effective, they must be coupled with swift and certain prosecution, adjudication, and a functional correctional system (jails and prisons) to remove persistently violent people from the community and to deter others from continued violence. Addressing the underlying conditions that give rise to violent people and places is a long-term goal that will require community-wide commitment and resources. In any city, violent crime is caused by a combination of social, structural, and environmental conditions, many of which are outside the direct control of the police. As the social and economic fallout of the Covid 19 pandemic continues to put pressure on public services and the criminal justice system, policy-makers at the state and local levels must be cognizant of the role that well- intended policies can have on crime and violence. The linkage between social and physical disorder and crime and fear of crime is well-established in the literature but may be moderated by collective efficacy4 in neighborhoods and is strongly influenced by concentrated poverty (O’Shea, 2006; Sampson & Raudenbush, 1999; Taylor et al., 1985; Wei et al., 2005; Yang, 2009). Violent crime, and especially robbery, as subset of violent crime, is directly correlated with levels of physical disorder (Sampson & Raudenbush, 1999; Wei et al., 2005). In Salt Lake City, evidence of homelessness and physical disorder is noticeable, and the homeless 4 Collective efficacy refers to cohesion among neighborhood residents coupled with shared expectations of informal social control of public space. 3 concentrate in a number of encampments and around shelters, which are also hot spots for violent crime. Research suggests that the disorder conditions produced by large numbers of people living on the streets will have a reciprocal relationship with crime, violence, and fear of crime (Yang, 2009). Moreover, it is well understood that the homeless are victimized at rates that far exceed those of the non-homeless and are especially vulnerable to predatory violence (Ellsworth, 2018; Fitzpatrick et. al, 1993). While the police are a necessary component of violent crime reduction and prevention, they do not make policy, influence the amount or concentration of physical or social disorder, or control the factors that produce concentrated poverty. Long-term solutions to violent crime in Salt Lake City will require strategic policing and a commitment from policy-makers and the community to address the underlying conditions that contribute to violence, including urban blight and decay. Finally, as criminal justice and bail reform efforts continue to gain traction throughout the nation, prosecutors and judges must be cognizant of how prosecution and bail decisions can impact violent crime by increasing the number of offenders who are not prosecuted or who are on pre-trial release, a portion of whom will commit additional crimes while on release pending trial.5 Thus, the successful execution of this plan will require active participation, cooperation, and investment by a wide-range of stakeholders in Salt Lake City, including City leadership, multiple City agencies and departments, federal and state law enforcement partners, community and faith-based organizations, non-profits, research partners, and community members themselves. Goals and Objectives The SLCPD is committed to renewing its efforts to reducing violent crime in the city by developing this multi-faceted, violence reduction strategy based on the best available science. Drawing from a substantial body of research on the positive impacts that hot spots policing can have on reducing violence, this plan begins with a short-term focus on substantially increasing police visibility at locations where violent crime is concentrated and prioritizing street-level deterrence in these areas. Building outward, the plan incorporates a mid-term strategy focused on violent places within the city using a Problem-Oriented, Place-Based Policing (POPPB) approach. Finally, over the longer-term, the 5 See Cassell & Fowles (2020) for a recent discussion of bail reform in Chicago and its impact on public safety. 4 SLCPD will lead a focused deterrence strategy to help break the cycle of violence among the small number of repeat and high-risk offenders who are responsible for committing most of the violent crime in Salt Lake City. All of these strategies are evidence-based, and all have shown success in other cities. By implementing these strategies, the Salt Lake City Police Department seeks to accomplish the following goals: • In partnership with other city agencies and the community, reverse the increasing trend in reported violent crime • Reduce the annual number of victims of violent crime • Increase community trust and engagement with the SLCPD to facilitate solving crimes of violence and successfully prosecuting violent offenders • Improve place-based conditions that contribute to violence in coordination with other City stakeholders Keys to Success Violent crime reduction is unlikely to be successful without a clear strategy for success. The details of this plan are outlined below to ensure that all stakeholders understand the goals and the specific strategies to be applied in addressing the violent crime problem in Salt Lake City. The creation and adoption of a strategic crime reduction plan is a necessary but insufficient element to achieving the goal of reducing violent crime over the long-term. Several additional factors need to be present to enhance the likelihood of success: • Clear communication and reinforcement of this plan by the chief and SLCPD leadership team • Buy-in and commitment from line officers to implement the strategies • Engagement and support from city leaders (i.e., Mayor and City Council) to include: o commitment of resources to support the plan o mobilization of city services to underpin aspects of the plan (i.e., the mid- term and long-term strategies) • A willingness to evaluate and modify current legal and social practices as needed to address the underlying challenges that facilitate and contribute to violent crime • Recognition that policy and practical alignment must exist between all components of the criminal justice system to ensure that the legal and corrections components of the system support the goals of the plan • Community support to include businesses, faith-based leaders, neighborhood associations, and other professional organizations/communities (i.e., health, education, etc.) • Consistent, honest evaluation of implementation and impact to facilitate modifications, as needed, to promote success 5 • Broad recognition that violent crime is a community problem that can be partially addressed by the SLCPD but cannot be fully addressed without action taken by the state, city, and community to tackle deep-rooted social problems (i.e., homelessness, employment opportunities, domestic violence, education, etc.) NEAR-TERM STRATEGY Hot Spots Policing Considerable evidence suggests that police can be effective at reducing violent crime in small areas with high rates of violence. Often referred to as “hot spots policing,” some of the strongest evidence of the impact that police can have on crime comes from more than 25 years of research showing that a relatively small number of areas generate the majority of violent crime in most American cities and that crime can be reduced in those areas through targeted police enforcement (Braga et al., 2019; National Research Council, 2004; Weisburd & Telep, 2014). Hot spots policing can be implemented fairly quickly and can reduce reported violent crime in targeted areas by 10-50 percent (Corsaro et al., 2019; Groff et al., 2015; Rosenfeld et al., 2014). Moreover, there is little evidence that violent crime is spatially displaced to surrounding areas when hot spots policing is implemented and considerable evidence that areas adjacent to hot spots also can expect lower crime rate benefits (albeit to a lesser degree) from the police treatment effects (Weisburd et al., 2006). Little is known, however, about the potential displacement of crime associated with hot spots policing to other areas of the city or to different crime types (Weisburd & Telep, 2014). While there is no universally accepted definition of a “hot spot,” hot spots often consist of street segments or similar small areas that are no more than a city block long and which extend no more than a half a block on either side of the segment, although many research studies have evaluated police interventions in larger hot spots (see Rosenfeld et al., 2014 – average hot spot contained 8 street segments and Groff et al., 2015 – average hot spot was the size of 22 football fields). The appropriate size of a hot spot should be driven by empirical considerations, such as the spatial distribution and density of crime, as well as considerations of geography and local police operational knowledge of street activity. In some cities, specific addresses may serve as appropriate hot spots for the concentration of police resources. What police actually do in hot spots policing and whether some tactics are more effective than others have also been the subject of research and evaluation. In their most recent meta-analysis of hot spots research studies, Braga et al. (2019) found that problem- oriented policing strategies generated moderately higher impacts on crime than merely increasing police presence with extra officers or patrols. Problem-oriented policing refers to police strategies targeted at specific problems with solutions tailored to those problems (Goldstein, 1990). Hot spots dominated by illegal drug sales may require different policing 6 tactics than areas with high levels of illegal prostitution, for example. While some research has evaluated hot spot strategies targeted at specific types of violent crime (e.g. robberies or gun crimes), most hot spot strategies focused on violent crime seek to reduce all types of serious violent crimes. A few studies have examined specific tactics and their effects on crime at hot spots. Recently, Corsaro et al. (2019) investigated whether foot patrols or stationary marked police vehicles with emergency lights illuminated had a greater impact on crime and calls for service within hot spots. They found that lighted patrol cars reduced violent crime in hot spots while foot patrols had the greatest impact on property crime. Groff et al. (2015) compared foot patrol, problem-oriented policing, and offender-focused tactics within experimental and control hot spots and found that only offender-focused tactics had an impact on violent crime. The experimental hot spots showed a 42% decrease in all violent crimes and a 50% decrease in violent felonies compared to their controls. Importantly, modern hot spot strategies rely on increased police visibility and intelligence-led offender targeting rather than generalized “stop and frisk,” oversaturation, or dragnet tactics that can lead to mistrust of the police and community resentment. Offender-focused police strategies are based in an intelligence-led policing framework and derive from the empirical premise that a small percentage of offenders are responsible for most crime (Clarke & Eck, 2005; Ratcliffe, 2008). By proactively targeting repeat offenders, police can theoretically have a greater impact on crime than by targeting places alone (National Research Council, 2004). This strategy has the added benefit of leaving a smaller police “footprint” within communities by focusing attention on known repeat offenders rather than all persons who happen to be out on the street. Offender- focused policing requires good intelligence on where repeat offenders live and/ or where they are likely to engage in future crime. In the Groff et al. (2015) study, the Philadelphia Police Department employed dedicated teams of officers who were exempt from answering calls for service and who proactively contacted, questioned, stopped, and arrested known offenders in the experimental hot spots. Hot spots policing has become a well-accepted strategy to address crime in urban areas, which is disproportionately found in micro-areas with high rates of crime. In a recent nationally representative survey of U.S. law enforcement agencies, the National Police 7 Research Platform found that 75% of agencies surveyed employed hot spots policing as a crime control strategy. Braga et al.’s (2019) most recent updated meta-analysis of hot spots policing studies reviewed 78 tests of hot spots policing across 65 eligible studies and found noteworthy crime control gains in 62 of the 78 tests reviewed. Problem-oriented strategies focused on changing the characteristics of crime-prone places were moderately more effective than increasing police presence or traditional enforcement activities (Braga et al., 2019), and recent evidence suggests that a hot spots approach focused on repeat offenders is potentially even more effective than other place-based problem-oriented approaches (Groff et al., 2015). That said, evidence is lacking that hot spots policing as it has been implemented and evaluated in most cities to date can effectively reduce crime in an entire city or within larger sections of cities (Sherman et al., 2014; Weisburd et al., 2017; Weisburd & Telep, 2014). For example, in an evaluation conducted in Dallas 10 years ago, Weisburd et al. (2015) found measurable reductions in crime within treatment hot spots that experienced increases in patrol time, but these reductions were not measurable within the larger geographic patrol beats where the treatment hot spots were located. Because the experiment resulted in only a 2% increase in unallocated patrol time to hot spots, Weisburd et al. (2015) theorized that the patrol dosage level was insufficient to produce large enough crime reductions gains that might have been observed at the beat level. Based on the observed levels of crime reduction in hot spots associated with the 2% increase in unallocated patrol time, Weisburd et al. (2015) estimated that if unallocated patrol time could have been increased to 25%, then crime could theoretically have been reduced by as much as 25% within the treatment beats. In a subsequent experimental simulation, Weisburd et al. (2017) demonstrated a hypothetical 13% reduction in street robberies within a large police borough when one third of patrol officers were assigned to spend 50 percent of their time at the top five hot spots within their beats and a 21% reduction in robberies when half of patrol officers spent all of their time at the top five hot spots. Taken together, the hot spots policing literature suggests several key factors that might produce optimal crime control within hot spots and possibly within larger areas surrounding those hot spots or even across an entire city (Weisburd et al., 2017): • Hot spots must receive enough “dosage” to produce measurable crime control gains beyond the boundaries of the hot spots themselves o Dosage reflects both the number of hot spots that receive intervention, and the amount of time police devote to each hot spot o Concentrating available patrol resources on hot spots may result in fewer officers assigned to lower crime areas and longer response times, especially for non-emergency calls • Police activities at hot spots matter o High-visibility presence (marked cars with lights on) and offender- focused tactics may be more effective than foot or drive-by patrols at reducing violent crime 8 • Police behavior matters o When police focus on procedural justice and are viewed as legitimate by the public, crime control gains are likely to be enhanced (Tyler et al., 2015) Hot Spots Policing in Salt Lake City Criminologists from the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA research partners) have evaluated the geographic concentration of crime in Salt Lake City and have found that violent crime is highly concentrated at a relatively small number of addresses in the city. Violence-prone locations in Salt Lake City include certain stores, hotels, homeless shelters, convenience stores, and apartment complexes. With this in mind, the SLCPD will employ a hot spots policing strategy that initially focuses on violence-prone addresses and which increases police visibility at or near those locations to deter violent offenders. First, working with UTSA researchers, SLCPD will update the locations of violent crime hot spots throughout the city by focusing on addresses where robberies, aggravated assaults, and homicides occurred over the past 12 months and within the most recent 60-90-day period to ensure that hot spots are appropriately identified. Initially, this empirically-driven analysis will seek to identify the small percentage of addresses where violent crime is most heavily concentrated (Weisburd et al., 2015). Once these addresses are identified, they will be rank ordered from highest to lowest city-wide and within police divisions. It is expected that some divisions may have few or even no high crime addresses while others may have multiple high crime hot spots. Depending upon available resources, SLCPD will seek to treat as many violence-prone addresses as possible with a goal of treating, at minimum, those addresses that together account for at least 10% of all violent crime in the City. Hot spot locations will be adjusted (if needed) every 60-90 days based on changing crime patterns, and police resources will be re-deployed accordingly. Second, once identified and rank-ordered within divisions, the high violent crime addresses will be evaluated by SLCPD commanders and their officers and hot spot boundaries adjusted, if appropriate, based on unique geographic features (e.g., a mall or shopping center) and local operational knowledge of crime patterns and trends. The list of current hot spots that emerges from this process will be mapped, revisited, and updated every 60- 90 days. 9 Finally, the hot spots will receive a high visibility “treatment” consisting of the systematic assignment of patrol officers to remain in the hot spots with their emergency lights activated for 15 minutes (the optimal dosage period) every hour during peak hours of crime as identified in each hot spot through crime analysis.6 Strong evidence exists that hot spots policing reduces crime in targeted micro-areas, and all available resources will be brought to bear in an effort to drive down violent crime in sectors and city-wide by concentrating sufficient dosage in the targeted violent crime hot spots identified through the process described above. Implementation of the strategy is expected to begin in September 2022, and impacts will be assessed every 90 days as described below. Adjustments to the hot spot boundaries and/or re-deployment of officers to new hot spots will be made every 90 days if needed based on changes in observed crime patterns. Measurement and Evaluation To assess the impact and effectiveness of the near-term hot spots policing strategy, reported violent crime counts, arrests, and calls for service data will be obtained for the treated hot spots, police divisions, and city-wide for 24-36 months leading up to the implementation of the strategy and monthly thereafter. Violent crime counts also will be obtained and evaluated for catchment areas surrounding the hot spots to check for crime displacement or diffusion of benefits resulting from the intervention. Violent crime counts will be reviewed descriptively at each of the four levels (hot spots, catchment areas, divisions, city-wide) on a monthly basis and patterns or changes assessed. At 60-90-day intervals, changes to crime and the other metrics will be evaluated and compared to the previous 60-90-day period. Quarterly reports will be prepared and disseminated internally within the SLCPD and externally to city council and other stakeholders as appropriate. Semi- annually, broader and more detailed analyses will be conducted by the UTSA research team to evaluate impacts of the strategy on violent crime, arrests, and calls for service within the hot spots, catchment areas, divisions, and city-wide. These analyses also will include an assessment of plan implementation and fidelity to ensure officers are present at the hot spots in accordance with the deployment plans (peak crime hours/days of the week). When emerging hot spots are identified, they will be added to the treatment protocols; likewise, hot spots that are no longer “hot” will be removed. Every six months, the Chief of Police will lead an intensive strategic review to assess the effectiveness of the strategy and to recommend any changes or adjustments. The possible addition of place-focused, problem-oriented strategies also will be evaluated during the strategic review sessions. To facilitate transparency and stakeholder input, biannual reports will be produced for public release outlining the hot spots strategy, detailing observed changes in violent crime, and noting any changes recommended to the strategy. 6 As in Las Vegas (see Corsaro et al., 2019) and Dallas, patrol officers will be assigned to these high visibility hot spot times each hour via dispatch. This will help ensure fidelity to the strategy. If resources or unforeseen events do not allow for the assignment of officers to hot spots during certain hours, these gaps will be documented and accounted for in the ongoing evaluation of the efficacy of the strategy. 10 MID-TERM STRATEGY Problem-Oriented, Place-Based Policing (POPBP) A robust body of literature has documented the effectiveness of hot spots policing at reducing crime in targeted areas. A recent meta-analysis of this research found that problem-oriented strategies carefully tailored to address the underlying conditions that contribute to recurring problems in crime-prone locations were more effective at reducing crime than merely increasing or intensifying traditional police activities (Braga et al., 2019). Moreover, a variety of problem-oriented, place-based strategies have been implemented and evaluated and have shown success at reducing a broad range of offenses from property crimes like burglary or theft to drug-related crimes and violent crime (Braga & Bond, 2008; Eck & Spelman, 1987; Hinkle & Weisburd, 2008; Hinkle et al., 2020; Taylor et al., 2011). While place-based crime reduction strategies often have a law enforcement component, they frequently require the involvement of other stakeholders who can help address the conditions that make a particular location attractive for crime. Routine activities theory suggests that three elements must come together in time and space for a crime to occur: A vulnerable victim, a motivated offender, and the lack of a capable guardian (Cohen & Felson, 1979). A recent Campbell Collaboration systematic review of 28 studies that examined the effects of reducing physical (vacant lots, trash, graffiti, etc.) and social (public drinking/ drug use, prostitution, loitering, etc.) disorder on crime found that 26 of the 30 effects tests reported statistically significant crime reduction impacts in the targeted areas associated with the problem-oriented, disorder abatement strategies utilized (Braga et al., 2019). Thus, problem-oriented, place- based crime prevention strategies seek to remove one or more of the necessary pre-conditions to crime to prevent victimization and reduce the likelihood that crime will reoccur at a targeted location. Reducing social and physical disorder can be a powerful deterrent to would-be offenders and stimulate guardianship through the increased, pro-social use of space. As noted, place-based crime prevention often requires a multidimensional response to a set of underlying conditions that make a particular place amenable to crime. City services are often needed to address social and physical disorder that contribute to fear of crime and that reduce the use of public space. Reducing homelessness, open-air drug use, litter, poor lighting, code violations, or aggressive panhandling requires resources and involvement 11 by city, county and state agencies, non-profits, or even volunteers. Likewise, a formal assessment and the application of principles of crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) may be needed to improve natural surveillance and guardianship of businesses, streets, or public parks where violent crime occurs. Problem-driven solutions may involve improved lighting, the removal or installation (depending upon conditions) of barriers to vehicular or foot traffic, the enforcement or adoption of building or zoning regulations, nuisance/disorder abatement, or traditional law enforcement measures such as conducting investigations and arresting or issuing citations to law violators. Above all, creative thinking, multi-disciplinary approaches, and appropriate resources are necessary to design and implement situational crime prevention strategies to reduce the incidence of violence at places where it is concentrated. Urban Blight and Disorder Abatement Rooted in “broken windows” theory (Wilson & Kelling, 1982), a growing body of literature has documented the association between urban blight and crime, including violent crime (Kondo et al., 2015; Branas et al., 2016; Branas et al., 2018; Connealy, 2022; Wheeler et al., 2018). Efforts in Philadelphia and Buffalo to remediate vacant lots and/or abandoned or neglected buildings led to measurable reductions in firearms assaults and other crimes in and around the treated areas compared to comparable untreated areas (Branas et al., 2016; Wheeler et al., 2018). In a follow-up study using a randomized controlled trial design (the “gold standard” in research design to show cause and effect), Branas and his colleagues (2018) obtained funding to randomly assign vacant lots in Philadelphia for treatment through the application of a vacant land ordinance that allowed city-contracted workers to remove trash and debris, grade the land, plant a small number of trees, hydroseed the lot with grass, and install a low wooden fence with gaps to encourage use of the lots as micro parks within neighborhoods. Approximately 375 lots were randomly assigned and treated (some more extensively than others) at an average cost of $5 per square meter and maintained afterwards at an average cost of $.50 per square meter. The researchers measured crime and neighborhood perceptions of crime in and around the treated sites and found significantly reduced perceptions of crime through surveys of residents and a statistically significant reduction in all reported crime (-4.2%), gun assaults (-2.7%), and burglaries (-6.3%) in the treated areas compared to the untreated areas; the effects were even more pronounced in neighborhoods below the poverty line. Kondo et al. (2015) found similar effects associated with the installation of working doors and windows to improve the facades of abandoned buildings, and recently, Connealy (2022) also demonstrated the salience of urban decay (deteriorated streets and sidewalks, dilapidated buildings, vacant/ unkempt land) on the formation and persistence of crime hot spots in Indianapolis. Taken as a whole, this body of evidence suggests that place-based strategies to control crime should include efforts to remediate urban decay, particularly in and around hot spots for violent crime. 12 POPBP in Salt Lake City Violent crime in Salt Lake City is highly concentrated at a relatively small number of addresses, and many of the places where violent crime repeatedly occurs are businesses or homeless shelters. Some motels, convenience stores, gas stations, and small number of apartment complexes also disproportionately contribute to violent crime in Salt Lake City. Thus, the existing pattern of violent crime in Salt Lake City suggests the need for a place- based strategy that would involve partnerships between businesses (including apartment/ motel management), the SLCPD, and other city agencies to address the conditions in and around these locations that make them attractive targets for violent crime. A holistic, problem-oriented response to such conditions will require detailed problem definitions, tailored, evidence-based solutions, and the careful assessment of results (Goldstein, 1990). As a promising mid-term strategy to address violence, the SLCPD, in coordination with other city agencies and stakeholders, intends to implement a POPBP process in Salt Lake City to complement the hot spots strategies it will implement in the shorter term. Realistically, a POPBP strategy will take 6-12 months to put into place and will require training and buy-in from multiple stakeholders. The following table was adapted from Herold et al. (2020) and serves to illustrate how the POPBP process will unfold in Salt Lake City. TABLE 1: The POPBP Process IMPLEMENTATION STEPS Select violent locations Select and train SLCPD POPBP unit Establish, train, and obtain buy-in from POPBP Board members Establish and train POPBP working group POPBP working group assesses the nature and extent of the problem(s) • Collect community intelligence • Gather and analyze agency-specific data Develop solutions to problem(s) identified; present to POPBP Board • Enforcement solutions • Environmental solutions • Community solutions Implement solutions Assess implementation and effectiveness Make adjustments as needed • Continual assessment To maximize its chances for success, the POPBP process requires buy-in from multiple stakeholders and a careful, data-driven process that starts with identifying violence-prone hot spots and investigating them exhaustively to understand the nature of the problems 13 that contribute to the violence occurring at these locations. Police and other POPBP stakeholders will require training on the POPBP process and/or investigative techniques, and the police must have (or put in place) a functional process for collecting and analyzing data and intelligence related to potential POPBP sites. Once likely sites have been identified, Chief Brown, working with the Mayor, will lead the development of a POPBP Board (stakeholder agency leaders) and working group (mid-level managers) to oversee the implementation of place-based operations plans. The working group will be responsible for gathering information about the violence-prone places, carefully defining the problems there, and developing creative solutions. The POPBP Board will review the information gathered and proposed solutions, approve the place-based plans, and commit the resources necessary to carry them out. The careful tracking and analysis of pre- and post-intervention metrics (agreed upon by the Board) is vital and will be carried out by the UTSA research partners. The effects of the interventions must be carefully assessed and documented and adjustments made to the plans if necessary to optimize success. Critically, the plans must include a strong maintenance component purposely designed to ensure that crime reduction gains are maintained and not squandered as attention is shifted to other sites (Herold et al., 2020). During the first six months of implementation, initial violent places will be identified by the SLCPD POPBP unit using traditional crime analysis methods and local police knowledge and intelligence. The process of putting together the POPBP board will begin concurrently, and the initial training of police POPBP personnel will take place during the initial six-month period. The Chief of Police will lead the POPBP Board and will be principally responsible for constituting the Board with support from the Mayor. Once the Board is in place, its members and working group designees will be trained on the POPBP process and goals within six months. Likely membership of the Board will include the following: TABLE 2: Initial POPBP Board Membership CITY DEPARTMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Police • Lead POPBP board • Gather intelligence • Conduct criminal investigations • Make arrests • Deter criminal activity • Analyze crime and public-safety related data City Attorney • Legal review of recommended intervention strategies as needed • Drafts municipal code changes as needed Building Services • Building inspections • Code compliance • Civil enforcement 14 Civil Enforcement • Enforcement (zoning, weeds, etc.) • Vacant/boarded housing Community & Neighborhoods • Housing solutions • Community problem-solving Compliance • Impoundment of abandoned vehicles • Parking issues Economic Development • Business investment/development Fire Department • Identify/address fire hazards and fire code violations Housing Stability • Housing programs • Provision of services/shelter • Impact and needs assessments Planning • Zoning-related issues Public Lands • Parks and recreation • Use and maintenance Redevelopment Agency • Livability • Neighborhood improvement Streets • Street improvements • Street design Transportation • Public transportation • Traffic problems/concerns Waste & Recycling • Illegal dumping • Trash removal Youth & Family • Youth programs • Summer jobs • Family support Once the POPBP board and working group are in place and trained, the SLCPD POPBP unit and POPBP working group will begin an intensive information-gathering process on the sites to identify the precise nature and scope of the underlying problems driving violent crime in and around them. This information-gathering and analysis phase will culminate in the development of potential solutions to the problems identified. Problems identified and solutions proposed will be incorporated into site-specific operations plans that will include timelines for implementation, responsible parties, and metrics for measuring implementation and effectiveness of each proposed solution. These strategies likely will involve traditional police enforcement and crime prevention activities but also should include a multipronged and multi-disciplinary strategy to address the underlying problems that facilitate violence at the crime-prone place. Changes to the physical environment, code enforcement, and even traffic flows may need to be addressed as part of a comprehensive place-based violence reduction strategy. Once operations plans have been developed, they will be presented to the POPBP board for its input, eventual approval, and commitment of resources. 15 Measurement and Evaluation To assess the implementation and effectiveness of the POPBP strategy on violent crime in Salt Lake City, the UTSA research team will conduct a process and impact evaluation of the strategy. Process evaluations are designed to document the implementation of programs and policies, assess whether they were implemented as intended, and identify any obstacles to implementation. An outcome (or impact) evaluation focuses on whether the program or strategy as implemented had its intended effect. In this case, the overarching goal of the strategy is to reduce violent crime (robberies, aggravated assaults, homicides) and its associated metrics such as shootings or violence-related calls for service in and around crime-prone places. The process evaluation will make use of problem-specific metrics to assess expected outcomes such as arrests made, code violations written, nuisances abated, or environmental changes made to document implementation. The POPBP working group will be asked for input on implementation metrics that should be tracked, and these will be systematically gathered and analyzed by the UTSA research team and reported semi- annually following POPBP implementation. On the outcome side, the POPBP working group will again work with the UTSA researchers to identify appropriate effectiveness metrics such as violent crimes, shootings, or violence- related calls for service received pre- and post-intervention. A 6-month pre and 6-month post intervention period will be utilized initially to gauge the impact of the strategy on the agreed-upon impact metrics collected in and around the crime-place locations and surrounding areas. Once maintenance plans are put in place to maintain crime reduction gains at targeted sites, the SLCPD and UTSA researchers will continue to follow key outcome metrics over time (e.g., 24-36 months) to track long-term effects. LONG-TERM STRATEGY Longer-term crime reduction strategies require additional time and resources to implement compared to short-term or mid-term strategies. In most cases, they also require collaboration with outside stakeholders, which may include other city departments, federal law enforcement agencies, schools, businesses, community groups, and non-profit organizations. The long-term violence reduction strategy proposed below is evidence- based and has proven successful in other cities after rigorous evaluation. Focused Deterrence First designed and implemented in Boston in the 1990s, focused deterrence strategies (sometimes referred to as “pulling levers”) have proven successful in reducing violent crime in a number of cities where they have been applied and evaluated (Braga et al., 2018; Corsaro, 2018; Engel, 2018). A leading expert in the design and evaluation of these approaches to reducing street-level violence has stated unequivocally that “focused deterrence strategies save lives” (Engel, 2018). The goal of focused deterrence is to change the behavior of high- 16 risk offenders through a combination of deterrence, incapacitation (arrest), community involvement, and the provision of alternatives to violence (Braga et al., 2018). A key feature of most focused deterrence strategies is the clear communication to gang members and other violent offenders of the risks associated with continued criminal activity and the alternatives available to them under a robust suite of social service, education, and job- related services made available to them under the strategy. Focused deterrence strategies have been successfully implemented in cities such as Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Chicago, New Orleans, Oakland, Detroit, and Seattle among others and have shown statistically significant, and in some cases, substantively large reductions (15-34%) in reported violent crime (McGarrell et al., 2006; Engel et al., 2010; Papachristos & Kirk, 2015; Corsaro & Engel, 2015; Saunders et al., 2016). Components of Focused Deterrence While focused deterrence strategies typically contain common elements, they should be viewed as problem-oriented policing strategies that work best when tailored to a specific crime problem or offending population (e.g., gang violence, youth homicide) in a city or area of a city. These strategies emphasize the development of an interagency law enforcement team often consisting of local, state, and federal partners (law enforcement, prosecutors, probation/parole, etc.), which relies on local intelligence to identify high risk offenders or groups of offenders within the targeted risk group. The law enforcement team then develops a strategy to target the offenders utilizing all available legal remedies – arrest and prosecution (often with federal partners taking the lead on drug and gun-related crimes), gang injunctions, place-based strategies to close down buildings or houses used to facilitate crime, etc. Key to the strategy is (1) a deterrence message communicated directly and repeatedly to the target population, and (2) offering violent lifestyle alternatives to the targeted offenders, which may involve the provision of social services, education, job training, substance abuse treatment, or direct employment with willing partners in the private or non-profit sectors (Braga, 2018). The deterrence message is often communicated through “call-ins” or offender notification meetings whereby offenders are invited or required (as a condition of probation or parole) to appear and hear deterrence messaging from law enforcement officials and respected community voices (e.g., clergy or family members of victims). At these meetings, social service representatives are also available to offer prosocial alternatives to the threat posed by law enforcement of arrest and long-term incarceration in a federal penitentiary. Cities that have used focused deterrence strategies successfully sometimes have made use of street workers (often former gang members) to communicate the deterrence message directly to gang members on the street and to serve as a resource to connect them with social services (CICF, 2021; Engel et al., 2010; McGarrell, et al., 2006). Each offender also should be assigned to a caseworker for follow-up and tracking from initial contact through final disposition. 17 Focused deterrence strategies come in several varieties. The original Boston Ceasefire model, later replicated and modified in Cincinnati and other cities, focused on gangs and violent criminal groups. Other cities have copied the High Point, NC drug market intervention (DMI) program that focused on identifying and arresting violent drug dealers while suspending criminal proceedings against non-violent drug offenders within targeted drug markets (Kennedy & Wong, 2009). These non-violent offenders were then provided moral support and encouragement from family members and/or community leaders and social service support from city or non-profit agencies. Based on the High Point experience, DMI has been rated as “effective” by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ, 2014). A final type of focused deterrence targets repeat offenders by leveraging available legal tools (arrest and prosecution), deterrence through the use of “moral” voices from the community, and the provision of social service alternatives (Braga, 2018; Papachristos et al., 2007). Focused Deterrence in Salt Lake City As part of its strategy to help provide long-term solutions to violent crime in Salt Lake City, the SLCPD will lead problem-based, focused deterrence strategies tailored to particular violent crime problems, neighborhoods, and offender groups. In partnership with the UTSA research team, the SLCPD will utilize problem-oriented policing methods to clearly identify underlying violent crime patterns in Salt Lake City and its neighborhoods,7 and then it will design tailored strategies to address those problems drawn from the success of focused deterrence models in other cities. Focused deterrence is a holistic, resource-intensive process involving multiple law enforcement and community partners. Initially, the SLCPD will work with its academic partners, city leadership, and other stakeholders to prioritize problems and people for focused deterrence interventions. The nature of those interventions may vary according to the problem identified (gang violence vs. neighborhood-based open-air drug markets), recognizing that some problems may overlap. As studies that have documented success have found, law enforcement partners at the local, state, and federal level will be engaged and brought onboard early in the process. These partners may include the FBI, U.S. Attorney’s Office, DEA, ATF, Salt Lake County District Attorney, Utah Adult Probation & Parole, and others. Given the resource-intensive nature of focused deterrence, initially one problem and/ or neighborhood will be selected for intervention. High risk offenders will be identified from a combination of arrest data and criminal intelligence maintained by SLCPD and/or federal law enforcement. The initial plan will be drawn-up as outlined above, and it will be continually assessed as part of the evaluation process once enacted. If resources allow, a second (or even third) focused deterrence effort may be undertaken simultaneously based on the emerging evidence and lessons learned from the first. 7 Neighborhoods may be defined in the traditional sense using historically understood neighborhood boundaries (e.g., Sugarhouse, University/Foothill, the Avenues) or it may focus on troublesome housing 18 Engaging in the SARA8 problem-oriented process and laying the groundwork for the partnerships needed to ensure programmatic success will take 6-12 months from the time implementation of the strategy begins. It is anticipated that the actual implementation of a focused deterrence strategy likely will begin in the latter half of 2023 or early 2024. By that time, the impact of the short and mid-term strategies that are part of SLCPD’s overall violence reduction strategic plan will have been measured and felt. The impact of these shorter- term strategies may affect the crime problems identified and chosen for intervention using a focused deterrence approach. In this way, the long-term focused deterrence strategy will build upon the expected success of the earlier components of the overall violent crime reduction plan, and the components will work synergistically to reduce violent crime in Salt Lake City and lay the groundwork for long-term change. The resources needed to successfully implement focused deterrence are considerable. Most cities that have utilized this approach have hired (or assigned) a full-time, senior-level director to oversee implementation of the strategy. Service providers must be identified, funding secured, and contracts or memoranda of understanding drawn up and signed. The cooperation of federal partners must be obtained and criteria established for federal prosecution when needed. The support of community and faith-based leaders, victim or survivor groups, family members, and other “moral voices” from the community will be necessary. Cooperation from other elements of the criminal justice system, especially the Salt Lake County prosecutor, is vital for success. In planning for the implementation of focused deterrence, the SLCPD chief and other city leaders may consider the development of a strategy to identify philanthropic partners who may be willing to help underwrite the initial and ongoing costs of the initiative and its evaluation. In sum, the time and effort needed to manage an effort of this magnitude requires a capable leader and appropriate staff (both police and non-police) to support and sustain the initiative for several years until processes are routinized and long-term impacts are felt. Measurement and Evaluation A scientifically valid process and impact evaluation of the Salt Lake City focused deterrence strategy is essential for measuring and documenting programmatic successes and failures. The UTSA research team will be engaged to conduct an independent evaluation of the strategy. An evaluation of this magnitude will be a considerable investment, but it is critical to know if the strategy was implemented as intended and had the impact it was intended to achieve. Before-and-after measures of crime, calls for service, quality of life, and community perceptions of safety will be key outcome indicators the UTSA team will consider. Carefully documenting the fidelity with which the strategy is implemented is also important and necessary to produce a “lessons learned” document that can serve as an implementation guide for subsequent iterations of the strategy. 8 Scanning, analysis, response, and assessment (Goldstein, 1990). 19 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION This document serves as the Violent Crime Reduction Strategic Plan for Salt Lake City and the Salt Lake City Police Department. It contains evidence-based short, mid, and long-term strategies to address violence and its underlying conditions in Salt Lake City over the next three years. In the short-term, the SLCPD will execute a hot spots policing strategy to significantly increase police visibility in violent crime hot spots and deter violent offenders. As a mid- term strategy, the SLCPD will coordinate and lead a problem-oriented, place-based policing strategy to identify crime-prone places, arrest offenders when needed, and address the underlying environmental conditions conducive to crime. Long-term, the SLCPD will lead a focused deterrence strategy to arrest and prosecute violent offenders, deter others from committing violent crimes, and facilitate the provision of social services to crime-prone individuals willing to take advantage of them. From short-term to long-term, the SLCPD is also committed to facilitating the scientific evaluation of these strategies by credible and independent evaluators to document programmatic successes or failures and to provide a roadmap for future leaders in Salt Lake City and beyond to follow in their continuing efforts to reduce violence and the toll it takes on individuals and families in the community. These strategies are evidence-based and purposely designed to work synergistically to lower violent crime and improve the environmental conditions that facilitate it, recognizing that lowering poverty, improving education, reducing unemployment, eliminating homelessness and food insecurity, and supporting families are also critical to reducing violence in communities in the long term. 20 TP D C r i m e P l a n T i m e l i n e : Y e a r 1 ( S e p 2 0 2 2 - A u g 2 0 2 3 ) MO N T H Se p Oc t No v De c Ja n Fe b Ma r Ap r Ma y Ju n Ju l Au g TA S K S Ho t S p o t s P o l i c i n g Al l o c a t e r e s o u r c e s b a s e d o n r e c e n t a n a l y s e s X X X X X X X X X X X X Ev a l u a t e t r e a t m e n t e f f e c t i v e n e s s X X X X Mo d i f y t r e a t m e n t a p p l i c a t i o n a s n e c e s s a r y X X X X Pr e p a r e i n t e r i m r e p o r t o n t r e a t m e n t e f f e c t i v e n e s s X X X X Pr e p a r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e r e p o r t o n l o n g e r t e r m t r e n d s an d p a t t e r n s X X Pr o b l e m - O r i e n t e d , P l a c e - B a s e d P o l i c i n g ( P O P B P ) Se l e c t a n d t r a i n T P D P O P B P u n i t X Es t a b l i s h a n d t r a i n P O P B P b o a r d a n d w o r k i n g g r o u p X X Ga t h e r p r e - i n t e l l i g e n c e t o s e l e c t v i o l e n t m i c r o - lo c a t i o n s X Co n d u c t i n t e r n a l a n d s t a k e h o l d e r i n f o r m a t i o n - ga t h e r i n g s e s s i o n s X X Pr e s e n t P O P B P p l a n t o B o a r d f o r a p p r o v a l X Ex e c u t e s t r a t e g y X X X Ev a l u a t e e f f e c t i v e n e s s ; a d j u s t ; a d d n e w s i t e s Pr e p a r e s u m m a r y r e p o r t Fo c u s e d D e t e r r e n c e Co n v e n e p r o g r a m s t a k e h o l d e r s Es t a b l i s h a n d t r a i n p r o g r a m b o a r d Pr o g r a m p l a n n i n g Id e n t i f y a t - r i s k o f f e n d e r s & l o c a t i o n s Co n d u c t o f f e n d e r c a l l - i n m e e t i n g s 21 In t e n s i v e e n f o r c e m e n t / p e o p l e & p l a c e s Mo n i t o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n Pr e p a r e s u m m a r y r e p o r t o n o u t c o m e s TP D C r i m e P l a n T i m e l i n e : Y e a r 2 ( S e p 2 0 2 3 - A u g 2 0 2 4 ) MO N T H Se p Oc t No v De c Ja n Fe b Ma r Ap r Ma y Ju n Ju l Au g TA S K S Ho t S p o t s P o l i c i n g Al l o c a t e r e s o u r c e s b a s e d o n r e c e n t a n a l y s e s X X X X X X X X X X X X Ev a l u a t e t r e a t m e n t e f f e c t i v e n e s s X X X X Mo d i f y t r e a t m e n t a p p l i c a t i o n a s n e c e s s a r y X X X X Pr e p a r e i n t e r i m r e p o r t o n t r e a t m e n t e f f e c t i v e n e s s X X X X Pr e p a r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e r e p o r t o n l o n g e r t e r m t r e n d s an d p a t t e r n s X X Pr o b l e m - O r i e n t e d , P l a c e - B a s e d P o l i c i n g ( P O P B P ) Se l e c t a n d t r a i n T P D P O P B P u n i t Es t a b l i s h a n d t r a i n P O P B P b o a r d a n d w o r k i n g g r o u p Ga t h e r p r e - i n t e l l i g e n c e t o s e l e c t v i o l e n t m i c r o - lo c a t i o n s X Co n d u c t i n t e r n a l a n d s t a k e h o l d e r i n f o r m a t i o n - ga t h e r i n g s e s s i o n s X X Pr e s e n t P O P B P p l a n t o B o a r d f o r a p p r o v a l X Ex e c u t e s t r a t e g y X X X X X X X X X X X X Ev a l u a t e e f f e c t i v e n e s s ; a d j u s t ; a d d n e w s i t e s X X Pr e p a r e s u m m a r y r e p o r t X X Fo c u s e d D e t e r r e n c e Co n v e n e p r o g r a m s t a k e h o l d e r s X Es t a b l i s h a n d t r a i n p r o g r a m s t a k e h o l d e r s X Pr o g r a m p l a n n i n g X X 22 Id e n t i f y a t - r i s k o f f e n d e r s & l o c a t i o n s X X Co n d u c t o f f e n d e r c a l l - i n m e e t i n g s X X In t e n s i v e e n f o r c e m e n t / p e o p l e & p l a c e s X X X X X X Mo n i t o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n X X X X X X Pr e p a r e s u m m a r y r e p o r t o n o u t c o m e s Pr e p a r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e r e p o r t TP D C r i m e P l a n T i m e l i n e : Y e a r 3 ( S e p 2 0 2 4 - A u g 2 0 2 5 ) MO N T H Se p Oc t No v De c Ja n Fe b Ma r Ap r Ma y Ju n Ju l Au g TA S K S Ho t S p o t s P o l i c i n g Al l o c a t e r e s o u r c e s b a s e d o n r e c e n t a n a l y s e s X X X X X X X X X X X X Ev a l u a t e t r e a t m e n t e f f e c t i v e n e s s X X X X Mo d i f y t r e a t m e n t a p p l i c a t i o n a s n e c e s s a r y X X X X Pr e p a r e i n t e r i m r e p o r t o n t r e a t m e n t e f f e c t i v e n e s s X X X X Pr e p a r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e r e p o r t o n l o n g e r t e r m tr e n d s a n d p a t t e r n s X X Pr o b l e m - O r i e n t e d , P l a c e - B a s e d P o l i c i n g ( P O P B P ) Se l e c t a n d t r a i n T P D P O P B P u n i t Es t a b l i s h a n d t r a i n P O P B P b o a r d a n d w o r k i n g g r o u p Ga t h e r p r e - i n t e l l i g e n c e t o s e l e c t v i o l e n t m i c r o - lo c a t i o n s X Co n d u c t i n t e r n a l a n d s t a k e h o l d e r i n f o r m a t i o n - ga t h e r i n g s e s s i o n s X X Pr e s e n t P O P B P p l a n t o B o a r d f o r a p p r o v a l X Ex e c u t e s t r a t e g y X X X X X X X X X X X X Ev a l u a t e e f f e c t i v e n e s s ; a d j u s t ; a d d n e w s i t e s X X Pr e p a r e s u m m a r y r e p o r t X X 23 Fo c u s e d D e t e r r e n c e Co n v e n e p r o g r a m s t a k e h o l d e r s Es t a b l i s h a n d t r a i n p r o g r a m b o a r d Pr o g r a m p l a n n i n g Id e n t i f y a t - r i s k o f f e n d e r s & l o c a t i o n s Co n d u c t o f f e n d e r c a l l - i n m e e t i n g s X X X X In t e n s i v e e n f o r c e m e n t / p e o p l e & p l a c e s X X X X X X X X X X X X Mo n i t o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n X X X X X X X X X X X X Pr e p a r e s u m m a r y r e p o r t o n o u t c o m e s X X X Pr e p a r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e r e p o r t X X 24 REFERENCES Berk, R. & MacDonald, J. (2010). Policing the homeless: An evaluation of efforts to reduce homeless-related crime. Criminology & Public Policy, 9, 813-840. Braga, A.A. & Bond, B.J. (2008). Policing crime and disorder hot spots: A randomized controlled trial. Criminology, 46, 577-607. Braga, A.A., Turchan, B.S., Papachristos, A.V., & Hureau, D.M. (2019). Hots spots policing and crime reduction: An update on an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15, 289-311. Braga, A.A., Welsh, B.C., & Schnell, C. (2019). Disorder policing to reduce crime: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 15. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1050. Braga, A.A., Weisburd, D., & Turchan, B. (2018). Focused deterrence strategies and crime control. Criminology & Public Policy, 17, 205-250. Branas, C.C., South, E.C., Kondo, M.C., Hohl, B., Bourgois, P., Wiebe, D.J., MacDonald, J.M. (2018). Citywide cluster randomized trial to restore blighted vacant land and its effects on violence, crime, and fear. PNAS, 115, 2946-2951. Branas, CC., Kondo, M.C., Murphy, S.M., South, E.C., Polsky, D., & MacDonald, J.M. (2016). Urban blight remediation as a cost-beneficial solution to firearm violence. American Journal of Public Health, 106, 2158-2164. Cassell, P.G. & Fowles, R. (2020). Does bail reform increase crime? An empirical assessment of the public safety implications of bail reform in Cook County, Illinois. Wake Forest Law Review, 55, 933-983. Central Indiana Community Foundation. (2021). Community-based violence prevention partnership toolkit. Indianapolis, IN: Author. Available at https://www.cicf.org/wp-content/ uploads/2019/06/OPHS-2019-VIOLENCE-PREVENTION-TOOLKIT.pdf. Clarke R., & Eck J. (2005). Crime analysis for problem solvers in 60 small steps. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. Available at https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops- w0047-pub.pdf. Cohen, L.E. & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588-608. 25 Connealy, N.T. (2022). The influence, saliency, and consistency of environmental crime predictors: A probability score matching approach to test what makes a hot spot. Justice Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2022.2106292. Corsaro, N. (2018). More than lightning in a bottle and far from ready-made. Criminology & Public Policy, 17, 251-259. Corsaro, N., & Engel, R.S. (2015). The most challenging of contexts: Assessing the impact of focused deterrence on serious violence in New Orleans. Criminology & Public Policy, 14: 471–505. Corsaro, N., Engel, R.S., Herold, T.D., & Yildirim, M. (2019). Implementing gang and gun violence reduction strategies in Las Vega, Nevada: Hot sports evaluation results. IACP/ UC Center for Police Research and Policy. Alexandria, VA: Authors. Available at https:// www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/Research%20Center/LVMPD_Hot%20Spots%20 Experiment_Final%20Report_FINAL.pdf. Culhane, D.P. (2010). Tackling homelessness on Los Angeles’ skid row. Criminology & Public Policy, 9, 851-857. Eck, J. & Spelman, W. (1987). Problem-solving: Problem-oriented policing in New Port News. Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum. Ellsworth, J.T. (2018). Street crime victimization among homeless adults: A review of the literature. Justice Quarterly, 14, 96-118. Engel, R.S. (2018). Focused deterrence strategies save lives: Introduction and discussion of an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Criminology & Public Policy, 17, 199-203. Engel, R.S., Corsaro, N., & Tillyer, M.S. (2010). Evaluation of the Cincinnati Initiative to Reduce Violence (CIRV). Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati Policing Institute. Fitzpatrick, K.M., La Gory, M.E., & Ritchey, F.J. (1993). Criminal victimization and the homeless. Justice Quarterly, 10, 353-368. Goldstein, H. (1990). Problem-oriented policing. New York: McGraw-Hill. Groff, E. R., Ratcliffe, J. H., Haberman, C. P., Sorg, E. T., Joyce, N. M., & Taylor, R. B. (2015). Does what police do at hot spots matter? The Philadelphia Policing Tactics Experiment. Criminology, 53, 23–53. 26 Herold, T.D. (2019). P.N.I.: Place network investigations. Presentation to IACP Research Advisory Committee. Available at https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/5.%20 THerold%20IACP%202019.pdf. Herold, T.D., Engel, R.S., Corsaro, N., & Clouse, S.L. (2020). Place network investigations in Las Vegas, Nevada: Program review and process evaluation. IACP/UC Center for Police Research and Policy. Alexandria, VA: Authors. Available at https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/ files/Research%20Center/LVMPD_PIVOT%20Program%20Review_Final.pdf. Hinkle, J.C. & Weisburd, D. (2008). The irony of broken windows policing: A micro-place study of the relationship between disorder, focused police crackdowns and fear of crime. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 503-512. Hinkle, J.C., Weisburd, D., Telep, C.W., & Petersen, K. (2020). Problem-oriented policing for reducing crime and disorder: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 16. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1089. Kennedy, D.M. & Wong, S. (2009). The High Point Drug Intervention Strategy. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Available at https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-p166-pub.pdf. Kondo, M.C., Keene, D., Hohl, B.C., MacDonald, J.M., Branas, C.C. (2015). A difference-in- differences study of the effects of a new abandoned building remediation strategy on safety. PLOS One, 10, e0129582. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0129582. McGarrell, E.F., Chermak, S., Wilson, J.M., & Corsaro, N. (2006). Reducing homicide through a “lever-pulling” strategy.” Justice Quarterly, 23: 214–229. National Research Council. (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing: The evidence. In W. Skogan & K. Frydl (Eds.), Committee on law and justice, division of behavioral and social sciences and education (Committee to Review Research on Police Policy and Practices). Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Available at https://www.nap.edu/ download/10419. NIJ. (2014). Program profile: High point drug market intervention. CrimeSolutions, National Institute of Justice. Retrieved May 30, 2022, from https://crimesolutions.ojp.gov/ ratedprograms/361 27 O’Shea, T.C. (2006). Physical deterioration, disorder, and crime. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 17, 173-187. Papachristos, A.V. & Kirk, D.S. (2015). Changing the street dynamic: Evaluating Chicago’s group violence reduction strategy. Criminology & Public Policy, 14: 525–558. Papachristos, A.V., Meares, T.L., & Fagan, J. (2007). Attention felons: Evaluating Project Safe Neighborhoods in Chicago. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 4, 223–272. Ratcliffe, J.H. (2008). Intelligence-Led Policing. Collumpton, UK: Willan Publishing. Rosenfeld, R., Deckard, M. J., & Blackburn, E. (2014). The effects of directed patrol and self- initiated enforcement on firearm violence: A randomized controlled study of hot spot policing. Criminology, 52, 428–449. Sampson, R.J. & Raudenbush, S.W. (1999). Systematic social observation of public spaces: A new look at disorder in urban neighborhoods. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 603- 651. Saunders, J., Ober, A.J., Kilmer, B., & Greathouse, S.M. (2016). A Community-Based, Focused- Deterrence Approach to Closing Overt Drug Markets. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Semerad, T. (2022, August 21). Why downtown SLC has blown past the pandemic and is topping the competition. The Salt Lake Tribune. https://www.sltrib.com/ news/2022/08/21/why-downtown-slc-has-blown-past/ Sherman, L. W., Williams, S., Ariel, B., Strang, L. R., Wain, N., Slothower, M., & Norton, A. (2014). An integrated theory of hot spots patrol strategy: implementing prevention by scaling up and feeding back. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 30, 95–122. Taylor, B., Koper, C.S., & Woods, D.J. (2011). A randomized controlled trial of different policing strategies at hot spots of violent crime. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7, 149-181. Taylor, R.B., Shumaker, S.A., Gottfredson, S.D. (1985). Neighborhood-level links between physical features and local sentiments: Deterioration, fear of crime, and confidence. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 2, 261-275. 28 Tyler, T.R., Goff, P.A., & MacCoun, R.J. (2015). The impact of psychological science on policing in the united states: Procedural justice, legitimacy, and effective law enforcement. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16, 75-109. Wei, E., Hipwell, A., Pardini, D., Beyers, J.M., & Loeber, R. (2005). Block observations of neighborhoud physical disorder are associated with neighbourhood crime, firearm injuries, and deaths, and teen births. Journal of Epidemiological Community Health, 59, 904-908. Weisburd, D., Braga, A.A., Groff, E., & Wooditch, A. (2017). Can hot spots policing reduce crime in urban areas? An agent-based simulation. Criminology, 55, 137–173. Weisburd, D., Groff, E.R., Jones, G., Cave, B., Amendola, K.L., Yang, S., Emison, R.F. (2015). The Dallas patrol management experiment: Can AVL technologies be used to harness unallocated patrol time for crime prevention? Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11, 367-391. Weisburd, D., Wyckoff, L. A., Ready, J., Eck, J. E., Hinkle, J. C., & Gajewski, F. (2006). Does crime just move around the corner? A controlled study of spatial displacement and diffusion of crime control benefits. Criminology, 44, 549-592. Weisburd, D. & Telep, C.W. (2014). Hot spots policing: What we know and what we need to know. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 30, 200-220. Wheeler, A., Kim, D., & Phillips, S. (2018). The effect of housing demolitions on crime in Buffalo, New York. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 55, 390-424. https://doi. org/10.1177/0022427818757283. Wilson JQ, & Kelling GL. (March 1982). Broken windows: police and neighborhood safety. Atlantic Monthly, 249. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken- windows/304465/. Yang, S. M. (2009). Assessing the spatial–temporal relationship between disorder and violence. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26(1), 139-163. A publication of the Salt Lake City Police Department ©2022 475 South 300 East Mailing Address: PO Box 145497 SLC, Utah 84114-5497 www.slcpd.com Attachment 4 Matrix Operational Scope Final Report Status Update May 2022 Status Update May 2023 Steps required Status Update Status UpdateRecommendation Prioritize the co‐response model to mental health crisis response over other approaches. Implementation of redeployment changes Implementation of Completed No Change Not plannedShift CIT training for those outside of CIT/HOST to a volunteer/self‐selection approach, and conduct the training as a secondary priority relative to meeting expanded co‐response coverage needs redeployment changes Command decision No Change ‐Contradicts REPC recommendations At current CIT/HOST unit staffing levels, the following deployment changes should be made to provide co‐response during virtually all hours and days where mental health crisis calls most frequently occur: Command decision Command decision Command decision Current staffing does not provide for thisTwo officers should be redeployed to afternoon shift hours (1430‐0030, or 2:30 PM to 12:30 AM).Officers with CIT certifications work all shifts One CIT/HOST officer on each shift should work a staggered schedule that covers Saturday and Sunday. Officers with CIT certifications work all shifts Shifts are covering 12 hours 8am‐8pm. New hires are slated to work 12pm‐12amTwo clinicians from the Community Connection Center should be redeployed to afternoon shift hours (1430‐ 0030, or 2:30 PM to 12:30 AM).Current staffing covers until 12:00 AM Command decision Command decision In progress: newly hired LCSW for weekend shift in training Not planned due to short staffing of detectives One clinician on each shift should work a staggered schedule that covers Saturday and Sunday.In progress: working to hire for weekend shifts The CIT/HOST sergeant should vary and stagger hours as needed to provide additional coverage to both sets of assignments. Sergeants with CIT certifications work all shifts Meet and confer with SLCPA Officers receive Shift Differential Clinicians do not all qualify based onSalt Lake City should consider offering pay incentives for both officers and clinicians working afternoon shift hours and weekends in order to be able to consistently fill these assignments. MOU update HR classification No Change No Change Increase the number of officers on the CIT/HOST team by an additional four authorized positions, resulting in a total of eight officers assigned to the unit. Budgetary allocation for additional positions Current staffing does not provide for this FY 22 budget ‐ hiring in processBudgetary allocation for additional positionsIncrease the number of clinicians by an additional one authorized position, resulting in a total of eight case managers and therapists assigned to the unit.Positions have been funded are are in process or filled Adapt information systems In process ‐ Working on utilizer coordination with local hospitals, to support additional case other agencies, etc. within HIPPA compliance. management data. Adopt a warm handoff approach for individuals being released from treatment, where the crisis response team meets with the individual patient’s clinical team and the individual to discuss care plan, set up appointments, and provide transport.Current practice with plans to expand following the Miami model Recommendation Steps required Status Update Core Police Functions and Call Diversion Opportunities Meet and confer with SLCPA FY 23 Budget MOU updateEstablish a new civilian field responder classification, Community Service Officer (CSO), that handles lower‐ priority calls for service that do not require a sworn officer to respond.In process. Currently 10 on staff, 2 in hiring process, 4 new FTE's requested Establish policies for civilian In process call response; develop training program. Completed Train dispatchers on dispatching alternative resources. New classification established by HR. Purchase uniforms, equipment, vehicles In Planning Completed Completed Completed In process FY 23 Budget Contingent upon completion FY 23 Budget for 12 of all steps in previous recommendation Add 20 new full‐time positions under the new Community Service Officer (CSO) classification. The additional cost of this would be about $1,602,720 in salary and benefits at 67% of the compensation of a police officer.FY 23 budget for 12, 4 requested in FY 24 budget Budgetary allocation for additional positions Hire and train personnel FY 23 Budget for 12 Scheduled for FY 23 Status Update FY 23 budget for 12, 4 requested in FY 24 budget In process. Currently 10 on staff, 2 in hiring process, 4 new FTE's requested Recommendation Internal Affairs Processes Steps required Command decision ‐ Meet Policy 1003 is currently under review including an emphasis on and confer with SLCPA MOU empowering field supervisors to address lower‐level issues update Update IA process to new proposed policy which outlines types of corrective action that can be taken that are not considered discipline which allows for better corrective action and less administrative hearings for issues that would not result in actual discipline of days off or termination.Implemented Command decision ‐ Meet Partial ‐ under policy review and confer with SLCPA MOU update Adopt the proposed change that allows sergeants to handle limited minor complaints in the field and provides that the complaint “shall” be entered into “Blue team” employee management database.Implemented Implemented Command decision Command decision Policy 1003 is currently under review including an emphasis on empowering field supervisors to address lower‐level issues Adopt proposed policy change that would require minor complaints be handled by division commands and more serious complaints to be handled by IA investigators. New IA Director was not aware of this recommendation. This will require command decision and coordination with other PD sections to include PR, CompStat & IMS. Summaries of all completed IA cases are currently published to the CRB quarterly Post complete IA complaint statistics on public website. No Change No Change Command decision Command decision New IA Director was not aware of this recommendation. This will require command decision and coordination with other PD sections to include PR, CompStat & IMS. Summaries of all completed IA cases are currently published to the CRB quarterly Post more Use of Force information with more breakout categories including demographics. PD does not have a discipline matrix however Division Commanders are required to consult HRBP to ensure consistency across the organizationAdopt the proposed discipline matrix to establish consistent discipline for all employees. No Change Adopt policy that would require internal affairs investigations be completed even when an employee resigns or retires. Adopt proposed policy recommendation that includes a “policy deficiency” finding. Command decision Completed No Change No Change Command decision Command decision Agree this could be useful. Would require command discussion and adoption into new proposed policy “Coaching/counseling” is an outcome (i.e. corrective action) that would follow a finding however the two are distinct conceptsAdopt proposed policy recommendation that includes a “coaching / counseling” finding.No Change No Change Agree this could be useful. Would require command discussion and adoption into new proposed policyAdd “training deficiency” finding which denotes the member did not violate policy, because they were not trained or there is a training gap that should be addressed department wide. Recommendation Steps required Status Update Personnel Management Systems In processRemove Early Intervention System Administrator duties from the IA lieutenant responsibilities.Completed Completed Transition of EI portfolio from IA to Administrative Lieutenant In processDesignate an Early Intervention and Identification System coordinator and move the administration of EIIS from under the Internal Affairs Unit in the Professional Standards Division. Defer to HR but Workday may accomplish this Transition of EI program is underway Identify and implement a personal management system that can be tailored to collect pre‐ programmed criteria specific to SLPD agency needs and community expectations. Workday is being implemented and this will need to be looked at after implementation Review categories for inclusion in data collection that could be useful as early indicators of potential problematic behavior (e.g. lawsuits and Traumatic Incidents).Utilizing EI Pro Completed IA has provided line‐up training to clarify EI purpose and transition from IA is underway in part to allay concerns that the program is disciplinary or punitive in nature Communicate in EIIS policy the stated goals for the personal management system. Replace the current method of data collection to a system that can be modified to capture data that supports the agency goals and purpose of a personal management system. Defer to HR No Change No Change In placeProvide agency wide executive led communication to agency personnel regarding personal management system goals, to include training on policy and/or system changes. Recommendation Steps required Status Update Employee Wellness and Mental Health Create a steering committee of stake holders, to include clinicians, to make actionable recommendations to address the 2019 and 2020 officer survey. Command decision This was not created. Only the Peer Support Team leaders and the Command staff were privy to the information. No Change SLCPD should identify ongoing funding for the Wellness Office training and program implementation. Command decision Not funded in FY 23 MRB Partialy funded on a grant which is ending Command decision This is in process. The Wellness Team is working with HR, SLC911 and Fire to coordinate more regular trainings using consultant Joe Gorton and the EAP training hours. The Wellness Team provided a 1.5 hour training course during Inservice for the current fiscal year. The team has requested a 2 hour block for the next fiscal year. The Wellness Team taught an hour course to 2 Sergeant Academies this fiscal year.Develop an executive led department wide plan to train all personnel regarding trauma, stress and PTSD for first responders from accredited behavioral science experts. Ongoing training is provided to the Peer Support Team on a regular basis.The Wellness program provided a 1.5 hour course twice to the Crime Lab. The MH Clinician is developing a skills training group to be held weekly. Skills taught include building resiliency, suicide prevention awareness and PTSD. The wellness team is currently building a CISD (critical incident stress debriefing) team and is holding their first CISD facilitated by the clinician in a few weeks.Completed during in service Wellness Office Wellness Office Wellness Team is constantly researching programs, modalities and other law enforcement agencies. This information has helped the team to develop programs and develop policy and procedures to better the program. Members of the Wellness Recently we identified VALOR training that team have been participating in attending trainings and conferences is being taught to a select group of Train Use steering committee to research resiliency training for employees in high stress/trauma environments. held by other agencies.the trainers Since providing more department training, the team has experienced more outreach from supervisors, officers and professional staff. The team has been able to provide more resources for affected employees. A FT Mental Health Clinician was funded based on the education and strategies put in place at the department. Employees, having access to an onsite therapist receive more prompt care and treatment. As a result, fewer people appear to be requesting mental health leave time and if they are, it appears to be much less time needed and/or an alternate temporary job. Measure outcomes of implemented education, programs, and strategies. No Change Recommendation Body Worn Cameras Maintain current monthly body worn camera auditing procedures by supervisors. Update body worn camera policy to include mandatory audits by supervisors. Steps required Status Update In placeCommand decision Command decision No Change No Change In place Conduct annual random small sample body worn camera audits to be conducted by the audits and inspections unit. Post body worn camera compliance on the public website. Command decision Command decision In place No Change Completed Not in place Add annual body worn camera audit responsibility City Decision to the police civilian review board (PCRB) responsibilities. Adapted ‐ Review by legal No Change No Change City Decision Adapted ‐ Review by legal 5 videos per monthThe independent body worn camera auditor should review a minimum of 20 videos per month. Added responsibility for auditing use of force reviews should be included in the position. The position should be required to publish a bi‐ annual or annual report. City Decision City Decision Command Decision and PCRB In placeBody worn camera review performance metrics should be established by working with the current Audit and Inspection unit within SLCPD.No Change Recommendation Steps required Status Update Memorandum of Understanding Between the City and the Police Association In placeRevise policy to enable supervisors to investigate and address low level complaints without violating agreed upon contractual rights.No Change No Change Negotiate with the Salt Lake Police Association regarding wording and/or what is considered discipline at the lowest level. In place Policy 610 Salt Lake City Police Department SLCPD Policy Manual Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/04/04, All Rights Reserved. Published with permission by Salt Lake City Police Department Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations - 1 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations 610.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the use of an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) and for the storage, retrieval and dissemination of images and data captured by the UAS. 610.1.1 DEFINITIONS Definitions related to this policy include: Certificate of Authorization (COA) - An authorization issued by the Federal Aviation Administration to a public operator granting approval for specific flight operations. Digital Multimedia Evidence (DME) - Digital recording of images, sounds, and associated data. Program Manager (PM) - The individual responsible for the administrative functions related to the UAS program. Remote Pilot in Command (RPIC) - The individual exercising control over the UAS during flight, and who is responsible for the overall flight operations for a specific mission. Target - A person upon whom, or an object, structure, or area upon which, another person has intentionally collected or attempted to collect information through the operation of an unmanned aircraft system, or intends to collect or to attempt to collect information through the operation of an unmanned aircraft system (Utah Code 72-14-202(4)). Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) – An unmanned aircraft of any type that is capable of sustaining flight whether preprogrammed or remotely controlled (commonly referred to as an unmanned aircraft) and all of the supporting or attached systems designed for gathering information through imaging, recording or any other means (Utah Code 72-14-102). Visual Line-of-Sight (VLOS) - A method of control and collision avoidance that refers to the Remote Pilot in Command or Visual Observer directly viewing the UAS with human eyesight. Visual Observer (VO) - A trained person who assists the Remote Pilot in Command in the duties associated with collision avoidance. This includes, but is not limited to, avoidance of other traffic, clouds, obstructions, and terrain. 610.2 POLICY A UAS may be utilized to enhance the department's mission of protecting lives and property when other means and resources are not available or are less effective. Any use of a UAS will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. 610.2.1 PROHIBITED USE A UAS shall not be used: •To conduct random surveillance activities. Salt Lake City Police Department SLCPD Policy Manual Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/04/04, All Rights Reserved. Published with permission by Salt Lake City Police Department Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations - 2 •To conduct random patrolling activities. •To target a person based solely on individual characteristics, such as but not limited to, race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, disability, gender, or sexual orientation. •To harass, intimidate, or discriminate against any individual or group. •To facilitate revenue-generating activities, such as monitoring parking areas. •To conduct personal business of any type. The UAS shall not be weaponized (Utah Code 72-14-303). 610.3 PRIVACY The use of a UAS potentially involves privacy considerations. To ensure individuals' privacy rights are not infringed upon, RPICs shall only operate a UAS to obtain and/or use DME in the following circumstances (Utah Code 72-14-203): (a)Pursuant to a search warrant. (b)In accordance with judicially recognized exceptions to warrant requirements (e.g., operation over areas where no reasonable expectation of privacy exists, exigent circumstances, consent from an individual who has apparent authority to consent, etc.). (c)To locate a lost or missing person in an area in which a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy. (d)For training purposes (no training may occur over areas where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy). If a UAS mission is conducted pursuant to a judicially recognized warrant exception, the exception(s) shall be documented fully and completely by the RPIC in a resulting report. If a UAS mission is conducted pursuant to consent from an individual who has apparent authority to consent, the consent must be in writing and must specify the period for which the operation of the UAS is authorized. RPICs shall take reasonable precautions to avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy that is not the focus of an approved investigation or operation. Reasonable precautions can include, for example, deactivating or turning imaging devices away from such areas or persons during UAS operations. 610.4 PROGRAM MANAGER The Chief of Police will appoint a Program Manager (PM) who will be responsible for the management of the UAS program. The PM will ensure that policies and procedures conform to current laws, regulations, and best practices, and will have the following additional responsibilities: •Coordinating the FAA Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) application process and ensuring that the COA is current. Salt Lake City Police Department SLCPD Policy Manual Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/04/04, All Rights Reserved. Published with permission by Salt Lake City Police Department Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations - 3 •Ensuring that all authorized RPICs, and observers have completed all required FAA and department-approved training in the operation, applicable laws, policies, and procedures regarding the use of the UAS. •Developing a uniform protocol for submission and evaluation of requests to deploy a UAS, including urgent requests made during ongoing or emerging incidents. •Implementing a system for public notification of UAS deployment. •Developing operational protocol governing the deployment and operation of a UAS including, but not limited to, safety oversight, use of Visual Observers, establishment of lost link procedures, and secure communication with air traffic control facilities. •Developing a protocol for fully documenting all missions (Utah Code 72-14-205). •Developing UAS inspection, maintenance, and record-keeping protocol to ensure the continuing airworthiness of a UAS, up to and including its overhaul or life limits. •Developing protocols to ensure that all video and data intended to be used as evidence are accessed, maintained, stored, and retrieved in adherence to the chain of custody requirements. •Facilitating law enforcement access to images and data captured by its UAS. •Developing protocols that ensure retention and purge periods are maintained in accordance with established records retention schedules. •Recommending program enhancements, particularly regarding safety and information security. •Ensuring that established protocols are followed by monitoring and providing periodic reports on the program to the Chief of Police. •Ensuring that data collected on a person, object, structure, or area that is not a target, as defined by Utah Code 72-14-202, is not used, copied, or disclosed (Utah Code 72-14-204). 610.5 OPERATION OF UAS Only SLCPD FAA-certified RPICs may operate a department UAS. The department has adopted the use of UASs to provide an aerial visual perspective in responding to emergency situations and exigent circumstances, and for the following objectives: (a)Situational awareness: To assist decision-makers (e.g. incident command staff, first responders, city, county, and state officials) in understanding the nature, scale, and scope of an incident, in planning and coordinating an effective response. (b)Search and rescue: To assist missing person investigations, AMBER Alerts, and other search and rescue missions. (c)Tactical deployment: To support the tactical deployment of officers and equipment in emergency situations like incidents involving hostages, barricades, support for large- scale tactical operations, and other temporary perimeter security situations. Salt Lake City Police Department SLCPD Policy Manual Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/04/04, All Rights Reserved. Published with permission by Salt Lake City Police Department Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations - 4 (d)Visual perspective: To provide an aerial visual perspective to assist officers in providing direction for crowd control, traffic incident management, special circumstances, and temporary perimeter security. (e)Scene documentation: To document a crime scene, accident scene, or other major incident scenes like disaster management, incident response, or large-scale forensic scene investigation. 610.5.1 TEMPORARY FLIGHT RESTRICTION DUE TO WILDLAND FIRES A department UAS shall not be used in an area under a temporary flight restriction as a result of a wildland fire without the permission of, and in accordance with the restrictions established by, the official in command of the fire response (Utah Code 65A-3-2.5). 610.5.2 MAINTENANCE The department and PM shall make available to the FAA, upon request, any department-owned or maintained UAS for inspection or testing, and any associated documents/records the FAA requires the department to keep. Each aircraft will have the required FAA Aircraft markings issued by the FAA. If the aircraft is too small to display markings in standard size, the aircraft will display markings in the largest practical manner. The maintenance of UASs will be the responsibility of the PM in accordance with the manufacturer recommendations. If non-routine maintenance is performed, a test flight shall be conducted and documented to ensure the UAS is operating properly. All maintenance performed on the aircraft will be documented on a maintenance log for that aircraft and be readily available for inspection if requested. The storage of all department-owned UASs shall be in accordance with manufacturer recommendations, and within a secured department facility or vehicle. 610.6 DOCUMENTATION The following information must be documented in any related report or other records of the law enforcement encounter when the UAS is operated by a member of the Salt Lake City Police Department, or when the Department obtains or receives data pursuant to Utah Code 72-14-203 (Utah Code 72-14-205): (a)The presence and use of the UAS (b)Any data acquired (c)If applicable, the private citizen from whom the data was received 610.8 REVISIONS Enacted: May 23, 2022 610.11 RETENTION OF UAS DATA The SO is responsible for correctly labeling, categorizing, and uploading collected data from a UAS operation to the department's evidence.com account. This shall occur as soon as practical Salt Lake City Police Department SLCPD Policy Manual Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/04/04, All Rights Reserved. Published with permission by Salt Lake City Police Department Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations - 5 after the conclusion of a flight. Upon verifying that the data was successfully uploaded, the SO shall destroy all other copies of the data. The SO shall mark any data that is determined to fall within the following categories as "evidence", and the data shall be retained until adjudication of final disposition (Utah Code 72-14-204): (a)Data that relates to the target of an operation or investigation, and that data is requisite for the success of the operation or investigation. (b)Data that was collected inadvertently, and the data appears to pertain to the commission of a crime. (c)The data pertains to an emergency situation, and using the data would assist in remedying the emergency. (d)The data is received through a court order that requires a person to release the data to the Department or prohibits the destruction of the data. The SO shall mark any data that is determined to not fall within one of the above listed categories as "UAS non-evidence data". UAS non-evidence data shall be retained for 30 days, after which it will be deleted. 610.11.1 DATA COLLECTED BY PRIVATE CITIZEN The Salt Lake City Police Department may not accept or review data captured by a privately owned UAS unless one of the following conditions exists (Utah Code 72-14-203): (a)The person delivering the UAS data informs the Department that the data appear to pertain to the commission of a crime. (b)The receiving member, in good faith, believes that the data pertain to an imminent or ongoing emergency that involves the danger of death or serious bodily injury to another person and that the disclosure of the data will permit the Department to assist in responding to the emergency. 610.11.2 DATA AUDITS The Audit and Inspections Unit will audit the data collected by the UAS and ensure that it is compliant with applicable policies, procedures, laws, and retention schedules. PUBLIC SERVICES FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Jorge Chamorro, Department Director 2 The mission of the Salt Lake City Police Department outlines the specific ways each employee will work to achieve the vision of the department for the city and its residents and visitors. “We will serve as guardians of our community to preserve life, maintain human rights, protect property, and promote individual responsibility and community commitment.” MISSION BB INSIGHT OVERVIEW POLICE DEPARTMENT FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Mike Brown, Chief of Police Insight Description FTE’s FY 24 Budget Request Score 1 Alternative Response -LPR –License Plate Reader $150,000 2 Internal Affairs Program -Sergeant 1 $164,266 3 Community Response Program 4 $283,455 4 Airport Operations Program -Revenue Budgeted 6 $917,361 5 Operational Inflationary Increase $302,991 6 Personnel base changes $6,429,307 BBPOLICE DEPARTMENT FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by: Mike Brown, Chief of Police Program Insight #1 -License Plate Reader (LPR) Camera Program •The department’s pilot program started during the FY 23 budget process. •LPR technology is a system that uses cameras and software to capture and read license plate information from vehicles. •The system typically includes one or more cameras mounted on a stationary object, such as a pole or a patrol car, that captures images of passing vehicles. •The LPR system then uses software to analyze the images and extract the license plate information, which is then checked against the state NCIC database of known or wanted vehicles. Insight Budget request: $150,000 for cameras and data licensing BBPOLICE DEPARTMENT FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by: Mike Brown, Chief of Police Program Insight #1 -License Plate Reader (LPR) Camera Program FY 23 -Program Based Budgeting BBPOLICE DEPARTMENT FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by: Mike Brown, Chief of Police Program Insight #1 -License Plate Reader (LPR) Camera Program Example cases RESOLVED because of LPR (January -April 2023) BBPOLICE DEPARTMENT FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Mike Brown, Chief of Police Program Insight # 2 – Internal Affairs Program BBPOLICE DEPARTMENT FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Mike Brown, Chief of Police Program Insight #3 –Police Community Response Team Insight Budget request: $283,455 for 9 months In the current fiscal year: •The PCRT program developed job descriptions, policies, procedures, training curriculum and ordered equipment. Expanding this program to 16 FTEs will provide a greater response and the capabilities it can provide the department. PCRT Specialists respond to low hazard, non-emergency calls for service. Guiding Principles: •Support, Service and Community Engagement BBPOLICE DEPARTMENT FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Mike Brown, Chief of Police Program Insight #3 –Police Community Response Team BBPOLICE DEPARTMENT FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Mike Brown, Chief of Police Program Insight # 4 – Airport Operations Program 6 FTE Insight summary: To increase staffing to facilitate coverage at the airport to cover the increased footprint as well as the increased volume of passengers to maintain a safe and secure environment. The SLCPD, with agreement from Airport Operations, is requesting 6 additional police officers to facilitate increased staffing needs. This expense is budget neutral as the Airport revenue to the general fund will cover the increase in budget to support the 6 FTEs. Insight Budget request: $977,361 for 6 months Image: Showing the footprint of the Salt Lake City International Airport, overlayed downtown BBPOLICE DEPARTMENT FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Mike Brown, Chief of Police Program Insight # 5 – Operations Program O & M, 39% Charges & Services, 57% Inflationary, 4% FY23-24 O & M Charges & Services Inflationary Insight summary: Operational Inflationary Costs Insight Budget request: $302,991 Budgetary request to cover inflationary increases in supplies, contracts and services BB INSIGHTS –PATROL SAVING (ALT. RESPONSE) POLICE DEPARTMENT FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by name and title here THANK YOU Presented by the Police Department, Mike Brown, Chief of Police BB INSIGHTS Personal Services, 92% O & M, 3%Charges & Services, 5% FY22-23 Personal Services O & M Charges & Services Capital Exp Personal Services, 93% O & M, 3%Charges & Services, 4% FY23-24 Personal Services O & M Charges & Services Capital Exp POLICE DEPARTMENT FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by name and title here CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL BUDGET STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY24 TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke Budget and Policy Analyst DATE:May 16, 2023 RE: Fiscal Year 2024 Compensation Budget ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Compensation budget includes salaries, supplemental pay, health insurance, pension costs, and other benefits. The proposed FY2024 budget includes $423.8 million for compensation across all departments. Of that total, $265.7 million is for General Fund employees’ compensation which is 60% of the General Fund budget (historically it represented approximately 67% of the budget). This would be an increase to the compensation budget of $11.5 million (9.7%) over the FY2023 adopted budget. This is partly driven by 65.5 new General Fund fulltime employees (FTEs) of which 4 were added through budget amendments in FY2023. It also includes a 5% proposed general pay increase for all employees, market-based salary increases recommended by a salary survey to maintain competitive compensation levels, previously agreed upon merit increases for represented employees, and a 2.9% medical insurance premium increase. The Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC) annual report is provided as Attachment 1 and a summary of their recommendations is in part A of the Additional Info section. This staff report provides a summary of the compensation budget changes, costs, historical context, and policy questions for Council consideration. New Proposed Employee Benefit Lifestyle Spending Account ($500,000 for half year January – June 2024) (See policy question #3) The Lifestyle Spending Account would provide $500 as an annual use-it-or-lose-it reimbursement to full-time employees. Unused funds for individual employees would not accrue over multiple fiscal years. The unused funds would be available for the program to reallocate the next fiscal year. Eligible expense categories are to be determined but may include childcare, out-of-state medical expenses, student loans, home down payments, physical fitness, and emotional wellness. If all 2,195 proposed General Fund FTEs in FY2024 were to participate in the new benefit, then $1,097,500 would be needed in the annual budget which is $597,500 more than requested. Note that this amount was being confirmed at the time of publishing. The Administration stated the eligible reimbursements are meant to be flexible in response to employee needs. A third-party administrator would manage the program for a fee after a request for proposal (RFP). Monthly fees may be deducted from each employee’s account balance. This approach is like how the Health Savings Account (HSA) program operates. Health Savings Accounts (HSA) ($4.4 Million) The Administration is proposing to continue the one-time annual contribution to front-load employees’ HSAs in the amounts of $750 for singles and $1,500 for doubles and families. The total cost is $4,422,015 and assumes all vacant positions are filled. Of this amount, $2,685,075 is covered by the General Fund. Medical Insurance ($1.2 Million increase from General Fund) Project Timeline: Briefing: May 16, 2023 Budget Hearings: May 17 & June 7, 2023 Potential Action: June 13, 2023 Page | 2 The Utah Retirement System (URS) requires cities to hold a medical plan reserve sufficient to cover at least 55 days of typical claims. PEHP provided the below chart showing the City’s annual medical insurance premium increases since FY2019 and the medical reserve balance measured in number of days of average claims that can be paid. In spring 2021 medical and prescription claims paid on a rolling basis by the City’s insurance increased and then levelled off possibly indicating pent up demand post 2020, which have since appeared to return to normal volumes. The table below summarizes medical insurance premium increases and plan reserve funding since FY2016. The estimated reserve balance is $10.8 – $11.8 million, which is 100 – 110 days of typical claims. The City maintained a larger reserve balance in recent years. This is primarily caused by two factors. First, claims were down during the pandemic when elective surgeries were halted by state order and people voluntarily delayed / avoided healthcare services. Second, PEHP recommends maintaining a larger than typical medical reserve because claims are taking longer to be submitted and processed than usual so the resulting number of claims in FY2023 and FY204 may be larger than expected. As shown in the table above, the FY2024 budget includes a 2.9% increase to premiums for the Summit STAR high deductible health plan (HDHP), the City’s only medical insurance plan. The cost of this increase is $1,269,520 of which $785,692 is covered by the General Fund. PEHP indicates national average medical insurance increases are 5% to 7%. See the Additional Info section for a chart of the City’s medical claims from FY2010-FY2022. It shows that the City’s HDHP resulted in lower overall costs compared to expected costs under the prior traditional health plan if no action had been taken. # o f Day s t o C o v e r T y pi c al C lai m s $ A m o u n t 2 0 1 6 5 .0 %86 $5 .9 m illio n 2 0 1 7 6 .6 %7 6 $5 .5 m illio n 2 0 1 8 3 .5 %7 6 $5 .9 m illio n 2 0 1 9 7 .0 %7 2 $6 m illio n 2 0 2 0 7 .5 %1 0 9 $1 0 millio n 2 0 2 1 4 .5 %1 2 2 $1 3 .1 m illio n 2 0 2 2 3 .5 %1 0 5 $1 1 .3 m illio n 2 0 2 3 6 .0 %9 5 $1 0 .2 m illio n 2 0 2 4 *2 .9 %1 0 0 -1 1 0 $1 0 .8 - 1 1 .8 m illio n Fisc al Y e ar Pre m iu m C h an ge M e dic al Re se rv e A c c o u n t *FY 2 0 2 4 is a n e st im ate fro m PEHP Page | 3 Premium Holidays – The FY2024 proposed budget includes a “premium holiday” for medical insurance which means the City and employees do not pay premiums for a pay period. The single medical insurance premium holiday will add a one-time $1 million transfer to the General Fund from the Risk Fund. The City has used this approach in recent years, although the City had no premium holiday in FY2023. The FY 2022 budget had a single premium holiday, two in FY2021, one in FY2020, none in FY2019, and two in FY2018. Medical Insurance Premium Cost Increases by Plan Type for City and Employees – The two tables below summarize the premium increase cost impact to the City and to employees. The increase reflects the required annual actuarial contributions. Represented Employee Merit Increases ($1.06 Million) The $1.06 million covers step increases, previously agreed upon, based on years of service for employees represented by the three bargaining units recognized by the City. The cost to the General Fund is $636,424. These amounts are determined through negotiations and are part of the Memorandums of Understanding between each unit and the City. Step increases begin on an employee’s hiring anniversary date. See the Additional Info section for more on the City’s three bargaining units. 5% Base Salary Increase for All Employees ($8.9 Million) The $8.9 million would provide a 5% base salary increase for all employees including those represented by a bargaining unit. Of that amount, $6.1 million is covered by the General Fund. It’s important to note that negotiations with American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees or AFSCME were ongoing at the time the Mayor’s Recommended Budget was presented to the Council. It includes funding for a 5% base salary increase to AFSCME employees. The City has provided general pay increases to all employees in recent years when incoming revenues were growing. Although not directly tied to the consumer price index, sometimes this type of pay increase is referred to as a cost-of-living adjustment or COLA increase. There was a 4.5% base salary increase for non-represented employees in FY2022 and FY2023 and no base salary increase for all City employees in the FY2021 annual budget because of the significant financial uncertainty facing the City during the early stages of the pandemic and was accompanied by a half-year hiring freeze. Employees did receive either a one-time $200 internet allowance or a $1,000 hazard payment. There was also a one-time bonus of $500 to all employees except for employees in the Fire Union and AFSCME union who received a one-time $2,000 bonus. Market-based Salary Adjustments ($1.05 Million) Salary adjustments for benchmarked employee groups who lag local market pay rates by 2% or more are reported annually by the Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC). See Attachment 1 pages 9-12 for a detailed breakout of employee benchmarks lagging the market. This year, the Administration proposes funding market-based adjustments for employees that would still be lagging the market by more than two percent after the 5% base salary increase. This would impact 11 job benchmarks identified as either slightly or significantly lagging the market affecting up to 156 existing employees. The total estimated cost to the City for these adjustments is $1.05 million of which $391,465 is covered by the General Fund. These annual adjustments are intended to ensure the City’s salaries are competitive in the local labor market. Plan C i t y ’s Biw ee k l y C o n t ribu t io n Biw e e k ly I n c re ase t o C i t y A n n u al I n c re ase t o C it y Single $2 1 9 .4 9 $6 .1 9 $1 6 0 .9 4 Do ub le $4 9 3 .86 $1 3 .9 3 $3 6 2 .1 8 Fam ily $6 5 8.4 5 $1 8.5 6 $4 82 .5 6 Plan E m pl o y e e ’s Biw e e k ly C o n t rib u t io n Biw e e k ly I n c re ase t o E m p lo y e e s A n n u al I n c re ase t o E m pl o y e e s Single $1 1 .5 5 $0 .3 2 $8.3 2 Do ub le $2 5 .9 9 $0 .7 3 $1 8.9 8 Fam ily $3 4 .6 6 $0 .9 8 $2 5 .4 8 Page | 4 Multiple Salary Increases for Some Employees (See policy question #1) It’s important to note that some City employees could receive two or more of the above salary increases (merit, negotiated, general 5%, and market-based adjustments) depending on what position they are in. The Administration is currently in wage negotiations with AFSCME. Additional compensation changes for those represented employees may be recommended to the Council as part of the FY2024 annual budget based on those ongoing negotiations. Annual Compensation Plan Changes: (See Attachment 2 for redlined version of the plan) The proposed FY2024 Compensation Plan would includes several adjustments to existing compensation items including: -Changing standby pay for police sergeants from two hours per 12-hour period to 30 minutes which was previously used, -Justice Court employees would receive the day after Thanksgiving as a paid holiday instead of Indigenous Peoples Day which would mean the court observes the same holiday schedule as most other City employees, -Bulk award of annual personal leave hours would shift to the pay period which includes November 1 instead of November 15, -The deadline for employees to convert unused personal leave to a payout at 50% of an employee’s hourly wage is shifting from the first pay period in November to October 31 which aligns the deadline for all employee groups, -Clarifying that personal leave used in a pay period may not exceed an employee’s regular work week hours, and -Pending adjustments to snowfighter pay and meal allowances which are dependent upon ongoing negotiations with AFSCME. The Administration recommends that the benefit for non-represented employees mirror what AFSCME represented employees performing the same work receive. Medical Coverage Changes Like most years, there are adjustments to expand coverage for some types of treatment. Last year the state of Utah implemented artificial reproductive technology as a new coverage. PEHP is proposed to add this as a new City benefit of $4,000 per single embryo implant. Multiple embryo implants would not be covered but a patient could do multiple attempts of a single embryo implant. This is determined based on greater complications when doing multiple embryo implants. Another change is expanding the number of mental health sessions available to non-first-responder employees from 10 to 15. This change provides the same 15 sessions to all full-time City employees. First-responder employees currently have access to 10 mental health sessions annually in retirement which is proposed to increase to 15. Dental Plan Premium Reductions The FY2024 budget includes reductions to the dental premiums paid biweekly by employees. The reductions shown in the table to the right are 7.5% for the singles and 4.5% for doubles. This is estimated to provide annual savings of $33.02 for singles and $39.52 for doubles on the preferred plan. The annual savings are $40.04 for singles and $47.58 for doubles on the premium plan. The decreases are possible for the preferred and premium dental plans because the dental reserve has a healthy balance able to absorb the revenue decreased from lower premiums. The dental reserve has a balance estimated to cover 138 days of typical claims. These changes are also expected to address some cross-subsidization between the dental plan groups where the single and double groups were partially subsidizing costs for the family group which is why there is no reduction for the family group. Page | 5 Department Turnover Comparison (See policy question #2) HR and the CCAC review department turnover annually. Overall, the City experienced a lower level of turnover in 2022 than in 2021. The color-coded table below summarizes total turnover for any reason (voluntary departure, involuntary termination, retirement, etc.). Relatively low turnover percentages are color-coded blue, relatively high are red and those in between have little or no coloring. It’s important to note that each department has a different number of FTEs. For example, in 2021, the Police Department had an 11% turnover rate which reflects 70 employees leaving employment compared to the Attorney’s Office which had a higher turnover rate of 38% reflecting 23 employees leaving which is a smaller number. Pension Contributions ($1,276,366 Reduction) For the second year in a row, changes by the Utah Retirement System (URS) are resulting in a net decrease for the General Fund. This year the decrease is $1,276,366 of which $603,313 is in the General Fund and last year it was a decrease of $29,658. Large mandatory contributions occurred in the years after the 2009 recession to make up for retirement system funds lost during the financial crisis. Retirement funding and rates are based on a rolling five-year average of investment returns. URS has an established process to change rates that requires audited financial and investment return information as of December 31 annually. POLICY QUESTIONS 1.Balancing Multiple Salary Increases for Employees – The Council may wish to the ask the Administration how the proposed FY2024 annual budget balances some employees receiving multiple salary increases with other employees that may receive a single increase. It’s important to note that some City employees could potentially receive two or more of the above-mentioned salary increases (merit, negotiated, general 5%, and market adjustments) depending on what position they are in. 2.Reducing Turnover Rates – The Council may wish to ask how HR can help departments address elevated turnover rates experienced in recent years as shown in the color-coded table above. In recent years, CCAC members and others suggested engagement surveys, cultural assessments, and/or exit interviews as additional tools the City could explore. 2 0 18 2 0 19 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 1 2 0 2 2 9 1 1 De p ar t m e nt 1 9 %2 2 %3 1 %2 4 %2 1 % A ir p o r t 1 2 %1 1 %7 %9 %1 2 % A tt o r ne y 's Offic e 1 8%2 8%2 3 %3 8%2 7 % Cit y Co u nc il 0 %4 %0 %2 3 %4 % Co m munity & Ne ig h b o r ho o ds 1 5 %1 3 %7 %1 2 %1 2 % Ec o no m ic De v e lo p m e nt 2 4 %2 3 %1 5 %1 9 %1 5 % Fina nc e 1 2 %1 0 %4 %1 0 %1 2 % Fir e 4 %3 %6 %7 %5 % Hu man Re so u r c e s 9 %2 5 %2 8%2 9 %1 3 % I nfo r m a tio n Manage me nt Se r v ic e s 1 7 %1 %1 1 %1 2 %4 % Just ic e Co ur t s 3 %1 2 %5 %5 %1 3 % May o r 's Offic e 2 2 %3 8%4 3 %2 1 %2 4 % Po lic e 1 0 %1 0 %1 3 %1 1 %7 % Pu b lic Se r v ic e s 9 %1 3 %6 %1 4 %1 2 % Pu b lic La nds*N/A N/A N/A 5 %1 4 % Pu b lic Ut ilit ie s 1 0 %9 %9 %1 2 %1 3 % Re d e v e lo p m e nt A ge nc y 1 4 %0 %4 %4 %4 % Sust a inab ilit y 1 1 %7 %9 %1 3 %1 2 % De p art m e n t T u rn o v er Rat e b y Y e ar *No te Pub lic Lands w a s a div isio n o f Pu b lic Se rv ic e s unt il FY 2 0 2 2 . A lso , d e p a rtm e nt s h a v e d iffe re nt nu mb e rs o f e m plo y e e s Page | 6 3.Funding Level Needed for All Employees to Participate in Lifestyle Spending Account – The Council may wish to ask the Administration to clarify how much funding is needed for all full-time employees to have the opportunity to participate in this new benefit at the suggested $500 annual reimbursement level. If all 2,195 proposed General Fund FTEs in FY2024 were to participate in the new benefit, then $1,097,500 would be needed in the annual budget which is $597,500 more than requested. Note that this amount was being confirmed at the time of publishing. See write-up on the first page of this staff report for more on the proposed new benefit. 4.Increasing Mental Health Resources for Employees– Some Council Members expressed interest in providing additional flexibility to the Administration for employees suffering from mental health issues such as PTSD. A position was added in the Police Department last fiscal year to assist in this area. Other ideas mentioned in prior discussions were purchasing retirement years to help reach full retirement, increase clinical advisory resources at the Midtown Clinic, suicide prevention training or increased flexibility necessary for alternate work arrangements. The Council may wish to ask the Administration what resources would be helpful and if the CCAC could research options and provide recommendations in their next annual report. See Additional Info item B on the next page for recent enhancements the City has made to its mental health benefits for employees. 5.Ongoing Review of the City’s Living Wage – The Council may wish to ask the Administration how often the living wage is reviewed, and whether the CCAC could include such a review as part of their annual report to the Mayor and Council. See Additional Info item D for recent history on this topic. ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. Citizen’s Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC) Findings and Recommendations (See Attachment 1 for the CCAC 2023 Annual Report) Each year the CCAC is responsible for preparing and submitting a written report, with any recommendations, to the Mayor and City Council for their consideration. The full CCAC report had a briefing for the Council at the March 21, 2023 work session and is included as Attachment 1. One role of this Committee is to study and compare the City’s salary groups, or job benchmarks, against the salaries of comparable employers, especially those that compete with the City for talent, to see if the City’s compensation levels are competitive in the current job market. A summary of the Committee’s recommendations is available on page 2 of the attachment and is copied below for reference. 1. No Less than a 5% Salary Adjustments to Maintain Competitive Position in Market – Considering the impact of current market conditions, including labor shortages, increased cost of labor and inflation on employer salary budgets in 2023, the Committee recommends leaders increase the City’s overall salary budget by no less than 5%. 2. City as a Pay Leader in the Market – The Committee continues to express its support for the City’s compensation strategy to position Salt Lake City as an area pay leader for employees. The Committee has long recognized that Salt Lake City employees deal with a volume of diverse situations and problems not seen by most other municipal entities in the state. Therefore, it is in the City’s best interest to attract the most capable employees to all positions and to encourage them to stay. The Committee believes that compensation should be an important factor in this equation and that this policy will prove beneficial to the City’s citizens in the future. 3. Market-based Salary Adjustments – Furthermore, as funds permit, the Committee recommends the Mayor and City Council appropriate financial resources necessary to grant market salary adjustments for employees in benchmark jobs identified in this report as lagging market. - Priority should be given to those lagging significantly; and, - Second priority should be given to those lagging slightly behind the market. Detailed breakdowns of which job benchmarks are leading or lagging the market are available in Attachment 1 on the following pages: - AFSCME employees on page 9 - Fire and Police employees on page 10 - Non-represented employees on page 12 Page | 7 B. Recent Enhancements for Mental Health Benefits Note that utilization reports for City benefits are typically available each fall. If Council Members have questions about specific benefits or overall benefit utilization, then Council staff can request these reports from the Administration. 1. Equalize Number of Sessions for All Employees – Non first responder employees may now match public safety employees with 15 mental health sessions which was previously set at 10 annually. 2. Sessions Available in Retirement for Public Safety Employees and Family – In retirement public safety employees may receive up to 15 mental health sessions for them or family members at the City’s cost. 3. In-house Clinician for Police Officers – A new FTE was approved in the FY2022 annual budget for the Police Department to focus on mental health needs of employees. The clinical mental health professional works at the Public Safety Building and is available to all Department employees and specializes in first responder clients. The City recently received an $80,000 grant to fund additional mental health provider sessions for first responders who are eligible for 15 sessions (five more than other City employees). 4. Residential Treatment Expansion in FY2020 Budget – Part of the medical insurance premium increase was to expand the residential treatment program for PTSD and substance abuse to provide up to 30 days of treatment per fiscal year at 13 available locations of which two specialize in PTSD and one specializes in fire fighter behavioral health treatment programs. 5. Additional Counseling Sessions for Public Safety Employees – All City employees have access to 10 counseling sessions at no additional cost. In FY19 a Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued to increase available counseling sessions with providers specializing in PTSD up to 15 sessions for public safety employees. The budget included $50,000 to cover the higher-than-expected cost. 6. Peer Support Groups – All three public safety departments (911 dispatch, fire, and police) have established peer support groups with employees who completed training in mental health and wellness. C. Longevity Pay As a long-standing policy, the City offers employees, except elected officials, a monthly longevity pay benefit based on years of employment as detailed in the below table. In total, approximately 49% of the City’s total workforce receive longevity pay. D. $15.11/hour Living Wage Unchanged from FY2023 The City increased the living wage for employees in two phases over the last two fiscal years. The first phase in the FY2022 annual budget was a $2.28 increase to $13.15 per hour. The second phase was a $1.95 increase to $15.10 per hour. These increases affected employees in the Public Services Department ($44,524 estimated cost) and in the Public Lands Department ($554,707 estimated cost). Some part-time positions in Golf are not included as that Division provides other incentives to maintain competitive hiring. It’s important to note that there are no regular full-time employees with pay below the $15.11/hour rate. E. Long-term Disability for All Employees ($1.1 million) The City began providing long-term disability insurance for all employees in FY2023. This converted the existing long-term disability benefit from a voluntary opt-in program to a City sponsored program for all employees. The total cost is estimated at $1.1 – $1.25 million of which $750,000 comes from the General Y e ar s o f Em p lo y me nt Mo nthly Be ne fit A nnu a l Be ne fit Num b e r o f Em p lo y e e s To t al b y Ca te go r y Six $5 0 $6 0 0 5 3 0 $3 1 8,0 0 0 Te n $7 5 $9 0 0 4 9 8 $4 4 8,2 0 0 Six te e n $1 0 0 $1 ,2 0 0 2 2 3 $2 6 7 ,6 0 0 Twe nt y $1 2 5 $1 ,5 0 0 5 0 2 $7 5 3 ,0 0 0 17 5 3 $1,7 86 ,80 0TOTALS Page | 8 Fund. The benefit provides a percentage of an employee’s annual salary after short-term disability runs out which is typically after 12 weeks. Short and long-term disability benefits are intended to provide income security when an employee is unable to work, such as after an injury or illness. This was necessary to bring City into compliance with URS regulations and is a benefit offered by many other municipalities in Utah. F. Bargaining Units The City has three bargaining units with which the Administration negotiates compensation and comes to agreements through three-year Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) – Salt Lake Police Association, International Association of Firefighters Local 81, and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 1004. Agreements with City bargaining units are developed prior to and after the Mayor presents the recommended annual budget, depending on the timing of negotiations concluding. The recommended budget includes total compensation adjustments for all City employees, both union represented and non-represented alike. However, depending on the outcome of negotiations, recommendations for union employees may be modified. Negotiations are governed by the 2011 Collective Bargaining Resolution. Approximately two-thirds of City employees are represented by a bargaining unit. G. City Historical Medical Claims PEHP provided the below chart showing actual claims in blue bars and projected claims as a red line if the City had remained on a traditional health care plan instead of moving to a high deductible health plan in 2011. The chart shows that the City is estimated to have saved money each year since the plan changed. In FY2022 the traditional claims are estimated to be $4.5 million more than actually incurred under the current plan. ATTACHMENTS 1. Citizens Compensation Advisory Committee or CCAC 2023 Annual Report 2. Redlined FY 2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-represented Employees ACRONYMS AFSCME – American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees CCAC – Citizens Compensation Advisory Committee COLA – Cost-of-living-adjustment OR Cost-of-labor-adjustment FTE – Full-time Employee FY – Fiscal Year HDHP – High Deductible Healthcare Plan HSA – Health Savings Account MOU – Memorandum of Understanding PTSD – Post Traumatic Stress Disorder RFP – Request for Proposals URS – Utah Retirement System Lisa Shaffer (Feb 27, 2023 16:43 MST)02/27/2023 02/27/2023 ANNUAL REPORT 2023 CITIZENS’ COMPENSATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2 PURPOSE & INTRODUCTION The Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC) was formed with the purpose of “…evaluating the total compensation levels of the city's elected officials, executives and employees and making recommendations to the human resources department, mayor and the city council…” (City Code Title 2, Chapter 2.35.050). Each year the committee is responsible for preparing and submitting a written report to the mayor and city council containing, among other things, recommendations on the “appropriate competitive position for the city relative to the compensation practices of comparable employers,” “wages and benefits of the city’s elected officials, executives and employees” and “general recommendations regarding the mix of compensation for the city’s employees, e.g., base salary, benefits, incentives” (City Code Title 2, Chapter 2.35.050.A.6) To provide city officials with the most valuable and relevant information, the Committee’s primary focus included a review of current economic conditions, salary budget forecasts, and local area market pay analysis including approximately 80 benchmark jobs. Additional information intended to provide city leaders with insight to key measures and indicators impacting the city’s workforce are also incorporated at the end of this report. Respectfully, Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee Mike Terry, Chair Brandon Dew, Vice-chair Jana Bake Jeff Herring Casey Lund Ray Schelble Jeff Worthington 1 Section One: Impact of labor shortages, cost of labor and inflation on 2023 salary budgets Research among global compensation consulting firms including WorldatWork, Willis Towers Watson and Mercer all reveal salary budgets and wages are increasing higher than ever. In a Workspan Daily article dated October 25, 2022, WorldatWork writer and editor, Nu Yang, reported these key takeaways and survey results forecasting merit and other pay increases are expected to rise in 2023. • WorldatWork’s 2022-23 Salary Budget Survey revealed that salary increase budgets reached their highest level in 20 years in the United States, rising to an average of 4.1% in 2022 and projected increases to be at a 4.1% average in 2023. • Willis Towers Watson (WTW) research also confirmed 2022 salary increase budgets were higher than ever. WTW’s “July 2022 Salary Budget Planning Survey” results showed that 96% of companies globally increased salaries (compared to 63% in 2020), and overall budgets have increased significantly over prior years. • Looking ahead to 2023, Sal DiFonzo, managing director for compensation and rewards consulting at Gallagher, said the most salient trend he saw in 2022 is a break from the long historic streak of steady 3% salary budgets for years to increases now forecast to be between 4-5% in 2023. Balancing the Impact of Inflation with Employer Compensation Strategies Considering the latest economic conditions, it’s not surprising to note a vast majority of employees (80 percent) say their current salary isn’t keeping up with inflation —a statistic noted from data collected by Remote.co, a remote-work firm who surveyed 1,100 global professionals between October 13-30, 2022. Although there is no Consumer Price Index (CPI) specific to Utah, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics show the national measure of prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of goods and services rose overall by 8% in 2022 compared to 4.7% in 2021. 2 When asked about the impact of inflation on overall salary budget increases, Mercer senior principal, Lauren Mason, states, “We see in our research and work with clients that labor shortages have been the key driver of heightened merit increases, not infla tion.” As employers set their 2023 preliminary budgets, Mason specified labor shortages, cost of labor and business performance were the top three factors organizations said were impacting their 2023 merit budgets. Only 30% of employers said inflation was having a high impact on their 2023 salary budgets. Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) writer Kathryn Mayer cited Amy Stewart, associate director of content marketing at Payscale (a Seattle-based compensation software firm) who explained, “Employers understand that high inflation effectively lowers purchasing power and devalues salaries…[however] raising wages to meet inflation can cause pricing [for consumer products and services] to go up to offset the cost, which perpetuates a vicious cycle" (“Employees Say Salary Isn’t Keeping Up with Inflation,” SHRM Newsletter dated December 13, 2022). While experts say employers would be wise to look at salaries, as well as to consider offering bonuses and other monetary support to help combat employees' concerns over inflation, Payscale’s Amy Stewart and Remote.co’s Kathy Gardner suggest there are other steps employers can take to help retain employees amid volatile times—many of which the Committee acknowledges the City has already implemented. These include: • Conducting a market analysis to ensure workers are paid fairly for their jobs. As a result, some positions may see pay increases above the inflation rate due to increased market competitiveness, while others may see more modest increases • Offering flexibility including remote-work options • Promoting from within • Providing competitive benefits, including financial wellness benefits and support designed to enable employees to deal with increasing costs • Offering career development opportunities • Creating a feedback loop for workers Beyond steps providing financial wellness support, bonuses and pay, and cost-of-living increases, [it's important to] show appreciation, lead with empathy and recognize employee efforts from all levels, says Remote.co’s Kathy Gardner. “These small and intentional practices can help workers feel more secure in their career choices, foster greater engagement and create long-term employee loyalty." Local Economic Trends & Conditions According to Mark Knold, chief economist at the state’s Department of Workforce Services, Utah ended the year 2022 in a strong economic position. In its January 20, 2023 DWS press release, the chief economist states, “All of 2022 will be categorized as a robust economic year for Utah. For most of the year, job growth was above average. Job availability and labor utilization was so pervasive that the unemployment rate fell to an historical low of 2.0%.” 3 Further evidence of Utah’s economic strength continuing in 2023 is demonstrated in the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ latest state unemployment report, which is marked by the Beehive state starting the new year with the lowest unemployment rate in the nation at 2.2% in December 2022. Although slightly higher at the national level, economists have noted 3.5% is the lowest unemployment rate seen in the U.S. in more than 50 years. RECOMMENDATION: Considering the impact of current market conditions, including labor shortages, increased cost of labor and inflation on employer salary budgets in 2023, the Committee recommends leaders increase the City’s overall salary budget by no less than 5%. Section Two: Local area market pay comparison The ability to effectively attract and retain key talent is based first and foremost on management, adaptability, administration of the city’s pay structures and employee base wage and salary rates. The committee reviewed market pay data obtained primarily from multiple locally based private or public employers with operations along the Wasatch Front. This approach was used because recruitment and applicant pool data historically has strongly suggested the city draws its talent from the local area and competes with other local employers for said talent. Results of the market pay analysis conducted this year were presented by the city’s human resources staff using the compensation management tool offered by Payfactors to aggregate the latest sources of market pay information available. To facilitate this review, the city organized its job titles into 84 distinct benchmark groups. The committee reviewed job pricing information obtained for each of the 84 benchmark job titles highlighted in this report. In total, these benchmarks cover 1,382 employees which represents approximately 46% of the city’s regular, full-time workforce. Because market data 4 is not available to price all jobs, it is important to note that if a job title is not shown as a benchmark title it is instead tied to a benchmark for pricing purposes. For example, Accountant III is designated as the benchmark job for related titles in the same job family, including: - Accountant I - Accountant II - Accountant III (benchmark) - Accountant IV If market pay data indicates a particular benchmark job is significantly below market, then all levels of the job should be reviewed for potential pay adjustments—not just the benchmark job. This way the pay differences between levels of the same or similar jobs are appropriately maintained. The results of this year’s local market pay analysis are displayed in three separate work groups. This is done not only to account for the differences in each group’s unique wage structure and pay practices, but to also gauge the City’s success more effectively at positioning itself as a pay leader. These three work groups include: • AFSCME • Public Safety (including Firefighters, Police Officers, and Public Safety Dispatchers) • Non-Represented Employees As was established last year, the Committee has maintained the following guidelines when determining an individual benchmark job’s compensation position relative to the market: - Significantly lagging when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is less than or equal to 90%. - Slightly lagging when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is between 90.1% and 98%. - Competitive when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is between 98.1% and 109.9%. - Significantly leading when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is greater than or equal to 110%. 5 GROUP FINDINGS & OVERALL SUMMARIES: Among the AFSCME workgroup, a total of 34 benchmark jobs, covering 286 employees, were evaluated (representing 40% of the total jobs surveyed). Market median (50th percentile) pay rates were compared to the Salt Lake City’s wage schedule top rate. The following list includes all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading. AFSCME Summary Benchmark Job Count Overall Average Market Position Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)0 0% Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)5 95% Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)19 105% Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)10 119% Overall Market Comparison 34 107% 2022 - Job Title (Job Code)SLC Top Rate (union only) # SLC Incumbents Market Salary (50th Percentile) Market Comparison (SLC Top Rate vs Market Median) Evidence Technician II (002277)$52,499 4 $57,200 92% Water Meter Technician II (002714)$54,808 2 $57,400 95% Plans Examiner I (002127)$72,987 4 $76,200 96% Maintenance Electrician IV (000168)$65,582 2 $68,300 96% Airport Environmental Specialist II (002745)$80,454 1 $82,800 97% Fleet Mechanic (002675)$63,544 38 $63,900 99% Plumber II (000854)$61,714 2 $60,800 102% Water Meter Reader II (006326)$47,174 1 $45,900 103% Airport Airfield Operations Specialist (002619)*$72,987 22 $70,900 103% Senior Utilities Representative - Customer Service (000199)$52,978 0 $51,200 103% Laboratory Chemist (002743)$76,627 2 $73,900 104% Senior Secretary (003030)$52,978 0 $51,000 104% HVAC Technician II (006050)$63,544 8 $61,100 104% Custodian II (006090)$38,314 2 $36,600 105% Painter II (001347)$58,074 6 $55,400 105% Judicial Assistant II (002084)$58,386 9 $55,500 105% Crime Scene Technician II (001779)$54,704 8 $51,700 106% Waste & Recycling Equipment Operator II (002347)$54,808 25 $51,700 106% General Maintenance Worker II (002489)$54,808 2 $51,200 107% Business Licensing Processor II (001964)$58,386 4 $54,300 108% Metal Fabrication Technician (001925)$65,582 5 $60,900 108% Building Inspector III (001967)$80,454 7 $74,700 108% Water Plant Operator II (000966)$63,544 22 $58,500 109% Water Reclamation Facility Operator II (002722)$61,714 10 $56,500 109% Water System Maintenance Operator II (000975)$56,410 13 $50,500 112% Warehouse Support Worker - Airport (002022)$51,168 0 $44,200 116% Carpenter II (001349)$58,074 6 $49,800 117% Engineering Technician IV (000829)$66,165 9 $56,500 117% Arborist II (001375)$56,410 4 $48,100 117% Asphalt Equipment Operator II (000909)$54,808 25 $46,700 117% Civil Enforcement Officer I (001893)$60,382 4 $51,100 118% Office Technician II (001191)$52,978 18 $41,900 126% Parks Maintenance Technician I (002847)$45,781 10 $36,100 127% Concrete Finisher (001852)$59,904 11 $46,200 130% * = Market salary normalized to Salt Lake City AFSCME Breakout 6 Among the Public Safety workgroup, a total of 10 benchmark jobs, covering 914 employees, were evaluated (representing 12% of the total jobs surveyed). Market top pay rates of pay were compared to the Salt Lake City’s wage schedule top rate. The following list includes all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading. Public Safety Summary Benchmark Job Count Overall Average Market Position Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)0 0% Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)3 96% Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)7 103% Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)0 0% Overall Market Comparison 10 101% 2022 - Job Title (Job Code)SLC Top Rate # SLC Incumbents Market Salary (Top Rate) Market Comparison (SLC Top Rate vs Market Top Rate) Fire Captain (008040)$97,614 79 $103,438 94% Firefighter / Paramedic - all levels $86,133 79 $89,606 96% Firefighter / Engineer - all levels $79,768 61 $81,037 98% Police Officer (002654)$89,669 441 $90,563 99% Battalion Chief (008030)$122,158 13 $122,034 100% Firefighter / EMT - all levels $74,568 68 $74,422 100% Police Sergeant (007008)$105,976 72 $104,541 101% Police Lieutenant (000849)$124,800 26 $118,352 105% Police Captain (000851)$141,336 8 $133,806 106% Public Safety Dispatcher (002629)$70,678 67 $65,582 108% Public Safety Breakout 7 Among the Non-Represented Employee workgroup, a total of 40 benchmark jobs, covering 182 employees, were evaluated (representing 48% of the total jobs surveyed). Market pay rates (calculated as the 50th percentile) were compared to the non-represented employee actual median wages/salaries. As with the other groups, the corresponding list ranks all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading. RECOMMENDATION: The Committee continues to express its support for the City’s compensation strategy to position Salt Lake City as an area pay leader for employees. The Committee has long recognized that Salt Lake City employees deal with a volume of diverse situations and problems not seen by most other municipal entities in the state. Therefore, it is in the City’s best interest to attract the most capable employees to all positions and to encourage them to stay. The Committee believes that compensation should be an important factor in this equation and that this policy will prove beneficial to the City’s citizens in the future. Furthermore, as funds permit, the committee recommends the mayor and city council appropriate financial resources necessary to grant market salary adjustments for employees in benchmark jobs identified in this report as lagging market. 1. Priority should be given to those lagging significantly; and, 2. Second priority should be given to those lagging slightly behind Market. 8 Non-Represented Summary Benchmark Job Count Overall Average Market Position Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)8 85% Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)7 95% Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)14 101% Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)11 116% Overall Market Comparison 40 99% 2022 - Job Title (Job Code)SLC Median Employee Salary # SLC Incumbents Market Salary (50th Percentile) Market Comparison (SLC Median vs Market Median) Cybersecurity Engineer II (002794)$106,468 2 $134,300 79% Systems Engineer III (002800)$107,085 2 $132,800 81% Network Engineer II (002789)$95,784 1 $114,300 84% Office Facilitator II (002804)$55,931 32 $64,500 87% Licensed Architect (002779)$91,000 1 $104,800 87% Paralegal (002201)$68,401 6 $77,600 88% Procurement Specialist II (000534)$64,595 1 $72,900 89% Golfcourse Superintendent - 18 Holes (000936)$74,797 3 $83,900 89% Real Property Agent (000370)$74,963 2 $81,300 92% Senior City Attorney (002319)$165,788 12 $175,900 94% Golf Professional II (002766)$83,123 2 $87,300 95% Engineer IV (002198)$95,784 8 $100,000 96% Human Resources Business Partner II (002811)$93,868 6 $97,900 96% Legal Secretary III (002814)$66,560 3 $69,400 96% Software Engineer III (002145)^$105,602 0 $108,400 97% Financial Analyst III (002773)$88,472 8 $89,700 99% Auditor III (002822)$83,911 3 $84,900 99% Senior Claims Adjuster (002534)$80,662 1 $81,600 99% Licensed Clinical Social Worker/Clinical Mental Health Counselor (002585)$74,963 3 $75,800 99% Principal Planner (001733)$77,143 10 $77,816 99% Business Systems Analyst II (002338)$91,208 6 $91,900 99% Forensic Scientist II (001974)$75,348 4 $75,900 99% Safety Program Manager (002790)$102,962 2 $103,600 99% Professional Land Surveyor (001890)$82,493 1 $80,700 102% Employee Marketing & Communications Specialist (002225)^$71,386 0 $69,600 103% Executive Assistant (001989)$74,963 13 $72,700 103% Learning & Development Specialist (002516)$78,728 1 $75,100 105% Accountant III (001666)$80,749 9 $76,100 106% Management Analyst (002757)$78,982 4 $73,300 108% Civic Engagement Program Specialist (001821)$67,995 1 $61,600 110% City Payroll Administrator (001945)$69,742 2 $63,100 111% Technical Systems Analyst III (002203)^$78,749 0 $71,100 111% Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Specialist (002154)$67,995 3 $60,900 112% Collections Officer (001376)$59,218 3 $53,000 112% Justice Court Judge (001601)$167,523 5 $148,100 113% Social Media Specialist II (002603)^$71,386 0 $62,800 114% Victim Advocate (001765)$58,822 5 $49,900 118% Program Coordinator - Arts Council (001799)$70,096 4 $58,400 120% Software Support Administrator II (001729)$86,632 6 $71,700 121% Network Support Administrator II (001396)$71,386 7 $51,300 139% ^ = Comparing against pay grade midpoint in lieu of median wage as job is currently vacant. Non-Represented Breakout Appendices Appendix A Salt Lake City 2022 Overall Recruitment Statistics (as reported 1/23/22) o Total # of Full-time job postings iCIMS = 209 (compared to 510 in 2021) o Total # of Full-time job postings Workday = 535 (each Position has its own job requisition/Some will overlap with iCIMS) o Total # of applicants iCIMS = 5,699 (compared to 17,051 in 2021) o Total # of applicants Workday = 3,492 o Total # regular, full-time employees hired (excluding seasonal and part-time workers) = 415 (compared to 412 in 2021) o Internal full-time job bids = 251 2022 Turnover Statistics – Rates by department Voluntary turnover includes resignations, retirements, and job abandonments. Involuntary turnover includes probationary releases, dismissals, separations, and deaths. Department # of Employees # total Terminations Overall Turnover Rate Retention Voluntary Turnover Involuntary Turnover 911 BUREAU 77 16 21% 79% 21% 0% AIRPORT 519 62 12% 88% 12% 0% ATTORNEY 63 17 27% 72% 27% 0% CITY COUNCIL 25 1 4% 96% 4% 0% COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 186 23 12% 87% 12% 1% ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 20 3 15% 82% 15% 0% FINANCE 74 9 12% 88% 11% 1% FIRE 366 18 5% 95% 5% 0% HUMAN RESOURCES 32 4 13% 87% 13% 0% INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SERVICES 83 3 4% 96% 4% 0% JUSTICE COURTS 40 5 13% 88% 10% 3% MAYOR 30 7 24% 74% 20% 3% POLICE 644 46 7% 93% 7% 0% PUBLIC LANDS 159 19 12% 87% 12% 0% PUBLIC SERVICES 265 36 14% 86% 13% 0% PUBLIC UTILITIES 396 51 13% 87% 13% 0% REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 27 1 4% 96% 4% 0% SUSTAINABILITY 61 7 12% 88% 12% 0% APPOINTMENT 4 NEW HIRE 415 REHIRE 45 Grand Total 464 2021 Turnover Statistics Department # of Employees # total Terminations Overall Turnover Rate Retention Voluntary Turnover Involuntary Turnover 911 BUREAU 84 20 24%76%23%1% AIRPORT 520 45 9%91%8%1% ATTORNEY 64 23 38%60%36%2% CITY COUNCIL 30 7 23%77%23%0% COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 176 20 12%88%10%1% ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 16 3 19%80%19%0% FINANCE 69 7 10%90%9%1% FIRE 356 23 7%93%6%1% HUMAN RESOURCES 30 8 29%68%29%0% INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SERVICES 77 9 12%88%12%0% JUSTICE COURTS 40 2 5%95%3%3% MAYOR 25 5 21%77%17%4% POLICE 628 70 11%89%11%0% PUBLIC SERVICES 277 39 14%86%14%0% PUBLIC LANDS 139 6 5%95%5%0% PUBLIC UTILITIES 393 47 12%88%11%1% REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 26 1 4%96%4%0% SUSTAINABILITY 62 8 13%86%12%2% Appendix B 2022 SWORN FIREFIGHTER TURNOVER DATA 2022 Total SLCFD Sworn Employees Voluntary Involuntary 371 19 3 TOTAL SWORN TURNOVER % 5.12% 0.81% Voluntary Turnover includes: 7 Resignations • 3 Firefighters • 1 Firefighter/Paramedic II • 2 Firefighter/Paramedic III’s • 1 Firefighter Hazmat Tech II 12 Retirements • 2 Airport Rescue Firefighter III’s • 2 Battalion Chief’s • 3 Fire Captains • 1 Firefighter Engineer III • 1 Firefighter/Paramedic III • 1 Firefighter Inspector III • 1 Firefighter Hazmat Technician III • 1 Firefighter III Involuntary Turnover includes: 3 Released from Probation • 3 Firefighter I’s 32 New Hire Firefighters in 2022 Appendix C 2022 SLCPD SWORN POLICE OFFICER TURNOVER DATA 2022 Total SLCPD Sworn Employees Voluntary Involuntary 540 41 10 TOTAL SWORN TURNOVER % 7.59% 1.85% Voluntary Turnover includes: 25 Resignations • 25 Police Officers 16 Retirements • 2 Deputy Chief • 2 Police Captains • 3 Police Lieutenants • 1 Police Sergeant • 8 Police Officers Involuntary Turnover includes: 1 Death • 1 Police Lieutenant 7 Probationary Releases • 7 Police Officers 2 Dismissals • 2 Police Officers 75 Total New Hires in 2022: • 10 Lateral (experienced LEO) Officer New Hires o Former agency listed below: • 1 came from Tooele PD • 1 came from the City of Goodlettsville PD, TN • 1 came from San Jose PD, CA • 1 came from Cincinnati PD, OH • 1 came from Clark County Sheriff’s, OR • 1 came from Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s, LA • 1 came from San Diego Sheriff’s, CA • 1 came from Riverdale PD • 1 came from San Francisco PD, CA • 1 came from Wright County Sheriff’s o Number of years in law enforcement when hired by SLCPD • 1 lateral had less than 2 years of experience • 6 laterals had between 2 to 5 years of experience • 3 laterals more than 5 years of experience • 65 Entry Level Police Officer New Hires o 1 new hire moved from Idaho o 2 new hires moved from California o 1 new hire moved from Tennessee o 1 new hire moved from Oregon o 1 new hire moved from New Jersey o 1 new hire moved from Kansas 8 Rehires in 2022: • 6 came back after being gone for more than 1 year • 2 came back after being gone for less than 1 year Prepared for and on behalf of the Committee by: Salt Lake City - Human Resources Department 349 South 200 East, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-5464 (801) 535-7900 Deb Alexander, Chief Human Resources Officer David Salazar, Compensation Program Manager Michael Jenson, Compensation Analyst ANNUAL COMPENSATON PLAN FOR NON-REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES FY2023-2024 i FY 2023 2024 COMPENSATION PLAN FOR SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION Table of Contents EFFECTIVE DATE ....................................................................................................................................... 1 EMPLOYEES COVERED BY THIS PLAN ................................................................................................ 1 AUTHORITY OF THE MAYOR ................................................................................................................. 1 APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS .................................................................................................................... 1 MODIFICATION, SUSPENSION, OR REVOCATION OF PROVISIONS ........................................... 1 SECTION I: DEFINITIONS ......................................................................................................................... 2 SUBSECTION I - DEFINITION OF TERMS ............................................................................................. 2 SECTION II: EMPLOYEE WAGES, SALARIES & BENEFITS ............................................................ 2 SUBSECTION I - COMPENSATION PROGRAM & SALARY SCHEDULES ....................................... 2 A. Determination ................................................................................................................................... 2 B. Salary Schedules ............................................................................................................................... 3 C. Other Compensation ......................................................................................................................... 3 SUBSECTION II - EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023 ..................................... 3 SUBSECTION III - EMPLOYEE INSURANCE ........................................................................................ 4 SUBSECTION IV - WORKERS’ COMPENSATION ................................................................................ 4 SUBSECTION V - SOCIAL SECURITY EXCEPTION FOR POLICE & FIRE ....................................... 4 SUBSECTION VI - RETIREMENT ............................................................................................................ 4 SECTION III: WORK HOURS, OVERTIME & OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES ................................. 5 SUBSECTION I – WORK HOURS ............................................................................................................. 5 SUBSECTION II- OVERTIME COMPENSATION ................................................................................... 5 SUBSECTION III - LONGEVITY PAY ..................................................................................................... 6 SUBSECTION IV - WAGE DIFFERENTIALS & ADDITIONAL PAY ................................................... 6 SUBSECTION V - EDUCATION AND TRAINING PAY ........................................................................ 9 SUBSECTION VI – OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES .................................................................................. 9 SUBSECTION VII - SEVERANCE BENEFIT ......................................................................................... 11 SECTION IV: HOLIDAY, VACATION & LEAVE ACCRUAL ............................................................ 13 SUBSECTION I – HOLIDAYS ................................................................................................................. 13 SUBSECTION II - VACATION LEAVE .................................................................................................. 15 SUBSECTION III - SICK AND OTHER RELATED LEAVE OR PERSONAL LEAVE ....................... 17 A. Plan “A ” ............................................................................................................................................ 17 1. Sick Leave .......................................................................................................................................... 17 ii 2. Hospitalization Leave ......................................................................................................................... 19 3. Dependent Leave ................................................................................................................................ 20 4. Career Incentive Leave, Plan “A” ........................................................................................................... 21 5. Retirement Benefit, Plan “A” ................................................................................................................. 21 B. Plan “B” .................................................................................................................................................. 21 SUBSECTION IV - PARENTAL LEAVE ................................................................................................ 25 SUBSECTION V - BEREAVEMENT LEAVE ......................................................................................... 26 SUBSECTION VI - MILITARY LEAVE .................................................................................................. 26 SUBSECTION VII - JURY LEAVE & COURT APPEARANCES .......................................................... 27 SUBSECTION VIII - INJURY LEAVE (SWORN POLICE AND FIRE EMPLOYEES ONLY)............ 28 SUBSECTION IX - ADDITIONAL LEAVES OF ABSENCE ................................................................. 29 SUBSECTION X - EMERGENCY LEAVE .............................................................................................. 29 APPENDIX B – APPOINTED EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT ....................................................... 32 APPENDIX C – ELECTED OFFICIALS SALARY SCHEDULE .......................................................... 35 APPENDIX D- UTAH STATE RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS FY 2021-2022 ............................. 36 DISCLAIMER City employment is subject to City ordinances, policies, practices and procedures as well as state law, federal law, and constitutional limitations on the City as a governmental entity. The policies, procedures, and practices of the City and its departments and workgroups do not limit, affect, or alter any legal or constitutional rights the City or its employees may have. The City’s policies, procedures, and practices do not create any contractual rights, either express or implied, or any other obligation or liability on the City. The City also expressly reserves the right to amend or change its policies, procedures, and practices at any time, with or without notice, and to amend or change its ordinances, with the notice required by law. 1 FY 2023 2024 COMPENSATION PLAN FOR NON-REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES of SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION EFFECTIVE DATE The provisions of this plan shall be effective commencing June 26, 2022June 25, 2023, unless otherwise noted. EMPLOYEES COVERED BY THIS PLAN This plan applies to all full-time city employees. This plan does not apply to employees classified as: seasonal, hourly, temporary, part-time or those covered by a memorandum of understanding. AUTHORITY OF THE MAYOR Employees covered by this compensation plan may be appointed, classified, and advanced under rules and regulations promulgated by the mayor within budget limitations established by the city council. Furthermore, the mayor may authorize leave not specified in this compensation plan to provide for operational flexibility, so long as the additional leave does not exceed the equivalent of eight hours of leave per employee, per year. However, with the exception of a benefit created or expanded pursuant to Section IV, Subsection X (“Emergency Leave”), the mayor may not otherwise create a new benefit or expand an existing benefit for employees covered by this compensation plan if doing so will result in a direct, measurable cost. A direct, measurable cost includes a circumstance where the total cost of the new benefit or expansion of an existing benefit exceeds appropriated funds. Further, city council input and approval is required if the creation of a new benefit has policy implications or is already addressed in this compensation plan. APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS All provisions in this compensation plan are subject to the appropriation of funds by the city council. MODIFICATION, SUSPENSION, OR REVOCATION OF PROVISIONS If a local emergency is declared, any provision in this compensation plan may be temporarily modified, suspended, or revoked for the duration (or any portion thereof) of the period of local emergency, if so authorized by the mayor and/or city council . 2 SECTION I: DEFINITIONS SUBSECTION I - DEFINITION OF TERMS As used in this compensation plan: 1. “Appointed employees,” with the exception of justice court judges who are covered under this plan, means employees who are "at-will" employees serving at the pleasure of the mayor (or the city council if they are employees of the Office of the City Council). 2. “Adult Designee” means any individual with whom an employee has a long- term, committed relationship of mutual caring and support. The adult designee must have resided in the same household with the eligible employee for at least the past 12 consecutive months and must have common financial obligations with the employee. The adult designee and the employee must be jointly responsible for each other’s welfare. 3. "Exempt” refers to any employee who is not eligible to receive compensation for overtime pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. 4. “FLSA” means the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. 5. “Full-time employee” means employees whose positions regularly require more than 30 hours per week on a full-time schedule. 6. "Non-Exempt” refers to an employee who is entitled to receive overtime compensation pursuant to the FLSA. SECTION II: EMPLOYEE WAGES, SALARIES & BENEFITS SUBSECTION I - COMPENSATION PROGRAM & SALARY SCHEDULES The city’s compensation system and program, in conjunction with this plan, is intended to attract, motivate and retain qualified personnel necessary to effectively meet public service demands. A. Determination 1. The mayor shall develop policies and guidelines for the administration of the pay plans. 2. To the degree that funds permit, employees shall be paid compensation that: a. Is commensurate with the skills and abilities required of the position; b. Achieves equal pay for equal work; 3 c. Attains comparability and is competitive with the compensation paid by other public and/or private employers with whom the city compares and/or competes for personnel recruitment and retention. 3. To the extent possible, market surveys shall be used to assess and evaluate the city’s competitiveness with a cross section of organizations with whom the city competes for personnel recruitment and retention. This may include one or more of the following: a. Compensation surveys, including actual pay and other cash allowances paid to employees. b. Benefits surveys, including paid leave, group insurance plans, retirement, and other employer-provided and voluntary benefits. c. Regular review of the city’s compensation plans and pay structures to ensure salary ranges and regular pay practices provide for job growth and encourage employee productivity. B. Salary Schedules 1. All Employees covered under this plan (except for those designated as “Elected Officials”) shall be paid base wages or salaries according to the General Employee Pay Plan attached as Appendix “A.” Wages and salaries shall not be less than the established range minimum or higher than the range maximum, unless otherwise approved by the mayor or mayor’s designee. 2. Appointed Employees: The specific pay level assignments for Appointed Employees are shown in Appendix “B.” 3. Elected Officials: Elected officials shall be paid annual compensation according to schedule attached as Appendix "C." C. Other Compensation The mayor or the city council may distribute appropriated monies to city employees as discretionary retention incentives or retirement contributions, or special lump sum supplemental payments. Retention incentives or special lump sum payments are subject to the mayor’s or city council’s approval. SUBSECTION II - EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 20232024 For employees covered under this plan, the city will increase each employee’s base pay by four and one-halffive percent. Salaries for elected officials will, also, be increased by four and one- halffive percent. The city’s living wage for regular, full-time employees is set and shall be no less than $15.11 per hour. 4 SUBSECTION III - EMPLOYEE INSURANCE The city will make available group medical, health and flex savings plans, dental, life, accidental death & dismemberment, long-term disability insurance, voluntary benefits and an employee assistance program (EAP) to all eligible employees and their eligible spouse, adult designee, dependents and dependents of adult designee pursuant to city policy. A. Employer-Paid Contributions. Effective July 1, 20222023, the city’s contribution toward the total premium for group medical will be 95% for the high-deductible Summit Star Plan. For employees enrolled in the high-deductible Summit Star Plan, the city will also contribute a one-time total of $750 into a qualified health savings account (HSA) or a Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) for those enrolled for single coverage and $1,500 for those enrolled for double or family coverage per plan year. Health savings account or Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) contributions will be pro-rated for any employee hired after July 1, 20222023. B. 501(c) (9) Post-Employment Health Reimbursement Account. The city will contribute $24.30 per bi-weekly pay period into each employee’s Post Employment Health Reimbursement Account. For any year in which there are 27 pay periods, no such contribution will be made in the 27th pay period. SUBSECTION IV - WORKERS’ COMPENSATION The city will provide workers’ compensation coverage to employees as required by applicable law. SUBSECTION V - SOCIAL SECURITY EXCEPTION FOR POLICE & FIRE All sworn employees in the Police and Fire departments covered under this plan are exempt from the provisions of the federal Social Security System unless determined otherwise by the city or required by applicable law. SUBSECTION VI - RETIREMENT A. Retirement Programs. The city hereby adopts the Utah State Retirement System for providing retirement benefits to employees covered by the plan. The city may permit or require the participation of employees in its retirement program(s) under terms and conditions established by the mayor and consistent with applicable law. Such programs may include: 1. The Utah State Public Employees (Contributory and Non-Contributory); Public Safety Retirement Systems; or, the Utah Firefighters Retirement System; or, 2. Deferred compensation programs. B. The 2022-20232023-2024 fiscal year retirement contribution rates for employees, including elected officials, are shown in Appendix “D.” 5 SECTION III: WORK HOURS, OVERTIME & OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES SUBSECTION I – WORK HOURS A. The city’s standard work week begins Sunday at 12:00am and ends the following Saturday at 11:59pm. Alternatives to the standard work week may be authorized and adopted for specific work groups, such as: 1. The standard work schedule for combat Fire Battalion Chiefs, which includes two consecutive 24-hour shifts immediately followed by 96 hours off. SUBSECTION II- OVERTIME COMPENSATION A. Overtime Compensation. The city will pay non-exempt employees overtime compensation as required by the FLSA. The city will pay overtime hours at 1 ½ times the employee’s regular hourly rate or, at the employee’s request and with their department director’s approval, provide compensatory time off at a rate of 1½ hours for each overtime hour in lieu of overtime compensation. 1. Employees may accrue compensatory time up to a maximum amount as determined by their department director. 2. The city may elect at any time to pay an employee for any or all accrued compensatory hours. 3. The city will include only actual hours worked and holiday leave hours when calculating overtime. 4. When used, personal leave and compensatory time will not be included in the calculation of overtime. 5. The city will pay out all accrued compensatory hours whenever an employee’s status or position changes from FLSA non-exempt to exempt. B. Labor Costs— Declared Emergency— Overtime Compensation for FLSA Exempt Employees. The city may pay exempt employees overtime pay for any hours worked over forty (40) hours in a workweek at a rate equivalent to their regular base hourly rate of pay during periods of emergency. The city shall only make such payment when all of the following conditions occur: 1. The mayor or the city council has issued a “Proclamation of Local Emergency” or the city responds to an extraordinary emergency; and, 2. Exempt employees are required to work over forty (40) hours for one or more workweek(s) during the emergency period: and, 3. The mayor and/or the city council approve the use of available funds to cover the overtime payments. 6 The city shall distribute any overtime payments consistently with a pre-defined standard that treats all exempt employees equitably. Hours worked under a declared or extraordinary emergency must be paid hours and cannot be accrued as compensatory time. SUBSECTION III - LONGEVITY PAY A. Eligibility. With the exception of elected officials, the city will pay a monthly longevity benefit to full-time employees based on the most recent date an employee began full-time employment as follows: 1. Employees who have completed six (6) consecutive years of employment with the city will receive $50; 2. Employees who have completed ten (10) consecutive years of employment with the city will receive $75; 3. Employees who have completed sixteen (16) full years of employment with the city will receive $100; and, 4. Employees who have completed twenty (20) full years of employment with the city will receive $125. B. Pension Base Pay. Longevity pay will be included in base pay for purposes of pension contributions. C. Longevity While on an Unpaid Leave of Absence. Employees do not earn or receive longevity payments while on an unpaid leave of absence. When an employee returns from an approved unpaid leave of absence, longevity payments will resume. SUBSECTION IV - WAGE DIFFERENTIALS & ADDITIONAL PAY Eligible employees receive certain wage differentials as follows: A. Call Back and Call Out Pay. Non-exempt employees will be paid Call Back or Call Out pay based upon department director approval and the following guidelines: 1. Call Back Pay: Non-sworn, non-exempt employees who have been released from normally scheduled work and standby periods, and who are directed by an appropriate department head or designated representative to return to work prior to their next scheduled normal duty shift, will be paid for a minimum of three (3) hours straight-time pay and, in addition, will be guaranteed a minimum four (4) hours work at straight-time pay. 2. Call Out Pay for Police Sergeants. Sergeants who have been released from their scheduled work shifts and have been directed by an appropriate division head or designated representative to perform work without at least 24 hours advance notice or scheduling, shall be compensated as follows: 7 a. Sergeants who are directed to report to work shall receive a minimum of four (4) hours compensation at one and one-half times their hourly wage rate, or one and one-half times their hourly wage rate for actual hours worked, whichever is greater. b. Sergeants who are assigned to day shift, and who are directed to perform work within eight (8) hours prior to the beginning of their regularly scheduled shift shall receive a minimum of four (4) hours compensation at one and one-half times their hourly wage rate, or one and one-half times their hourly wage rate for actual hours worked, whichever is greater. c. Sergeants who are assigned to afternoon or graveyard shifts, and who are directed to perform work within eight (8) hours following the end of their regularly scheduled shift shall receive a minimum of four (4) hours compensation at one and one-half times their hourly wage rate, or one and one-half times their hourly wage rate for actual hours worked, whichever is greater. B. Standby Pay : Non-exempt employees are eligible to receive Standby pay based upon the following guidelines. 1. Standby for Non-Sworn Employees: Non-exempt, non-sworn employees who have been released from normally scheduled work but have not been released from standby status will be paid either two (2) hours of straight time pay for each 24 hour period of limited standby status; or two (2) hours straight time pay for each 12- hour period of standby status if they are Department of Airports or Public Utilities Department employees. a. First Call to Work. An eligible employee who is directed to return to his or her normal work site during an assigned Standby period by a department head or designated representative without advanced notice or scheduling will be paid a guaranteed minimum of four (4) hours, which may include any combination of hours worked and/or non-worked straight-time pay. b. Additional Calls to Work. An eligible employee will be paid an additional guaranteed minimum of two (2) hours, which may include any combination of hours worked and/or non-worked straight-time pay, for each additional occasion he or she is called to work during the same twenty-four (24) or twelve (12) hour standby period. c. Exclusion for Snow Fighters. Any employee on standby as a member of the Snow Fighter Corps shall not receive standby/on-call pay or shift differential when on standby or called back to fight snow. 2. Standby for Police Sergeants: Police Sergeants directed by their division commander or designee to keep themselves available for city service during otherwise off-duty hours shall be compensated two (2) hours30 minutes of straight time for e ach 12-hour period of standby status. This compensation shall be in addition to any callout pay or pay for time worked the employee may receive during the standby period. 8 C. Extra-Duty Shifts for Police Sergeants. "Extra-duty shifts" are defined as scheduled or unscheduled hours worked other than the sergeant's normally scheduled work shifts. "Extra-duty shifts" do not include extension or carry over of the sergeant's normally scheduled work shift. 1. Any sergeant required by the city to work extra-duty shifts shall receive a minimum of three (3) hours compensation at one and one-half times their regular base hourly rate, or time worked paid at one and one-half times their regular hourly base wage rate, whichever is greater. D. Shift Allowance, not including Police Sergeants & Lieutenants. Only non- exempt employees who perform afternoon/ swing or evening shift work are eligible to receive a shift allowance. 1. The city will include all shift allowance when computing overtime. An employee who receives Snow Fighter Corps differential pay is not eligible to also receive shift allowance. 2. Day Shift: No allowance will be paid for work hours which are part of a regular day shift. 3. Eligible Hours: For each non-day shift hour worked between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., the city will pay an eligible non-exempt employee a differential of $1.00 per hour. E. Shift Differential for Police Sergeants & Lieutenants: The city will pay Police sergeants & lieutenants shift differentials according to the shift actually worked. Actual shift differential rates are determined as follows: 1. Day Shift: No differential pay for hours worked during day shift, which begins at 0500 hours until 1159 hours. 2. Swing Shift: A differential of 2.5% in addition to the regular day rate shall be paid for swing shift, which begins at 1200 hours until 1759 hours. 3. Graveyard Shift: A differential of 5.0% in addition to the regular day rate shall be paid for graveyard shift, which begins at 1800 hours until 0459 hours. F. K-9 Squad Allowance: Police sergeants assigned to the K-9 squad will be compensated as follows: 1. Police sergeants shall be allowed ten (10) hours per month to care for the police service dog. Such hours shall be counted as part of the Police sergeant's regular work shift(s). 2. Police sergeants shall be provided ten (10) hours per month while off duty, at the rate of one-and-one-half (1 ½) times their wage rate, to care for the police service dog. No more than ten (10) hours per month shall be spent off duty to care for the police service dog unless authorized by the Police Chief or designee. 9 G. Acting/Working out of Classification. A department head may elect to grant additional compensation to an employee for work performed on a temporary basis, whether in an acting capacity or otherwise, beyond the employee’s regular job classification for any period lasting 20 or more working days. Unless approved by the mayor or mayor’s designee, acting pay shall be limited to no more than 90 calendar days from the start date and paid separately from regular earnings on each employee’s wage statement. Compensation adjustments may be retroactive to the start date of the temporary job assignment. Exceptions may be approved by the mayor or mayor’s designee. 1. Acting pay shall be excluded when calculating any leave payouts, including vacation, holiday, and personal leave. H. Snowfighter Pay. The city will pay employees designated by the department head, or designee, as members of the Snow Fighter Corps a pay differential equal to $200 per pay period for the snowfighter season not to exceed $2,000 during each fiscal year for work related to snow removal. This pay shall be separate from regular earnings on each employee’s wage statement. SUBSECTION V - EDUCATION AND TRAINING PAY A. Education Incentives. The mayor may adopt programs to promote employee education and training, provided that all compensation incentives are authorized within appropriate budget limitations established by the city council. 1. Police Sergeants, Lieutenants, and Captains are eligible for a $500 per year job- related training allowance. 2. Fire Battalion/Division Chiefs are eligible for incentive pay following completion of degree requirements at a fully accredited college or university and submission of evidence of a diploma to Human Resources. The city will pay monthly allowances according to the educational degree held, as follows: Doctorate………….. $100.00 Masters………..…... $75.00 SUBSECTION VI – OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES A. Meal Allowance. When approved by management, employees may receive meal allowances in the amount of $10.00 when an employee works two or more hours consecutive to their normally scheduled shift. Employees may also be eligible to receive $10.00 for each additional four-hour consecutive period of work which is in addition to the normally scheduled work shift. 1. Fire and police department employees shall be provided with adequate food and drink to maintain safety and performance during emergencies or extraordinary circumstances. Commented [SD1]: This pay allowance will be adjusted to match any new rate negotiated by AFSCME for FY24-FY26. Commented [SD2]: This pay allowance will be adjusted to match any new rate negotiated by AFSCME for FY24-FY26. 10 B. Business Expenses. City policy shall govern the authorization of employee advancement or reimbursement for actual expenses reasonably incurred while performing city business. Advance payment or reimbursement for expenses shall be approved only when the amounts are documented and within the budget limitations established by the city council. C. Automobiles 1. The mayor may authorize, subject to the conditions provided in city policy, an employee to utilize a city vehicle on a take-home basis and may require an employee to reimburse the city for a portion of the take-home vehicle cost as provided in city ordinance. 2. Employees who are authorized to use privately-owned automobiles for official city business will be reimbursed for the operation expenses at the rate specif ied in city policy. 3. The city will provide a car allowance to department directors, the mayor’s chief of staff, the mayor’s chief administrative officer, up to three additional employees in the mayor’s office, and the city council Executive Director at a rate not to exceed $400 per month. A car allowance may be paid to specific appointed employees at a rate not to exceed $400 per month as recommended by the mayor and approved by the city council. D. Uniform Allowance. The city will provide employees who are required to wear uniforms in the performance of their duties a monthly uniform allowance as follows: 1. Non-sworn Police and Fire Department employees—$65.00 2. Watershed Management Division employees—$65.00 3. Fire: Battalion Chiefs will be providedprovided with uniforms and other job- related safety equipment, as needed. Employees may select uniforms and related equipment from an approved list. The total allowance provided shall be $600 per year, or the amount received by firefighter employees, whichever is greater. Appointed employees shall be provided uniforms or uniform allowances to the extent stated in Fire department policy. a. Dangerous or contaminated safety equipment shall be cleaned, repaired, or replaced by the Fire department. 4. Police: Police sergeants, lieutenants, and captains in uniform assignments, as determined by their bureau commander, will be enrolled in the department’s quartermaster system. a. The quartermaster system will operate as follows: i. Necessary uniform and equipment items, including patrol uniforms, detective uniforms, duty gear, footwear, cold- weather gear, headwear, 11 etc. will be provided to Police sergeants, lieutenants, and captains by the department’s quartermaster pursuant to department policy. ii. A full inventory of items that the quartermaster will provide to Police sergeants, lieutenants and captains within the quartermaster system and the manner in which they will be distributed will be stated in department policy. iii. Police sergeants, lieutenants and captains in the quartermaster system will be paid the sum of One Hundred Dollars ($100) each fiscal year for the purpose of independently purchasing any incidental uniform item or equipment not provided by the quartermaster system. Payment will be made each year on the first day of the pay-period that includes August 15. b. The city will provide for the cleaning of uniforms as described in Police department policy. c. Police sergeants, lieutenants, and captains in plainclothes assignments, as determined by their bureau commander, are provided a clothing and cleaning allowance totaling $39.00 per pay period. Sergeants, lieutenants, and captains who are transferred back to a uniform assignment will return to the quartermaster system upon transfer. d. Uniforms or uniform allowances for appointed Police employees will be provided to the extent stated in Police department policy. E. Allowances for Certified Golf Teaching Professionals. The mayor may, within budgeted appropriations and as business needs indicate, authorize golf lesson revenue sharing between the city and employees recognized as Certified Golf Teaching Professionals as defined in the Golf Division’s Golf Lesson Revenue Policy. Payment to an employee for lesson revenue generated shall be reduced by: 1) a ten (10%) percent administrative fee to be retained by the Golf division, and 2) the employee’s payroll tax withholding requirements in accordance with applicable law. F. Other Allowances. The mayor or the city council may, within budgeted appropriations, authorize the payment of other allowances in extraordinary circumstances (as determined by the mayor or the city council). SUBSECTION VII - SEVERANCE BENEFIT Subject to availability of funds, any current appointed employee who is not retained, not terminated for cause and who is separated from city employment involuntarily shall receive severance benefits based upon their respective appointment date. A. Severance benefits shall be calculated using the employee’s salary rate in effect on the employee’s date of termination. Receipt of severance benefits is contingent upon execution of a release of all claims approved by the city attorney’s office. 12 1. Employees appointed on or after January 1, 1989 and before January 1, 2000 shall receive a severance benefit equal to one months’ base salary for each continuous year of city employment in an appointed status before January 1, 2000. Severance shall be calculated on a pro-rata basis for a total benefit of up to a maximum of six months. 2. Current department heads, along with the mayor’s chief of staff and the executive director of the city council office, appointed on or after January 1, 2000 shall receive a severance benefit equal to two month’s base salary after one full year of continuous city employment in an appointed status; four months’ base salary after two full years of continuous city employment in an appointed status; or, six months’ base salary after three full years or more of continuous city employment in an appointed status. 3. Current appointed employees who are not department heads, and who were appointed on or after January 1, 2000 shall receive a severance benefit equal to one week’s base salary for each year of continuous city employment in an appointed status, calculated on a pro-rata basis, for a total benefit of up to a maximum of six weeks. B. Leave Payout: Appointed employees with leave hour account balances under Plan A or Plan B shall, in addition to the severance benefit provided, receive a severance benefit equal to the “retirement benefit” value provided under the leave plan of which they are a participant (either Plan A or Plan B), if separation is involuntary and not for cause. C. Not Eligible for Benefit. An appointed employee is ineligible to be paid severance benefits under the following circumstances: 1. An employee who, at the time of termination of employment, has been convicted, indicted, charged or is under active criminal investigation concerning a public offense involving a felony or moral turpitude. This provision shall not restrict the award of full severance benefits should such employee subsequently be found not guilty of such charge or if the charges are otherwise dismissed. 2. An employee who has been terminated or asked for a resignation by the mayor or department director under bona fide charges of nonfeasance, misfeasance or malfeasance in office. 3. An employee who fails to execute a Release of All Claims approved by the city attorney’s office, where required as stipulated above. 4. An employee who is hired into another position in the city prior to their separation date. In the event an employee is hired into another position in the city after their separation date and prior to the expiration of the period of time for which the severance benefit was provided, the employee is required to reimburse the City (on a pro-rata basis) for that portion of the severance benefit covering the period of time 13 between the date of rehire and the expiration of the period of time for which the severance benefit was provided. SECTION IV: HOLIDAY, VACATION & LEAVE ACCRUAL Benefits-eligible employees shall receive pay for holidays, vacation and other leave as provided in this section. Employees do not earn or receive holiday and vacation benefits while on unpaid leave of absence. However, employees on an unpaid military leave of absence may be entitled to the restoration of such leave benefits, as required by applicable law. SUBSECTION I – HOLIDAYS A. The following days are recognized and observed as holidays for covered employees. Eligible employees will receive pay for non-worked holidays equal to their regular rate of pay times the total number of hours which make a regularly scheduled shift. Except as otherwise noted in this subsection, an employee may not bank a worked holiday. 1. New Year's Day, the first day of January. 2. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day (Human Rights Day), the third Monday of January. 3. President's Day, the third Monday in February. 4. Memorial Day, the last Monday of May. 5. Juneteenth National Freedom Day, June 19 a. If June 19 is on a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday, the holiday will be observed on the immediately preceding Monday. If June 19 is on a Saturday or Sunday, the holiday will be observed on the immediately following Monday. 6. Independence Day, July 4. 7. Pioneer Day, July 24. 8. Labor Day, the first Monday in September. 9. Indigenous People’s Day, the second Monday of October (only for eligible employees assigned to the Justice Court) 109. Veteran's Day, November 11. 1110. Thanksgiving Day, the fourth Thursday in November. 1211. The Friday after Thanksgiving Day (excluding employees assigned to the Justice Court) 14 1312. Christmas Day, December 25. 1413. One personal holiday per calendar year, taken upon request of an employee and as approved by a supervisor. B. When any holiday listed above falls on a Sunday, the following business day is considered a holiday. When any holiday listed above falls on a Saturday, the preceding business day is considered a holiday. In addition to the above, any day may be designated as a holiday by proclamation of the mayor or the city council. C. All holiday hours, including personal holidays, must be used in no less than regular full day or shift increments. 1. A Fire battalion/division chief may be allowed to use a holiday in less than a full shift increment only when converting from a “support” to “operations” work schedule results in the creation of a half-shift. D. No employee will receive more than the equivalent of one workday or a regular scheduled shift as holiday pay for a single holiday. Employees must either work or be in an authorized paid leave status a working day before and a working day after the holiday to qualify for holiday pay. 1. An employee who is off work and in a paid status covered by short-term disability or parental leave receives regular pay as a benefit and, therefore, is not entitled to bank a holiday while off work. E. Holiday Exceptions: Except for employees assigned to the Justice Court, an eligible employee may observe the Friday after Thanksgiving Day up to 50 days prior to the actual holiday with prior management approval. For Columbus Day, which is limited only to employees assigned to the Justice Court, an employee may observe the holiday up to 50 days following the actual holiday. FE. Police Sergeant, Lieutenant, & Captain Holiday Hours Worked: When a day designated as a holiday falls on a scheduled workday, a Police sergeant, lieutenant, or captain may elect to take the day off work, subject to the approval of their supervisor, or receive their regular wages for such days worked and designate an alternate day off work to celebrate the holiday. For a Police sergeant whose assignment requires staffing on either the graveyard shift prior to, or the day and afternoon shift on Thanksgiving Day or Christmas Day, all hours worked will be compensated at a rate of one-and-one- half (1 ½) times the employee’s regular base wage rate. GF. Police Sergeant, Lieutenant, & Captain Accrued Holiday Leave Payout: Police sergeants, lieutenants, and captains who retire or separate from city employment for any reason shall be compensated for any holiday time accrued and unused during the preceding 12 months. Employees will not be compensated for any unused holiday time accrued before the 12 months preceding the employee’s retirement or separation. 1. Any Police sergeant, lieutenant, or captain who is transferred or promoted to a higher-level position within the department, including Deputy Chief, Assistant 15 Chief, or Police Chief, or to a position in another city department will be paid out at their current base pay rate for any holiday time accrued and unused during the preceding 12 months. SUBSECTION II - VACATION LEAVE The city will pay eligible employees their regular salaries during vacation periods earned and taken in accordance with the following provisions. Except as provided for expressly in either city policy or this plan, vacation leave hours are ineligible to be cashed out or used to exceed the total number of hours for which an employee is regularly compensated during a work week or a pay period. Vacation hours may be used on the first day of the pay period following the period in which the vacation hours are accrued. A. Full-Time employees and appointed employees (except for those noted in paragraphs B and C of this subsection) accrue vacation leave based upon years of city service as follows: Years of Hours of Vacation Accrued City Service Per Bi-Weekly Pay Period 0 to end of year 3 3.73 4 to end of year 6 4.42 7 to end of year 9 4.81 10 to end of year 12 5.54 13 to end of year 15 6.15 16 to end of year 19 6.77 20 or more 7.69 B. Department directors, the mayor’s chief of staff, the mayor’s chief administrative officer, up to two additional senior positions in the mayor’s office as specified by the mayor, the executive director of the city council, and justice court judges will accrue 7.69 hours each bi-weekly pay period. 16 C. Fire battalion chiefs in the Operations division of the Fire department will accrue vacation leave according to the following schedule: Years of Accrued Hours of Vacation City Service Per Pay Period 0 to end of year 3 5.54 4 to end of year 6 6.46 7 to end of year 9 7.38 10 to end of year 12 8.31 13 to end of year 14 9.23 15 to end of year 19 10.15 20 or more 11.54 D. For any plan year in which there are 27 pay periods, no vacation leave hours will be awarded in the 27th pay period. E. Years of city service are based on the most recent date the person became a full- time salaried employee. F. Full-time employees re-hired by the city are eligible to receive prior service credit for previous full-time city employment and time worked with other public jurisdictions without a break in service. Prior service credit is applicable for vacation accrual, personal leave accrual, short-term disability benefits, layoff, and awarding of employee service awards and service certificates only. Prior service credit does not apply to longevity pay. G. Full-time and appointed employees (except those listed in Paragraph B of this subsection) may accumulate vacations, according to the length of their full-time years of city Service, up to the following maximum limits: Up to and including 9 years Up to 30 days/ 15 shifts/ 240 hours After 9 years Up to 35 days/ 17.5 shifts/ 280 hours After 14 years Up to 40 days/ 20 shifts/ 320 hours For purposes of this subsection, "days" means "8-hour" days and “shifts” means “24-hour” combat shifts. H. Department directors and those included in Paragraph B of this subsection may accumulate up to 320 hours of vacation without regard to their years of employment with the city. 17 I. Any vacation accrued beyond the allowable maximums, including any Plan A sick leave hours converted to vacation, will be deemed forfeited unless used before the end of the pay period in which an employee’s designated longevity date occurs. However, in the case of an employee’s return from an unpaid military leave of absence, leave hours may be restored according to requirements under applicable law. J. Vacation Payout at Termination: An employee separating from employment may not exhaust more than 80 hours of any combination of accrued vacation, personal leave, or banked (holiday or vacation) leave prior to their last day of employment. Employees shall be paid at their base hourly rate for any unused accrued vacation leave time following termination of employment, including retirement. K. Vacation Allowance: As a recruiting incentive, the mayor or the city council may provide a one-time allowance of up to 120 hours of vacation leave. SUBSECTION III - SICK AND OTHER RELATED LEAVE OR PERSONAL LEAVE Benefits in this section are for the purpose of income replacement for employees during absence from work due to illness, accident, or personal reasons. Some of these absences may qualify under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA). Although the city requires use of accrued paid leave prior to taking unpaid FMLA leave, employees will be allowed to reserve up to 80 hours of non-lapsing leave as a contingency for future use by submitting a written request to Human Resources. Employees are not eligible to earn or receive leave benefits while on an unpaid leave of absence. However, employees on an unpaid military leave of absence may be entitled to the restoration of such leave benefits, as provided by applicable law. Employees hired on or after November 16, 1997 receive personal leave benefits under Plan B. All other employees receive personal leave benefits pursuant to the plan they participated in as of November 15, 1998. Employees hired before November 16, 1997 shall receive personal leave benefits under Plan B if they elected to do so during any city - established election period occurring in 1998 or later. A. Plan “A ” 1. Sick Leave a. Sick leave is provided for full-time employees under Plan “A” as insurance against loss of income when an employee is unable to perform assigned duties because of illness or injury. The mayor may establish rules governing the interfacing of sick leave and workers’ compensation benefits and avoiding, to the extent allowable by law, duplicative payments. b. Each full-time employee accrues sick leave at a rate of 4.62 hours per pay period. For any plan year in which there are 27 pay periods, no sick leave hours will be awarded in the 27th pay period. Authorized and unused sick leave may be accumulated from year to year, subject to the limitations of this plan. 18 1. Sick Leave Accrual for Fire Battalion Chiefs – Each covered employee shall be entitled to 15 days of sick leave each calendar year, except for members of the Operations division who shall be entitled to 7.5 shifts of sick leave each calendar year. The City shall credit a covered employee’s sick leave account in a lump sum (either 15 days or7.5 shifts) during the first month of each calendar year. Authorized and unused sick leave may be accumulated from year to year subject to the limitations of this plan. c. Under this Plan “A,” Full-Time employees who have accumulated 240 hours of sick leave may choose to convert up to 64 hours of the sick leave earned and unused during any given year to vacation. Any sick leave used during the calendar year reduces the allowable conversion by an equal amount. 1. Sick Leave Conversion for Fire Battalion Chiefs – Fire Battalion Chiefs who have accumulated 15 shifts (for Operations employees), or 240 hours (for non-Operations employees) may choose to convert a portion of the year sick leave grant from any given year to vacation, as follows— Number of Sick Leave Shifts Used During Previous Calendar Year (Operations Only) Number of Sick Leave Shifts Available for Conversion (Operations Only) No shifts used 5 shifts One shift used 4 shifts Two shifts used 3 shifts Three shifts used 2 shifts Four shifts used 1 shift Five or more shifts used No shifts Number of Sick Leave Shifts Used During Previous Calendar Year (Support Only) Number of Sick Leave Shifts Available for Conversion (Support Only) No days used 9 days One day used 8 days Two days used 7 days Three days used 6 days Four days used 5 days Five or more days used 0 days d. Conversion at the maximum allowable hours will be made unless the employee elects otherwise. Any election by an employee for no conversion, or to convert less than the maximum allowable sick leave hours to vacation time, must be made by notifying the employee’s department timekeeper or the city payroll administrator, in writing, not later than the second pay period of the new calendar year (or the November vacation draw for Fire Battalion Chiefs). Otherwise, the opportunity to waive conversion or elect conversion other than the maximum allowable amount will be deemed waived for that 19 calendar year. In no event may sick leave days be converted from other than the current year's sick leave allocation. e. Any sick leave hours, properly converted to vacation benefits as above described, must be taken before any other vacation hours to which the employee is entitled; however, in no event is an employee, upon the employee’s separation from employment, entitled to any pay or compensation for any sick leave converted to vacation. An employee forfeits any sick leave converted to vacation remaining unused at the date of separation from employment. f. Sick Leave Benefits Upon Layoff. Employees who are subject to layoff because of lack of work or lack of funds will be paid at 100% of their hourly base wage rate as of the date of termination for each accumulated unused sick leave hour. 2. Hospitalization Leave a. Hospitalization leave is provided for full -time employees under Plan “A,” in addition to sick leave authorized hereunder, as insuran ce against loss of income when an employee is unable to perform assigned duties because of scheduled surgical procedures, urgent medical treatment, or hospital inpatient admission. b. Employees are entitled to 30 days of hospitalization leave each calendar year. Hospitalization leave does not accumulate from year to year. Employees may not convert hospitalization leave to vacation or any other leave, nor may they convert hospitalization leave to any additional benefit at time of retirement. c. Employees who are unable to perform their duties during a shift due to preparations (such as fasting, rest, or ingestion of medicine), for a scheduled surgical procedure, may report the absence from the affected shift as hospitalization leave, with the prior approval of their division head or supervisor. d. An employee who must receive urgent medical treatment at a hospital, emergency room, or acute care facility, and who is regularly scheduled for work or unable to perform their duties during a shift (or work day) due to urgent medical treatment, may report the absence from the affected shift as hospitalization leave. Similarly, an employee who is absent from work while on approved leave is also allowed to claim hospitalization leave. 1. An employee who wishes to claim hospitalization leave is responsible to report the receipt of urgent medical treatment to the employee’s division head or supervisor as soon as practical. 20 2. For purposes of use of hospitalization leave, urgent medical treatment includes at-home care directed by a physician immediately after the urgent medical treatment and within the affected shift. e. Employees who, because they are admitted as an inpatient to a hospital for medical treatment, are unable to perform their duties, may report the absence from duty while in the hospital as hospitalization leave. f. Medical treatment consisting exclusively or primarily of post-injury rehabilitation or therapy treatment, whether conducted in a hospital or other medical facility, shall not be counted as hospitalization leave. g. An employee requesting hospitalization leave under this section may be required to provide verification of treatment or care from a competent medical practitioner. 3. Dependent Leave a. Under Plan “A,” dependent leave may be requested by a full-time employee for the following reasons: 1. Becoming a parent through birth or adoption of a child. 2. Placement of a foster child in the employee’s home. 3. Due to the care of the employee’s child, spouse, spouse’s child, adult designee, adult designee’s unmarried child under age 26, or parent with a serious health condition. b. Under Plan “A,” dependent leave may also be requested by a full- time employee to care for an employee’s child, spouse, spouse’s child, adult designee, an adult designee’s unmarried child under age 26, or a parent who is ill or injured but who does not have a serious health condition. c. The following provisions apply to the use of dependent leave by a full- time employee: 1. Dependent leave may be granted with pay on a straight time basis. 2. If an employee has available unused sick leave, sick leave may be used as dependent leave. 3. An employee is required to give notice of the need to take dependent leave, including the expected duration of leave, to his or her supervisor as soon as possible. 4. Upon request of a supervisor, an employee will be required to provide a copy of a birth certificate or evidence of child placement for adoption, or a letter from the attending physician in the event of 21 hospitalization, injury, or illness of a child, spouse, spouse’s child, adult designee, adult designee’s child, or parent within five calendar days following a return from leave. 5. An employee’s sick leave shall be reduced by the number of hours taken by an employee as dependent leave. 4. Career Incentive Leave, Plan “A” Full-Time employees, who have been in continuous full-time employment with the city for more than 20 years, and who have accumulated to their credit 1500 or more sick leave hours, may make a one-time election to convert up to 160 hours of sick leave into 80 hours of paid Career Incentive Leave . Career Incentive Leave must be taken prior to retirement. Sick leave hours converted to Career Incentive Leave will not be eligible for a cash payout upon termination or retirement even though the employee has unused Career Incentive Leave hours available. This leave can be used for any reason. Requests for Career Incentive Leave must be submitted in writing to the appropriate department director and be approved subject to the department’s business needs (e.g., work schedules and workloads). 5. Retirement Benefit, Plan “A” a. Employees who meet the eligibility requirements of the Utah State Retirement System and who retire from the city will be paid at their base hourly rate for 50% of their accumulated sick leave hours balance based on the schedule below: Retirement Month 50% sick leave will be: January 1st – June 30th Contributed to 501(c)9 Health Reimbursement Account Plan (premium-only account) July 1st – December 31st Cash to retiree B. Plan “B” 1. The benefit Plan Year of Plan “B” begins in each calendar year on the first day of the pay-period that includes November 15. Under Plan “B,” paid personal leave is provided for employees as insurance against loss of income when an employee needs to be absent from work because of illness or injury, to care for a dependent, or for any other emergency or personal reason. Each eligible employee will receive personal leave on November 1st of each calendar year. P e r s o n a l l e a v e h o u r s a r e i n e l i g i b l e t o b e u s e d t o e x c e e d t h e t o t a l n u m b e r o f w o r k h o u r s f o r w h i c h a n e m p l o y e e i s r e g u l a r l y c o m p e n s a t e d d u r i n g a w o r k w e e k o r a p a y p e r i o d. Where the leave is not related to the employee’s own illness or disability—or an event that qualifies under the FMLA—a personal leave request is subject to supervisory approval based on the operational requirements of the city and any policies regarding the use of such leave adopted by the department in which the employee works. Accrued personal leave hours may be used on the same day 22 the hours are receivedPersonal leave hours may be used on the first day of the pay period following the period in which the hours are earned. 23 2. Each full-time employee under Plan “B” is awarded personal leave hours based on the following schedule: Months of Consecutive Hours of City Service Personal Leave Less than 6 40 Less than 24 60 24 or more 80 Employees hired during the plan year are provided paid personal leave on a pro- rated basis. 3. Not later than October 31st 15th of each calendar year, employees covered by Plan “B” may elect, by notifying their department timekeeper or the city payroll administrator in writing, to: a. Convert any unused personal leave hours available at the end of the first pay period of Novemberas of October 31st to a lump sum payment equal to the following: For each converted hour, the employee will be paid 50 percent of the employee’s regular hourly base wage rate (not including acting pay) in effect on the date of conversion. In no event will total pay hereunder exceed 40 hours of pay (80 hours at 50%); or b. Carryover to the next calendar year up to 80 unused personal leave hours; or c. Convert a portion of unused personal leave hours, to a lump sum payment as provided in subparagraph (3)(a), above, and carry over a portion as provided in subparagraph (3)(b), above. 4. Maximum Accrual. A maximum of 80 hours of personal leave may be carried over to the next plan year. Any personal leave hours unused at the end of the plan year in excess of 80 will be converted to a lump sum payment as provided in subparagraph 3(a) above. 5. Termination Benefits. An employee separating from employment may not exhaust more than 80 hours of any combination of accrued vacation, personal leave, or banked (holiday or vacation) leave prior to their last day of employment. At termination of employment for any reason, accumulated unused personal leave hours, minus any adjustment necessary after calculating the “prorated amount,” shall be paid to the employee at 50 percent of the regular hourly base wage rate (not including acting pay) on the date of termination for each unused hour. For purposes of this paragraph, “prorated amount” shall mean the amount of personal leave credited at the beginning of the plan year, multiplied by the ratio of the number of pay periods worked in the plan year (rounded to the end of the pay period which includes the separation date) to 26 pay periods. If the employee, at the time of separation, has 24 used personal leave in excess of the prorated amount, the value of the excess amount shall be reimbursed to the city and may be deducted f rom the employee’s paycheck. 6. Conditions on Use of Personal Leave include: a. Minimum use of personal leave, with supervisory approval, must be in no less than quarter-hour increments. b. Except in unforeseen circumstances, such as emergencies or the employee’s inability to work due to illness or accident or an unforeseen FMLA-qualifying event, an employee must provide their supervisor with prior notice to allow time for the supervisor to make arrangements necessary to cover the employee’s work. c. For leave due to unforeseen circumstances, the employee must give their supervisor as much prior notice as possible. d. Except as provided for expressly in either city policy or this plan, personal leave hours are ineligible to be cashed out or used to exceed the total number of hours for which an employee is regularly compensated during a work week or a pay period. 7. Career Enhancement Leave, Plan “B”: A full-time employee covered under this Plan “B” is eligible, after 15 years of full-time service with the city, to be selected to receive up to two weeks of career enhancement leave. This one-time leave benefit could be used for formal training, informal course of study, job-related travel, internship, mentoring or other activity that could be of benefit to the city and the employee’s career development. Selected employees will receive their full regular salary during the leave. Request for this leave must be submitted in writing to the appropriate department head, stating the purpose of the request and how the leave is intended to benefit the city. The request must be approved by the department head and by the Human Resources director (who will review the request to ensure compliance with these guidelines). 8. Retirement/Layoff (RL) Benefit, Plan “B” a. Full-Time employees currently covered under Plan “B” who were hired before November 16, 1997, and who elected to be covered under Plan “B,” shall have a retirement/layoff (RL) account equal to sixty percent of their accumulated unused sick leave hours available on November 16, 1997, minus any hours withdrawn from that account since it was established. b. Full-Time employees who were hired before November 16, 1997 and who elected in 1998 to be covered under Plan “B,” shall have a retirement/layoff (RL) account equal to fifty percent of their accumulated unused sick leave hours available on November 14, 1998, minus any hours withdrawn after the account is established. c. Full-Time employees who were hired before November 16, 1997 and 25 who elected in 2007 or later during any period designated by the city to be covered under Plan “B,” shall have a retirement /layoff (RL) account equal to forty percent of their accumulated unused sick leave hours available on the date that Plan B participation began, minus any hours withdrawn after the account is established. d. Payment of the RL Account. 1. All hours in an employee’s RL account shall be payable upon retirement or as a result of layoff. In the case of layoff, 100% of R/L hours shall be paid to the employee according to the employee’s base hourly rate of pay on date of layoff. Any employee who quits, resigns, is separated, or is terminated for cause is not eligible to receive payment for RL account hours. 2. In cases of retirement, an eligible employee shall be paid at their base hourly rate for 100% of their RL account balance based on the schedule below: Retirement Month 100% RL hours will be: January 1st – June 30th Contributed to 501(c)9 Health Retirement Account Plan (premium-only account) July 1st – December 31st Cash to retiree e. Hours may be withdrawn from the RL account to cover an employee’s absence from work due to illness or injury, need to care for a dependent, any emergency or to supplement Workers’ Compensation benefits after all pPersonal lLeave hours are exhausted. RL account hours, when added to the employee’s workers’ compensation benefit, may not exceed the employee’s regular net salary. 9. Short-Term Disability Insurance, Plan “B”: Protection against loss of income when an employee is absent from work due to short -term disability shall be provided to full-time employees covered under Plan “B” through short-term disability insurance (SDI). There shall be no cost to the employee for SDI. SDI shall be administered in accordance with the terms determined by the city. SUBSECTION IV - PARENTAL LEAVE A. Full-time employees who become parents through birth, adoption, or foster care may take up to six consecutive weeks of paid parental leave to care for and bond with the child. An employee may be allowed to take parental leave up to one year from the date of a child’s birth or, in the case of adoption or foster care, the date a child is placed in the employee’s home. Parental leave may be taken during a new employee’s probationary period. The probationary period will be extended by an amount of time equivalent to the parental leave taken. B. Parental leave will run concurrently (during the same period of time) with FMLA and SDI (if applicable). Parental leave is limited to six weeks per twelve-month period. 26 For employees approved for short-term disability, parental leave will make up the difference between 100% pay and 66 2/3% pay (if applicable) for up to six weeks. SUBSECTION V - BEREAVEMENT LEAVE A. An employee who suffers the loss of an immediate family member including a(n): current spouse, domestic partner, or adult designee; child, mother, father, brother, sister; current father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law; grandparent; current step-grandfather, step-grandmother; grandchild, or current step grandchild, stepchild, stepmother, stepfather, stepbrother or stepsister, grandfather-in-law, grandmother-in-law; or, domestic partner’s or adult designee’s relative as if the domestic partner or adult designee were the employee’s spouse is eligible to be released from work for bereavement, including attendance at a funeral, memorial service, or related event(s). B. In the event of death of an immediate family member, the city will provide an employee with up to five working days of paid leave for bereavement, including attendance at a funeral, memorial service, or related event(s). The employee will be permitted one additional day of bereavement leave if the employee attends a funeral, memorial service or equivalent event that is held more than 150 miles from Salt Lake City and the day following the memorial service or equivalent event is a regular working shift. C. In the event of death of a first-line extended relative of an employee, or of an employee’s spouse, domestic partner, or adult designee’s relative as if the adult designee were the employee’s spouse not covered in paragraph A above (such as an uncle, aunt or cousin), the city will provide an employee with up to one work shift for bereavement, including attendance at a funeral, memorial service, or related event(s). The employee will be permitted one additional day of bereavement leave if the employee attends a funeral, memorial service or equivalent event that is held more than 150 miles from Salt Lake City and the day following the memorial service or equivalent event is a regular working shift. D. In the event of death of a friend, an employee may be allowed to use vacation or personal leave for time off to attend the funeral or memorial service, as approved by an immediate supervisor. E. In the event of death of any covered family member while an employee is on vacation leave, an employee’s absence may be extended and authorized as bereavement leave. F. In the event of a miscarriage or stillbirth, the employee, employee’s spouse or partner, or employee to be an adoptive parent, the city will provide an employee with up to three working days of paid leave for bereavement. SUBSECTION VI - MILITARY LEAVE A. Leave of absence for employees who enter uniformed service. An employee who enters the uniformed services of the United States, including the United States Army, 27 United States Navy, United States Marine Corps, United States Air Force, commissioned Corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, United States Coast Guard, or the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service, is entitled to be absent from his or her duties and service from the city, without pay, as required by applicable l law. Leave will be granted in accordance with the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA). B. Leave while on duty with the armed forces or Utah National Guard. An employee who is or who becomes a member of the reserves of the federal armed forces, including the United States Army, United States Navy, United States Marine Corps, United States Air Force, and the United States Coast Guard, or any unit of the Utah National Guard, is allowed military leave for up to 15 working days per calendar year for time spent on active or reserve duty. Military leave may be in addition to vacation leave and need not be consecutive days of service. To be covered, an employee must provide documentation demonstrating a duty requirement. SUBSECTION VII - JURY LEAVE & COURT APPEARANCES A. Jury Leave: An employee will be released from duty with full pay when, in obedience to a subpoena or direction by proper authority, the employee is required to either serve on a jury or appear as a witness for the United States, the state of Utah, or other political subdivision. 1. Employees are entitled to retain statutory fees paid for service in a federal court, state court, or city/county justice court. 2. On any day that an employee is required to report for service and is thereafter excused from such service during his or her regular worki ng hours from the city, he or she must forthwith return to and carry on his or her regular city employment. Employees who fail to return to work after being excused from service for the day are subject to discipline. B. Court Appearances. A Police sergeant is eligible to receive compensation as a witness subpoenaed by the city, the State of Utah, or the United States for a court or administrative proceeding appearance as follows: 1. Appearances in court or administrative proceeding made while on-duty will be compensated as normal hours worked. 2. In the event an appearance extends beyond the end of an employee's regularly scheduled shift, time will be counted as normal work time for the purpose of computing an employee's overtime compensation. 3. Employees are entitled to retain statutory witness fees paid for service in a federal court, state court, or city/county justice court. 4. Appearances made while off-duty will be compensated as follows: (a) The city will pay employees for two hours of preparation time plus actual time spent in court or in an administrative hearing at one and one-half 28 times their regular hourly rate. Lunch periods granted are not considered compensable time. Compensation for additional preparation time for any subsequent appearance during the same day is allowed only when there is at least two hours between the employee’s release time from a prior court or administrative proceeding and the start of the other. (b) If the time spent in court or administrative proceeding extends into the beginning of the employee's regularly scheduled work shift, time spent in court or in administrative proceeding will be deemed ended at the time such shift is scheduled to begin. 5. An employee is required to provide a copy of the subpoena, including the beginning time and time released from the court or administrative hearing, with initials of the prosecuting or another court representative within seven working days following the appearance. 6. Any employee failing to appear in compliance with the terms of a formal notice or subpoena may be subject to disciplinary action. SUBSECTION VIII - INJURY LEAVE (SWORN POLICE AND FIRE EMPLOYEES ONLY) The city has established rules governing the administration of an injury leave program for sworn public safety personnel under the following qualifications and restrictions: A. The disability must have resulted from an injury arising out of the discharge of official duties or while exercising some form of necessary job-related activity as determined by the city; B. The employee must be unable to return to work due to the injury, as verified by a medical provider acceptable to the city; C. The leave benefit may not exceed the value of the employee's net salary during the period of absence due to the injury, less all amounts paid or credited to the employee as workers’ compensation, Social Security, long-term disability or retirement benefits, or any form of governmental relief whatsoever; D. The value of benefits provided to employees under this injury leave program may not exceed the total of $5,000 per employee per injury, unless approved in writing by the employee’s department head after receiving an acceptable treatment plan and consulting with the city’s risk manager; E. The city's risk manager is principally responsible for the review of injury leave claims, except that appeals from the decision of the city’s risk manager may be reviewed by the Human Resources director, who may make recommendations to the mayor for final decisions; F. If an employee is eligible for workers’ compensation as provided by law and is not receiving injury leave pursuant to this provision, an employee may elect to use either accumulated sick leave or hours from the RL account, if applicable, and authorized 29 vacation time to supplement workers’ compensation. The total value of leave hours or hours from an RL account combined with a workers’ compensation benefit may not exceed an employee's regular net salary. SUBSECTION IX - ADDITIONAL LEAVES OF ABSENCE Additional leaves of absence may be requested in writing and granted as identified in policy to an employee at the discretion of a department director. SUBSECTION X - EMERGENCY LEAVE The city may provide additional paid leave to employees if: i) the mayor has declared a local emergency; and ii) the mayor and/or city council authorize and approve the use of available funds for such purposes during the period of local emergency. Emergency leave may also be provided as a form of income replacement for part-time (hourly) and/or seasonal employees whose work hours are either reduced or discontinued temporarily, so long as there is an expectation they will return to work after the emergency period is ended. 30 APPENDIX A - SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION GENERAL EMPLOYEE PAY PLAN (GEPP) Effective June 26, 2022June 25. 2023 GRADE MINIMUM CITY MARKET MAXIMUM GRADE MINIMUM CITY MARKET MAXIMUM SEAX/HRLY $11.87 $38.23 SEAX/HRLY $12.46 $70.00 10 $12.60 $16.46 $20.31 10 $13.23 $17.28 $21.33 11 $13.21 $17.28 $21.35 11 $13.87 $18.15 $22.42 12 $13.88 $18.29 $22.71 12 $14.57 $19.21 $23.85 13 $14.58 $19.06 $23.54 13 $15.31 $20.02 $24.72 14 $15.30 $19.94 $24.58 14 $16.07 $20.94 $25.81 15 $16.06 $21.10 $26.14 15 $16.86 $22.16 $27.45 16 $16.86 $22.33 $27.81 16 $17.70 $23.45 $29.20 17 $17.71 $23.24 $28.77 17 $18.60 $24.41 $30.21 18 $18.60 $24.70 $30.80 18 $19.53 $25.94 $32.34 19 $19.52 $25.79 $32.06 19 $20.50 $27.08 $33.66 20 $20.51 $26.89 $33.27 20 $21.54 $28.24 $34.93 21 $20.69 $28.22 $35.75 21 $21.72 $29.63 $37.54 22 $21.75 $29.66 $37.57 22 $22.84 $31.15 $39.45 23 $22.83 $31.15 $39.47 23 $23.97 $32.71 $41.44 24 $23.97 $32.69 $41.41 24 $25.17 $34.33 $43.48 25 $25.16 $34.32 $43.47 25 $26.42 $36.03 $45.64 26 $26.43 $36.04 $45.66 26 $27.75 $37.85 $47.94 27 $27.73 $37.86 $47.98 27 $29.12 $39.75 $50.38 28 $29.11 $39.77 $50.42 28 $30.57 $41.76 $52.94 29 $30.59 $41.76 $52.93 29 $32.12 $43.85 $55.58 30 $32.11 $43.85 $55.58 30 $33.72 $46.04 $58.36 31 $33.72 $46.05 $58.37 31 $35.41 $48.35 $61.29 32 $35.40 $48.34 $61.27 32 $37.17 $50.75 $64.33 33 $37.18 $50.77 $64.35 33 $39.04 $53.31 $67.57 34 $39.04 $53.31 $67.57 34 $40.99 $55.97 $70.95 35 $40.98 $55.96 $70.95 35 $43.03 $58.77 $74.50 36 $43.03 $58.77 $74.50 36 $45.18 $61.71 $78.23 37 $45.19 $61.70 $78.21 37 $47.45 $64.79 $82.12 38 $47.45 $64.78 $82.12 38 $49.82 $68.03 $86.23 39 $49.83 $104.65 39 $52.32 $109.88 40 $52.31 $109.86 40 $54.93 $115.35 41 $54.93 $178.21 41 $57.68 $187.12 31 GRADE MINIMUM CITY MARKET MAXIMUM GRADE MINIMUM CITY MARKET MAXIMUM SEAX/HRLY $24,689.60 $79,518.40 SEAX/HRLY $25,916.80 $145,600.00 10 $26,208.00 $34,236.80 $42,244.80 10 $27,518.40 $35,942.40 $44,366.40 11 $27,476.80 $35,942.40 $44,408.00 11 $28,849.60 $37,741.60 $46,633.60 12 $28,870.40 $38,043.20 $47,236.80 12 $30,305.60 $39,956.80 $49,608.00 13 $30,326.40 $39,644.80 $48,963.20 13 $31,844.80 $41,631.20 $51,417.60 14 $31,824.00 $41,475.20 $51,126.40 14 $33,425.60 $43,555.20 $53,684.80 15 $33,404.80 $43,888.00 $54,371.20 15 $35,068.80 $46,082.40 $57,096.00 16 $35,068.80 $46,446.40 $57,844.80 16 $36,816.00 $48,776.00 $60,736.00 17 $36,836.80 $48,339.20 $59,841.60 17 $38,688.00 $50,762.40 $62,836.80 18 $38,688.00 $51,376.00 $64,064.00 18 $40,622.40 $53,944.80 $67,267.20 19 $40,601.60 $53,643.20 $66,684.80 19 $42,640.00 $56,326.40 $70,012.80 20 $42,660.80 $55,931.20 $69,201.60 20 $44,803.20 $58,728.80 $72,654.40 21 $43,035.20 $58,697.60 $74,360.00 21 $45,177.60 $61,630.40 $78,083.20 22 $45,240.00 $61,692.80 $78,145.60 22 $47,507.20 $64,781.60 $82,056.00 23 $47,486.40 $64,792.00 $82,097.60 23 $49,857.60 $68,026.40 $86,195.20 24 $49,857.60 $67,995.20 $86,132.80 24 $52,353.60 $71,396.00 $90,438.40 25 $52,332.80 $71,385.60 $90,417.60 25 $54,953.60 $74,942.40 $94,931.20 26 $54,974.40 $74,963.20 $94,972.80 26 $57,720.00 $78,717.60 $99,715.20 27 $57,678.40 $78,748.80 $99,798.40 27 $60,569.60 $82,680.00 $104,790.40 28 $60,548.80 $82,721.60 $104,873.60 28 $63,585.60 $86,850.40 $110,115.20 29 $63,627.20 $86,860.80 $110,094.40 29 $66,809.60 $91,208.00 $115,606.40 30 $66,788.80 $91,208.00 $115,606.40 30 $70,137.60 $95,763.20 $121,388.80 31 $70,137.60 $95,784.00 $121,409.60 31 $73,652.80 $100,568.00 $127,483.20 32 $73,632.00 $100,547.20 $127,441.60 32 $77,313.60 $105,560.00 $133,806.40 33 $77,334.40 $105,601.60 $133,848.00 33 $81,203.20 $110,874.40 $140,545.60 34 $81,203.20 $110,884.80 $140,545.60 34 $85,259.20 $116,417.60 $147,576.00 35 $85,238.40 $116,396.80 $147,576.00 35 $89,502.40 $122,231.20 $154,960.00 36 $89,502.40 $122,241.60 $154,960.00 36 $93,974.40 $128,346.40 $162,718.40 37 $93,995.20 $128,336.00 $162,676.80 37 $98,696.00 $134,752.80 $170,809.60 38 $98,696.00 $134,742.40 $170,809.60 38 $103,625.60 $141,492.00 $179,358.40 39 $103,646.40 $217,672.00 39 $108,825.60 $228,550.40 40 $108,804.80 $228,508.80 40 $114,254.40 $239,928.00 41 $114,254.40 $370,676.80 41 $119,974.40 $389,209.60 Annual Rates Annual Rates 32 APPENDIX B – APPOINTED EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT Effective June 26, 2022June 25, 2023 911 BUREAU Job Title Grade 911 DISPATCH DIRECTOR 041X 911 COMMUNICATIONS DEPUTY DIRECTOR 032X EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X AIRPORT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF AIRPORTS 041X CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, AIRPORT 040X DIRECTOR AIRPORT ENGINEERING DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 039X DIRECTOR AIRPORT MAINTENANCE 039X DIRECTOR FINANCE/ACCOUNTING AIRPORT 039X DIRECTOR OF AIRPORT ADMINISTRATION/COMMERCIAL SERVICES 039X DIRECTOR OF AIRPORT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 039X DIRECTOR OF AIRPORT PLANNING & CAPITAL PROJECTS 039X DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS - AIRPORT 039X DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONAL READINESS & TRANSITION 039X DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS & MARKETING 038X EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X CITY ATTORNEY CITY ATTORNEY 041X DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY 040X CITY RECORDER 034X035X CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBER-ELECT N/A* EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL OFFICE 041X COUNCIL LEGAL DIRECTOR 039X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - CITY COUNCIL 039X ASSOCIATE DEPUTY DIRECTOR COUNCIL 037X LEGISLATIVE & POLICY MANAGER 037X SENIOR ADVISOR CITY COUNCIL 037X SENIOR PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 033X COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL 031X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST III 031X COMMUNITY FACILITATOR 031X OPERATIONS MANAGER & MENTOR – CITY COUNCIL 031X PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 031X POLICY ANALYST/PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 028X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST II 028X CONSTITUENT LIAISON/POLICY ANALYST 027X CONSTITUENT LIAISON 026X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST I 026X ASSISTANT TO THE COUNCIL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 025X COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT/AGENDA 024X COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 021X COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 041X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 037X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY SERVICES 037X DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (ENGINEER) 037X PLANNING DIRECTOR 037X 33 BUILDING OFFICIAL 035X DIRECTOR OF HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 035X DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (PLANNER) 035X YOUTH & FAMILY DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 041X DEPUTY DIRECTOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 037X ARTS DIVISION DIRECTOR 032X033X BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT DIVISION DIRECTOR 032X033X FINANCE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 041X CITY TREASURER 039X DEPUTY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 039X CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER 036X FIRE FIRE CHIEF 041X DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF 037X ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF 035X EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X HUMAN RESOURCES CHIEF HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICER 041X DEPUTY CHIEF HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICER 037X CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARD INVESTIGATOR 035X TRANSITION CHIEF OF STAFF 041X* TRANSITION COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR 039X* TRANSITION EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 024X026X* INFORMATION MGT SERVICES CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 041X CHIEF INNOVATIONS OFFICER 039X DEPUTY CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 039X JUSTICE COURTS JUSTICE COURT JUDGE 037X038X CITY COURTSJUSTICE COURT ADMINISTRATOR 036X037X MAYOR CHIEF OF STAFF 041X CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 041X COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR 039X DEPUTY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 039X DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF 039X SENIOR ADVISOR 039X COMMUNICATIONS DEPUTY DIRECTOR 030X POLICY ADVISOR 029X REP COMMISSION POLICY ADVISOR 029X COMMUNITY LIAISON 026X EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X OFFICE MANAGER - MAYOR'S OFFICE 024X COMMUNITY OUTREACH - EQUITY & SPECIAL PROJECTS COORDINATOR 024X COMMUNICATION AND CONTENT MANAGER - MAYOR'S OFFICE 021X ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 019X CONSUMER PROTECTION ANALYST 016X 34 POLICE CHIEF OF POLICE 041X ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE 039X DEPUTY CHIEF POLICE 037X ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR - COMMUNICATIONS 037X ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR - INTERNAL AFFAIRS 037X EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X PUBLIC LANDS PUBLIC LANDS DIRECTOR 041X DEPUTY DIRECTOR, PUBLIC LANDS 037X GOLF DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X PARKS DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X URBAN FORESTRY DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES 041X CITY ENGINEER 039X DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS 038X FACILITIES DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X FLEET DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X STREETS DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X COMPLIANCE DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X PUBLIC UTILITIES DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC UTILITIES 041X DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC UTILITIES 039X FINANCE ADMINISTRATOR PUBLIC UTILITIES 039X CHIEF ENGINEER - PUBLIC UTILITIES 037X WATER QUALITY & TREATMENT ADMINSTRATOR 037X EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DIRECTOR, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 041X DEPUTY DIRECTOR, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 037X SUSTAINABILITY SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTOR 041X SUSTAINABILITY DEPUTY DIRECTOR 037X WASTE & RECYCLING DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X Except for a change in job title or reassignment to a lower pay level, no appointed position on this pay plan may be added, removed or modified without approval of the City Council. * Compensation for transitional positions, including city council member-elect, is set as provided under Chapter 2.03.030 of the Salt Lake City Code. Benefits for transitional employees are equivalent to those provided to full-time employees. Except for leave time, benefits for city council members-elect are also equivalent to those provided to full-time employees. 35 APPENDIX C – ELECTED OFFICIALS SALARY SCHEDULE Annual Salaries Effective June 26, 2022June 25, 2023 Mayor $160,064168,067 Council Members $40,01642,017 Except for leave time, benefits for the mayor and city council members are equivalent to those provided to full-time employees. 36 APPENDIX D- UTAH STATE RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS FY 2022-20232023-2024 Tier 1 Defined Benefit System System Employee Contribution Employer Contribution Total Public Employees Contributory System 6.0% 13.96% 19.96% Public Employees Noncontributory System 0 17.97% 17.97% Public Safety Noncontributory System 0 46.71% 46.71% Firefighters Retirement System 0 22.95% 22.95% Tier 1 Post Retired System Post Retired Employment After 6/30/10 – NO 401(k) Amortization of UAAL* Post Retired Employment Before 7/1/2010 Optional 401(k) Public Employees Noncontributory System 6.61 6.11% 11.86% Public Safety Noncontributory System 24.20% 22.51% Firefighters Retirement System 0% n/a Tier 2 Defined Benefit Hybrid System Employee Contribution Employer Contribution 401(k) Total Public Employees Noncontributory System 0% 16.01% 0.18% 16.19% Public Safety Noncontributory System (for entry and two year pay steps only) 2.59% (city paid) 38.28% 6.00% 46.87% Public Safety Noncontributory System (for pay steps year four or more) 2.59% (city paid) 38.28% 0% 40.87% Firefighters Retirement System 2.59% (city paid) 14.08% 0% 16.67% Tier 2 Defined Contribution Only Employee Contribution Employer Contribution 401(k) Total Public Employees Noncontributory System 0% 6.19% 10.00% 16.19% Public Safety Noncontributory System (for entry and two year pay steps only) 0% 24.28% 22.27% 46.55% Public Safety Noncontributory System (for pay steps year four or more) 0% 24.28% 16.2714.00% 40.5538.28% Firefighters Retirement System 0% 0.08% 16.2714.00% 16.3514.08% 37 Executive Non- Legislative Position Employer Contribution Public Employees Noncontributory System Department Heads, Mayor, Mayor’s Chief of Staff, Chief Administrative Officer, Up to Two Additional Senior Executives in the Mayor’s Office, Executive Director for City Council Normal contribution into Utah Retirement System (URS)with 3% into 401(k) – OR – If Tier 1 and exempt from system or Tier II and exempt from vesting, 401k contribution equal to the applicable URS system contribution plus 3% Public Safety Noncontributory System Department Head Same as above Firefighters Retirement System Department Head Same as above Council Members Elected with prior service in the Utah Retirement System (Tier 1 Defined Benefit) System Employee Contribution Employer Contribution Total Public Employees Noncontributory System 0 17.97% 17.97% If exempt… 0 10% base salary to 401(k) 10% Council Members Elected After July 1, 2011 with no prior service in the Utah Retirement System (may exempt from vesting) Tier 2 Defined Contribution Only Employer 401K Total 6.19% 10% 16.19% Tier 2 Defined Benefit Hybrid System Employer 401K Total 16.01% 0.18% 16.19% Salt Lake City Proposed FY23-24 Budget Presented by David Salazar FY23-24 Compensation Budget Presented by David Salazar, Compensation Manager 1 BB General & Merit Increases •5.0% Base Salary Increase (All Employees) •$8.9 million provides a general increase for all employees including those represented by a bargaining unit •Cost to the General Fund is $6.1 million •Merit Increases (Represented Employees only) •$1.06 million covers step increases based on years of service for employees represented by the three bargaining units •Cost to the General Fund is $636,424 FY23-24 COMPENSATION BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by David Salazar, Compensation Manager 3 BB Non-Represented Employees •5% General Increase •Individual base pay increases •Salary range adjustments •Covered employees include— •Non-represented paraprofessional & administrative support staff •Professional staff •Appointed department leaders •Elected officials FY23-24 COMPENSATION BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by David Salazar, Compensation Manager 3 BB AFSCME •Negotiations with AFSCME are on-going •Merit step increases honored for eligible employees •Increases range between 13% and 17% for 100 Series employees •Increases range between 6% and 17% for 200 Series employees •Increases range between 6% and 11% for 330 Series employees FY23-24 COMPENSATION BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by David Salazar, Compensation Manager 3 BB Firefighters •Final year of multi-year wage agreement with IAFF –Local 81 •Original wage agreement calls for a 3% general increase for FY24 •Base pay and step ranges adjusted by 5% to keep pace with market •Merit step increases honored for eligible employees •Increases for Firefighter EMT’s, Specialists, Paramedics, and Captains range between 6% and 23.5% FY23-24 COMPENSATION BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by David Salazar, Compensation Manager 3 BB Police Officers •Ratified wage agreement with Salt Lake Police Association for FY24 •Includes 5% base pay and step range adjustments •Merit step increases honored for eligible employees •Increases for Police Officers range between 6% and 23.5% FY23-24 COMPENSATION BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by David Salazar, Compensation Manager 3 BB Market-based Salary Adjustments •Targeted Market Pay •$1.05 million for market-based adjustments to employees in lagging benchmark jobs •Ten (10) benchmarks identified as lagging market by more than two percent after the recommended general increase •Slightly Lagging Benchmarks •Seven (7) benchmark jobs are >2%, but <10% below market •Significantly Lagging Benchmarks •Three (3) benchmark jobs are >10% below market FY23-24 COMPENSATION BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by David Salazar, Compensation Manager 3 THANK YOU •Salt Lake City Proposed FY23-24 Budget •Presented by Lori Gaitin 1 Risk/Benefits FY23-24 Budget Presented by Lori Gaitin BB INSIGHT #1: Cost to be Determined RISK/BENEFITS FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Lori Gaitin Lifestyle Spending Account MEETING EMPLOYEES’ EVERDAY NEEDS UNDER ONE UMBRELLA Matrix MSCW 28 Must 2 BB INSIGHT #1, continued RISK/BENEFITS FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Lori Gaitin What is a Lifestyle Spending Account? A Lifestyle Spending Account (LSA) is a relatively new employee benefit designed to encourage spending wellness activities. The City already offers a Health Savings Account (HSA) and Flexible Spending Accounts (FSA) to help employees with health-related costs. Plus, Dependent Care Reimbursement for tax savings on daycare. The Lifestyle Spending Account opens an entirely different type of spending. 3 BB INSIGHT #1, continued RISK/BENEFITS FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Lori Gaitin What types of expenses are eligible in a Lifestyle Spending Account? Employers are the decision-makers when determining what expenses are eligible for reimbursement through a Lifestyle Spending Account. It’s another potential perk that employers can offer to improve their relationship with employees. Essentially, anything that promotes your wellness could be considered an eligible expense. Financial Wellness •Home purchase costs such as, down payment, closing costs •Financial advisor and planning services •Financial seminars and classes •Estate planning costs •Out of state Medical Travel Expenses. Emotional Wellness •Meditation classes •Non-medical counseling services, such as marital counseling, life coaching, parental skill counseling, executive coaching •Retreats, such as leadership and spiritual retreats •Personal development classes, such as art and cooking •Park passes •Licenses, such as for fishing or hunting Return to Office Incentives •Gas, Meals, Auto Maintenance •Care Services such as, childcare and adult care related expenses •Work from home needs, utilities bills, internet services or office essentials. Physical Wellness •Athletic equipment-Exercise equipment •Gym, spa, and fitness memberships •Recreational expenses such as, rock climbing, martial arts, tennis •Fitness classes such as, yoga or Pilates and Personal trainers •Fitness trackers or Nutritional supplements •Passes such as, ski, snowboard, golf, swimming 4 Benefit Changes: Artificial Reproductive Technology (ART) Benefit Covers up to $4,000 per single embryo implant Multiple embryo implants are excluded ART services require preauthorization Mental Health Parity New Federal Law –opting out of parity is no longer allowed PEHP is still reviewing the impact to plans Hartford Short Term Disability and Long Term Disability –rate remains the same RISK/BENEFITS FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Lori Gaitin INSIGHT #2 Benefits Renewal Estimated cost $1.1 million Medical and Dental Renewal PEHP Medical Plan +2.9% PEHP Dental Plans 0.0% Matrix MSCW 30 Must 5 BB RISK/BENEFITS FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Lori Gaitin BB Insight Description FTEs FY2024 Request MSCW Score 1 Lifestyle Spending Account 0 TBD$Should 28 2 PEHP Renewal 0 $1,100,000 Must 30 TOTAL $1,100,000 + Lifestyle Spending Account Cost BENEFITS INSIGHT SUMMARY 6 RISK/BENEFITS FY23-24 BUDGET PROPOSAL Presented by Lori Gaitin CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM:Brian Fullmer Policy Analyst DATE:May 16, 2023 RE: Sign Ordinance Text Amendment to Allow Pole Signs on Public and Private School Property PLNPCM2021-00190 The Council will be briefed about a proposal initiated by the Salt Lake City School District to allow freestanding pole signs on school property. Some zoning districts on which schools are located do not allow pole signs under the current ordinance. An enforcement case for a pole sign at a high school prompted the requested text amendment. The Administration recommends allowing pole signs on public and private K-12 school property within the city regardless of the zoning district if they meet the following requirements: •One pole sign per school property. •Maximum freestanding pole sign height is 15 feet for local streets, and 25 feet along collector and arterial streets. •Maximum of three sign faces with a combined sign face area of 180 square feet for signs on local streets, and 540 square feet for signs on collector or arterial streets. •No minimum setback, but all portions of the sign must be on school property, and not overhang into the public right-of-way. •No advertising of off-premises events, goods, or services. •Animated images would not be allowed. •Pole signs would be subject to all other requirements for signs, and applicable zoning overlay requirements. Planning staff recommended the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the Council. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at its February 8, 2023 meeting and held a public hearing at which no one spoke. Commissioners voted 9-2 in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Item Schedule: Briefing: May 16, 2023 Set Date: May 16, 2023 Public Hearing: June 6, 2023 Potential Action: June 13, 2023 Page | 2 City Council. A Commissioner who voted against the proposal stated she was not supportive of additional pole signs in the city. The other Commissioner opposed did not state a reason for her opposition. Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed zoning map amendments, determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to discuss limiting how close pole signs can be placed to homes near schools. 2. The Council may wish to discuss limiting overall brightness of signs or require dimming the sign displays after sunset. 3. The Council may wish to consider whether the School District should notify immediately adjacent neighbors of any changes to existing signs or installations of new signs. KEY CONSIDERATIONS Planning staff identified three key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 6-7 of the Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the staff report. Consideration 1-Public Process As noted above, the Glendale Neighborhood Council sent a letter expressing support for the proposal. Planning staff and a representative from the Salt Lake City School District attended the December 12, 2022 Sugar House Community Council meeting. Meeting attendees expressed general support for standards permitting the signs at local schools. The signs were said to be appreciated by the public for providing information about events at the schools. Scenic Utah provided a letter in December 2022 recommending smaller signage with limited impact to the neighborhood and displays only school related information. Additional recommendations included issuing permits for new school signs on a case-by-case basis, and an impact assessment. Consideration 2-Compliance with Master Plan Policies Planning staff found the proposed text amendment aligns with initiatives found in Plan Salt Lake, and stated: “The amendment supports the vision of neighborhoods that provide a safe environment, opportunity for social interaction, and services needed for the wellbeing of the community therein. Schools are frequently regarded as cultural resources, as well as places of learning and social interaction. Active communication with the public about ongoing events is a resource for residents.” Consideration 3-Compliance with the Standards for General Amendments Planning staff reviewed the proposed text amendment against the following criteria City Code says the City Council should consider. Please see Attachment C (page 15) of the Planning Commission staff report for additional information. Factor Finding Whether a proposed text amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the City as stated through its various adopted planning documents. Complies Page | 3 Whether a proposed text amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies A proposed text amendment is consistent with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. Complies The extent to which a proposed text amendment implements the best current, professional practices of urban planning and design. Complies City Department Review During City review of the petition the City Attorney’s Office suggested constraints to address potential issues with the signs. •Limit nuisance lighting on adjacent properties. •Prohibit off-premises advertising. •Designate setbacks. •Limit sign size. No other responding departments or divisions expressed concerns with the proposal, but stated additional review and permits would be required as signs are installed. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • March 3, 2021-Petition for zoning map amendment received by Planning Division. • October 26, 2022-Petition assigned to Meagan Booth, Principal Planner. • November 16, 2022-Information about petition sent to all community councils. Project posted to City website for an online open house. o January 26, 2023-Planning Commission agenda posted to City website and emailed to listserv. • February 8, 2023-Planning Commission meeting and public hearing. The Planning Commission voted 9-2 to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed zoning text amendment. • March 2, 2023-Ordinance requested from Attorney’s Office. • March 21, 2023-Planning received signed ordinance from the Attorney’s Office. • April 5, 2023-Transmittal received in City Council Office. ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ________________________ Date Received: _________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: April 5, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: PLNPCM2021-00190 Salt Lake School District Signs STAFF CONTACT: Meagan Booth, Principal Planner meagan.booth@slcgov.com or 801-535-7213 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the changes to the Sign Ordinance to allow pole signs on public and private school property as recommended by the Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Paul Schulte with the Salt Lake School District proposed a petition to amend the Sign Ordinance to allow pole signs on school property. This change does not affect any other sign type or land use. The amendment permits the size and height of the sign to be regulated depending on the type of street it is situated on. The signs would still need to adhere to basic construction regulations and couldn't be used for off-premise advertising. More specific information regarding the petition can be found in the Planning Commission Staff Report. The Planning Commission considered the request at a public hearing and sent a positive recommendation to the City Council based on staff's proposed zoning text. Lisa Shaffer (Apr 5, 2023 13:13 MDT)04/05/2023 04/05/2023 PUBLIC PROCESS: Community Council Notice: A notice of application was sent to all recognized community organizations on November 15, 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. Staff and the applicant attended the Sugar House Community Council Meeting on December 12th. The Sugar House Community Council and the Glendale Community Council sent letters of support for the amendment. The 45-day public engagement period ended on December 30, 2022. Public Open House: An online open house was held from November 15, 2022, to December 30, 2022. One emailed comment was submitted to the Planning Division. This comment has been included as an exhibit. Planning Commission Meeting: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 8, 2023. The Planning Commission provided a positive recommendation to City Council on the proposed amendment. Planning Commission (PC) Records: a)PC Agenda for February 8, 2023 (Click to Access) b)PC Minutes for February 8, 2023 (Click to Access) c)PC Staff Report for February 8, 2023 (Click to Access EXHIBITS: 1)Project Chronology 2)Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3)Original Petition 4)Public Comment SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2023 (Amending the zoning text of Section 21A.46.052 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to pole signs on school property) An ordinance amending the text of Section 21A.46.052 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to pole signs on school property pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00190. WHEREAS, on March 3, 2021, Paul Schulte on behalf of the Salt Lake City School District (“Applicant”) submitted an application to amend the text of the Section 21A.46.052 to allow freestanding pole signs on school premises pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00190; and WHEREAS the Applicant sought to have the text modified consistent with Salt Lake City master plans; and WHEREAS, on February 8, 2023, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a public hearing regarding the Applicant’s petition; and WHEREAS, at its February 8, 2023, meeting, the planning commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said application; and WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Text. That Subsection 21A.46.052 of the Salt Lake City Code (Signs Exempt from Specific Criteria Except Fees and Permits), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.46.052: SIGNS EXEMPT FROM SPECIFIC CRITERIA EXCEPT FEES AND PERMITS: A. Signs within open-air malls, stadiums, or other enclosed spaces that do not have a roof but are otherwise physically confined and separated from the public street right-of-way are required to obtain sign permits and pay fees to ensure public safety and compliance with the City’s Building Code. Such signs are subject to Sign Ordinance regulations unless a sign master plan agreement was specifically considered as part of a planned development as outlined in Chapter 21A.55 of this title or was specifically authorized through the design review process as outlined in Chapter 21A.59 of this title. The sign master plan agreement shall only be authorized for signage within the open-air mall or stadium that is not oriented to the public street. Signage oriented to a public street or to a surface parking lot is specifically not exempt from Sign Ordinance requirements and not subject to modification through a sign master plan agreement. B. Pole Signs on School Property: Pole signs on property used for K-12 public school or K-12 private school are allowed regardless of the zoning district. Pole signs on K-12 public school or K-12 private school property are permitted provided such signs comply with the following requirements: 1. The maximum number of signs permitted is one pole sign; 2. The maximum height of a freestanding pole sign is 15 feet, except that pole signs on the property along a collector or arterial street may be a maximum height of 25 feet; 3. There is no minimum setback requirement; however, all portions of the sign must be located on school property. No portion of the sign may overhang onto the public right-of- way 4. The sign will be allowed to have a maximum of three sign faces. For pole signs located on school properties, the sign face is the total sign area of each side of the sign. A sign face may include multiple separate sign panels; 5. The total combined sign face areas of a pole sign shall not exceed 180 square feet, except that pole signs on the property along a collector or arterial street may have a maximum total combined sign face area of 540 square feet; 6. No sign may be used as an off premises sign; and 7. The pole sign is subject to all other requirements as stated in this chapter and all applicable zoning overlay requirements. 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 (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2023. APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Paul Nielson, Senior City Attorney March 21, 2023 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2023 (Amending the zoning text of Section 21A.46.052 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to pole signs on school property) An ordinance amending the text of Section 21A.46.052 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to pole signs on school property pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00190. WHEREAS, on March 3, 2021, Paul Schulte on behalf of the Salt Lake City School District (“Applicant”) submitted an application to amend the text of the Section 21A.46.052 to allow freestanding pole signs on school premises pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00190; and WHEREAS the Applicant sought to have the text modified consistent with Salt Lake City master plans; and WHEREAS, on February 8, 2023, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a public hearing regarding the Applicant’s petition; and WHEREAS, at its February 8, 2023, meeting, the planning commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said application; and WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Text. That Subsection 21A.46.052 of the Salt Lake City Code (Signs Exempt from Specific Criteria Except Fees and Permits), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.46.052: SIGNS EXEMPT FROM SPECIFIC CRITERIA EXCEPT FEES AND PERMITS: A. Signs within open-air malls, stadiums, or other enclosed spaces that do not have a roof but are otherwise physically confined and separated from the public street right-of-way are required to obtain sign permits and pay fees to ensure public safety and compliance with the City’s Building Code. Such signs are subject to Sign Ordinance regulations unless a sign master plan agreement was specifically considered as part of a planned development as outlined in cChapter 21A.55 of this title or was specifically authorized through the design review process as outlined in cChapter 21A.59 of this title. The sign master plan agreement shall only be authorized for signage within the open-air mall or stadium that is not oriented to the public street. Signage oriented to a public street or to a surface parking lot is specifically not exempt from Sign Ordinance requirements and not subject to modification through a sign master plan agreement. B. Pole Signs on School Property: Pole signs on property used for K-12 public school or K-12 private school are allowed regardless of the zoning district. Pole signs on K-12 public school or K-12 private school property are permitted provided such signs comply with the following requirements: 1. The maximum number of signs permitted is one pole sign; 2. The maximum height of a freestanding pole sign is 15 feet, except that pole signs on the property along a collector or arterial street may be a maximum height of 25 feet; 3. There is no minimum setback requirement; however, all portions of the sign must be located on school property. No portion of the sign may overhang onto the public right-of- way 4. The sign will be allowed to have a maximum of three sign faces. For pole signs located on school properties, the sign face is the total sign area of each side of the sign. A sign face may include multiple separate sign panels; 5. The total combined sign face areas of a pole sign shall not exceed 180 square feet, except that pole signs on the property along a collector or arterial street may have a maximum total combined sign face area of 540 square feet; 6. No sign may be used as an off premises sign; and 7. The pole sign is subject to all other requirements as stated in this chapter and all applicable zoning overlay requirements. 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 (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2023. 1. CHRONOLOGY ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Petition: PLNPCM2021-00190 March 3, 2021 Application Accepted October 26, 2022 Petition assigned to Meagan Booth, Principal Planner November 15, 2022 Petition was reviewed internally, and staff provided comments to the applicant. November 16, 2022 Notice mailed to all Community Councils November 16, 2022 Application posted for the online open house. January 26, 2023 Planning Commission agenda posted to the website and emailed to the listserv. February 3, 2023 Staff report posted to Planning’s website. February 8, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting and Public Hearing: A positive recommendation was forwarded to City Council. 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2021-00190, a request by Paul Schulte representing the Salt Lake City School District for an amendment to the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance to allow pole signs on school properties. Public and private schools are located in various zoning districts around the city, and not all of the zoning districts permit freestanding pole signs. The signs are used to educate the community about activities at the school. The proposal would amend Chapter 21A.46of the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance. As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be held: DATE: TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Room 315 City & County Building 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Meagan Booth at 801-535-7213 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail at meagan.booth@slcgov.com The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801- 535-7600, or relay service 711. 3. ORIGINAL PETITION Updated 11/20/2020 Zoning Amendment Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance Amend the Zoning Map OFFICE USE ONLY Received By: Date Received: Project #: Name or Section/s of Zoning Amendment: PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION Address of Subject Property (or Area): Name of Applicant: Phone: Address of Applicant: E-mail of Applicant:Cell/Fax: Applicant’s Interest in Subject Property: Owner Contractor Architect Other: Name of Property Owner (if different from applicant): E-mail of Property Owner:Phone: 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 review by any interested party. AVAILABLE CONSULTATION If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this application, please contact Salt Lake City Planning Counter at zoning@slcgov.com prior to submitting the application. REQUIRED FEE Map Amendment: filing fee of $1,058 plus $121 per acre in excess of one acre Text Amendment: filing fee of $1,058, plus fees for newspaper notice. Plus, additional fee for mailed public notices. Noticing fees will be assessed after the application is submitted. SIGNATURE If applicable, a notarized statement of consent authorizing applicant to act as an agent will be required. Signature of Owner or Agent: Date: SA L T L A K E C I T Y P L A N N I N G Paul Schulte 801-974-8372 Paul.Schulte@slcschools.org 4 All Salt Lake City School District schools 995 West Beardsley Place 4 Board of Education of Salt Lake City Updated 11/20/2020 St a f f R e v i e w SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1.Project Description (please electronically attach additional sheets. See Section 21A.50 for the Amendments ordinance.) A statement declaring the purpose for the amendment. A 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. Is the request amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance? If so, please include language and the reference to the Zoning Ordinance to be changed. WHERE TO FILE THE COMPLETE APPLICATION Apply online through the Citizen Access Portal. There is a step-by-step guide to learn how to submit online. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED ______ 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. 4 4 4 4 4 Excellence and Equity: every student, every classroom, every day www.slcschools.org AUXILIARY SERVICES 995 West 2480 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84119 801.974.8367 The Salt Lake City School District would like to request an amendment of the Sign Zoning Ordinance to allow for pole signs on public and private school campuses. Regardless of the zoning district, freestanding signs on public and private school property must comply with the following: i. The maximum area per sign at 180 square feet per gross sign face. ii. The maximum size is 540 square feet of the structure iii. The maximum height of a freestanding sign is 30 feet. iv. No signs will be allowed to project the project over the property line. v. The number of signs permitted is one pole sign, which allows four sign panels per sign face, one of which may be an electronic changeable copy sign, and one logo sign. (12 total signs for a triangular pole). The Salt Lake City School District recommends this amendment so to maintain essential communication for neighborhoods. Name Address Backman Elementary 601 N 1500 W Beacon Heights Elementary 1850 S 2500 E Bonneville Elementary 1145 S 1900 E Dilworth Elementary 1953 S 2100 E Edison Elementary 430 South Cheyenne St Emerson Elementary 1017 East Harrison Ave Ensign Elementary 775 E 12th Ave Escalante Elementary 1810 W 900 N Franklin Elementary 1115 W 300 S Hawthorne Elementary 1675 S 600 E Highland Park Elementary 1738 E 2700 S Indian Hills Elementary 2496 East St Mary Drive Liberty Elementary 1085 S Roberta St Mary W. Jackson Elementary 750 W 200 N Meadowlark Elementary 497 N Morton Dr M. Lynn Bennion Elementary 429 S 800 E Mountain View Elementary 1380 S 1340 W Newman Elementary 1269 N Colorado St North Star Elementary 1545 N Morton Dr Parkview Elementary 970 S Emery St Riley Elementary 1410 S 800 W Rose Park Elementary 1105 W 1000 N Uintah Elementary 1571 E 1300 S Wasatch Elementary 30 R Street Washington Elementary 420 N 200 W Whittier Elementary 1600 S 300 E Nibley Park School 2785 S 800 E Clayton Middle School 1470 S 1900 E Glendale Middle School 1430 E Andrew Ave Hillside Middle School 1825 S Nevada St Northwest Middle School 1730 W 1700 N Salt Lake Center for Science Education‐Bryant 40 S 800 E East High School 840 S 1300 E Highland High School 2166 S 1700 E Horizonte Instruction and Training Center 1234 S Main St Innovations Early College High School 1633 S Edison St West High School 241 N 300 W Open Classroom 134 N D Street Salt Lake Center for Science Education 1400 W Goodwin Ave Salt Lake School for the Performing Arts 2291 S 2000 E 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS From:Turner Bitton To:Booth, Meagan Subject:(EXTERNAL) Re: Salt Lake School District Signs Text Amendment Early Notification Date:Tuesday, December 6, 2022 11:17:30 PM Hi Meagan, Thank you for the opportunity to weigh in on this proposal. Please consider this email a letter of support from the Glendale Neighborhood Council. Thanks, Turner C. Bitton (he/him) Chair, Glendale Neighborhood Council (801) 564-3860 www.glendaleslc.org On Nov 15, 2022, at 12:46 PM, Booth, Meagan <Meagan.Booth@slcgov.com> wrote: Hello to all the Community Council Chairs, The purpose of this email is to inform you of a text amendment initiated by the Salt Lake City School District. This is a city-wide text amendment. As a recognized community organization, you have 45 days to provide comments on the proposed petition. The public comment period ends on Friday, December 30, 2022. This project is also scheduled for an open house, which will be posted online and run until the Planning Commission Hearing which has not yet been scheduled. I have attached the following materials for your review: 1.Notice to All Community Council Chairs 2.Application 3.Proposed Text Amendment Please let me know if you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Thank you! MEAGAN BOOTH Principal Planner Planning Division DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION TEL 801-535-7213 EMAIL meagan.booth@slcgov.com WWW.slc.gov/planning Disclaimer: The Planning Division strives to give the best customer service possible and to respond to questions as accurately as possible based upon the information provided. However, answers given at the counter and/or prior to application are not binding and they are not a substitute for formal Final Action, which may only occur in response to a complete application to the Planning Division. Those relying on verbal input or preliminary written feedback do so at their own risk and do not vest any property with development rights. Letter to PC SHCC School Signs.doc www.sugarhousecouncil.org Page 1 of 1 December 20, 2022 TO: Salt Lake City Planning Commission From: Judi Short, Vice Chair and Land Use Chair Sugar House Community Council RE: PLNPCM2021-00190 Salt Lake City School District Signs Text Amendment We have all seen the signs on the various schools around our city. What the school district recently learned was that none of these signs were legal as far as the Sign Zoning Ordinance. This is an attempt to amend the sign ordinance to incorporate existing signs, so they become legal, and to give guidance to schools, public and private, when designing new signs. We put this in our Sugar House Community Council December newsletter (circulation 2500), and on our website with a comment form for people to tell us what they think. It was also on the SHCC LUZ agenda December 12. Sugar House Trustees and LUZ Committee members were notified (another 125) and we did not receive a single comment. Paul Schulte from the SLC School District attended our meeting, explained what they were trying to do, and answered a few questions. No one had any concerns. We ask that you approve this amendment. www.scenicutah.org 5 South 500 West #102 Salt Lake City, UT 84101 801-554-5263 TO: Meagan Booth, Principal Planner – Salt Lake City FROM: Ralph Becker – Scenic Utah Chair Kate Kopischke – Scenic Utah Director DATE: Dec. 29, 2022 SUBJECT: Sign Zoning Ordinance Amendment Request by SLC School District Scenic Utah appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Salt Lake City School District’s request to amend the Sign Zoning Ordinance to allow for pole signs on public and private school campuses. Scenic Utah is a nonprofit organization working to protect the visual qualities of our communities and landscapes. We advocate for sensible outdoor advertising laws and policies, and we work with towns, cities, businesses, community groups and individuals on a range of issues related to the impacts of signs and billboards. Since launching in 2018, we have received multiple requests from individuals and businesses throughout Utah for support in opposing the placement of digital and other pole signs in neighborhoods and small business districts. In each case, the signage was installed with no prior consultation or engagement with impacted residents and businesses. One example is Salt Lake Regional Medical Center’s placement in 2020 of four digital signs on each corner of its property, which encompasses an entire city block in the South Temple historic district. Nearby residents who contacted Scenic Utah were outraged by the intrusion of flashing light into their homes, and by sign owners’ failure to consult or notify them prior to the signs going in. In addition to Salt Lake City, we have received similar complaints and requests for help from residents or businesses owners in Clearfield, Orem, Salem, Vernal, South Salt Lake, Ogden, St. George, and Millcreek. Scenic Utah supports the right of any business or organization to advertise goods and services and post information relevant to the community. And we appreciate the School District’s interest in using dynamic, digital media to “maintain essential communication for neighborhoods.” Should the City agree to change its Zoning Sign Ordinance, however, and allow the school district to erect pole signs, we urge you to consider the following comments and suggestions for minimizing the many potential negative impacts of digital and other types of signage. • Sign sizes as indicated in the proposed amendment are far larger than necessary to convey information to a school community or neighborhood. Should signs be built to the maximum proposed sizes – 180 square-foot sign face, 540 square foot structure, and 30 feet in height – would www.scenicutah.org 5 South 500 West #102 Salt Lake City, UT 84101 801-554-5263 be visual intrusions by most community standards, and unnecessarily large for the district’s stated purpose. o Limitations that reflect neighborhood character, values, and aesthetics should be established for size, location, height, brightness, dwell / twirl times, and hours of operation. o If freestanding signs are necessary, Scenic Utah recommends they be pedestal signs, no higher than necessary for visibility from nearby roads and sidewalks. In most cases 15 feet is a reasonable height limit for this purpose. Signs attached to buildings typically are more aesthetically appropriate and require fewer materials and building / maintenance costs. o The photograph of the sign depicted your Petition Number PLNCPM2021-00190 document reflects an appropriate design and good starting point for establishing sign standards on school campuses. • Messages should reflect public, school-related information only, and commercial advertising should be prohibited. • Schools seeking to place signs on their campuses should be required to undertake an impact assessment that includes: o The signs’ likely digital carbon footprint – or amount of additional fossil-fuel generated electricity that the signs will require. o Identification of and consultation with neighbors and businesses who may be impacted by the signage. o Accurate renderings of the proposed signage that impacted residents and City officials can review and amend accordingly. • Permits for new school signs should be issued on a case-by-case basis, subject to outcomes of the completed assessments and public input from surrounding communities. We would be happy to discuss these comments and suggestions with the Planning Commission and City, and to provide any additional input at your request. And we thank you for considering Scenic Utah’s comments. Respectfully submitted: Ralph Becker Kate Kopischke Chair Director cc: Community Council Chairs CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO: City Council Members FROM: Brian Fullmer Policy Analyst DATE: May 16, 2023 RE: Downtown Building Height and Street Activation Text Amendment PLNPCM2022-00529 UPDATE FOR MAY 16, 2023 There are several outstanding issues related to the proposed text amendment which are summarized below that the Council may wish to discuss. Effective Date of Ordinance Some construction projects may be substantially designed at the time the proposed ordinance is adopted and negatively impacted by requirements within the new ordinance. Other projects may be on hold until the ordinance is adopted so they can be developed with designs not available under the current ordinance. To help resolve these conflicting impacts, the Council may wish to consider allowing applicants to choose either the current or proposed ordinance for a period of four to six months following ordinance adoption. Completed applications would need to be submitted to either the Planning Division or Building Services within this period to be considered under the current ordinance. The Council may recall a similar process was included in the off-street parking ordinance adopted in 2022. FB-UN2 Concerns The Council received constituent concerns about the impact proposed changes to the FB-UN2 zoning designation may have. A resident expressed concern with the proposed changes to when upper floor stepbacks in the FB-UN2 zoning district are triggered for properties adjacent to parcels with lower maximum heights. Item Schedule: Briefing: April 4, May 16, 2023 Set Date: April 4, 2023 Public Hearing: April 18, May 2, 2023 Potential Action: June 6, 2023 Page | 2 The current ordinance requires a stepback when adjacent to zoning districts with a maximum building height of 35 feet or less. The proposed ordinance calls for the stepback to be triggered when multifamily developments are adjacent to zoning districts with a maximum building height of 30 feet or less. (It should be noted the proposed ordinance calls for the stepback to be triggered when rowhouse developments in the FB-UN2 zoning district are adjacent to zoning with a maximum building height of 35 feet or less.) The constituent believes this change will exclude stepbacks from being required in many areas where FB-UN2 is used, and he encouraged the Council to keep the existing requirement. Another resident shared her concern with the impact FB-UN2 will have in other parts of the city. Her recommendation is for the Council to either remove FB-UN2 from the proposed ordinance or limit the proposed changes to only the Downtown Plan area. The latter would result in two versions of FB-UN2. D-4 Height There is some community interest in additional height up to 145 feet in the Downtown D-4 zoning district. Council staff also received a request to maintain the current height limit of 75 feet, or up to 120 feet through design review, in this zoning district. Planning staff recommends, and the draft ordinance includes, retaining the current height limit. G-MU Height The Utah Transit Authority would like to increase the allowed height in the Gateway Mixed Use (G-MU) zoning district to accommodate a larger proposed headquarters building. Clarification of the Sugar House Business District (CSHBD) design standards Planning staff identified an error in the CSHBD design standards to incorporate a 15-foot stepback for buildings above 60 feet in height. Planning recommends eliminating this change and retaining the current step back requirement for buildings taller than 45 feet. For buildings in the CSHBD that abut single- or two-family districts Planning recommends a step back of 15’ be incorporated at 30 feet. Clarifying Ground Floor Use Standards Following the last briefing for this item, Planning made some technical changes clarifying language to the ground floor use standards. These include clarification on uses that are considered “active.” Ground floor residential is included as an active use. The option for ground floor use and visual interest allows for pedestrian interaction through porches, colonnades, bays, etc. to count as visual interest in the proposed ordinance. POTENTIAL STRAW POLLS 1. Does the Council support allowing applicants to utilize either the current or proposed ordinance for completed applications as outlined above, for up to 6 months? 2. Does the Council support Planning staff’s recommendation to require stepbacks for multifamily residential developments adjacent to zoning districts with a maximum height of 30 feet? 3. Does the Council support either removing FB-UN2 from the proposed ordinance or limiting the proposed FB-UN2 changes to the Downtown Plan area? 4. Does the Council support Planning staff’s recommendation to remove the stepback requirements for buildings in the D-1 (Central Business District) zone? 5. Does the Council wish to require bird-friendly glass in buildings? Page | 3 6. Does the Council support retaining the current stepback requirements for buildings in the Sugar House Business District (CSHBD)? 7. Does the Council support retaining the current height limit in the Downtown D-4 zone? 8. Does the council support amending the ordinance to include UTA’s request to remove maximum height limitation in the G-MU zoning district? PUBLIC HEARING UPDATE Two people spoke at the May 2, 2023 continued public hearing. One commenter outlined her concerns about proposed changes to the FB-UN2 zoning district being applied citywide and potential negative impacts to low density neighborhoods. The second commenter stated proposed changes to the General Commercial zone, including a mid-block walkway requirement, would make a planned home improvement store impossible to construct. This person submitted a letter to the Council which is included at the end of this report. The Council closed the public hearing and deferred action to a future meeting. Additional comments received via email expressed concern about required building stepbacks in the FB- UN2 zone being lowered from 35 feet to 30 feet. The constituent asked that they remain at 35 feet. Four people spoke at the April 18, 2023 public hearing. Commenters stated the FB-UN2 zoning district is a blank check for developers and is inappropriate for use in historic districts with lower density if additional limitations are not included. A desire to restrict changes in this text amendment to areas shown in the Administration’s map was expressed. Additional comments included a caution about a future lack of water if the city continues to grow, and a request for City oversight of development projects that remove single-family homes. There needs to be a balance between growth and preservation of neighborhoods. A former Planning staff member expressed general support for the plan, but noted the G-MU zone was written specifically to be the forefront of downtown and not a wall blocking the city skyline. There have been historic policies of maintaining the view corridor to the LDS Temple from I-15 and I-80 and he requested criteria be included in design review to consider impacts development could have on this view corridor. A written comment asked the Council to keep the 10-foot stepback rule above 35 feet in FB-UN2 zone near residential areas with a maximum height of 35 feet. The new proposal reduces the required stepback to 30 feet. The commenter thinks that the existing rule is better for creating a smoother transition in height when near zoning districts like RMF-35. The Council continued the public hearing to a future meeting. The following information was provided for the April 4, 2023 Council briefing. It is included again for background purposes. BRIEFING UPDATE Page | 4 Following a presentation from Design Workshop, the Council expressed general support for the proposed changes to building heights and pedestrian engagement. Council Members discussed the proposed minimum ten-foot sidewalk width for new development or redeveloped properties. Comments included a desire for wider sidewalks depending on building height to enhance the pedestrian experience. Consistency in sidewalk width was also discussed. The consultant and Planning staff clarified the proposed ten-foot sidewalk width is a minimum, and additional width could be discussed at the design review stage. The intent was to balance the need for appropriate sidewalk width without creating an overly open feel in some downtown areas with very wide streets. If a public right-of-way is not wide enough to accommodate a ten-foot sidewalk, a portion of it would be required on private property. It was noted that there will be inconsistencies when a property is developed or redeveloped with ten-foot sidewalks, but an adjacent property would not have the same requirement unless or until it is redeveloped. Maximum height differences in the Depot District and Granary were also discussed. There is an opportunity to provide additional housing in the more industrial Granary neighborhood, but capping height lower than in the Depot District would make it more difficult to include affordable housing units. Planning staff stated there is a desire to strike a balance between existing warehouses in the Granary District that will hopefully be preserved through adaptive reuse, and very tall buildings being built on adjacent or nearby properties. Affordable housing in these areas is difficult because of what can be developed by right. Some additional height through the design review process is an incentive to include affordable housing. Pedestrian amenities were also discussed, with a desire for ground floor commercial space serving the community rather than a gym, leasing office, etc. for building resident use. There was also a request to include bird-friendly glass in the building. Planning staff noted that can be included in the ordinance. The April 18, 2023 public hearing does not include an option for online comments. The Council may consider continuing the public hearing to a future meeting to provide an additional opportunity for comments. As a reminder, the following straw polls were included below in this report. Staff will reach out to you for your input on these and the policy question about UTA’s request to maximize building height in the G-MU district to accommodate redevelopment plans. 1. Does the Council support Planning staff’s recommendation to remove the step back requirement for buildings in the D-1 (Central Business District) zone? 2. Does the Council support the current requirement of a 15 foot step back for buildings in the Sugar House Business District (CSHBD) that are taller than 45 feet? 3. Does the Council support requiring buildings in the CSHBD that abut single- or two-family zoning districts include a step back at 30 feet? 4. Does the Council support other changes as recommended by Planning Staff (parking, landscaping requirements, etc.)? The following information was provided for the April 4, 2023 Council briefing. It is included again for background purposes. Page | 5 The Council will be briefed about proposed amendments to the City’s zoning ordinance pertaining to building heights and pedestrian engagement in the Downtown Plan area. The city worked with a consultant, Design Workshop, on the proposal. Proposed changes would affect the following zoning districts as shown in the image below: • D-1 (Downtown Central Business District) • D-2 (Downtown Support) • D-3 (Downtown Warehouse) • D-4 (Downtown Secondary Business District) • G-MU (Gateway Mixed Use) • CG (General Commercial) • FB-UN-1/2 (Form-Based Urban Neighborhood 1 and 2) The Administration’s proposal also recommends changes to the Design Standards found in Chapter 21A.37, and the Design Review process found in Chapter 21A.59 of Salt Lake City Code. The proposal includes three main elements: Pedestrian Orientation, Human Scale Design, and Building Height. These are summarized below. Please see the attached presentation from Planning staff and Design Workshop to view a presentation the Planning Division provided that outlines the key changes. Pedestrian Orientation Under the proposal an area is considered pedestrian oriented if sidewalks and public spaces feel safe, welcoming, and free of barriers to those walking or using a wheelchair. Human Scale Design The proposal calls for development to be scaled toward humans through building form, visual interest, first floor activation, façade transparency, overhead elements, setbacks, and public access points. Building Height Building heights may be adjusted and will be considered as they preserve visual corridors, reflect the character of downtown’s individual districts, and include public benefits for height bonuses. Page | 6 Downtown Plan Boundaries and Zoning Districts Image Courtesy Salt Lake City Planning Division ADDITIONAL INFORMATION After the Planning Commission forwarded its recommendation and Planning staff was preparing the ordinance in coordination with the Attorney’s Office, they identified a few changes they would like to ask the Council to consider including the final ordinance: • Design standards for the D-1 (Central Business District) zoning district. The draft ordinance includes an upper floor step back of 10’ for buildings between 78’-104’ and 15’ for buildings taller than 104’. Step backs were introduced to additional districts outside the Sugar House Business District (CSHBD) and Form Based Urban Neighborhood-2 (FB-UN2) to encourage additional light and air in higher density districts. o Planning staff doesn’t believe the D-1 (Central Business District) warrants a step back to this degree and recommends the Council remove this requirement, given the distinct feel of the downtown core. Page | 7 • Clarification in the Sugar House Business District (CSHBD) and Form Based Urban Neighborhood (FB-UN) design standards. The draft ordinance includes a 15’ step back for buildings in the CSHBD districts taller than 60’. o Planning staff recommends eliminating changes from the current step back requirement for buildings taller than 45’. For buildings in the CSHBD that abut single- or two-family districts Planning recommends a step back be incorporated at 30’. • Omission of requirement for buildings in the Form Based Urban Neighborhood (FB-UN) zones taller than 30’ to include a 15’ step back was omitted in an earlier draft ordinance. o Planning Staff corrected that omission in the current draft ordinance. • The recently adopted off-street parking ordinance is also being amended as part of this proposal due to language in the draft ordinance limiting size and location of surface parking in the Downtown (D-1, D-2, D-3, and D-4) and General Commercial (CG) zones. o Planning staff is recommending those changes be included in the draft ordinance. • Changes to the Form Based District and Design Standards chapters in City Code making standards for the FB-UN1 and FB-UN2 consistent with the proposed FB-UN3 form-based zoning district being considered by the Council. o Proposed changes to open space landscaping requirements discussed during the Council briefing for the FB-UN3 zone are included. Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed text amendments, determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POTENTIAL STRAW POLLS 1. Does the Council support Planning staff’s recommendation to remove the step back requirement for buildings in the D-1 (Central Business District) zone? 2. Does the Council support the current requirement of a 15’ step back for buildings in the Sugar House Business District (CSHBD) that are taller than 45’? 3. Does the Council support requiring buildings in the CSHBD that abut single- or two-family zoning districts include a step back at 30’? 4. Does the Council support other changes as recommended by Planning Staff (parking, landscaping requirements, etc.)? POLICY QUESTIONS 1. Additional height beyond what is allowed “by right” may be included through design review and would require a public benefit. The Council may wish to ask the Administration to specify what these benefits are and how they can be quantified and tracked for compliance (affordable housing for example). 2. The Council may wish to discuss minimum building heights and potential impacts they may have on developing some smaller parcels. 3. The draft ordinance includes changes to the Form Based District and Design Standards chapters of City Code that include FB-UN3 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood 3) the Council has been briefed about but has not yet adopted. These changes would make FB-UN3 zoning regulations consistent with proposed changes to the FB-UN1 and 2 zones. These include changes to open space landscaping requirements the Council discussed during the FB-UN3 briefing. The Council may Page | 8 wish to ask the Administration for their recommendation on how to move forward without creating any text inconsistencies. 4. The Council may wish to discuss and consider the request from UTA to amend the proposal to maximize allowable height in the GMU district to accommodate redevelopment plans proximate to a potential future UTA headquarters (see chart at the end of this staff report for a comparison of building heights proposed in different downtown zones). PUBLIC PROCESS Design Workshop, consultants for the proposal, held several stakeholder meetings with community council representatives, members of the development community, business and advocacy representatives, the Downtown Alliance, and the Disability and Accessibility Commission. Feedback from these meetings helped guide the proposal. In addition, a citywide survey gathered more than 450 responses from the broader community. Stakeholder Zoom Meetings were held with the following: • Chambers of Commerce and Development Community - November 30, 2021 • Community Council representatives - December 1, 2021 • Community representatives, including members of the Disability and Accessibility Commission - December 2, 2021 • Downtown Alliance - January 19, 2022 The public survey was published on Planning’s website, listserv, Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook. The survey was open for three weeks and closed February 24, 2022. Notice was mailed to property owners within the Downtown Plan area May 13, 2022. The Planning Commission was briefed on the proposal at its June 8, 2022 meeting and held a public hearing August 18, 2022 at which one person spoke expressing support. The Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation on the amendments to the City Council. The Utah Transit Authority (UTA) sent the attached letter to the Council expressing a desire for additional height in the Gateway Mixed Use (GMU) zone beyond what is in the proposal. UTA is preparing to redevelop property near the North Temple and Salt Lake Central Stations. These plans include relocating UTA’s headquarters and potentially construct as many additional floors to the building as allowed by the City, and what the market will support. UTA asked to further increase allowed height or eliminate the maximum allowed height in the GMU zoning district. Current and Proposed Building Heights Zoning District Current Minimum Height Proposed Minimum Height Existing Maximum Height Proposed Maximum Height D-1 Central Business District 100’ 100’ 375’ Corner Lots 100’ mid-block None >200’ subject to conditions and design review Page | 9 D-2 Downtown Support District 65’ 65’ 120’ 120’ with conditions D-3 Downtown Warehouse 75’ 75’ 90’ 180’ with conditions D-4 Downtown Secondary Central Business District N/A N/A 75’ (up to 120’ through design review) 120’ - 375’ in permitted locations1 75’ (up to 120’ through design review) 120’ – 375’ in permitted locations1 subject to conditions and design review GMU Gateway District Mixed-use 45’ 25’ along 200 South Corridor 75’ 75’ flat roofs 90’ non-flat roofs Buildings over 90’ up to 180’ are subject to design review CG General Commercial 60’ 90’ subject to design review 75’ (76’-150’ in Granary District with design review.) (76’-105’ outside Granary District with design review.) FBD Form Based District N/A N/A 30’ 50’ 1-The area bounded by South Temple, West Temple, 200 South, and 200 West ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ________________________ Date Received: _________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: December 22, 2022 Dan Dugan, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: Downtown Building Height and Street Activation Text Amendment STAFF CONTACT: Kelsey Lindquist, Planning Manager kelsey.lindquist@slcgov.com or 385-226-7227 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Downtown Building Height and Street Activation Ordinance BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Salt Lake City Planning Division was awarded a Transportation Land Use Connection Grant from the Wasatch Regional Council in 2021 to update sections of the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance pertaining to building heights and pedestrian engagement in the Downtown Plan area. The consultant, Design Workshop, worked with stakeholders and the city to develop a proposal that updates portions of the Zoning Ordinance as it pertains to building heights, review processes, and pedestrian spaces downtown. These code amendments aim to accommodate growth and respond to development pressures while developing standards for public spaces that improve the livability of the downtown area. Changes seek to promote future downtown growth that is safe, links land use with transportation to reduce vehicle trips, aligns building height with construction types in the building code, and encourages downtown living. Lisa Shaffer (Dec 22, 2022 12:08 MST)12/22/2022 12/22/2022 The city’s adopted plans and policies provide a basis for this proposal. The plans include both the citywide plan, Plan Salt Lake (2015) and the Downtown Plan (2016). These plans were adopted by the City Council after extensive engagement and review by the public and city boards and commissions. The proposal is consistent with a number of principals, objectives, and policies in both plans. Downtown Plan Boundaries and Zoning Districts The above map illustrates the number of zoning districts within the Downtown Plan Area, as well as the number of distinct neighborhoods. The following zoning districts impacted by this proposal, include: D-1 (Downtown Central Business District), D-2 (Downtown Support), D-3 (Downtown Warehouse), D-4 (Downtown Secondary Business District), G-MU (Gateway Mixed-Use), CG (General Commercial) and the FB-UN1 and 2. Additionally, the Design Standards (21A.37) and the Design Review process (21A.59) are being amended as part of this project. Summary of Proposed Amendments: Downtown Districts (D-1, D-2, D-3 & D-4) The draft introduced consistent language for all four downtown districts, and includes the following proposals within the downtown area: • Eliminating the need for design review for all conditional uses allowed in the downtown districts. • Limiting the location and size of surface parking lots to two double loaded parking aisles no more than 10 parking spaces wide. The surface parking lot location is limited to behind the building. • Prohibiting parking lots, structures, or garages as a principal use, when they result in the demolition of a building. • Standards for midblock walkways, which include a minimum 15’ wide walkway with 6’ unobstructed pedestrian path. These standards include the introduction of allowed encroachments into the midblock walkway. • Sidewalk standards of a minimum of 10’. D-1 (Central Business District) Amendments • Introduction of a maximum of 8’ front or corner side yard. If a yard is provided, the yard must include one of the following pedestrian elements: o Seating at a ratio of one bench for every 500 square feet o Increase of 25% in the total number of trees required o Awning or similar form of weather protection that covers at least 5’ in width and length from all street facing building entrances • Eliminated the distinction between block corners and midblock lots. • Changing the height threshold for design review to 200’ on all properties in the zone compared to the current standard of 100’ for midblock properties and 375’ for corner properties. • Built in exceptions to the minimum height requirement of 100’. These exceptions include: o Utility buildings o Accessory building and structures that serve public transportation, downtown improvement districts or public maintenance o Buildings on lots less than 5,000 square feet • Glass buildings in excess of 100’ must have a stepback between the first floor and 150’. • Buildings in excess of 200’ are allowed through the Design Review process and require compliance with one of the identified options: o Inclusion of a midblock walkway o Inclusion of the affordable housing incentives o Exceeding the requirements for ground floor use and visual interest o Providing a restrictive covenant for a building older than 50 years and not currently listed as a local landmark site o Providing a minimum of 500 square feet of open space that is privately owned but publicly accessible • Introducing new design standards and adjusting the requirement for existing design standards. The amendments include the following: o Upper floor reflective glass limitation o Upper floor stepback o Dimensions between building entrances o Maximum blank wall limitation o Tree canopy coverage percentage requirements o Minimum vegetation standards o Street trees o Soil volume o Curb cut reduction o Overhead cover o Streetscape landscaping o Horizontal articulation D-2 (Downtown Support) Amendments • Requiring a minimum setback of 8’ and maximum of 16’ for residential developments. If the maximum setback is provided, the development must include one of the pedestrian features listed (see the list under the first bullet for D-1). • Required interior side and rear yard setbacks when adjacent to a zone with a height limit of 35’ or less. • Introducing new design standards and adjusting the requirement for existing design standards. See list in D-1. D-3 (Downtown Warehouse) Amendments • Requiring a minimum setback of 8’ and maximum of 16’ for residential developments. If the maximum setback is provided, the development must include one of the pedestrian features listed (see the list under the first bullet for D-1). • Building height of 75’ by right. • Buildings taller than 75’ to a maximum height of 180’ are allowed through the Design Review process with one of the following options: o Inclusion of a midblock walkway o Inclusion of the affordable housing incentives o Exceeding the requirements for ground floor use and visual interest o Providing a restrictive covenant for a building older than 50 years and not currently listed as a local landmark site o Providing 500 square feet of open space that is privately owned but publicly accessible • Introducing new design standards and adjusting the requirement for existing design standards. See list in D-1. • Removed the limitation on non-residential uses above the second floor. D-4 (Downtown Secondary Central Business District) Amendments • Introduction of a maximum front yard of 8’. If the maximum front yard is provided, one of the listed pedestrian amenities would be required. • Interior side and rear yard of 10’ required when abutting a district with a maximum height of 35’ or lower. • Additional height beyond 120’ requires one of the identified options listed above. • Introducing new design standards and adjusting existing design standards. See list in D-1. GMU (Gateway Mixed-Use) Amendments • This draft proposes to delete the existing GMU language and replace it with the language provided. The draft eliminates the required Planned Development Application for all new development in the GMU. It also relocates the design standards for the GMU to Chapter 37, so that it is consistent with the rest of the zoning ordinance. • Similarly, to the Downtown Districts, the draft language for the GMU includes midblock walkway standards and allowed encroachments. • Introduction of a maximum front yard setback of 10’ for 30% of the building façade. If the maximum yard is provided, one of the pedestrian amenities would be required. • Increased the height minimum to 75’. Any building over 90’ up to 180’ is allowed through the Design Review process. • Introducing new design standards and adjusting existing required design standards. The amendments include the following: o Upper floor reflective glass limitation o Dimensions between building entrances o Maximum blank wall limitation o Tree canopy coverage percentage requirements o Minimum vegetation standards o Street trees o Soil volume o Curb cut reduction o Overhead cover o Streetscape landscaping o Horizontal articulation CG (General Commercial) Amendments • Decrease of the required 10’ front yard to 5’. • Introduction of a maximum front yard of 10’. If the maximum front yard is provided, one of the pedestrian amenities would be required. See the list under the D-1 heading. • Increase of the permitted height to 75’ from 60’. Specific boundary for height between 75’ and 150’ through the Design Review process. The boundaries for this height are for properties between 400 S to 700 S from 300 W to I-15. Outside of the boundaries, 105’ is the maximum height allowed through Design Review. • Introduction of outdoor usable space, which provides flexibility for locating the additional required landscaping in the midblock walkway, on the rooftop, plaza or within the required provided yard. • Introducing midblock walkway standards. The dimensional requirements and allowed encroachments are the same as the proposed language for the Downtown districts. • Restricting the location and size of surface parking lots. • Introducing the following design standards to CG within the specified boundary: o Ground floor use o Ground floor use and visual interest o Building materials o Ground floor and upper floor glass requirements o Building entrance locations o Blank wall limitations o Street facing façade limitation o Upper floor stepback FB-UN Districts (FB-UN1 & FB-UN2) Amendments • These amendments address many of the community concerns with the form-based districts. • Moving the design standards for FB districts to Chapter 21A.37: Design Standards. • Building form regulations include specific open space requirements. • Introducing tree standards to the required open space in the district. • Allowing height encroachments for rooftop uses, such as a garden or outdoor living space with the following requirements: o The rooftop garden includes vegetation that covers 15% of the space on the roof. o Requires a 6’ tall wall when abutting an FB-UN1, if the rooftop space is used for a commercial space. • Introducing new design standards and adjusting the requirement of existing design standards. The amendments include the following: o Ground floor use o Ground floor use and visual interest o Building materials for both the ground and upper floors o Ground and upper floor glass requirements o Building entrance requirements o Blank wall limitations o Street facing façade length limitations o Upper floor step back required in FBUN2 o Tree canopy coverage percentage requirements o Minimum vegetation standards o Street trees o Soil volume o Curb cut reduction o Overhead cover o Streetscape landscaping o Horizontal articulation o Height transition o Screening of mechanical equipment Design Standards Amendments • Clarifies the authority of the Planning Director when reviewing a modification to a design standard. • New “ground floor use only” definition. •New definition for “amenity space”. •Clarifying durable materials requirements. •Limiting the percentage of reflective glass on new developments. •Clarifying the requirement of an upper floor step back. •Introducing tree canopy coverage requirements. •Introducing height transitions between districts with a taller height allowance and districts with a height maximum of 35’ or less. •Clarifying the horizontal articulation requirements. Design Review Amendments •Clarification on the applicability of the Design Review standards. •Introduces a small threshold for some Design Review proposals to be administratively approved. •Introducing new requirements for building facades that exceed 200’ in length. •Clarification on the roof and cornice design review standard. As anticipated, this project will amend section 21A.44.060 of the recently adopted Off-Street Parking Ordinance. The proposed amendments to this chapter are included in this transmittal. The Planning Commission was briefed on the amendments on June 8, 2022. The Planning Commission provided input and comments to staff. Subsequently, the Planning Commission provided a positive recommendation on the proposed amendments on August 24, 2022. Part of the discussion during the August hearing included comments about the graphics. In response, the consultant adjusted the graphics, which are included in the exhibits of this transmittal. CHANGES TO OFF-STREET PARKING ORDINANCE The recently adopted Off-Street Parking Ordinance will need to be amended as part of this project. This is due to the incorporation of language that limits the size and location of surface parking in the D-1, D-2, D-3, D-4, and CG zoning districts. The amended off-street parking ordinance, specifically section 21A.44.060, is included in the ordinance for this transmittal. FB-UN3 INCLUSION The City Council is considering the adoption of the FB-UN3 zone. Due to the potential adoption of this district, staff has added in changes to the Form Based District Chapter and the Design Standards Chapter to make the FB-UN3 zone regulations consistent with the proposed changes to the FB-UN1 and 2 zones. These include changes to open space landscaping requirements that the Council discussed at a work session regarding the FB-UN3 zone. CONSIDERATIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL Since the positive recommendation from Planning Commission, Planning staff identified potential issues with the proposed Design Standards for the D-1 zoning district. The recommended ordinance includes an upper floor step back requirement of 10’ for buildings between 78’-104’ and 15’ for buildings above 104’ in height. Step backs were introduced to additional districts outside of the CSHBD and FB-UN2 zoning districts. The goal of the step back was to encourage additional light and air in higher density districts. Staff doesn’t believe that the D-1 (Central Business District) warrants a step back to this degree. Staff recommends that the City Council remove this requirement. Staff identified an error to the CSHBD and the FB-UN design standards. The recommended ordinance required all development in the CSHBD districts to incorporate a 15' step back for buildings above 60’ in height. Staff believes that this language is in error and should be reversed to eliminate any amendments to the step backs in the CSHBD districts. All development in the CSHBD districts should incorporate a step back for buildings above 45’ in height. For buildings that abut single or two-family districts, a step back shall be incorporated at 30’. Additionally, development above 30’ in height in the FB-UN districts required a 15’ stepback. This was mistakenly omitted from the draft ordinance. All development above 30’ in the FBUN districts should incorporate a 15’ stepback. The current ordinance reflects these corrections. Additionally, staff found the proposed ground floor use language limiting to strictly residential buildings in specific zoning districts. The language was also confusing and could be difficult to administer. Staff adjusted the language to address these concerns and the attached ordinance reflects this change. Additional alterations include the removal of the dash (-) in the design standard tables for each zoning district. Staff removed the dash and replaced it with a blank for standards that do not apply to specific districts. This change was made for the ease of future amendments. PUBLIC PROCESS: The consultants, Design Workshop, hosted several stakeholder meetings with community council representatives, members of the development community, business and advocacy representatives, Downtown Alliance, as well as the Disability and Accessibility Commission. The stakeholder groups provided vital direction and feedback on where additional building height could be achieved and tolerated, current experience of the downtown area, as well as known issues within applying the existing development regulations. Additionally, a citywide survey was provided to the broader community, in which 456 individuals responded. Stakeholder Meetings: Held as Zoom meetings and attendees participated via Mentimeter. Chambers of Commerce and Development Community – November 30, 2021 Community Council Representatives – December 1, 2021 Community Representatives, including members of the DAAC – December 2, 2021 Downtown Alliance – January 19, 2022 Public Survey: Published on Planning’s website and published via the list serve, Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. The survey was open for 3 weeks and closed on February 24, 2022. Downtown Building Height Website Public Notification: Mailed notification to property owners within the downtown plan area was provided on May 13, 2022. The noticed provided contact information for staff, as well as how to find current drafts of the amendments. Planning Commission Briefing: Planning Commission held a briefing on these amendments on June 8, 2022. PC Briefing Memo Planning Commission Public Hearing: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the text amendments on August 18, 2022. The Planning Commission provided a positive recommendation to City Council on the proposed amendments. Planning Commission Staff Report Planning Commission (PC) Records: a)PC Agenda for June 8, 2022 (Click to Access) b)PC Minutes for June 8, 2022 (Click to Access) c)PC Staff Report for June 8, 2022 (Click to Access) d)PC Agenda of August 24, 2022 (Click to Access) e)PC Staff Report of August 24, 2022 (Click to Access Report) f)PC Minutes for August 24, 2022 (Click to Access) EXHIBITS: 1)Project Chronology 2)Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3)Original Petition 4)Proposed Graphic Changes 5)Public Comment Received after Planning Commission Staff Report was Published 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2023 (Amending the zoning text of various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to building heights in the Downtown Plan area) An ordinance amending the text of various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to building heights in the Downtown Plan area pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00529. WHEREAS, on August 24, 2022, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a public hearing on a petition submitted by Salt Lake City Mayor, Erin Mendenhall--at the request of the Salt Lake City Council--to amend land use regulations pertaining to building heights in the Downtown Plan area (Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00529); and WHEREAS, at its August 24, 2022 meeting, the planning commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake 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.26.070. That Section 21A.26.070 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: CG General Commercial District), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.26.070: CG GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT: A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the CG General Commercial District is to provide an environment for a variety of commercial uses, some of which involve the outdoor display/storage of merchandise or materials. This district provides economic development 2 opportunities through a mix of land uses, including retail sales and services, entertainment, office, residential, heavy commercial and low intensities of manufacturing and warehouse uses. This district is appropriate in locations where supported by applicable master plans and along major arterials. Safe, convenient and inviting connections that provide access to businesses from public sidewalks, bike paths and streets are necessary. Access should follow a hierarchy that places the pedestrian first, bicycle second and automobile third. The standards are intended to create a safe and aesthetically pleasing commercial environment for all users. B. Uses: Uses in the CG General Commercial District as specified in Section 21A.33.030, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts”, of this title are permitted subject to the general provisions set forth in Section 21A.26.010 and this section. C. Minimum Lot Size: 1. Minimum Lot Area: 10,000 square feet. 2. Minimum Lot Width: 60’. 3. Existing Lots: Lots legally existing prior to April 12, 1995, shall be considered legal conforming lots. D. Minimum Yard Requirements: 1. Front Yard: Five feet. 2. Corner Side Yard: 10’. 3. Interior Side Yard: None required. 4. Rear Yard: 10’. 5. Buffer Yard: All lots abutting residential property shall conform to the buffer yard requirements of Chapter 21A.48 of this title. 6. Accessory Buildings and Structures in Yards: Accessory buildings and structures may be located in a required yard subject to Section 21A.36.020, Table 21A.36.020.B of this title. E. Maximum Yard: The maximum yard requirement is 10’. 1. If provided, the yard must include one of the following elements: a. Seating at a ratio of at least one bench for every 500 square feet of yard space; or b. Landscaping that includes an increase of at least 25% in the total number of trees required to be planted on the site; or c. Awning or a similar form of weather protection that covers at least five feet in width and length from all street-facing building entrances. 3 2. Regardless of the setback provided, doors shall be setback a minimum distance to allow the door to operate without swinging into a right of way or midblock walkway. 3. All provided front or corner side yards must contain a tree every 30’. 4. The planning director, in consultation with the transportation director, may modify this requirement to accommodate a wider sidewalk if the adjacent public sidewalk is less than 15’ wide and the resulting modification to the setback results in a more efficient public sidewalk. The planning director may waive this requirement for any addition, expansion, or intensification, which increases the floor area or parking requirement by less than 50% if the planning director finds the following: a. The architecture of the addition is compatible with the architecture of the original structure or the surrounding architecture, or b. The addition reduces the extent of the noncompliance of the existing building. 5. Exceptions to this subsection may be authorized through the design review process, subject to the requirements of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. F. Landscape Yard Requirements: A landscape yard of five feet shall be required on all front or corner side yards, conforming to the requirements of Section 21A.48.090 of this title. G. Maximum Height: No building shall exceed 75’ unless the property is within the following boundary: from 400 South to 700 South from 300 West to I-15, where buildings shall not exceed 150’. Additionally, buildings taller than 75’ to a maximum of 105’ outside of the described boundary may be allowed in accordance with the provisions of Subsections G.1 through G.3 of this section. Illustration of Regulation 21A.26.070.G Maximum Height 4 1 No building shall exceed 75’ unless it is within the identified boundaries. 2 Buildings that are outside of the identified boundary higher than 75’ may be allowed in accordance with the provisions of Subsections G.1 through G.3 of this section. 1. Procedure For Modification: A modification to the height regulations, in this Subsection G may be granted through the design review process in conformance with the provisions of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. In evaluating an application submitted pursuant to this section, the planning commission or in the case of an administrative approval the planning director or designee, shall find that the increased height will result in improved site layout and amenities. 2. Outdoor Usable Space: If additional height is approved, the site shall include outdoor usable space for the building occupants that is equal to at least 10% of the gross floor area of the additional floors. The outdoor usable area may be located within a wider park strip that extends further into the right of way than the current park strip, in midblock walkways that include a public access easement, in rooftop gardens, plazas, or in a provided yard that exceeds the minimum yard requirement. The outdoor usable space shall include a minimum dimension of at least 10’ by 10’. 3. Maximum Additional Height for Properties Outside of Boundary Identified in Subsection G: Additional height shall be limited to 30’subject to the provisions in Subsection G.2 for a maximum height of 105’. 5 H. Midblock Walkways: As part of the city’s plan for the downtown area, it is intended that midblock walkways be provided to facilitate pedestrian movement within the area. The city has adopted the Downtown Plan that includes a midblock walkway map and establishes a need for such walkways as the Downtown area grows. Because the districts within the downtown area allow building heights that exceed those of other districts in the city, the requirement for a midblock walkway is considered to be necessary to alleviate pedestrian impacts on the public sidewalks by dispersing future use of the public sidewalks. This requirement implements the city’s Downtown Plan and provides visual relief from the additional height that is available in these zone districts when compared to the remainder of the city. All buildings constructed after the effective date hereof within the Downtown zoning districts shall conform to this officially adopted plan for midblock walkways, in addition to the following standards: 1. Any new development shall provide a midblock walkway if a midblock walkway on the subject property has been identified in a master plan that has been adopted by the city. 2. The following standards apply to the midblock walkway: a. The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. b. The midblock walkway may be incorporated into the building provided it is open to the public. A sign shall be posted indicating that the public may use the walkway. c. Building encroachments into the midblock walkway are permitted if they include one or more of the following elements: (1) Colonnades; (2) Staircases; (3) Balconies – All balconies must be located at the third story or above; (4) Building overhangs and associated cantilever - These coverings may be between 9’ and 14’ above the level of the sidewalk. They shall provide a minimum depth of coverage of six feet and project no closer to the curb than three feet; (5) Skybridge – A single skybridge is permitted. All skybridges must be located at the third, fourth, or fifth stories; and (6) Other architectural element(s) not listed above that offers refuge from weather and/or provide publicly accessible usable space. Illustration of Regulation 21A.26.070.H Midblock Walkways 6 1 The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. I. Restrictions on Parking Lots and Structures: An excessive amount of at or above ground parking lots and structures can negatively impact the urban design objectives of the General Commercial (CG) District. To control such impacts, the following regulations shall apply to parking facilities that are at or above ground: 1. Parking shall be located behind principal buildings or incorporated into the principal building provided the parking is wrapped on street facing facades with a use allowed in the zone other than parking. 2. Parking lots not wholly behind the principal building are limited to no more than two double-loaded parking aisles (bays) adjacent to each other. The length of a parking lot shall not exceed 10 stalls. 3. No special restrictions shall apply to belowground parking facilities. 4. Parking structures shall conform to the requirements set forth in Chapter 21A.37 of this title. 5. All parking lot and structure landscaping must comply with the provisions set forth in Chapter 21A.48 of this title. SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Section 21A.27.020. That Section 21A.27.020 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Form Based Districts: Building Types and Forms Established), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 7 21A.27.020: BUILDING TYPES AND FORMS ESTABLISHED: A. Building Types and Form Standards: 1. Encourage building forms that are compatible with the neighborhood and the future vision for the neighborhood by acknowledging the current scale of the area and it’s architectural and material elements. These elements within new development shall compliment those of the existing buildings; 2. Arrange building heights and scale to provide appropriate transitions between buildings of different scales and adjacent areas, especially between different subdistricts; 3. Guide building orientation through setbacks and other requirements to create a consistent street edge, enhance walkability by addressing the relationship between public and private spaces, and ensure architectural design will contribute to the character of the neighborhood; 4. Use building form, placement, and orientation to identify the private, semiprivate, and public spaces; 5. Minimize the visual impact of parking areas; and 6. Minimize conflicts between pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles. B. Building Types and Forms: 1. Description: The permitted building forms are described in this subsection. Each building form includes a general description and definition, as well as images of what the building form may look like. Building form images are for informational purposes only and not intended to demonstrate exactly what shall be built. The description and images should be used to classify existing and proposed buildings in order to determine what development regulations apply. The drawings are not to scale. They should not be used to dictate a specific architectural style as both traditional and contemporary styles can be used. a. Urban House: A residential structure with the approximate scale of a single dwelling unit, as viewed from the street, but may contain up to two dwelling units. The structure has a single entry facing the street, a front porch or stoop, and a small front yard. Second units may be arranged vertically (up and down) or horizontally (front and back), but the entry to the second unit is from the side, rear, or interior of structure. A third unit may also be located along an alley as a stand alone unit or as a dwelling unit located in an accessory building. All units are on a single lot. 8 9 b. Two-Family Dwelling: A residential structure that contains two dwelling units in a single building. The units may be arranged side by side, up and down, or front and back. Each unit has its own separate entry directly to the outside. Dwellings may be located on separate lots or grouped on one lot. A third unit may also be located along an alley as a stand alone unit or as a dwelling unit located in an accessory building, but may not be located on a separate lot. 10 c. Cottage Development: A unified development that contains two or more detached dwelling units with each unit appearing to be a small single-family dwelling with 11 a common green or open space area. Dwellings may be located on separate lots or grouped on one lot. d. Additional Development Standards for Cottage Building Forms: (1) Setbacks Between Individual Cottages: All cottages shall have a minimum setback of eight feet from another cottage. (2) Footprint: No cottage shall have a footprint in excess of 850 square feet. (3) Building Entrance: All building entrances shall face a public street or a common open space area. (4) Open Space Area: A minimum of 250 square feet of common, open space area is required per cottage. At least 50% of the open space area shall be contiguous and include landscaping, walkways or other amenities intended to serve the residents of the development. 12 e. Row House: A series of attached single-family dwellings that share at least one common wall with an adjacent dwelling unit. A row house contains a minimum of three residential dwelling units. Each unit may be on its own lot. If possible, off street parking is accessed from an alley. 13 14 f. Multi-Family Residential: A multi-family residential structure containing three or more dwelling units that may be arranged in a number of configurations. 15 16 g. Storefront: A commercial structure that may have multiple stories and contain a variety of commercial uses that are allowed in the district that permits this building type. All buildings, regardless of the specific use, have a ground floor that looks like a storefront. 17 18 h. Vertical Mixed Use: A multi-story building that contains a mix of commercial and/or office with residential uses. 19 20 C. Building Form Standards: 1. The provisions of this section shall apply to all properties located within the Form Based Districts as indicated on the maps in each Form Based District. 2. Building form and street type standards apply to all new buildings and additions when the new construction related to the addition is greater than 25% of the footprint of the structure or 1,000 square feet, whichever is less. Refer to Section 21A.27.030 of this chapter on the building configuration standards for more information on how to comply with the standards. The graphics included provide a visual representation of the standards as a guide and are not meant to supersede the standards in the tables. Only building forms identified in the table are permitted. SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Section 21A.27.030. That Section 21A.27.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Form Based Districts: Building Configuration and Design Standards), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.27.030: BUILDING CONFIGURATION AND DESIGN STANDARDS: A. Specific Intent of Configuration and Design Standards: 1. Design Related Standards: The design related standards are intended to do the following: 21 a. Implement applicable master plans; b. Continue the existing physical character of residential streets while allowing an increase in building scale along arterials and near transit stations; c. Focus development and future growth in the city along arterials and near transit stations; d. Arrange buildings so they are oriented toward the street in a manner that promotes pedestrian activity, safety, and community; e. Provide human scaled buildings that emphasize design and placement of the main entrance/exit on street facing facades; f. Provide connections to transit through public walkways; g. Provide areas for appropriate land uses that encourage use of public transit and are compatible with the neighborhood; h. Promote pedestrian and bicycle amenities near transit facilities to maximize alternative forms of transportation; and i. Rehabilitate and reuse existing residential structures in the Form Based Zoning Districts when possible to efficiently use infrastructure and natural resources, and preserve neighborhood character. B. Building Entry: Refer to the building entrance standards in Subsection 21A.37.050.D of this title. 1. Entry Feature: The following building entries are permitted as indicated: TABLE 21A.27.030.B ENTRY FEATURE STANDARDS Entry Feature Permitted Based on Building Form Type Urban House Cottage Development Two- Family Dwelling Row House Multi- Family Storefront Vertical Mixed Use Porch and fence: A planted front yard where the street facing building facade is set back from the front property line with an attached porch that is P P P P P P 22 permitted to encroach into the required yard. The porch shall be a minimum of 6’ in depth. The front yard may include a fence no taller than 3’ in height Reference Illustration - Porch and Fence Entry Feature Permitted Based on Building Form Type Urban House Cottage Development Two- Family Dwelling Row House Multi- Family Storefront Vertical Mixed Use Terrace or lightwell: An entry feature where the street facing facade is set back from the front property line by an elevated P P P P P P P 23 terrace or sunken lightwell. May include a canopy or roof Reference Illustration - Terrace or Lightwell Entry Feature Permitted Based on Building Form Type Urban House Cottage Development Two- Family Dwelling Row House Multi- Family Storefront Vertical Mixed Use Forecourt: An entry feature wherein a portion of the street facing facade is close to the property line and the central portion is set back. The court created must be landscaped, contain outdoor plazas, outdoor dining areas, P P P P P P P 24 private yards, or other similar features that encourage use and seating Reference Illustration - Forecourt Entry Feature Permitted Based on Building Form Type Urban House Cottage Development Two- Family Dwelling Row House Multi- Family Storefront Vertical Mixed Use Stoop: An entry feature wherein the street facing facade is close to the front property line and the first story is elevated from the sidewalk sufficiently to secure privacy for the windows. The entrance contains an exterior stair and landing that is either parallel or P P P P P P P 25 perpendicular to the street. Recommended for ground floor residential uses Reference Illustration - Stoop Entry Feature Permitted Based on Building Form Type Urban House Cottage Development Two- Family Dwelling Row House Multi- Family Storefront Vertical Mixed Use Shopfront: An entry feature where the street facing facade is close to the property line and building entrance is at sidewalk grade. Building entry is covered with an awning, canopy, or is recessed from the front building facade, which defines the entry and P P P P 26 provides protection for customers Reference Illustration - Shopfront Entry Feature Permitted Based on Building Form Type Urban House Cottage Development Two- Family Dwelling Row House Multi- Family Storefront Vertical Mixed Use Gallery: A building entry where the ground floor is no more than 10’ from the front property line and the upper levels or roofline cantilevers from the ground floor facade up to the front property line P P P Reference Illustration - Gallery 27 C. Additional Design Standards Required for Form Based Districts: 1. Open Space Area: A minimum of 10% of the lot area shall be provided for open space area, unless a different requirement is specified in the building form regulation. Individual districts may require additional open space area requirements. Open space area may include landscaped yards, patio, dining areas, common balconies, rooftop gardens, and other similar outdoor living spaces. Private balconies shall not be counted toward the minimum open space area requirement. Required parking lot landscaping or perimeter parking lot landscaping shall also not count toward the minimum open space area requirement. a. At least one open space area shall include a minimum dimension of at least 15’ by 15’. b. Open space areas that are greater than 500 square feet must contain at least one useable element, accessible to all building occupants, from the following list. i. A bench for every 250 square feet of open space area; ii. A table for outdoor eating for every 500 square feet of open space area; iii. An outdoor amenity. This is defined as an amenity that intends to provide outdoor recreation and leisure opportunities including, but not limited to, walking paths, playgrounds, seating areas, gardens, sport court or similar amenity intended to promote outdoor activity; iv. Trees with a minimum spread of 20’ at mature height to shade a minimum of 33% of the open space area; and/or v. landscaping that equals at least 33% of the landscaped area. 28 2. Residential Balconies: All street facing residential units above the ground floor or level shall contain a usable balcony facing the street that is a minimum of four feet in depth. Balconies may overhang any required yard. 3. Design Standards Alternatives: a. Alternatives to Required Build-To Line: Where a “required build-to” standard applies, the following alternatives may count toward the minimum build-to requirement as indicated: (1) Landscaping Walls: Landscaping walls between 24” and 42” high may count up to 25% toward the minimum requirement provided the following: (A) The wall incorporates seating areas. (B) The wall is constructed of masonry, concrete, stone or ornamental metal. (C) The wall maintains clear view sightlines where sidewalks and pedestrian connections intersect vehicle drive aisles or streets. (2) Pergolas and Trellises: Pergolas and trellises may count up to 25% toward the minimum build-to requirement provided the following: (A) The structure is at least 48” deep as measured perpendicular to the property line. (B) A vertical clearance of at least eight feet is maintained above the walking path of pedestrians. (C) Vertical supports are constructed of wood, stone, concrete or metal with a minimum of six inches by six inches or a radius of at least four inches. 29 (D) The structure maintains clear view sightlines where sidewalks and pedestrian connections intersect vehicle drive aisles or streets. (3) Arcades: Arcades may count up to 100% toward the minimum requirement provided the following: (A) The arcade extends no more than two stories in height. (B) No portion of the arcade structure encroaches onto public property. (C) The arcade maintains a minimum pedestrian walkway of five feet. (D) The interior wall of the arcade complies with the building configuration standards. (4) Plazas and Outdoor Dining: Plazas and outdoor dining areas may count up to 50% toward the minimum requirement, and have a maximum front setback of up to 15’ provided the following: (A) The plaza or outdoor dining is between the property line adjacent to the street and the street facing building facade. (B) Shall be within two feet of grade with the public sidewalk. (C) The building entry shall be clearly visible through the courtyard or plaza. (D) The building facades along the courtyard or plaza shall comply with the ground floor transparency requirement. b. Alternatives to Ground Floor Transparency Requirement: The planning director may modify the ground floor transparency requirement in the following instances: (1) The requirement would negatively impact the historical character of a building within the H Historic Preservation Overlay District; or (2) The requirement conflicts with the structural integrity of the building and the structure would comply with the standard to the extent possible. 4. Permitted Encroachments and Height Exceptions: Obstructions and height exceptions are permitted as listed in this section or in Section 21A.36.020 of this title or as indicated in this subsection. a. Building Height: In order to promote a varied skyline and other roof shapes in the area, structures with a sloped roof may exceed the maximum building height in the form based districts by five feet provided: (1) The additional height does not include additional living space. Vaulted ceilings, storage spaces, and utility spaces are permitted. 30 (2) The slope of the roof is a minimum of a twelve-four pitch or a quarter barrel shape. b. Roof Top Gardens: Building height encroachments for rooftop uses are permitted to encroach up to 6 feet to accommodate rooftop gardens and/or outdoor living space provided: (1) The rooftop garden includes vegetation that covers a minimum of 15% of the outdoor living space on the roof. The vegetation coverage shall be calculated by utilizing the spread of any trees, shrubs, or ground cover at maturity. (2) If the rooftop is used for non-residential land uses allowed in the zone and located adjacent to the FB-UN1 Form Based Urban Neighborhood District, single-family district, or two-family district, a six foot wall shall be installed along the entire length of the outdoor space facing such zones. 31 5. Pedestrian Connections: Where required, the following pedestrian connection standards apply: a. The connection shall provide direct access from any building entry to the public sidewalk or walkway. b. The connection shall comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) standards for accessibility. c. The connection shall be fully paved and have a minimum width of four feet (4’). d. The connection shall be separated from vehicle drive approaches and drive lanes by a change in grade and a wheel stop if the walkway is less than eight feet (8’) wide. e. Pedestrian connections that lead directly from the sidewalk to the primary building entrance may contain wing walls, no taller than two feet (2’) in height for seating, landscaping, etc. D. Other Applicable Development Standards: All uses in the form based districts shall comply with the standards set in Part IV, Regulations of General Applicability, of this title, including the appliable standards in the following chapters: 1. 21A.33 Land Use Tables 2. 21A.36 General Provisions 3. 21A.37 Design Standards 4. 21A.38 Nonconforming Uses and Noncomplying Structures 5. 21A.40 Accessory Uses, Buildings, and Structures 6. 21A.42 Temporary Uses 7. 21A.44 Off Street Parking, Mobility, and Loading 8. 21A.46 Signs 9. 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers 10. Any other applicable chapter of this title that may include applicable provisions. E. 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. When a required setback abuts a residential district, the minimum setback required shall be a landscape yard to provide a buffer to the abutting residential district. No structure (primary or accessory) shall be permitted within this landscaped buffer. 32 SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.27.050.C. That Subsection 21A.27.050.C of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Form Based Districts: FB-UN1 and FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood District: FB-UN2 Building Form Standards), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: C. FB-UN2 Building Form Standards: Building form standards are listed in Tables 21A.27.050.C.1 through 21A.27.050.C.3 of this section. 1. Cottage Development Form Standards: TABLE 21A.27.050.C.1 Building Regulation Regulation for Building Form: Cottage Development H Height 30’ maximum. All heights measured from the established grade. F Front and Corner Side Yard Setback Minimum 10’. Provided front or corner side yard shall provide one tree for every 30 linear foot of front or corner side yard property line. The mature tree canopy must cover at least 50% of the required yard area and sidewalk area. S Interior Side Yard Minimum of 6’. R Rear Yard Minimum of 20’ between cottage building form and rear property line. SC Separation between Cottages Minimum of 10’, measured from the outside perimeter wall of the principal structure. E Entry Feature Each dwelling unit must include an allowed entry feature. See Table 21A.27.030.B for allowed entry features. Dwelling units adjacent to a street must include an entry feature on the street facing façade. Pedestrian connections with minimum of 5’ width required to each required entry feature. OS Open space Area At least 25% of the total land area of the cottage development shall be maintained as an open space area that complies with the requirements of Subsection 21A.27.030.C.1 “Open Space Area.” 33 BF Building forms per lot Multiple buildings may be built on a single lot. Individual lots without street frontage may be created provided each lot has legally established access to a public street that includes a minimum 5’ wide solid surface walkway. SO Side/Interior Orientation Dwelling units not located directly adjacent to a street are permitted, provided the design standards for glass are complied with on the façade with the required entry feature. L Lots without Street Frontage Lots for individual cottage units without public street frontage are allowed subject to recording a final subdivision plat that: 1. Documents that new lots have adequate access for pedestrians and vehicles to a public street by way of a minimum 5’ wide solid surface walkway, easements or a shared driveway; and 2. Includes a disclosure of private infrastructure costs for any shared infrastructure associated with the new lot(s). The requirements for the disclosure of private infrastructure costs shall be the same as required for planned developments per Section 21A.55.110 of this title. MW Midblock Walkway As part of the city’s plan for the downtown area, it is intended that midblock walkways be provided to increase pedestrian connectivity and overall livability downtown through the creation of an intricate pedestrian network. The city has adopted the Downtown Plan that includes a midblock walkway map and establishes the need for such walkways as the Downtown grows. Because the districts within the downtown area allow building heights that exceed those of other districts in the city, the requirement for a midblock walkway is considered to be necessary to alleviate pedestrian impacts on the public sidewalks by dispersing future use of the public sidewalks. All buildings constructed after the effective date hereof within this district shall conform to this officially adopted plan for midblock walkways, in addition to the following standards: F. The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. G. The midblock walkway may be incorporated into the building provided it is open to the public. A sign shall be posted indicating that the public may use the walkway. H. Building encroachments into the midblock walkway are permitted if they include one or more of the following elements: (1) Colonnades; (2) Staircases; (3) Balconies – All balconies must be located at the third story or above. 34 2. Row House Building Form Standards: TABLE 21A.27.050.C.2 (4) Building overhangs and associated cantilever – These coverings may be between 9 and 14 feet above the level of the sidewalk. They shall provide a minimum depth of coverage of 6’ and project no closer to the curb than 3’. (5) Skybridge – A single skybridge is permitted. All skybridges must be located at the 3rd, 4th, or 5th stories. (6) Other architectural element(s) not listed above that offers refuge from weather and/or provide publicly accessible usable space. DS Design Standards See Section 21A.27.030 and Chapter 21A.37 for other applicable building configuration and design standards. 35 Building Regulation Regulation for Building Form: Row House H Height Maximum of 40’; All heights measured from established grade. Rooftop decks and associated railing/parapet are allowed on any roof, including roofs at the maximum allowed height. The height of the railing/parapet is limited to the height required to meet building code requirements. F Front and Corner Side Yard Setback Minimum 10’ and maximum 15’, unless a greater setback is required due to existing utility easements in which case the maximum setback shall be at the edge of the easement. This requirement may be modified through Design Review (Chapter 21A.59). Provided front or corner side yard shall provide one tree for every 30 linear foot of front or corner side yard property line. The mature tree canopy must cover at least 50% of the required yard area and sidewalk area. S Interior Side Yard Minimum of 6’ between row house building form and side property line. Minimum of 10’ along a side property line when abutting a property in a zoning district with a maximum permitted building height of 35’ or less. No setback is required for common walls. R Rear Yard Minimum of 20’ between row house building form and rear property line, except when rear yard is abutting a zoning district with a maximum permitted building height of 35’ or less, then the minimum is 25’. For the purpose of this regulation, an alley that is a minimum of 10’ in width that separates the subject property from another property shall be counted towards the minimum setback. U Uses Per Story Residential on all stories; live/work units permitted on ground level. E Entry Feature Each dwelling unit must include an allowed entry feature. See Table 21A.27.030.B for allowed entry features. Dwelling units adjacent to a street must include an entry feature on street facing façade. Pedestrian connections with minimum 5’ width required to each required entry feature. U Upper level Stepback When adjacent to a lot in a zoning district with a maximum building height of 35’ or less, the first full floor of the building above 30’, measured from finished grade, shall stepback 10’ from the building facade along the side or rear yard that is adjacent to the lot in the applicable zoning district. This regulation does not apply when a lot in a different zoning district is separated from the subject parcel by a street or alley. 36 OS Open space Area Each dwelling unit shall include a minimum open space area that is equal to at least 25% of the footprint of the individual unit, subject to all other open space area requirements of Subsection 21A.27.030.C.1 “Open Space Area.” A minimum of 20% of the required open space area shall include vegetation. Tree canopy at maturity shall count toward the vegetation requirement, BF Building Forms per Lot Multiple buildings may be built on a single lot provided all of the buildings have frontage on a street. All buildings shall comply with all applicable standards. SO Side/Interior Orientation Dwelling units not located directly adjacent to a street are permitted, provided the design standards for glass are complied with on the façade with the required entry feature. Lots for individual row house dwelling units without public street frontage are allowed subject to recording a final subdivision plat that: 1. Documents that new lots have adequate access to a public street by way of easements or a shared driveway; and 2. Includes a disclosure of private infrastructure costs for any shared infrastructure associated with the new lot(s) per Section 21A.55.110 of this title. MW Midblock Walkway As part of the city’s plan for the downtown area, it is intended that midblock walkways be provided to facilitate pedestrian movement within the area. The city has adopted the Downtown Plan that includes a midblock walkway map and establishes a need for such walkways as the Downtown grows. Because the districts within the downtown area allow maximum building heights that exceeds those of other districts in the city, the requirement for the midblock walkway is important to maintain the overall scale and pedestrian nature of the downtown. This requirement implements the city’s Downtown Plan and provides visual relief from the additional height that is available in these zone districts when compared to the remainder of the city. All buildings constructed after the effective date hereof within the Downtown zoning districts shall conform to this officially adopted plan for midblock walkways, in addition to the following standards: a. Any new development shall provide a midblock walkway if a midblock walkway on the subject property has been identified in a master plan that has been adopted by the city. b. The midblock walkway may be incorporated into the building provided it is open to the public. A sign shall be posted indicating that the public may use the walkway. The following building encroachments are permitted in a midblock walkway. Under no circumstances shall a midblock walkway be entirely covered. 37 3. Multi-family Residential, Storefront, and Vertical Mixed-use building form standards: TABLE 21A.27.050.C.3 (1) Colonnades; (2) Staircases; (3) Balconies: All balconies must be located at the third story or above; (4) Building overhangs and associated cantilever: These coverings may be between nine and fourteen feet above the level of the sidewalk. They shall provide a minimum depth of coverage of six feet and project no closer to the curb than three feet; (5) Skybridge: A single skybridge is permitted. All skybridges must be located at the third, fourth, or fifth stories; and (6) Other architectural element(s) not listed above that offers refuge from weather and/or provide publicly accessible usable space. DS Design Standards See Section 21A.27.030 and Chapter 21A.37 for other applicable building configuration and design standards. Building Regulation Regulation for Building Forms: Multi-family Residential/Storefront/Vertical Mixed Use H Height Maximum height of 50’.1 All heights measured from established grade. Rooftop use is permitted and required railings and walls necessary to comply with building code requirements are permitted to encroach beyond the maximum height up to 5’. GH Ground Floor Height Minimum ground floor height of 14’. F Front and Corner Side Yard Setback Ground Floor Residential Uses: A minimum of 10’ and a maximum of 20’. Ground Floor occupied by retail, restaurants, taverns, brewpubs, bar establishments, art galleries, theaters, or performing art facilities: no minimum is required, provided no doors open into the right of way. A maximum setback of up to 10’ is allowed. All other ground floor uses: A minimum of 5’ and a maximum 10’. The maximum may be increased due to existing utility easements in which case the maximum setback shall be at the edge of the easement. 38 This requirement may be modified through Design Review process (Chapter 21A.59). Provided front or corner side yard shall provide one tree for every 30 linear foot of front or corner side yard property line. The mature tree canopy must cover at least 50% of the required yard area and sidewalk area. S Interior Side Yard Minimum of 6’ required, except when an interior side yard is abutting a property in a zoning district with a maximum permitted building height of 35’ or less, then the minimum shall be 15’. For the purpose of this regulation, an alley that is a minimum of 10’ in width that separates a subject property from a different zoning district shall be counted towards the minimum setback. R Rear Yard The rear yard minimum shall be 10’, except when rear yard is adjacent to a zoning district with a maximum permitted building height of 30’ or less, then the minimum is 20’. For the purpose of this regulation, an alley that is a minimum of 10’ in width that separates a subject property from a property in a different zoning district shall be counted towards the minimum setback. GU Ground Floor Use Requirem ents 900 South: The ground floor use space facing 900 South shall be limited to the following uses: retail goods establishments, retail service establishments, public service portions of businesses, restaurants, taverns/brewpubs, bar establishments, art galleries, theaters, or performing art facilities for a depth of 25’. Amenity space for the occupants of the building shall account for no more than 25% of the length of the ground floor space. E Ground Floor Dwelling Entrances Ground floor dwelling units adjacent to a street must have an allowed entry feature. See Table 21A.27.030.B for allowed entry features. U Upper Level Stepback When adjacent to a lot in a zoning district with a maximum building height of 30’ or less, the first full floor of the building above 30’ shall stepback 10’ from the building facade at finished grade along the side or rear yard that is adjacent to the lot in the applicable zoning district. This regulation does not apply when a lot in a different zoning district is separated from the subject parcel by a street or alley M W Midblock Walkway As part of the city’s plan for the downtown area, it is intended that midblock walkways be provided to facilitate pedestrian movement within the area. The city has adopted the Downtown Plan that includes a midblock walkway map and establishes a need for such walkways as the Downtown grows. Because the districts within the downtown area allow 39 maximum building heights that exceeds those of other districts in the city, the requirement for the midblock walkway is important to maintain the overall scale and pedestrian nature of the downtown. This requirement implements the city’s Downtown Plan and provides visual relief from the additional height that is available in these zone districts when compared to the remainder of the city. All buildings constructed after the effective date hereof within this district shall conform to this officially adopted plan for midblock walkways, in addition to the following standards: 1. Any new development shall provide a midblock walkway if a midblock walkway on the subject property has been identified in a master plan that has been adopted by the city. 2. The following standards apply to the midblock walkway: a. The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. b. The midblock walkway may be incorporated into the building provided it is open to the public. A sign shall be posted indicating that the public may use the walkway. c. The following building encroachments are permitted in midblock walkway. Under no circumstances shall a mid block walkway be entirely covered. (1) Colonnades; (2) Staircases; (3) Balconies – All balconies must be located at the third story or above; (4) Building overhangs and associated cantilever - These coverings may be between 9 and 14’ above the level of the sidewalk. They shall provide a minimum depth of coverage of 6’ and project no closer to the curb than 3’; (5) Skybridge – A single skybridge is permitted. All skybridges must be located at the third, fourth, or fifth stories; and (6) Other architectural element(s) not listed above that offers refuge from weather and/or provide publicly accessible usable space. BF Building Forms Per Lot Multiple buildings may be built on a single lot provided all of the buildings have frontage on a street. All buildings shall comply with all applicable standards. OS Open Space Area As required in Subsection 21A.27.030.C.1 “Open Space Area.” 40 Footnotes: 1. Additional Building Height Regulations. Properties listed in this footnote shall have a permitted building height of up to 65’ and 5 stories. a. For legally existing parcels or lots as of January 1, 2023 located on the corners of West Temple at 800 South or 900 South; b. For legally existing parcels or lots as of January 1, 2023 located on the corners of 200 West at 700 South, 800 South or 900 South; c. For legally existing parcels or lots as of January 1, 2023 located on the corners of West Temple at Fayette Avenue; d. For legally existing parcels or lots as of January 1, 2023 located on the corners of 300 West at 800 South or 900 South; e. On the southeast corner of 1300 South and State Street. f. As indicated on the following map: DS Design Standards See Section 21A.27.030 and Chapter 21A.37 for other applicable building configuration and design standards. 41 SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Chapter 21A.30. That Chapter 21A.30 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Downtown Districts), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: CHAPTER 21A.30 DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS SECTION: 21A.30.010: General Provisions 21A.30.020: D-1 Central Business District 21A.30.030: D-2 Downtown Support District 21A.30.040: D-3 Downtown Warehouse/Residential District 21A.30.045: D-4 Downtown Secondary Central Business District 21A.30.010: GENERAL PROVISIONS: 42 A. Statement of Intent: The downtown districts are intended to provide use, bulk, urban design and other controls and regulations appropriate to the commercial core of the city and adjacent areas in order to enhance employment opportunities; to encourage the efficient use of land; to enhance property values; to improve the design quality of downtown areas; to create a unique downtown center which fosters the arts, entertainment, financial, office, retail and governmental activities; to provide safety and security; encourage permitted residential uses within the downtown area; and to help implement adopted plans. B. Permitted Uses: The uses specified as permitted uses in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title are permitted; provided, that they comply with all requirements of this chapter, the general standards set forth in Part IV of this title, and all other applicable requirements of this title. 1. Conditional Uses: The uses specified as conditional uses in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title, may be allowed in the downtown districts provided they are approved pursuant to the standards and procedures for conditional uses set forth in Chapter 21A.54 of this title, and comply with all other applicable requirements. C. Impact Controls and General Restrictions in the Downtown Districts: 1. Refuse Control: Refuse containers must be covered and shall be stored within completely enclosed buildings or screened in conformance with the requirements of Chapter 21A.48 of this title. For buildings existing as of April 12, 1995, this screening provision shall be required if the floor area or parking requirements are increased by twenty five percent (25%) or more by an expansion to the building or change in the type of land use. 2. Lighting: On site lighting, including parking lot lighting and illuminated signs, shall be located, directed or designed in such a manner so as not to create glare on adjacent properties. D. Outdoor Sales, Display and Storage: “Sales and display (outdoor)” and “storage and display (outdoor)”, as defined in Chapter 21A.62 of this title, are allowed where specifically authorized in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title. These uses shall conform to the following: 1. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not encroach into areas of required parking for periods longer than 30 days; 2. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not be located in any required yard area within the lot when the required yard abuts a residential zoning district; 3. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not include the use of banners, pennants or strings of pennants; 43 4. Outdoor storage shall be allowed only where specifically authorized in the applicable district regulation and shall be required to be fully screened with opaque fencing not to exceed eight feet in height; and 5. Outdoor sales and display and outdoor storage shall also be permitted when part of an authorized temporary use as established in Chapter 21A.42 of this title. E. Restrictions on Parking Lots and Structures: An excessive amount of at or above ground parking lots and structures can negatively impact the urban design objectives of the Downtown Zoning Districts. To control such impacts, the following regulations apply to surface parking and above grade structures: 1. Parking shall be located behind principal buildings or incorporated into the principal building provided the parking is wrapped on street facing facades with a use allowed in the zone other than parking. 2. A parking lot shall not consist of more than two double-loaded parking aisles (bays) adjacent to each other. The length of a parking lot shall not exceed 10 stalls. Parking for government facilities necessary for public health and safety are exempt from this provision. Illustration of Regulation 21A.010.E.2 Surface Parking Lots 3. Parking lots, garages or parking structures, proposed as the only principal use on a property that has frontage on a public street and that would result in a building demolition are prohibited in the Downtown zoning districts. 4. No special restrictions shall apply to belowground parking facilities. 44 F. Midblock Walkways: As part of the city’s plan for the downtown area, it is intended that midblock walkways be provided to increase pedestrian connectivity and overall livability downtown through the creation of an intricate pedestrian network. The city has adopted the Downtown Plan that includes a midblock walkway map and establishes a need for such walkways as the Downtown grows. Because the districts within the downtown area allow building heights that exceed those of other districts in the city, the requirement for a midblock walkway is considered to be necessary to alleviate pedestrian impacts on the public sidewalks by dispersing future use of the public sidewalks. All buildings constructed after the effective date hereof within the Downtown zoning districts shall conform to this officially adopted plan for midblock walkways, in addition to the following standards: 1. Any new development shall provide a midblock walkway if a midblock walkway on the subject property has been identified in a master plan that has been adopted by the city. 2. The following standards apply to the midblock walkway: a. The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. b. The midblock walkway may be incorporated into the building provided it is open to the public. A sign shall be posted indicating that the public may use the walkway. c. Building encroachments into the midblock walkway are permitted if they include one or more of the following elements: (1) Colonnades; (2) Staircases; (3) Balconies: All balconies must be located at the third story or above. (4) Building overhangs and associated cantilever - These coverings may be between 9 and 14’ above the level of the sidewalk. They shall provide a minimum depth of coverage of six feet and project no closer to the curb than three feet. (5) Skybridge: A single skybridge is permitted. All skybridges must be located at the third, fourth, or fifth stories. (6) Other architectural element(s) not listed above that offers refuge from weather and/or provide publicly accessible usable space. Illustration of Regulation 21A.30.010.F Midblock Walkways 45 1 The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. G. Sidewalks: For all downtown districts, sidewalks must be a clear walking path that is a minimum of 10’ wide. Outdoor dining shall be permitted within the sidewalk if it complies with the minimum width of a clear path as defined in the outdoor dining design guidelines. H. Additional Standards: All uses in the downtown districts shall comply with the standards set in Part IV, Regulations of General Applicability, of this title, including the applicable standards in the following chapters: 1. 21A.36 General Provisions 2. 21A.37 Design Standards 3. 21A.38 Nonconforming Uses and Noncomplying Structures 4. 21A.40 Accessory Uses, Buildings, and Structures 5. 21A.42 Temporary Uses 6. 21A.44 Off Street Parking, Mobility, and Loading 7. 21A.46 Signs 8. 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers 9. Any other applicable chapter of this title that may include applicable provisions. 21A.30.020: D-1 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT: A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the D-1 Central Business District is to provide for commercial and economic development within Salt Lake City’s most urban and intense areas. A broad range of uses, including very high density housing, are intended to foster a 46 24 hour activity environment consistent with the area’s function as the business, office, retail, entertainment, cultural and tourist center of the region. Development is intended to be very intense with high lot coverage and large buildings that are placed close together while being oriented toward the pedestrian with a strong emphasis on a safe and attractive streetscape and preserving the urban nature of the downtown area. This district is appropriate in areas where supported by applicable master plans. The standards are intended to achieve established objectives for urban design, pedestrian amenities and land use control. B. Uses: Uses in the D-1 Central Business District as specified in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title, are permitted subject to the general provisions set forth in Section 21A.30.010 of this chapter. C. D-1 Central Business District General Regulations: The regulations established in this section apply to the D-1 Central Business District as a whole 1. Yard Requirements: No minimum yards are required. A maximum yard of eight feet is allowed. a. If provided, the yard must include one of the following elements: i. Seating at a ratio of at least one bench for every 500 square feet of yard space; or ii. Landscaping that includes an increase of at least 25% in the total number of trees required to be planted on the site; or iii. Awning or a similar form of weather protection that covers at least five feet in width and length from all street-facing building entrances. b. Exceptions to this requirement may be authorized through the design review process, subject to the requirements of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. c. The planning director, in consultation with the transportation director, may modify this requirement to accommodate a wider sidewalk if the adjacent public sidewalk is less than 15’ wide and the resulting modification to the setback results in a more efficient public sidewalk. The planning director may waive this requirement for any addition, expansions, or intensification, which increases the floor area or parking requirement by less than 50% if the planning director finds the following: i. The architecture of the addition is compatible with the architecture of the original structure or the surrounding architecture, or ii. The addition reduces the extent of the noncompliance of the existing building. 47 d. Regardless of the setback provided, doors shall be setback a minimum distance to allow the door to operate without swinging into a right of way or midblock walkway. e. Interior Side Yards: No minimum interior side yard is required. f. Rear Yard: No minimum rear yard is required. 4. Landscape Requirements for Demolition Sites: Vacant lots, resulting from demolition activities where no replacement use is proposed, shall conform to Chapter 21A.48 of this title, special landscape requirements applicable to the D-1 Central Business District. D. Height Regulations: Buildings in the D-1 zoning district shall comply with the following provisions: 1. Building Heights: No building shall be less than 100’. There is no maximum building height, subject to standards contained in Subsections 21A.30.020.D.2 through D.3. 2. Exceptions to the minimum height requirements are as follows: a. Utility Buildings necessary to provide electricity, water, sewer, storm water, and other necessary utility services to the downtown area. b. Accessory building and structures, including accessory buildings that serve public transportation, downtown improvement districts, and other public maintenance buildings. c. Buildings on lots or parcels that are less than 5,000 square feet in size. d. Buildings with a footprint of less than 2,500 square feet. e. Building approved through the design review process in Chapter 21A.59. 2. Buildings in excess of 100’, are allowed subject to the following standard: a. A minimum stepback of five feet or other architectural feature that can deflect snow and ice from falling directly onto a sidewalk, midblock walkway, or other public space. The stepback may be located above the height of the first floor and below 150’ in height above the sidewalk or public space. Buildings that are not clad in glass are exempt from this requirement. 3. Buildings in excess of 200’ with no limit and subject to Chapter 21A.59, Design Review, shall include at least one of the following five options: a. Midblock walkway is provided on the property and the midblock walkway connects to an existing or planned street, midblock walkway, or publicly accessible public space and exceeds all the required dimensions of Subsection 21A.30.010.G by at least five feet. This option allows for additional height in return for exceeding the midblock walkway requirements; or 48 b. The building is utilizing affordable housing incentives identified in Chapter 21A.52 of this title; or c. The property where the building is located exceeds the minimum requirement for ground floor uses identified in chapter 21A.37 (Design Standards) of this title, specifically: (1) For Subsection 21A.37.050.A.1 (Design Standards Defined, Ground Floor Use Only), the requirement must be increased to 100%. This option requires that the entire ground floor use of a building consists of retail good establishments, retail service establishments or restaurants, public service portions of businesses, department stores, art galleries, motion picture theaters, performing art facilities or similar uses that encourages walk-in traffic through an active use. Vehicle entry and exit ways necessary for access to parking are exempt from this requirement; or (2) For Subsection 21A.37.050.A.2 (Design Standards Defined, Ground Floor Use and Visual Interest), the ground floor use requirement must be increased to 85% and the visual interest requirement must be increased to 15%. This option requires an increased percentage of ground floor space to be used for an active use, and an increased percentage of the building to provide visual interest; d. The applicant provides a restrictive covenant on a historic building, a building that is 50 years or older, or a building that is a nationally recognized property, located outside of the H Historic Preservation Overlay District for the purpose of preserving the structure for a minimum of 50 years. e. The proposal includes a privately owned, publicly accessible open space on the property or on another property within the geographic boundaries of the Downtown Plan. To qualify for this provision, a restrictive covenant in the favor of the city shall be recorded against the open space portion of the property. The space shall be a minimum of 500 square feet and include enough trees to provide a shade canopy that covers at least 60% of the open space area. This option allows for additional height in return for the designation of open public open space. E. Special Controls Over the Main Street Retail Core: 1. Intent: Special controls shall apply to land located within the Main Street retail core area to preserve and enhance the viability of retail uses within the downtown area. The regulations of this subsection shall be in addition to the requirements of Subsections C and D of this section. 2. Area of Applicability: The controls established in this subsection shall apply to property developed or redeveloped after April 12, 1995, when located along any block face on the following streets: a. Main Street located within the D-1 District; 49 b. 100 South Street between West Temple Street and State Street; c. 200 South Street between West Temple Street and State Street; and d. 300 South Street between West Temple Street and State Street. 3. First Floor Retail Required: The first floor space of all buildings within this area shall be required to provide uses consisting of retail goods establishments, retail service establishments or restaurants, public service portions of businesses, department stores, art galleries, motion picture theaters or performing arts facilities. 4. Restrictions on Driveways: Driveways shall not be permitted along Main Street, but shall be permitted along other streets within the Main Street retail core area, provided they are located at least 80’ from the intersection of two street right of way lines. 21A.30.030: D-2 DOWNTOWN SUPPORT DISTRICT: A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the D-2 Downtown Support District is to provide an area that fosters the development of a sustainable urban neighborhood that accommodates commercial, office, residential and other uses that relate to and support the Central Business District. Development within the D-2 Downtown Support District is intended to be less intensive than that of the Central Business District, with high lot coverage and buildings placed close to the sidewalk. This district is appropriate in areas where supported by applicable master plans. Design standards are intended to promote pedestrian oriented development with a strong emphasis on a safe and attractive streetscape. B. Uses: Uses in the D-2 Downtown Support District, as specified in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title, are permitted subject to the general provisions set forth in Section 21A.30.010 of this chapter and this section. C. Lot Size Requirements: No minimum lot area or lot width shall be required. D. Maximum Building Height: The maximum permitted building height shall not exceed 120’ subject to the following review process: Buildings over 65’ in height are subject to design review according to the requirements of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. E. Yard Requirements: 1. Front and Corner Side Yard: There is no minimum setback. The maximum setback is 10 feet. Buildings that contain ground floor residential uses shall have a front yard setback of a minimum of 8’ and a maximum setback no greater than 16’. A provided yard for any use shall be considered a landscaped yard and subject to the provisions of Chapter 21A.48 for required landscaped yards. a. If provided, the yard must include one of the following elements: 50 i. Seating at a ratio of at least one bench for every 500 square feet of yard space; or ii. Landscaping that includes an increase of at least 25% in the total number of trees required to be planted on the site; or iii. Awning or a similar form of weather protection that covers at least 5’ in width and length from all street-facing building entrances. b. Exceptions to this requirement may be authorized through the design review process, subject to the requirements of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. c. The planning director, in consultation with the transportation director, may modify this requirement to accommodate a wider sidewalk if the adjacent public sidewalk is less than 15’ wide and the resulting modification to the setback results in a more efficient public sidewalk. The planning director may waive this requirement for any addition, expansions, or intensification, which increases the floor area or parking requirement by less than 50% if the planning director finds the following: i. The architecture of the addition is compatible with the architecture of the original structure or the surrounding architecture, or ii. The addition reduces the extent of the noncompliance of the existing building. d. Regardless of the setback provided, doors shall be setback a minimum distance to allow the door to operate without swinging into a right of way or midblock walkway. 2. Interior Side Yards: No Minimum side yard is required except a minimum of 10’ is required when the side yard is adjacent to a zoning district with a maximum permitted height of 35’ or less. 3. Rear Yard: No minimum rear yard is required except a minimum of 10’ is required when the rear yard is adjacent to a zoning district with a maximum permitted height of 35’ or less. 4. Buffer Yards: Any lot abutting a lot in a residential district shall conform to the buffer yard requirements of Chapter 21A.48 of this title or the above standards, whichever is greater. F. Existing Vehicle Sales or Lease Lots: 1. Vehicle Display Area: The parking provided in the vehicle display area will not be counted as off street parking when computing maximum parking requirements and is not considered to be a surface parking lot when determining required setbacks in this section. 2. Design Standards: Structures associated with accessory uses such as, but not limited to, repair shops or vehicle washing do not need to meet required design standards and 51 may exceed the maximum front and corner side yard setbacks. These structures are required to have one of the following elements listed below: a. Durable materials, as defined in Subsection 21A.37.050.B; or b. Landscaping. Primary structures that contain sales floors and auto display areas must meet all design standards and setbacks. 3. Landscaping: A landscaped yard of at least 10’ in depth is required along any portion of the street frontage of the property that is not occupied by a permanent structure. All other landscaping requirements in Chapter 21A.48 remain applicable. 4. Multiple Buildings: Vehicle sales or lease lots may have multiple buildings on a parcel subject to all buildings being associated with the use of the lot as vehicles sales or lease. 21A.30.040: D-3 DOWNTOWN WAREHOUSE/RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the D-3 Downtown Warehouse/Residential District is to provide for the reuse of existing warehouse buildings for multi-family and mixed use while also allowing for continued retail, office and warehouse uses within the district. The reuse of existing buildings and the construction of new buildings are to be done as multi-family residential or mixed use developments containing retail or office uses on the lower floors and residential on the upper floors. This district is appropriate in areas where supported by applicable master plans. The standards are intended to create a unique and sustainable downtown neighborhood with a strong emphasis on urban design, adaptive reuse of existing buildings, alternative forms of transportation and pedestrian orientation. B. Uses: Uses in the D-3 Downtown Warehouse/Residential District as specified in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title, are permitted subject to the provisions of this chapter and other applicable provisions of this title. C. Lot Size Requirements: No minimum lot area or lot width shall be required. D. Yard Requirements: There are no minimum setbacks, except for buildings that contain ground floor residential uses in which case the front yard setback shall be a minimum of 8’ and no greater than 16’. A provided front yard for any use shall be considered a landscaped yard and subject to the provision of Chapter 21A.48 for required landscaped yards. The maximum front yard setback shall be eight feet for all other uses. 52 1. The yard must be designed with usability as a consideration. Development that implements the maximum yard is required to have at least one of the following elements: a. Seating at a ratio of at least one bench for every 500 square feet of yard space; or b. Landscaping that includes an increase of at least 25% in the total number of trees required to be planted on the site; or c. Awning or a similar form of weather protection that covers at least 5’ in width and length from all street-facing building entrances. 2. Exceptions to this requirement may be authorized through the design review process, subject to the requirements of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. 3. The planning director, in consultation with the transportation director, may modify this requirement to accommodate a wider sidewalk if the adjacent public sidewalk is less than 15’ wide and the resulting modification to the setback results in a more efficient public sidewalk. The planning director may waive this requirement for any addition, expansions, or intensification, which increases the floor area or parking requirement by less than 50% if the planning director finds the following: a. The architecture of the addition is compatible with the architecture of the original structure or the surrounding architecture, or b. The addition reduces the extent of the noncompliance of the existing building. 4. Regardless of the setback provided, doors shall be setback a minimum distance to allow the door to operate without swinging into a right of way or midblock walkway. E. Maximum Building Height: Buildings in the D3 zoning district shall comply with the following provisions: 1. The permitted building height shall not exceed 75’. 2. Buildings taller than 75’ but less than 180’ may be allowed subject to the following provisions: a. Approval is subject to Chapter 21A.59 Design Review: (1) Provided the additional height is supported by the applicable master plan. (2) The building includes at least one of the following five options: (A) Midblock walkway is provided on the property and the midblock walkway connects to an existing or planned street, midblock walkway, or publicly accessible public space and exceeds all the required dimensions of Subsection 21A.30.010.G by at least five feet. This option allows for additional height in return for exceeding the midblock walkway requirements; 53 (B) The building is utilizing affordable housing incentives identified in Chapter 21A.52 of this title; (C) The property where the building is located exceeds the minimum requirement for ground floor uses identified in Chapter 21A.37 (Design Standards) of this title, specifically: (i) For Subsection 21A.37.050.A.1 (Design Standards Defined, Ground Floor Use Only), the requirement must be increased to 100%. This option requires that the entire ground floor use of a building consists of retail good establishments, retail service establishments or restaurants, public service portions of businesses, department stores, art galleries, motion picture theaters, performing art facilities or similar uses that encourages walk-in traffic through an active use. Vehicle entry and exit ways necessary for access to parking are exempt from this requirement; or (ii) For Subsection 21A.37.050.A.2 (Design Standards Defined, Ground Floor Use and Visual Interest), the ground floor use requirement must be increased to 75% and the visual interest requirement must be increased to 25%. This option requires for an increased percentage of ground floor space to be used for an active use, and an increased percentage of the building to provide visual interest; (D) The applicant provides a restrictive covenant on a historic building, a building that is 50 years or older, or a building that is a nationally recognized property, located outside of the H Historic Preservation Overlay District for the purpose of preserving the structure for a minimum of 50 years; or (E) The proposal includes a privately owned, publicly accessible open space on the property or on another property within the geographic boundaries of the Downtown Plan. To qualify for this provision, a restrictive covenant in the favor of the city shall be recorded against the open space portion of the property. The space shall be a minimum of 500 square feet and include enough trees to provide a shade canopy that covers at least 60% of the open space area. This option allows for additional height in return for the designation of open public open space. 21A.30.045: D-4 DOWNTOWN SECONDARY CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT: A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the D-4 Secondary Central Business District is to foster an environment consistent with the area’s function as a housing, entertainment, cultural, convention, business, and retail section of the city that supports the Central Business District. Development is intended to support the regional venues in the district, 54 such as the Salt Palace Convention Center, and to be less intense than in the Central Business District. This district is appropriate in areas where supported by applicable master plans. The standards are intended to achieve established objectives for urban and historic design, pedestrian amenities, and land use control, particularly in relation to retail commercial uses. B. Uses: Uses in the D-4 Secondary Central Business District as specified in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title, are permitted subject to the general provisions set forth in Section 21A.30.010 of this chapter. In addition, all conditional uses in the D-4 District shall be subject to design evaluation and approval by the planning commission. C. Minimum Lot Size: No minimum lot area or lot width is required. D. Yard Requirements: 1. Front and Corner Side Yards: No minimum yards are required, however, a maximum front yard setback of eight feet is allowed. a. The yard must be designed with the usability as a consideration. Development that implements the maximum yard is required to have at least one of the following elements: i. Seating at a ratio of at least one bench for every 500 square feet of yard space; ii. Landscaping that includes an increase of at least 25% in the total number of trees required to be planted on the site; or iii. Awning or a similar form of weather protection that covers at least 5’ in width and length from all street-facing building entrances. b. Exceptions to this requirement may be authorized through the design review process, subject to the requirements of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. c. The planning director, in consultation with the transportation director, may modify this requirement to accommodate a wider sidewalk if the adjacent public sidewalk is less than 15’ wide and the resulting modification to the setback results in a more efficient public sidewalk. The planning director may waive this requirement for any addition, expansions, or intensification, which increases the floor area or parking requirement by less than 50% if the planning director finds the following: i. The architecture of the addition is compatible with the architecture of the original structure or the surrounding architecture, or ii. The addition reduces the extent of the noncompliance of the existing building. 55 d. Regardless of the setback provided, doors shall be setback a minimum distance to allow the door to operate without swinging into a right of way or midblock walkway. 2. Interior Side Yards: No minimum side yard is required except a minimum of 10’ is required when the side yard is adjacent to a zoning district with a maximum permitted height of 35’ or less. 3. Rear Yard: No minimum rear yard is required except a minimum of 10’ is required when the rear yard is adjacent to a zoning district with a maximum permitted height of 35’ or less. E. Building Height: Buildings in the D-4 zoning district shall comply with the following provisions: 1. The permitted building height shall not exceed 75’. 2. Buildings taller than 75’ and up to 120’may be authorized through the design review process, subject to the requirements of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. a. Additional Height: Additional height may be authorized up to 120’ if the street facing facades contain ground floor commercial uses other than parking for at least 75% of the street facing facades according to Chapter 21A.37 and subject to approval through the design review process in Chapter 21A.59. b. Additional Permitted Height Location: Additional height greater than 120’ but not more than 375’ in height is permitted in the area bounded by: (1) The centerlines of South Temple, West Temple, 200 South, and 200 West Streets; and (2) Beginning at the Southeast Corner of Block 67, Plat ‘A’, Salt Lake City Survey, and running thence along the south line of said Block 67, N89°54’02”W 283.86 feet; thence N00°04’50”E 38.59 feet; thence N10°46’51”W 238.70 feet; thence N24°45’15”W 62.98 feet; thence S89°54’02”E 355.45 feet to the east line of said Block 67; thence along said east line S00°06’35”W 330.14 feet to the point of beginning. Contains 102,339 square feet, or 2.349 acres, more or less. 56 3. Buildings in excess of 120’ up to 375’ may be authorized subject to the following provisions: a. Approval is subject to Chapter 21A.59 Design Review; b. Shall include a minimum stepback of five feet or other architectural feature that can deflect snow and ice from falling directly onto a sidewalk, midblock walkway, or other public space. The stepback may be located above the height of the first floor and below 120’ in height above the sidewalk or public space. Buildings that are clad in glass that totals less than 50% of the total wall surface area are exempt from this requirement; c. The additional height is supported by the applicable master plan; and d. The building includes at least one of the following five options: 1. Midblock walkway is provided on the property and the midblock walkway connects to an existing or planned street, midblock walkway, or publicly accessible public space and exceeds all the required dimensions of Section 21A.30.010.G by at least five feet. This option allows for additional height in return for exceeding the midblock walkway requirements; 2. The building is utilizing affordable housing incentives identified in chapter 21A.52 of this title; 3. The property where the building is located exceeds the minimum requirement for ground floor uses identified in Chapter 21A.37 (Design Standards) of this title, specifically: (1) For Subsection 21A.37.050.A.1 (Design Standards Defined, Ground Floor Use Only), the requirement must be increased to 100%. This option 57 requires that the entire ground floor use of a building consists of retail good establishments, retail service establishments or restaurants, public service portions of businesses, department stores, art galleries, motion picture theaters, performing art facilities or similar uses that encourages walk-in traffic through an active use. Vehicle entry and exit ways necessary for access to parking are exempt from this requirement.; or (2) For Subsection 21A.37.050.A.2 (Design Standards Defined, Ground Floor Use and Visual Interest), the ground floor use requirement must be increased to 75% and the visual interest requirement must be increased to 25%. This option requires for an increased percentage of ground floor space to be used for an active use, and an increased percentage of the building to provide visual interest; (D) The applicant provides a restrictive covenant on a historic building, a building that is 50 years or older, or a building that is a nationally recognized property, located outside of the H Historic Preservation Overlay District for the purpose of preserving the structure for a minimum of 50 years. (E) The proposal includes a privately owned, publicly accessible open space on the property or on another property within the geographic boundaries of the Downtown Plan. To qualify for this provision, a restrictive covenant in the favor of the city shall be recorded against the open space portion of the property. The space shall be a minimum of 500 square feet and include enough trees to provide a shade canopy that covers at least 60% of the open space area. This option allows for additional height in return for the designation of open public open space. e. Exception: The first 50’ of height shall not be set back from the street front more than five feet except that setbacks greater than five feet may be approved through the design review process or, has otherwise allowed by this code. SECTION 6. Amending the Text of Chapter 21A.31. That Chapter 21A.30 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Gateway Districts), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: CHAPTER 21A.31 GATEWAY DISTRICTS SECTION: 21A.31.010: General Provisions 21A.31.020: G-MU Gateway-Mixed Use District 58 21A.31.010: GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. Statement of Intent: The G-MU Gateway-Mixed Use District is intended to provide an urban setting for residential and commercial, developments, and implement the objectives of the Downtown Plan through district regulations that reinforce the mixed use character of the area and encourage the development of urban neighborhoods containing supportive retail, service commercial, office, and high density residential. B. Uses: Uses in the G-MU Gateway-Mixed District as specified in Section 21A.33.060, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses in the Gateway District”, of this title, are permitted subject to the general provisions set forth in this section. C. Permitted Uses: The uses specified as permitted uses, in Section 21A.33.060, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses in the Gateway District”, of this title are permitted; provided, that they comply with all requirements of this chapter, the general standards set forth in Part IV of this title, and all other applicable requirements of this title. D. Conditional Uses: The uses specified as conditional uses in Section 21A.33.060, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses in the Gateway District”, of this title, shall be permitted in the G-MU Gateway-Mixed Use District provided they are approved pursuant to the standards and procedures for conditional uses set forth in Chapter 21A.54 of this title. E. Midblock Walkways: As part of the city’s plan for the downtown area, it is intended that midblock walkways be provided to increase pedestrian connectivity and overall livability downtown through the creation of an intricate pedestrian network. The city has adopted the Downtown Plan that includes a midblock walkway map and establishes a need for such walkways as the Downtown grows. Because the districts within the downtown area allow building heights that exceed those of other districts in the city, the requirement for a midblock walkway is considered to be necessary to alleviate pedestrian impacts on the public sidewalks by dispersing future use of the public sidewalks. This requirement implements the city’s Downtown Plan and provides visual relief from the additional height that is available in these zone districts when compared to the remainder of the city. All buildings constructed after the effective date hereof within the Downtown zoning districts shall conform to this officially adopted plan for midblock walkways, in addition to the following standards: 1. Any new development shall provide a midblock walkway if a midblock walkway on the subject property has been identified in a master plan that has been adopted by the city. 2. The following standards apply to the midblock walkway: a. The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. 59 b. The midblock walkway may be incorporated into the building provided it is open to the public. A sign shall be posted indicating that the public may use the walkway. c. Building encroachments into the midblock walkway are permitted if they include one or more of the following elements: (1) Colonnades; (2) Staircases; (3) Balconies: All balconies must be located at the third story or above; (4) Building overhangs and associated cantilever - These coverings may be between 9 and 14’ above the level of the sidewalk. They shall provide a minimum depth of coverage of six feet and project no closer to the curb than three feet; (5) Skybridge: A single skybridge is permitted. All skybridges must be located at the third, fourth, or fifth stories; and (6) Other architectural element(s) not listed above that offers refuge from weather and/or provide publicly accessible usable space. Illustration of Regulation 21A.31.010.E2 Midblock Walkways 1 The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. F. Modifications of Standards: A modification to the provisions of this chapter may be granted through the design review process, subject to conformance with the standards and procedures of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. 60 G. Midblock Street Development: Developments constructing midblock streets, either privately owned with a public easement or publicly dedicated, that are desired by an applicable master plan: 1. May transfer a portion or all of the above ground development square footage of the proposed new midblock street to other land within the proposed development. 2. May increase the height of the building on the remaining land within the development site to a height necessary to accommodate the development square footage of the proposed right of way that is being transferred. 3. Any proposal under this section shall be subject to conformance with the standards and procedures of Chapter 21A.59, “Design Review”, of this title. H. Parking: 1. Belowground Parking Facilities: No special design and setback restrictions shall apply to belowground parking facilities. 2. Landscape Requirements: Surface parking lots shall have a landscaped setback of at least 20’ and meet interior landscaped requirements as outlined in Chapter 21A.48 of this title. 3. Design Review Approval: A modification to the restrictions on parking lots and structures provisions of this section may be granted through the design review process, subject to conformance with the standards and procedures of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. Such conditional uses shall also be subject to urban design evaluation. 4. Parking structures shall conform to the requirements set forth in Chapter 21A.37 of this title. I. Outdoor Sales, Display and Storage: “Sales and display (outdoor)” and “storage and display (outdoor)”, is permitted for retail uses and the retail components of other permitted and conditional uses authorized in Section 21A.33.060 “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses in the Gateway District. These uses shall conform to the following: 1. Outdoor sales and display and outdoor storage may also be permitted when part of an authorized temporary use as established in Chapter 21A.42 of this title; 2. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not encroach into areas of required parking for longer than 30 days; 3. The outdoor permanent sales or display of merchandise shall not be located in any required yard area within the lot when the lot abuts a residential zoning district; 4. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not include the use of banners, pennants or strings of pennants. 61 21A.31.020: G-MU GATEWAY-MIXED USE DISTRICT: A. Purpose Statement: The G-MU Gateway-Mixed Use District is intended to implement the objectives of the adopted Downtown Plan and encourage the mixture of residential, commercial and assembly uses within an urban neighborhood atmosphere. The 200 South corridor is intended to encourage commercial development on an urban scale and the 500 West corridor is intended to be a primary residential corridor from North Temple to 400 South. Development in this district is intended to create an urban neighborhood that provides employment and economic development opportunities that are oriented toward the pedestrian with a strong emphasis on a safe and attractive streetscape. The standards are intended to achieve established objectives for urban and historic design, pedestrian amenities and land use regulation. B. Special Provisions: 1. Commercial Uses, 200 South: All buildings fronting 200 South shall have commercial uses that may include retail goods/service establishments, offices, restaurants, art galleries, motion picture theaters or performing arts facilities shall be provided on the first floor adjacent to the front or corner side lot line. The facades of such first floor shall be compatible and consistent with the associated retail or office portion of the building and other retail uses in the area. 2. Residential Units, 500 West: Buildings fronting on 500 West shall be required to have residential units occupying a minimum of 50% of the structure’s gross square footage. C. Building Height: The minimum building height shall be 75’ The maximum building height shall not exceed 180’. 1. Design Review: A modification to building height over ninety feet (90’) in height shall only be allowed if approved through the design review process, subject to conformance with the standards and procedures of Chapter 21A.59 of this title, and subject to compliance to the applicable master plan. D. All buildings shall be designed with a base that is differentiated from the remainder of the building. The base shall be between one and three stories in height, be visible from pedestrian view, and appropriately scaled to the surrounding contiguous historic buildings. The base shall include fenestration that distinguishes the lower from upper floors. Insets and/or projections are encouraged. The ground floor of all new buildings shall have a minimum floor to ceiling height of 16’. E. Yard Requirements: No minimum setback requirements. A maximum setback of 10’ is allowed for up to 30% of the building facade. 62 1. If provided, the yard must include one of the following elements: a. Seating at a ratio of at least one bench for every 500 square feet of yard space; or b. Landscaping that includes an increase of at least 25% in the total number of trees required to be planted on the site; or c. Awning or a similar form of weather protection that covers at least 5’ in width and length from all street-facing building entrances. 2. Regardless of the setback provided, doors shall be setback a minimum distance to allow the door to operate without swinging into a right of way or midblock walkway. 3. The planning director, in consultation with the transportation director, may modify this requirement to accommodate a wider sidewalk if the adjacent public sidewalk is less than 15’ wide and the resulting modification to the setback results in a more efficient public sidewalk. The planning director may waive this requirement for any addition, expansion, or intensification, which increases the floor area or parking requirement by less than 50% if the planning director finds the following: a. The architecture of the addition is compatible with the architecture of the original structure or the surrounding architecture, or b. The addition reduces the extent of the noncompliance of the existing building. 4. Exceptions to this requirement may be authorized through the design review process, subject to the requirements of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. 5. Ground floor residential uses shall have a minimum setback of 10’. This setback shall be incorporated into a private yard for the ground floor units. SECTION 7. Amending the Text of Section 21A.33.050. That Section 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.33.050: TABLE OF PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES FOR DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS: Legend: C = Conditional P = Permitted Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4 63 Accessory use, except those that are otherwise specifically regulated elsewhere in this title P P P P Adaptive reuse of a landmark site P P P P4 Alcohol: Bar establishment (indoor) P6 C6 C6 P6 Bar establishment (outdoor) P6 C6 C6 P6 Brewpub (indoor) P6 P6 P6 P6 Brewpub (outdoor) P6 P6 P6 P6 Tavern (indoor) P6 C6 C6 P6 Tavern (outdoor) P6 C6 C6 P6 Animal, veterinary office P P Antenna, communication tower P P P P Antenna, communication tower, exceeding the maximum building height C C C C Art gallery P P P P Artisan food production P14,18 P18 P18 P18 Bed and breakfast P P P P Bed and breakfast inn P P P P Bed and breakfast manor P P P P Bio-medical facility P17,18 P17,18 P17,18 P17,18 Blood donation center P Bus line station/terminal P7 P7 P7 P7 Bus line yard and repair facility P Car wash P3 Check cashing/payday loan business P5 Clinic (medical, dental) P P P P Commercial food preparation P18 P18 P18 P18 Community garden P P P P Convention center P Crematorium P P P Daycare center, adult P P P P Daycare center, child P P P P Daycare, nonregistered home daycare P12 P12 P12 P12 64 Daycare, registered home daycare or preschool P12 P12 P12 P12 Dwelling: Artists’ loft/studio P P P P Assisted living facility (large) P P P P Assisted living facility (limited capacity) P P P Assisted living facility (small) P P P P Congregate care facility (large) C C C C Congregate care facility (small) P P P P Group home (large) C C Group home (small) P P P P Multi-family P P P P Residential support (large) C C Residential support (small) C C Exhibition hall P Farmers’ market P Financial institution P P P P Financial institution with drive- through facility P8 P8 Funeral home P P P Gas station P P7 P7 Government facility C C C C Government facility requiring special design features for security purposes P7 P7 Heliport, accessory C C C Home occupation P13 P13 P13 P13 Homeless resource center C15 C15 Homeless shelter C15 C15 Hotel/motel P P P P Industrial assembly C18 C18 Laboratory, medical related P18 P18 P18 P18 Laundry, commercial P18 Library P P P P Limousine service P Mixed use development P P P P 65 Mobile food business (operation in the public right of way) P P P P Mobile food business (operation on private property) P P P P Mobile food court P P P P Municipal services uses including Ccity utility uses and police and fire stations P P P P Museum P P P P Office P P P P Office, publishing company P P P P Open space on lots less than 4 acres in size P7 P7 P7 P7 Park P P P P Parking, commercial C19 P19 C19 C19 Parking, off site P19 P19 P19 P19 Performing arts production facility P P P P Place of worship P11 P11 P11 P11 Radio, television station P P P Railroad, passenger station P P P P Reception center P P P P Recreation (indoor) P P P P Recreation (outdoor) P Research and development facility P18 P18 P18 P18 Restaurant P P P P Restaurant with drive-through facility P8 Retail goods establishment P P P P Retail service establishment P P P P Retail service establishment, upholstery shop P P Sales and display (outdoor) P P P P School: College or university P P P P K - 12 private P P K - 12 public P P Music conservatory P P P P Professional and vocational P P P P Seminary and religious institute P P P P 66 Small brewery C18 Social service mission and charity dining hall C C Stadium C C C Storage, self P16 P P Store: Department P P P Fashion oriented department P2 Mass merchandising P P P Pawnshop P Specialty P P P Superstore and hypermarket P Studio, art P P P P Technology facility P18 P18 P18 P18 Theater, live performance P9 P9 P9 P9 Theater, movie P P P P Utility, buildings or structure P1 P1 P1 P1 Utility, transmission wire, line, pipe or pole P1 P1 P1 P1 Vehicle: Automobile repair (major) P P7 P7 Automobile repair (minor) P P7 P7 Automobile sales/rental and service P10 P P10 Vending cart, private property P P P P Vending cart, public property Warehouse P18 Warehouse, accessory P P Wholesale distribution P18 Wireless telecommunications facility (see Section 21A.40.090, Table 21A.40.090.E of this title) Qualifying provisions: 1. Subject to conformance to the provisions in Subsection 21A.02.050.B of this title. 2. Uses allowed only within the boundaries and subject to the provisions of the Downtown Main Street Core Overlay District (Section 21A.34.110 of this title). 67 3. A car wash located within 165 feet (including streets) of a residential use shall not be allowed. 4. Building additions on lots less than 20,000 square feet for office uses may not exceed 50 percent of the building’s footprint. Building additions greater than 50 percent of the building’s footprint or new office building construction are subject to a design review (Chapter 21A.59 of this title). 5. No check cashing/payday loan business shall be located closer than 1/2 mile of other check cashing/payday loan businesses. 6. Subject to conformance with the provisions in Section 21A.36.300, “Alcohol Related Establishments”, of this title. 7. Subject to conformance with the provisions of Chapter 21A.59, “Design Review”, of this title. 8. Subject to conformance to the provisions in Section 21A.40.060 of this title for drive- through use regulations. 9. Prohibited within 1,000 feet of a single- or two-family zoning district. 10. Must be located in a fully enclosed building and entirely indoors. 11. If a place of worship is proposed to be located within 600 feet of a tavern, bar establishment, or brewpub, the place of worship must submit a written waiver of spacing requirement as a condition of approval. 12. Subject to Section 21A.36.130 of this title. 13. Allowed only within legal conforming single-family, duplex, and multi-family dwellings and subject to Section 21A.36.030 of this title. 14. Must contain retail component for on-site food sales. 15. Subject to conformance with the provisions of Section 21A.36.350 of this title. 16. Limited to basement/below ground levels only. Not allowed on the ground or upper levels of the building, with the exception of associated public leasing/office space. 17. Prohibited within 1/2 mile of a residential use if the facility produces hazardous or radioactive waste as defined by the Utah Department of Environmental Quality administrative rules. 18. Consult the water use and/or consumption limitations of Subsection 21A.33.010.D.1. 19. Parking lots, garages or parking structures, proposed as the only principal use on a property that has frontage on a public street that would result in a building demolition are prohibited subject to the provisions of Subsection 21A.30.010.F.3. SECTION 8. Amending the Text of Section 21A.37.020. That Section 21A.37.020 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Design Standards: Applicability), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.37.020: APPLICABILITY: 68 The design standards identified in this chapter apply to all properties in the zoning districts listed in Section 21A.37.060 of this chapter pursuant to the following: A. Change in Use: A change in use shall be exempt from this chapter, provided that it does not result in alterations of existing design elements regulated by the standards of this chapter. B. Additions: When an addition to an existing structure is made, only the addition is subject to this chapter, provided that no existing design element regulated by these standards is altered in other portions of the existing structure. C. Repair, Maintenance or Alterations: Structures may be repaired, maintained or altered, except that no such work shall create a noncompliance or increase the degree of an existing noncompliance. If a design element of an existing structure complies with this chapter, the design element shall not be altered such that the structure becomes noncompliant. D. Certificate of Appropriateness: All new construction, additions, exterior building work, structure work, and site work on property in an H Historic Preservation Overlay District or a landmark site remains subject to a certificate of appropriateness as required in Subsection 21A.34.020.E of this title. SECTION 9. Amending the Text of Section 21A.37.040. That Section 21A.37.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Design Standards: Modifications of Design Standards), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.37.040: MODIFICATIONS OF DESIGN STANDARDS: The planning director and/or planning commission may modify any of the design standards identified in this chapter subject to the requirements of Chapter 21A.59, “Design Review”, of this title. The applicant must demonstrate that the modification meets the intent for the specific design standards requested to be modified, the standards for design review and any adopted design guidelines that may apply. A. The planning director may approve, approve with modifications, deny or refer to the planning commission modifications to specific design standards when proposed as new construction, an addition or modification to the exterior of an existing structure, or a modification to an existing structure as authorized in Section 21A.59.040, Table 21A.59.040 or when authorized in the specific zoning district. 69 1. The director shall approve a request to modify a design standard if the director finds that the proposal complies with the purpose of the individual zoning district, the purpose of the individual design standards that are applicable to the project, the proposed modification is compatible with the development pattern of other buildings on the block face or on the block face on the opposite side of the street, and the project is compliant with the applicable design standards (Sections 21A.37.050 and 21A.37.060). 2. The director may approve a request to modify a design standard with conditions or modifications to the design if the director determines a modification is necessary to: a. Comply with the purpose of the base zoning district; b. Comply with the purpose of the applicable design standards of the base zoning; c. Achieve compatibility with the development pattern of other buildings on the block face or on the block face on the opposite side of the street; d. Achieve the applicable design review objectives; or e. Encourage the reuse of existing buildings when a modification to a noncomplying building results in the building becoming closer to complying with a specific design standard. 3. The director shall deny a request to modify a design standard if the design does not comply with the purpose of the base zoning district, the purpose of the applicable design standards or the applicable design review objectives and no modifications or conditions of approval can be applied that would make the design comply. 4. The director may forward a request to modify a design standard to the planning commission if the director finds that the request for modification is greater than allowed by this chapter, a person receiving notice of the proposed modification can demonstrate that the request will negatively impact their property, or at the request of the applicant if the director is required to deny the request as provided in this section. B. For properties subject to the H Historic Preservation Overlay District, the historic landmark commission may modify any of the design standards in this chapter as part of the review of the standards in Section 21A.34.020 of this title. SECTION 10. Amending the Text of Section 21A.37.050. That Section 21A.37.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Design Standards: Design Standards Defined), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.37.050: DESIGN STANDARDS DEFINED: 70 The design standards in this chapter are defined as follows. Each design standard includes a specific definition of the standard and may include a graphic that is intended to help further explain the standard; however, in cases where a conflict exists between the definition and the graphic, the definition shall take precedence. The table that follows (Section 21A.37.060) highlights the connection between each design standard and the zoning districts. It identifies whether a standard is required or not. Standards that are required are identified by an X or a number referencing the applicable standard. If there is a specific detail for the standard, it will also be identified in the table. A. Ground Floor Use and Visual Interest: This standard’s purpose is to increase the amount of active uses and/or visual interest on the ground floor of a building. Active uses are those that support the vibrancy and usability of the public realm adjacent to a building, and encourage walk-in traffic. There are two options for achieving this, one dealing solely with the amount of ground floor use, and the other combining a lesser amount of ground floor use with increased visual interest in the building facade’s design. The majority of the ground level facade of a building shall be placed parallel, and not at an angle, to the street. 1. Ground Floor Use Only: This option requires that a portion of the length of any street-facing building façade on the ground floor of a new principal building include a permitted use, conditional use, or an amenity space within a residential building that is only available for the residents of the building. The ground floor of all new buildings shall have a minimum floor to ceiling height of 16’ and shall promote an active pedestrian environment through inclusion of active uses that capture the attention of a passer-by. Active uses include retail establishments, retail services, civic spaces (theaters, museums, etc), restaurants, bars, art and craft studios, and other uses determined to be substantially similar by the planning director and/or planning commission. For buildings that are entirely residential, active uses may include ground floor residential units. The ground floor use shall not consist of spaces that discourage walk-in traffic, such as a residential mailroom, common room, back of house functions, or private business offices associated with an active use. Allowed uses shall occupy a minimum percentage of the length of the street facing facade according to Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. All portions of such ground floor spaces shall extend a minimum of 25’ into the building. Parking may be located behind these spaces. a. For single-family attached uses, the required use depth may be reduced to ten feet (10’). b. The TSA (Transit Station Area), R-MU-35 (Residential Mixed-Use), R-MU-45 (Residential Mixed-Use), FB-UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood), FB-UN3 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood), FBUN-SC (Form Based Urban Neighborhood Special Corridor Core), FBUN-SE (Form Based Urban 71 Neighborhood Special Corridor Edge), CSHBD (Sugar House Business District) are not subject to the 16’ minimum floor to ceiling height. c. For single-family or two-family uses, garages occupying up to 50% of the length of the ground floor building facade are exempt from this requirement. d. For all other uses, vehicle entry and exit ways necessary for access to parking are exempt from this requirement. Such accessways shall not exceed 30’ in width. Individual dwelling unit garages do not qualify for this exemption. e. Amenity space is defined as a portion of the public right of way adjacent to the sidewalk, outside of the pedestrian walking area, which can include streetscape elements, street furniture, landscaping, outdoor dining areas, and/or trees. It shall only be counted for up to 25% of the length of the building façade. For corner properties, each street facing building façade shall be allowed to have up to 25% of the required ground floor to include amenity space. This is applicable in districts where there are no front or side yard setback requirements. Amenity spaces are subject to any necessary encroachment agreements that may be required. f. Areas such as kitchens, storage, bicycle parking, and other areas that are not accessible to customers shall not be counted towards the requirement for ground floor use and visual interest. 2. Ground Floor Use and Visual Interest: This option allows for some flexibility in the amount of required ground floor use, but in return requires additional design requirements for the purpose of creating increased visual interest and pedestrian activity where the lower levels of buildings face streets or sidewalks. This option identifies a required percentage of ground floor space that must be an active use, and the percentage of the building which must provide visual interest. An applicant utilizing this option must proceed through the design review process, Chapter 21A.59), for review of the project for determination of the project’s compliance with those standards, and in addition, whether the design contributes to increased visual interest through a combination of increased building material variety, architectural features, facade changes, art, and colors; and, increased pedestrian activity through permeability between the building and the adjacent public realm using niches, bays, gateways, porches, colonnades, stairs or other similar features to facilitate pedestrian interaction with the building. \ 72 B. Building Materials: 1. All buildings which have been altered over 75% on the exterior facade shall comply with the material requirements detailed below. Buildings older than 50 years are exempt from this requirement if alterations are consistent with the existing architecture. 2. For the purpose of the requirements below, a durable material is defined as any material that has a manufacturer’s warranty of a minimum of 20 years or is a natural material such as stone or wood provided the wood is treated and maintained for exterior use. 3. Ground Floor Building Materials: Other than windows and doors, a minimum amount of the ground floor facade’s wall area of any street facing facade shall be clad in durable materials according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. Durable materials include stone, brick, masonry, textured or patterned concrete, fiber cement board or other material that includes a minimum manufacturer warranty of 20 years from color fading, weather, and local climate induced degradation of the material. Other materials may be used for the remainder of the ground floor facade adjacent to a street. Other materials proposed to satisfy the durable requirement may be approved at the discretion of the planning director if it is found that the proposed material is durable and is appropriate for the ground floor of a structure. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.A.2 Ground Floor Use and Visual Interest 1 Contribute to increased visual interest through a combination of increased building material variety, architectural features, facade changes, art, and colors. 2 Contribute to increased pedestrian activity through a clear visual relationship between the building and the adjacent public realm using niches, bays, gateways, porches, colonnades, stairs or other similar features. 73 4. Upper Floor Building Materials: Floors above the ground floor level shall include durable materials on a minimum amount of any street facing building facade of those additional floors according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. Windows and doors are not included in that minimum amount. Durable materials include stone, brick, masonry, textured or patterned concrete, and fiber cement board or other material that includes a minimum manufacturer warranty of 20 years from color fading, weather, and local climate induced degradation of the material. C. Glass: 1. Ground Floor Glass: The ground floor building elevation of all new buildings facing a street, and all new ground floor additions facing a street, shall have a minimum percentage of glass, as calculated between three feet and eight feet above grade according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. All ground floor glass shall allow unhampered and unobstructed visibility into the building for a depth of at least five feet, excluding any glass etching and window signs when installed and permitted in accordance with Chapter 21A.46, “Signs”, of this title. The planning director may approve a modification to ground floor glass requirements if the planning director finds: a. The requirement would negatively affect the historic character of an existing building; b. The requirement would negatively affect the structural stability of an existing building; or c. The ground level of the building is occupied by residential uses that face the street, in which case the specified minimum glass requirement may be reduced by 15%. 74 2. Upper Floor Glass: Above the first floor of any multi-story building, the surface area of the facade of each floor facing a street must contain a minimum percentage of glass according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. a. Reflective Glass: The maximum percentage of reflective glass, defined as glass with a coating that creates a mirror-like appearance, is allowed according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter, on both the ground floor and upper floor of buildings. D. Building Entrances: A building entrance is defined as an entrance to a building that includes a door and entry feature such as a recess or canopy that provides customers with direct access to the use. For the purpose of this provision, an operable building entrance shall be open and accessible during the hours that the business is open and comply with applicable ADA standards. At least one operable building entrance on the ground floor is required for every street facing facade. Additional operable building entrances shall be required, at a minimum, at each specified length of street facing building facade according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. The center of each additional entrance shall be located within six feet either direction of the specified location. Each ground floor nonresidential leasable space facing a street shall have an Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.C.1 Ground Floor Glass (References the measurements in Table D, D-1) 1 The ground floor building elevation of all new buildings facing a street, and all new ground floor additions facing a street, shall have a minimum percentage of glass as indicated in the associated tables in this chapter, between three feet and eight feet above grade. 75% 75 operable entrance facing that street and a walkway to the nearest sidewalk. Corner entrances, when facing a street and located at approximately a 45° angle to the two adjacent building facades (chamfered corner), may count as an entrance for both of the adjacent facades. E. Maximum Length of Blank Wall: The maximum length of any blank wall uninterrupted by windows, doors, art or architectural detailing at the ground floor level along any street facing facade shall be as specified according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. Changes in plane, texture, materials, scale of materials, patterns, art, or other architectural detailing are acceptable methods to create variety and scale. This shall include architectural features such as bay windows, recessed or projected entrances, windows, balconies, cornices, columns, or other similar architectural features. The architectural feature shall be either recessed a minimum of 12” or projected a minimum of 12”. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.D Building Entrances (References the measurements in Table D, D-1) 1 At least one operable building entrance on the ground floor is required for every street facing facade. Additional operable building entrances shall be required, at a minimum distance as indicated in the associated tables in this chapter. 76 F. Maximum Length of Street Facing Facades: This requirement sets the maximum length of a single street facing façade of a structure. The purpose of this is to have building massing that better responds to human scale to create a walkable pedestrian environment. No street facing building wall may be longer than specified along a street line according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. A minimum of 20’ is required between separate buildings when multiple buildings are placed on a single parcel according to Subsection 21A.36.010.B, “One Principal Building Per Lot”, of this title. The space between buildings shall include a pedestrian walkway at least five feet wide. G. Upper Floor Stepback: 1. The upper floor stepback for street facing facades is dependent on the height of the building according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. For buildings that are between 78’ to 104’, or between 6 and 8 stories, a minimum stepback of 10’ is required at least 25’ above grade. For buildings above 105’, or 8 stories, the step back shall be a minimum of 15’ from the property line. The stepback Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.E Maximum Length of Blank Wall (References the measurements in Table D, Downtown Districts) 1 The maximum length of any blank wall uninterrupted by windows, doors, art or architectural detailing at the ground floor level along any street facing façade shall be limited to the specified measurement indicated in the associated table in this chapter. 2 The architectural feature shall be either recessed a minimum of 12” or projected a minimum of 12”. 77 shall appear after the first two to five floors. In addition to these provisions, 20% of the entire building façade can meet the street at the lot line with no stepback. An alternative to this street facing facade stepback requirement may be utilized for buildings limited to 45’ or less in height by the zoning ordinance: those buildings may provide a 4’ minimum depth canopy, roof structure, or balcony that extends from the face of the building toward the street at a height of between 12’ and 15’ above the adjacent sidewalk. Such extension(s) shall extend horizontally parallel to the street for a minimum of 50% of the face of the building and may encroach into a setback as permitted per Section 21A.36.020, Table 21A.36.020.B, “Obstructions in Required Yards”, of this title. 2. Stepbacks are required for full floors above the height, according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter, measured from average finished grade that have facades facing single- or two-family residential districts with a permitted height that is 35’ or less, a public trail or public open space. The purpose of this Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.G1 Upper Floor Stepback 1 For buildings that are between 78’ to 104’, or between 6 and 8 stories, a minimum stepback of 10’ is required at least 25’ above grade. The stepback shall appear after the first 26’ to 65’, or 2 to 5 floors. In addition to these provisions, 20% of the entire building façade can meet the street at the lot line with no stepback. 2 For buildings above 104’, or 8 stories, the stepback shall be a minimum of 15’ from the property line. The stepback shall appear after the first 26’ to 65’, or 2 to 5 floors. In addition to these provisions, 20% of the entire building façade can meet the street at the lot line with no stepback. 78 provision is to reduce the impact that buildings over a certain height have on abutting properties when the abutting properties have a permitted height that is 35’ or less. 3. For street facing facades the first full floor, and all additional floors, above thirty feet (30’) in height from average finished grade shall be stepped back a minimum horizontal distance from the front line of building, according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. An alternative to this street facing facade step back requirement may be utilized for buildings limited to forty five feet (45’) or less in height by the zoning ordinance: those buildings may provide a four foot (4’) minimum depth canopy, roof structure, or balcony that extends from the face of the building toward the street at a height of between twelve feet (12’) and fifteen feet (15’) above the adjacent sidewalk. Such extension(s) shall extend horizontally parallel to the street for a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the face of the building and may encroach into a setback as permitted per Section 21A.36.020, Table 21A.36.020.B, “Obstructions in Required Yards”, of this title. 4. Floors rising above thirty feet (30’) in height shall be stepped back fifteen (15) horizontal feet from the building foundation at grade for building elevations that are adjacent to a public street, public trail, or public open space. This stepback does not apply to buildings that have balconies on floors rising above thirty feet (30’) in height. H. Exterior Lighting: All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed down to prevent light trespass onto adjacent properties. Exterior lighting shall not strobe, flash or flicker. I. Parking Lot Lighting: If a parking lot/structure is adjacent to a residential zoning district or land use, any poles for the parking lot/structure security lighting are limited to 16’ in height and the globe must be shielded and the lighting directed down to minimize light encroachment onto adjacent residential properties or into upper level residential units in multi-story buildings. Lightproof fencing is required adjacent to residential properties. J. Screening of Mechanical Equipment: All mechanical equipment for a building shall be screened from public view and sited to minimize their visibility and impact. Examples of such impact-minimizing siting include on the roof, enclosed or otherwise integrated into the architectural design of the building, or in a rear or side yard area subject to yard location restrictions found in Section 21A.36.020, Table 21A.36.020.B, “Obstructions in Required Yards”, of this title. K. Screening of Service Areas: Service areas, loading docks, refuse containers, utility meters, and similar areas shall be fully screened from public view. All screening enclosures viewable from the street shall be either incorporated into the building architecture or shall incorporate building materials and detailing compatible with the building being served. Waste and loading facilities are prohibited from being located on street-facing facades and shall be co-located and screened when possible. Exceptions to 79 this requirement may be approved by the planning director when the service provides power or some form of utilities in and around the surrounding area. Exemptions may also be approved through the site plan review process when a permit applicant demonstrates that it is not feasible to accommodate these activities on the block interior. If such activities are permitted adjacent to a public street, a visual screening design approved by the planning director shall be required. All screening devices shall be a minimum of one foot higher than the object being screened, and in the case of fences and/or masonry walls the height shall not exceed eight feet. Dumpsters must be located a minimum of 25’ from any building on an adjacent lot that contains a residential dwelling or be located inside of an enclosed building or structure. L. Ground Floor Residential Entrances for Dwellings with Individual Unit Entries: For the zoning districts listed in Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter, all attached dwellings including attached single-family dwellings, townhomes, row houses, multi-family developments with ground floor uses, and other similar housing types located on the ground floor shall have a primary entrance facing the street for each unit adjacent to a street. Units may have a primary entrance located on a courtyard, midblock walkway, or other similar area if the street facing facades also have a primary entrance. M. Parking Garages or Structures: The following standards shall apply to parking garages or structures whether stand alone or incorporated into a building: 1. Parking structures shall have an external skin designed to improve visual character when adjacent to a public street or other public space. Examples include heavy gauge metal screen, precast concrete panels; live green or landscaped walls, laminated or safety glass, decorative photovoltaic panels or match the building materials and character of the principal use. The planning director may approve other decorative materials not listed if the materials are in keeping with the decorative nature of the parking structure. 2. Facade elements shall align to parking levels and there shall be no sloped surfaces visible from a public street, public trail or public open space. 3. Internal circulation must be designed such that parking surfaces are level (or without any slopes) along all primary facades. All ramping between levels need to be placed along the secondary facade or to the center of the structure. Parking structures shall be designed to conceal the view of all parked cars and drive ramps from public spaces. 4. Elevator and stairs shall be highlighted architecturally so visitors can easily access these entry points both internally and externally. 80 5. Signage and wayfinding shall be integrated with the architecture of the parking structure and be architecturally compatible with the design. The entrances of public parking structures shall be clearly signed from public streets. 6. Interior garage lighting shall not produce glaring sources toward adjacent properties while providing safe and adequate lighting levels. The use of sensor dimmable LEDs and white stained ceilings are a good strategy to control light levels on site while improving energy efficiency. 7. Where a driveway crosses a public sidewalk, the driveway shall be a different color, texture, or paving material than the sidewalk to warn drivers of the possibility of pedestrians in the area. 8. The ground floor of all parking structures shall be wrapped along all street frontages with habitable space that is occupied by a use that is allowed in the zone as a permitted or conditional use. 9. Parking structures shall be designed to minimize vehicle noise and odors on the public realm. Venting and fan locations shall not be located next to public spaces and shall be located as far as possible from adjacent residential land uses. 10. If the parking structure is adjacent to a midblock walkway, pedestrian oriented elements shall be provided. These may include, but are not limited to seating and vegetation. N. Residential Character in RB District: 1. All roofs shall be pitched and of a hip or gable design except additions or expansions to existing buildings may be of the same roof design as the original building; 2. The remodeling of residential buildings for retail or office use shall be allowed only if the residential character of the exterior is maintained; 3. The front building elevation shall contain not more than 50% glass; 4. Signs shall conform with special sign regulations of Chapter 21A.46, “Signs”, of this title; 5. Building orientation shall be to the front or corner side yard; and 6. Building additions shall consist of materials, color and exterior building design consistent with the existing structure, unless the entire structure is resurfaced. O. Primary Entrance Design in SNB District: Primary entrance design shall consist of at least two of the following design elements at the primary entrance, so that the primary entrance is architecturally prominent and clearly visible from the abutting street. 1. Architectural details such as arches, friezes, tile work, canopies, or awnings. 2. Integral planters or wing walls that incorporate landscape or seating. 3. Enhanced exterior light fixtures such as wall sconces, light coves with concealed light sources, or decorative pedestal lights. 81 4. A repeating pattern of pilasters projecting from the facade wall by a minimum of eight inches or architectural or decorative columns. 5. Recessed entrances that include a minimum stepback of two feet from the primary facade and that include glass on the sidewalls. P. Streetscape Standards: These standards are required for landscaping that is within the public right of way. This is defined as the space between the private property line and the back of the curb. 1. Tree Canopy Coverage: No tree canopy shall cover less than the specified percentage according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. The defined percentage represents the canopy coverage at maturity. At installation, a minimum of 20% of all trees shall have a minimum caliper of 3”. 2. Minimum Vegetation Standards: The percentage of vegetation shall be no less than the specified amount according to Chapter 21A.48. The vegetation shall be planted in the public right of way. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.1 Tree Canopy Coverage 1 No tree canopy coverage shall cover less than the specified percentage according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.2 Minimum Vegetation Standards (References the measurements in Table D, Downtown Districts) 82 3. Street Trees: Street trees are required and subject to the regulations in Section 21A.48.080. In addition to those standards, for every new development, there shall be one street tree planted for every 30’ of street frontage. 4. Soil Volume: In order to promote street tree health and longevity, each tree shall have an adequate volume of soil. The soil volume surrounding a tree shall be 750ft3 to 1,000ft3 per tree, provided that this area is exclusive of the soils volume calculation for adjacent trees. The soil volume may be reduced if under ground utilities are present within the soil volume and the soil volume cannot be extended horizontally due to other obstructions or barriers. 1 The percentage of vegetation shall be no less than the specified percentage according to Chapter 21A.48. 2 Vegetation shall be planted in the public right of way. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.4 Soil Volume 1 The soil volume surrounding a tree shall be 750ft3 to 1,000ft3 per tree, provided that this area is exclusive of the soils volume calculation for adjacent trees. 83 5. Minimize Curb Cuts: As an effort to emphasize the public realm and encourage the safety of pedestrians, places where cars intersect the street shall be minimized. More specifically, curb cuts are encouraged to be concentrated at midblock and alley locations. The sidewalk material shall continue at ground level of the curb cuts. 6. Overhead Cover: Overhead covers are required at building entrances to provide weather protection to pedestrians and may encroach into a required yard as indicated in this section or into a public right of way with an approved encroachment agreement with the City. These coverings are required to be between 9 and 14’ above the level of the sidewalk. They shall also provide coverage with a minimum depth of 6’ and project no closer to the curb than 3’. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.5 Minimize Curb Cuts 1 Curb cuts are encouraged to be concentrated at midblock and alley locations. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.6 Overhead Cover 84 7. Streetscape Landscaping: All vegetation used along the streetscape must comply with the landscape requirements set forth in Chapter 21A.48. Q. Height Transitions: This measurement is applied to control the size and shape of the building envelope or portion thereof for such purposes as promoting transition in scale between buildings of different height, protecting access to sunlight, and/or limiting shadow and overlook on neighboring properties. A transition may be achieved by relating a building’s form to those that surround it through the following way. An angular plane of 45°, measured from the relevant property lines, should be used to provide a frame of reference for transition in scale from proposed high-rise buildings down to lower scale areas. The transition is required when development is directly adjacent to a zone with a height maximum of 35’ or less or adjacent to a local historic landmark site. These standards do not apply when a right of way separates the buildings. 1 The shade structure shall occur between 9 and 14’ above the level of the sidewalk. The shade shall provide a minimum coverage of 6’ in width. The cover shall project no closer than 3’ to the curb. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.Q Height Transitions 85 R. Horizontal articulation: Buildings shall be designed in such a way that they are appropriately scaled to the pedestrian at the street level. This scale is emphasized through authentic breaks in the façade. These breaks shall be articulated on the primary façade to the full height of the building to the cornice or to the full height of the building to the first horizontal setback. There may be a maximum spacing of 60’ for horizontal articulation. Horizontal articulation shall be achieved through one of the following architectural features: a. Bay windows: Bay windows shall be a minimum of two feet in depth and four feet in width; or b. Recessed entrances or windows: These shall be recessed a minimum of four feet in depth and six feet in width. Canopies or awnings are required at primary building entries; or c. Niches: Niches shall be a minimum of two feet in depth and four feet in width; or d. Openings for gates that are a minimum of four feet in width; or e. Porches measuring at least 48 square feet; or f. Colonnades that are a minimum of four feet in width. 1 An angular plane of 45°, measured from the relevant property lines, should be used to provide a frame of reference for transition in scale from proposed high-rise buildings down to lower scale areas. The transition is required when development is adjacent to a zone with a height maximum of 35’ or less or adjacent to a local historic landmark site. 86 SECTION 11. Amending the Text of Section 21A.37.060. That Section 21A.37.060 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Design Standards: Design Standards Required in Each Zoning District), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.37.060: DESIGN STANDARDS REQUIRED IN EACH ZONING DISTRICT: This section identifies each design standard and to which zoning districts the standard applies. If a box is checked (X), that standard is required. If a box is blank, it is not required. If a specific dimension or detail of a design standard differs among zoning districts or differs from the definition, it will be indicated within the box. In cases where a dimension in this table conflicts with a dimension in the definition, the dimensions listed in the table shall take precedence. 87 TABLE 21A.37.060 A. Residential Districts: Standard (Code Section) District RMF-3 0 RMF-3 5 RMF-4 5 RMF-7 5 RB R-MU-35 R-MU-45 R-M U RO Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) 75 75 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050B.3) 80 80 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.4) Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 60 60 40 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) 75 75 X Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 15 15 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G) 10 Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X X X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K.1) X X X Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) 88 Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) Residential character in RB District (21A.37.050.N) X B. Commercial Districts: Standard (Code Section) District SNB CN CB CS CC CSHB D CG1 TSA Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) 80 802 80 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) 60/25 70/20 60/25 Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.3) 80 70 90 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.4) 60 60 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 40 40 40 40 60 60 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 25 Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 0 Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 40 Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) X X X X X 40 40 40 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 15 15 15 20 15 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) 200 200 200 Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G.3) 15 X Façade height for required stepback (21A.37.050.G.2) 30 Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X X X X X X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X X X X X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) X X X X X X 89 Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) X Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) X Primary entrance design SNB District (21A.37.050.O) X Tree canopy coverage (%)(21A.37.050.P.1) 40 Minimum vegetation standards (%) (21A.37.050.P.2) X Street trees (21A.37.050.P.3) X Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.4) X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.5) X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.6) X Streetscape landscaping (21A.37.050.P.7) X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent buildings (21A.37.050.Q) Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) X Notes: 1. These standards only apply to the portion of the CG district within the boundaries of north of 900 S, south of 200 S, west 300 W and east of I-15. 2. Maximum width of the entrance shall be 35’ if the additional 20% is used for an entrance to a parking structure. 90 C. Manufacturing Districts: Standard (Code Section) District M-1 M-2 Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G) Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) 91 Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) Ground floor residential entrances (21A.37.050.L) Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) D. Downtown Districts: Standard (Code Section) District D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4 Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) 90 80 80 80 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) 80/10 70/20 70/20 70/20 Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) 70 80 701 70 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) 50 50 701 50 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 60 60 60 60 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 50 50 50 50 Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 0 0 0 0 Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 50 50 50 50 Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) 40 40 60 60 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 20 20 20 20 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) 150 200 150 150 Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G.1) X X X X Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X 92 Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X X X X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) X X X X Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) X2 X2 Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1) 40 40 40 40 Minimum vegetation standards (21A.37.050.P.2) X X X X Street trees (21A.37.050.P.3) X X X X Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.4) X X X X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.5) X X X X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.6) X X X X Streetscape landscaping (21A.37.050.P.7) X X X X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) X X X Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) X X X X Notes: 1. In the D-3 zoning district this percentage applies to all sides of the building, not just the front or street facing facade. 2. Parking structures shall be located behind principal buildings. This requirement may be modified so that structures may be located at least 15’ from front and corner side lot lines if a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the ground floor adjacent to a sidewalk is used for retail goods/service establishments, office and/or restaurant space to encourage pedestrian activity. The facades of the ground floor shall be designed to be compatible and consistent with the associated retail or office portion of the building and other retail uses in the area. 93 E. Gateway Districts: Standard (Code Section) District G-MU Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) 80 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) 70/20 Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) 70 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) 50 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 60 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 50 Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 0 Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 50 Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) 40 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) 150 Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G.1) X Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X1 Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X1 Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) X Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) 94 Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) X2 Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1) 40 Minimum vegetation standards (21A.37.050.P.2) X Street trees (21A.37.050.P.3) X Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.4) X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.5) X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.6) X Streetscape landscaping (21A.37.050.P.7) X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) X Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) X Notes: 1. Sidewalks and street lamps installed in the public right-of- way shall be of the type specified in the sidewalk/street lighting policy document adopted by the city. 2. Parking structures shall be located behind principal buildings. This requirement may be modified so that structures may be located at least 15’ from front and corner side lot lines if a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the ground floor adjacent to a sidewalk is used for retail goods/service establishments, office and/or restaurant space to encourage pedestrian activity. The facades of the ground floor shall be designed to be compatible and consistent with the associated retail or office portion of the building and other retail uses in the area. 95 F. Special Purpose Districts: Standard (Code Section) District RP BP FP AG AG-2 AG-5 AG-20 PL PL-2 I UI OS NOS MH EI MU Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 40-70 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) X Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) 96 Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G) Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) X Ground floor residential entrances (21A.37.050.L) Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1) Minimum vegetation standards (21A.37.050.P.2) Street trees (21A.37.050.P.3) Soil Volume (21A.37.050.P.4) Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.5) 97 Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.6) Streetscape landscaping (21A.37.050.P.7) Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) 98 G. Form Based Districts: Standard (Code Section) District FB-UN1 FB-UN2 FB-UN3 FB-SC FB-SE Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) 75 753 75 75 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.3) 70 70 70 70 70 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.4) 70 70 70 70 70 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 601 601 601 601 601 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 15 15 15 15 15 Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) 75 75 75 75 75 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 15 30 30 30 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) 200 200 200 200 200 Upper floor step back (feet) (21A.37.050.G.4) X X X X Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X X X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X X X 99 Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K.1) X X X2 Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) X X X Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) X X X X X Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1) 40 40 40 Minimum vegetation standards (21A.37.050.P.2) X X X Street trees (21A.37.050.P.3) X X X X X Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.4) X X X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.5) X X X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.6) Streetscape landscaping (21A.37.050.P.7) X X X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) X X X Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) X X X Notes: 1. This may be reduced to twenty percent (20%) if the ground floor is within one of the following building types: urban house, two-family, cottage, and row house. 2. Except where specifically authorized by the zone. 3. For buildings with street facing facades over 100' in length, a minimum of 30% of the façade length shall be an “active use” as defined in Subsection 21A.37.050.A.1. Except for the rowhouse building form, residential units shall not count as an “active use” toward the 30% minimum. 100 SECTION 12. Amending the Text of Section 21A.44.060. That Section 21A.44.060 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Off Street Parking, Mobility and Loading), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.44.060: PARKING LOCATION AND DESIGN: All required parking areas shall be located and designed in accordance with the standards in this Chapter 21A.44: Off Street Parking, Mobility, and Loading and the standards in the Off Street Parking Standards Manual. Modifications to the standards of this Section 21A.44.060 may be granted through the design review process, subject to conformance with the standards and procedures of Chapter 21A.59: Design Review. A. Generally: 1. Parking Located on Same Lot as Use or Building Served: All parking spaces required to serve buildings or uses erected or established after the effective date of this ordinance shall be located on the same lot as the building or use served, unless otherwise allowed pursuant to Subsection 21A.44.060.A.4, “Off-Site Parking Permitted”. 2. Biodetention and Landscape Islands in General and Neighborhood Center Contexts: For parking lots with one hundred (100) or more parking spaces in the General Context and Neighborhood Center Context areas, parking lot islands or biodetention areas shall be provided on the interior of the parking lot to help direct traffic flow and to provide landscaped areas within such lots. 3. Parking Location and Setbacks: All parking shall comply with the parking restrictions within yards pursuant to Table 21A.44.060-A, “Parking Location and Setback Requirements“. TABLE 21A.44.060-A: PARKING LOCATION AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS: N = parking prohibited between lot line and front line of the principal building Zoning District Front Lot Line Corner Side Lot Line Interior Side Lot Line Rear Lot Line GENERAL CONTEXT Residential (FR Districts, RB, RMF, RO) FR N Parking in driveways that comply with all applicable city standards is exempt 6 ft. R-1, R-2, SR-1, 0 ft. 101 SR-2 from this restriction. 0 ft. RMF-30 N 0 ft.; or 10 ft. when abutting any 1-2 family residential district RMF-35, RMF- 45, RMF-75, RO 0 ft.; or 10 ft. when abutting any 1-2 family residential district. Limited to 1 side yard except for single- family attached lots. Commercial and Manufacturing (CC, CS, CG, M-1, M-2, SNB) CC 15 ft. 0 ft.; or 7 ft. when abutting any residential district CS 0 ft.; or 15 ft. when abutting any residential district CG N. See also Subsection 21A.26.070.I M-1 15 ft. M-2 0 ft.; or 50 ft. when abutting any residential district Special Purpose Districts A 0 ft. 0 ft. AG, AG-2, AG- 5, AG-20 N BP 8 ft.; or 30 ft. when abutting any residential district EI 10 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. 20 ft. 102 FP 20 ft. 6 ft. 0 ft. I 0 ft.; or 15 ft. when abutting any residential district MH 0 ft. OS 30 ft. 10 ft. PL 0 ft.; or 10 ft. when abutting any residential district PL-2 20 ft. RP 30 ft. 8 ft.; or 30 ft. when abutting any residential district NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER CONTEXT CB , CN, SNB N 0 ft.; or 7 ft. when abutting any 1-2 family residential district R-MU-35, R- MU-45 Surface Parking: N Parking Structures: 45’ or located behind principal building Limited to 1 side yard, 0 ft.; or 10 ft. when abutting any 1-2 family residential district 0 ft.; or 10 ft. when abutting any 1-2 family residential district RB, SR-3, FB- UN1, FB-SE N 0 ft. URBAN CENTER CONTEXT CSHBD1 N 0 ft.; or 7 ft. when abutting any residential district CSHBD2 0 ft.; or 7 ft. when abutting any 1-2 family residential district D-2 Surface Parking: N Surface parking must be located behind the principal structure and comply with other requirements of Subsection 0 ft. 103 21A.30.010.F Parking Structures: N MU Surface Parking: 25 ft. or located behind principal structure Parking Structures: 45 ft. or located behind principal structure 0 ft.; limited to 1 side yard 0 ft. TSA-T See Subsection 21A.44.060.B.2 0 ft. TRANSIT CONTEXT D-1 See Subsection 21A.44.060.B.1 D-3 D-4 See Subsections 21A.44.060.B.1, 21A.30.010.F and 21A.31.010.H 0 ft. G-MU FB-UN2, FB- UN3, FB-SC N TSA-C See Subsection 21A.44.060.B.2 R-MU Surface Parking: 30 ft. Parking Structures: 45 ft. or located behind principal structure 0 ft.; or 10 ft. when abutting any 1-2 family residential district Surface parking at least 30 ft. from front lot line. 0 ft.; or 10 ft. when abutting any 1-2 family residential district UI 0 ft; Hospitals: 30 ft. 0 ft.; or 15 ft. when abutting any 1-2 family residential district; Hospitals: 10 ft. 0 ft.; or 15 ft. when abutting any 1-2 family residential district; Hospitals: 10 ft. 104 4. Off-Site Parking Permitted: When allowed as either a permitted or conditional use per Chapter 21A.33, “Land Use Tables”, off-site parking facilities may be used to satisfy the requirements of this chapter and shall comply with the following standards: a. Maximum Distance of Off-Site Parking: Off-site parking shall be located according to the distance established in Table 21A.44.060-B, “Maximum Distances for Off-Site Parking“ (measured in a straight line from the property boundary of the principal use for which the parking serves to the closest point of the parking area). Table 21A.44.060-B: Maximum Distances for Off-Site Parking: Context Maximum Distance to Off-Site Parking Neighborhood Center 600 ft. General Legal Nonconforming Use in Residential District Urban Center 1,200 ft. Transit 1,000 ft. b. Documentation Required: (1) The owners of record involved in an off-site parking arrangement shall submit written documentation of the continued availability of the off-site parking arrangement to the planning director for review. (2) The planning director shall approve the off-site parking arrangement if the director determines the location meets the standards of this section. No zoning or use approval shall be issued until the director has approved the off-site parking arrangement and the documentation has been recorded in the office of the Salt Lake County Recorder. (3) If the off-site parking arrangement is later terminated or modified and the planning director determines that the termination or modification has resulted in traffic congestion, overflow parking in residential neighborhoods, or threats to pedestrian, bicycle, or vehicle safety, the property owners of the uses for which the off-site parking was provided may be held in violation of this chapter. 105 5. Circulation Plan Required: Any application for a building permit shall include a site plan, drawn to scale, and fully dimensioned, showing any off street parking or loading facilities to be provided in compliance with this title. A tabulation of the number of off street vehicle and bicycle parking, loading, and stacking spaces required by this chapter shall appear in a conspicuous place on the plan. 6. Driveways and Access: a. Compliance with Other Adopted Regulations: (1) Parking lots shall be designed in compliance with applicable city codes, ordinances, and standards, including but not limited to Title 12 of this code: Vehicles and Traffic and the Off Street Parking Standards Manual to the maximum degree practicable, with respect to: (a) Minimum distances between curb cuts; (b) Proximity of curb cuts to intersections; (c) Provisions for shared driveways; (d) Location, quantity and design of landscaped islands; and (e) Design of parking lot interior circulation system. (2) Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection 21A.44.060.A.6.a(1) above, relocation of a driveway for a single-family, two-family, or twin home residence in any zoning district shall only be required when the residence is replaced, and shall not be required when the residence is expanded or renovated in compliance with the city code. b. Access Standards: Access to all parking facilities shall comply with the following standards: (1) To the maximum extent practicable, all off street parking facilities shall be designed with vehicular access to a street or alley that will least interfere with automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic movement. (2) Parking facilities in excess of five (5) spaces that access a public street shall be designed to allow vehicles to enter and exit the lot in a forward direction. (3) Parking facilities on lots with less than one hundred feet (100’) of street frontage shall have only one curb cut, and lots with one hundred feet (100’) of street frontage or more shall be limited to two curb cuts, unless the transportation director determines that additional curb cuts are necessary to ensure pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle safety or to comply with the fire code. 106 Public safety uses shall be exempt from limitations on curb cuts. (4) All vehicular access roads/driveways shall be surfaced as required in accordance with Subsection 21A.44.060.A.8, “Surface Materials”. c. Driveway Standards: All driveways shall comply with the following standards: (1) Driveway Location in Residential Zoning Districts: With the exception of legal shared driveways, driveways shall be at least twenty feet (20’) from street corner property lines and five feet (5’) from any public utility infrastructure such as power poles, fire hydrants, and water meters. Except for entrance and exit driveways leading to approved parking areas, no curb cuts or driveways are permitted. (2) Driveway Widths: All driveways serving residential uses shall be a minimum eight feet wide and shall comply with the standards for maximum driveway widths listed in Table 21A.44.060-C, “Minimum and Maximum Driveway Width“. TABLE 21A.44.060-C: MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM DRIVEWAY WIDTH: Zoning District Minimum Driveway Width (in front and corner side yard) Maximum Driveway Width* (in front and corner side yard) SR-1, SR-2 and SR-3 8 ft. 22 ft. MH 8 ft. 16 ft. Other Residential Zoning Districts 8 ft. 30 ft. M-1 and M-2 12 ft. single lane and 24 ft. for two-way 50 ft. Other Non-Residential Zoning Districts 12 ft. single lane and 24 ft. for two-way 30 ft. * Maximum width is for all driveways combined when more than one driveway is provided (3) Shared Driveways: Shared driveways, where two or more properties share one driveway access, may be permitted if the transportation director determines that the design and location of the shared driveway access will not create adverse impacts on traffic congestion or public safety. 107 (4) Driveway Surface: All driveways providing access to parking facilities shall be improved and maintained pursuant to the standards in the Off Street Parking Standards Manual. 7. Minimum Dimensional Standards: All parking spaces shall comply with the dimensional standards in the Off Street Parking Standards Manual. 8. Surface Materials: All parking spaces shall comply with the standards for surfacing of access, driving, and parking surfacing in the Off Street Parking Standards Manual. 9. Grading and Stormwater Management: All surface parking areas shall comply with city grading and stormwater management standards and shall be reviewed for best management practices by Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities. Refer to the Salt Lake City Stormwater Master Plan, Storm Drainage Manual, and Green Infrastructure Toolbox for additional information. 10. Sight Distance Triangles: All driveways and intersections shall comply with the sight distance triangle standards as defined in the Off Street Parking Standards Manual. 11. Landscaping and Screening: All parking areas and facilities shall comply with the landscaping and screening standards in Chapter 21A.48, “Landscaping and Buffers”. 12. Lighting: Where a parking area or parking lot is illuminated, the light source shall be shielded so that the light source is not directly visible from any abutting property or abutting private or public street. 13. Signs: All signs in parking areas or related to parking facilities shall comply with Chapter 21A.46, “Signs”, and applicable provisions of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). 14. Pedestrian Walkways: a. Surface parking lots with between twenty-five (25) and one hundred (100) parking spaces shall provide a pedestrian walkway or sidewalk through the parking lot to the primary entrance of the principal building. Pedestrian walkways shall be identified by a change in color, material, surface texture, or grade elevation from surrounding driving surfaces. b. Parking lots with more than one hundred (100) parking spaces shall provide: (1) One or more grade-separated pedestrian walkway(s), at least five feet (5’) in width, and located in an area that is not a driving surface, leading from the farthest row of parking spaces to the primary entrance of the principal building. 108 (2) Vehicles shall not overhang the pedestrian walkway(s). (3) Where the walkway(s) crosses a drive aisle, pedestrian walkway(s) shall be identified by a change in color, material, surface texture, or grade elevation from surrounding driving surfaces. (4) One pedestrian walkway meeting these standards shall be provided for each one hundred (100) parking spaces provided on site or part thereof, after the first one hundred (100) parking spaces. 15. Parking Garages: The following standards shall apply to all above-ground parking garages except those located in the FB zones subject to Subsection 21A.27.030.C.4, whether freestanding or incorporated into a building: a. Each façade or a parking garage adjacent to a public street or public space shall have an external skin designed to conceal the view of all parked cars. Examples include heavy gauge metal screen, precast concrete panels, live green or landscaped walls, laminated or safety glass, or decorative photovoltaic panels. b. No horizontal length of the parking garage façade shall extend longer than 40 feet without the inclusion of architectural elements such as decorative grillwork, louvers, translucent screens, alternating building materials, and other external features to avoid visual monotony. Facade elements shall align with parking levels. c. Internal circulation shall allow parking surfaces to be level (without any slope) along each parking garage facade adjacent to a public street or public space. All ramps between levels shall be located along building facades that are not adjacent to a public street or public space, or shall be located internally so that they are not visible from adjacent public streets or public spaces. d. The location of elevators and stairs shall be highlighted through the use of architectural features or changes in façade colors, textures, or materials so that visitors can easily identify these entry points. e. Interior parking garage lighting shall not produce glaring sources toward adjacent properties while providing safe and adequate lighting levels. The use of sensor dimmable LEDs and white stained ceilings are recommended to control light levels on-site while improving energy efficiency. f. In the Urban Center Context and Transit Context areas, the street-level facades of all parking garages shall be designed to meet applicable building code standards for habitable space to allow at least one permitted or conditional use, other than parking, to be located where the parking garage is located. 109 g. Vent and fan locations shall not be located on parking garage facades facing public streets or public spaces, or adjacent to residential uses, to the greatest extent practicable. 16. Tandem Parking: Where more than one parking space is required to be provided for a residential dwelling unit, the parking spaces may be designed as tandem parking spaces, provided that: a. No more than two required spaces may be included in the tandem parking layout; and b. Each set of two tandem parking spaces shall be designated for a specific residential unit. 17. Cross-Access Between Adjacent Uses: The transportation director may require that access to one or more lots be through shared access points or cross-access through adjacent parcels when the transportation director determines that individual access to abutting parcels or limited distance between access points will create traffic safety hazards due to traffic levels on adjacent streets or nearby intersections. Such a determination shall be consistent with requirements of state law regarding property access from public streets. Required cross- access agreements shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder’s Office. B. Zone Specific Location and Design Standards: 1. D-1, D-3, D-4, and G-MU Zoning Districts: The following regulations shall apply to surface or above-ground parking facilities. No special design and setback restrictions shall apply to below-ground parking facilities. a. Above-ground parking facilities located within the block corner areas and on Main Street, shall be located behind principal buildings and: (1) All above-ground parking facilities that front a street shall contain uses other than parking along the entire length of the building façade and along all stories or levels of the building. (2) Vehicle access to parking shall be located to the side of the building or as far from the street corner as possible unless further restricted by this title. b. Parking garages shall meet the following: (1) Retail goods/service establishments, offices and/or restaurants shall be provided on the first floor adjacent to the front or corner side lot line. The facades of such first floors shall be compatible and consistent with the associated retail or office portion of the building and other retail uses in the area. (2) Levels of parking above the first level facing the front or corner side lot line 110 shall have floors and/or facades that are horizontal, not sloped. (3) Landscape Requirements: Surface parking lots, where allowed shall have a minimum landscaped setback of fifteen feet (15’) and shall meet interior parking lot landscaping requirements as outlined in Chapter 21A.48, “Landscaping and Buffers”. 2. TSA Transit Station Area District: New uses and development or redevelopment within the TSA Transit Station Area District shall comply with the following standards. a. Surface Parking on Corner Properties: On corner properties, surface parking lots shall be located behind principal buildings or at least sixty feet (60’) from the intersection of the front and corner side lot lines. b. Surface Parking in the Core Area: Surface parking lots in the core area are required to be located behind or to the side of the principal building. (1) When located to the side of a building, the parking lot shall be: (a) Set back a minimum of thirty feet (30’) from a property line adjacent to a public street. The area between the parking lot and the property line adjacent to a public street shall be landscaped or activated with outdoor dining, plazas, or similar features; (b) Screened with a landscaped hedge or wall that is at least thirty-six inches (36”) above grade and no taller than forty-two inches (42”) above grade. Landscaping berms are not permitted; and (c) No wider than what is required for two rows of parking and one drive aisle as provided in the Off Street Parking Standards Manual. (2) Unless a second driveway is necessary to comply with the fire code, a maximum of one driveway and drive aisle shall be permitted per street frontage. The access point shall be located a minimum of one hundred feet (100’) from the intersection of the front and corner side lot lines. If the front or corner side lot line is less than one hundred feet (100’) in length, then the edge of the drive approach shall be located within twenty feet (20’) of the side or rear property line. c. Surface Parking in the Transition Area: (1) Surface parking lots in the transition area are required to be located behind the principal building or to the side of a principal building. (2) When located to the side of a principal building, the parking lot shall be: 111 (a) Set back so that no portion of the parking area (other than the driveway) shall be closer to the street than the front wall setback of the building. In cases where the front wall of the building is located within five feet (5’) of a property line adjacent to a street, the parking lot shall be set back a minimum of eight feet (8’). The space between the parking lot and the property line adjacent to a street shall be landscaped or activated with outdoor dining, plazas, or similar features; and (b) Screened with a landscaped hedge or wall that is at least thirty-six inches (36”) above grade and no taller than forty-two inches (42”) above grade. Landscaped berms are not permitted. d. Off street parking for police services are exempt from landscape setback dimensions when off street parking is necessary for a police substation located in an existing building. This exemption permits parking for emergency vehicles when the landscape setback also fulfills any requirement for open space area on the property. The extent of the exemption shall be the minimum necessary to accommodate the necessary parking. If the police substation use vacates the space, the landscaping that was removed, if any, shall be restored in a manner that complies with the applicable regulations in place at the time the use ceases. C. Recreational Vehicle Parking: 1. Generally: a. Recreational vehicle parking spaces shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, required off street vehicle parking spaces. b. Recreational vehicles shall not be used for storage of goods, materials, or equipment other than those that are customarily associated with the recreational vehicle. c. All recreational vehicles shall be stored in a safe and secure manner. Any tie downs, tarpaulins, or ropes shall be secured from flapping in windy conditions. d. Recreational vehicles shall not be occupied as a dwelling while parked on the property. e. Recreational vehicle parking is permitted in any enclosed structure conforming to building code and zoning requirements for the zoning district in which it is located. f. Recreational vehicle parking outside of an approved enclosed structure shall be permitted for each residence and shall be limited to one motor home or travel trailer and a total of two recreational vehicles of any type. 112 g. Recreational vehicle parking outside of an enclosed structure shall comply with the standards in this section. 2. Front Yard Parking: Recreational vehicle parking is prohibited in any required or provided front yard. 3. Rear Yard Parking: Recreational vehicles may be parked in the rear yard when they are on a hard surfaced pad compliant with surfacing standards in the Off Street Parking Standards Manual and with access provided by either a hard surfaced driveway, hard surfaced drive strips or an access drive constructed of turf block materials with an irrigation system. 4. Side Yard Parking: Recreational vehicle parking in side yards shall be allowed only when topographical factors, the existence of mature trees, or the existence of properly permitted and constructed structures prohibit access to the rear yard. The existence of a fence or other structure that is not part of a building shall not constitute a lack of rear yard access. Any recreational vehicle parking area in a side yard shall: a. Be on a hard surface compliant with the Off Street Parking Standards Manual; b. Be accessed via a driveway compliant with driveway standards of this chapter; c. Not obstruct access to other required parking for the use. SECTION 13. Amending the Text of Chapter 21A.59. That Chapter 21A.59 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Design Review), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: CHAPTER 21A.59 DESIGN REVIEW SECTION: 21A.59.010: Purpose Statement 21A.59.020: Authority 21A.59.030: Design Review Process 21A.59.040: Scope of Modifications Authorized 21A.59.045: Design Review Standards Applicability 21A.59.050: Standards for Design Review 21A.59.060: Time Limit on Approved Applications for Design Review 21A.59.070: Effect of Approval of Applications for Design Review 21A.59.080: Modifications to Approved Design Review Plans 21A.59.010: PURPOSE STATEMENT: 113 The purpose of the design review chapter is to: a) establish a process and standards of review for minor modifications to applicable design standards, and b) ensure high quality outcomes for larger developments that have a significant impact on the city. The intent of the process to review applications for minor modifications to applicable design standards is to allow some flexibility in how the design standards are administered by recognizing that this title cannot anticipate all development issues that may arise. The intent of the process to review larger developments is to verify new developments are compatible with their surroundings, impacts to public infrastructure and public spaces are addressed, and that new development helps achieve development goals outlined in the adopted master plans of the city as identified in the purpose statements of each zoning district. 21A.59.020: AUTHORITY: Design review shall be required pursuant to the provisions of this chapter for developments and alternate building and site design features as specified within individual zoning districts before building permits may be issued. A. Administrative Review: The planning director may approve, approve with modifications, deny or refer to the planning commission modifications to specific design standards when proposed as new construction, an addition or modification to the exterior of an existing structure, or a modification to an existing structure as authorized in Section 21A.59.040, Table 21A.59.040 of this chapter or when authorized in the specific zoning district. 1. The director shall approve a request to modify a design standard if the director finds that the proposal complies with the purpose of the individual zoning district, the purpose of the individual design standards that are applicable to the project, the proposed modification is compatible with the development pattern of other buildings on the block face or on the block face on the opposite side of the street, and the project is compliant with the applicable design review objectives (Section 21A.59.050 of this chapter). 2. The director may approve a request to modify a design standard with conditions or modifications to the design if the director determines a modification is necessary to comply with the purpose of the base zoning district, the purpose of the applicable design standards of the base zoning, to achieve compatibility with the development pattern of other buildings on the block face or on the block face on the opposite side of the street, or to achieve the applicable design review objectives. 3. The director shall deny a request to modify a design standard if the design does not comply with the purpose of the base zoning district, the purpose of the applicable design standards or the applicable design review objectives and no modifications or conditions of approval can be applied that would make the design comply. 4. The director may forward a request to modify a design standard to the planning commission if the director finds that the request for modification is greater than allowed by this chapter, a person receiving notice of the proposed modification can 114 demonstrate that the request will negatively impact their property, or at the request of the applicant if the director is required to deny the request as provided in this section. B. Planning Commission Review: The following types of applications shall be reviewed by the planning commission. If an application for design review is not listed below, it shall be eligible for administrative review as outlined in Subsection A of this section: 1. All projects where planning commission review is required in the specific zoning district. 2. All projects that include a request for additional building height or a reduction to a minimum height requirement; 3. All projects that request additional square footage when authorized in the specific zoning district; 4. All projects that have applied for a modification of base zoning design standards but could not be approved administratively because they exceed limits identified in Section 21A.59.040, Table 21A.59.040 of this chapter. 5. Projects in the TSA Transit Station Area District that have a development score that requires planning commission review and approval. C. Planning Commission Decisions: When reviewing design review applications, the planning commission may take any of the following actions: 1. The commission shall approve a project if it finds that the proposal complies with the purpose of the zoning district and applicable overlay district(s), the purpose of the individual design standards that are applicable to the project, and the project is compliant with the applicable design review objectives found in this chapter. 2. The commission may approve a project with conditions or modifications to the design if it determines a modification is necessary to comply with the purpose of the base zoning district, the purpose of the applicable design standards of the base zoning, or the applicable design review objectives. 3. The commission shall deny the design of a project if the design does not comply with the purpose of the base zoning district, the purpose of the applicable design standards or the applicable design review objectives and no modifications or conditions of approval can be applied that would make the design comply. D. H Historic Preservation Overlay District: Modifications to design standards for properties within an H Historic Preservation Overlay District are subject to the processes and applicable standards outlined in Section 21A.34.020 of this title and not this chapter. 21A.59.030: DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS: A. Presubmittal Meeting: A presubmittal meeting with planning staff is recommended prior to submitting an application for design review to ensure a detailed understanding of the application submission requirements and design review process. 115 B. Complete Application: The design review application is considered complete when it includes all of the following: 1. All of the application information required for site plan review as identified in Chapter 21A.58 of this title. 2. Photos showing the facades of adjacent development, trees on the site, general streetscape character, and views to and from the site. 3. Demonstration of compliance with the purpose of the individual zoning district in written narrative and graphic images. 4. Demonstration of compliance with the purpose of the applicable design standards of the individual zoning district in written narrative, graphic images, and relevant calculations. 5. Demonstration of compliance with the applicable design review objectives (Section 21A.59.060 of this chapter) in written narrative, graphics, images, and relevant calculations. 6. The zoning administrator may waive a submittal requirement if it is not necessary in order to determine if a request for a modification to a design standard complies with the standards of review. C. Public Notification and Engagement: 1. Notice of Application for Administrative Review: Prior to the approval of an administrative decision for a modification to a specific design standard, the Pplanning director shall provide written notice as provided in Chapter 21A.10 of this title. 2. Required Notice for Planning Commission Review: a. Applications subject to planning commission review of this chapter are subject to notification requirements of Chapter 2.60 of this code. b. Any required public hearing is subject to the public hearing notice requirements found in Chapter 21A.10 of this title. 21A.59.040: SCOPE OF MODIFICATIONS AUTHORIZED: A. The authority of the planning director through the design review process shall be limited to modification of the specific element referenced within each zoning district. For planning director review, the design standards of the applicable zoning district (see Chapter 21A.37, “Design Standards”, of this title), may be modified according to the following table. TABLE 21A.59.040 116 Design Standards Primary Modification Allowed Secondary Modification Allowed A. Ground Floor Use and Visual Interest: 1. Ground floor use only Length: 10% Depth: 20% 2. Ground floor use and visual interest planning commission only B. Building Materials: 1. Ground floor building materials planning commission only 2. Upper floor building materials planning commission only C. Glass: 1. Ground floor glass 10% 2. Upper floor glass 10% D. Building Entrances 10% E. Maximum Length of Blank Wall 10% F. Maximum Length of Street- Facing Facades 10% G. Upper Floor Stepback: 1. For street facing facades 20% 2. For facades facing single- or two- family residential districts planning commission only B. The planning commission may consider modifications that exceed allowances listed in this section or any other design standard modification authorized in the base zoning district or Chapter 21A.37 of this title. 21A.59.045: DESIGN REVIEW STANDARDS APPLICABILITY: A. Design Review applications shall be reviewed for compliance with the design review standards of Section 21A.59.050, as follows: 1. General Modification Requests: Applications to modify a design standard in Chapter 21A.37, or other zoning standard specifically authorized for modification through design review, shall be reviewed for compliance with the design review standards that are directly related to the purpose of the associated regulation requested for modification. 117 2. Additional Height or Square Footage Requests: Applications required to go through design review due to a height or square footage regulation shall be reviewed for compliance with all design review standards. 3. Transit Station Area Requests: For properties in a Transit Station Area District, applications required to go through design review due to not meeting the minimum points for administrative approval shall be reviewed for compliance with all design review standards. 4. All Other Requests: Any application not covered by Subsections 1 through 3 above, shall be subject to review for compliance with all design review standards. B. Exception: For those applications required to be reviewed against all design review standards, if an application complies with a standard in the base zoning district or with an applicable requirement in Chapter 21A.37 of this title, and that standard is directly related to a standard found in this section, the planning commission shall find that application complies with the specific standard for design review found in this section. 1. If there is no directly related zoning district standard or applicable requirement in Chapter 21A.37 of this title related to the design review standard, then the design review standard applies, and the commission shall not by default make the above finding. C. Alternatives: An applicant may propose an alternative to a standard for design review provided the proposal is consistent with the intent of the standard for design review. 21A.59.050: STANDARDS FOR DESIGN REVIEW: A. Any new development shall comply with the intent of the purpose statement of the zoning district and specific design regulations found within the zoning district in which the project is located as well as the city’s adopted “urban design element” and adopted master plan policies and design guidelines governing the specific area of the proposed development. B. Development shall be primarily oriented to the sidewalk, not an interior courtyard or parking lot. 1. Primary entrances shall face the public sidewalk (secondary entrances can face a parking lot). 2. Building(s) shall be sited close to the public sidewalk, following and responding to the desired development patterns of the neighborhood. 3. Parking shall be located within, behind, or to the side of buildings. C. Building facades shall include detailing and glass in sufficient quantities to facilitate pedestrian interest and interaction. 118 1. Locate active ground floor uses at or near the public sidewalk. 2. Maximize transparency of the street facing facades by prohibiting covering the ground floor glass with reflective treatments, interior walls, and other similar features that prevent passers-by from seeing inside of the building for non-residential uses. 3. Use or reinterpret traditional storefront elements like sign bands, clerestory glazing, articulation, and architectural detail at window transitions. 4. Locate outdoor dining patios, courtyards, plazas, habitable landscaped yards, and open spaces so that they have a direct visual connection to the street and outdoor spaces. D. Large building masses shall be divided into heights and sizes that relate to human scale. 1. Relate building scale and massing to the size and scale of existing and anticipated buildings, such as alignments with established cornice heights, building massing, step-backs and vertical emphasis. 2. Modulate the design of a larger building using a series of vertical or horizontal emphases to equate with the scale (heights and widths) of the buildings in the context and reduce the visual width or height. 3. Include secondary elements such as balconies, porches, vertical bays, belt courses, fenestration and window reveals. 4. Reflect the scale and solid-to-void ratio of windows and doors of the established character of the neighborhood or that which is desired in the master plan. E. Building facades that exceed a combined contiguous building length of two hundred feet (200’) shall include: 1. Changes in vertical plane (breaks in facade); 2. Material changes; 3. Massing changes; 4. A minimum of 80% of the ground floor must be used for active, publicly accessible uses. Active uses are those that promote an active pedestrian environment through inclusion of uses that capture the attention of a passer-by. This includes retail establishments, retail services, civic spaces (theaters, museums, etc), restaurants, bars, art and craft studios, and other uses determined to be substantially similar by the planning director and/or commission; and 5. Stepback must be a minimum of 10’ from the base of the building. This allows the base to be the primary defining element for the site and the adjacent public realm, reducing wind impacts, and opening sky views. The maximum height of the base of a proposed building should be equal to the width of the right of way if allowed in the zoning district to provide sufficient enclosure for the street without overwhelming the street. The minimum height of the base must be at least two stories. 119 A building over 200’ in width shall include necessary separation from property lines to minimize the impact of shadows and development rights of adjacent properties. F. If provided, privately-owned public spaces shall include at least three of the six following elements: 1. At least one sitting space for each 250 square feet shall be included in the plaza. Seating shall be a minimum of 16” in height and 30” in width. Ledge benches shall have a minimum depth of 30”; 2. A mixture of areas that provide seasonal shade; 3. Trees in proportion to the space at a minimum of one tree per 800 square feet, at least 2” caliper when planted; 4. Water features or public art; 5. Outdoor dining areas; and 6. Other amenities not listed above that provide a public benefit. G. Building height shall be modified to relate to human scale and minimize negative impacts. In downtown and in the CSHBD Sugar House Business District, building height shall contribute to a distinctive city skyline. 1. Human scale: a. Utilize stepbacks to design a building that relate to the height and scale of adjacent and nearby buildings, or where identified, goals for future scale defined in adopted master plans. b. The minimum stepback for any building located in a zoning district that does not contain an upper level stepback provision shall be 10’. This stepback is only required for applications requesting additional height when authorized in the underlying zoning district. The stepback shall be applied to the first full floor of the building that is seeking the request for additional height. c. For buildings more than three stories or buildings with vertical mixed use, compose the design of a building with distinct base, to reduce the sense of apparent height. 2. Negative impacts: All buildings seeking additional height as authorized in the underlying zoning district shall be subject to the following standards: a. Modulate taller buildings vertically and horizontally so that it steps up or down to its neighbors. b. Minimize shadow impacts of building height on the public realm and semi-public spaces by varying building massing. Demonstrate impact from shadows due to building height for the portions of the building that are subject to the request for additional height. 120 c. Modify tall buildings to minimize wind impacts on public and private spaces, such as the inclusion of a wind break above the first level of the building. d. Design and orient to prevent snow, ice, or water from falling directly onto a public sidewalk, public space, neighboring property, or directly onto the walkway leading to the building entrance. 3. Cornices and rooflines: a. Cohesiveness: Shape and define rooflines to be cohesive with the building’s overall form and composition. The roofline and architectural detailing, including cornices, shall be complimentary to the structure’s scale, material, color, and form and create a change in plane of at least 6 inches, a change in material, utilizing at least one visible sloping plan along a minimum of 50% of the roofline on building elevations facing a street, or a change in material orientation to define the roof line of the building. b. Green Roof and Roof Deck: Include a green roof and/or accessible roof deck to support a more visually compelling roof landscape and reduce solar gain, air pollution, and the amount of water entering the stormwater system. H. Parking and on site circulation shall be provided with an emphasis on making safe pedestrian connections to the sidewalk, transit facilities, or midblock walkway. Parking is encouraged to be behind the principal building and away from pedestrian walkways. Parking lots and structures shall be setback a minimum of 25’ from required midblock pedestrian access locations or as required in the underlying zoning district if the underlying zoning requires a larger setback. I. Waste and recycling containers, mechanical equipment, storage areas, and loading docks shall be fully screened from public view and, for buildings with only one street-facing frontage, are prohibited from being located along street-facing facades. They shall incorporate building materials and detailing compatible with the building being served and shall be co-located with driveways unless prohibited by the presence of a street tree, public infrastructure, or public facility within the right of way. Service uses may be located within the structure. (See Subsection 21A.37.050.K of this title.) J. Signage shall emphasize the pedestrian/mass transit orientation. 1. Define specific spaces for signage that are integral to building design, such as commercial sign bands framed by a material change, columns for blade signs, or other clearly articulated band on the face of the building. 2. Coordinate signage locations with appropriate lighting, awnings, and other projections. 3. Coordinate sign location with landscaping to avoid conflicts. 121 K. Lighting shall support pedestrian comfort and safety, neighborhood image, and dark sky goals. 1. Provide street lights as indicated in the Salt Lake City Lighting Master Plan. 2. Outdoor lighting should be designed for low-level illumination and to minimize glare and light trespass onto adjacent properties and uplighting directly to the sky. 3. Coordinate lighting with architecture, signage, and pedestrian circulation to accentuate significant building features, improve sign legibility, and support pedestrian comfort and safety. L. Streetscape improvements shall be provided as follows: 1. One street tree chosen from the street tree list consistent with the city’s urban forestry guidelines and, with the approval of the city’s urban forester, shall be placed for every 30’ of property frontage on a street. Existing street trees removed as the result of a development project shall be replaced by the developer with trees approved by the city’s urban forester. 2. Hardscape (paving material) shall be utilized to differentiate privately-owned public spaces from public spaces. Hardscape for public sidewalks shall follow applicable design standards. Permitted materials for privately-owned public spaces shall meet the following standards: a. Use materials that are durable (withstand wear, pressure, damage), require a minimum of maintenance, and are easily repairable or replaceable should damage or defacement occur. b. Where practical, as in lower-traffic areas, use materials that allow rainwater to infiltrate into the ground and recharge the water table. c. Limit contribution to urban heat island effect by limiting use of dark materials and incorporating materials with a high Solar- Reflective Index (SRI). d. Utilize materials and designs that have an identifiable relationship to the character of the site, the neighborhood, or Salt Lake City. e. Use materials (like textured ground surfaces) and features (like ramps and seating at key resting points) to support access and comfort for people of all abilities. f. Asphalt shall be limited to vehicle drive aisles. 21A.59.060: TIME LIMIT ON APPROVED APPLICATIONS FOR DESIGN REVIEW: No design review approval shall be valid for a period longer than one year from the date of approval unless a building permit is issued or a complete building plans and building permit applications have been submitted to the Division of Building Services and Licensing. An extension of one year may be granted by the entity that approved the application. Extension requests must be submitted prior to the expiration of the design review approval. 122 21A.59.070: EFFECT OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR DESIGN REVIEW: A. The approval of a design review application shall authorize the preparation, filing and processing of applications for any permits or approval that may be required by the city, including, but not limited to, a building permit. B. Following the approval of a design review application, any future alteration to the property, building or site shall comply with the approved design review application unless a modification is approved subject to the process outlined in this chapter. 21A.59.080: MODIFICATIONS TO APPROVED DESIGN REVIEW PLANS: A. Minor Modifications: The planning director may authorize minor modifications to approved design review applications as listed below. 1. Dimensional requirements that are necessary in order to comply with adopted building codes, fire codes, or engineering standards. The modification is limited to the minimum amount necessary to comply with the applicable building code, fire codes, or engineering standard. 2. Minor changes to building materials provided the modification is limited to the dimension of the material, color of material, or texture of material. Changes to a different material shall not be considered a minor modification. 3. Modifications other than those listed in Subsections 1 and 2 that comply with an applicable standard in this Title provided the standard was not subject to a requested modification as part of this process or any other process authorized by this title and does not conflict with a specific condition of approval or a finding associated with the approval. B. Other Modifications: Any other modifications not listed in Subsection A of this section shall be processed as follows: 1. If the proposed modification does not require a change to a condition of approval or a finding that was identified in a staff report or record of decision the matter may be reviewed by the planning commission, or in the case of administrative approvals, by the planning director, as a reconsideration of that specific modification subject to a public hearing for planning commission decisions or a notice of application for administrative approvals. 2. Any other modification shall require a new application and be subject to all required processes and standards. 123 SECTION 14. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.27.050.D (Contingent on Adoption of the FB-UN3 District). That, if Subsection 21A.27.050.D of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Form Based Districts: FB-UN1, FB-UN2, and FB-UN3 Form Based Urban Neighborhood District) is adopted by the date of the City Council adopting this ordinance, that subsection shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.27.050.D. FB-UN3 Building Form Standards: Building form standards for each allowed building form and other associated regulations for the FB-UN3 zone are listed in the below tables of this section. 1. Row House Building Form Standards: TABLE 21A.27.050.D.1 Building Regulation Regulation for Building Form: Row House H Height Maximum of 40’. All heights measured from established grade. Rooftop decks and associated railing/parapet are allowed on any roof, including roofs at the maximum allowed height. F Front and Corner Side Yard Setback Minimum 5’. Maximum 10’, unless a greater setback is required due to existing utility easements in which case the maximum setback shall be at the edge of the easement. May be modified through Design Review (Chapter 21A.59). S Interior Side Yard Minimum of 5’ between row house building form and side property line, except when an interior side yard is adjacent to a zoning district that has a maximum permitted building height of 30’ or less, then the minimum shall be 10’. For the purpose of this regulation, an alley that is a minimum of 10’ in width that separates a subject property from a different zoning district shall not be considered adjacent. No setback required for common walls. R Rear Yard Minimum of 5’ between row house building form and rear property line, except when rear yard is adjacent to a zoning district with a maximum permitted building height of 30’ or less, then the minimum is 20’. For the purpose of this regulation, an alley that is a minimum of 10’ in width that separates a subject property from a different zoning district shall not be considered adjacent. U Uses Per Story Residential on all stories; live/work units permitted on ground level. 124 GU Ground Floor Use on 900 South The required ground floor use space facing 900 South must be occupied by a live/work space at least 25’ in depth. Dimensions may be modified through Design Review (Chapter 21A.59). E Entry Feature Each dwelling unit must include an allowed entry feature. See Table 21A.27.030B for allowed entry features. Dwelling units adjacent to a street must include an entry feature on street facing façade. Pedestrian connections, as per Subsection 21A.27.030.C.5, with minimum 5’ width are required for each required entry feature. U Upper Level Stepback When adjacent to a lot in a zoning district with a maximum building height of 30’ or less, the first full floor of the building above 30’ shall step back 10’ from the building façade at finished grade along the side or rear yard that is adjacent to the lot in the applicable zoning district. This regulation does not apply when a lot in a different zoning district is separated from the subject parcel by a street or alley. OS Open Space Area Each dwelling unit shall include a minimum open space area that is equal to at least 25% of the footprint of the individual unit, subject to all other open space area requirements of Subsection 21A.27.030.C.1 “Open Space Area.” A minimum of 20% of the required open space area shall include vegetation. BF Building Forms Per Lot Multiple buildings may be built on a single lot provided all of the buildings have frontage on a street. All buildings shall comply with all applicable standards. SO Side/Interior Orientation Dwelling units not located directly adjacent to a street are permitted, provided the design standards for glass are complied with on the façade with the required entry feature. Lots for individual row house dwelling units without public street frontage are allowed subject to recording a final subdivision plat that: 1. Documents that new lots have adequate access to a public street by way of easements or a shared driveway; and 2. Includes a disclosure of private infrastructure costs for any shared infrastructure associated with the new lot(s) per Section 21A.55.110 of this title. MW Midblock Walkway If a midblock walkway is shown in an adopted city plan on the subject property, a midblock walkway shall be provided. The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 10’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. DS Design Standards See Section 21A.27.030 and Chapter 21A.37 for other applicable building configuration and design standards. 125 2. Multi-Family Residential, Storefront, and Vertical Mixed-Use Building Form Standards: TABLE 21A.27.050.D.2 Building Regulation Regulation for Building Forms: Multi-family Residential/Storefront/Vertical Mixed Use H Height Maximum height of 125’. All heights measured from established grade. Buildings in excess of 85’ require design review in accordance with Chapter 21A.59. Rooftop decks and associated railing/parapet are allowed on any roof, including roofs at the maximum allowed height. GH Ground Floor Height Minimum ground floor height 14’. F Front and Corner Side Yard Setback No minimum is required; however, doors are prohibited from opening into the public right of way. Maximum 10’ unless a greater setback is required due to existing utility easements in which case the maximum setback shall be at the edge of the easement. May be modified through Design Review process (Chapter 21A.59). B Required Build-To Minimum of 50% of street facing facade shall be built within 5’ of the front or corner side property line. May be modified through Design Review process (Chapter 21A.59). S Interior Side Yard No minimum required, except when an interior side yard is adjacent to a zoning district that has a maximum permitted building height of 30’ or less, then the minimum shall be 10’. For the purpose of this regulation, an alley that is a minimum of 10’ in width that separates a subject property from a different zoning district shall not be considered adjacent. R Rear Yard No minimum required, except when rear yard is adjacent to a zoning district with a maximum permitted building height of 30’ or less, then the minimum is 20’. For the purpose of this regulation, an alley that is a minimum of 10’ in width that separates a subject property from a different zoning district shall not be considered adjacent. GU Ground Floor Use on 900 South The required ground floor use space facing 900 South shall be limited to the following uses: retail goods establishments, retail service establishments, public service portions of businesses, restaurants, taverns/brewpubs, bar establishments, art galleries, theaters, or performing art facilities. E Ground Floor Dwelling Entrances Ground floor dwelling units adjacent to a street must have an allowed entry feature. See Table 21A.27.030B for allowed entry features. Pedestrian connections, as per Subsection 21A.27.030.C.5, are required to each required entry feature. 126 SECTION 15. 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 _______________________. U Upper Level Stepback When adjacent to a lot in a zoning district with a maximum building height of 30’ or less, the first full floor of the building above 30’ shall step back 10’ from the building facade at finished grade along the side or rear yard that is adjacent to the lot in the applicable zoning district. This regulation does not apply when a lot in a different zoning district is separated from the subject parcel by a street or alley. M W Midblock Walkway If a midblock walkway is shown in an adopted city plan on the subject property, a midblock walkway shall be provided. The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 10’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. BF Building Forms Per Lot Multiple buildings may be built on a single lot provided all of the buildings have frontage on a street. All buildings shall comply with all applicable standards. OS Open Space Vegetation A minimum of 20% of the required open space area shall include vegetation. LB Loading Bay Maximum of one (1) loading bay on a front façade per street face, subject to all dimensional requirements in Section 21A.44.070. Loading bay entry width limited to 14’ and must be screened by garage door. One loading bay driveway is allowed in addition to any other driveway allowances. DS Design Standards See Section 21A.27.030 and Chapter 21A.37 for other applicable building configuration and design standards. 127 Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2023. APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney December 21, 2022 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Project Chronology 2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3. Original Petition 4. Clean Ordinance 5. Public Comment Received After Planning Commission Staff Report was Published 6. Proposed Graphic Changes 7. Proposed Amendments to Off-Street Parking 8. Mailing List 1) PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Petition: PLNPCM2022-00529 December 10, 2020 Salt Lake City Corporation applies for a Transportation and Land Use Connection Grant from Wasatch Front Regional Council. March 15, 2021 Salt Lake City awarded the Transportation and Land Use Connection Grant. October 15, 2021 Design Workshop tours SLC November 30, 2021 Design Workshop and SLC Planning Division held a stakeholder meeting with the local development community. December 1, 2021 Design Workshop and SLC Planning Division held a stakeholder meeting with the Neighborhood Councils and Downtown Development Committee. December 2, 2021 Design Workshop and the SLC Planning Division held a stakeholder meeting with an ADA community representative group. January 17, 2022 A public visual preference survey was advertised on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. January 19, 2022 Design Workshop held a stakeholder meeting with the Downtown Alliance. May 9, 2022 The proposed code changes were posted to the Planning Division’s Online Open House webpage. May 13, 2022 An informational postcard was mailed to approximately 1,700 property owners within the study area informing them of the study and providing them with a QR code to obtain more information. June 1, 2022 The Planning Division presented an update to the Downtown Development Committee. June 8, 2022 Design Workshop briefs Salt Lake City Planning Commission August 24, 2022 Planning Commission forwards a positive recommendation to City Council 2) NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2022-00529 – A petition initiated by Mayor Erin Mendenhall to amend the Salt Lake City Zoning Code for the Downtown Building Height and Street Activation Text Amendment. This proposal includes amendments to the following zoning districts: D-1, D-2, D-3, D-4, CG, FBUN1, and FBUN2. Additionally, the proposed code revisions aim to accommodate growth and respond to new development pressures, while developing standards for public spaces. Changes seek to have a positive impact on human-scale orientation, pedestrian accessibility, and community character. The City Council may consider modifications to other related sections of the code as part of this proposal. DATE: Date #1 and Date #2 TIME: 7:00 p.m. All persons interested and present will be given an opportunity to be heard in this matter. his meeting will be held via electronic means, while potentially also providing for an in person opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building,located at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. If you are interested in participating during the Public Hearing portion of the meeting, please visit the website www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings/ or call 801-535-7654 to obtain connection information. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801)535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Kelsey Lindquist at 385-226-7227 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail Kelsey.lindquist@slcgov.com People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance in order to participate in this hearing. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535- 7600, or relay service 711. 3) ORIGINAL PETITION 41 N. Rio Grande Street, Suite 103 Salt Lake City, UT 84101 (801) 363-4250 www.wfrc.org Jeff Silvestrini, Chair Mayor, Millcreek Jeff Scott, Vice Chair Commissioner, Box Elder County Mark Allen Mayor, Washington Terrace Len Arave Mayor, North Salt Lake Ron Bigelow Mayor, West Valley Mike Caldwell Mayor, Ogden Robert Dahle Mayor, Holladay Jim Harvey Commissioner, Weber County Scott Jenkins Commissioner, Weber County Randy Lewis Mayor, Bountiful Erin Mendenhall Mayor, Salt Lake City Mike Newton Councilmember, Morgan County Mark Shepherd Mayor, Clearfield Bob Stevenson Commissioner, Davis County Derk Timothy Mayor, Bluffdale Troy Walker Mayor, Draper Scott Wardle Councilmember, Tooele County Jenny Wilson Mayor, Salt Lake County Aimee Winder-Newton Councilmember, Salt Lake County Senator Wayne Harper Utah State Senate Representative Mike Schultz Utah House of Representatives Carlton Christensen Utah Transit Authority Carlos Braceras Utah Department of Transportation Dawn Ramsey Utah League of Cities & Towns Lorene Kamalu Utah Association of Counties Ari Bruening Envision Utah Evan Curtis State Planning Coordinator ______________________________________ Andrew Gruber Executive Director March 15, 2021 Dear Salt Lake City: The Transportation and Land Use Connection program partners would like to thank you for your participation in the program,and we are pleased to inform you that your project will be receiving funding in the 2021 award year. The Downtown Building Height and Public/Ped Space Code Update project will receive an award of $102,500 contingent upon a local match of $7,500,for a total project budget of $110,000.The next step in the process is to sign a Letter of Concurrence,which will be sent to you by your WFRC project manager,who will be assigned in the coming weeks.An invoice for the local match will also be sent.Prior to being assigned a project manager,please let me know if you have any questions. Your project manager will guide you through the process of completing this important effort; you can become familiar with the next steps here.We hope this award fills a need for your community, and we look forward to seeing this project through to success. Congratulations, Megan Townsend Community and Economic Development Director Wasatch Front Regional Council (801) 404-8925 4) PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED AFTER PLANNING COMMISSIONS STAFF REPORT PUBLISHED 669 West 200 South Salt Lake City, UT 84101 August 24, 2022 c/o Aubrey Clark, Administrative Secretary Salt Lake City Planning Commission 451 State Street Salt Lake City, UT 84111 RE: Downtown Building Heights & Street Activation Text Amendment Dear Planning Commissioners, The Utah Transit Authority (UTA) is intensely interested in Salt Lake City’s effort to assess potential height increases in its downtown zones and would encourage maximizing development potential within the station area, particularly on the parcels immediately adjacent to Salt Lake Central Station. UTA, in collaboration with the Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency (SLC-RDA), is preparing for the redevelopment of a significant amount of property around North Temple and Salt Lake Central Stations. The concept for Central Station envisions a substantial, mixed-use structure, opposite the Historic Rio Grande Depot, bookending the city’s planned 300 South festival street. It will include significant improvements to pedestrian and passenger amenities, providing a drastically improved transit gateway experience to the city. It will also include space for UTA’s relocated headquarters, replacing its current building, which is aging and in poor seismic condition. Moving UTA’s administrative functions to Salt Lake Central will build on the development activity along 200 South and the Salt Lake City RDA’s plans for properties within the Depot District. Salt Lake Central and the Depot District are at the intersection of the most transit-connected location in the state. To maximize this opportunity, UTA will explore providing additional space beyond its own needs. UTA plans to construct as many additional floors as the city will allow and the market will support. This would capitalize on the transit investments the city and state have made in the neighborhood by encouraging more ridership and decreasing the impact of single occupancy commuter trips into the downtown core. The proposed code changes before the Planning Commission, affecting building heights in the Gateway Mixed Use District, are a positive step in the right direction. However, UTA is concerned that artificially limiting heights near the station will unduly restrain the potential of Salt Lake Central and surrounding development. UTA requests the Planning Commission consider further increasing height allowances, or eliminating height limitations altogether, in this critical location for commercial mixed uses and office before advancing this proposal to City Council. We recognize that the city may desire to retain control, through design review or other means, but feel the benefit to the city and value of increased land use intensity around this regionally significant transit hub warrant additional consideration. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Carlton J. Christensen Chair of the Board of Trustees 5) PROPOSED GRAPHIC CHANGES 6) MAILING LIST CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL BUDGET STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY23 TO:City Council Members FROM: Sylvia Richards Policy and Budget Analyst DATE:May 16, 2023 RE: FY2024 BUDGET - JUSTICE COURT PROJECT TIMELINE: Briefing: May 16, 2023 Budget Hearings: May 16 and June 6, 2023 Potential Action: June 13, 2023 WRITTEN BRIEFING ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Justice Court handles misdemeanor criminal citations, small claims, traffic citations, and traffic school for moving violations. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 budget proposes a total budget of $5,489,720 and 42 full-time employees. There is an increase of $290,060 or (5.6%) from the FY 2023 Adopted budget. The proposed budget does not include any new programs or services. Information regarding the proposed budget is included on pages 50 and 215 through 219 of the Mayor’s Recommended Budget FY 2024. BUDGET SYNOPSIS The chart on the following page shows the Justice Court’s recommended budget for FY2024. Page | 2 Table 1 Personal Service Base to Base Changes FY 2024 Provided by Justice Court Staff Remodel of Courtroom(s) – Resource Center During last year’s annual budget, the Justice Court indicated that due to many of the court calendars being held remotely, there are fewer individuals coming to the Justice Court to conduct their business. In response, the Justice Court began working with an architect and designer on plans to remodel at least one courtroom to create a Resource Center where individuals needing to come to court can access computers, phones and private space if they need to meet with a judge, speak to their attorney, meet with a probation officer, review their case, or complete court-ordered classes. Last year there was no funding available to create this space; however, since then, the Justice Court received a substantial donation from the Utah Bar Foundation which funded the new room pods/spaces. In addition, the National Center for State Courts provided a large donation which was used to purchase new furniture. The Court has further indicated they used a portion of their budget as well towards the remodel. According to Court administration, the Resource Center is currently about 85% complete. They anticipate a ‘soft opening’ May 22nd or May 30th while they await delivery of technical supplies and new furniture. They expect that the Resource Center will be fully operational by late June. If the Resource Center needs to be expanded in the near future, additional funding will need to be identified, potentially in a budget amendment. ➢The Council may wish to request further details about the costs associated with a potential expansion of the Resource Center. Page | 3 ADDITIONAL POLICY QUESTIONS ➢Assessment from the National State Court In November of 2022, the City received a copy of the National Center for State Court Salt Lake City Justice Court Governance and Leadership Assessment, Best Practice Recommendations. The Council may wish to ask the Court to provide a synopsis of the report in a future Work Session and discuss any potential action items resulting from recommendations in the assessment. ➢Harvard University Study on Implicit Bias Update Last year, the Court began working on an Implicit Bias study partnering with the Access to Justice Lab (A2J), Harvard Law School and Harvard University studying the effect of a de- biasing jury instruction tool on the decision-making of juries and the outcome of trials. The Council may wish to ask the Court when the study will conclude and when results might be available. ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION Tracking Measurements The Justice Court uses four metrics included in the Table below to measure performance monthly; access and fairness (customer satisfaction), time to disposition for criminal Court cases, age of active pending criminal cases, and Criminal Case Clearance rate. PERFORMANCE MEASURES Fy201 Actual FY2022 Actual FY2023 Target FY2023 Actual FY2024 Target State Average Access & Fairness – Percentage of Justice Court customers satisfied with service received. 95%NA NA NA >90%NA Time to Disposition – 95% of criminal case dispositions should meet established guidelines for Time to Disposition (6 months) 58%58%>95%64%>95%76% Age of Acting Pending Cases – 95% of all criminal cases should have a disposition within a 180-day time frame. 50%67%>95%73%>95%70% Criminal Case Clearance Rate – A Clearance Rate of 100% means the court has disposed of as many cases as were filed, i.e., the court is keeping up with its incoming caseload 90%112%>100%102%100%91% Table 2 Justice Court Performance Measures (Mayor’s Budget Book p. 217) Metrics Results from University of Utah Business School The University of Utah Business School interviewed 288 Justice Court defendants to ask questions regarding the Salt Lake City Justice Court. A portion of the results can be found in Attachment A at the end of this staff report. The Business School found that 88% of Court defendants prefer remote hearings, and 72.5% took no time off from work for their hearing. Page | 4 ➢The Council may wish to ask about the percentage of remote Court appearances versus in-person, and how that percentage compares to the numbers from the last fiscal year. Additional research on the effects of virtual hearings will be completed by the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC). Researchers at the AOC will be working with the current and future data from the University of Utah. The Court will share all new data/research with the Council and the City Administration once it is received. Justice Court Background The Salt Lake City Justice Court is the largest municipal Court in the State of Utah with a very high volume of misdemeanor cases. The Court is a limited jurisdiction Court under the umbrella of the Utah State Court system. The Justice Court is responsible for and processes Class B and C misdemeanor, infractions and small claims cases, jury trials, appeals and expungements, video hearings, prisoner transports, and daily interaction with jails throughout the State of Utah. The Court monitors and tracks probation, warrants, community service, and restitution, collections of monetary penalties, appeals, expungements, and plea in-abeyance cases. The Court also provides traffic school, coordination of interpreter services, and any ADA needs that arise. The Justice Court judiciary, employees, and security team describe their environment as “dedicated to open and transparent access to the Court, bringing justice for all, and providing a safe and civil environment for dispute resolution”. Vision Statement Creating a Court that is just, equitable, and trusted by all. Court Core Values Excellence Having the desire to succeed and the motivation to reach our full potential, going above and beyond in to accomplish the task at hand. Respect Recognize and appreciate the value of each individual and their experience and situation. Integrity Doing what we say we are going to do, applying honesty and accountability with openness. Community Bridging the gap between Court, community, and other agencies, improving access to resources and information. Unity Supporting one another and fostering growth while reaching our goals and adhering to our values. VIRTUAL HEARINGS IN THE SALT LAKE CITY JUSTICE COURT Data Interviews with 288 Defendants in the Salt Lake Justice System 2022-2023 Results —Preferences 88% 2%10% Remotely from your home/office/other preferred location At a courthouse booth with a judge appearing virtually At a courthouse courtroom with an in- person judge 88% of Defendants prefer remote hearings 10% In Person VIRTUAL HEARINGS IN THE SALT LAKE CITY JUSTICE COURT Results—Time-Saving 80% of arraignment hearings are less than 10 minutes “It [Virtual Court] allows parties to keep their jobs, many of whom we [the Court] order to have gainful employment and then sanction when they do not.”-Judge Fonnesbeck, Presiding Judge of the Utah First District Court 72.5% 15.7% 5.9% 1.3%0.4% 4.2% None 0-2 hours 2-4 hours 4-6 hours 6-8 hours 8+ hours 72.5% of Defendants took no time off work Results —Environment 59% of defendants would have driven a private car to their hearing 24% of Drivers live 20+ miles from the courthouse ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ______________________________ Date Received: 4/3/2023 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 4/3/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 4/3/2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Sister Cities Board STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Sister Cities Board RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Ricardo Becerra a member of the Sister Cities Board. . ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 April 3, 2023 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Dear Council Member Mano, Listed below is my recommendation for the membership appointment for Sister Cities Board. Ricardo Becerra to be appointed for a four year term, starting from date of City Council advice and consent and term ending on Monday, July 6, 2027. I respectfully ask for your consideration and support for this appointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall, Mayor cc: file ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ______________________________ Date Received: 4/6/2023 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 4/6/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 4/6/2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Sister Cities Advisory Board STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Sister Cities Advisory Board RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Ronald Joe Zeidner a member of the Sister Cities Advisory Board. ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 April 6, 2023 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Dear Council Member Mano, Listed below is my recommendation for the membership appointment for Sister Cities Advisory Board. Ronald Joe Zeidner to be appointed for a four year term, starting from date of City Council advice and consent and term ending on Tuesday, July 6, 2027. I respectfully ask for your consideration and support for this appointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall, Mayor cc: file ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ______________________________ Date Received: 4/6/2023 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 4/6/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 4/6/2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Sister Cities Advisory Board STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Sister Cities Advisory Board RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Ahimara Suarez a member of the Sister Cities Advisory Board. ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 April 6, 2023 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Dear Council Member Mano, Listed below is my recommendation for the membership appointment for Sister Cities Advisory Board. Ahimara Suarez to be appointed for a four year term, starting from date of City Council advice and consent and term ending on Tuesday, July 6, 2027. I respectfully ask for your consideration and support for this appointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall, Mayor cc: file 2 0 5 8 7 City Council Announcements May 16, 2023 Information Needed A. Council Meetings Given the Memorial Day holiday, we have both Thursday, May 25th and Tuesday, May 30th held as tentative meeting days, but the Council does not need to meet on both days. ➢Would the Council prefer to meet on one of those meeting days or meet until approximately 9 p.m. next Tuesday, May 23? ➢If the Council would prefer to add one of the meeting days, which one works better? Thursday, May 25 or Tuesday, May 30? ➢Another option could be for Council Members to start the rest of the May and June meetings at 1:00 P.M.? For Your Information B. Below are the Meetings for June: •Thursday, June 1 Council Work Session Only •Tuesday, June 6 Council Work Session & Formal Meeting •Thursday, June 8 Council Work Session Only •Tuesday, June 13 RDA Meeting, Council Work Session & Formal Meeting •TENTATIVE - Tuesday, June 20 Formal (as needed for budget)