The URL can be used to link to this page

02/01/2022 - Formal Meeting - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FORMAL MEETING February 1,2022 Tuesday 7:00 PM This Meeting Will be an Electronic Meeting Pursuant to the Chair’s Determination. SLCCouncil.com CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: Dan Dugan,Chair District 6 Darin Mano,Vice Chair District 5 Victoria Petro-Eschler District 1 Alejandro Puy District 2 Chris Wharton District 3 Ana Valdemoros District 4 Amy Fowler District 7 Generated:13:47:16 This meeting will be an electronic meeting pursuant to the Chair’s determination. As Salt Lake City Council Chair,I hereby determine that conducting the Salt Lake City Council meeting at an anchor location presents a substantial risk to the health and safety of those who may be present.The decision to meet online follows a local increase in COVID-19 cases in the City and elsewhere and will be re-evaluated weekly. The change in meeting attendance is a precautionary measure for the safety of the public and City employees based on the latest reports from the Centers for Disease Control and the Salt Lake County Health Department.The Council will return with hybrid or in-person meetings when appropriate We encourage those interested in participating in meetings to do so how they feel most comfortable.City Council meetings are available on the following platforms: •Facebook Live:www.facebook.com/slcCouncil/ •YouTube:www.youtube.com/slclivemeetings •Web Agenda:www.slc.gov/council/agendas/ •SLCtv Channel 17 Live:www.slctv.com/livestream/SLCtv-Live/2 If you are interested in participating during the Formal Meeting for the Public Hearings or general comment period,you may do so through the Webex platform.To learn how to connect through Webex,or if you need call-in phone options,please visit our website or call us at 801-535-7607 to learn more. We welcome and encourage your comments.You may provide comments by calling our 24-Hour comment line,801-535-7654 or emailing council.comments@slcgov.com. Council staff monitors voicemail and email inboxes to ensure all comments received are shared with Council Members and added to the public meeting record.View agenda- related comments at www.slc.gov/council/agendas. More information including Council meeting information and resources can be found at www.SLCCouncil.com. Please note:Dates not identified in the FYI -Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. WELCOME AND PUBLIC MEETING RULES A.OPENING CEREMONY: 1.Council Member Dan Dugan will conduct the formal meeting. 2.Pledge of Allegiance. 3.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules. 4.The Council will approve the work session meeting minutes of March 2,2021 as well as the formal meeting minutes of March 2,2021,March 16,2021,and January 4,2022. 5.The Council will consider adopting a joint ceremonial resolution with Mayor Mendenhall celebrating the 20th anniversary of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games, and expressing the City’s support and goals for hosting a future games beneficial to the community. B.PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1.Ordinance:Amendment to Require Notice for Permits to Work in the Public Way The Council will continue to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would require notice for permits to work in the public way.The Council has requested that Engineering codify and expand the policy that adjacent property owners are notified of work being performed in the right of way. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,January 12,2021;Tuesday,February 9,2021;Tuesday, January 11,2022 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,December 8,2020 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,January 19,2021 and Tuesday, February 1,2022 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS: NONE. D.COMMENTS: 1.Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. 2.Comments to the City Council.(Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for a public hearing,as well as on any other City business.Comments are limited to two minutes.) E.NEW BUSINESS: NONE. F.UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. G.CONSENT: 1.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.6 for Fiscal Year 2021-22 The Council will set the date of Tuesday,February 15,2022 at 7 p.m.to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the final budget of Salt Lake City,including the employment staffing document,for Fiscal Year 2021-22.Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets,including proposed project additions and modifications.The proposed amendment includes funding for new Arts Council employees,adding a second sergeant to the Special Victims Unit,and additional Emergency Rental Assistance Program funding from the Federal Government, among other items. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,February 15,2022 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 1,2022 Staff Recommendation -Set date. 2.Resolution:Art Barn Public Benefits Analysis The Council will set the date of Tuesday,March 1,2022 at 7 p.m.to accept public comment and consider adopting a resolution that would authorize the waiver of lease fees for the use of the Art Barn by the Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation.The Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation &Arts Council Division is requesting to continue utilizing 54 Finch Lane,or the “Art Barn”as the administrative headquarters,housing 6.5 Arts Council FTEs and multiple seasonal and part-time employees,as well as to provide a home for the Finch Lane Art Gallery and its numerous exhibitions. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 1,2022 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 22,2022 Staff Recommendation -Set date. 3.Ordinance:Rezone and Master Plan Amendment for the Former Fire Station No.3 Property The Council will set the date of Tuesday,February 15,2022 at 7 p.m.to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning map pertaining to properties located at 1085 East Simpson Avenue,1095 East Simpson Avenue,1097 East Simpson Avenue,and 1104 East Sugarmont Drive to rezone those properties from PL (Public Lands)District to CSHBD1 (Sugar House Business District),and would amend the Sugar House Community Plan Future Land Use Map.The purpose for the proposal is to consolidate the subject properties with the property to the east for future development.Both properties are owned by the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City.There is no development proposal associated with this request.Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics. Petition No.:PLNPCM2021-01007 and PLNPCM2021-00914 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,February 15,2022 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 1,2022 Staff Recommendation -Set date. 4.Ordinance:Rezone at 1193 West California Avenue The Council will set the date of February 15,2022 at 7 p.m.to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning of property located at approximately 1193 West California Avenue from R-1/7,000 (Single Family Residential District)to R-1/5,000 (Single Family Residential District).If approved,the property owner intends to subdivide the property, remove the existing home and construct two new homes,potentially with attached ADUs.The owner anticipates retaining ownership of both properties.Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.Petition No.:PLNPCM2021-00709 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,February 15,2022 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 1,2022 Staff Recommendation -Set date. 5.Ordinance:Rezone at 2060 North 2200 West The Council will set the date of Tuesday,February 15,2022 at 7 p.m.to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning map pertaining to one parcel of property located at 2060 North 2200 West Street to rezone the property from AG-2 (Agricultural District)to M-1 (Light Manufacturing District).The amendment is to implement the master plan zoning and to accommodate future commercial land uses.No specific site development proposal has been submitted at this time.Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.Petition No.:PLNPCM2021-00575 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,February 15,2022 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 1,2022 Staff Recommendation -Set date. 6.Grant Holding Account Items (Batch No.4)Associated with BAM No.6 for Fiscal Year 2021-22 The Council will consider approving Grant Holding Account Items (Batch No.4) for Fiscal Year 2021-22 Associated with Budget Amendment No.6. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -n/a Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Staff Recommendation -Approve. 7.Board Appointment:Arts Council Board –Richard Taylor The Council will consider approving the appointment of Richard Taylor to the Arts Council Board for a term ending February 1,2025. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Staff Recommendation -Approve. 8.Board Appointment:Arts Council Board –Ayanna Allen The Council will consider approving the appointment of Ayanna Allen to the Arts Council Board for a term ending February 1,2025. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,February 1,2022 Staff Recommendation -Approve. H.ADJOURNMENT: CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 5:00 p.m.on _____________________,the undersigned,duly appointed City Recorder,does hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1)posted on the Utah Public Notice Website created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701,and (2)a copy of the foregoing provided to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others who have indicated interest. CINDY LOU TRISHMAN SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda,including but not limited to adoption,rejection,amendment,addition of conditions and variations of options discussed. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation,which may include alternate formats,interpreters,and other auxiliary aids and services.Please make requests at least two business days in advance.To make a request,please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com,801-535-7600,or relay service 711. PENDING MINUTES –NOT APPROVED The City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,met in Formal Session on Tuesday,January 4,2022. The following Council Members were present: Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Victoria Petro- Eschler,Alejandro Puy Present Legislative leadership: Cindy Gust-Jenson,Executive Director;Jennifer Bruno,Deputy Director;Lehua Weaver,Associate Deputy Director Present Administrative leadership: Mayor Erin Mendenhall;Rachel Otto,Chief of Staff;Lisa Shaffer,Chief Administrative Officer Present City Staff: Katherine Lewis –City Attorney,Cindy Lou Trishman –City Recorder,Allison Rowland –Public Policy Analyst,Amanda Lau –Public Engagement &Communication Specialist,Ben Luedtke –Senior Public Policy Analyst,Mary Beth Thompson –Chief Financial Officer,Thais Stewart –Deputy City Recorder,Michelle Barney –Minutes &Records Clerk Council Member Amy Fowler presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 7:05 pm MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,January 4,2022 1 A.OPENING CEREMONY: 1.Council Member Amy Fowler will conduct the formal meeting. Minutes: Council Member Fowler welcomed attendees and began the meeting. 2.Pledge of Allegiance. Minutes: The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 3.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules. Minutes: Council Member Fowler presented the rules of decorum. 4.The Council will approve the work session meeting minutes of Tuesday,January 5, 2021;Tuesday,January 19,2021;Tuesday,December 7,2021;and Tuesday, December 14,2021 as well as the formal meeting minutes of Tuesday,April 6, 2021;Tuesday,April 13,2021;Tuesday,September 14,2021;Tuesday,December 7,2021;and Tuesday,December 14,2021. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Wharton,seconded by Councilmember Mano to approve the work session meeting minutes of Tuesday, January 5,2021;Tuesday,January 19,2021;Tuesday,December 7, 2021;and Tuesday,December 14,2021 as well as the formal meeting minutes of Tuesday,April 6,2021;Tuesday,April 13,2021;Tuesday, September 14,2021;Tuesday,December 7,2021;and Tuesday,December 14,2021. AYE:Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,Amy Fowler,Chris Wharton,Victoria Petro-Eschler,Alejandro Puy ABSENT:Ana Valdemoros Final Result:6 –0 Pass B.PUBLIC HEARINGS: MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,January 4,2022 2 1.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.5 for Fiscal Year 2021-22 The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the final budget of Salt Lake City,including the employment staffing document,for Fiscal Year 2021-22.Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets,including proposed project additions and modifications.The proposed amendment includes funding for low- income senior and veteran transitional housing and public safety overtime in neighborhoods hosting homeless shelters,among other items. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,January 4,2022 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,December 14,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,January 4,2022 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Minutes: Council Member Fowler reviewed the rules of decorum. Ben Luedtke introduced the Ordinance for Budget Amendment No.5 for Fiscal Year 2021-22. Chris Butler spoke against the use of funds for police services at the homeless shelters;the money should be used to shelter the homeless. George Chapman spoke in support of the use of funds for additional police services at the homeless shelters,stated the Switchpoint hotel would not be sustainable;and the City needed to increase the maintenance for city projects. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Wharton,seconded by Councilmember Dugan to continue the public hearing to a future date,adopt partial final budget amendment for Ordinance 01,of 2022,amending the FY 2021-22 final budget of Salt Lake City including the employment staffing document,A-1:Salt Lake County Police Services at Homeless Resource Centers Contract ($400,000 from Fund Balance),E-1: COVID-19 Local Assistance Matching Grant for the Switchpoint Hotel Project ($3 million from Misc.Grants),I-1:Council Office Reclassification and Amending FY22 Appointed Pay Plan (-0-),and I-2: MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,January 4,2022 3 CARES Act Unused Funds –Firefighter Personnel Expenses (Estimated at $47,000 and presumption authorization is for all unused funds) AYE:Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,Amy Fowler,Chris Wharton,Victoria Petro-Eschler,Alejandro Puy ABSENT:Ana Valdemoros Final Result:6 –0 Pass C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS: NONE. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,January 4,2022 4 D.COMMENTS: 1.Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. Minutes: No comments 2.Comments to the City Council.(Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for a public hearing,as well as on any other City business.Comments are limited to two minutes.) Minutes: Council Member Fowler opened the public comment portion of the meeting. Jay Ingleby spoke to the operations of the Council;making sure the process are correctly followed and the right questions asked before decisions are made. Daniel Schelling spoke to the Public Natural and Urban Lands Board meetings regarding save our foothills and the trails plan,development of the foothills trails,the open space master plan and that the trails plan contradicted it;would like an updated plan to address the foothills. Kathryn Van Sleen spoke to environment of the December 14,2021 meeting,use of funding for police and the disappointment she felt over the actions of the Council. George Chapman spoke to the need to increase police presence at the homeless shelters,closing Jefferson Park due to the criminal activity,and agreed that spending money on Pioneer Park was not appropriate and thanked the Council for enforcing the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance. E.NEW BUSINESS: MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,January 4,2022 5 1.Motion:Nomination of Council Chair and Vice Chair for Calendar Year 2022 The Council will consider a motion to ratify the election of Chair and Vice-Chair of the Salt Lake City Council for calendar year 2022. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,January 4,2022 Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,January 4,2022 Staff Recommendation -Suspend the rules and adopt. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Petro-Eschler,seconded by Councilmember Puy to elect Council Member Dugan to be the Chairperson and Council Member Mano to be the Vice Chairperson for 2022 calendar year. AYE:Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,Amy Fowler,Chris Wharton,Victoria Petro-Eschler,Alejandro Puy ABSENT:Ana Valdemoros Final Result:6 –0 Pass Minutes: Council Member Fowler thanked everyone for their service and expressed her gratitude to the staff for all their hard work. F.UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,January 4,2022 6 G.CONSENT: 1.Board Appointment:Bicycle Advisory Committee –Ashley Lodmell The Council will consider approving the appointment of Ashley Lodmell to the Bicycle Advisory Committee for a term ending January 4,2025. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,January 4,2022 Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,January 4,2022 Staff Recommendation -Approve. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Wharton,seconded by Councilmember Dugan to approve the Consent Agenda. AYE:Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,Amy Fowler,Chris Wharton,Victoria Petro-Eschler,Alejandro Puy ABSENT:Ana Valdemoros Final Result:6 –0 MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,January 4,2022 7 H.ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 7:40 pm Minutes Approved: _______________________________ City Council Chair _______________________________ City Recorder This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as other items may have been discussed;please refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203(2)(b). To listen to the audio recording of the meeting or view meeting materials,please visit Salt Lake City Public Body Minutes library,available at www.data.slc.gov,selecting the Public Body Minutes hyperlink.If you are viewing this file in the Minutes library,use the links on the right of your screen within the ‘Document Relationships’information to listen to the audio or view meeting materials. This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held Tuesday,January 4,2022. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,January 4,2022 8 PENDING MINUTES –NOT APPROVED The City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,met in Formal Session on Tuesday,March 2,2021 in an Electronic Meeting,pursuant to the Chair’s determination and Salt Lake City Emergency Proclamation No.2 of 2020(2)(b). The following Council Members were present: Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers The following Council Members were absent: Amy Fowler Present Legislative leadership: Cindy Gust-Jenson,Executive Director;Jennifer Bruno,Deputy Director;Lehua Weaver,Associate Deputy Director Present Administrative leadership: Mayor Erin Mendenhall;Rachel Otto,Chief of Staff;Lisa Shaffer,Chief Administrative Officer Present City Staff: Katherine Lewis –City Attorney,Cindy Lou Trishman –City Recorder,DeeDee Robinson –Deputy City Recorder,Brian Fullmer –Constituent Liaison,Policy Analyst,Robert Nutzman –Administrative Assistant Council Member Andrew Johnston presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 1 A.OPENING CEREMONY: 1.Council Member Andrew Johnston will conduct the formal meetings. Minutes: Council Member Johnston conducted the meeting. 2.Pledge of Allegiance. Minutes: A moment of silence was held while the American Flag and Pledge was displayed on the screen. 3.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules. Minutes: Council Member Johnston reviewed the rules of decorum. 4.The Council will approve the work session meeting minutes of Tuesday,December 1,2020 as well as the Airport Bond minutes of Tuesday,January 19,2021. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Dugan,seconded by Councilmember Mano to approve Work Session Meeting Minutes for Tuesday,December 1,2020 and the Airport Bond Minutes for Tuesday,January 19,2021. AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers ABSENT:Amy Fowler,Chris Wharton Final Result:5 –0 B.PUBLIC HEARINGS: MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 2 1.Ordinance:West End Alley Vacation (Adjacent to Properties Located at 740 West and 746 West 900 South) The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would close a small portion of a City-owned alley at approximately 740 West and 746 West 900 South.This is not a request to vacate the entire alley.The proposal would allow the petitioner to square off the southwestern corner of his property for a proposed future multi-family residential and commercial development.The closure will not impact traffic or access.Petition No.:PLNPCM2020-00268 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,January 19,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,January 19,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 2,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Motion: Moved by Councilmember Rogers,seconded by Councilmember Dugan to close the Public Hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting. AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano, James Rogers ABSENT:Amy Fowler Final Result:6 –0 Pass Minutes: Brian Fullmer presented the ordinance for West End Alley Vacation adjacent to properties located at 740 West and 746 West 900 South. Ron Temu expressed concerned about access and use of the alley for traffic. Brenda Scheer stated the Salt Lake City Planning Commission supported the proposal and was a nice project for area. Dennis Faris expressed support for the project,stated it would allow developers to improve the space and would be beneficial to community. Larry Framme spoke in support of the ordinance;he expressed excitement to see renovations of warehouses and conversion of commercial spaces,and said it was great to see the work and changes in the neighborhood. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 3 2.Ordinance:Zoning Map Amendment located at approximately 706 to 740 West 900 South and 710 to 739 West Genesee Avenue The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would rezone properties at 706 to 740 West 900 South and 710 to 739 West Genesee Avenue,including portions of two alleys,from M-1 (Light Manufacturing) to R-MU (Residential Mixed Use).The applicant intends to develop the remaining portion of the site with multi-family residential housing that is not currently permitted under the existing zoning designation.The developer has not proposed a specific development plan as part of the rezone application.The applicant also intends to renovate two vacant commercial buildings on the site for commercial uses.Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.Other sections of Title 21A –Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition.Petition Nos.:PLNPCM2019-01137 and PLN2020-00442 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 16,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 16,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 2,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Motion: Moved by Councilmember Rogers,seconded by Councilmember Wharton to close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano, James Rogers ABSENT:Amy Fowler Final Result:6 –0 Pass Minutes: Brian Fullmer presented the Zoning Map Amendment located at approximately 706 to 740 West 900 South and 710 to 739 West Genesee Ave. Linnus Wege expressed support of the redevelopment,stating his only concern was with east/west travel through the property. Kerri Hopkins spoke in support of the project and bringing new life to the west side of the City. Merilee Sabino spoke in support of the project,expressed excitement for revitalization MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 4 of the area and expressed concern over the RMU zoning height allowance. Larry Framme spoke in support of the project,expressed excitement to see residential development in the area and future potential commercial spaces in the area and requested more information on the height regulations for the RMU zoning. Ron Temu spoke of the neighboring church,Summum,how the height of the proposed development would impact the use of their property and religious practices and the potential noise pollution from the development. Bernie Aua,Vice President of Summum,expressed opposition to the rezoning of the property due to the height of the proposed building,being a disruption to religious practices,and requested the property be zoned RMU 35 (restricting the height). Su Menu,President of Summum,spoke in opposition to rezoning of the property to RMU,agreed with comments regarding noise and limiting religious practices,development creating an undue burden,requiring more security and maintenance to continue practices,and parking would become an issue for the church. Ian Percy spoke in support of the project;project would be a positive catalyst for change in the neighborhood,creating trails and commercials spaces –bringing life to the neighborhood. Maximilian Coreth,Applicant,reviewed the proposal and public outreach for the project. Brenda Scheer,Planning Commission,spoke in favor of the project and stated the area was ideal for more density and consideration given to the Summum church. Melanie Pehrson,Poplar Grove Community Council,spoke in favor of the proposal, supportive of mixed use development and understood growing housing needs,supportive of affordability in both residential and commercial spaces,and expressed appreciation of the developers active communication with the Community Council. Dennis Faris reviewed the developers interaction with the Poplar Grove Community Council/community and stated the project as a whole would be a great benefit to the neighborhood. Justin Heppler,AJC Architects,expressed excitement to help build and invigorate neighborhoods in Salt Lake City and reviewed the benefit of the RMU zoning for the project and surrounding neighborhood. Kseniya Kniazeva spoke to current lobbying efforts with the Mayor and Council to rezone land for the unsheltered and believed that spaces were being wasted on commercial spaces when there were individuals struggling to find space. Ryan McMullen spoke in support of the development and growth of 9th and 9th area MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 5 specifically spaces growing on 900 S,was happy to see the area becoming pedestrian friendly and stated the height was not an issue due to the existing freeway and haunted house. Anne Charles stated she was encouraged to hear how much public outreach was conducted and concerned over the disturbing language in regards to low income housing as it seemed exclusionary when working with local religious organizations. George Chapman spoke to the shadow issues (due to building height)for neighboring properties and how the Council could help mitigate the negative impacts. 3.Ordinance:Zoning Amendments at Approximately 2903 South Highland Drive The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the Sugar House Master Plan and Zoning Map for property at 2903 South Highland Drive.The property is currently “split zoned.”The applicant is requesting the eastern portion of the property be changed from Low Density Residential to Low Intensity –Mixed Use in the Sugar House Master Plan.The applicant is also requesting a zoning change on the eastern portion of the property from the current R-1-7000 (Single-Family Residential)to CB (Community Business)in order to match zoning on the western portion.If approved,the changes would allow for potential future development of the site.Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.Other sections of Title 21A –Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition.Petition No.:PLNPCM2020-00053/00054 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 2,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Motion: Moved by Councilmember Wharton,seconded by Councilmember Mano to close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council Meeting. AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano, James Rogers ABSENT:Amy Fowler Final Result:6 –0 Pass Minutes: MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 6 Brian Fullmer provided an overview of the Ordinance for Zoning Amendments at approximately 2903 South Highland Drive. Brenda Scheer spoke in favor of the proposal. 4.Ordinance:Rezone at 1301 and 1321 South State Street The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would rezone the properties at 1301 and 1321 South State Street.The proposal would change the properties from CC (Corridor Commercial)to FB-UN2 (Form Base Urban Neighborhood 2)and amend the table of the zoning ordinance to include additional land area eligible for additional building height.The applicant requested the rezone because the FB-UN2 zoning district better aligns with potential use of the corner lot and potential for a new mixed-use building,which would replace existing buildings on the parcels.Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.Other sections of Title 21A –Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition. Petition No.:PLNPCM2020-00328 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 2,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Motion: Moved by Councilmember Rogers,seconded by Councilmember Dugan to close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting. AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano, James Rogers ABSENT:Amy Fowler Final Result:6 –0 Pass Minutes: Brian Fullmer provided an overview of the Ordinance for a rezone at 1301 and 1321 South State Street. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 7 Jen Colby spoke in support of the project,stated the proposal contrasted the Lincoln Street Zoning Amendment,the project was an ideal way to add housing to address the gap,development agreements seemed unenforceable,an ordinance should be required (not a side agreement),and the City could create a larger price on height to compensate the City. Brenda Scheer stated the area was a very important corridor in the City,suggested changing to the zoning to allow a higher building in this area as it would address high density housing needs and give the area more character,and the City should empower the Planning Department to address a maturing City and encourage higher density. Kathryn Jezek spoke in support of the project and was in favor of developers trying to address the needs of the area and creating more high density housing. Alice Betts spoke in support of the project;taller buildings on State Street,and making the area more modern. 5.Ordinance*:Zoning Amendments at Lincoln Street and 200 South The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning map and Central Community Master Plan for properties located at 159 South Lincoln Street,949 East,955 East,959 East and 963 East 200 South.The requested rezone would change the properties from R-2 (Single and Two-Family Residential)to RMF-35 (Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential) zoning district.The Master Plan amendment would change the properties from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential.The proposal would allow the applicant more flexibility to develop future multi-family residential housing than what is currently allowed.Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.Other sections of Title 21A –Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition.Petition No.: PLNPCM2019-00683 and PLNPCM2019-00684 *The Planning Commission forwarded a negative recommendation,therefore an ordinance has not been drafted.If the Council decides to approve the zone amendment,an ordinance would be drafted and considered for approval. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 2,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Motion: MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 8 Moved by Councilmember Rogers,seconded by Councilmember Valdemoros to close the public hearing and defer action to a future Counicl meeting. AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano, James Rogers ABSENT:Amy Fowler Final Result:6 –0 Pass Minutes: Brian Fullmer provided an overview of the Ordinance for zoning amendments at Lincoln Street and 200 South. Katharine Biele expressed understanding of the anxiety of the affordable housing,but expressed concern regarding the history of the City changing,She noted St.Paul’s proposed to tear down multiple historic structures in the neighborhood (destroying character),and encouraged the Council to protect historic neighborhoods. Jude Rebadue expressed understanding that the structures were aging and rundown, enjoyed the existing look of the street scape,requested the Council respect the current zone and keep the area historic. Gwen Crist spoke in opposition to the rezoning,expressing concern with high density zoning,stated it was against the City’s master plan and destroyed the history of Salt Lake, historic homes should be refurbished,and the City should respect the overall character and take public comment into consideration. Kelsey Maas,Preservation Utah,expressed appreciation for the local community’s help to keep the area historic,stated rehabilitation encouraged sustainable practices and kept the area’s character,high density housing crisis was killing existing housing and ruining the charm of Salt Lake and potentially increasing the cost of home buying in the future. Jen Colby stated rezoning was against the City’s master plan and ordinance. Monica Hilding spoke in agreement with the Planning report,encouraged the Council to vote no on the proposal,stated the existing historic homes provided affordable housing and landlords that do not maintain properties,should not be rewarded by the price increase that would occur with the rezone. Esther Hunter,Chair of East Central Community Council,stated the application did not add housing to the City but instead increased housing costs,the community carried the highest density in the City with parcels (zoned RMF 35 and 45)nearby that could be developed instead. MaryAnn Wright compared the area to that of the Avenues and the travesty of losing the historic housing stock to high density housing,tearing down homes was not sustainable,landfills were 40%construction waste (contributing to it would be MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 9 negative),planners can direct investors to other locations throughout the City that did not contain historic buildings. Polly Hart spoke in opposition to the zoning change stating it was inconsistent with the master plan and it would reward landlords who have allowed the buildings to deteriorate. Cathy Campbell stated there was no need for high density housing and rezoning would increase parking issues in the area. Shannon Wells spoke in opposition of the rezoning,residents of the community did not want high density housing or the character of the community to change. Angela Jensen spoke to the eviction process for current residents and the lack of displacement aid that was offered. Cindy Cromer spoke to the history of the area and the potential for existing housing in the neighborhood Melinda Main Main,Bryant Neighborhood Chair,spoke in opposition to the rezone. Brenda Scheer,Planning Commission/Fellow of American Institute of Architects, spoke to the City’s need to update Master Plans that do not reflect the needs or vision of the residents and high density housing did not match the community’s character. Sanford Meek spoke in opposition of the rezoning as it was presumptive and did not seem to warrant the rezone,displacing affordable housing that already existed. Vincent Gryboski spoke in opposition to the rezoning stating it would negatively impact the character of the surrounding community and would create a slippery slope that could continue to destroy historic communities. Arthur Sandack spoke in opposition to the proposal. Melissa Hubbell spoke to the historic nature and character of the area;it should be respected,new buildings would become rundown as the current landlords did not care for the properties now,parking and traffic problems would increase and place a strain on the infrastructure. Scott Andrews spoke to the conversations held at the East Side Community Council that lead people to believe the properties could not be repaired. Chiao-ih Hui stated the proposal spoke to the percentage of designated affordable housing stock,addressed parking,added green space,family oriented housing,would potentially lower bad air quality in the City,housing prices would be raised,and approving the rezone would be a strong step in the right direction. Kathryn Jezek spoke in opposition to the rezone;allowing for changes in older and MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 10 developed communities was a slippery slope that lead to more destruction of character and ultimately a potential loss of the communities. Natalie Deeco expressed concern that the development would destroy the character of the area and take something away that could not be brought back. Carolyn Lyons spoke in opposition to the rezone. Dustin Dastrup spoke in opposition of the rezone and encouraged the developer to revisit the homes in question and see them through new eyes. Alex Sparks spoke to the misinformation that was given to the residents of the homes. C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS: NONE. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 11 D.COMMENTS: 1.Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. Minutes: Council Member Valdemoros thanked the Mayor for the invitation to the City &County Building’s memorial service for those who passed away from COVID-19. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 12 2.Comments to the City Council.(Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for a public hearing,as well as on any other City business.Comments are limited to two minutes.) Minutes: Council Member Johnston explained the rezone process for landuse items and the rules of decorum. Cindy Cromer spoke to the RMF 30 rezoning and those involved in the process,the need for understanding the economic side of the housing crises and the number of people that would be displaced with the proposed developments. Scot Andrews spoke to his life in Salt Lake City and the increasing housing costs that drove people out of the City. Devin O’Donnell expressed concerned over high density development and the consensus that they were entirely unaffordable to most residents. Kseniya Kniazeva spoke to homeless issues in the City;people that did not own land needed a voice as much as the commercial interests,schedule of homeless abatements, and encouraged the City to work with the homeless to provide a tiny house community. Darin Mann spoke to the homeless camp abatements;trauma cased by the abatements, and how the City could help with homelessness. Sarah Lind spoke to the homeless abatement issues,asked the Council to end the abatement process,zone an area for a tiny home community and allow people to stay where they were until a solution was found. Carolyn Lyons spoke to the increase of dogs being off leash in parks and public areas. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 13 Jen Colby clarified her earlier comments regarding rezoning for national and local historic districts;property owners using loopholes in the ordinance to demolish homes that were not maintained,and the understanding that if historic homes were lost –the nature of the area was lost as well. Ron Temu expressed shock and frustration for the lack of consideration and respect given to the Summum church in regard to the neighboring rezone. E.NEW BUSINESS: 1.Motion:Meeting Remotely Without an Anchor Location The Council will consider a motion to ratify the determination that the Council will continue to meet remotely and without an anchor location under HB5002. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -n/a Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 2,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Motion: Moved by Councilmember Dugan,seconded by Councilmember Mano to continue to meet remotely without an anchor location under HB5002. AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano, James Rogers ABSENT:Amy Fowler Final Result:6 –0 Pass F.UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 14 G.CONSENT: 1.Ordinance:Text Amendments to the RMF-30 Low Density Multi- Family Residential Zoning District The Council will set the date of Tuesday,March 16,2021 at 7 p.m.to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the RMF-30 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential)Zoning District and corresponding sections of Salt Lake City’s Zoning Ordinance.The changes aim to remove zoning barriers to multi-family housing developments in RMF-30 zoned areas of the City. Proposed changes include: 1.Introducing design standards for all new development; 2.Allowing the construction of new building types including sideways row houses,cottage developments,and tiny houses; 3.Reducing minimum lot area requirements per unit; 4.Removing lot width minimum requirements; 5.Allowing more than one primary structure on a lot; 6.Granting a density bonus for the retention of an existing structure;and 7.Introducing a lot width maximum to discourage land banking. Related sections of Title 21A –Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition.Petition No.:PLNPCM2019-00313 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,September 1,2020 and Tuesday,March 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,September 1,2020 and Tuesday,March 2,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,October 6,2020;Tuesday, October 20,2020;and Tuesday,March 16,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 15 Staff Recommendation -Set date. 2.Board Appointment:Library Board –David Wirthlin The Council will consider approving the appointment of David Wirthlin to the Library Board for a term ending June 30,2024. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,March 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 2,2021 Staff Recommendation -Approve. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Rogers,seconded by Councilmember Wharton to approve the consent agenda. AYE:Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers ABSENT:Amy Fowler Final Result:6 –0 Pass MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 16 H.ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 9:30 pm Minutes Approved: _______________________________ City Council Chair _______________________________ City Recorder This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as other items may have been discussed;please refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203(2)(b). To listen to the audio recording of the meeting or view meeting materials,please visit Salt Lake City Public Body Minutes library,available at www.data.slc.gov,selecting the Public Body Minutes hyperlink.If you are viewing this file in the Minutes library,use the links on the right of your screen within the ‘Document Relationships’information to listen to the audio or view meeting materials. This document along with the digital recording constitutes the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held Tuesday,March 2,2021. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 17 PENDING MINUTES –NOT APPROVED The City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,met in Work Session on Tuesday,March 2,2021 in an Electronic Meeting,pursuant to the Chair’s determination and Salt Lake City Emergency Proclamation No.2 of 2020(2)(b). The following Council Members were present: Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers The following Council Members were absent: Amy Fowler Present Legislative leadership: Cindy Gust-Jenson,Executive Director;Jennifer Bruno,Deputy Director;Lehua Weaver,Associate Deputy Director Present Administrative leadership: Mayor Erin Mendenhall;Rachel Otto,Chief of Staff;Lisa Shaffer,Chief Administrative Officer Present City Staff: Cindy Lou Trishman –Clerk,Katherine Lewis –City Attorney,Amanda Lau –Public Engagement & Communication Specialist,Ben Luedtke –Senior Public Policy Analyst,Kira Luke –Policy Analyst/Public Engagement,Nick Tarbet –Senior Public Policy Analyst,Robert Nutzman –Administrative Assistant,Russell Weeks –Senior Advisor,Sam Owen –Public Policy Analyst, Sylvia Richards –Public Policy Analyst,DeeDee Robinson –Deputy City Recorder,Ben Kolendar –Economic Development Director,Blake Thomas –Community &Neighborhoods Director,Chief Mike Brown –Police Chief,Laura Briefer –Public Utilities Director,Lorna Vogt –Public Services Director,Mary Beth Thompson –Chief Financial Officer,Keith Reynolds –Attendee,Kelsey Lindquist –Senior Planner,Nick Norris –Director of Planning ,Wayne Mills –Planning Manger, Felica Baca –Arts Division Director ,Jesse Stewart –Deputy Director Public Utilities,Kimberly Chytraus –Senior City Attorney,Mayara Lima –Principal Planner,Mark Stephens –Deputy City Engineer,Angela Price –HAND Project &Policy Manager Council Member James Rogers presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 2:00 pm MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 1 Work Session Items 1.Informational:Updates from the Administration ~2:00 p.m. 30 min. The Council will receive an update from the Administration on major items or projects, including but not limited to: •COVID-19,the March 2020 Earthquake,and the September 2020 Windstorm; •Updates on relieving the condition of people experiencing homelessness; •Police Department work,projects,and staffing,etc.;and •Other projects or updates. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Recurring Briefing Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a Minutes: Mayor Mendenhall provided information regarding:vaccination participation,the County launching a new website regarding the vaccine (ThisIsOurShot.com),vaccine distribution,outreach for vaccine information (provided in multiple languages),information regarding the Community Commitment Program,resource fair,and scheduled homeless camp abatements. Lisa Shaffer provided recognition of the “first”first responders (911 Dispatch for Salt Lake City &Sandy City)and the services they provided. Chief Mike Brown provided information regarding the Police Bike Squads (Pioneer squad –Glendale/Rose Park,Central squad –Main Street corridor,Liberty squad –1300 S. State/Ball Park communities),accomplishments of the bike squads (arrests,traffic stops,drug/firearm seizures,etc.),year to date activity,Community Liaison Program new team members,and the Central Patrol Bureau team members. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 2 2.Informational:State Legislative Briefing ~2:30 p.m. 20 min. The Council will be briefed by the Administration about issues affecting the City that may arise during the 2021 Utah State Legislative Session. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,January 12,2021;Tuesday,February 2,2021;Tuesday,February 9,2021; Tuesday,February 16,2021;and Tuesday,March 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a Minutes: Kate Bradshaw provided an update regarding:significant committee deadlines,bills no longer in play (Senate Bill (SB)61 –related to billboards,House Bill (HB)364 –creation of a Utah Lake authority,SB24 –sales tax distribution,SB221 –City’s ability to regulate short term rentals,HB302 –transgender sports),bills still in play/priority to the City (HB98 –building inspections,HB422 –political subdivision/civil liability,HB347 –homelessness services,new Inland Port bill SB243 –creating infrastructure loan fund,and SB217 –housing &transit redevelopment zones). Mayor Mendenhall thanked Ms.Bradshaw for her work with the lobbyist team for Salt Lake City. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 3 3.Ordinance:Text Amendments to the RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential Zoning District Follow-up ~2:50 p.m. 45 min. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about a proposal to amend the RMF-30 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential)Zoning District and corresponding sections of Salt Lake City’s Zoning Ordinance.The changes aim to remove zoning barriers to multi-family housing developments in RMF-30 zoned areas of the City.Proposed changes include: 1.Introducing design standards for all new development; 2.Allowing the construction of new building types including sideways row houses,cottage developments,and tiny houses; 3.Reducing minimum lot area requirements per unit; 4.Removing lot width minimum requirements; 5.Allowing more than one primary structure on a lot; 6.Granting a density bonus for the retention of an existing structure;and 7.Introducing a lot width maximum to discourage land banking. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,September 1,2020 and Tuesday,March 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,September 1,2020 and Tuesday,March 2,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,October 6,2020;Tuesday,October 20,2020; and Tuesday,March 16,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD Minutes: Nick Tarbet provided an introduction to the Text Amendments to the RMF-30 Low Density Multi Family Residential Zoning District. Kelsey Lindquist and Mayara Lima presented the proposal for the zoning change, explained the purpose of the change was to remove zoning barriers for development and increase affordable housing in Salt Lake City,reviewed the possibility for demolition of historic structures,the request for proposal (RFP)for a housing mitigation loss ordinance and the timeframe for draft ordinance. Council Member Johnston asked Kelsey Ms.Lindquist to clarify the option to increase units rather than demolish an existing single family home.Kelsey Ms.Lindquist stated if the lot was a double lot the second lot could be developed,an additional unit could be added to the house internally or as an addition to the home.She added this option would differ from an ADU because the ordinance criteria would be different and it would not require owner occupancy. Mayara Lima Ms.Lima explained the ordinance would require contained different criteria to requirements be applied and there were incentives for both options.**(If this is a response or addition to what Kelsey just said,I suggest adding this sentence to the previous paragraph.) Council Member Mano explained how the additional unit option would work alongside an existing structure. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 4 Wayne Mills explained the limitations to where an Accessory Dwelling Unit could be constructed in the City and that the new ordinance would allow additional units to be constructed in some restricted areas.He stated the new ordinance did not require owner occupancy of the structure. Council Member Wharton inquired about the possible displacement of residents with the decrease in units and how the City knew the number of units would increase and not decrease overall. Nick Norris reviewed the current trend in the RMF Zones where more units were being constructed and explained the difficulty in predicting the number of units. Council Member Wharton asked if trends and barriers were known,why there was not a way to predict the outcome. Nick Norris stated it was hard to predict what property owners intended to do with their properties,and the unsettled housing market impacted the types of developments constructed. Council Member Johnston inquired on the status of the housing mitigation ordinance. Blake Thomas reviewed the housing mitigation program and what was being done to help those who needed to be relocated. Angela Price reviewed the work and status of the Housing Mitigation Ordinance. Council Member Dugan spoke to the access of additional units and if it was creating a larger problem by displacing individuals. Council Members discussed if the RMF-30 Ordinance should or should not be approved prior to the Housing Mitigation Ordinance. 4.Informational:Updates on Racial Equity and Policing ~3:35 p.m. 45 min. The Council will hold a discussion about recent efforts on various projects City staff are working on related to racial equity and policing in the City.The conversation may include issues of community concern about race,equity,and justice in relation to law enforcement policies,procedures,budget,and ordinances.Items may include: •An update or report on the Commission on Racial Equity in Policing; ◦Discussion with some of the Commissioners on the Youth Subcommittee; ◦A presentation of training recommendations for the Police Department; •Other project updates or discussion. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 5 Briefing -Recurring Briefing Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a Minutes: Kira Luke provided an introduction to the Racial Equity and Policing Commission and provided subcommittee meeting dates and times. Commissioner Dante James gave and overview of the committee commission,its activities and members. Commissioner France Davis and Commissioner Moises Prospero presented the recommendations for Field Training Officers (FTO)and the need for diversity on the police force;Crisis Intervention Team (CIT)-a task force to assist individuals with mental health issues;Training Academy and In-Service Training Curriculum –a recertification program to keep officers up to date on CIT certifications.They discussed the need for all existing and new officers to be CIT certified,prioritizing the budget for recertification,and staffing for two shifts of CIT trained officers/professional team members. Council Members Mano and Valdemoros asked for clarification on the recommendation for the social workers team and emphasized how important the program would be for the citizens of Salt Lake City. Council Member Wharton asked for clarification on the recommendation for more diversity for the Field Training Officers. Commissioner Moises Prospero discussed the importance of why need for diversity in the program was so important and how the recruitment process was being conducted to increase the diversity of the team. A Straw Poll to accept the recommendations of the Racial Equity and Policing Committee Commission was supported by all Council Members present. Mahider Tadesa (school safety),Ephraim Kum (policy/procedures),MJ Powell (training)introduced themselves and the subcommittees they participated in as part of the Racial Equity and Policing Committee Commission youth program. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 6 5.Tentative Break ~4:20 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 6.Informational:Public Art Portfolio Maintenance Study ~4:40 p.m. 20 min. The Council will be briefed about the Public Art Portfolio Maintenance Study,including the goals,outcomes and next steps in the process.The study updates the inventory of City-owned art and assesses the condition of artworks to identify repairs and ongoing maintenance recommendations. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,March 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a Minutes: Sylvia Richards introduced the report and those involved. Roni Thomas (Consultant –Arts Council Assessment Team)gave an overview of public arts inventory and condition assessment of public works,stated some damage was found but nothing that would cause any harm to the public. Felicia Baca reviewed the purpose of the study,reported the last public art assessment was done in 2013,reported 240 individual objects in accessioned public art collection,86 plaques missing resulting in about $10,000 worth of replacements,11 priority works were identified,and about $109,000 to repair the 11 high priority works. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 7 7.Ordinance:2020 Salt Lake City Street Lighting Master Plan ~5:00 p.m. 30 min. The Council will be briefed about the 2020 Salt Lake City Street Lighting Master Plan.Some major changes in the proposed plan include adjustments to how the City chooses lighting in public spaces based on pedestrian activity and transportation needs,as well as identifies new street lighting standards for retrofit and new construction. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,March 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -TBD Hold hearing to accept public comment -TBD TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD Minutes: Sam Owen introduced the 2020 Salt Lake City Street Lighting Master Plan. Laura Briefer and Jesse Stewart reported the purpose of the Public Utilities Street Lighting Master Plan being developed was to bring all street lighting under one umbrella,rather than special assessment areas,gave the history of street lighting,updates and options to ensure proper lighting was used in the appropriate areas. Council Member Johnston asked how pedestrian lighting was integrated with street lighting. Mr.Stewart stated individual areas might need additional research and planning to accommodate the area effectively.He suggested visiting the areas with Council Members or residents to evaluate what was best for specific locations. Council Member Mano asked about the safety guide post and how these types of lights would be allocated through the City.Mr.Stewart and Ms.Briefer stated it would be on a case by case bases to properly address each area. Council Member Dugan asked how neighborhood maintained lights would be addressed in the plan.Mr.Stewart stated the City would work with the neighborhoods to update existing lights in accordance with the Master Plan to adequately light neighborhoods. Council and Staff discussed the timeline for approval of the Master Plan. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 8 8.Informational:Small Cell Wireless Facilities ~5:30 p.m. 30 min. The Council will be briefed about the legal frameworks governing small cell wireless facilities in the public right of way.The Council may also discuss potential policy directions to regulate placement and design of these facilities. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,March 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a Minutes: Kira Luke reviewed the reasoning for the discussion and the need to regulate small cell wireless facilities in the public right of way. Kimberly Chytraus gave a legal overview including definitions,regulations,City’s role, design standards,common feedback,and policy discussion about Small Cell Wireless Facilities in the public right of way. Council Member Dugan asked if other City’s/States had challenged the FCC on the small cell wireless facility regulations with the Federal Government and the outcome of those challenges.Ms.Chytraus reviewed active lawsuits and challenges in the federal court systems. Katherine Lewis talked to the status of the current lawsuits and options as to when Salt Lake City could join those lawsuits. Council Member Wharton reported on the discussion with US Legislature regarding small cell wireless facilities and current Bills being discussed.He asked if the design standards regulated the number of poles that could be installed in one area.Ms.Chytraus stated the City did not have the right to regulate the distance between the poles or the location.Council Member Wharton asked if there was an enforcement option as to meeting or not meeting the design standards.Ms.Chytraus stated the providers had worked with the City whenever an issue had arose to adequately meet the standards,however the City did have the right to implement fines and stop permits if necessary. Council Member Dugan asked if there was a restriction to proximity to schools or hospitals. Ms.Chytraus stated the radio frequency was regulated through the FCC which stated these poles did not require environmental review. Council Member Johnston stated one of the conditions was that the City could not require one or more provider to co-exist on one pole.Ms.Chytraus reviewed the process for approval and possible incentives that could be offered to encourage providers to join together. Council Member Wharton asked if police departments were able to access the frequency from the 5G cell towers.Ms.Chytraus stated to her knowledge the provider was the only one that MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 9 could access that information and police would need a warrant to access the information. Council asked for additional information on multiple carriers using one pole and the City using the poles for street lighting. Ms.Chytraus reviewed the structural requirements for using existing poles,new poles and free standing poles (mono poles). Mark Stephens reported on updating the policy regarding small cell wireless facilities, public outreach,the permitting process,and ordinance on placement/location. Council Member Dugan asked what the possible poll distance would be to a house in the policy updates.Mark Mr.Stephens stated it would depend on the width of the lot and if a park strip was available.Council Member Dugan asked if a minimum or maximum distance could be enforced between the poles and existing utilities.Mark Mr.Stephens stated distance was part of the existing design standards and was applied to many aspects regarding the location of the pole. Council Member Johnston asked if contact information was posted on the poles as to who owned to the poles.Ms.Chytraus Kimberly stated that was part of the design standards and existing poles should have the information posted on them. 9.Board Appointment:Library Board –David Wirthlin ~6:00 p.m. 5 min. The Council will interview David Wirthlin prior to considering appointment to the Library Board for a term ending June 30,2024. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,March 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 2,2021 Minutes: David Wirthlin introduced himself and explained his desire to join the library board. Council Member Dugan thanked David for his willingness to serve on the Library Board. Council Member Valdemores thanked David for his willingness to serve. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 10 Standing Items 10.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair Report of Chair and Vice Chair. Minutes: No report was given. 11.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director Report of the Executive Director,including a review of Council information items and announcements.The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to City Council business,including but not limited to scheduling items. Minutes: No report was given MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 11 12.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; MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 12 (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. Meeting adjourned at 6:30 pm Minutes Approved: _______________________________ City Council Chair _______________________________ City Recorder This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as other items may have been discussed; please refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203(2)(b). To listen to the audio recording of the meeting or view meeting materials,please visit Salt Lake City Public Body Minutes library,available at www.data.slc.gov,selecting the Public Body Minutes hyperlink.If you are viewing this file in the Minutes library,use the links on the right of your screen within the ‘Document Relationships’information to listen to the audio or view meeting materials. This document along with the digital recording constitutes the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held Tuesday,March 2,2021. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 2,2021 13 PENDING MINUTES –NOT APPROVED The City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,met in Formal Session on Tuesday,March 16,2021 in an Electronic Meeting,pursuant to the Chair’s determination and Salt Lake City Emergency Proclamation No.2 of 2020(2)(b). The following Council Members were present: Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano, James Rogers Present Legislative leadership: Cindy Gust-Jenson,Executive Director;Jennifer Bruno,Deputy Director;Lehua Weaver,Associate Deputy Director Present Administrative leadership: Mayor Erin Mendenhall;Rachel Otto,Chief of Staff;Lisa Shaffer,Chief Administrative Officer Present City Staff: Katherine Lewis –City Attorney,Cindy Lou Trishman –City Recorder,DeeDee Robinson –Deputy City Recorder,Brian Fullmer –Constituent Liaison,Policy Analyst,Nick Tarbet –Senior Public Policy Analyst,Robert Nutzman –Administrative Assistant,Russell Weeks –Senior Advisor,Sylvia Richards –Public Policy Analyst,Lindsey Nikola –Communications Director,Office of the Mayor,Keith Reynolds –Deputy City Recorder,Isaac Canedo –Council Staff Council Member Andrew Johnston presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 1 A.OPENING CEREMONY: 1.Council Member Andrew Johnston will conduct the formal meetings. Minutes: Council Member Johnston opened the meeting and welcomed those in attendance. 2.Pledge of Allegiance. Minutes: The pledge of allegience text and image of the flag was displayed on the screen during a moment of silence. 3.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules. Minutes: Council Member Johnston turned the time over to Council Member Dugan to acknowledge the passing and work of former Council Member Roslyn Kirk who served in District Six from 1985-1996.In addition to leadership on the Council and RDA,her accomplishments included the Fire Station at Research Park,the Anderson Library,This is the Place Monument,Wasatch Hollow Park,and first donation of the Open Space Land Trust.Council Member Dugan quoted a newspaper article about Roslyn stating “she was the most effective City Council Member I’ve worked with;a facilitator with a strong sense of fairness.She made tough decisions,was delightful and was a voice for the less fortunate.”Council Member Dugan read her obituary and extended appreciation for her life and legay. Council Member Johnston stated he would read the rules of decorum before opening the Public Hearings. 4.The Council will approve the work session meeting minutes of Tuesday,May 12, 2020;Tuesday,May 26,2020;and Thursday,May 28,2020 as well as the formal meeting minutes of Tuesday,January 5,2021 and Tuesday,January 19,2021. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Fowler,seconded by Councilmember Wharton to approve the Work Session minutes of Tuesday,May 12,2020;Tuesday,May 26,2020; Tuesday,May 28,2020 and Formal Meeting minutes of Tuesday,January 5, 2021 and Tuesday,January 19,2021. , AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan, Darin Mano,James Rogers Final Result:7 –0 Pass B.PUBLIC HEARINGS: Items B1-B3 will be heard as one public hearing MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 2 1.Grant Application:Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Grant Fiscal Year 2022-27 –East Downtown 200 South Transit Hub The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the Transportation Division to the Wasatch Front Regional Council.If awarded,this grant would fund construction of an East Downtown 200 South Transit Hub for bus parking/layover infrastructure to accommodate commuter needs and first and last-mile connections.The hub will also include bus parking,curb extensions,mid- block pedestrian crossings,bike lanes,and improved intersections for bicyclists. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -n/a Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 16,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda. 2.Grant Application:Assistance to Firefighters Grant –Fire Equipment Purchase The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the Fire Department to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).If awarded,the grant would fund eight apparatus mounted extrication equipment. The new equipment replaces old and obsolete equipment currently in use.The Department is also requesting eight battery operated ventilation fans to replace the existing gas-powered units. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -n/a Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 16,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 3 3.Grant Application:Justice Court Implementation Lab Initiative – Online Virtual Platform Tool The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the Salt Lake City Justice Court to the National Center for State Courts.If awarded, the grant would be used for a virtual platform that allows individuals charged with class B and C misdemeanors and infractions to take care of the initial steps of their cases virtually without having to go to the courthouse. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -n/a Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 16,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -n/a Staff Recommendation -Close and refer to future consent agenda. Minutes: Sylvia Richards provided an introduction to the grant applications for Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Grant for Fiscal Year 2022-27 –East Downtown 200 South Transit Hub,Assistance to Firefighters Grant-Fire Equipment Purchase,and Justice Court Implementation Lab Initiative –Online Virtual Platform. George Chapman spoke in opposition to the bus garage on 200 East (Congestion Air Quality Grant –East Downtown 200 South Transit)stating the $400,000 grant funding would be better used to provide $1 fares for SLC residents. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Wharton,seconded by Councilmember Fowler to close the public hearing and refer the items B1-B3 to a future consent agenda for action. AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan, Darin Mano,James Rogers Final Result:7 –0 Pass MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 4 4.Ordinance:Library Budget Amendment No.1 for Fiscal Year 2020-21 The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance to amend the budget for the Library Fund for Fiscal Year 2020-21.Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets,including proposed project additions and modifications.The proposed amendment includes funding to complete the Library’s Master Facilities Plan,a grant to increase digital access to underserved populations in the City,for earthquake repairs to the Main Library Branch,and Sprague Branch renovations, among other changes. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 9,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 16,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 16,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,April 6,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Minutes: Russell Weeks presented the Library Budget Amendment No.1 for Fiscal Year 2020-2021. No comments or discussion. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Rogers,seconded by Councilmember Wharton to close the Public Hearing and defer action to a later date. AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan, Darin Mano,James Rogers Final Result:7 –0 Pass MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 5 5.Ordinance:Zoning Text Amendments for Off-street Parking The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend various sections of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to off- street parking regulations.The proposal would: •Update parking requirements to better reflect demand; •Simplify parking regulations; •Address technical issues in enforcement;and •Establish a responsive ordinance to the City’s changing development patterns. Other sections of Title 21A –Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition.Petition No.:PLNPCM2017-00753 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 16,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 16,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 16,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Minutes: Russell Weeks presented the zoning text amendments for off-street parking. Ron Temu spoke to issues with parking around his property (church)and the need to discuss the development with the Mayor and zoning team. Jen Colby spoke in favor of the ordinance stating there were good elements but didn’t believe it was ready for Council action adding a bicycle safe network was needed. Devin O’Donnel expressed approval of the increased bike parking and the reduction of car use,accessibility issues needed to be addressed,concerned parking was being reduced to create more development,off-street parking was an issue in his neighborhood, the cost of parking downtown was expensive and an deterrent to people visiting downtown. Brenda Scheer stated the ordinance simplified all of the parking requirements in the City independent of the zoning requirements and was supportive of the bike parking. George Chapman spoke in opposition to the proposal stating the plan would make parking worse and re-emphasized public transit needs;additionally he requested the parking study be presented and reviewed prior to ordinance approval. Zachary Dussault spoke in opposition of the proposal stating it did not address the long-term issues for transportation solutions outside of the traditional car. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 6 Austin Taylor spoke in favor of the off-street parking reduction requirements,reviewed the cost to construct parking structures,sharing that parking indirectly impacts the lower income residents of the City. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Rogers,seconded by Councilmember Fowler to close the Public Hearing and defer action to a later date. AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan, Darin Mano,James Rogers Final Result:7 –0 Pass 6.Ordinance:Text Amendments to the RMF-30 Low Density Multi- Family Residential Zoning District The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the RMF-30 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential)Zoning District and corresponding sections of Salt Lake City’s Zoning Ordinance.The changes aim to remove zoning barriers to multi-family housing developments in RMF-30 zoned areas of the City.Proposed changes include: 1.Introducing design standards for all new development; 2.Allowing the construction of new building types including sideways row houses,cottage developments,and tiny houses; 3.Reducing minimum lot area requirements per unit; 4.Removing lot width minimum requirements; 5.Allowing more than one primary structure on a lot; 6.Granting a density bonus for the retention of an existing structure;and 7.Introducing a lot width maximum to discourage land banking. Related sections of Title 21A –Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition.Petition No.:PLNPCM2019-00313 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,September 1,2020 and Tuesday,March 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,September 1,2020 and Tuesday,March 2, 2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,October 6,2020;Tuesday, October 20,2020;and Tuesday,March 16,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Minutes: Nick Tarbet provided an introduction to the ordinance for text amendments to the MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 7 RMF-30 low density multi-family residential zoning district. Sarah Balland spoke in opposition to any type of rezoning or development ordinances resulting in consequences to the west side,specifically related to housing displacement,affordability and sustainable growth. Ean Daxter spoke in opposition to the amendments sharing that affordable housing was dismissed in the proposal,expressed concern about the ongoing rental rate issues and lack of family housing. Paula Mendoza spoke in opposition to the amendments,requesting explicit provisions for affordable housing must be prioritized and enforced. Eli Kauffman spoke in opposition of the ordinance,requesting inclusion of affordable housing for individuals that make minimum wage. Beverly Hill offered a solution for the property between 800-900 South/300-400 West, to begin a tiny home location allowing people to live with dignity and safety;and starting GAVE (Greener Acres Village Environment). Jen Colby spoke in opposition to the ordinance. David Amott stated the RMF 30 proposal was a well-intended starth,but at present may inadvertently incentivize the demolition of older homes. Emma Gleave stated she agreed with comments stated prior. Cindy Cromer gave a history of the changes to the RMF 30 zone,stated the ordinance would increase the value of property and therefore the cost of housing,would change the character of diverse neighborhoods and concluded that the City needed a policy regarding displacement of residents. Tina Balderrama asked the City Council to help drive the creation of affordable housing and prevent anything that could deplete the housing stock. Brenda Scheer recommended approval of the ordinance,with the addition of inclusionary zoning and requirement of affordable housing by developers. Zachary Dussault expressed general support of the amendment and added the need for land use reform is necessary to allow different types of housing in Salt Lake City. Madeline Glenn spoke in opposition to the proposal,specifically the impact to low income families,asked the Council to reject the amendments with approval contingent on affordable housing. George Chapman stated the staff should return with inclusionary zoning and affordable housing added to the existing proposal. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 8 Devin O’Donnel spoke to the intention of the ordinance stating it meant well but lacked the affordable aspect. Martha Castillo spoke to the need of including affordable housing in the ordinance. Tressa Marre stated it was important to prioritize affordability. Annie Lim reiterated the need to include affordable housing in the ordinance. Monica Hilding spoke to prioritizing affordable housing in all zoning decisions, concerned the amendments would be detrimental to historic neighborhoods. Qiru Cantua spoke to the development of the Westside and the increase in housing costs that are driving people out of their homes. Carrie Marsh spoke to the lack of options for affordable housing for families and the need to keep preservation a priority. Koly Swistak spoke in opposition of amendment,adding that housing cannot come at the cost of low-income residents. Brooks Bergmann spoke in opposition to the rezoning sharing that displacing residents and lack of affordable housing is undesirable. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Fowler,seconded by Councilmember Dugan to close the Public Hearing defer action until related amendments such as the Affordable Housing Overlay or Residential Housing Loss Mitigation Plan are brought to the Council for consideration and potential adoption. Council Member Johnston stated he agreed with the motion,discussed the current housing mitigation ordinance,affordable housing overlay,displacement efforts and the ADU incentive which need to be part of the Text Amendment along with inclusionary zoning. Council Member Mano stated tying the amendment to affordable housing and waiting for approval was a good idea while expressing concern about parcels limited to Single Family zoning demolition,and that the current zoning does not encourage affordable development.He concluded with support of the motion and encourage the Administration to finalize the ordinance as soon as possible. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 9 AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan, Darin Mano,James Rogers Final Result:7 –0 Pass Minutes: Council Member Johnston read through the public meeting rules. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 10 C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS: 1.Ordinance:West End Alley Vacation (Adjacent to Properties Located at 740 West and 746 West 900 South) The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would close a small portion of an alley at approximately 740 West and 746 West 900 South.This is not a request to vacate the entire alley.The proposal would allow the petitioner to square off the southwestern corner of his property for a proposed future multi- family residential and commercial development.The closure will not impact traffic or access.Petition No.:PLNPCM2020-00268 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,January 19,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,January 19,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 2,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Motion: Moved by Councilmember Mano,seconded by Councilmember Valdemoros to adopt Ordinance 3 of 2021,for the West End Alley Vacation (Adjacent to Properties at 740 West and 746 West 900 South). AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan, Darin Mano,James Rogers Final Result:7 –0 Pass MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 11 2.Ordinance:Zoning Map Amendment located at approximately 706 to 740 West 900 South 710 to 739 West Genesee Avenue The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would rezone properties at 706 to 740 West 900 South and 710 to 739 West Genesee Avenue,including portions of two alleys,from M-1 (Light Manufacturing)to R-MU (Residential Mixed Use).The applicant intends to develop the remaining portion of the site with multi-family residential housing that is not currently permitted under the existing zoning designation.The developer has not proposed a specific development plan as part of the rezone application.The applicant also intends to renovate two vacant commercial buildings on the site for commercial uses. Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.Other sections of Title 21A –Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition.Petition Nos.:PLNPCM2019-01137 and PLN2020-00442 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 16,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 16,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 2,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Motion: Moved by Councilmember Fowler,seconded by Councilmember Mano to to defer action to a future Council Meeting. AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan, Darin Mano,James Rogers Final Result:7 –0 Pass MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 12 3.Ordinance:Zoning Amendments at Approximately 2903 South Highland Drive The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the Sugar House Master Plan and Zoning Map for property at 2903 South Highland Drive. The property is currently “split zoned.”The applicant is requesting the eastern portion of the property be changed from Low Density Residential to Low Intensity –Mixed Use in the Sugar House Master Plan.The applicant is also requesting a zoning change on the eastern portion of the property from the current R-1-7000 (Single-Family Residential)to CB (Community Business)in order to match zoning on the western portion.If approved,the changes would allow for potential future development of the site.Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.Other sections of Title 21A – Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition. Petition No.:PLNPCM2020-00053/00054 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 2,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Motion: Moved by Councilmember Fowler,seconded by Councilmember Dugan to adopt Ordinance 4 of 2021,for the Zoning Amendments at approximately 2903 South Highland Drive. AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan, Darin Mano,James Rogers Final Result:7 –0 Pass MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 13 4.Ordinance:Rezone at 1301 and 1321 South State Street The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would rezone the properties at 1301 and 1321 South State Street.The proposal would change the properties from CC (Corridor Commercial)to FB-UN2 (Form Base Urban Neighborhood 2) and amend the table of the zoning ordinance to include additional land area eligible for additional building height.The applicant requested the rezone because the FB-UN2 zoning district better aligns with potential use of the corner lot and potential for a new mixed-use building,which would replace existing buildings on the parcels.Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.Other sections of Title 21A –Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition.Petition No.:PLNPCM2020-00328 FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 2,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Motion: Moved by Councilmember Mano,seconded by Councilmember Dugan to adopt Ordinance 5 of 2021,for a rezone at 1301 and 1321 South State Street. AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan, Darin Mano,James Rogers Final Result:7 –0 Pass MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 14 5.Ordinance*:Zoning Amendments at Lincoln Street and 200 South The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning map and Central Community Master Plan for properties located at 159 South Lincoln Street,949 East,955 East,959 East and 963 East 200 South.The requested rezone would change the properties from R-2 (Single and Two-Family Residential)to RMF-35 (Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential)zoning district.The Master Plan amendment would change the properties from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential.The proposal would allow the applicant more flexibility to develop future multi-family residential housing than what is currently allowed.Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics.Other sections of Title 21A – Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition.Petition No.: PLNPCM2019-00683 and PLNPCM2019-00684 *The Planning Commission forwarded a negative recommendation,therefore an ordinance has not been drafted.If the Council decides to approve the zone amendment,an ordinance would be drafted and considered for approval. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,February 2,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,March 2,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). Motion: Moved by Councilmember Valdemoros,seconded by Councilmember Fowler to reject the petition. AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan, Darin Mano,James Rogers Final Result:7 –0 Pass D.COMMENTS: MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 15 1.Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. Minutes: Mayor Mendenhall expressed gratitude for the Council’s collaborative work with the Administration regarding housing plans for the City sharing that the Administration was invested and would continue to make affordable housing a priority. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 16 2.Comments to the City Council.(Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for a public hearing,as well as on any other City business.Comments are limited to two minutes.) Minutes: Eli Kauffman spoke to the need for funding affordable housing. Bernia Aua spoke to the development surrounding the Summum Church,stating the developer and community organization did not work with the property owners and the project was a detriment to the area. Cindy Cromer stated the City should not reward bad behavior of developers but make them create better developments in the City. Tina Balderrama stated tents were the new affordable housing and expressed her feelings and dismay regarding the process of approval and construction of the Kozo apartments. Denis Farris expressed appreciation of the Council,and shared about the community and developer outreach conducted with the property owners of the Summum Church,and encouraged all to be involved in the process. Su Menu spoke regarding the Summum Church located near Gennesee Avenue and the sacred ground of the property,including that the new building height would create issues with shade on their property and noise and asked for the building to be shorter to allow for their church to thrive. Dave Iltis spoke to the Council public notifications accessibility,requested more information about the parking ordinance amendments and if the 2015/16 Downtown and Sugar House parking study was considered,and added that bike lanes between 800 South to 1900 south would be beneficial. George Chapman expressed concern for the decreased public engagement of the City, citing the ADA TIP project for Miller Park not being adequately funded due to the cost of the consultant,the 900 East bike lane redesign,and encouraged rental assistance from the City necessary due to COVID-19. Ean Daxter spoke to the need for affordable housing and the demands of the Wasatch Tenants United group,expressed concern with the police department assisting the health department and homeless camp abatements. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 17 Zachary Dessault spoke to land use and housing reform to protect affordable housing and requested more information on the Transportation plan for the City and closing Main Street for the summer to allow outdoor dining. Michael Showalter spoke about the development of luxury apartment buildings and the loans property developers can obtain which result in high rent,and funds being misused. Devin O’Donnel agreed there was misuse of funding relating to police funds,expressed concern with housing affordability and the Westside being continually ignored. E.NEW BUSINESS: NONE. F.UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE. G.CONSENT: 1.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.7 for Fiscal Year 2020-21 The Council will set the date of Tuesday,April 6,2021 at 7 p.m.to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance amending the final budget of Salt Lake City,including the employment staffing document,for Fiscal Year 2020-21. The proposed amendment includes $6 million from the U.S.Treasury Department for rental assistance,funding to host the National League of Cities Conference in November 2021,an outdoor business activity assistance pilot program,and a needs assessment of the Police Department,among many other items. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,April 6,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,April 20,2021 Staff Recommendation -Set date. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 18 2.One-year Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant & Other Federal Grants for Fiscal Year 2021-22 The Council will set the date of Tuesday,April 6,2021 at 7 p.m.to accept public comment and consider a resolution adopting the Mayor’s funding recommendations and an appropriations resolution adopting the One-Year Annual Action Plan that includes Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding,HOME Investment Partnership Program funding,Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG)funding,Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) funding,for Fiscal Year 2021-22 and approving an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City and the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,March 23,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,March 16,2021 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,April 6,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,April 20,2021 Staff Recommendation -Set date. Motion: Moved by Councilmember Rogers,seconded by Councilmember Dugan to approve the consent agenda AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers Final Result:7 –0 Pass MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 19 H.ADJOURNMENT: Meeting Adjourned:9:15 pm. Minutes Approved: _______________________________ City Council Chair _______________________________ City Recorder This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as other items may have been discussed;please refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203(2)(b). To listen to the audio recording of the meeting or view meeting materials,please visit Salt Lake City Public Body Minutes library,available at www.data.slc.gov,selecting the Public Body Minutes hyperlink.If you are viewing this file in the Minutes library,use the links on the right of your screen within the ‘Document Relationships’information to listen to the audio or view meeting materials. This document along with the digital recording constitutes the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held Tuesday,March 16,2021. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,March 16,2021 20 A JOINT RESOLUTION CELEBRATING THE 20TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE 2002 OLYMPIC WINTER GAMES, AND EXPRESSING SALT LAKE CITY’S SUPPORT AND GOALS FOR HOSTING A FUTURE GAMES WHEREAS, the opening ceremony of the 2002 Olympic Winter Games and Paralympic Winter Games took place at Rice-Eccles Stadium 20 years ago, on February 8, 2002; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City set a new, positive standard for how an Olympic Games could run; and WHEREAS, facilities built for the Games continue to be utilized to this day, including the Utah Olympic Oval, Utah Olympic Park, the Weber County Sports Complex, and many more; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City is working in partnership with the Salt Lake City-Utah Committee for the Games “SLC-UTCG” in developing beneficial operating principles for Games in Utah’s communities; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City desires to ensure that the next Games hosted in our City prioritizes diversity, equity and inclusion, is climate-positive, and net-zero waste, and acts as a catalyst for achieving major community initiatives; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City believes such a vision will be accomplished in a multitude of ways including ensuring that: • everyone employed to help prepare for the Games or employed during the Games will be paid a living wage; • the Games are welcoming, inclusive, and accessible for all, with universally accessible venues and events, and disability awareness training for public-facing staff and volunteers, and that opportunities should be created for residents of all income levels to attend Games and accompanying events at no cost or reduced rates; • prioritizing use of existing infrastructure and venues, developing a carbon- management plan for Games-related activities, striving for a Games that is net-zero waste, and forming a local sustainability committee to ensure that sustainability goals are achieved for the Games; • maximizing use of public transportation, including clean and active transportation modes, for all Games stakeholders; • the SLC-UTCG will be a model of transparency, robustly engaging the public in the planning process, making regular meetings open to the public and sharing information. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that Salt Lake City celebrates the anniversary of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games and looks forward with great anticipation to being selected a host city for a future Winter Olympic Games. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Salt Lake City is committed to working with our community partners and the SLC-UTCG to create a Games that strives for diversity, equity and inclusion in all Games activities, delivers a net-zero waste and climate-positive Games, and acts as a catalyst for achieving major community initiatives. Adopted this _____ day of February 2022 ________________________ _________________________ Erin Mendenhall Dan Dugan, Chair Salt Lake City Mayor Salt Lake City Council Member, District Six _________________________ ____________________________ Darin Mano, Vice Chair Victoria Petro-Eschler Salt Lake City Council Member, District Five Salt Lake City Council Member, District One __________________________ ____________________________ Alejandro Puy Chris Wharton Salt Lake City Council Member, District Two Salt Lake City Council Member, District Three __________________________ __________________________ Ana Valdemoros Amy Fowler Salt Lake City Council Member, District Four Salt Lake City Council Member, District Seven 1 9 4 6 0 A JOINT RESOLUTION CELEBRATING THE 20TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE 2002 OLYMPIC WINTER GAMES, AND EXPRESSING SALT LAKE CITY’S SUPPORT AND GOALS FOR HOSTING A FUTURE GAMES WHEREAS, the opening ceremony of the 2002 Olympic Winter Games and Paralympic Winter Games took place at Rice-Eccles Stadium 20 years ago, on February 8, 2002; and WHEREAS,Salt Lake City set a new, positive standard for how an Olympic Games could run; and WHEREAS, facilities built for the Games continue to be utilized to this day, including the Utah Olympic Oval, Utah Olympic Park, the Weber County Sports Complex, and many more; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City is working in partnership with the Salt Lake City-Utah Committee for the Games “SLC-UTCG” in developing beneficial operating principles for Games in Utah’s communities; and WHEREAS, Salt Lake City desires to ensure that the next Games hosted in our City prioritizes diversity, equity and inclusion, is climate-positive, and net-zero waste, and acts as a catalyst for achieving major community initiatives; and WHEREAS,Salt Lake City believes such a vision will be accomplished in a multitude of ways including ensuring that: everyone employed to help prepare for the Games or employed during the Games will be paid a living wage; the Games are welcoming, inclusive, and accessible for all, with universally accessible venues and events, and disability awareness training for public-facing staff and volunteers, and that opportunities should be created for residents of all income levels to attend Games and accompanying events at no cost or reduced rates; prioritizing use of existing infrastructure and venues, developing a carbon- management plan for Games-related activities, striving for a Games that is net-zero waste, and forming a local sustainability committee to ensure that sustainability goals are achieved for the Games; maximizing use of public transportation, including clean and active transportation modes, for all Games stakeholders; the SLC-UTCG will be a model of transparency, robustly engaging the public in the planning process, making regular meetings open to the public and sharing information. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that Salt Lake City celebrates the anniversary of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games and looks forward with great anticipation to being selected a host city for a future Winter Olympic Games. 1 9 4 6 0 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Salt Lake City is committed to working with our community partners and the SLC-UTCG to create a Games that strives for diversity, equity and inclusion in all Games activities, delivers a net-zero waste and climate-positive Games, and acts as a catalyst for achieving major community initiatives. Adopted this _____ day of February 2022 ________________________ _________________________ Erin Mendenhall Dan Dugan, Chair Salt Lake City Mayor Salt Lake City Council Member, District Six _________________________ ____________________________ Darin Mano, Vice Chair Victoria Petro-Eschler Salt Lake City Council Member, District Five Salt Lake City Council Member, District One __________________________ ____________________________ Alejandro Puy Chris Wharton Salt Lake City Council Member, District Two Salt Lake City Council Member, District Three __________________________ __________________________ Ana Valdemoros Amy Fowler Salt Lake City Council Member, District Four Salt Lake City Council Member, District Seven Item B1 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Nick Tarbet Policy Analyst DATE:February 1, 2022 RE: Text Amendment: Notice of Work in the Public Right of Way MOTION 1 I move that the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting. MOTION 2 I move that the Council continue the public hearing. COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Nick Tarbet, Policy Analyst DATE: February 1, 2022 RE:Text Amendment: Public Notice for Permits to Work in the Public Right of Way PROJECT TIMELINE: Written Briefing: Jan 12, 2021 Briefing 2: Feb 9, 2021 Briefing 3 January 11, 2022 Set Date: December 8, 2020 Public Hearing 1: Jan 19, 2021 Public Hearing 2: Feb 1, 2022 Potential Action: TBD New Information During the January 11, 2022 work session briefing, the Council didn’t raise any significant concerns or questions about the updated draft ordinance. Staff said they would reach out to stakeholders and residents who have expressed interested in these changes. Additionally, staff met with some stake holders who wanted to better understand the proposed changes. They expressed concerns about the following: Would this exclude work that is being done on existing infrastructure? o An example is hanging wires on existing poles Does notice only have to go to the adjacent property owners where the work is being done, i.e. the ground is being disturbed? o An example is if fiber is being pushed through existing conduit, does everyone along the route have to be notified, or only the adjacent properties where the work is disturbing the ground. In order to address these concerns, they submitted the following change for consideration to the exemption list: 14.32.036(4)(f): f. The installation of fiber optic cables to existing utility infrastructure, including existing poles, wires or conduit. If this Council is supportive of this change, staff will include in the final draft. The public hearing will be held on February 1, 2022. Page | 2 The following information was provide for the January 11, 2022 work session briefing. It is provided again for background purposes. The Council will be briefed on proposed amendments to City Code requiring permit applicants for construction work in the public right of way to provide notice to property owners whose properties are adjacent to the work that will be performed. The proposed changes were requested in response to numerous constituent inquiries about the lack of notice on certain nearby utility construction projects. Much of the right-of-way work that is performed is governed by State statute and limits the amount of interaction the City has with the work. However, in balancing the work that is performed and the impact to residents, some additional noticing steps are proposed to be added to the ordinance. Originally, the petition was intended to only apply to above-ground work in the public right of way. However, based on a public hearing on January 12, 2021 and a follow-up work session on February 9, 2021, the Council directed staff to work with the Administration to make the following changes to the draft ordinance: Include under-ground work as part of the notification requirements Notification should be provided before obtaining the permit o Proof must be part of the permit application The applicant is responsible to give proof that notice was provided Outline specific requirements that should be included in notice o Purpose of construction, contact info, date of construction, etc. The Administration has forwarded the attached ordinance for the Council to consider. The following table shows where the requested changes are included in the draft ordinance. Please see the legislative draft. Requested Change Page and Line(s) Include underground work as part of the notification requirements Page 4, lines 148-150 Notification should be provided before obtaining the permit. Proof must be part of the permit application Page 4, lines 141-143 The applicant is responsible to give proof that notice was provided Page 4, lines 141-143 Specific requirements that should be included in notice: purpose of construction, contact info, date of construction, etc. Page 5, lines 159-175 Page | 3 During the February 9 public hearing, representatives from Verizon spoke, in addition to submitting a letter outlining their concerns. They stated the current process is efficient and they would prefer to provide notice to property owners after the permit has been received. The new ordinance would require them to provide notice before they obtain a permit. Their concerns are outlined below on pages 3-4. The revised draft has not been distributed for public comment yet. Staff wanted to check in with the Council Members to make sure the updated version meets the Council’s intent. If it does, staff recommends setting a public hearing for February. Staff will then send the revised ordinance to stakeholders for comment. Policy Questions 1. The draft ordinance requires notification for work located below ground and behind the curb to adjacent properties on the same side of the public right of way, while notice for work below ground and in the paved section of the public way will be required for both sides of the public right of way. The Council may wish to ask the administration why this difference is needed. Would it be appropriate to notice both sides of the street, even when work is done behind the curb and gutter? 2. The draft ordinance says the applicant is responsible for delivering the public notice unless otherwise determined by the City Engineer. The Council may wish to ask the Administration what situation are envisioned that the applicant may not be the one responsible for delivering the public notice. The following information was provide for the February 9, 2021 work session briefing. It is provided again for background purposes. PUBLIC HEARING SUMMARY During the public hearing members of the public spoke about the proposed changes and asked some questions, Additionally, a letter from Verizon was submitted pertaining to the proposed change. A few individuals requested the Council require public notice for below ground work as well. Some also said current contractors are not doing a good job of restoring property to the way it was before the work happened. Verizon representatives spoke during the public hearing and also submitted a letter, outlining their concerns. They stated the current process is efficient and they would prefer to provide notice to property owners after the permit has been received. The new ordinance would require them to provide notice before they obtain a permit. Council staff met with staff from CAN and the Attorney’s Office to go over the comments and formulate the following responses. 1. Request to apply the notification requirement to work “below ground” as well. Page | 4 Administrative staff said this is obviously possible, but it will likely require an increase in staff and costs for the city to monitor and / or respond to concerns about projects. The proposed change before the Council would only require public notice to adjacent property owners for above ground work – typically, this type of work is limited to a few properties that are near the above ground poles/facilities. Underground work can go for hundreds of yards (larger/longer projects would be miles). It would take more staff to verify and ensure the public notices were properly provided. Administrative staff have prepared some very preliminary estimates for cost/staffing impact to the City. They will be available during the briefing to respond to questions the Council may have about potential cost of notifying for below ground work. 2. Reponses to Verizon’s Letter Verizon’s request: Allow permit holders to post notice after the permit is obtained. Prefer to submit template with permit application and actual notice is provided 48-72 hours before work commences. Administration response: o CAN staff said the current process has not been working and that is the reason for the proposed changes. The goal is to get the notifications out sooner, so the public is aware of the work before the permit is issued. o The new process would require the permit holder to submit evidence that the notice was provided to adjacent property owners. They then submit that as part of their permit application. The work would typically commence about 2-3 weeks later. Verizon’s request: Clarify type of evidence that is required to demonstrate applicant has satisfied notification requirement. Administration response: o CAN staff said notice such as a door hangar, with timestamped photos is one way to satisfy this requirement. o The goal is to avoid situations where a piece of paper is placed on a doorstep that can easily be blown away. Verizon’s request: Adopt definition of adjacent owner currently in notification process. Administration response: o CAN staff stated this could be clarified. Verizon’s request: Clarify purpose of the notice and what is to be included in the description of the purpose of construction. Administration response: o CAN staff has stated they can help provide examples of the type of language they that should be on the notice. o They can do this to help ensure consistency for all permit holders. Verizon’s request: Clarify definition of above ground work; does it include excavation to run conduit or lay fiber. Administration response: Page | 5 o CAN staff has stated this type of work applies to facilities that are permanently above ground or on poles or anything that would fall under the master license agreement for small cells. o Typically, this type of work would also include trenching for conduit. Verizon’s request: Any other info reasonably required by City engineer is too broad Administration response: o CAN staff stated this is meant to be specific to notice requirements. They can provide some language to clarify that. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. Some Council Members have expressed interest to require more public notice for below ground work. Does the Council want to adopt these proposed changes and also adopt a legislative action asking the Administration to come back with a proposal for increased public outreach for underground work in the public right of way? o This may include identifying options to require contractors to do the outreach and an option for the city to be responsible for providing the public notice 2. The Council may want to ask about the description of information that would be suggested / requested for the notice. For example, location, description, duration of type of work; contact information for the contractor and City, etc.? 3. The Council may wish to ask what the change in the timeline for permit holders would be and how the Administration can notify potential applicants of the changes. The following information was provide for the January 19 public hearing. It is provided again for background purposes. WORK SESSION SUMMARY This item was on the January 12 agenda as a written briefing. Council Members did not raise any concerns or ask staff questions about the proposed changes. The public hearing is scheduled for January 19. The following information was provide for the January 12 work session briefing. It is provided again for background purposes. ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will be briefed on proposed amendments to City code requiring permit holders to provide notice to property owners whose properties are adjacent to the above groundwork that will be performed in the public way. The proposed changes were requested in response to numerous constituent inquiries about the lack of notice to adjacent property owners. Much of the right-of-way work that is performed is governed by State statute and limits the amount of interaction the City has with the work. However, in balancing the work that is performed and the impact to residents, some additional noticing steps are being added to the ordinance. Page | 6 The key changes would require the franchise holder/applicant to provide the following: Evidence that they provided notice to all property owners whose properties are adjacent to the portion of the public way where the work is being performed. Notice that includes the name of the permit holder performing the construction, the purpose of the construction, and a contact phone number and email for the permit holder. Evidence shall be satisfactory to the City Engineer that all adjacent property owners have received notice. Related text cleanups to match current practice. Since work in the public right of way is overseen by the City’s Engineering Division, they have reviewed the ordinance in collaboration with the Attorney’s Office. Engineering has expressed their support for these proposed changes. Administrative staff have noted the contractor will have to give notice of the construction prior to submitting an application for a permit to Engineering. Once Engineering approves the permit, the contractor may move forward with construction. PUBLIC PROCESS Engineering provided Council Staff a list of the companies who do much of the work in the public right of way. Council staff emailed this group to let them know about the proposed changes, and the dates of the briefing and public hearing. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. For the properties that would be included in the notification, the Council may wish to consider expanding the requirement beyond the proposal of adjacent property owners. 2. If the Council has questions about the timing of the when the notice must be given to when the permit is granted, the Council may wish to ask the administration to explain the process for when the notice must be given before receiving the permit for construction. 3. If it would be helpful, the Council may wish to ask the Attorney’s office or Administration representative to provide a quick review on the types of things the City is able to require or request versus items that are monitored or regulated by the State. 4. The Council may also ask Engineering to provide a description of their typical interaction with the permit holders. 5. The Council may wish to raise any other issues that have been raised by constituents. 6. The Council may wish to ask about options to address issues when the noticing requirements are not followed. Lisa Shaffer (Dec 14, 2021 13:14 MST) 12/14/2021 12/14/2021 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY22Budget TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke, Sylvia Richards, Allison Rowland Budget and Policy Analysts DATE:February 1, 2022 RE: Budget Amendment Number Six FY2022 ________________________________________________________________________________ Budget Amendment Number Six includes thirty-five proposed amendments and requested changes to seven funds. Total expenditures coming from fund balance are $2,701,648. The Council may wish to note that the Administration is proposing to add sixteen ongoing FTE’s using Fund Balance, and those positions would need to be added to the upcoming annual budget. If all the items are adopted as proposed, then Fund Balance would be $29,721,935 or 21.29% above the 13% minimum target established by the Council in FY2020. State law was updated and set a maximum General Fund Balance limit of 35%. The increase is a result of higher- than-expected revenues and unspent funds dropping to Fund Balance at the end of FY2021. The Finance Department will be available at the briefing to provide a more detailed revenues update as summarized in the table later in this report. Inflation Impacts for Upcoming FY2023 Annual Budget Although there are positive revenue and fund balance reports, staff wanted to mention that there will likely be several inflationary impacts that may offset that positive news. Some departments have mentioned they expect significant cost increases for existing services and contract renewals as part of the upcoming FY2023 annual budget. For example, item A-13 in this budget amendment represents a 36% budget increase for fuel purchases. In addition, the CIP Cost Overrun Account is less able to offset project cost increases in response to pandemic-related construction supplies inflation so either project scopes are reduced, or additional funding may be needed. The FY2022 annual budget included significant use of one-time funding for ongoing expenses which will need to have ongoing revenue identified in future fiscal years to continue. The Council may wish to consider if some proposed items in this budget amendment would be better evaluated during the annual budget with the full context of the City’s competing needs. Project Timeline: Set Date: February 1, 2022 1st Briefing: February 1, 2022 2nd Briefing: Feb. 8 or 15 (if needed) Public Hearing: February 15, 2022 Potential Action: March 1, 2022 Page | 2 Revenue for FY2022 Budget Adjustments The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for Fiscal Year 2022. The Finance Department will be available at the briefing to review individual revenue line-item changes. According to the Administration, projections for fiscal year 2021 were better than expected, while projections for fiscal year 2022 continue to trend above budget. Sales tax for the first quarter was well above budget and the prior year. Franchise tax is lagging below budget from a decrease in water franchise ($250,000) and telephone ($150,000) franchise taxes. Other notable increases include licenses which are above budget driven by increases in airport parking taxes and innkeepers’ tax. Permits remain very strong with increases in plan check fees and building permits. Field reservations, land leases and building leases are leading to an increase in Charges, Fees and Rentals. Notable decreases include a decrease in moving violations and justice court fines. Fire reimbursement from the airport is also below budget. Page | 3 Fund Balance The Administration’s chart below shows the current General Fund Balance figures. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) has confirmed amounts that lapsed to General Fund Balance at the end of Fiscal Year 2021. If all items are approved as proposed by the Administration, then combined General Fund Balance would be 21.29% or $29,721,935 above the 13% minimum target. Impact Fees Update The Administration provided a summary of impact fee tracking, details on refunding amounts and dates and lists of unfinished projects with impact fee funding. The information is current as of December 13, 2021. As a result, the City is on-track with impact fee budgeting to have no refunds during all FY2022. The Administration reports work is nearing completion to update the fire and parks sections of the impact fee plan. The transportation section was updated last year. Eligible projects for police impact fees are being identified. Type Unallocated Cash “Available to Spend”Next Refund Trigger Date Amount of Expiring Impact Fees Fire $1,644,113 More than a year away - Parks $11,709,246 More than a year away - Police $471,211 More than a year away - Transportation $6,585,173 More than a year away - Note: Encumbrances are an administrative function when impact fees are held under a contract Page | 4 Section A: New Items (note: to expedite the processing of this staff report, staff has included the Administration’s descriptions from the transmittal for some of these items) A-1: Suazo Business Center Membership ($25,000 from General Fund Balance) This $25,000 would fund an annual membership for the Suazo Business Center, resulting in an ongoing partnership with an organization that provides technical support for businesses owned by Latinx residents and members of other underrepresented groups. The Center's location on the West Side facilitates access for area residents, and it was able to expand its services last year because of $25,000 that the Council approved in FY2021 Budget Amendment #2. At the time, one-time federal CARES Act funding was available to cover this amount for one year, but this request is for ongoing City general fund support. Policy Questions: Membership Level – The Council may wish to ask the Administration is there are other membership levels available for the City. Evaluate During Upcoming Annual Budget – The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration whether this item could be addressed in the upcoming annual budget rather than in a budget amendment. Would the Council prefer to address this in the annual budget? A-2: Move Grants Manager from ARPA to General Fund ($66,000 from General Fund Balance) In the FY2022 annual budget the Council approved one Grants Manager FTE in the Finance Department using ARPA funding assuming the final guidance from the U.S. Treasury allowed such a use. The Finance Department has determined the position is not a qualified use and requests the Council shift the position to the General Fund. The position will continue to assist with tracking, reporting and compliance of ARPA funding as well as other grants. The City has seen an increase in grant applications to approximately 100 in the last two fiscal years. The City is on track for a similar number of grants in FY2022. The bipartisan infrastructure bill recently passed in Congress and signed by the President increases funding opportunities over the next several years and could also result in more grant applications. A-3: Healthcare Innovation Branding Biohive ($50,000 from General Fund Balance) Council staff asked DED why another $50,000 was needed after the same amount, also identified as one-time, was approved in Budget Amendment #4 of FY2021, and what deliverables would result from this amount of spending. The Department’s response did not address this specific question about the additional funding. The Department has provided general information about the goals of the program (see Attachment 1). Policy Questions: Ongoing or One-time Need – The Council may wish to clarify with the Administration if this is in fact more of an ongoing need, and if so whether it should be addressed in the upcoming annual budget rather than as sequential budget amendment requests. Status of Earlier $50,000 – The Council may wish to ask the Department if funds from FY2021 are fully spent or encumbered, and what data was collected because of the previous expenditure. A-4: Fix the Bricks Program and FTE Transfer from Fire Department to Community and Neighborhoods Department (Budget Neutral) This item would transfer an Office Technician II FTE and an hourly Office Technician from the Emergency Division within the Fire Department to the Housing Stability Division within the CAN Department. No budget impact would be incurred as the positions already exist. Note that both positions are currently vacant. Ongoing administration of the FEMA grant which funds Fix the Bricks and the two positions would also transfer to the CAN Department. The Housing Stability Division administers several other ongoing Federal grants, many from the U.S. HUD Department, and could apply those existing skillsets to this FEMA grant. The Division’s housing rehabilitation employees have also assisted Fix the Bricks operations in the past such as environmental reviews, floodplains, Page | 5 historic preservation, noise abatement and control, etc. There may be benefits of combining Fix the Bricks with the housing rehabilitation programs that offer small and medium sized repairs to qualified low- and moderate-income homeowners. The two Fix the Bricks employees would be supervised by the Housing Project Manager that also oversees the housing rehabilitation program. Demand has exceeded program capacity since launching several years ago. Last year an engineering firm was contracted with for home inspection and repair approvals which is speeding up that step of the process. Contractors must be on the approved list to submit seismic improvement project bids. A training program for contractors is being developed to try and get more added to the approved list. Issues related to supply chains and job vacancies are also reported to be slowing the pace of contractor’s work. The multiple emergencies of the past two years and ongoing pandemic have reduced Emergency Management staff’s ability to work on Fix the Bricks. Policy Questions: Resources to Increase Pace of Seismic Improvements – The Council may wish to ask the Administration what additional resources, staffing and/or program changes could decrease wait times for residents. FEMA’s Use of Funding Timeliness Expectations – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if FEMA has any timeliness requirements or expectations about the use of grant funds awarded to the City. The program recently completed using funding from 2017. Geographic Equity – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration potential changes to improve geographic equity of program participants such as helping low- and moderate-income residents cover the 25% cost share, using a sliding scale based on income, and assistance navigating funding options (historic tax credits, grants, local community organizations, etc.). The Council may also wish to ask if information is available on the current distribution of participants for completed projects and those on the waiting list. A-5: Additional Police Sergeant for Special Victims Unit ($135,971 from General Fund Balance) This request would create a second sergeant for the Special Victims Units (SVU) in the Police Department and provide funding for a vehicle, computer, and other equipment. The current sergeant supervises 12 detectives which is more than best practice and raises span of control issues. The SVU caseload has increased in recent years. A major driver of the growing caseload is sexual assault evidence kit DNA matches in the national database. A DNA match can provide suspect identification and other new information for investigation. In 2014 and 2015 over 700 sexual assault evidence kits from cold cases were submitted to the State Crime Lab for processing. The Police Department reports over 400 DNA matches have been identified which provides new leads to investigate. If the second sergeant is approved, then the SVU would designate a team focused on sex crimes investigations including the new DNA leads from the older sexual assault evidence kits. This is expected to improve case investigations and the Department’s ability to process the cold cases. The Department reports similar workload and span of control issues are being experienced for victim advocates working with the SVU. A grant funded advocate was embedded in the SVU to directly work with detectives investigating cold cases. However, the grant funding ends September 2022. Continuing the position by using General Fund dollars could be a request in the FY2023 annual budget. The Department reports one or two more SVU detectives may also be requested given the high number of DNA matches from sexual assault evidence kits. Policy Question: Resources to Increase Pace of Cold Case Investigations – The Council may wish to ask the Administration what resources in addition to SVU police officers could improve the pace of cold case investigations. For example, are there upstream or downstream resources that could help crime lab evidence processing, victim advocates, the justice court or prosecutor’s office? Evaluate During Upcoming Annual Budget – The Council may wish to ask if this position should be considered in the context of the annual budget, or if the need is more immediate/urgent because of the caseload? Page | 6 A-6: Police Access Control Upgrade and Support ($214,538 from General Fund Balance) This request would replace the original security access control system at the Public Safety Building which was installed nine years ago. The funding includes $113,198 for hardware (controllers, readers, and server), $56,340 for installation and ongoing maintenance and support estimated at $45,000 annually. The new system allows the building to continue meeting Federal and State security compliance rules. The hardware includes a new server that could act as the backbone for a new standard security system across all city facilities. The approach was developed by IMS, Facilities and Engineering. The Police Department would be the first to move to the new system. Additional funding may be needed to transfer other departments and facilities into the new system A-7: Fireworks Budget ($25,000 from General Fund Balance) This request would fund two fireworks shows in July 2022: one at Jordan Park on Independence Day, July 4th, and another at Liberty Park on Pioneer Day, July 24th. Funding and contracts for the two shows are typically needed in the spring to ensure vendor availability. The Administration states the shows could be cancelled based on certain conditions such as an air quality index of 100+ and severe drought. The Council removed funding for the shows in the FY2022 annual budget because of the ongoing drought. At the time some Council Members expressed concern about fireworks in general, that they are always bad for air quality. Some current Council Members have expressed similar concerns. Policy Question: Alternative Celebration Options – The Council may wish to discuss alternative options to celebrate the two July holidays such as festivals, laser & light shows, drone shows, etc. A-8: This item will be held as a future briefing about the City’s efforts to diversify public safety response options A-9: Arts Council Staff Increase of 3 FTEs ($175,000 from General Fund Balance) The Administration indicates that the Arts Council needs additional staff support to handle current workload as well as the duties/role of the Mayor’s Advisor on Arts and Culture which was shifted from the Mayor’s Office to the Arts Council. A total of three (3) FTEs are being requested: two (2) Arts Council Program Coordinators and one (1) Arts Council Program Manager. The Council may wish to note that these same positions were initially proposed in the last annual budget process requesting the use of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) monies to fund the positions, however, these positions did not qualify for ARPA funds, and the Council did not prioritize them for funding with General Fund dollars when balancing the budget before adoption. The Administration is requesting that these positions be funded now using fund balance – six months each for two program coordinators and six months for one program manager. The job descriptions are as follows: Arts Council Program Coordinators (Annual salary and benefits $94,383 – Six months is $47,192) The incumbents would coordinate, organize, and implement Arts Council & Economic Development-related programs and services; implement marketing efforts, collaborate on grant writing and reporting; provide information and technical assistance as needed to artists, arts organizations, and the public; and track income and expenses. Arts Council Program Manager (Annual salary and benefits $121,116 – Six months is $60,558) The incumbent would direct one or more major program and initiative(s) within the City’s Department of Economic Development, including arts and culture programming, small business and entrepreneurship support, and recruitment and retention activities. Activities would include being responsible for the department programs, working with community members, advisory boards, and project management with the end goal to support the City’s arts, economic and equity master plan goals. Policy Questions: Work for the Non-profit and/or the City – The Council may wish to ask whether the new staff members will perform work that relates to the non-profit organization, or whether the work will be directly for Salt Lake City. Page | 7 Evaluate During Upcoming Annual Budget – The Council may wish to discuss if this proposal would be better evaluated during the annual budget with the full context of the City’s competing needs. The FY2022 annual budget tentatively included using ARPA funding for three new Arts Council FTEs, but U.S. Treasury guidance determined those positions were an ineligible use. The Administration shared the following context regarding this policy question: 1. “ZAP Grant Funding: Since 2016, the Arts Council’s award from Salt Lake County Zoo, Arts, and Parks (ZAP) Tier I grant funding has averaged $360,000 annually, based on qualifying programming and operating expenses. This prestigious grant, of which the Arts Council is the only local Arts Agency within among only 22 organizations countywide, is a continuing opportunity to leverage funds outside the City. Due to strategic shifts in programming in 2018, the Arts Council no longer incurs the $1.5 to 2 million dollars cost of in-house expenses to the Twilight Concert Series. A natural consequence of this shift is that the annual ZAP award is calculated based on three years of qualifying expenditures; thus, the organization’s qualifying expenditures have been significantly decreasing with compounding effects. The Arts Council projects over $175,000 in losses by 2022. The additional staffing costs will qualify as expenditures to begin to mitigate and stabilize this award in the next three years (although it will not reach its previous levels due to lower expenditures). So, less expenditures lead to a lesser grant award. It should be noted that the ZAP grant revenue losses will still occur and compound despite new staffing expenditures mitigating the stabilization of this critical funding. In preparation for FY23 the staff and board are currently considering tiered approaches and scenarios to programmatic cuts while mitigating service losses to the arts community during one of the hardest hit industries through the COVID-19 pandemic. 2. Programmatic & Mayoral goal execution and staffing capacity: Since 2013, the Arts Council has been a staff of six full-time City employees (5 in 2011). Since that time significant changes to programming scope, budget, and priorities/values-and a rapidly growing city-have occurred with no increases to full- time support. Over the years, there have been increases to program funds and the grants budget without additional staffing support. Major impacts include our ability to deliver program services namely in Public Art and the new maintenance fund, all public programs such as Living Traditions Presents, City Arts Grants; and new initiatives of the City, and the Mayor’s Plan-all outside the scope of baseline programs and functions of our Local Arts Agency designation. Additionally, in 2020 the full-time policy role of Mayor’s Advisor on Arts & Culture was eliminated from the Mayor’s Office and that role condensed to the Arts Division Executive Director. This has resulted in expanded Citywide and external communications, projects, policy, and consultation (internal and external) asked of the Executive Director as a result, and the incorporation of the management of the Cultural Core project into the Arts Council. For the Arts Council to continue its development efforts (which have shown measurable increases in recent years) to begin to mitigate the ZAP losses, and leverage value to the City, capacity needs to exist to staff the above efforts. [If the Council were to wait to fund the positions during the annual budget process], the above considerations would just be further postponed and continue the strains mentioned. The Arts Council has requested staffing at the Department since FY21 to mitigate these challenges. It has been in the Mayors Plan to “Stabilize the Structure and Funding of the Arts Council” in Plans 2020-2022. While our team is passionate and committed, we have experienced staff retention and morale issues related to high volumes of work. Retaining the incredible talent that we currently have is of the utmost importance for service continuity to the arts community.” A-10: Allen Park CIP Rescope (Budget Neutral to Swap Funding Sources) In FY2021 CIP, the Council approved $450,000 of recaptured bond funds to create an Adaptive Reuse and Activation Plan for Allen Park. In FY2022 CIP, the Council approved $420,000 of parks impact fees for historic preservation and renovation work at 11 structures in the park and capital improvements like pedestrian stairway connections and new amenities. The funding includes analysis, cost estimates and construction ready designs. Additional funding requests for construction would come to the Council in future budget openings. Page | 8 This request is to rescope the FY2022 CIP funding of $420,000 to be used on the Adaptive Reuse and Activation Plan instead of the pre-construction work for structure renovations and capital improvements. This change accommodates legal limitations that bond funds may not be spent on the plan. The FY2021 CIP funding of $450,000 would be used for the pre-construction work instead of developing the Reuse Plan. The total funding available for Allen Park would not change. The Parks and Public Lands Department provided the below breakdown of how the bond funds have been spent so far. $284,253 of bond funds remain and need to be spent quickly to comply with spending deadlines. The remaining bond funds are anticipated to be fully spent on waterline replacements, water meter replacements and roof upgrades. Construction schedules estimate the work could be completed over the coming summer months. -$75,000 for Assets & Structures Inventory & Documentation/Assessments of Historic Features -$33,993 for Roof Stabilization & Leak Repair, George Allen Home -$31,433 for Construction Documents for Water Line / Water Meter Replacement & Irrigation Upgrade -$11,560 for Installation of Power Boxes for Site Power / Event Infrastructure -$11,505 for Waste and Hazardous Materials Removal from Historic Residences -$2,256 for Engineering fees charged for review of construction documents A-11: Executive Assistant in the Mayor’s Office ($39,792 from General Fund Balance) This item would add one executive assistant FTE to the Mayor’s Office. The requested funding is for five months. The fully loaded annual cost is estimated at $95,501 and would be added to the FY2023 annual budget. A-12: Citywide Equity Study ($90,000 from General Fund Balance) The Council approved $100,000 for this study in Budget Amendment #4 of FY2020. This additional funding adds several tasks to the study scope: -Task 1. Additional project coordination and management for 2022. -Task 2. Documentation and mapping of current community engagement processes at the City, including those spearheaded by the Civic Engagement Team and those led by departments. -Task 3. Review of current City data on how/whether constituents receive information or provide feedback. -Task 4. Review of representation of different constituencies on City advisory boards and other groups. -Task 4. Interviews, virtual workshops, focus groups and other discussions with City staff and community leaders. -Task 5. Review of the literature concerning good practices for public sector communication and engagement with hard-to-reach populations. -Task 6. Case studies of good practices employed by state or local governments. -Task 7. Recommendations for solidifying and strengthening current efforts and creating new avenues for outreach and engagement. -Task 8. Piloting new community engagement strategies. -Task 9. Report and three presentations. A-13: Fuel Cost Increases ($938,076 to Fleet Fund from Several Sources) Fuel inflation in the market has caused costs to exceed the FY2022 Fleet Fund budget for fuel. This item will increase the fuel budget to be enough to reach the end of the fiscal year. The FY2022 budget has $2.6 for fuel purchases which would be increased 36% to $3.5 million. Council staff requested a funding source breakdown for the additional budget. The information was not available at the time of publishing this staff report. A-14: COVID Personal Protective Equipment ($200,000 from General Fund Balance) The City’s supply of masks and other PPE to combat COVID is depleting. This request is for an additional $200,000 to purchase additional supplies to keep citizens, visitors, and employees safe in City owned buildings. The new masks will be medical grade and tests will also be procured. Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section B-1: ARPA Authorized HUD HOME Grant Funding for Admin and Planning Funds ($176,660 from HOME-ARPA Grant) Page | 9 HUD has authorized the City to access 5% ($176,659.75) of admin and planning funds of the City's 2021 HUD HOME-ARPA award (total award, $3,533.195). HOME-ARPA funds are designated for housing opportunities for individuals experiencing homelessness. These admin and planning funds will facilitate existing City staff and expenses related to the HUD-required HOME-ARPA Community Assessment. The Community Assessment will identify needs and opportunities to help direct the HOME-ARPA funds. It’s important to note that the total award is one-time additional grant funding from HUD. This is separate from the annual HOME grant funding the City receives. After HUD reviews and approves the Community Assessment, the Council would need to adopt a substantial amendment to the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan for the City to accept and be able to use the funding. Housing Stability staff will provide the Council with a quick overview of this one-time funding, the process and timeline. Policy Question: Community Needs for this Funding – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration what community needs should be prioritized for this funding and any recommendations for stakeholders to be included in developing the Community Assessment. Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section (None) Section D: Housekeeping D-1: Interest Income on Bonding ($64,140 and $80,977 from CIP Fund) The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2019A, were issued in October 2019 for the purpose of funding the reconstruction of City streets. The total par amount of the bonds issued were $17,540,000. At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee. Since then, the unspent bond proceeds have been earning interest. This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect the actual proceeds available including accumulated interest from October 2020 through August 2021. The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020, were issued in September 2020 for the purpose of funding the reconstruction of City streets. The total par amount of the bonds issued were $17,745,000. At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee. Since then, the unspent bond proceeds have been earning interest. This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect the actual proceeds available including accumulated interest from February 2021 through August 2021. D-2: WITHDRAWN D-3: Reimburse Misc. Grants for Unreimbursed HUD HOPWA Funds ($32,495 from Bank Pool Clearing Account) Finance discovered that $32,494.55 was paid out to a subgrantee in 2017, but never reimbursed from HUD for HOPWA Cost Center 7261611. The HUD reimbursement deadline of three years has passed for these funds. Housing Stability has identified unrestricted funds from 7800404 Bank Pool Clearing to make the City whole. This budget amendment will facilitate the transfer of funds from a 78 Fund Class to a 72 Fund Class. The Bank Pool Clearing account is used for housing related expenses like credit and title reports, mortgage insurance premiums, and loan fees. The Finance Department worked with the Housing Stability Division to change policies, procedures and staff training to avoid the City losing out on missed reimbursements in the future. D-4: Treasury ERAP 1 Reallocated Funds ($3 million from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) The Treasury has reallocated unspent Emergency Rent Assistance Program (ERAP) 1 funds set-aside for the State of Utah by low-performing cities and made these funds available to apply for by high-performing cities, such as Salt Lake City. These reallocated funds are for direct client assistance only. To administer Salt Lake City’s initial ERAP 1 award, the City contracted with the State of Utah, Department of Workforce Services’ (DWS) online Utah Rent Relief application portal, https://rentrelief.utah.gov/. Coordinating with DWS, Housing Stability staff have determined that Salt Lake City could apply for $3,000,000 in reallocated ERAP 1. These funds will further assist Salt Lake City residents with deposit, rent, utilities, rent arrears, and utility arrears, again utilizing the Utah Rent Page | 10 Relief application portal. Note: This new request is separate from, and does not affect, the City’s other Treasury ERAP 1 ($6,067,033) and ERAP 2 ($4,800,559.40) awards. See attached funding agreement. (Note: 7262150- Treasury ERA Direct Financial Assistance, is the current Cost Center for ERAP 1 Direct Client Assistance) Nearly all of the $6 million from ERAP 1 has been spent with some outstanding invoices pending processing. The deadline to spend ERAP 1 funds is September 30, 2022. The deadline to spend ERAP 2 funds is September 30, 2025. If D-4 and D-5 are approved as requested, then the City’s total funding from ERAP would be $13,867,632. D-5: Treasury ERAP 2 Reallocated Funds ($2,880,366 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) This budget amendment is to recognize the City's second allocation of the American Rescue Plan Act, Treasury Emergency Rent Assistance (ERAP) 2 funds, in the amount of $2,880,335.64, for the purpose of addressing housing stability for Salt Lake City residents. See attached funding agreement. The City approved the first allocation of the ERAP 2 funds in BA1 of FY 21-22, in the amount of $1,920,233.76. The City's total ERAP 2 award is $4,800,599.40. BA1 included the following budget items for those funds: Direct Client Assistance $1,632,199, and Community Partner Admin $288,034.76. To administer Salt Lake City’s first and second allocations of ERAP 2, the City will contract with the State of Utah, Department of Workforce Services’ (DWS) online Utah Rent Relief application portal, https://rentrelief.utah.gov/. The City has previously and successfully contracted with DWS for the City’s ERAP 1 funds. This budget amendment aligns with Treasury guidance on eligible activities and allowable percentage amounts for ERPA 2. In addition to further supporting Direct Client Assistance (deposits, rent, utilities, rent arrears, and utility arrears), and the associated Community Partner Admin to facilitate the proper distribution of these funds, Housing Stability is requesting City Admin to support one (1) FTE, and funds to support Housing Stability services. Re: the one (1) FTE: Currently, the City’s ERAP 1 and 2 funds are being administered by 1 PTE. This position is necessary to facilitate the City administration, coordination, and compliance monitoring. This position was pervious approved by Council with ERAP 1 funding. Since then, the administration of these funds has demonstrated that a FTE is required. This one (1) requested position would be Grade 26, Community Development Grant Specialist, fully loaded for 39 months. (April 2022 - Jun 2025, at $34.50 an hour [$215,280], plus benefits [$53,820]. Total $269,100.) This position would be fully funded by ERAP funding and would sunset when funding expires. Re: Housing Stability services: According to the Treasury, eligible “Housing Stability” services include: Case management, Eviction prevention, Eviction diversion programs, Mediation between landlords and tenants, Housing counseling, Fair housing counseling, Housing navigators or promotors that help households access ERA programs or find housing, Housing-related services for survivors of domestic abuse or human trafficking, Legal services or attorney’s fees related to eviction proceedings and maintaining housing stability, Specialized services for individuals with disabilities or seniors that support their ability to access or maintain housing. A public competitive process would receive applications from providers for eligible Housing Stability services. Staff note: after transmittal updated numbers confirmed the total amount should actually be $41 less than the originally requested budget. This will be adjusted for the Council’s final adoption vote. D-6: Annex Building Renovation – Moving Funds from Misc. Grants to CIP Fund ($500,000 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) In Budget Amendment #2, the Council added an item totaling $500,000 in grant funding to be used for Annex Building Renovations. This amount was approved within the Miscellaneous Grants Fund. Since the associated annex building renovation should be done through CIP, the budget needs to be moved. D-7: State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Loan ($7 million from Debt Service Fund) On December 6, 2021, the City and the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) entered into a loan agreement which will be used to finance a portion of a neighborhood parking structure between 400 West and 500 West and 600 South and 700 South. The loan is expected to be repaid with funds allocated to the City by H.B. 244 (2021). The City has received funds for the State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Loan. This amendment creates the revenue budget for the receipt of loan proceeds and the expenditure budget to disburse the proceeds for the project. Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources E-1: UDOT Railroad Safety Grant ($86,750 from CIP Fund) The Dept. of Community & Neighborhood, Division of Engineering applied for and received $86,750 for the Utah Railroad Safety Grant 2021 (round 1) for safety improvements to the railroad crossing at 4900 West 700 South. Page | 11 Planned safety improvements include widening the roadway, improving sight distance by raising the street grade approach, adding sidewalk on the south side of the crossing, adding bike lanes, and replacing the railroad crossing signals. The funding plan is to request an additional $260,250 in the Utah Railroad Safety Grant 2021 Round 2 competition to complete the funding package for the project. A Public hearing was held 7/5/21. E-2: UDOT Railroad Safety Grant, Round 2 ($93,750 from CIP Fund) The Dept. of Community & Neighborhood, Division of Engineering applied for and received $93,750 for the Utah Railroad Safety Grant 2021 (round 2) for safety improvements to the railroad crossing at 4900 West 700 South. Planned safety improvements include widening the roadway, improving sight distance by raising the street grade approach, adding sidewalk on the south side of the crossing, adding bike lanes, and replacing the railroad crossing signals. This grant has no match requirement. A public hearing was held 12/7/21. E-3: Utah Department of Transportation, 600/700 N Frequent Transit Network Improvement Grant ($228,000 from CIP Fund) The Dept. of Community & Neighborhood, Division of Engineering applied for and received $93,750 for the Utah Railroad Safety Grant 2021 (round 2) for safety improvements to the railroad crossing at 4900 West 700 South. Planned safety improvements include widening the roadway, improving sight distance by raising the street grade approach, adding sidewalk on the south side of the crossing, adding bike lanes, and replacing the railroad crossing signals. This grant has no match requirement. A public hearing was held 12/7/21 for the original grant application for this award. E-4: State of Utah, Governor’s Office of Economic Opportunity, Bonneville Shoreline Trail Grant The Salt Lake City Department of Public Lands received $1,300,000 for the Foothills Natural Area & Bonneville Shoreline Trailhead Infrastructure Improvements. The project proposes to construct five public access trailheads along the stretch of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail that runs through the Salt Lake City foothills between Emigration Canyon and Davis County. Proposed trailhead locations are: 1) Bonneville Boulevard near City Creek Canyon and Utah State Capitol, 2) Emigration Canyon near This Is The Place Heritage Park, 3) Popperton Park near the University of Utah, 4) 18th Avenue in the upper Avenues neighborhood, and 5) Victory Road northwest of the Utah State Capitol. This grant has a match requirement of $1,300,000. Parks & Public Lands has committed matching funds is from parks impact fees adopted in FY 2022 Capital Improvement Program for the Foothills Trailhead Development Phase II. The $2.6 million total project funding will fully cover construction costs at all five locations based on current plans and estimates. Note: This funding is not subject to the FY2022 annual budget adoption ordinance contingency on all Foothill trails funding because this project is constructing trailhead infrastructure. Policy Question: Pausing Trail Construction and Building Trailhead Infrastructure – The Council may wish to ask the Administration how this relates to the pause in work relating to the Foothills Trails Plan. Section F: Donations (None) Section G: Council Consent Agenda No. 3 G-1: State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety Office, Distracted Driving Prevention Program Grant ($13,000 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) The Police Department applied for and received a $13,000 grant from the Utah Highway Safety Office for the 2022 Distracted Driving Prevention Program. The grant funding is for overtime to conduct distracted driving enforcement/education shifts. A Public Hearing was held on 4/20/21 for the grant application on this award. G-2: State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety Office, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program Grant ($9,690 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) The Police Department applied for and received a $9,690 grant from the Utah Highway Safety Office for the 2022 Salt Lake City Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program. This award is to fund crosswalk enforcement/education overtime and Youth bicycle rodeo overtime. A Public Hearing was held on 4/20/21. G-3: U S Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), FY21 De-Escalation Training Solicitation Grant ($92,230 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) The Police Department applied for and received a $92,320 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, Community Page | 12 Oriented Policing Services through the FY21 Community Policing Development De-Escalation Training Program. The grant will fund the Apex Officer Interactive Crisis Intervention, De-Escalation and Force Options Virtual Reality Training Simulator. It will also provide funding for up to 20 officers to attend an ICAT (Integrating Communications, Assessment, and Tactics) de-escalation train-the-trainer course as well as training staff overtime/supplies to implement the ICAT and virtual reality curriculums. The Apex Officer Virtual Reality Training System is a comprehensive solution that is designed to allow trainers the ability to give presentations and classes, conduct interactive testing and assessment, and provide immersive, hands-on scenario-based exercises with detailed debriefing and after-action review. ICAT is a training program that provides first responding police officers with the tools, skills, and options they need to successfully and safely defuse a range of critical incidents. The only costs being funded are for per diem. Remaining travel costs will be covered by other funding sources. A Public Hearing was held on 10/5/21. G-4: U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), FY21 Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Grant ($59,360 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) The Police Department applied for and received a $59,360 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services through the FY21 Community Policing Development Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act. The grant will fund training for Employee Wellness and Peer Support Teams, Wellness Initiative, chaplain uniforms, program education and marketing materials, supplies, program evaluation, instructor fees for Family Wellness Workshops, and overtime. A Public Hearing was held on 9/7/21. G-5: US Department of Justice, 2021 Bureau of Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Grant ($340,246 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) The Police Department applied for and received a grant award from the U.S. Department of Justice under the 2021 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program. The total grant award is $340,246. Of that total the City will subaward $57,055 to the Unified Police Department and $57,054 to Salt Lake County (Sheriff's Office). The subaward amounts are determined by a federal funding allocation formula. The Police Department will use its award to provide training for sworn and civilian personnel, to support directed community policing overtime, and to purchase the following: a tactical robot, less lethal shotguns and ammo, tactical operation center throw phone capability enhancements, a laptop for Crime Lab FARO software, vest carriers and plates for Crime Lab personnel, LEAPS (Law Enforcement Automated Personnel Software), and camera systems for the Internal Affairs Unit and the HOP physical training facility. No Match is required. A Public Hearing was held on 10/5/21. G-6: Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), State Asset Forfeiture Grant (SAFG) ($10,000 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) The Salt Lake City Police Department applied for additional grant funding and was awarded $10,000 from the State of Utah, Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), under the State Asset Forfeiture Grant (SAFG) program. The State is combining these new funds with the previously funded amount of $1,500. The funds will be used for an overt pole camera kit, Narcan nasal spray, and drug prevention resource cards. A public hearing was held 9/7/21. Section G: Council Consent Agenda No. 4 G-1: Utah State Office of Education, Child and Adult Care Food Program - Youth After School Programs Grant ($46,000 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) The Youth & Family Division of Public Services applied for and received a continuation grant offered annually by the Utah State Office of Education, under the Child and Adult Care Food Program. These funds are available to youth service providers as part of the At-Risk Snack Program to reimburse the costs of snacks served to children participating in the after-school programs. Central City Rec. Center, Fairmont Park, Glendale Library, Liberty Park, Northwest Rec. Center, Ottinger Hall, the Youth and Family Division Office, and Sorenson Campus will receive reimbursement directly through the State Office of Education and will receive up to $46,000, based on qualified snack expenses. SLC is reimbursed on a monthly basis and only qualified healthy snacks and meals served to children participating in the after-school enrichment/education activities during the afterschool program hours are eligible for reimbursement. A public hearing was held 10/5/21. G-2: Marathon Petroleum Thriving Communities Grant Program, Marathon Petroleum Foundation Grant ($100,000 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) The Division of Youth & Family Services applied for and received $100,000 in grant funding for the Marathon Petroleum Thriving Communities Program. The funding will be used to purchase two 14-passenger vans that will be used by program staff to transport youth participants from neighborhood elementary schools to the YouthCity Page | 13 Northwest Recreation center site for afterschool programming. No match is required. A public hearing was held 1/18/22. G-3: Mental Health First Responders, Utah Department of Human Services Grant ($80,010 from Miscellaneous Grant Fund) The Human Resource Dept. applied for and received $80,010 in grant funding for the Mental Health First Responders grant program from Utah Dept. of Human Services. The funding will be used to increase the capacity of the City's existing EAP (Employee Assistance Program), targeting first responders. The two clinicians currently under contract with ComPsych will increase their hours of availability to provide onsite, in person, telephone, and virtual counselling particularly emergency services for individuals who may be in crisis. The total hours will increase by 815 over the course of the pilot projecting. No match is required. A public hearing was held 1/18/22. Section I: Council Added Items I-1: PLACEHOLDER: Additional Funding for Planning Division Mailings ($90,000 – General Fund Balance) The Planning Division needs additional funding to complete mailings for several projects between now and the end of the fiscal year. The Council Chair has suggested using fund balance to supplement the cost of Planning Division mailings as detailed below. The additional $3,980 would be flexible funding in case the number of land use applications and/or the citywide mailing costs come in higher than expected. -$78,120 for two citywide mailings -$1,600 for land use application mailings -$6,300 for Ballpark Station Area Plan and Downtown Building Height code amendments mailings -$86,020 Total ATTACHMENTS 1.Item A-3: Healthcare Innovation Branding Biohive Response from Department of Economic Development to Council Staff’s Questions ACRONYMS ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act ARPA – American Rescue Plan Act CAFR – Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CAN – Community and Neighborhoods Department CCJJ – Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice CIP – Capital Improvement Program COPS – Community Oriented Policing Services COVID – Name for the disease caused by the 2019 Novel Coronavirus ERAP – Emergency Rental Assistance Program FTE – Full Time Equivalent Position FY – Fiscal Year GF – General Fund HOPWA – Housing Opportunities For People With Aids HUD – United States Housing and Urban Development Department JAG – Justice Assistance Grant PPE – Personal Protective Equipment RDA – Redevelopment Agency SAFG – Utah State Asset Forfeiture Grant Program SIB – State Infrastructure Bank UDOT – Utah Department of Transportation Page | 14 Attachment 1. Department of Economic Development’s "Response" to Council Staff Questions about Item A-3, Healthcare Innovation Branding Biohive Council Staff Questions: The Council approved $50,000 in Budget Amendment #4 of FY21 for this same use and it was identified as one-time. Could you please discuss why additional funding is needed and what deliverables are expected? Department of Economic Development Response: In 2020, the Mayor convened stakeholders in the life science industry to help shape the City’s economic development approach around health care innovation. The goal of this was to harness the impact and growth of this industry and to connect companies and organizations to workforce development, STEM education, and other programs and policies that will help provide economic opportunity to underserved communities in the City. The partnerships created between Salt Lake City, GoUtah, WTC Utah, BioUtah, EDC Utah, University of Utah, as well as companies representing various sub-sectors of health care innovation are focused on elevating the awareness of this industry with a focus on branding and marketing it through the new entity known as Biohive. This partnership is in alignment to not duplicate efforts, but to harness the collective goals of key organizations and the City to retain and help grow this industry together for the benefit of City residents. This will be accomplished through the following deliverables and activities: i.Marketing and branding of the industry that has the City at the central hub of activity to connect residents to an industry that creates high wage jobs (multiple entry points for careers and jobs), pipeline of new talent through new technologies being created at the University of Utah, and an already strong yet not well-known history of diagnostic and medical device companies. ii.Workforce development programing in partnership with the Salt Lake School District, Salt Lake Community College, and higher education by providing new opportunities for communities who have not participated before in the life science industry. iii.Programming and activities to ensure the momentum of this industry continues to be retention and growth. iv.A report that updates on these fronts within Salt Lake City. Attachment 1. Department of Economic Development’s "Response" to Council Staff Questions about Item A-3, Healthcare Innovation Branding Biohive Council Staff Questions: The Council approved $50,000 in Budget Amendment #4 of FY21 for this same use and it was identified as one-time. Could you please discuss why additional funding is needed and what deliverables are expected? Department of Economic Development Response: In 2020, the Mayor convened stakeholders in the life science industry to help shape the City’s economic development approach around health care innovation. The goal of this was to harness the impact and growth of this industry and to connect companies and organizations to workforce development, STEM education, and other programs and policies that will help provide economic opportunity to underserved communities in the City. The partnerships created between Salt Lake City, GoUtah, WTC Utah, BioUtah, EDC Utah, University of Utah, as well as companies representing various sub-sectors of health care innovation are focused on elevating the awareness of this industry with a focus on branding and marketing it through the new entity known as Biohive. This partnership is in alignment to not duplicate efforts, but to harness the collective goals of key organizations and the City to retain and help grow this industry together for the benefit of City residents. This will be accomplished through the following deliverables and activities: i.Marketing and branding of the industry that has the City at the central hub of activity to connect residents to an industry that creates high wage jobs (multiple entry points for careers and jobs), pipeline of new talent through new technologies being created at the University of Utah, and an already strong yet not well-known history of diagnostic and medical device companies. ii.Workforce development programing in partnership with the Salt Lake School District, Salt Lake Community College, and higher education by providing new opportunities for communities who have not participated before in the life science industry. iii.Programming and activities to ensure the momentum of this industry continues to be retention and growth. iv.A report that updates on these fronts within Salt Lake City. DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238 PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455 TEL 801-535-6394 ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor MARY BETH THOMPSON Chief Financial Officer CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ___________________________________ Date Received: ________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 14,2022 Dan Dugan, Chair FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Budget Amendment #6 SPONSOR: NA STAFF CONTACT: John Vuyk, Budget Director (801) 535-6394 or Mary Beth Thompson (801) 535-6403 DOCUMENT TYPE: Budget Amendment Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that, subsequent to a public hearing, the City Council adopt the following amendments to the FY 2021-22 adopted budget. BUDGET IMPACT: REVENUE EXPENSE GENERAL FUND $ 0.00 $ 2,701,648.00 FLEET FUND 1,482,576.00 1,482,576.00 IMS FUND 259,338.00 259,338.00 MISCELLANEOUS GRANT FUND 6,840,147.00 7,227652.00 HOUSING FUND 1,100,000.00 1,132,495.00 DEBT SERVICE FUND 7,000,000.00 7,000,000.00 CIP FUND 3,658,298.75 3,658,298.75 TOTAL $ 20,340,359.75 $ 23,462,007.75 Lisa Shaffer (Jan 14, 2022 12:34 MST) BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Revenue for FY 2021-22 Budget Adjustments The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for fiscal year 2022. Projections for fiscal year 2021 were better than expected, while projections for fiscal year 2022 continue to trend above budget. Sales tax for the first quarter was well above budget and the prior year. Franchise tax is lagging below budget from a decrease in water franchise ($250,000) and telephone ($150,000) franchise taxes. Other notable increases are licenses are above budget driven by increases in airport parking taxes and innkeepers tax. Permits remain very strong with increases in plan check fees and building permits. Field reservations, land leases and building leases are leading to an increase in Charges, Fees and Rentals. Notable decreases include a decrease in moving violations and justice court fines and fire reimbursement from the airport is also below budget. FY21-22 Variance Annual Revised Favorable Revenue Budget Forecast (Unfavorable) Property Taxes 112,726,044 112,726,044 - Sales and Use Tax 89,556,472 93,436,473 3,880,001 Franchise Tax 12,102,129 11,700,054 (402,075) PILOT Taxes 1,562,041 1,562,041 - TOTAL TAXES 215,946,686 219,424,612 3,477,926 License and Permits 29,904,360 34,561,893 4,657,533 Intergovernmental 4,644,018 5,166,761 522,743 Interest Income 1,271,153 1,271,153 - Fines & Forfeiture 3,474,455 3,425,328 (49,127) Parking Meter Collection 2,693,555 2,693,555 - Charges and Services 3,934,570 4,252,996 318,426 Miscellaneous Revenue 3,372,272 3,329,733 (42,539) Interfund Reimbursement 22,032,892 21,523,465 (509,427) Transfers 21,079,600 21,079,601 1 TOTAL W/OUT SPECIAL TAX 308,353,561 316,729,097 8,375,536 Sales and Use Tax - 1/2 cent 35,600,001 38,000,000 2,399,999 Sales and Use Tax - County Option - - - TOTAL GENERAL FUND 343,953,562 354,729,097 10,775,535 With the completion of the CAFR fund balance would be projected as follows for FY2021 and FY2022: With the use of fund balance from this budget amendment fund balance is projected to be at 21.29%. FOF GF Only TOTAL FOF GF Only TOTAL Beginning Fund Balance 6,625,050 82,617,126 89,242,176 12,114,190 104,171,780 116,285,970 Budgeted Change in Fund Balance 2,924,682 (7,810,302) (4,885,620) (2,879,483) (15,335,334) (18,214,817) Prior Year Encumbrances (3,733,743) (6,165,453) (9,899,196) (1,879,654) (10,259,789) (12,139,443) Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 5,815,989 68,641,371 74,457,360 7,355,053 78,576,657 85,931,710 Beginning Fund Balance Percent 14.51%23.16%22.13%18.22%24.71%23.98% Year End CAFR Adjustments Revenue Changes - - - - - - Expense Changes (Prepaids, Receivable, Etc.) - (5,676,583) (5,676,583) - (7,535,897) (7,535,897) Fund Balance w/ CAFR Changes 5,815,989 62,964,788 68,780,777 7,355,053 71,040,760 78,395,813 Final Fund Balance Percent 14.51%21.24%20.44%18.22%22.34%21.88% Budget Amendment Use of Fund Balance (1,000,000) (15,858,313) (16,858,313) BA#1 Revenue Adjustment - - - - BA#1 Expense Adjustment - - 5,138,235 5,138,235 BA#2 Revenue Adjustment - - 490,847 490,847 BA#2 Expense Adjustment - - (986,298) (986,298) BA#3 Revenue Adjustment - - - - BA#3 Expense Adjustment - (1,000,000) (1,000,000) (2,000,000) BA#4 Revenue Adjustment - - 1,508,044 1,508,044 BA#4 Expense Adjustment - - (4,242,779) (4,242,779) BA#5 Revenue Adjustment - - 400,000 400,000 BA#5 Expense Adjustment - - (400,000) (400,000) BA#6 Revenue Adjustment - - - - BA#6 Expense Adjustment - - (1,997,761) (1,997,761) BA#7 Revenue Adjustment - - - - BA#7 Expense Adjustment - - - - Change in Revenue 7,298,201 10,388,598 17,686,799 - - - Fund Balance Budgeted Increase - - - - - - - - Adjusted Fund Balance 12,114,190 57,495,073 69,609,263 6,355,053 69,951,048 76,306,101 Adjusted Fund Balance Percent 30.21%19.40%20.69%15.75%22.00%21.29% Projected Revenue 40,095,707 296,422,894 336,518,601 40,359,137 317,980,599 358,339,736 2021 Projection 2022 Projection The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $20,340,359.75 of revenue and expense of $23,462,007.75. The amendment proposes changes in seven funds, including the addition of 16 new FTEs. The amendment also includes the use of $2,701,648.00 from the General Fund fund balance. The proposal includes 35 initiatives for Council review. A summary spreadsheet document, outlining proposed budget changes is attached. The Administration requests this document be modified based on the decisions of the Council. The budget opening is separated in eight different categories: A. New Budget Items B. Grants for Existing Staff Resources C. Grants for New Staff Resources D. Housekeeping Items E. Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources F. Donations G. Council Consent Agenda Grant Awards I. Council Added Items PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. ______ of 2022 Sixth amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 In June of 2021, the Salt Lake City Council adopted the final budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the employment staffing document, effective for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2021 and ending June 30, 2022, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-118 of the Utah Code. The City’s Budget Director, acting as the City’s Budget Officer, prepared and filed with the City Recorder proposed amendments to said duly adopted budget, including the amendments to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes specifically stated herein, copies of which are attached hereto, for consideration by the City Council and inspection by the public. All conditions precedent to amend said budget, including the employment staffing document as provided above, have been accomplished. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the final budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized by Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 32 of 2021. SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including amendments to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes specifically stated herein, attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance shall be, and the same hereby are adopted and incorporated into the budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the amendments to the employment staffing document described above, for the fiscal year beginning 2 July 1, 2021 and ending June 30, 2022, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128 of the Utah Code. SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including amendments to the employment staffing document, in the office of said Budget Officer and in the office of the City Recorder which amendments shall be available for public inspection. SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of __________, 2022. ________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________ Mayor’s Action: ____ Approved ____ Vetoed _________________________ MAYOR ATTEST: _______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. _________ of 2022. Published: ___________________. Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Approved As To Form Senior City Attorney Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Ongoing or One- time FTEs 1 Suazo Membership GF - 25,000.00 - - Ongoing - 2 Move Grants Manager from ARPA to GF Funding GF - 66,000.00 - - Ongoing 1.00 2 Move Grants Manager from ARPA to GF Funding Misc Grants - (80,000.00) - - Ongoing (1.00) 3 Healthcare Innovation - Biohive GF - 50,000.00 - - One-time - 4 Fix the Bricks Grant - Transfer Grant Funded PCN GF - - - - Ongoing - 5 Additional Sergeant for Special Victims Unit GF - 81,671.00 - - Ongoing 1.00 5 Additional Sergeant for Special Victims Unit GF - 54,300.00 - - One-time - 5 Additional Sergeant for Special Victims Unit Fleet 49,500.00 49,500.00 - - One-time - 5 Additional Sergeant for Special Victims Unit IMS 4,800.00 4,800.00 - - One-time - 6 Police Access Control Upgrade and Support GF - 214,538.00 - - One-time - 6 Police Access Control Upgrade and Support IMS 214,538.00 214,538.00 - - One-time - 7 Fireworks Budget GF - 25,000.00 - - One-time - 8 Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City Match GF - 364,030.00 - - Ongoing 10.00 8 Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City Match GF - 282,430.00 - - Ongoing - 8 Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City Match GF - 535,000.00 - - One-time - 8 Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City Match Fleet 495,000.00 495,000.00 - - One-time - 8 Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City Match IMS 40,000.00 40,000.00 - - One-time - 9 Arts Council Staff GF - 175,000.00 - - Ongoing 3.00 10 Allen Part Plan CIP [Project Rescope]CIP - - One-time - 11 Executive Assistant in Mayors Office GF - 39,792.00 Ongoing 1.00 12 Citywide Equity Study GF - 90,000.00 One-time - 13 Fuel Cost Increases GF - 498,887.00 Ongoing - 13 Fuel Cost Increases Fleet 938,076.00 938,076.00 Ongoing - 14 COVID PPE GF - 200,000.00 One-time - Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Council ApprovedAdministration Proposed Section A: New Items 1 Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Ongoing or One- time FTEs 1 ARPA HOME Admin and Planning Funds Misc Grants 176,660.00 176,660.00 - - One-time - 1 Interest Income on Bonding CIP 64,139.78 64,139.78 - - One-time - 1 Interest Income on Bonding CIP 80,976.97 80,976.97 - - One-time - 2 Housing Program Construction Costs Housing 1,100,000.00 1,100,000.00 - - One-time - 3 Reimburse Misc Grants for Unreimbursed HUD HOPWA Funds Misc Grants 32,495.00 - - - One-time - 3 Reimburse Misc Grants for Unreimbursed HUD HOPWA Funds Housing - 32,495.00 - - One-time - 4 Treasury ERAP 1 Reallocated Funds Misc Grants 3,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 - - One-time - 5 Treasury ERAP 2 Reallocated Funds Misc Grants 2,880,366.00 2,880,366.00 - - One-time 6 Annex Building Renovation - Moving Funds from Misc Grants to CIP Misc Grants - 500,000.00 - - One-time - 6 Annex Building Renovation - Moving Funds from Misc Grants to CIP CIP 500,000.00 500,000.00 - - One-time - 7 State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Loan Debt Service 7,000,000.00 7,000,000.00 - - One-time - Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Ongoing or One- time FTEs 1 UDOT Railroad Safety Grant CIP 86,750.00 86,750.00 - - One-time - 2 UDOT Railroad Safety Grant, Round 2 CIP 93,750.00 93,750.00 - - One-time - 3 Utah Dept. of Transportation, 600/700 N FREQUENT TRANSIT NETWORK IMP CIP 228,000.00 228,000.00 - - One-time - 3 Utah Dept. of Transportation, 600/700 N FREQUENT TRANSIT NETWORK IMP CIP (152,000.00) (152,000.00) - - One-time - 3 Utah Dept. of Transportation, 600/700 N FREQUENT TRANSIT NETWORK IMP CIP 152,000.00 152,000.00 - - One-time - 4 State of Utah, Governor's Office of Economic Opportunity, Bonneville Shoreline Trail CIP 1,300,000.00 1,300,000.00 - - One-time - 4 State of Utah, Governor's Office of Economic Opportunity, Bonneville Shoreline Trail CIP 1,304,682.00 1,304,682.00 - - One-time - - Council Approved Section D: Housekeeping Section F: Donations Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Administration Proposed Council Approved Administration Proposed 2 Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Ongoing or One- time FTEs Consent Agenda #3 1 State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety Office, Distracted Driving Prevention Program Misc Grants 13,000.00 13,000.00 - - One-time - 2 State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety Office, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program Misc Grants 9,690.00 9,690.00 - - One-time - 3 US Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), FY21 De- Escalation Training Solicitation Misc Grants 92,320.00 92,320.00 - - One-time - 4 US Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), FY21 Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Misc Grants 59,360.00 59,360.00 - - One-time - 5 US Department of Justice, 2021 Bureau of Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Misc Grants 340,246.00 340,246.00 - - One-time - 6 Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ) , State Asset Forfeiture Grant (SAFG) Misc Grants 10,000.00 10,000.00 - - One-time - 1 Utah State Office of Education, Child and Adult Care Food Program - Youth After School Programs Misc Grants 46,000.00 46,000.00 - - One-time - 2 Marathon Petroleum Thriving Communities Grant Program, Marathon Petroleum Foundation Misc Grants 100,000.00 100,000.00 - - One-time - 3 Mental Health First Responders, Utah Department of Human Services Misc Grants 80,010.00 80,010.00 - - One-time - Total of Budget Amendment Items 20,340,359.75 23,462,007.75 - - 15.00 Administration Proposed Council Approved Section I: Council Added Items Section G: Council Consent Agenda -- Grant Awards Consent Agenda #4 3 Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Ongoing or One- time FTEs Total by Fund Class, Budget Amendment #6: General Fund GF - 2,701,648.00 - - 16.00 Fleet Fund Fleet 1,482,576.00 1,482,576.00 - - - IMS Fund IMS 259,338.00 259,338.00 - - - Miscellaneous Grants Fund Misc Grants 6,840,147.00 7,227,652.00 - - (1.00) Housing Fund Housing 1,100,000.00 1,132,495.00 - - - Debt Service Fund Debt Service 7,000,000.00 7,000,000.00 - - - CIP Fund CIP 3,658,298.75 3,658,298.75 - - - - - - Total of Budget Amendment Items 20,340,359.75 23,462,007.75 - - 15.00 Administration Proposed Council Approved 4 Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Current Year Budget Summary, provided for information only FY 2021-22 Budget, Including Budget Amendments FY 2021-22 Adopted Budget BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total ^^ Total Through BA#5 ^^ General Fund (FC 10)367,582,070 (5,138,235.00) 986,298.00 2,000,000.00 4,242,779.00 400,000.00 370,072,912.00 Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000 3,000.00 DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)2,033,573 2,033,573.00 Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,550,000 1,550,000.00 Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)5,699,663 7,098.00 5,706,761.00 Water Fund (FC 51)127,365,555 460,716.00 18,118.00 127,844,389.00 Sewer Fund (FC 52)268,213,796 221,826.00 7,941.00 268,443,563.00 Storm Water Fund (FC 53)19,201,013 19,705.00 2,278.00 19,222,996.00 Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)706,792,500 1,350,949.00 39,790.00 708,183,239.00 Refuse Fund (FC 57)24,713,505 36,538.00 4,109.00 24,754,152.00 Golf Fund (FC 59)9,697,417 19,649.00 88,749.00 1,802,257.00 11,608,072.00 E-911 Fund (FC 60)4,056,856 4,056,856.00 Fleet Fund (FC 61)28,090,576 18,999.00 112,646.00 423,258.00 28,645,479.00 IMS Fund (FC 65)24,302,487 219,193.00 135,492.00 24,657,172.00 County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for Transportation (FC 69) 5,307,142 5,307,142.00 CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)5,341,332 5,341,332.00 Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)18,684,617 10,427,551.76 1,522,743.00 11,151,215.48 3,447,000.00 45,233,127.24 Other Special Revenue (FC 73)273,797 273,797.00 Donation Fund (FC 77)2,752,565 2,752,565.00 Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)16,121,000 16,121,000.00 Debt Service Fund (FC 81)31,850,423 26,165,000.00 58,015,423.00 CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)29,503,216 (150,753.00) 23,400,000.00 52,752,463.00 Governmental Immunity (FC 85)2,933,913 24,843.00 2,958,756.00 Risk Fund (FC 87)52,939,489 19,705.00 212,897.00 53,172,091.00 Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,755,009,505 7,688,537.76 2,559,683.00 2,000,000.00 67,605,134.48 3,847,000.00 1,838,709,860.24 5 Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 ^^ Total Through BA#5 ^^ BA #6 Total ^^ Total Through BA#6^^ General Fund (FC 10)370,072,912.00 2,701,648.00 372,774,560.00 Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000.00 3,000.00 DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)2,033,573.00 2,033,573.00 Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,550,000.00 1,550,000.00 Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)5,706,761.00 5,706,761.00 Water Fund (FC 51)127,844,389.00 127,844,389.00 Sewer Fund (FC 52)268,443,563.00 268,443,563.00 Storm Water Fund (FC 53)19,222,996.00 19,222,996.00 Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)708,183,239.00 708,183,239.00 Refuse Fund (FC 57)24,754,152.00 24,754,152.00 Golf Fund (FC 59)11,608,072.00 11,608,072.00 E-911 Fund (FC 60)4,056,856.00 4,056,856.00 Fleet Fund (FC 61)28,645,479.00 1,482,576.00 30,128,055.00 IMS Fund (FC 65)24,657,172.00 259,338.00 24,916,510.00 County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for 5,307,142.00 5,307,142.00 CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)5,341,332.00 5,341,332.00 Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)45,233,127.24 7,227,652.00 52,460,779.24 Other Special Revenue (FC 73)273,797.00 273,797.00 Donation Fund (FC 77)2,752,565.00 2,752,565.00 Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)16,121,000.00 1,132,495.00 17,253,495.00 Debt Service Fund (FC 81)58,015,423.00 7,000,000.00 65,015,423.00 CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)52,752,463.00 3,658,298.75 56,410,761.75 Governmental Immunity (FC 85)2,958,756.00 2,958,756.00 Risk Fund (FC 87)53,172,091.00 53,172,091.00 - Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,838,709,860.24 23,462,007.75 - - - - 1,862,171,867.99 BA#4 and BA#5 remain open with the City Council. Budget Manager Analyst, City Council Contingent Appropriation 6 Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 1 Section A: New Items A-1: Suazo Membership GF $25,000.00 Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Jolynn Walz, Ben Kolendar For Questions Please Include: Jolynn Walz, Ben Kolendar, Randy Hillier This funding would continue to allow Salt Lake City to be represented on the Suazo Board. According to the organization’s website, “The Suazo Business Center is a business Resource committed to the development and empowerment of the Latino/Hispanic and other underserved communities. We provide assistance to help existing and potential minority entrepreneurs succeed and build wealth.” The Administration stated Economic Development would identify a staff person to serve on the Board. A-2: Move Grants Manager from ARPA to GF Funding GF $66,000.00 Misc Grants -$80,000.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: Mary Beth Thompson For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson , John Vuyk The position associated with this move will be managing all grants, including ARPA. Since ARPA funds need to be specifically dedicated, this position doesn’t qualify for ARPA funding and will need to be moved to and funded by the General Fund. A-3: Healthcare Innovation - Biohive GF $50,000.00 Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Jolynn Walz, Ben Kolendar For Questions Please Include: Jolynn Walz, Ben Kolendar, Randy Hillier Salt Lake City has focused a substantial amount of economic recovery efforts on the healthcare innovation industry as a part of the Tech Lake City initiative. This industry has a strong presence in the City and has high growth potential. This industry is particularly strategic for the City as these jobs are anchor ed with research and development and have high potential for upward mobility. This funding will go towards a collaborative effort alongside industry partners to brand the industry, highlight opportunities within it for underserved communities, and elevate apprenticeships, internships, and upward career mobility. A-4: Fix the Bricks Grant – Transfer Grant Funded PCN GF $0.00 Department: Fire Prepared By: Clint Rasmussen For Questions Please Include: Clint Rasmussen, Randy Hillier Emergency Management recently integrated into the Fire Department. Its existing programs have improved, and new projects are in the works. Emergency Management has several federal grants that it manages including "Fix the Bricks". Part of this specific grant funds the salary/benefits of one FTE to help administer the program. It was determined that the 'Fix the Bricks' grant would be more appropriately administered in the Department of Community and Neighborhood's Housing Stability. This budget amendment would amend the staffing document to reflect the move of 1 PCN/FTE from Fire to Community and Neighborhoods. As the FTE is funded through the grant, no transfer of budget needs to occur. Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 2 A-5: Additional Sergeant for Special Victims Unit GF $81,671.00 GF $54,300.00 Fleet $49,500.00 IMS $4,800.00 Department: Police Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich, Jordan Smith For Questions Please Include: Shellie Dietrich, Jordan Smith, Sandee Moore Currently, the SVU Sergeant is supervising 12 detectives which is not manageable. SVU caseloads have continued to increase and additional detectives have been assigned to the squad over the past few years in an effort to manage the caseload. Also, over 700 Sexual Assault Kit Initiative (SAKI) kits were submitted a few years ago and the state lab has been making good progress, now returning Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) hits at an increasingly rapid rate. Due to the response of the State lab, we currently have over 400 CODIS hits from the SAKI kits producing cold case leads. These cases need follow up and investigation in a timely manner which we cannot facilitate without additional resources. The benefit of an additional Sergeant, outside rectifying the immense span of control currently handled by a single Sergeant, is the ability to focus efforts on the SAKI and cold case queue. Separating the functions of the squad, overseen by a second Sergeant, to investigate sex crimes committed against adults and children from cold cases, SAK cases, and lesser, but still serious sex crimes (voyeurism, sexual battery, gross lewdness, etc.) would reduce individual caseloads and allow for better case investigation of these crimes as well as increase our ability to make progress on the SAKI cases with CODIS hits. This request for an additional Sgt includes funding for fleet and IMS. This request facilitates an immediate need and future budget requests may be considered for two additional SAKI cold case detectives, overtime, or other resources to facilitate investigation of these cases in a timely manner. A-6: Police Access Control Upgrade and Support GF $214,538.00 IMS $214,538.00 Department: Police Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich, Captain Teerlink For Questions Please Include: Shellie Dietrich, Captain Teerlink, Sandee Moore, Aaron Bentley Budget request for an update of the security access control system at PSB and ancillary PD facilities. The current system needs to be replaced to prevent a critical failure of building security required for state compliance. PD has worked with facilities to identify a state contracted vendor that will provide the hardware, software and support for access control. The server that is specified in this system has capacity to add other city access control systems as the city system expands. Ongoing cost for support is $45,000 per year and is included in the initial cost for the first yea r. The Police Department has coordinated on this request with Facilities IMS and public works to ensure functionality for all departments as the system is expanded throughout the city. This request is for the first phase of the implementation that covers the police department system. A-7: Fireworks Budget GF $25,000.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Gregg Evans For Questions Please Include: Gregg Evans, Kristin Riker, John Vuyk The Public Lands Department Community Events group is requesting $25,000 from General Funds to cover the annual July firework shows that would occur during calendar year 2022. Due to the severe drought, we experienced this past summer the City Council cut the firework funding "one -time" from the FY22 budget. Due to the firework show contract requirements the FY22 show was already prepaid in March of FY21 to reserve the fireworks show in July of FY22. Cutting the funding in FY22 actually impacts the FY23 firework shows. Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 3 This budget amendment request would reinstate those funds and provide spending authority to purchase the firework display in advance for the following fiscal year. A-8: Violent Crimes Cops Hiring Grant City Match GF $364,030.00 GF $282,430.00 GF $535,000.00 Fleet $495,000.00 IMS $40,000.00 Department: Police Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich, Jordan Smith For Questions Please Include: Shellie Dietrich, Jordan Smith, Sandee Moore The COPS Hiring Grant was funded by DOJ in 2019 and accepted by the City and approved by City Council. A condition o f the grant is that the 3-year project must be completed within a 5-year project period as extensions allow. This will require hiring in January or February of 2022 to facilitate the 3-year project period within the 5 years allowed. The requested budget would be the city portion of the hiring costs for FY 22. Funding would also be required in FY 23 and FY 24 . In FY 25, 6 months of funding would be the city portion and then the city would take on full budget for these 10 positions. The total grant funding is $1,250,000 which will equate to approximately 25% of the cost over 3 years. The 10 officer positions were identified to create a squad dedicated to addressing Violent Crime in the community. These positions, in conjunction with the cooperative Project Safe Neighborhoods program, will have a major impact on the ability to proactively work to reduce violent crime in the city by enforcement and prosecution. A-9: Arts Council Staff GF $175,000.00 Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Jolynn Walz, Ben Kolendar For Questions Please Include: Ben Kolendar, Lorena Riffo Jensen, Jolynn Walz, Randy Hillier The Arts Council is in need of additional staffing support to accommodate duties shifted from the Mayor’s Advisor on Arts & Culture role. In addition, challenges remain to keep up with current workload, fundraising needs due to ZAP loss of qualifying expenditures, and new initiatives requested of the Arts Council. Attrition has been a challenge at the Arts Council due to workload. The request is for 3.0 FTEs which is approximately $350,000 in ongoing expenses and approximately $175,000 in FY22 if funded mid-year. The Arts Council currently has 6.5 FTE to run the full operations of a non-profit, the City’s growing public art program (including maintenance), the city’s arts grants program, programming such as Living Traditions and the Twilight Concert Series and serve as an ombudsman to the arts community. A-10: Allen Park Plan CIP Project Rescope CIP $0.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Gregg Evans For Questions Please Include: Kristin Riker, Lewis Kogan, Katherine Maus, Gregg Evans Public Lands is requesting a budget amendment to revise the scope of submitted CIP application for FY 2021 -2022. The original scope for Historic Structure Renovation and Activation at Allen Park included funding for structural and occupancy analysis of historic structures; drawings, plans and cost estimates for reconstruction of the George Allen Home, the "Rooster House," septic system removal, sewer line construction, water infrastructure, stabilization of exterior art pieces, and pedestrian stairway connections; and reconstruction of lighting and driveways. The current scope also lists reconstruction of the George Allen Home and "Rooster House" to serve as a small cafe with dining opportunities. Due to initial public engagement and feedback, Public Lands is requesting a scope change to engage in robust community and stakeholder engagement to create an Adaptive Reuse and Activation Plan for Allen Park which will determine the future use of the structures. In order to preserve the strong community investment in the site, Public Lands believes it would be necessary to engage in extensive public engagement to inform a plan that will guide future management decisions and capital improvement projects in the Park. Public Lands is currently engaging with a consultant to complete a Cultural Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 4 Landscape Report, which will also influence the Adaptive Reuse and Activation Plan and be completed in a timely manner, in conjunction with public engagement for the plan. Funding for an Adaptive Reuse and Activation Plan for Allen Park was awarded in 2020 with reallocated emergency bond funding. However, it was ultimately discovered that it was not legally permit ted for bond funding to be utilized for a non- capital expense. Public Lands is currently utilizing the emergency bond funding for emergency repairs to minimize damage to the structures and the property, including but not limited to roof repair, restoring e xternal power to select structures, investigation and construction documentation for sewer and water line installation, failing appliance removal, septic infrastructure removal, etc. Project tasks within the new scope may include but are not limited to: - Robust community engagement with key stakeholders, the Sugarhouse community, and the broader public - Development of an Adaptive Reuse and Activation Plan, informed by the Cultural Landscape Report and public engagement, to guide future management of the site including over-arching goals, specific projects, objectives and prioritization - Structural and occupancy analysis of the historic structures - Development of conceptual and construction documents, and cost estimates for adaptive reuse and activation projects listed in the Plan - Investigation into the feasibility of Allen Park becoming a Historic Landmark Site A-11: Executive Assistant in the Mayor’s Office GF $39,792.00 Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: Dawn Valente, John Vuyk For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk The budget proposes to increase staffing in the Mayor’s Office by one additional executive assistant. The budget is for five month’s salary and costs for computers and other supplies. A-12: Citywide Equity Study GF $90,000.00 Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: John Vuyk For Questions Please Include: Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Kaletta Lynch, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk The City has been working with Keen Independent Research to review equity practices in the City. The Administration is seeking funding to continue to work with Keen in developing plans to bring equity to Salt Lake City. Funding will allow the City to work with the vendor through this fiscal year to complete the plans. A-13: Fuel Cost Increases GF $498,887.00 Fleet $938,076.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dawn Valente, John Vuyk For Questions Please Include: Lorna Vogt, Dawn Valente, Nancy Bean, Denise Sorensen, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk The City has seen an increase in fuel cost. The budget will provide Fleet funding to purchase the required fuel for the remainder of the fiscal year. The budget also proposes to transfer funding from personnel within the Police [$300,000] and CAN [$12,622] Department to cover fuel increases. The budget also proposes additional funding from Non- Departmental to cover the costs not covered by general fund department budgets. The fuel increase has also impacted the Public Utilities, Sustainability, and Golf funds. Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 5 A-14: COVID PPE GF $200,000.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: John Vuyk For Questions Please Include: Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk, Lorna Vogt The City’s supply of masks and other PPE to combat COVID is depleting. This request is for an additional $200,000 to purchase additional supplies to keep citizens, visitors and employees safe in City owned buildings. Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources B-1: ARPA HOME Admin and Planning Funds Misc Grants $176,660.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Tony Milner For Questions Please Include: Tony Milner, Brent Beck, Randy Hillier, Melyn Osmond HUD has authorized the City to access 5% ($176,659.75) of admin and planning funds of the City's 2021 HUD HOME - ARPA award (total award, $3,533.195). HOME-ARPA funds are designated for housing opportunities for individuals experiencing homelessness. These admin and planning funds will facilitate admin for existing City staff and expenses related to the HUD-required HOME-ARPA Community Assessment. The Community Assessment will identify needs and opportunities to help direct the HOME-ARPA funds. Please see attached funding agreement. Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section D: Housekeeping D-1: Interest Income on Bonding CIP $64,139.78 CIP $80,976.97 Department: Finance Prepared By: Jared Jenkins For Questions Please Include: Jared Jenkins, Brandon Bagley, Marina Scott, Mary Beth Thompson The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2019A, were issued in October 2019 for the purpose of funding the reconstruction of City streets. The total par amount of the bonds issued were $17,540,000. At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee. Since then, the unspent bond proceeds have been earning interest. This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect the actual proceeds available including accumulated interest from October 2020 through August 2021. The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020, were issued in September 2020 for the purpose of funding the reconstruction of City streets. The total par amount of the bonds issued were $17,745,000. At the time the bonds were issued the proceeds were deposited with the Trustee. Since then, the unspent bond proceeds have been earning interest. This amendment will adjust the budget to reflect the actual proceeds available including accumulat ed interest from February 2021 through August 2021. D-2: Housing Program Construction Costs Housing $1,100,000.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Tony Milner For Questions Please Include: Tony Milner, Brent Beck, Randy Hillier, Suzanne Swanson Recognize $1,100,000 in unbudgeted revenue for the purpose of offsetting increases in constructions costs for three affordable single-family homes currently in development. This revenue was not included in the initial budget due to the timing of other home sales in the Housing Program that generated the revenue. Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 6 D-3: Reimburse Misc Grants for Unreimbursed HUD HOPWA Funds Misc Grants $0.00 Housing $32,495.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Tony Milner For Questions Please Include: Tony Milner, Brent Beck, Randy Hillier, Suzanne Swanson Finance discovered that $32,494.55 was paid out to a subgrantee in 2017, but never reimbursed from HUD for HOPWA Cost Center 7261611. The HUD reimbursement deadline of three years has passed for these funds. Housing Stability has identified unrestricted funds from 7800404 Bank Pool Clearing to make the City whole. This budget amendment will facilitate the transfer of funds from a 78 Fund Class to a 72 Fund Class. D-4: Treasury ERAP 1 Reallocated Funds Misc Grants $3,000,000.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Tony Milner For Questions Please Include: Tony Milner, Brent Beck, Randy Hillier, Suzanne Swanson The Treasury has reallocated unspent Emergency Rent Assistance Program (ERAP) 1 funds set -aside for the State of Utah by low-performing cities and made these funds available to apply for by high-performing cities, such as Salt Lake City. These reallocated funds are for direct client assistance only. To administer Salt Lake City’s initial ERAP 1 award, the City contracted with the State of Utah, Department of Workforce Services’ (DWS) online Utah Rent Relief application portal, https://rentrelief.utah.gov/. Coordinating with DWS, Housing Stability staff have determined that Salt Lake City could apply for $3,000,000 in reallocated ERAP 1. These funds will further assist Salt Lake City residents with deposit, rent, utilities, rent arrears, and utility arrears, again utilizing the Utah Rent Relief application portal. Note: This new request is separate from, and does not affect, the City’s other Treasury ERAP 1 ($6,067,033) and ERAP 2 ($4,800,559.40) awards. See attached funding agreement. (Note: 7262150-Treasury ERA Direct Financial Assistance, is the current Cost Center for ERAP 1 Direct Client Assistance) D-5: Treasury ERAP 2 Reallocated Funds Misc Grants $2,880,366.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Tony Milner For Questions Please Include: Tony Milner, Brent Beck, Randy Hillier, Suzanne Swanson This budget amendment is to recognize the City's second allocation of the American Rescue Plan Act, Treasury Emergency Rent Assistance (ERAP) 2 funds, in the amount of $2,880,335.64, for the purpose of addressing housing stability for Salt Lake City residents. See attached funding agreement. The City approved the first allocatio n of the ERAP 2 funds in BA1 of FY 21-22, in the amount of $1,920,233.76. The City's total ERAP 2 award is $4,800,599.40. BA1 included the following budget items for those funds: Direct Client Assistance $1,632,199, and Community Partner Admin $288,034.76. To administer Salt Lake City’s first and second allocations of ERAP 2, the City will contract with the State of Utah, Department of Workforce Services’ (DWS) online Utah Rent Relief application portal, https://rentrelief.utah.gov/. The City has previously and successfully contracted with DWS for the City’s ERAP 1 funds. This budget amendment aligns with Treasury guidance on eligible activities and allowable percentage amounts for ERPA 2. In addition to further supporting Direct Client Assistance (deposits, rent, utilities, rent arrears, and utility arrears), an d the Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 7 associated Community Partner Admin to facilitate the prop er distribution of these funds, Housing Stability is requesting City Admin to support one (1) FTE, and funds to support Housing Stability services. Re: the one (1) FTE: Currently, the City’s ERAP 1 and 2 funds are being administered by 1 PTE. This positio n is necessary to facilitate the City administration, coordination, and compliance monitoring. This position was pervious approved by Council with ERAP 1 funding. Since then, the administration of these funds has demonstrated that a FTE is required. This one (1) requested position would be Grade 26, Community Development Grant Specialist, fully loaded for 39 months. (April 2022 - Jun 2025, at $34.50 an hour [$215,280], plus benefits [$53,820].Total $269,100.) This position would be fully funded by ERAP funding and would sunset when funding expires. Re: Housing Stability services: According to the Treasury, eligible “Housing Stability” services include: Case management, Eviction prevention, Eviction diversion programs, Mediation between landlords and tenants , Housing counseling, Fair housing counseling, Housing navigators or promotors that help households access ERA programs or find housing, Housing-related services for survivors of domestic abuse or human trafficking, Legal services or attorney’s fees related to eviction proceedings and maintaining housing stability, Specialized services for individuals with disabilities or seniors tha t support their ability to access or maintain housing. A public competitive process would receive applications from providers for eligible Housing Stability services. D-6: Annex Building Renovation – Moving Funds from Misc Grants to CIP Misc Grants $500,000.00 CIP $500,000.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: Randy Hillier For Questions Please Include: Teresa Beckstrand, John Vuyk, Randy Hillier In Budget Amendment #2, the Council added an item totaling $500,000 in grant funding to be used for Annex Building Renovations. This amount was approved within the Miscellaneous Grants Fund. Since the associated annex building renovation should be done through CIP, the budget needs to be moved. D-7: State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Loan Debt Service $7,000,000.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: Brandon Bagley For Questions Please Include: Marina Scott, Brandon Bagley, Jared Jenkins, Mary Beth Thompson On December 6, 2021, the City and the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) entered into a loan agreement which will be used to finance a portion of a neighborhood parking structure between 400 West and 500 West and 600 South and 700 South. The loan is expected to be repaid with funds allocated to the City by H.B. 244 (2021). The City has received funds for the State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) Loan. This amendment creates the revenue budget for the receipt of loan proceeds and the expenditure budget to disburse the proceeds for the project. Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources E-1: UDOT Railroad Safety Grant CIP $86,750.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: Melyn Osmond For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Mary Beth Thompson, Jon Larsen, Orion Goff The Dept. of Community & Neighborhood, Division of Engineering applied for and received $86,750 for the Utah Railroad Safety Grant 2021 (round 1) for safety improvements to the railroad crossing at 4900 West 700 South. Planned safety improvements include widening the roadway, improving sight distance by raising the street grade approach, adding sidewalk on the south side of the crossing, adding bike lanes, and replacing the railroad crossing signals . The funding plan is to request an additional $260,250 in the Utah Railroad Safety Grant 2021 Round 2 competition to complete the funding package for the project. Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 8 This grant has no match requirement. A public hearing was held 4/6/21 for the original grant application for this award. E-2: UDOT Railroad Safety Grant, Round 2 CIP $93,750.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: Melyn Osmond For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Mary Beth Thompson, Jon Larsen, Orion Goff The Dept. of Community & Neighborhood, Division of Engineering applied for and received $93,750 for the Utah Railroad Safety Grant 2021 (round 2) for safety improvements to the railroad crossing at 4900 West 700 South. Planned safety improvements include widening the roadway, improving sight distance by raising the street grade approach, adding sidewalk on the south side of the crossing, adding bike lanes, and replacing the railroad crossing signals. This grant has no match requirement. A public hearing was held 12/7/21 for the original grant application for this award. E-3: Utah Department of Transportation, 600/700 N Frequent Transit Network Improvement CIP $228,000.00 CIP -$152,000.00 CIP $152,000.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: Melyn Osmond For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Mary Beth Thompson, Jon Larsen, Orion Goff Salt Lake City Division of Transportation nominated 600/700 North Frequent Transit Network Improvements (Near Term) for $228,000 from the TTIF: Transit Projects funding. The project installs approximately 20 new Level III transit shelters along 600/700 North from 2200 West to 300 West. This grant has a match requirement of $152,000 coming from the Funding Our Futures sales tax transit funding. A public hearing was held 4/7/20 for the original grant application for this award. E-4: State of Utah, Governor’s Office of Economic Opportunity, Bonneville Shoreline Trail CIP $1,300,000.00 Impact Fee $1,304,682.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: Melyn Osmond For Questions Please Include: Melyn Osmond, Mary Beth Thompson, Kristin Riker The Salt Lake City Department of Public Lands received $1,300,000 for the Foothills Natural Area & Bonneville Shoreline Trailhead Infrastructure Improvements. The project proposes to construct five public access trailheads along the stretch of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail that runs through the Salt Lake City foothills between Emigration Canyon and Davis County. Proposed trailhead locations are: 1) Bonneville Boulevard near City Creek Canyon and U tah State Capitol, 2) Emigration Canyon near This Is The Place Heritage Park, 3) Popperton Park near the University of Utah, 4) 18th Avenue in the upper Avenues neighborhood, and 5) Victory Road northwest of the Utah State Capitol. This grant has a match requirement of $1,300,000. Parks & Public Lands has committed matching funds is from parks impact fees adopted in FY 2022 Capital Improvement Program for the Foothills Trailhead Development Phase II. Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 9 A public hearing was held on 12/7/21 on the grant appl ication for this award. Section F: Donations Section G: Consent Agenda Consent Agenda #3 G-1: State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety Office, Distracted Driving Prevention Program Misc. Grants $13,000.00 Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond The Police Department applied for and received a $13,000 grant from the Utah Highway Safety Office for the 2022 Distracted Driving Prevention Program. The grant funding for overtime to conduct distracted driving enforcement/education shifts. A Public Hearing was held on 4/20/21 for the grant application on this award. G-2: State of Utah, The Utah Highway Safety Office, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program Misc. Grants $9,690.00 Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith/ Melyn Osmond The Police Department applied for and received a $9,690 grant from the Utah Highway Safety Office for the 2022 Salt Lake City Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program. This award is to fund Crosswalk enforcement/education overtime and Youth bicycle rodeo overtime. A Public Hearing was held on 4/20/21 for the grant application on this award. G-3: U S Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), FY21 De-Escalation Training Solicitation Misc. Grants $92,320.00 Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond The Police Department applied for and received a $92,320 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services through the FY21 Community Policing Development De-Escalation Training Program. The grant will fund the Apex Officer Interactive Crisis Intervention, De-Escalation and Force Options Virtual Reality Training Simulator. It will also provide funding for up to 20 officers to attend an ICAT (Integrating Communications, Assessment, and Tactics) de-escalation train-the-trainer course as well as training staff overtime/supplies to implement the ICAT and virtual reality curriculums. The Apex Officer Virtual Reality Training System is a comprehensive solution that is designed to allow trainers the ability to give presentations and classes, conduct interactive testing and assessment, and provide immersive, hands -on scenario- based exercises with detailed debriefing and after-action review. ICAT is a training program that provides first responding police officers with the tools, skills, and options they need to successfully and safely defuse a range of critical incidents. The only costs b eing funded are for per diem, remaining travel costs will be covered by other funding sources. A Public Hearing was held on 10/5/21 for the grant application on this award. G-4: U S Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), FY21 Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Misc. Grants $59,360.00 Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith/ Melyn Osmond The Police Department applied for and received a $59,360 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services through the FY21 Community Policing Development Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act. The grant will fund: Training for Employee Wellness and Peer Support Teams, Wellness Initiative and Chaplain Program Uniforms, Program Education and Marketing Materials, Class Supplies, Program Evaluation, Instructor Fees for Family Wellness Workshops, and Overtime. Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 10 A Public Hearing was held on 9/7/21 for the grant application on this award. G-5: US Department of Justice, 2021 Bureau of Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Misc. Grants $340,246.00 Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond The Police Department applied for and received a grant award from the U.S. Department of Justice under the 2021 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program. The total grant award is $340,246. Of that total the City will subaward $57,054.50 to the Unified Police Department and $57,054.50 to Salt Lake County (Sheriff's Office). The subaward amounts are determined by a federal funding allocation formula. The Police Department will use its award to provide training for sworn and civilian personnel, to support directed community policing overtime, and to purchase the following: a tactical robot, less lethal shotguns and ammo, tactical operation center throw phone capability enhancements, a laptop for Crime Lab FARO software, vest carriers and plates for Crime Lab personnel, LEAPS (Law Enforcement Automated Personnel Software), and camera systems for the Internal Affairs Unit and the HOP physical training facility. No Match is required. A Public Hearing was held on 10/5/21 for the grant application on this award. G-6: Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), State Asset Forfeiture Grant (SAFG) Misc. Grants $10,000.00 Department: Police Department Prepared By: Jordan Smith / Melyn Osmond The Salt Lake City Police Department applied for additional grant funding and was awarded $10,000 from the State of Utah, Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), under the State Asset Forfeiture Grant (SAFG) program. The State is combining these new funds with the previously funded amount of $1,500. The funds will be used for an overt pole camera kit, Narcan nasal spray, and drug prevention/resource cards A public hearing was held 9/7/21 for this grant application. Consent Agenda #4 G-1: Utah State Office of Education, Child and Adult Care Food Program - Youth After School Programs Misc Grants $46,000.00 Department: CAN (Youth & Family) Prepared By: Kim Thomas / Melyn Osmond The Youth & Family Division of Public Services applied for and received a continuation grant offered annually by the Utah State Office of Education, under the Child and Adult Care Food Program. These funds are available to youth service providers as part of the At-Risk Snack Program to reimburse for the costs of snacks served to children participating in the after-school programs. Central City Rec. Center, Fairmont Park, Glendale Library, Liberty Park, Northwest Rec. Center, Ottinger Hall, the Youth and Family Division Office, and Sorenson Campus will receive reimbursement directly through the State Office of Education and will receive up to $46,000, based on qualified snack expenses. SLC is reimbursed on a monthly basis and only qualified healthy snacks and meals served to children participating in the after-school enrichment/education activities during the afterschool program hours are eligible for reimbursement. A public hearing will be held for the grant application. G-2: Marathon Petroleum Thriving Communities Grant Program, Marathon Petroleum Foundation Misc Grants $100,000.00 Department: CAN (Youth & Family) Prepared By: Ken Perko / Melyn Osmond The Division of Youth & Family Services applied for and received $100,000 in grant funding for the Marathon Petroleum Thriving Communities Program. The funding will be used to purchase two 14 -passenger vans that will be used by program staff to transport youth participants from a variety of neighborhood elementary schools to the YouthCity Northwest Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 11 Recreation center site for afterschool programming. No match is required. A public hearing will be held for this grant application. G-3: Mental Health First Responders, Utah Department of Human Services Misc Grants $80,010.00 Department: Human Resources Prepared By: Trent Steele / Melyn Osmond The Human Resource Dept. applied for and received $80,010 in grant funding for the Mental Health First Responders grant program from Utah Dept. of Human Services. The funding will be used to increase the capacity of the City's existing EAP (Employee Assistance Program), targeting first responders. The two clinicians currently under contract with ComPsych will increase their hours of availability to provide onsite, in person, telephone, and virtual counselling particularly emergency services for individuals who may be in crisis. The total hours will increase by 815 over the course of the pilot projecting. No match is required. A public hearing will be held for this grant application. Section I: Council Added Items Impact Fees ‐ Summary Confidential Data pulled 12/13/2021 Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area Area Cost Center UnAllocated Cash Notes: Impact fee - Police 8484001 471,211$ A Impact fee - Fire 8484002 1,644,113$ B Impact fee - Parks 8484003 11,709,246$ C Impact fee - Streets 8484005 6,585,173$ D 20,409,744$ Expiring Amounts: by Major Area, by Month 202107 (Jul2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202108 (Aug2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202109 (Sep2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202110 (Oct2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Current Month 202111 (Nov2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202112 (Dec2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202201 (Jan2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202202 (Feb2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202203 (Mar2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202204 (Apr2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202205 (May2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202206 (Jun2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202207 (Jul2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202208 (Aug2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202209 (Sep2022)2023Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202210 (Oct2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202211 (Nov2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202212 (Dec2022)2023Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202301 (Jan2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202302 (Feb2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202303 (Mar2023)2023Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202304 (Apr2023)2023Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202305 (May2023)2023Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202306 (Jun2023)2023Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202307 (Jul2023)2024Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202308 (Aug2023)2024Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202309 (Sep2023)2024Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202310 (Oct2023)2024Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202311 (Nov2023)2024Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202312 (Dec2023)2024Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202401 (Jan2024)2024Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202402 (Feb2024)2024Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202403 (Mar2024)2024Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202404 (Apr2024)2024Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202405 (May2024)2024Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202406 (Jun2024)2024Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Total, Currently Expiring through June 2021 0$ -$ -$ -$ 0$ Fiscal Quarter E = A + B + C + D Police Fire Parks Streets Total FY 2 0 2 3 Calendar Month FY 2 0 2 2 FY 2 0 2 4 Impact Fees Confidential Data pulled 12/13/2021 AAA BBB CCC DDD = AAA - BBB - CCC Police Allocation Budget Amended Allocation Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining Appropriation Values Description Cost Center Sum of Police Allocation Budget Amended Sum of Police Allocation Encumbrances Sum of Police Allocation YTD Sum of Police Allocation Remaining Appropriation ReimbExcessPoliceCapacity IF 8422800 1,898,497$ -$ 1,898,497$ -$ Police'sConsultant'sContract 8419205 3,565$ -$ 3,565$ -$ Sugarhouse Police Precinct 8417016 10,331$ 10,331$ -$ -$ PolicePrecinctLandAquisition 8419011 239,836$ 239,836$ -$ -$ Eastside Precint 8419201 21,639$ 21,639$ -$ -$ A Public Safety Building Replcmn 8405005 14,068$ 14,068$ -$ 0$ Police Refunds 8418013 -$ -$ (3,588)$ 3,588.33$ Police Impact Fee Refunds 8421102 338,448$ -$ 68,100$ 270,348$ Grand Total 2,526,385$ 285,875$ 1,966,574$ 273,937$ Fire Allocation Budget Amended Allocation Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining Appropriation Values Description Cost Center Sum of Fire Allocation Budget Amended Sum of Fire Allocation Encumbrances Sum of Fire Allocation YTD E Sum of Fire Allocation Remaining Appropriation Fire refunds 8416007 82,831$ -$ -$ 82,830.52$ Fire Station #14 8415001 6,083$ 6,083$ -$ -$ Fire Station #14 8416006 44,612$ -$ -$ 44,612$ Fire Station #3 8415002 1,568$ -$ -$ 1,568.09$ Fire Station #3 8416009 565$ 96$ -$ 469$ Study for Fire House #3 8413001 15,700$ -$ -$ 15,700$ Fire'sConsultant'sContract 8419202 4,941$ 3,021$ 1,862$ 58$ FY20 FireTrainingFac. 8420431 56,031$ -$ -$ 56,031$ B Grand Total 212,331$ 9,200$ 1,862$ 201,268$ Parks Allocation Budget Amended Allocation Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining Appropriation Values Description Cost Center Sum of Parks Allocation Budget Amended Sum of Parks Allocation Encumbrances Sum of Parks Allocation YTD Sum of Parks Allocation Remaining Appropriation Cnty #2 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420426 88$ -$ 88$ -$ Parks and Public Lands Compreh 8417008 7,500$ -$ 7,500$ -$ Fairmont Park Lighting Impr 8418004 49,752$ 12,155$ 37,597$ -$ Fisher Carriage House 8420130 1,098,764$ 1,038,968$ 59,796$ -$ FY Warm Springs Off Leash 8420132 20,411$ -$ 20,411$ -$ Park'sConsultant'sContract 8419204 4,857$ 2,596$ 2,219$ 42$ Folsom Trail/City Creek Daylig 8417010 146$ -$ -$ 146$ Cwide Dog Lease Imp 8418002 23,530$ 23,000$ -$ 530$ Rosewood Dog Park 8417013 1,110$ -$ -$ 1,110$ Jordan R 3 Creeks Confluence 8417018 1,570$ -$ -$ 1,570$ Waterpark Redevelopment Plan 8421402 224,247$ 188,467$ 34,134$ 1,646$ C 9line park 8416005 21,958$ 19,702$ -$ 2,256$ Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 2,946$ -$ -$ 2,946$ JR Boat Ram 8420144 15,561$ -$ 7,763$ 7,798$ Rich Prk Comm Garden 8420138 12,795$ 4,328$ -$ 8,467$ Redwood Meadows Park Dev 8417014 9,350$ -$ -$ 9,350$ ImperialParkShadeAcct'g 8419103 10,830$ -$ -$ 10,830$ Park refunds 8416008 11,796$ -$ -$ 11,796.28$ IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 58,014$ -$ 1,905$ 56,109$ Parks Impact Fee Refunds 8418015 101,381$ -$ -$ 101,381.06 UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 135,084$ 21,169$ 1,355$ 112,560$ FY20 Bridge to Backman 8420430 722,920$ 571,809$ 3,343$ 147,769$ Three Creeks West Bank NewPark 8422403 150,736$ -$ -$ 150,736$ 9Line Orchard 8420136 195,045$ 32,650$ -$ 162,395$ RAC Playground with ShadeSails 8422415 180,032$ -$ -$ 180,032$ Fisher House Exploration Ctr 8421401 523,889$ 284,846$ 11,297$ 227,746$ Cnty #1 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420424 388,477$ 59,106$ 64,495$ 264,877$ Trailhead Prop Acquisition 8421403 275,000$ -$ -$ 275,000$ Bridge to Backman 8418005 290,276$ 10,285$ 4,515$ 275,475$ Parley's Trail Design & Constr 8417012 327,678$ -$ -$ 327,678$ Historic Renovation AllenParK 8422410 420,000$ -$ -$ 420,000$ SLC Foothills Land Acquisition 8422413 425,000$ -$ -$ 425,000$ Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 489,688$ 64,333$ -$ 425,355$ Jordan Prk Event Grounds 8420134 431,000$ -$ -$ 431,000$ Jordan Park Pedestrian Pathway 8422414 510,000$ -$ -$ 510,000$ Green loop 200 E Design 8422408 610,000$ -$ -$ 610,000$ Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 1,094,430$ 8,302$ 25,921$ 1,060,208$ SLCFoothillsTrailheadDevelpmnt 8422412 1,304,682$ -$ -$ 1,304,682$ Pioneer Park 8419150 3,343,904$ 107,850$ 121,172$ 3,114,882$ GlendaleWtrprk MstrPln&Rehab 8422406 3,200,000$ 21,800$ -$ 3,178,200$ Grand Total 16,694,447$ 2,471,367$ 403,507$ 13,819,573$ Streets Allocation Budget Amended Allocation Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining Appropriation Values Description Cost Center Sum of Street Allocation Budget Amended Sum of Street Allocation Encumbrances Sum of Street Allocation YTD Sum of Street Allocation Remaining Appropriation 700 South Reconstruction 8415004 2,449$ -$ 2,449$ -$ 9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 152,500$ 139,280$ 13,220$ -$ Trans Master Plan 8419006 13,000$ 13,000$ -$ -$ 500/700 S Street Reconstructio 8412001 32,718$ 16,691$ 16,027$ -$ Trans Safety Improvements 8419007 95,653$ 20,953$ 73,999$ 700$ D Transportation Safety Improvem 8417007 1,444$ -$ -$ 1,444$ Gladiola Street 8406001 16,109$ 13,865$ -$ 2,244$ Urban Trails FY22 IF 8422619 6,500$ -$ -$ 6,500$ Street'sConsultant'sContract 8419203 29,817$ 17,442$ -$ 12,374$ Corridor Transformations IF 8422608 25,398$ -$ -$ 25,398$ 900 South 9Line RR Cross IF 8422604 28,000$ -$ -$ 28,000$ 1700S Corridor Transfrmtn IF 8422622 35,300$ -$ -$ 35,300$ Complete Street Enhancements 8420120 35,392$ -$ -$ 35,392$ 200S TransitCmpltStrtSuppl IF 8422602 37,422$ -$ -$ 37,422$ Transp Safety Improvements 8420110 58,780$ 20,697$ -$ 38,083$ 1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestr 8416004 42,833$ -$ -$ 42,833$ Transportatn Safety Imprvmt IF 8422620 44,400$ -$ -$ 44,400$ Local Link Construction IF 8422606 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$ 900 S Signal Improvements IF 8422615 70,000$ -$ -$ 70,000$ 400 South Viaduct Trail IF 8422611 90,000$ -$ -$ 90,000$ Neighborhood Byways IF 8422614 104,500$ -$ -$ 104,500$ Indiana Ave/900 S Rehab Design 8412002 124,593$ -$ -$ 124,593$ Bikeway Urban Trails 8418003 200,000$ -$ 12,484$ 187,516$ TransportationSafetyImprov IF 8421500 302,053$ -$ -$ 302,053$ IF Complete Street Enhancement 8421502 625,000$ -$ -$ 625,000$ Street Improve Reconstruc 20 8420125 2,250,220$ 290,460$ 1,216,451$ 743,309$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8419008 221,688$ 213,483$ 8,205$ -$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8420105 300,000$ 300,000$ -$ -$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 875,000$ 87,063$ -$ 787,937$ Grand Total 5,967,404$ 1,155,677$ 1,416,728$ 3,394,999$ Total 25,400,567$ 3,922,119$ 3,788,672$ 17,689,776$ E = A + B + C + D TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE UnAllocated Budget Amount 8484001 471,211$ $1,644,113 20,409,744$ 8484002 8484003 8484005 11,709,246$ 6,585,173$ HOME-ARP FundingFebruary 1, 2022 Through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARP) the City received a supplemental allocation of HUD, HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME-ARP) funds in the amount of $3,533,195. For the purpose of non-congregate shelter, affordable housing, and related services to benefit homeless individuals and other specified qualifying populations. HOME-ARP HOME-ARP Funding Homeless, or at risk of becoming homeless Individuals or households Populations with a high risk of housing instability Veterans who are homeless, or at risk of becoming homeless Households Fleeing Domestic Violence Qualifying Populations HOME-ARP Funding Development of Affordable Housing Tenant-Based Rent Assistance Non-Congregant Shelter that will be converted into Permanat Housing Support Services, i.e.Housing Counseling, Homeless Prevention Eligible Uses HOME-ARP Funding Nonprofit Operating & Capacity Building HUD is requiring all allocation recipients to undertake an in-depth Community Assessment, including surveying community partners and conducting an inventory and gap analysis, prior to the development and submission of an Allocation Plan for approval. HUD has authorized access to, and use of 5% ($176,660) of a recipient’s total award for up-front administrative and planning costs. Community Assessment HOME-ARP Funding Timeline Apr 2021 HOME-ARP allocation May-Aug 2021 Conversations with local homeless services providers and planning orgs Sept-Dec 2021 Review released HUD guidance Re: Assessment and Allocation Plan Jan-Mar 2022 Surveys, housing and homeless data, and draft Assessment and Plan Apr-May 2022 Transmit to Council Assessment and Plan for review and recommendation Sept 2030 All funds must be spent HOME-ARP Funding CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY www.slccouncil.com/city-budget TO:City Council Members FROM:Sylvia Richards Budget & Policy Analyst DATE: February 1, 2022 RE: Continued Use of Art Barn for Arts Council and Arts Council Foundation Public Benefits Analysis – Below-Market Rate Lease Agreement Resolution ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Administration has submitted a transmittal, including a public benefits analysis, regarding City-owned property known as the Art Barn, located at 54 Finch Lane. Currently the Art Barn functions as the administrative office for the Arts Council, the Arts Council Foundation, as well as an art gallery, community arts education facility, and active art studio. The Administration recommends that the Arts Council continue to use and inhabit the property as its administrative office including 6.5 Arts Council FTE’s, as well as part-time and seasonal employees. A public hearing is required for public benefits analysis, and the Administration recommends that the Council consider approving the below-market rate lease agreement with the Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation allowing the continued use of the Art Barn. While the Arts Council has used the Art Barn for decades, a public benefits analysis has never been completed as required by code. The Administration tasked the Arts Council with formalizing an operating agreement between the Arts Council Foundation and Salt Lake City. In addition, as part of this process, the Arts Council revised the Foundation bylaws, and created a human resources policy and procedures manual. With the completion of the new operating agreement, the Attorney’s Office suggested a public benefits analysis be completed to satisfy code requirements. PUBLIC BENEFITS The Administration has identified the public benefits the City receives from allowing the continued use of the Art Barn for the Arts Council Division and the Arts Council Foundation as follows: “On average the Arts Council’s programs have reached approximately 100,000 individual audience members and over 1,000 artists per year. These programs are intended to serve residents along the Wasatch Front, with a focus on the Salt Lake County area. However, events such as the Living Set Date: Feb. 1, 2022 Briefing: Feb. 1, 2022 Public Hearing: Mar. 1, 2022 Potential Action: Mar. 22, 2022 Page | 2 Traditions Festival attract attendees from across Utah and throughout the region. Programs are thoughtfully curated each year with the intention of supporting artists and arts organizations and making Salt Lake City a more vibrant, equitable, and engaging place to live.” Arts Council Programs a) Finch Lane Art Gallery (Includes year-round visual art exhibits and flash projects) b) Living Traditions Presents (Features traditional art forms of Salt Lake’s native, immigrant and ethnically diverse communities) c) Twilight Concert Series (Music concert series presented each summer featuring nationally recognized and upcoming musicians from across the country and around the world held at the Gallivan Center.) d) Outreach and Engagement (Provides professional development and activation opportunities to local performing artists to engage with audiences through the Brown Bag Concert Series and Busker Festival) e) Salt Lake City’s Public Art Program (Provides opportunities for artists to create site-specific artwork that enhances or is integrated into public buildings and spaces) f) City Arts Grants Program (Supports artists, arts organizations, nonprofits and elementary schools conducting programming across Salt Lake City through five grant categories. g) Technical Assistance, Services and Research (Arts Council staff members have expertise in various artistic disciplines, and provide assistance to artists, organizations and community members through communication efforts (newsletters, blog posts, social media). Additional Benefits: Streamline City art initiatives and improve structure and funding of the Arts Councils (Mayor’s Plan 2021). Ability to fundraise in support of programming and staff which creates a direct benefit to residents by leveraging City funding. National and local funding support which increases accountability to community and the public. Arts Council mission is to fill niche gaps, incubate, and fulfill community needs. Constant presence of staff and public at Reservoir Park. Increase overall participation in arts and cultural activities. BUDGET AND POLICY QUESTIONS Is there a time limit to the Operating Agreement? In other words, does the agreement go forward in perpetuity? Have seismic improvements been made to the Art Barn? What is the current condition of the Art Barn from a structural standpoint? The 2020 Facilities Condition Index indicates there are $46,780 in Capital Asset Renewal Needs. The Council may wish to ask for additional details. The Council may wish to ask the Administration to identify any structural issues or any anticipated repairs needed in the next five years and the associated cost estimates. The Administration indicates that while a public benefits analysis study is not required under Utah Code 10-8-2 before the City can enter an agreement for a below-market value lease, according to the transmittal, it’s helpful to study whether such an agreement will meet the public benefit requirements of the code. Because Salt Lake City Arts Council is a non-profit entity, the City may waive the consideration it would ordinarily collect in exchange for the conveyance of the City property so long as the municipal legislative body holds a public hearing and authorizes the waiver. (The City leases the property to the Arts Council for $1 per year.) MARY BETH THOMPSON Finance Director ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238 PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455 TEL 801-535-6394 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ________________________ Date Received: ___________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 21, 2022 Dan Dugan FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer Katie Lewis, City Attorney SUBJECT: Sustained occupation and usage of Salt Lake City Corporation property located at 54 Finch Lane, also known as the “Art Barn,” to Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation, a Utah nonprofit corporation: Public Benefit Analysis under Utah Code Section 10-8-2. SPONSOR: NA STAFF CONTACT: Randy Hillier, Policy and Budget Analyst (801) 535-6606, Felicia Baca, Executive Director, Salt Lake City Arts Council, Taylor Knuth, Deputy Director, Salt Lake City Arts Council or Sara Montoya, City Attorney (801) 535-7685 DOCUMENT TYPE: Public Benefits Analysis and Recommendation (Revised to correct typographical error) RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that a public hearing be held on the matter of the Public Benefits Analysis and to consider adopting a resolution allowing the sustained occupation and usage of the Salt Lake City Corporation property located at 54 Finch Lane, also known as the “Art Barn” to the Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation. BUDGET IMPACT: NA BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation & Arts Division is requesting to continue utilizing 54 Finch Lane, or the “Art Barn” as the administrative headquarters, housing 6.5 Arts Council FTEs and multiple seasonal and part-time employees, as well as to provide a home for the Finch Lane Art Gallery and its numerous exhibitions. Katherine Lewis (Jan 21, 2022 12:35 MST) Lisa Shaffer (Jan 28, 2022 15:54 MST) Over the past 18+months, the Arts Council was tasked with formalizing an Operating Agreement between the Arts Council Foundation and Salt Lake City. As part of this work, the Arts Council completed drafts of the Operating Agreement, revised the Foundation Bylaws, and completed a comprehensive Human Resource policies and procedures manual for the Salt Lake Arts Council Foundation. Although the Arts Council has utilized the Art Barn for decades, a Public Benefits Analysis, as per Utah Code 10-8-2, has never been completed. With the completion of the newly formalized operating agreement, the Attorney’s Office thought it would be appropriate to complete a Public Benefits Analysis to satisfy the requirements of this code. Utah Code 10-8-2 (1) (a) (v) states that after first holding a public hearing, a municipal legislative body may authorize municipal services or other nonmonetary assistance to be provided to or waive fees required to be paid by a nonprofit entity, whether or not the municipality receives consideration in return. While a study is not required under Utah Code 10-8-2 before the City can enter an agreement for a below market value lease, it is beneficial to consider whether such an agreement will meet the public benefit requirements under Utah Code 10-8-2. The attached memo to Rachel Otto, Mayor’s Chief of Staff, outlines the public benefits identified by the Administration that the City will realize from allowing the continued usage of the City- owned 54 Finch Lane “Art Barn” as the primary administrative headquarters of the Salt Lake City Foundation & Arts Division. PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing MEMORANDUM TO: Lisa Shaffer Chief Administrative Officer FROM: Felicia Baca Executive Director Salt Lake City Arts Council DATE: January 21, 2022 SUBJECT: Sustained occupation and usage of Salt Lake City Corporation property located at 54 Finch Lane, also known as the “Art Barn,” to Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation, a Utah nonprofit corporation: Public Benefit Analysis under Utah Code Section 10 -8-2. ____________________________________________________________________________________ In continuation of longstanding support from Salt Lake City since 1979, the Salt Lake Arts Council Foundation & Arts Division respectfully requests the continued usage of the Art Barn in Salt Lake City as both the administrative headquarters of 6.5 Salt Lake City Government staff and multiple seasonal and part time employees of the Arts Council foundation. Additionally, maximizing efficient usage, this site serves the community and local artists as the Finch Lane Art Gallery, home to exhibitio ns of diverse emerging and established Utah artists since 1931. The Salt Lake City Arts Council has served as an integral component of Salt Lake City as a governmental non-profit under Utah Code 11-13a-101. Over the past 18+months, the Arts Council was tasked with formalizing an Operating Agreement between the Arts Council Foundation and Salt Lake City, As part of this work, the Arts Council completed drafts of the Operating Agreement, revised the Foundation Bylaws, and completed a comprehensive Human Resource policies and procedures manual for the Salt Lake Arts Council Foundation. Under Utah law, after first holding a public hearing, a municipality may “authorize municipal services or other nonmonetary assistance to be provided to a nonprofit entity, whether or not the municipality receives consideration in return.” Utah Code §10-8-2(1)(a)(v). Because Salt Lake City Arts Council is a nonprofit entity, the City may waive the consideration it would ordinarily collect in exchange for conveyance of the City Property so long as the municipal legislative body holds a public hearing and authorizes the waiver. Though a formal study is not required under Utah Code section 10-8-2(3)(e) for services or assistance provided to a nonprofit entity after public hearing, an informal analysis considering the same factors as a formal study is set forth below to assist the Salt Lake City Council in their consideration of the costs and benefits of the requested waiver. Utah Code § 10-8-2(2)(a). Those factors are: (1) The specific benefits (including intangible benefits) to be received by the City in return for the arrangement; (2) The City’s purpose in making the appropriation, including an analysis of how the safety, health, prosperity, moral well-being, peace, order, comfort or convenience of the residents of Salt Lake City will be enhanced; and (3) Whether the appropriation is “necessary and appropriate” to accomplish the reasonable goals and objectives of the City in the area of economic development, job creation, affordable housing, blight elimination, resource center development, job preservation, the preservation of historic structures and property, and any other public purpose. See Utah Code §10-8-2(3)(e). Background: The Salt Lake Arts Council Foundation is a nonprofit organization that was established in November of 1979, under the direction of Mayor Ted Wilson, with objectives to promote and support artistic programs; to ascertain community cultural needs; to facilitate community efforts in developing cultural and artistic programs to reach the public in new ways in Salt Lake City; to act as the advisory body to the City in relation to the arts; and to bridge communication between the cultural community and City government. These objectives are related in City Ordinance Chapter 2.32, which connects the City to the nonprofit via the appointment of board members by the Mayor and confirmation by the City Council, by defining the responsibilities of the Executive Director, and by providing staff support to the Salt Lake City Arts Council. The affairs of the Foundation are managed by a Board of Trustees who are also the officers of the Salt Lake City Arts Council Board. While the goals of the Arts Council have grown over the last forty-three years, these elements remain at the core of the organization. City employees of the Arts Division manage the day-to-day operations of programs and Division initiatives, with oversight and direction from both City Administration and leadership of the Department of Economic Development. The Foundation is c onsidered a component unit of the City by the IRS, which means that the Foundation’s annual financial audit is considered as a part of the City’s annual financial audit. The City funds the Arts Council by providing funds in a City department cost center, mainly consisting of salary and benefits, as well as through a non-departmental funding contract with the Foundation for grantmaking and programming. The Foundation raises additional funding from private donors/sponsors, other government entities, and through earned income. Collaboratively, over the past 18+ months the City, and Foundation Board’s Executive and Governance committees revisited the subject of this Operating Agreement. Board members and the Arts Council’s Executive Director worked with Bruce White, an attorney at Parsons Behle & Latimer specializing in nonprofit organizations and governmental non-profits to develop an updated draft of the Operating Agreement in order to articulate this long standing relationship between the two entities. This draft was presented to the City Attorney Megan DePaulis for review and comment in March 2020 (see in References). The Bylaws for the Foundation (last updated in the 90’s) were also re-drafted to comply with City ordinance and current best practice. In addition to this, a comprehensive Human Resources handbook was contracted for the Foundation employees regarding policies and procedures specific to the non-profit who employs non-City employees. The Operating Agreement and Bylaws revision are major steppingstones in a mutually beneficial relationship. On average, the Arts Council’s programs have reached approximately 100,000 individual audience members and over 1,000 artists per year. These programs are intended to serve residents along the Wasatch Front, with a focus on the Salt Lake County area. However, events such as the Living Traditions Festival attract attendees from across Utah and throughout the region. Programs are thoughtfully curated each year with the intention of supporting artists and arts organizations and making Salt Lake City a more vibrant, equitable, and engaging place to live. The Arts Council’s programs: Finch Lane Gallery hosts year-round visual art exhibitions in three gallery spaces at the historic Art Barn in Reservoir Park. The gallery gives local artists an opportunity to exhibit a current body of work, explore exhibition themes or media relevant to the community and field of arts at large, and foster the development of curatorial skills through exhibition production and collaboration. T hrough a new initiative, Flash Projects, the Gallery opened its spaces for short-term, interdisciplinary, community-oriented, and/or experimental projects in 2020. In response to COVID-19, the Gallery is currently hosting exhibitions online, virtual experiences, as well as limited in-person gallery visits by appointment only. Living Traditions Presents features the traditional artforms of Salt Lake’s native, immigrant, and ethnically diverse communities. Over the years, program offerings have been expanded in an effort to reach more geographically diverse communities in typical programming years, this includes a three-day festival; Mondays in the Park, a concert series throughout the summer at the Chase Home in Liberty Park; hands-on workshops with traditional folk artists at libraries and community centers throughout Salt Lake; and a summer end Garden Party which is a smaller festival event at Jordan Park. We hope that future years will allow us to continue this series of events. We have budgeted for these events in 2020- 2021 in the event social distancing changes are made, but for now these events have been postponed or modified. Twilight Concert Series is a music concert series presented each summer featuring nationally recognized and upcoming musicians from across the country and around the world. The series is held at the Gallivan Center and produced through a more sustainable private partnership that ensures continued access to residents and enables the Arts Council to focus on more diversity in its gene ral programming. Musical acts are prioritized on the basis of diversity through both musical genres and those that represent, speak to, and serve as role models to multiple communities including underrepresented demographics. For almost 35 years the Twilight Concert Series has brought communities together to share this experience, creating a vibrant and relevant downtown atmosphere, and promoting Salt Lake City through the arts. The 2020 series was cancelled due to COVID -19, but our new and modified efforts are expanded on in the description below. Outreach and Engagement is a priority for our organization. The Salt Lake Arts Council provides additional professional development and activation opportunities to local performing artists to engage with audiences through such programs as the Brown Bag Concert Series and Busker Festival, among others. These programs contribute to the cultural vibrancy of public parks, plazas and businesses by creating temporary placemaking. Modified presentations in 2020 included the Cultural Caravan, which was a traveling pop-up version of the Busker Festival and presented with social distancing measures in place in all seven City Council Districts. Additionally, the Art Barn serves as a facility that can be rented by the community and that other City agencies can utilize for meetings and events. A variety of venue rentals and partnerships facilitate long standing Literary Arts programs in the community. In 2020 in response to the pandemic, the Arts Council partnered with Emergency Management and the Salt Lake City School district to act as a food distribution center for families in need. Recent partnerships and programs related to exhibition at Finch Lane have facilitated tree plantings in Reservoir Park, and trainings related to exhibitions on Suicide Prevention and Domestic Abuse Survivor Training. Salt Lake City’s Public Art Program provides opportunities for artists to create site-specific artwork that enhances or is integrated into public buildings and spaces. Approximately four new projects are commissioned each year with 2019 resulting in the installation of the State’s largest dollar art commission in history. The Arts Council recognizes that art in public spaces reflects the history, culture, and pride of our people and civic spaces. City Arts Grants Program supports the arts activities of artists, arts organizations, nonprofits, and elementary schools conducting programming across Salt Lake City through five grant categories. The City Arts Grant program allows the Arts Council to reach more geographically diverse areas, support multiple artistic disciplines, and fill gaps that may exist in education and programming for residents. Technical Assistance, Services, & Research Arts Council staff members have expertise in various artistic disciplines and provide assistance to artists, organizations, and community members through communication efforts (such as a monthly newsletter, website blog posts, and a strong social-media presence), technical assistance (by providing on-site support to performing arts partners, artist consultation, and by serving on committees and boards), and through referrals. Additionally, the organization participates in national studies such as the Americans for the Arts & Economic Prosperity® V study and conducts local-level research for the benefit of the arts and creative industries. The City Property: The City Property in question consists of approximately 7,000 leasable square feet on .34 acres with a fair market lease value (based upon an average price per square foot formula comparing approximately nine similar facilities in the area) of approximately $194,250 averaged at market rate provided by Real Estate Services at $27.75 per square foot See highlighted parcel on diagram below. A Brief History of the Art Barn: The Art Barn was built during the Great Depression with assistance from the City of Salt Lake, the federal Works Projects Administration, private contributors, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Alta Rawlins Jensen was one of the visionaries who worked toward the building of a community arts center that was described in the Salt Lake Telegram as “A Greenwich Village for Salt Lake.” Ms. Jensen believed that despite desperate economic times, an art center could help to lift the spirit and rekindle the dreams of the community. In March of 1931, the Salt Lake City Commission gave the Art Barn founding group permission to build in Reservoir Park. Designed by architect Taylor Woolley, a former associate of Frank Lloyd Wright, the Art Barn’s projected construction cost was $10,000. The groundbreaking took place in October 1931, and the cornerstone was laid in December of the same year. Difficulties in raising the funds necessary to complete construction delayed the official opening until June 11, 1933. Governor Henry H. Blood and Mayor Louis Marcus addressed the crowd that filled the building and the lawn surrounding it. The Art Barn has been a significant community center for arts activities since that time. The road that runs through Reservoir Park in front of the Art Barn, at the insistence of the founders, was named Finch Lane to honor the Commissioner of City Parks, Harry L. Finch. Commissioner Finch had been instrumental in securing the property from the City at a lease rate of $1 per year, and in obtaining the Federal funds to hire unemployed laborers for this public building project. In its 90th anniversary year, this space has touched thousands of people, serving artists of all disciplines and those who experienced their work. Not only has the physical facility survived, with occasional renovations and additions, but it is still serving the public as its founders intended. Benefits to Salt Lake City: All Arts Council programs and services are provided at no charge or at an affordable, low cost to the public (Twilight Concert Series). Annually, the Arts Council obtains operating and programming funding from numerous resources, including federal, state, county, and private funding with Salt Lake City providing on average 65% of our total support. In late 2018 Union Creative Agency analyzed the operating model of the organization reporting, “The hybrid model has potential to be a premier and innovative model for Local Arts Agencies. While this model may require more work and development than simpler models, it has the capacity to deliver unprecedented impact.” This hybrid model of operations, recently also adopted by the State’s Utah Department of Heritage and Arts as an innovative model, benefits the City and residents in myriad ways: ● Ability to fundraise a significant portion of the funds that support programming and staff, creating a direct benefit to residents through leveraging City dollars. ● Wide community buy-in from other government and private funders both national and local. Increases accountability to community and public when funding sources are diverse. ● Procurement and commissioning procedures that are effective for best practices in the field, resulting in responsiveness, efficiency, and effective partner collaboration -in particular when it comes to executing on issues of equity and inclusion. ● Ability to engage in Citywide issues relevant to the community through Mayor, City Departments, etc. Effective collaboration, access to information, and resources. ● Mission as an Arts Council to fill niche gaps, incubate, and fulfill comm unity needs. ● Staff and public presence at the facility maintain a constant presence and awareness in Reservoir Park, as many parks in Salt Lake City see usage by unsheltered populations, as well as an active University of Utah Student population nea rby. Accomplishing Salt Lake City’s Goals: The Salt Lake City Arts Council recently completed a 5-year strategic plan in concert with the Salt Lake City Arts Council Board, Mayor, Department of Economic Development, and multi-year stakeholder engagement process involving residents, stakeholders and City Departments. Additionally, the Executive Director is tasked with implementation of the goals of PLAN SLC, the Mayor’s Current Plans, and guiding strategic plans and policies of the Department of Economic Development. The Board of the Salt Lake City Arts Council acts as an advisory body to the City in all matters pertaining to the arts and cultural development of the City. ● Streamline City art initiatives and improve the structure and funding of the Arts Council (Mayor’s Plan 2021) ● Ensure access to, and support for, a diversity of cultural facilities citywide.(Plan SLC) ● Increase Overall Participation in arts and cultural activities (Plan SLC) ● Strengthen Organization Health and Development (Salt Lake City Arts Council Strategic Plan) Below is a breakdown of funding sources from the previous three years. FY 2018-2019 FY 2019-2020 FY 2020-2021 FY 2020-2021 ACTUAL ACTUAL APPROVED BUDGET APPROVED AMENDED BUDGET CITY REVENUE 1,149,148.00 1,063,941.00 1,223,801.00 1,411,437.00 CONTRIBUTIONS 107,514.24 8,188.10 110,000.00 139,645.00 EARNED INCOME 136,288.76 106,823.98 46,250.00 18,500.00 GOVERNMENT GRANTS 409,054.45 345,980.00 304,552.00 505,647.00 OTHER REVENUE 10,622.36 4,013.65 2,505.00 5,160.00 TOTAL REVENUE $ 1,812,627.81 $ 1,528,946.73 $ 1,687,108.00 $ 2,080,389.00 The Arts Council receives funding from Salt Lake City’s Non-departmental each year to help with the expenses of managing the Art Barn facility. In FY19 and FY20 support was given at $7,500 and in FY21 support was at $10,000. The Arts Council Foundation uses this funding to pay for the building utilities. The Arts Council Foundation also incurs the cost of monthly building cleaning, building security, and purchases building supplies such as cleaning products, bathroom paper supplies, and PPE. Conclusion: In conclusion, we would like to take this opportunity to thank both the City Administration and the City Council for this opportunity to present our Public Benefits Analysis for the Salt Lake City Arts Council. We have demonstrated in this document that the Salt Lake City Arts Council and Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation provide a clear, direct, and substantial benefit to not only Salt Lake City Residents and Visitors, but to the Greater Salt Lake City Area. Additionally, we believe that our hybrid st ructure as both a division of Salt Lake City Government and as a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization provides an excellent example of; (1) robust and healthy public-nonprofit partnerships to our industry at large,(2) remarkable stewardship of public funds, (3) innovative and solutions focused business practices, and (4) sustainable and inclusive organizational structure. In closing, we invite any member of the Administration or Council, as well as members of the general public, to request additional information to clarify any remaining questions you might have regarding our Public Benefits Analysis. Thank you! References: Draft Operating Agreement Draft Salt Lake Arts Council Foundation Bylaws Articles of Incorporation and supporting City documents establishing the agency Salt Lake City Arts Council Board Chapter 2.32 (City Ordinance) Salt Lake Arts Council Foundation Bylaws (current) City Commission Minutes 1976 Establishment of Arts Council RESOLUTION NO. _____ OF 2021 A Resolution Authorizing the Waiver of Lease Fees for the Use of the Art Barn by the Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation (“City”) desires to execute a below-market rate lease agreement (the “Nonmonetary Assistance”) with the Salt Lake City Arts Council Foundation, a Utah nonprofit corporation (“Foundation”) for use of the Art Barn located at 54 Finch Lane (“Art Barn”); and WHEREAS, the Foundation utilizes the Art Barn as its administrative headquarters, which allows the Foundation to operate in furtherance of its objectives in promoting and supporting the arts in the community as outlined under Salt Lake City Code 2.32; and WHEREAS, Utah Code Section 10-8-2(1)(a)(v) allows a municipal corporation to provide nonmonetary assistance to and waive fees for nonprofit entities, such as the Foundation, after first holding a public hearing; and WHEREAS, although Utah Code Section 10-8-2 does not require a study for such nonmonetary assistance to a nonprofit entity, the City has voluntarily performed an informal analysis setting forth the benefits afforded to Salt Lake City residents and how the Nonmonetary Assistance for the Foundation’s use of the Art Barn facilitate provision of such benefits and the achievement of the Salt Lake City Arts Council’s goals outlined under City Code 2.32 (“Analysis”), which Analysis was included in the transmittal to the City Council and made publicly available before the public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the Analysis and has fully considered all comments made during the public hearing. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, as follows: 1. The City Council hereby adopts the conclusions set forth in the Analysis, and hereby finds and determines that, for the reasons set forth in the Analysis, the Nonmonetary Assistance is appropriate. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of _________, 2021. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By: ______________________ CHAIRPERSON 2 ATTEST: ____________________________ CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM: Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office ______________________________ Sara Montoya, Senior City Attorney Date: ______________________ November 23, 2021 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM:Brian Fullmer Policy Analyst DATE:February 1, 2022 RE: Master Plan and Zoning Map Amendments for Former Fire Station #3 Properties at Approximately 1085, 1095, and 1097 East Simpson Avenue, and 1104 East Sugarmont Drive PLNPCM2021-00914 & PLNPCM2021-01007 The Council will be briefed about an ordinance that would amend zoning of Redevelopment Agency (RDA) properties at approximately 1085, 1095, and 1097 East Simpson Avenue from the current PL (Public Lands) zoning designation to CHSBD1 (Sugar House Central Business District 1) as shown in the image below. The proposal would also amend the Sugar House Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map for the properties from “Public Lands and Institutional” to “Business District Mixed Use Town Center Scale.” It is anticipated the subject properties will be consolidated with adjacent property to the east for future development, but no development proposal is being considered at this point. Planning staff noted a future project would likely be a mixed-use development including housing and commercial uses. If approved by the Council, the subject properties’ zoning designation would match that of property to the east, which is also owned by the RDA. Properties to the north and south are privately owned and are also zoned CSHBD1. Fairmont Park and Aquatic Center are to the west and zoned OS (Open Space). Two buildings are on the subject properties. The first is the former fire station #3 which served the Sugar House neighborhood. A new station was built at 2425 South 900 East which serves the Sugar House community, and the former station is no longer being used. The second is a Sugar House Business District maintenance building used by crews that maintain the area’s public spaces. If the properties are used for future development a new location would need to be found for the maintenance building. Planning staff recommended and the Planning Commission forwarded a unanimous positive recommendation to the City Council on the proposed master plan and zoning map amendments. Item Schedule: Briefing: February 1, 2022 Set Date: February 1, 2022 Public Hearing: February 15, 2022 Potential Action: March 1, 2022 Page | 2 Area zoning map with subject properties shaded blue inside circle Image courtesy Salt Lake City Planning Division Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed master plan and zoning map amendments, determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to ask the Administration for an update on plans to solicit development on this property, including whether a long-term lease is the preferred approach. The Council may also wish to further consider/discuss community input about future uses. 2. The Council may wish to ask the Administration if a space has been identified for maintenance needs in the business district, and if any funding is needed to secure that location? 3. The Council may wish to ask the Administration if the potential future extension of the S-Line streetcar to the east would impact redevelopment of this property or if it should be coordinated? 4. Is the Council supportive of the proposed master plan and zoning map amendments? ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CSHBD1 Zoning Summary (21A.26.060 Salt Lake City Code) Purpose Statement The purpose of the CSHBD Sugar House Business District is to promote a walkable community with a transit oriented, mixed use town center that can support a twenty-four (24) hour population. The CSHBD provides for residential, commercial and office use opportunities, with incentives for high density residential land use in a manner compatible with the existing form and function of the Sugar House master plan and the Sugar House Business District. The tables below include standards for the CSHBD1 zoning designation. CSHBD1 Lot and Yard Standards Page | 3 Lot Width Lot Area Front/Corner Side Yard Interior Side Yard Rear Yard Building Coverage Buffer yard (Not applicable in this instance) None required None required None required Max setback of 15 feet None required None required No maximum Next to any residential zone: 7-foot landscaped yard. Next to single family: one additional foot setback for every 3 feet in height over 30 feet. SCHBD1 Building Height Standards Lot Width Minimum Height Maximum Height Design Review Residential Uses No minimum 105 feet When over 50 feet in height or if building is over 20,000 square feet in size. Non- residential Uses No minimum 30 feet; 75 feet if equal amount of non-residential and residential square footage; 105 feet if 90% of parking is structured and residential uses are provided off-site. When over 50 feet in height or if building is over 20,000 square feet in size. CSHBD1 Ground Floor Use Requirements Must be residential, retail goods establishments, retail service establishments, public service portions of businesses, restaurants, taverns/brewpubs, bar establishments, art galleries, theaters, or performing art facilities. MASTER PLAN CONSIDERATIONS The subject parcels are within the area covered by the Sugar House Community Plan, adopted in 2005. The Plan’s future land use map designates the subject parcels as “Institutional and Public Lands,” which aligned with the previous use. As noted above, a new fire station was constructed at 2425 South 900 East. The Plan also recommends expanding the Sugar House Business District to include the subject parcels. It is Planning staff’s opinion the Plan supports changing the future land use map and zoning map to align with the recommended Business District expansion. ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS Attachment C (pages 10-11) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines zoning map amendment standards that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. Planning staff found the proposed amendment does not conflict with applicable standards. PUBLIC PROCESS • September 27, 2021-Notice of the project and request for comments sent to the Sugar House Community Council. • September 28, 2021-Notice mailed to all property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the subject properties. Digital open house notice posted to the Planning Division website and emailed to Planning’s list serve. • October 11, 2021-Sugar House Community Council Land Use Committee presentation and discussion on the proposal. Page | 4 • November 1, 2021-Sugar House Community Council sent a letter expressing support for the proposed master plan and zoning map amendments. • November 24, 2021-Planning Commission public hearing notice sent to Planning Division list serve, posted on City and Utah Public Meeting websites. Public hearing notice posted on property. • December 8, 2021-Planning Commission public hearing. One person spoke at the hearing expressing support for the proposal. The Commission closed the hearing and voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council. • The Sugar House Community Council forwarded a few comments received on the proposal. Most are generally supportive, with suggestions on what the land could be used for. These include a community-oriented project rather than luxury apartments; a senior center; or extension of the Fairmont Aquatic Center adding a recreation center. One commenter suggested retaining the property as open space, a public plaza or other public amenity. The Sugar House Community Council letter to Planning and public comments are found on pages 13-15 of the Planning Commission staff report. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 406 WWW.SLCGOV.COM PO BOX 145480 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5480 TEL 801-5357757 FAX 801-535-6174 PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS Staff Report To: Salt Lake City Planning Commission From: Nick Norris Planning Director Date: December 1, 2021 Re: PLNPCM2021-01007 Sugar House Community Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment and PLNPCM2021-00914 Zoning Map Amendment Master Plan and Zoning Map Amendment PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1085 Simpson (2 parcels with the same address), 1095 Simpson, 1097 Simpson and 1104 Sugarmont Drive. PARCEL ID: 16-20-252-001; 16-20-252-002; 16-20-252-005; 16-20-252-003; 16-20-252-004 MASTER PLAN: Sugar House Community Plan ZONING DISTRICT: Current zoning designation is PL Public Lands, proposed zoning designation is CSHBD1 Sugar House Central Business District MEETING DATE: December 8, 2021 REQUEST: Mayor Erin Mendenhall has initiated an amendment to the Sugar House Community Master Plan and the Salt Lake City Zoning Map for properties located at 1085 Simpson (2 parcels with the same address), 1095 Simpson, and 1104 Sugarmont Drive. The proposal would modify the future land use designation in the Sugar House Community Plan from "Public Lands and Institutional" to " Business District Mixed Use Town Center Scale" and the zoning map from PL Public Lands to CSHBD-1 Central Sugar House Business District 1. The purpose of the proposal is to facilitate the future development of the site. No development proposals are being considered at this time. The property is in City Council District 7, represented by Amy Fowler. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the information in this staff report and the factors to consider for zoning map, Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the City Council regarding this proposal. ATTACHMENTS: A. Vicinity Map B. Existing Conditions C. Analysis of Standards D. Public Process and Comments E. Dept. Comments furnishings, lighting, and landscaping or a delineated and developed open space system of the same character. The street level businesses are commercial and retail in nature, while the upper levels can be either residential or office depending on compatibility of the adjacent uses. Town Center Scale Mixed Use occurs primarily in the core area of the Business District surrounded by the Neighborhood Scale Mixed Use. The Sugar House Community Plan also includes a section about the expansion of the Sugar House Business District. The expansion area recommended in the plan includes the subject property (the map below can be found on Page 16 of the plan). The subject property is within the red circle on the map. Based on this, the plan supports the proposal to officially change the designation on the future land use map and the zoning map to align with the recommendations in the Sugar House Community Plan. The future land use map in the Sugar House Community Plan is proposed to be updated so that it matches the surrounding property and reflects the zoning. Furthermore, the update helps implement the plan by matching the proposed expansion of the Sugar House Business District. Proposed Zoning Map Amendment The purpose of the zoning map amendment is to match the zoning of the property directly to the east, which is also owned by the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City. The intent is to combine the properties and then develop the site. A proposal to amend the zoning map of the city is subject to the factors found in 21A.50 of the Zoning Code. It is important to note that the factors are not standards and that the proposal does not need to comply with each factor listed. This is considered a legislative action and the Planning Commission is legally required to make a recommendation to the City Council. The standards from 21A.50.050 that apply to zoning map amendments are found in Attachment C. The subject property (indicated in the red circle) is proposed to change from PL to CSHBD1 PUBLIC INPUT This proposal is subject to the 45-day engagement process outlined in City Code. Notice was provided to the surrounding property owners and the Sugar House Community Council on September 27, 2021. The 45-day public input period ended on November 12, 2021. The proposal was presented to the Sugar House Community Council Land Use Committee on October 11, 2021. The Sugar House Community Council provided a letter outlining their position that can be found in attachment D. Several other comments were submitted to the Sugar House Committee Council that can also be found in attachment D. The comments are summarized below: • Sugar House Community Council: The community council stated, “We believe this change is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the City through the Sugar House master plan.” The letter does not identify any issues to consider with the proposal. • Other Public Comments received: o it makes sense to rezone the property to match the zoning of the parcel to the East. o the rezoning should be approved, but nor for more luxury apartments and would prefer a truly community-oriented project for everyone. o Would love the site to be a senior center. o Would prefer to see the site be retained as public lands and used for open space, a public plaza, or some other public amenity that can service the growth in the neighborhood. o Should be an extension of the Fairmont Aquatic Center, Sugar House needs a rec center. Response to Public Input: The proposal does not include any development proposals at this time, but it is highly likely that a future project would be a mixed-use development that includes housing and commercial uses. It is highly likely that the site will be used as open space given the proximity to Fairmont Park and the S Line, but the opportunity for some public space on the site and the site to the east would be possible with the proposed zoning change. Those details will be determined by the Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency. The RDA Board ultimately determines what sort of community benefits and uses are included in an RDA project. The RDA Board holds public hearings and receives public input on these proposals. Those that are interested in providing input on the future development are encouraged to visit the RDA website to learn more about RDA projects and for ways to be involved: https://slcrda.com/ The proposal has not been modified based on the public comment received as of November 29, 2021 and there are no proposed modifications being recommended by the Planning Division. IMPACTS: The proposal is not anticipated to have significant impacts to the area. No existing residents or businesses will be displaced by this proposal. The existing Sugar House Business District facility will have to be relocated or included in the future development of the site. That is an issue that can be resolved by the RDA and the Public Services Department and does not require any specific action or recommendation from the Planning Commission. NEXT STEPS: The City Council is the final decision maker regarding zoning map amendments and will consider the proposal regardless of the Planning Commission’s recommendation. If approved by the City Council, the RDA would likely start the process of seeking out a development partner to come up with a development plan for the property. Any future development would have to comply with the zoning approved by the City Council and any conditions or agreements decided by the City Council. It is typical that developments using RDA land and/or resources to include requirements that align with city goals. Common examples of requirements include affordable housing units, public space, energy efficiency, and other benefits that are determined as part of the solicitation for development. These are just examples and no decisions have been made regarding what may be required in any development proposal. ATTACHMENT A: VICINITY MAP Subject property outlined in red ATTACHMENT B: Existing Conditions Current Zoning: PL Public Lands Proposed Zoning: CSHBD Sugar House Business District 1 CSHBD1 Purpose Statement: The purpose of the CSHBD Sugar House Business District is to promote a walkable community with a transit oriented, mixed use town center that can support a twenty-four (24) hour population. The CSHBD provides for residential, commercial and office use opportunities, with incentives for high density residential land use in a manner compatible with the existing form and function of the Sugar House master plan and the Sugar House Business District. Allowed Uses: a mix of uses typically found in an urban neighborhood such as this. Dense residential buildings, ground floor commercial uses on primary streets, a mix of retail and restaurants, office buildings, retail service, and public uses are found in the business district. Building Height varies based on the use. Residential buildings can potentially be as tall as 105 feet. Nonresidential uses are limited to 30 feet. Mixed use buildings that contain residential can go up to 105 feet in some instances. Setbacks: There are no minimum setbacks in the zoning district. There is a maximum setback of 15 feet, which means no building can be more than 15 feet from a front property line. Public Review Processes: • Conditional Uses: some uses are required to obtain conditional use approval and are subject to a 45-day early engagement period. • Design Review if buildings are over a certain height or over a certain square footage the 45-day engagement period applies. Minor modifications to a building design standard are not subject to the 45-day engagement period. Surrounding Properties Future Land Use Current Zoning Current Use East Business District Mixed Use Town Center Scale CSHBD1 Commercial (vacant building) South Business District Mixed Use Town Center Scale CSHBD1 Commercial West Open Space Open Space Fairmont Park and Fairmont Aquatic Center North Business District Mixed Use Town Center Scale CSHBD1 Apartments, Commercial CSHBD1 Zoning Summary 21A.26.060 ATTACHMENT D: Public Process and Comments The proposal was sent to the Sugar House Community Council on September 27, 2021 with a 45-day comment period that expired on November 12, 2021. The Sugar House Community Council Land Use Committee met on October 11, 2021 to discuss the proposal. The Sugar House Community Council provided a letter of support for the proposal and included comments received related to the proposal. Those comments follow. Norris, Nick From:Judi Short <judi.short@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, November 3, 2021 10:36 AM To:Norris, Nick Subject:(EXTERNAL) Fwd: Rezone the Old SH Fire Station to CSHBD2 Here is an additional comment about the fire station rezone. Judi ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Heather Hendrikse Date: Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 10:39 PM Subject: Rezone the Old SH Fire Station to CSHBD2 To: From: Heather Hendriksen Subject:Rezone the Old SH Fire Station to CSHBD2 The former fire house and Deseret Industries should be turned into an extension of Fairmont Aquatic center making it an actual rec center similar to the county facilities throughout the county. Sugar House needs a county rec center. Ideas could include a basketball court with an indoor track, racquetball courts, fitness and weight equipment. I wonder if you could even close the road behind the aquatic center and build a little bigger since there’s a road next to the apartments being built where Granite Furniture used to be. ‐‐ This email was sent from a contact form on Sugar House Community Council (https://www.sugarhousecouncil.org ) ‐‐ Judi Short ATTACHMENT E: Deparment Comments The proposal was routed to the following Departments. The comments that follow are what was provided. • Building Services (Heather Gilcrease): No comments provided • Economic Development (Lorena Riffo Jenson) Business Development supports the zoning change to “Business District Mixed Use Town Center Scale,” and encourages that the zoning changes promotes commercial space and especially small-scale retail. • Engineering (Scott Weiler): Engineering has no objections to this. • Transportation (Kevin Young) No comments provided • Public Utilities (Jason Draper): No utility objections to the proposed master plan and zoning map amendment. Redevelopment of this property may require relocation of storm drain facilities and may require utility improvements for water and sewer service. • Police Department (Lamar Ewell): no comments provided • Sustainability (Debbie Lyons) No comments provided • Parks and Public Lands (Kristen Riker) No comments provided • Public Services (Lorna Vogt): Inquired about how the zoning change impacts the existing maintenance building for the Sugar House Business Improvement District. The use is considered a conditional use in the proposed zone and if relocated to another site in the zoning district would need a new conditional use. If incorporated into a new development it may require a new conditional use. • Redevelopment Agency (Danny Walz); no direct comments provided; however, the RDA owns the property and requested the zoning change. SUGAR HOUSE COMMUNITY PLAN AND ZONING MAP CHANGES FORMER SUGAR HOUSE FIRE STATION PLNPCM2021-01007 and PLNPCM2021-00914 •Sugar House Community Plan: •Public Lands and Institutional to Business District Mixed Use Town Center Scale •Zoning Map •From Pl Public Lands to CSHBD1 Central Sugar House Business District Recommendation: Forwarding a positive recommendation to the City Council. PROJECT REQUEST Salt Lake City // Planning Division Salt Lake City // Planning Division Salt Lake City // Planning Division SUGAR HOUSE COMMUNITY PLAN Subject Properties Salt Lake City // Planning Division SUGAR HOUSE COMMUNITY PLAN Plan supports expanding the Sugar House Business District (Pg 16 of Sugar House Community Plan) Salt Lake City // Planning Division CURRENT ZONING MAP RECOMMENDATIONS Salt Lake City // Planning Division The Planning Commission and the Planning Division recommend approval of this proposal. Salt Lake City // Planning Division RECOMMENDATION 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: Dan Dugan, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: PLNPCM2021-01007 Sugar House Community Plan Future Land Use Map and PLNPCM2021-00914 Zoning Map Amendment for the former Fire Station #3 property STAFF CONTACT: Nick Norris Planning Director, nick.norris@slcgov.com or 801-535-6173 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the proposed amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This proposal would change the future land use map found in the Sugar House Community Master Plan from “Public Lands and Institutional” to Business District Mixed Use Town Center Scale” and change the zoning map from PL Public Lands to CSHBD1 Sugar House Central Business District 1. The purpose for the proposal is to consolidate the subject properties with the property to the east for future development. Both properties are owned by the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City. There is no development proposal associated with this request. The subject properties include four parcels of land. All four parcels are included in the proposal. The total land area included in this proposal is approximately 0.75 acres. January 14, 2021 Lisa Shaffer (Jan 14, 2022 11:29 MST) 01/14/2022 01/14/2022 The property currently contains two buildings: one was the former fire station for the Sugar House neighborhood, and one contains a maintenance building for the business improvement district that maintains public spaces in the area. The subject properties are in an area that the Sugar House Community Plan identifies as an expansion of the Sugar House central business district. Updating the future land use map and the zoning map are consistent with the goals and policies recommended in the Sugar House Community Plan. PUBLIC PROCESS: The Sugar House Community Council was notified of the proposal on September 27, 2021, starting the 45-day public comment period. The Sugar House Community Council Land Use Committee discussed the item at their October 11, 2021 meeting. Property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the subject property were also notified of the 45-day public comment period. Information was posted on the Planning Division website and the notices provided a link to the online information. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 8, 2022. The public hearing was noticed by a direct mailing to all property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the subject properties, posted on the City and Statue of Utah Public Notice website, emailed to the Planning Division list serve, and signs were posted on the property advertising the meeting. After he public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted a motion recommending that the City Council adopt the proposal. More detailed information on public input can be found in the Planning Commission staff report. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) PC Agenda of December 8, 2021 (Click to Access) b) PC Minutes of December 8, 2021 (Click to Access) c) Planning Commission Staff Report of December 8, 2021 (Click to Access Report) EXHIBITS: 1) Project Chronology 2) Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3) Original Petition 4) Mailing List 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2021 (Amending the zoning map pertaining to properties located at 1085 East Simpson Avenue, 1095 East Simpson Avenue, 1097 East Simpson Avenue, and 1104 East Sugarmont Drive to rezone those properties from PL Public Lands District to CSHBD1 Sugar House Business District) and amending the Sugar House Community Plan Future Land Use Map) An ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to properties located at 1085 East Simpson Avenue, 1095 East Simpson Avenue, 1097 East Simpson Avenue and 1104 East Sugarmont Drive to rezone those properties from PL Public Lands District to CSHBD 1 Sugar House Business District pursuant to petition number PLNPCM2021-00914 and amending the Sugar House Community Future Land Use Map pursuant to petition number PLNPCM2021- 01007. WHEREAS, Mayor Erin Mendenhall initiated a petition to rezone properties located at 1085 East Simpson Avenue, 1095 East Simpson Avenue, 1097 East Simpson Avenue and 1104 East Sugarmont Drive to rezone those properties from PL Public Lands District to CSHBD1 Sugar House Business District pursuant to petition number PLNPCM2021-00914 and amending the Sugar House Community Future Land Use Map with respect to the property from Public Lands and Institutional to Business District Mixed Use Town Center Scale pursuant to petition number PLNPCM2021-01007; and WHEREAS, at its December 8, 2021 meeting, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council on said applications; and WHEREAS, after holding a public hearing on this matter, the city council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 2 SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be and hereby is amended to reflect that the properties located at 1085 East Simpson Avenue, 1095 East Simpson Avenue, 1097 East Simpson Avenue and 1104 East Sugarmont Drive (Tax ID Nos. 16- 20-252-001; 16-20-252-002; 21-20-252-003 and 16-20-252-005), which are more particularly described on Exhibit “A” attached hereto, are rezoned from PL Public Lands District to CSHBD1 Sugar House Business District. SECTION 2. Amending the Sugar House Community Master Plan. The Future Land Use Map of the Sugar House Community Master Plan shall be and hereby is amended to change the future land use designation of the properties identified in Exhibit “A” from Public Lands and Institutional to Business District Mixed Use Town Center Scale. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ___ day of ____________, 2022. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. 3 Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2022 Published: ______________. APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date: _________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Paul Nielson, Senior City Attorney December 20, 2021 4 Exhibit “A” Legal descriptions of the properties to be rezoned: Parcel 16-20-252-001 COM AT NW COR LOT 4 BLK 3 GRANITE SUB PLAT A S 0^14’48” W 151.61 FT N 46^19’51” W 60.28 FT NW’LY ALG CURVE TO LEFT 202.5 FT S 89^45’15” E 211.65 FT S 0^14’48” W 1.31 FT TO BEG0.32 AC BEING IN LOT 11 BLK 45 10 AC A. Parcel 16-20-252-002 COM NW COR LOT 4, BLK 3, GRANITE SUB PLAT “A”, SE’LY ALG CURVE TO RIGHT 105.05 FT; S 43^40’09” W 119.64 FT; N 0^14’48” E 151.61 FT TO BEG. Parcel 16-20-252-003 COM N 0^14’48” E 47 FT FR SW COR LOT 4, BLK 3, GRANITE SUB PLAT A; S 46^19’51” E 68.15 FT; S 89^56’ E 53.396 FT; N 0^14’48” E 109.306 FT; NW’LY ALG CURVE TO L 31.88 FT; S 43^40’09” W 119.641 FT TO BEG. Parcel 16-20-252-005 COM AT NW COR LOT 4, BLK 3, GRANITE SUB PLAT A, SE’LY ALG CURVE TO R 136.933 FT; N 0^14’48” E 46.093 FT; NW’LY ALG CURVE TO L 64.526 FT; N 89^45’15” W 54.792 FT TO BEG. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING 3. ORIGINAL PETITION 4. MAILING LIST 1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Petition: PLNPCM2021-00914 and PLNPCM20221-01007 August 23, 2021 The mayor initiated a petition to update the community master plan and zoning of the property where the former Sugar House Fire Station was located. September 27, 2021 Petition assigned to Nick Norris, Planning Director, for staff analysis and processing. September 28, 2021 Petition routed to each City Department and Division for review and comment. September 28, 2021 Early engagement period started by sending an email containing preliminary information sent to all Community Council Chairs informing them of the proposed text amendments, and that Planning Commission and City Council meetings would be scheduled in the future. Notice also sent to all property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the proposal. September 28, 2021 Public information posted to the Planning Division website explaining the proposal and containing proposed text of code changes. September 28, 2021 Email notice of the digital open house sent to the Planning Division list- serve. This email is sent every two weeks with each item that is in the public engagement phase. October 11, 2021 Presentation to the Sugar House Land Use Committee. November 24, 2021 Public notice for December 20, 2021 Planning Commission public hearing sent to Division list serve, posted on city website, and posted on Utah Public Meeting website. Property posted with sign advertising publich earing. December 8, 2021 Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and conducted a public hearing. The Planning Commission adopted a motion recommending that the City Council adopt the proposal. 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition P:NPCM2021-00914 and PLNPCM2021-01007 – A petition initiated by Mayor Erin Mendenhall to amend the Sugar House Community Master Plan and the Salt Lake City Zoning Map for properties located at approximately 1085 Simpson (2 parcels with the same address), 1095 Simpson, 1097 Simpson and 1104 Sugarmont Drive. The proposal would modify the future land use designation in the Sugar House Community Plan from "Public Lands and Institutional" to " Business District Mixed Use Town Center Scale" and the zoning map from PL Public Lands to CSHBD-1 Central Sugar House Business District 1. The purpose of the proposal is to facility the future development of the site. No development proposals are being considered at this time. The City Council may consider other future land use designations or zoning districts as part of this proposal. DATE: Date #1 and Date #2 TIME: 7:00 p.m. All persons interested and present will be given an opportunity to be heard in this matter. This meeting will be held via electronic means, while potentially also providing for an in- person opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. If you are interested in participating during the Public Hearing portion of the meeting, please visit the website www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings/ or call 801-535-7654 to obtain connection information. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801)535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Nick Norris at 801-535-6173 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail at nick.norris@slcgov.com People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance in order to participate in this hearing. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. 3. ORIGINAL PETITION 4. MAILING LIST OWN_FULL_NAME OWN_ADDR OWN_CITY OWN_STATE OWN_ZIP UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY 669 WEST 200 SOUTH SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101 SUGARHOUSE VETERINARY HOSPITAL BUILDING PTRN 2206 S MCCLELLAND ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 ZIONS FIRST NATIONAL BANK PO BOX 54288 LEXINGTON KY 40555 SUGARMONT LLC 2121 S MCCLELLAND ST #303 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 S STATE ST # 425 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SUGARHOUSE DIXON, LLC 11 SPANISH BAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 SALT LAKE COUNTY PO BOX 144575 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114 SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION PO BOX 145460 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 S STATE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SALT LAKE CITY PO BOX 145460 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114 SALT LAKE CITY CORP.PO BOX 145460 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114 Unknown PO BOX 145518 SALT LAKE CITY UT UT 84114 YORK FAMILY 2257, LLC 2257 S 1100 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK OF SALT LAKE CITY UTAH 425 PIKE ST # BRO79 SEATTLE WA 98101 CMRK LLC; RLR INVESTMENTS #1 LLC 2280 S HIGHLAND DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 DEE'S SUGARHOUSE INVESTMENTS LLC 777 E 2100 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 Current Occupant 975 E SUGARMONT DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2200 S HIGHLAND DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2220 S HIGHLAND DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2191 S MCCLELLAND ST Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1055 E SUGARMONT DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1044 E SUGARMONT DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1040 E SUGARMONT DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1085 E SIMPSON AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1095 E SIMPSON AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1097 E SIMPSON AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1104 E SUGARMONT DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1116 E SUGARMONT DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2234 S HIGHLAND DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2262 S HIGHLAND DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2274 S HIGHLAND DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2227 S HIGHLAND DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2201 S HIGHLAND DR Salt Lake City UT 84106 Nick Norris c/o Planning Division PO BOX 145480 Salt Lake City UT 84111 PLNPCM2021-00709 1 October 27, 2021 PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS Staff Report To: Salt Lake City Planning Commission From: Amanda Roman, Principal Planner Amanda.Roman@slcgov.com or 385-386-2765 (Cell) / 801-535-7660 (Voicemail) Date: October 27, 2021 Re: PLNPCM2021-00709 – Zoning Map Amendment Zoning Map Amendment PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1193 W California Avenue PARCEL SIZE: Total of .28 acres (Approx. 12,200 square feet) PARCEL ID: 15-14-104-001-0000 MASTER PLAN: Westside Master Plan (2014) ZONING DISTRICT: R-1/7,000 Single-Family Residential REQUEST: Salt Lake City has received a request from Kesaia Young, property owner, requesting that the City amend the zoning map designation for the property at 1193 W California Avenue. The proposal would rezone the property from R-1/7,000 (Single-Family Residential) to R-1/5,000 (Single-Family Residential). The rezone would allow the property to be subdivided into two lots that each meet the minimum lot area for a single-family dwelling. A specific development proposal was not submitted with the Zoning Map Amendment, but if approved, the property owner intends to redevelop the site by replacing the existing single-family home with two new single-family homes, each on their own parcel. The Planning Commission’s role in this application is to provide a recommendation to the City Council, who will make the final decision on the requested zoning map amendment. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the information in this staff report, Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed zoning map amendment. ATTACHMENTS: A. Current Zoning Map & Future Land Use Map B. Applicant Information C. Site and Vicinity Photos D. Analysis of Amendment Standards E. Public Process and Comments F. Department Comments PLNPCM2021-00709 2 October 27, 2021 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The property owner is requesting to change the zoning map designation of the property at 1193 W California Avenue from R-1/7,000 (Single-Family Residential) to R-1/5,000 (Single-Family Residential) with the intent to subdivide the parcel into two lots to build two new single-family homes and potentially two attached ADUs. The lots would remain under the same ownership and the dwelling units would be occupied by additional family members. A specific site development proposal has not been submitted, but the existing single-family home that was built in 1946 would be replaced. The subject property is approximately 12,200 square feet. The current R-1/7,000 zoning district requires a minimum lot area of 7,000 square feet for a single-family dwelling. Under the existing R-1/7,000 zoning, the subject property does not have the minimum 14,000 square feet to subdivide the property and build two single family dwellings. The proposed request to amend the zoning map from R-1/7,000 to R-1/5,000 would allow for the property to be subdivided into two separate lots that each meet the minimum lot size requirements of 5,000 square feet with the intent of building a single-family dwelling on each parcel. The property is located in the South Salt Lake Subdivision, recorded in 1890. The original lots were narrow and deep, measuring between 4,092 and 4,224 square feet. The residential development pattern largely remains intact, but most of the properties were consolidated to create larger lots and the north-south alleyway between the properties was vacated. The neighborhood consists of single-and two-family homes, institutional uses, as well as some interspersed commercial. The Jordan River Parkway Trail is less than 600 feet to the east and two “Community Nodes”, as identified in the Westside Master Plan, are less than 600 feet to the west, at approximately California Avenue and between 1300 W and Concord Street. The Westside Master Plan is not being changed and the proposed zoning is supported by the neighborhood and housing visions identified in the plan which states, “All new infill development, whether single-, two- or multi-family residential, should adhere to the prevailing development pattern in the immediate area.” The prevailing development pattern in the neighborhood, and on the westside, is single-family residential. The proposed rezone would not change the character of the existing single-family neighborhood but would allow for the subject property to be subdivided, resulting in two lots that could be developed with single-family dwellings. The applicant provided a project narrative explaining the rationale for the zoning map amendment request that can be found in Attachment B of this report. PLNPCM2021-00709 3 October 27, 2021 KEY CONSIDERATIONS The key considerations associated with this proposal are: 1. Compliance with Master Plan Policies 2. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties 3. R-1/5,000 and R-1/7,000 Zoning District Comparison Consideration 1: Compliance with Master Plan Policies Westside Master Plan (2014) Through changes in land use, improved public infrastructure and increased community investment, the Westside Master Plan envisions redevelopment that maintains the character of existing stable neighborhoods, while diversifying commercial centers and growing recreational assets. The plan supports higher density residential growth where appropriate and encourages the reinvestment in and protect of existing low density residential neighborhoods. The master plan anticipates that the overall level of change within single-family neighborhoods will be low, but they are viewed as areas of opportunity for incremental growth and redevelopment. As stated in the master plan, “The established and stable neighborhoods of the Westside will remain the core of the community, retaining traditional development patterns while also providing new housing opportunities.” The Westside Community is comprised of the Glendale and Poplar Grove neighborhoods, both of which have designated neighborhood, community and regional nodes where future growth is to be accommodated. The subject property is located within the Glendale neighborhood and adjacent to a “Community Node” located at California Avenue and Concord Street, where the Glendale City Library and a Baptist and LDS church are located. A “Community Node” is defined as “an intersection consisting of at least one major road where there is potential for changes in land use and the development pattern.” Community nodes support adding residential density in low-density neighborhoods in the form of infill development and appropriately scaled multi-family units and ADUs. Community nodes are also areas where smaller commercial and institutional uses should be established as anchoring businesses within residential areas. The proposed zoning map amendment is compatible with the traditional development pattern of the neighborhood and the increase in allowable density is supported by the property’s location near a community node. Plan Salt Lake (2015) The proposed zoning map amendment adheres to the initiatives within Plan Salt Lake, a citywide plan that outlines the City’s overall vision for sustainable growth and development. This includes the development of a diverse mix of uses and housing options, which are essential to accommodate the growing population in a responsible manner. The compatibility of new development and how it fits into the scale and character of existing neighborhoods is also an important consideration. Applicable growth and housing initiatives that the proposed zoning map amendment would help implement are below. Growth: • Locate new development in areas with existing infrastructure and amenities, such as transit and transportation corridors. • Promote infill and redevelopment of underutilized land. • Accommodate and promote an increase in the City’s population. • Provide access to opportunities for a healthy lifestyle (including parks, trails, recreation, and healthy food). PLNPCM2021-00709 4 October 27, 2021 Housing: • Encourage housing options that accommodate aging in place. • Direct new growth toward areas with existing infrastructure and services that have the potential to be people-oriented. • Enable moderate density increases within existing neighborhoods where appropriate. • Increase the number of medium density housing types and options. Guiding Principles outlined in Plan Salt Lake that would relate to the proposed change include the following: • Neighborhoods that provide a safe environment, opportunity for social interaction, and services needed for the wellbeing of the community therein. • Growing responsibly while providing people with choices about where they live, how they live, and how they get around. • Access to a wide variety of housing types for all income levels throughout the city, providing the basic human need for safety and responding to changing demographics. The proposed zoning map amendment is aligned with the vision and guiding principles outlined in Plan Salt Lake relating to growth and housing opportunities. Additionally, the subject property is located on a major transit corridor and nearby recreation and outdoor amenities, which can support the increase in density. Consideration 2: Compatibility with Adjacent Properties The subject property is located on the south-east corner of California Avenue and 1200 West. California Avenue is one of the largest east-west roads in the area and is surrounded by primarily residential development. Surrounding uses include churches, public libraries, and the Jordan River Parkway Trail. The residential zoning designation on the south side of California Avenue is R-1/7,000 Single-Family Residential. While it is a single-family zoning designation, there are existing duplexes in the neighborhood, including one directly east of the subject property. There are three nearby corners that are designated as Community Nodes and zoned Neighborhood Commercial, which are intended to support small scale commercial development. The properties on the north side of California Avenue are primarily zoned R- 1/5,000 Single-Family Residential with one north-south block face that is zoned R-2 Single- and Two-Family Residential. CALIFORNIA AVE 12 0 0 EM E R Y S T . CO N C O R D S T . PLNPCM2021-00709 5 October 27, 2021 While the proposed rezone would create the only R-1/5,000 property on the south side of California Avenue, the existing development pattern is more compatible with the R-1/5,000 zoning standards than the R-1/7,000 zoning standards. As discussed above, the recorded South Salt Lake Subdivision plat consisted of narrow lots just over 4,000 square feet in size. The built development pattern differs from the original subdivision as most of the lots have been consolidated and the north-south alleyway was vacated. For comparison, staff reviewed the average lot sizes of the lots between California Avenue and Utahna Drive and between 1200 W and Emery Street. The 1890 South Salt Lake Subdivision plat has 72 lots, which have since been consolidated into 42 total lots. Of the 42 lots, only three, including the subject property, exceed 7,000 square feet. The other 39 lots are approximately 6,500 square feet and therefore, do not meet the current R-1/7,000 zoning standards, even after being consolidated. The change in zoning would reflect the original and current residential development pattern and provide a compatible infill housing opportunity. Consideration 3: R-1/5,000 and R-1/7,000 Zoning District Comparison A comparison of the R-1/5,000 and R-1/7,000 zoning standards is below. In addition to the difference in minimum lot square footage, the R-1/5,000 zone also has reduced rear and side yard building setbacks. The permitted building height, lot width, lot coverage, front yard setback, and parking requirements are the same in both zones. The permitted and conditional land uses are also identical in both zones. Staff does not anticipate any significant impacts to the surrounding property owners or occupants if the rezone is approved and the lot is subsequently subdivided and developed under the R-1/5,000 zoning standards. ZONING STANDARDS MIN. LOT SQUARE FOOTAGE MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT MIN. LOT WIDTH MAX. LOT COVERAGE FRONT YARD REAR YARD CORNER SIDE YARD INTERIOR SIDE YARD R-1/5,000 5,000 SF 28 feet for pitched roofs 20 feet for flat roofs 50 feet 40% Average of front yards for existing buildings on block face. Where none, 20 feet minimum 25% of lot depth or 20 feet, whichever is less Corner: 10 feet Interior: 4 feet on corner lots 4 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other for interior lots R-1/7,000 7,000 SF 28 feet for pitched roofs 20 feet for flat roofs 50 feet 40% Average of front yards for existing buildings on block face. Where none, 20 feet minimum 25 feet Corner: Equal to the average of the existing buildings on the block face. Where none, 20 feet Interior: 6 feet on corner lots 6 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other for interior lots PLNPCM2021-00709 6 October 27, 2021 DISCUSSION The proposed rezone is compatible with the platted subdivision and reflects the existing development pattern, which consists of single- and two-family dwellings on lots less than 7,000 square feet in size. The proposed change would allow for the subdivision of the property but is not expected to change the character of the neighborhood or have adverse impacts on future growth. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map meets the vision of the Westside Master Plan and Plan Salt Lake housing and growth initiatives. Furthermore, rezoning the property to R-1/5,000 meets the intent of the zoning district which is to, “provide for conventional single-family residential neighborhoods on lots not less than five thousand (5,000) square feet in size. This district is appropriate in areas of the City as identified in the applicable community Master Plan. Uses are intended to be compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. The standards for the district are intended to provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play, promote sustainable and compatible development patterns and to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood”. The subject property is also near transit, parks, and other amenities which are intended to support housing in the city. The proposed rezone is compatible with the neighborhood and supports the Westside community’s vision for neighborhood growth as outlined in the Westside Master Plan. NEXT STEPS The Planning Commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for their consideration as part of the final decision on this petition. If the zoning map amendment is approved, the applicant may proceed with subdividing and developing the property under the applicable R-1/5,000 zoning standards. PLNPCM2021-00709 7 October 27, 2021 ATTACHMENT A: Current Zoning Map PLNPCM2021-00709 8 October 27, 2021 Future Land Use Map in the Westside Master Plan Subject Property PLNPCM2021-00709 9 October 27, 2021 ATTACHMENT B: Applicant Information PLNPCM2021-00709 10 October 27, 2021 PLNPCM2021-00709 11 October 27, 2021 ATTACHMENT C: Site and Vicinity Photos Subject Property – east façade and driveway 2 on California Ave Subject Property –north façade fronting California Ave Subject Property – west façade and driveway 1 on 1200 West Subject Property – rear facade PLNPCM2021-00709 12 October 27, 2021 North: LDS church East: duplex and 7-11 South: single-family home West: single-family home PLNPCM2021-00709 13 October 27, 2021 ATTACHMENT D: ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS 21A.50.050: A decision to amend the text of this title or the zoning map by general amendment is a matter committed to the legislative discretion of the city council and is not controlled by any one standard. In making a decision to amend the zoning map, the City Council should consider the following: Factor Finding Rationale 1. Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the city as stated through its various adopted planning documents; Complies with Master Plan policy statements and Future Land Use Map The proposed Zoning Map Amendment meets the purpose and vision of the Westside Master Plan and Plan Salt Lake. Based on the existing land uses, development pattern and the adopted master plans, rezoning the parcel to the R-1/5,000 zoning district is appropriate for the following reasons: • The proposed change in zoning is consistent with the future land use map in the Master Plan which identifies this as a neighborhood use near Community Nodes. • The proposed change is in compliance with the future vision for the area. • The proposed zoning map amendment is aligned with the vision and guiding principles contained in Plan Salt Lake. 2. Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies The proposed rezone is from single-family residential to single- family residential. The purpose of residential zoning districts is: “The residential districts are intended to provide a range of housing choices to meet the needs of Salt Lake City’s citizens, to offer a balance of housing types and densities, to preserve and maintain the City’s neighborhoods as safe and convenient places to live, to promote the harmonious development of residential communities, to ensure compatible infill development, and to help implement adopted plans.” Other than the difference in the required minimum lot size, the purpose statement of both the R-1/5,000 and R-1/7,000 Zoning Districts is to provide for single-family neighborhoods with uses that are compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. The proposed rezone from R-1/7,000 to R-1/5,000 would support the purpose statements within the zoning ordinance and is compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. 3. The extent to which a proposed map amendment will affect adjacent properties; Complies As discussed in Consideration 2, while the surrounding properties are zoned R-1/7,000, the existing development pattern more closely reflects the R-1/5,000 zone. The lots in the platted 1890 subdivision were just over 4,000 SF in size. Since being subdivided, most of the lots have been consolidated with others, but even so, the majority of them are less than the prescribed minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet. If the zone change is approved and the subject property is subdivided into two lots, the two lots would be compatible in size to the existing lots PLNPCM2021-00709 14 October 27, 2021 and could be developed in a similar manner. The zone change would reduce the lot size and setback requirements but would not change the standards related to building height, lot width, lot coverage, or parking. Staff does not anticipate there being adverse impacts related to the change in zone from single-family to single-family. 4. Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards Complies The subject property does not fall within an overlay zoning district. 5. The adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including, but not limited to, roadways, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection, schools, stormwater drainage systems, water supplies, and wastewater and refuse collection. Complies The petition was reviewed by the necessary city departments and there were no concerns regarding the rezone. The applicant also went to a DRT meeting to discuss subdividing the property if the rezone is approved. The DRT comments are included in Attachment F. The property is located within an established residential development where public facilities, roadways, and services are existing. If the rezone is approved, any future subdivision or development would be required to comply with the applicable R- 1/5,000 standards. PLNPCM2021-00709 15 October 27, 2021 ATTACHMENT E: Public Process and Comments Public Notice, Meetings, Comments The following is a list of public meetings that have been held, and other public input opportunities, related to the proposed project: • Notice of the project and request for comments sent to the Chair of the Glendale Community Council on July 27, 2021. • Staff sent an early notification announcement of the proposal to all residents and property owners located within 300 feet of the subject property on July 28, 2021. • The petition information was posted to the Online Open House webpage to solicit public comments on the proposal. The Online Open House period started on July 30, 2021 and will be open until after the Planning Commission meeting. • The 45-day recognized organization comment period expired on September 10, 2021. The Glendale Community Council did not provide comments. Notice of the public hearing for the proposal included: • Public hearing notice mailed: October 15, 2021 • Public hearing notice signs posted on property: October 15, 2021 • Public notice posted on City & State websites and Planning Division list serves: October 15, 2021 Public Input: No comments in favor or opposition of the petition were submitted by members of the public. If any comments are submitted after the publication of the staff report they will be forwarded to the Planning Commission and included in the public record. PLNPCM2021-00709 16 October 27, 2021 ATTACHMENT F: Department Comments Planning staff routed the proposed rezone to Building, Engineering, Transportation, Public Utilities, Fire, and Sustainability. There were no concerns regarding the rezone from any of the departments. Staff asked the applicant to attend a DRT meeting prior to moving forward with the petition to make sure there were no upfront issues with subdividing the property if the rezone were to be approved. The DRT group did not have any concerns regarding subdividing the property under the R-1/5,000 zoning standards, but a formal review of a preliminary and final plat will be completed if rezone is approved by the City Council. As of October 2021, internal ADUs are permitted uses and would not be reviewed by Planning staff or approved by the Planning Commission. City Council // February 1, 2022 1193 W CALIFORNIA AVENUE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT PLNPCM2021-00709 •One parcel –total of approx. 12,200 SF (.28 acres) •Requested zone change from R-1/7,000 to R-1/5,000 •The property owner intends to redevelop the site by replacing the existing single-family home with two new single-family homes (and potentially two attached ADUs), each on their own parcel •No specific site development plan has been submitted PROJECT REQUEST Salt Lake City // Planning Division Subject Property R-1/5,000 R-1/7,000 CN R-2 1.Compliance with Master Plan Policies 2.Compatibility with Adjacent Properties 3.R-1/7,000 and R-1/5,000 Zoning District Comparison Salt Lake City // Planning Division CONSIDERATIONS & STAFF ANALYSIS Subject Property City Council // February 1, 2022 1193 W CALIFORNIA AVENUE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT PLNPCM2021-00709 •One parcel –total of approx. 12,200 SF (.28 acres) •Requested zone change from R-1/7,000 to R-1/5,000 •The property owner intends to redevelop the site by replacing the existing single-family home with two new single-family homes (and potentially two attached ADUs), each on their own parcel •No specific site development plan has been submitted PROJECT REQUEST Salt Lake City // Planning Division Subject Property R-1/5,000 R-1/7,000 CN R-2 1.Compliance with Master Plan Policies 2.Compatibility with Adjacent Properties 3.R-1/7,000 and R-1/5,000 Zoning District Comparison Salt Lake City // Planning Division CONSIDERATIONS & STAFF ANALYSIS Subject Property ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 445 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145487, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5487 TEL 801.535.7712 FAX 801.535.6269 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ________________________ Date Received: _________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: Dan Dugan, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: Petition PLNPCM2021-00709 1193 W California Avenue Zoning Map Amendment STAFF CONTACT: Amanda Roman, Principal Planner amanda.roman@slcgov.com or (801) 535-7660 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the proposed Zoning Map amendment. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Kesaia Young, the property owner of 1193 W California Avenue, initiated a petition to amend the Zoning Map in July of 2021. The request is to rezone the property from R-1/7,000 (Single Family Residential) to R-1/5,000 (Single Family Residential). On October 27, 2021, the Planning Commission heard the petition and forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council to amend the Zoning Map. If approved, the property owner intends to subdivide the property and build two new single family homes that will potentially include two attached ADUs. The property owner anticipates retaining ownership of both properties. The proposed rezone is compatible with the platted South Salt Lake subdivision and reflects the existing development pattern, which consists of single- and two-family dwellings on lots less than 7,000 square feet in size. The permitted and conditional land uses are identical in both the R- 1/7,000 and R-1/5,000 zones. January 14, 2021 Lisa Shaffer (Jan 14, 2022 11:28 MST) 01/14/2022 01/14/2022 In addition to the difference in minimum lot square footage, the R-1/5,000 zone also has reduced rear and side yard building setbacks. The proposed change would allow for the subdivision of the property but is not expected to change the character of the neighborhood or have adverse impacts on future growth. If the zoning map amendment is approved, the property owner would be allowed to redevelop the site in accordance with the R-1/5,000 (Single Family Residential) zoning district standards and permitted land uses. PUBLIC PROCESS: •Information concerning this petition was sent to the chair of the Glendale Community Council on July 27, 2021. o The Glendale Community Council did not provide formal comments. •The surrounding property owners within 300’ received an early notification by mail on July 28, 2021. •Public notification for the Planning Commission Hearing was mailed October 15, 2021 to all neighbors within 300’ of the Zoning Map amendment site. •The petition was heard by the Planning Commission on October 27, 2021. The Planning Commission voted unanimously (8-0) to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed zoning map amendment. o There were no public comments received prior to or during the Planning Commission meeting. California Avenue 12 0 0 W e s t Em e r y S t . Co n c o r d S t . Subject Property PLANNING COMMISSION RECORDS of OCTOBER 27, 2021: Planning Commission Agenda Planning Commission Minutes Planning Commission Staff Report EXHIBITS: 1. Project Chronology 2. Notice of City Council Hearing 3. Original Petition 4. Mailing List SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2022 (Amending the zoning of property located at approximately 1193 West California Avenue from R-1/7,000 Single Family Residential District to R-1/5,000 Single Family Residential District) An ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to property located approximately 1193 West California Avenue from R-1/7,000 Single Family Residential District to R-1/5,000 Single Family Residential District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00709. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 27, 2021 on an application submitted by Kesaia Young (“Applicant”), property owner, to rezone property located at 1193 West California Avenue (Tax ID No. 15-14-104-001) (the “Property”) from R-1/7,000 Single Family Residential District to R-1/5,000 Single Family Residential District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00709; and WHEREAS, at its October 27, 2021 meeting, the planning commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council on said application; and WHEREAS, following a public hearing on this matter the city council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be and hereby is amended to reflect that the Property identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto shall be and hereby is rezoned from R-1/7,000 Single Family Residential District to R-1/5,000 Single Family Residential District. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________, 2022. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2022. Published: ______________. Ordinance rezoning 1193 W California Avenue APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney January 3, 2022 EXHIBIT “A” Legal Description of Property to be Rezoned: 1193 W California Avenue Tax ID No. 15-14-104-001 0702 BEG S 7.5 FT FR NW COR LOT 1, BLK 2, SOUTH SALT LAKE SUB; S 92.4 FT; E 128.8 FT; N 94.63 FT; W'LY 129.8 FT TO BEG 4902-1099 5426-1472 5460-3011 6238-1762 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.Project Chronology 2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3. Original Petition 4. Mailing List 1. Project Chronology PROJECT CHRONOLOGY PETITION: July 12, 2021 July 20, 2021 July 27, 2021 July 28, 2021 July 30, 2021 September 10, 2021 October 15, 2021 October 15, 2021 October 27, 2021 PLNPCM2021-00709 - 1193 W California Avenue Zoning Map Amendment Petition for the zoning map amendment received by the Salt Lake City Planning Division Petition assigned to Amanda Roman, Principal Planner, for staff analysis and processing. Information about the proposal was sent to the Chair of the Glendale Community Council in order to solicit public comments and start the 45-day Recognized Organization input and comment period. Staff sent an early notification announcement of the project to all residents and property owners living within 300 feet of the project site providing information about the proposal and how to give public input on the project. Staff hosted an online Open House to solicit public comments on the proposal. The Online Open House period started on July 30, 2021 and ended on September 10, 2021. The 45-day public comment period for Recognized Organizations ended. No formal comments were submitted to staff by the recognized organizations to date related to this proposal. Public notice posted on City and State websites and sent via the Planning list serve for the Planning Commission meeting of October 27, 2021. Public hearing notice mailed. Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of the Planning Commission public hearing physically posted on the property. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on October 27, 2021. By a unanimous vote of 8-0, the Planning Commission forwarded a Positive recommendation to City Council for the proposed zoning map change. 2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2021-00709 1193 W California Avenue Zoning Map Amendment – Salt Lake City received a request from Kesaia Young, the property owner, to amend the zoning map for a property located at approximately 1193 W California Avenue. The proposal would rezone the entire property from R-1/7,000 (Single Family Residential) to R-1/5,000 (Single Family Residential). The amendment would allow the property to be subdivided into two lots that each meet the minimum lot area for a single-family dwelling. The Master Plan is not being changed. The property is located within Council District 2, represented by Dennis Faris. (Staff contact: Amanda Roman at 801-535-7660 or amanda.roman@slcgov.com) As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be held: DATE: TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: This will be an electronic meeting pursuant to Salt Lake City Emergency Proclamation No.2 of 2020(2)(b). Please visit https://www.slc.gov/council/news/featured-news/virtually-attend-city- council-meetings/ to learn how you can share your comments live during electronic City Council meetings. If you would like to provide feedback or comment, via email or phone, please contact us at: 801-535-7654 (24- Hour comment line) or by email at: council.comments@slcgov.com . If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Amanda Roman at 801-535-7660 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail at amanda.roman@slcgov.com. 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.(P 19-19) 3. Original Petition Linda Mitchell Accepted - July 12, 2021 PLNPCM2021-00709 Zoning Amendment Questionnaire Parcel Number: 15141040010000 1.A statement declaring the purpose of the zoning amendment: The proposed Master Plan zoning amendment change from the R-1-7000 designation to a R-1-5000 designation supports the Westside Master Plan and 5YP for community growth through the subdivision of a large, underutilized lot. This Master Plan zoning amendment will enable the parcel to support more housing by subdividing the lot to build single-family homes with ADUs on each lot. The Growing SLC: Five Year Housing Plan 2018-2022 (“5YP”) acknowledges that “such options would also help restore the ‘missing middle’ housing types…restoring choices for a wider variety of household sizes, from seniors to young families” (5YP pg. 19). The proposed development would allow for two single family homes with ADUs on the large, underutilized lot while blending into the existing neighborhood and provide housing solutions for diverse demographics (students, seniors, young families, multi-generational families). The development can further materialize the objectives stated in the Five Year Housing Plan. The ﬁrst Goal expounded in the Five Year Plan recognizes the need to “increase housing options…by seeking policy reforms that can enhance the ﬂexibility of the land-use code and create an efficient and predictable development process for community growth” (5YP pg. 17). 2.A description of the proposed zoning amendment: The property is currently zoned as R-1-7000 Glendale Residential Neighborhood in the Westside Community. The purpose of the R-1-7000 Glendale residential neighborhood is to promote lots not less than seven thousand (7,000) square feet in size, suitable for parts of Glendale locations. The proposed zoning designation for the property is R-1-5000; a zoning designation that allows for a majority of single family homes, up to twenty eight eight feet (28’) in height measured to the ridge of the roof. The master plan zoning amendment would continue to allow lots not less than seven thousand (7,000) square feet in size as envisioned in the Glendale residential neighborhood zoning, and would further provide the ﬂexibility to enhance housing type diversity in the neighborhood. 3.List the reasons why the present zoning may not be appropriate for the area: The current zone does not accurately reﬂect much of the existing housing stock adjacent to the subject property. In fact, the surrounding land uses, with the exception of the southern boundary and across the street along the western boundary, are much more dense than what could be built on the subject property under the current zone. Adjoining this property to the east is duplex on a lot less than ﬁve thousand (5,000) square feet in size, as well as a single-family residential home on a lot less than ﬁve thousand (5,000) square fees in size. One block to the east is a two story, stacked condominium complex zoned RMF-35, arguably the most dense zoning island of property in the area. Across California Avenue to the north are single family homes in the R-1-5000 Glendale zone, and duplex multi-family homes in the R-2 Glendale zone, which is the reasoning behind the proposed change of zoning that would be consistent with the majority of adjoining homes and neighborhood directly across California Avenue. Glendale is a unique and historic neighborhood including single-family and two-family dwellings with a variety of yards, lot sizes, and bulk characteristics. The RMF-35 zone is really the outlier in an area that is mostly surrounded by single-family and duplex housing types. Rezoning the property to R-1-5000 will provide the ability to add additional housing that blends well with neighboring community. At the same time the rezoning of the property will allow for the “underutilized parcel to allow for small lot single-family residential…with ADU…in ﬁll development…that will meet size and design standards to ensure community compatibility,” which is envisioned in Salt Lake City’s The Westside Master Plan (WMP pg. 33). 4.Is the request amending the zoning map? The request is amending the Zoning Map. The parcel number to be changed is 15141040010000. 5.Is the request amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance? there is no request to amend the text. 4. Mailing List OWN_FULL_NAME OWN_ADDR own_unit OWN_CITY OWN_STATOWN_ZIP STEFAN JULIUS NIEDERAUER; MARK QUINN NIEDERAUER; GABRIELE NIEDERA 1305 S CONCORD ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 V & K INVESTMENTS, LLC PO BOX 25512 SALT LAKE UT 84125 CYNTHIA GROW 1300 S 1200 W SALT LAKE UT 84104 STEVE R SR MCCOY; STEVE R JR MCCOY (JT)1208 W CALIFORNIA AVE SALT LAKE UT 84104 N.P.M.C., INC.20 W CENTURY PARK WY SOUTH SAL UT 84115 CONCORD, LLC 1947 E STAG HILL CIR DRAPER UT 84020 CORP OF PRES BISHOP OF CH OF JC OF LDS 50 E NORTH TEMPLE # FL-22 SALT LAKE UT 84150 MARGARETA B DIAZ 1316 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 AUSTIN BLACK; TRISTANA YEGGE (JT)1320 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 LIEM T NGUYEN; TUYET DAO THI LE (JT)963 W CALIFORNIA AVE SALT LAKE UT 84104 JUAN GONZALEZ GARCIA; MAYRA PRADO (JT)1308 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 RONALD BARRETT; RODOLFO G REVELES (JT)1285 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 LTD SHARED EQUITIES A 1373 E SKYLINE DR BOUNTIFU UT 84010 SALT LAKE BAPTIST ASSOCIATION PO BOX 18894 SALT LAKE UT 84118 FAITH M SAVAGE; JAMES DENZIL SAVAGE (JT)1352 S 1200 W SALT LAKE UT 84104 MOSIANA L MAU 1366 S 1200 W SALT LAKE UT 84104 UTAH LOCAL BUILDING AUTHORITY OF SALT LAKE CITY PO BOX 145460 SALT LAKE UT 84114 MICHAEL R WEIS; LUCIA R WEIS (JT)12235 S 4000 W RIVERTON UT 84096 SIONE T TONGAMANA; DUSTIN PAUL BISHOP 1207 W CALIFORNIA AVE SALT LAKE UT 84104 YONI MENDOZA (JT)1344 S 1200 W SALT LAKE UT 84104 AVALISI LAPUAHO; ANA LAPUAHO (JT)1193 W CALIFORNIA AVE SALT LAKE UT 84104 ERIC NESS 1345 S 1200 W SALT LAKE UT 84104 PERLITA N RAMIREZ; JULIO A RAMIREZ (TC)1361 S 1200 W SALT LAKE UT 84104 ANNETTE S JENSEN 1367 S 1200 W SALT LAKE UT 84104 JOSE JESUS RIOS 1373 S 1200 W SALT LAKE UT 84104 MARIANNE WILLIAMS 1379 S 1200 W SALT LAKE UT 84104 GORDON G WATKINS; CLARINDA S WATKINS (JT)1338 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 RAUL M FIGUEROA; CANDELARIA FIGUEROA (JT)1344 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 RONALD L JOHNSON; VICKI JO JOHNSON (JT)1350 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 GHB TR 1356 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 CIPRIANO OROZCO 1362 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 VICTORIA RICCARDI RICHARDS; JANETTE RICCARDI (JT)1368 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 NAGENDRA DEV 1374 S EMERY ST SALT LAKE UT 84104 EUSEBIO REYES-RODRIGUEZ; IGNACIO REYES-RODRIGUEZ (TC)1353 S 1200 W SALT LAKE UT 84104 ROBERT KELLER (JT)1788 E 5600 S HOLLADAY UT 84121 SOUTHLAND CORPORATION PO BOX 711 DALLAS TX 75221 KYLE J HAMMOND; JAMIE B HAMMOND (JT)459 COUNTRY CLUB STANSBURY UT 84074 GERALD D BURT; CHRISTOPHER S BURT (TC)3045 E LOUISE AVE SALT LAKE UT 84109 Current Occupant 1226 W CALIFORNIA AVE Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1306 S 1200 W Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1281 S CONCORD ST Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1301 S 1200 W Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1172 W CALIFORNIA AVE Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1315 S 1200 W Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1291 S EMERY ST Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1235 W CALIFORNIA AVE Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1365 S CONCORD ST Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1372 S 1200 W Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1177 W CALIFORNIA AVE Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1165 W CALIFORNIA AVE Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1363 S EMERY ST Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1369 S EMERY ST Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1157 W CALIFORNIA AVE Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1353 S UTAHNA DR Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 Current Occupant 1357 S UTAHNA DR Salt Lake Ci UT 84104 PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS Staff Report To: Salt Lake City Planning Commission From: Krissy Gilmore, Principal Planner, (385) 214-9714 or Kristina.gilmore@slcgov.com Date: August 25, 2021 Re: PLNPCM2021-00575 2200 West Zoning Map Amendment Zoning Map Amendment PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2060 North 2200 West PARCEL ID: 08-21-226-001-0000 MASTER PLAN: North Point Small Area Plan ZONING DISTRICT: AG-2 (Agricultural District) REQUEST: Chad Salmon, property owner, has submitted a zoning map amendment to amend the existing AG-2 (Agricultural District) to M-1 (Light Manufacturing). The amendment is to implement the master plan zoning and to accommodate future commercial land uses. The subject property is located at 2060 North 2200 West. No specific site development proposal has been submitted at this time. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the findings in the staff report, Planning Staff recommends that the zoning of the subject property located at 2060 N. 2200 W. be amended from AG-2 (Agricultural District) to M-1 (Light Manufacturing) zoning district. Based on the information in this staff report and the factors to consider for zoning map amendments, Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the City Council regarding this proposal. ATTACHMENTS: A. Vicinity Map a. Northpoint Small Area Plan Future Land Use Map B. Additional Applicant Information C. AG-2 and M-1 Allowed Uses Comparison D. Existing Conditions E. Photos of Subject Property F. Analysis of Standards G. Public Process and Comments H. City Department Comments PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request by a private land owner to amend the existing AG-2 (Agricultural District) to M-1 (Light Manufacturing) zoning district. The property owner is seeking to amend the subject property to implement the future land use designations noted in the applicable master plan and to increase the economic viability of the subject property. M-1 (Light Manufacturing) zoning district aligns with the future anticipated use of the subject property. Additionally, the properties located to the south along 2200 West were rezoned from BP (Business Park) zoning district to M-1 (Light Manufacturing) zoning district in 2017. The horseshoe property surrounding the subject parcel was rezoned from AG-2 to M-1 with final approval from the City Council in May 2021 (PLNPCM2018-00657). Agricultural District (AG-2) VS. Light Industrial (M-1) Zoning The following are the purpose statements of the AG-2 (existing zoning) and M-1 (proposed zoning) districts: The purpose of the AG-2 Agricultural District is to preserve and protect agricultural uses in suitable portions of Salt Lake City on lots not less than two (2) acres. These regulations are also designed to minimized conflicts between agricultural and nonagricultural uses. This district is appropriate in areas of the City where the applicable Master Plans support this type of land use. The purpose of the M-1 Light Manufacturing District is to provide an environment for light industrial uses that produce no appreciable impact on adjacent properties, that desire a clean attractive industrial setting, and that protects nearby sensitive lands and waterways. This zone is appropriate in locations that are supported by the applicable Master Plan policies adopted by the City. This district is intended to provide areas in the City that generate employment opportunities and to promote economic development. The uses include other types of land uses that support and provide service to manufacturing and industrial uses. Safe, convenient and inviting connections that provide access to businesses from public sidewalks, bike paths and streets are necessary and to be provided in an equal way. Certain land uses are prohibited in order to preserve land for manufacturing uses and to promote the importance of nearby environmentally sensitive lands. The purpose of the amendment is to facilitate future commercial land uses along the 2200 West corridor and to provide a contiguous district along 2200 West. The remaining AG-2 (Agricultural District) will be appropriately buffered with the adopted amendments that were incorporated into the M-1 Zoning District regulations. KEY ISSUES: The key issues listed below have been identified through the analysis of the project, neighbor and community input and department review comments. 1. Mater Plan Recommendations 2. Inland Port Overlay Issue 1: Master Plan Recommendations The Northpoint Small Area Plan was adopted in 2000 and includes the subject property. The plan shows the future land use of this area as Business Park which was consistent with the zoning put in place during the Citywide zoning amendment project in 1995. While the Northpoint Small Area Plan identifies the area as a Business Park, it also states that the Business Park zone should be amended to allow retail and service type businesses that would support the employee base in the area. The Business Park zoning district allows retail and restaurant uses only if they are approved as part of an overall business park planned development. They are not allowed as single uses on a property, which limits the feasibility of these uses occurring in the area. In addition to the Business Park land use designation, the Northpoint Small Area Plan also states that future business park development should be buffered from the existing agricultural properties. The buffer includes a 100 foot building setback, a 50 foot parking lot setback, and landscaping with a five foot tall berm. Although the proposed Light Manufacturing zoning district is not strictly consistent with the future land use designation as stated in the Northpoint Small Area Plan, it is Staff’s opinion that the zoning amendment is consistent with the intent of the plan for the following reasons: 1. The plan highlights the need for retail and service uses to serve the future employee s of the area. The Light Manufacturing district allows single-tenant retail and service uses, which would serve the employees of the area. 2. The uses allowed in the Light Manufacturing District are required to be environmentally clean, light industrial. Heavy manufacturing is not allowed in the Light Manufacturing zoning district. Of note, the Northpoint Small Area Plan is in the beginning stages of a rewrite and update. That said, a privately initiated petition must still be processed regardless of the update process. The request is subject to review comparing the existing Northpoint Small Area Plan. In addition to the Northpoint Small Area Plan, the proposal is also supported by Plan Salt Lake’s Economy Principal and Initiatives. The plan discusses initiatives to support the growth of industrial areas of the City (Initiative 9), as well as recruiting headquarters and large scale businesses. Issue 2: Inland Port Overlay The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Inland Port Overlay District (IP Overlay). The IP Overlay was adopted in December 2018. One impact of the IP Overlay is that it allows for all properties in the IP Overlay to follow the uses allowed in the M-1 Light Manufacturing Zoning District regardless of their underlying or base zoning designation. Where uses are allowed in the M-1 district but not allowed in the underlying base zone, the use is allowed through the Conditional Use process. As such, the full range of uses allowed in the M-1 district would already be allowed on the AG-2 zoned subject properties via the IP Overlay rules but some uses would have to go through the Conditional Use process since they are not allowed under the AG-2 base zoning designation. The change in zoning designation therefore has negligible impact on what could eventually be developed on the property and only impacts the approval process that must be followed for approval depending upon the proposed use. DISCUSSION: The proposal complies with the standards for zoning map amendments, see Attachment D. After analyzing the proposal and the applicable standards, Planning Staff is of the opinion that a positive recommendation should be forwarded to the City Council for this request. NEXT STEPS: The City Council has the final authority to make changes to the zoning map. The recommendation of the Planning commission for this request will be forwarded to the City Council for their review and decision. ATTACHMENT A: VICINITY MAP Note: The AG-2 property surrounding the subject property was rezoned to M-1 in May 2021. The City’s GIS layer has not been updated as of publishing of this report. Neighboring parcel rezoned to M-1 Subject Property Subject Property Northpoint Small Area Plan Future Land Use Map Subject Property ATTACHMENT B: ADDITIONAL APPLICANT INFORMATION ATTACHMENT C: AG-2 AND M-1 ALLOWED USES COMPARISON PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES – AG-2 & M-1 DISTRICTS COMBINED LIST Uses AG-2 M-1 Accessory use, except those that are otherwise specifically regulated elsewhere in this title P P Adaptive reuse of a landmark site C Agricultural use P P Alcohol: Bar establishment C6,10 Brewpub P6,10 Distillery P Tavern C6,10 Winery P Ambulance services (indoor and/or outdoor) P Animal: Cremation service P Kennel P8 P13 Pet cemetery P4 P2 Pound P12,13 Raising of furbearing animals C Stockyard C12 Stable (private) P Stable (Public) P Veterinary office P Antenna, communication tower P P Antenna, communication tower, exceeding the maximum building height P C Artisan food production P Bakery, commercial P Blacksmith shop P Bottling plant P Brewery P Building materials distribution P Bus line station/terminal P Bus line yard and repair facility P12 Check cashing/payday loan business P9 Chemical manufacturing and/or storage Commercial food preparation P Community correctional facility, large C8,16 Community correctional facility, small C8,16 Community garden P P Concrete and/or asphalt manufacturing C12,13 Contractor’s yard/office P Crematorium P Daycare, nonregistered home daycare P22 P Daycare, registered home daycare or preschool P22 P Daycare center, adult P Daycare center, child P Drop forge industry Dwelling, living quarters for caretaker or security guard, limited to uses on lots 1 acre in size or larger and is accessory to principal use allowed by the zoning district P Dwelling: Assisted living facility (large) Assisted living facility (limited capacity) Assisted living facility (small) Group home (large) Group home (small) P Living quarters for caretaker or security guard Manufactured home P Mobile home Multi-family Residential support (large) Residential support (small) Rooming (boarding) house Single-family (attached) Single-family (detached) P Twin home and two-family Eleemosynary facilities Exhibition hall Equipment, heavy (rental, sales, service) P Equipment rental (indoor and/or outdoor) P Explosive manufacturing and storage Farm stand, seasonal P Financial institution with or without drive-through facility P11 Flammable liquids or gases, heating fuel distribution and storage Food processing P Gas station P Government facility P Government facility requiring special design features for security purposes P Grain elevator P12 Greenhouse P Heavy manufacturing P15 Home occupation P Hotel/motel P Impound lot P12 Incinerator, medical waste/hazardous waste Industrial assembly P Laboratory (medical, dental, optical) P Laboratory, testing P Large wind energy system C P13,14 Laundry, commercial P Light manufacturing P Limousine service P Mobile food business (operation in the public right- of-way) P Mobile food business (operation on private property) P Mobile food court P Office P Office, publishing company P Open space P P Package delivery facility P Paint manufacturing Parking: Commercial P Off site P Park and ride lot P Park and ride lot shared with existing use P Photo finishing lab P Poultry farm or processing plant Printing plant P Radio television station P Railroad, freight terminal facility C4 Railroad, repair shop P Recreation (indoor) P Recreation (outdoor) P Recycling: Collection station P Processing center (indoor) P Processing center (outdoor) C12,13,14 Refinery, petroleum products Restaurant with or without drive-through facilities P Retail goods establishment with or without drive- through facility P Retail service establishment: Electronic repair shop P Furniture repair shop P Upholstery shop P Rock, sand and gravel storage and distribution C School: Profession and vocational (with outdoor activities) P Professional and vocational (without outdoor activities) P Seminary and religious institute P Seasonal farm stand P Sexually oriented business P5 Sign painting/fabrication P Slaughterhouse Small brewery P Solar array P Storage and display (outdoor) P Storage, public (outdoor) P Store, convenience P Studio, motion picture P Taxicab facility P Tire distribution retail/wholesale P Truck freight terminal P12 Urban farm P P Utility: Building or structure P1 P Electric generation facility C3,12 Sewage treatment plant C Solid waste transfer station C12 Transmission wire, line, pipe or pole P1 P1 Vehicle: Auction P Automobile and truck repair P Automobile and truck sales and rental (including large truck) P Automobile salvage and recycling (indoor) P Automobile salvage recycling (outdoor) C12,13,14 Recreational vehicle (RV) sales and service P Truck repair (large) P Vending cart, private property P Warehouse P Welding shop P P Wholesale distribution P P Wireless telecommunications facility Woodworking mill P QUALIFYING PROVISIONS (COMBINED FROM AG-2 AND M-1) 1. See subjection 21A.02.050B of this title for utility regulations. 2. Subject to Salt Lake Valley Health Department approval. 3. Electric generating facilities shall be located within 2,640 feet of an existing 138kV or larger electric power transmission line. 4. No railroad freight terminal facility shall be located within 1 mile of a residential zoning district. 5. Pursuant to the requirements set forth in section 21A.36.140 of this title. 6. If a place of worship is proposed to be located within 600 feet of a tavern, bar establishment, or brewpub, the place worship must submit a written waiver of spacing requirement as a condition of approval. 7. 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 conditional building and site design review. 8. A community correctional facility is considered an institutional use and any such facility located within an airport noise overlay zone is subject to the land use and sound attenuation standards for institutional uses of the applicable airport overlay zone within chapter 21A.34 of this title. 9. No check cashing/payday loan business shall be located closer than ½ mile of other check cashing/payday loan businesses. 10. Subject to conformance with the provisions in section 21A.36.300 “Alcohol Related Establishments”, of this title. 11. Subject to conformance to the provisions in section 21A.40.060 of this title for drive-through use regulations. 12. Prohibited within 1,000feet of a single- or two-family zoning district. 13. Prohibited within the Eco-Industrial Buffer Area of the Northwest Quadrant Overlay District. 14. Prohibited within the Development Area of the Northwest Quadrant Overlay District. 15. Allowed only within legal conforming single-family, duplex, and multi-family dwellings and subject to section 21A.36.030 of this title. 16. Prohibited within ½ mile of any residential zoning district boundary and subject to section 21A.36.110 of this title. 17. When located in a building listed on the Salt Lake City Register of cultural Resources. 18. When located on an arterial street. 19. Subject to Salt Lake Valley Health Department approval. 20. In conjunction with, and within the boundaries of, a cemetery for human remains. 21. Radio station equipment and antennas shall be required to go through the site plan review process to ensure that the color, design and location of all proposed equipment and antennas are screened or integrated into the architecture of the project and are compatible with surrounding uses. 22. When approved as part of a business park planned development pursuant to the provisions of chapter 21A.55 of this title. 23. Kennels, whether within penned enclosures or within enclosed buildings, shall not be permitted within 200 feet of an existing single-family dwelling on an adjacent lot. 24. Trails and trailheads without parking lots and without directional and informational signage specific to trail usage shall be permitted. 25. Greater than 3 ambulances at location require a conditional use. 26. Maximum of 1 monopole per property and only when it is government owned and operated for public safety purposes. 27. If located on a collector or arterial street according to the Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan – major street plan: roadway functional classification map. 28. Prohibited within 1,000 feet of a single- or two-family zoning district. 29. Occupancy shall be limited to 25 persons. 30. No large group home shall be located within 800 feet of another group home. 31. No small group home shall be located within 800 feet of another group home. 32. No large residential support shall be located within 800 feet of another residential support. 33. No small residential support shall be located within 800 feet of another residential support. 34. No eleemosynary facility shall be located within 800 feet of another eleemosynary, group home or residential support. 35. Allowed only within legal conforming single-family, duplex, and multi-family dwellings and subject to section 21A.36.130 of this title. 36. Allowed only within legal conforming single-family, duplex, and multi-family dwellings and subject to section 21A.36.030 of this title. 37. Must contain retail component for on-site foot sales. 38. Prior to issuance of a building permit in the Development Area and the Eco-Industrial Buffer Area of the Northwest Quadrant Overlay, consultation with the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources is required to obtain recommendations on siting and equipment types for all solar arrays on a particular property to mitigate impacts to wildlife. ATTACHMENT D: EXISTING CONDITIONS Uses in the Immediate Vicinity of the Property Surrounding the property and to the east of the subject property is zoned M-1. To the south of the subject property, except for 1998, 2004 and 1980 North 2200 West, all of the properties are zoned M-1 (Light Manufacturing). The properties noted above are zoned AG-2 (Agricultural District). AG-2 Agricultural District: The purpose of the AG-2 Agricultural District is to preserve and protect agricultural uses in suitable portions of Salt Lake City on lots not less than two (2) acres. These regulations are also designed to minimize conflicts between agricultural and nonagricultural uses. This district is appropriate in areas of the City where the applicable Master Plans support this type of land use. AG-2 Agricultural District Development Standards (21A.32.052) Maximum Building Height Front Yard Corner Side Yard Rear Yard Side Yard Lot Coverage Landscape Yards Buildable Area for Principal Dwelling Restrictions on Agricultural Uses Single- Family Dwellings: Thirty feet (30’) Thirty feet (30’) Thirty feet (30’) None Thirty five feet (35’) The surface coverage of the principal dwelling shall not exceed eighty percent (80%) of the buildable area for residential uses of the lot. All front and corner side yards shall be maintained as landscape yards in conformance with the requirements of chapter 21A.48 of this title. A residential structure shall not be located farther than two hundred feet (200’) from the front property line. In addition to the applicable foregoing regulations, agricultural uses shall comply with the following requirements: No feeding, grazing, or sheltering of livestock and poultry, whether within penned enclosures or within enclosed buildings, shall be permitted within fifty feet (50’) of an existing single-family dwelling on an adjacent lot. Small Group Homes: Thirty feet (30’) Thirty feet (30’) Thirty feet (30’) None Thirty five feet (35’) The surface coverage of the principal dwelling shall not exceed eighty percent (80%) of the buildable area for residential uses of the lot. All front and corner side yards shall be maintained as landscape yards in conformance with the requirements of chapter 21A.48 of this title. A residential structure shall not be located farther than two hundred feet (200’) from the front property line. Agricultural Uses: Forty five feet (45’) Thirty feet (30’) Thirty feet (30’) None Thirty five feet (35’) The surface coverage of the principal dwelling shall not exceed eighty percent (80%) of the buildable area for residential uses of the lot. All front and corner side yards shall be maintained as landscape yards in conformance with the requirements of chapter 21A.48 of this title. A residential structure shall not be located farther than two hundred feet (200’) from the front property line. Conditional Uses: Forty five feet (45’) Thirty feet (30’) Thirty feet (30’) None Thirty five feet (35’) The surface coverage of the principal dwelling shall not exceed eighty percent (80%) of the buildable All front and corner side yards shall be maintained as landscape yards in conformance with the requirements of chapter A residential structure shall not be located farther than two hundred feet (200’) from the front area for residential uses of the lot. 21A.48 of this title. property line. M-1 Light Manufacturing District: The purpose of the M-1 Light Manufacturing District is to provide an environment for light industrial uses that produce no appreciable impact on adjacent properties, that desire a clean attractive industrial setting, and that protects nearby sensitive lands and waterways. This zone is appropriate in locations that are supported by the applicable Master Plan policies adopted by the City. This district is intended to provide areas in the City that generate employment opportunities and to promote economic development. The uses include other types of land uses that support and provide service to manufacturing and industrial uses. Safe, convenient and inviting connections that provide access to businesses from public sidewalks, bike paths and streets are necessary and to be provided in an equal way. Certain land uses are prohibited in order to preserve land for manufacturing uses and to promote the importance of nearby environmentally sensitive lands. M-1 Light Manufacturing District Development Standards (21A.28.020) Minimum Lot Size Front Yard Corner Side Yard Interior Side Yard Rear Yard Additional Setback Landscape Yards Maximum Height Minimum Lot Area: ten thousand (10,000) square feet. Minimum Lot Width: Eighty feet (80’). Existing Lots: Lots legally existing as of April 12, 1995, shall be considered legal conforming lots. Fifteen feet (15’) Fifteen feet (15’) None Required. None Required. When adjacent to a lot in the AG-2 or AG-5 Zoning District, buildings or portions of buildings, shall be set back one foot (1’) beyond the required landscape buffer as required in section 21A.48.080 of this title for every one foot (1’) of building height above Front and Corner Side Yards: All required front and corner side yards shall be maintained as landscape yards in conformance with the requirements of chapter 21A.48 of this title. Buffer Yards: All lots abutting a lot in a residential district shall conform to the buffer yard requirements Distillation Column Structures; Development in AFPP Overlay District: No building shall exceed sixty five feet (65’) except that emission free distillation column structures, necessary for manufacture processing purposes, shall be permitted up to the most restrictive Federal Aviation Administration imposed minimal approach surface elevations, or one hundred twenty feet (120’) thirty feet (30’) of chapter 21A.48 of this title. Northwest Quadrant Overlay District: Properties located within the Northwest Quadrant Overlay District are subject to special landscape requirements as outlined in subsection 21A.34.140B2 of this title. maximum, whichever is less. Said approach surface elevation will be determined by the Salt Lake City Department of Airports at the proposed locations of the distillation column structure. Any proposed development in the Airport Flight Path Protection (AFPP) Overlay District, as outlined in section 21A.34.040 of this title, will require approval of the Department of Airports prior to issuance of a building permit. All proposed development within the AFPP Overlay District which exceeds fifty feet (50’) may also require site specific approval from the Federal Aviation Administration. Location Exception: In the M-1 Zoning Districts located west of the Sale City International Airport and north of Interstate 80 (I-80), buildings may exceed sixty five feet (65’) in height subject to the conditional building and site design review standards and procedures of chapter 21A.59 of this title. In no case shall any building exceed eighty five feet (85’). Railroad Offloading Structures: Cranes, lifts, and other similar offloading structures related to the operation of a railroad terminal are allowed up to eighty five feet (85’) in height and are also subject to the Airport Flight Path Protection (AFPP) Overlay District and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements. ATTACHMENT E: PHOTOS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY Photo of Subject Property Looking East Photo of Subject Property Looking East Photo of 2200 West Looking South Photo of Adjacent Property Looking West Photo of 2200 West Looking North ATTACHMENT F: ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS 21A.50.050: A decision to amend the text of this title or the zoning map by general amendment is a matter committed to the legislative discretion of the city council and is not controlled by any one standard. In making a decision to amend the zoning map, the City Council should consider the following: Factor Finding Rationale 1. Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the city as stated through its various adopted planning documents; Complies As stated in the Key Issues section of this report, changing the zoning of the subject property to M-1 is consistent with the Northpoint Small Area Master Plan and Plan Salt Lake. Staff is of the opinion that the proposal is consistent with the intent of this master plan. The regulations of the M-1 zoning district were amended in 2017. 2. Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies Section 21A.02.030 of the Salt Lake city Code provides the Purpose and Intent of the Zoning Ordinance and states: “The purpose of this title is to promote the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of a present and future inhabitants of Salt Lake City, to implement the adopted plans of the city, and to carry out the purposes of the municipal land use development and management act, title 10, chapter 9, of the Utah Code Annotated or its successor, and other relevant statutes.” The purpose and intent statement then provides eight additional points describing the intent of the zoning code, two of which are applicable to the rezone proposal: • Protect the tax base • Foster the city’s industrial, business and residential development. The purpose of amending the zoning of the subject property is to maximize the development potential by allowing more land uses than allowed in the current zone and expanding the development area of the lots. This is consistent with the overall purpose of the Zoning Ordinance in that it promotes the “prosperity” of the “future inhabitants of Salt Lake City.” It is also consistent with the purpose and intent points stated above. 3. The extent to which a proposed map amendment will affect adjacent properties; Complies The surrounding property was rezoned to M-1 in 2021, therefore, the affect is considered to be minimal since the proposal is for the same zone. Since the property is located within the boundaries of the Inland Port Overlay, the full range of uses allowed in the M-1 zoning district are allowed on the property under the current AG-2 zoning designation although they must follow the Conditional Use process if the use is not allowed in the underlying AG-2 zone. The change in zoning designation therefore only impacts the approval process that must be followed depending on the proposed use and has negligible impact on what could be developed on the subject property. Staff finds the proposed map amendment to M-1 will have a negligible impact on surrounding properties given that M-1 uses are allowed on the property due to the Inland Port Overlay. 4. Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards Complies The project area is partially located in the Airport Flight Path Protection Zone A and B. These overlay districts provides special regulations that pertain to building height and land use. In the event that there is a conflict on a particular property, the regulations in the overlay district would prevail. 5. The adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including, but not limited to, roadways, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection, schools, storm water drainage systems, water supplies, and wastewater and refuse collection. Complies The proposal was reviewed by other city division and no concerns were raised regarding ability to service the subject property under the M-1 development capacity. All requests for a new use would be reviewed to ensure compliance with City codes and policies. ATTACHMENT G: PUBLIC PROCESS AND COMMENTS A letter was mailed to residents and property owners within 300 of the subject property on June 23, 2021. The letter provided early notification of the proposed zoning map amendment. Additionally, early notification was emailed the Westpointe Community Council on June 23, 2021. The early engagement period expired on August 9th. The Westpointe Community Council requested attendance from city staff at a community event on August 3, 2021. Staff attended the event and did not receive any comments regarding the proposal. As of publishing of this report, staff has not received a letter indicating a position from the Westpointe Community Council. Notice of the public hearing for the proposal included: • Public hearing notice mailed on: August 12, 2021 • Public hearing notice sign posted on property: August 12, 2021 • Public notice posted on City and State websites and Pl anning Division list serve: August 12, 2021 ATTACHMENT I: DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMENTS The proposed zoning amendment was sent to the following City Departments/Divisions for review: • Building Services; • Engineering; • Public Utilities; • Transportation; • and Sustainability. There were no objections raised by any of the City Departments. Additionally, notice was mailed to UDOT. City Council // February 1, 2022 2060 N 2200 W MAPAMENDMENT PLNPCM2021-00575 •One parcel –total of approx. .64 acres •Requested change from AG-2 (Agricultural) to M-1 (Light Manufacturing) •Wants to accommodate future development of the property. •No specific site development plan has been submitted PROJECT REQUEST Salt Lake City // Planning Division Subject Property 2100 N 2 2 0 0 W 1.Nature of the general area 2.Master Plan recommendations 3.Inland Port overlay regulations 4.Compatibility with adjacent properties Salt Lake City // Planning Division CONSIDERATIONS & STAFF ANALYSIS ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 445 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145487, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5487 TEL 801.535.7712 FAX 801.535.6269 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ________________________ Date Received: _________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: Dan Dugan, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: Zoning Map Amendment at approximately 2060 North 2200 W, Petition PLNPCM2021-00575 STAFF CONTACT: Krissy Gilmore, Principal Planner, Kristina.Gilmore@slcgov.com, 385- 535-7780 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission to change the zoning map to M-1 (Light Manufacturing) from the current designation of AG-2 (Agricultural) for one parcel. BUDGET IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Chad Salmon, property owner, has submitted a zoning map amendment to amend the existing zoning of AG-2 (Agricultural District) to M-1 (Light Manufacturing). The subject property is located at 2060 North 2200 West and is surrounded by M-1 zoning. The amendment is to implement the master plan zoning and to accommodate future commercial land uses. No specific site development proposal has been submitted at this time. For specific information regarding the proposal, please refer to the Planning Commission Staff Report. One parcel is part of this request and contains a single-family dwelling and related agricultural accessory structures. The property is located within the boundaries of the Inland Port (IP) Overlay District. The IP Overlay permits uses not currently allowed in the AG-2 zoning by allowing all M- 1 uses through the City’s conditional use process. The change in zoning designation only impacts the approval process that must be followed for a proposed use and has negligible impact on what could ultimately be developed on the property. January 14, 2021 Lisa Shaffer (Jan 14, 2022 11:16 MST) 01/14/2022 01/14/2022 PUBLIC PROCESS: • Information about this petition and a request for comments was sent to the Chair of the Westpointe Community Council on June 23, 2021. • Staff sent an early notification announcement of the project to all residents and property owners living within 300 feet of the project site providing notice about the proposal and information on how to give public input on the project on June 23, 2021. • The Westpointe Community Council requested attendance from city staff at a community event on August 3, 2021. Staff attended the event and did not receive any comments regarding the proposal at that time. • At the Public Hearing of August 25, 2021, written comments were submitted via email from the Chair of the Westpointe CC for the Planning Commission’s consideration. Those comments were not reflected in the staff report. A copy of the submitted letter is included in Attachment 4 of this transmittal - Written Comments Submitted to Planning Commission. Planning Commission (PC) Records PC Agenda for August 25, 2021 (Click to Access) PC Minutes of August 25, 2021 (Click to Access) PC Staff Report for August 25, 2021 (Click to Access Staff Report) EXHIBITS 1. Chronology 2. Notice of City Council Hearing 3. Petition Application 4. Written Comments Submitted to Planning Commission 22 0 0 W 2100 N SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2022 (Amending the zoning map pertaining to one parcel of property located at 2060 North 2200 West Street to rezone the property from AG-2 Agricultural District to M-1 Light Manufacturing District) An ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to one parcel of property located at 2060 North 2200 West Street to rezone the property from AG-2 Agricultural District to M-1 Light Manufacturing District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00575. WHEREAS, Chad Salmon submitted an application on behalf of the property owner, Salmon Investments, LLC, to rezone property located at 2060 North 2200 West Street (Tax ID No. 08-21-226-001-0000) from AG-2 Agricultural District to M-1 Light Manufacturing District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2021-00575; and WHEREAS, at its August 25, 2021 meeting, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council on said application; and WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the city council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be and hereby is amended to reflect that the parcel located at 2060 North 2200 West Street (Tax ID No. 08-21-226-001-0000), and as more particularly described on Exhibit “A” attached hereto, shall be and hereby is rezoned from AG-2 Agricultural District to M-1 Light Manufacturing District. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________, 2022. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2022. Published: ______________. APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Paul Nielson, Senior City Attorney December 17, 2021 Exhibit “A” Legal Descriptions of the four to be rezoned to M-1 Light Manufacturing District Parcel located at 2060 North 2200 West Street: Parcel No. 08-21-226-001-0000 0106 COM 1309 FT W & 153 FT S FR NE COR SEC 21 T 1N R 1W SL MER S 140 FT E 200 FT N 140 FT W 200 FT TO BEG 0.64 AC 6150-2588 7490-2237 9980-8541 1) CHRONOLOGY PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Petition: PLNPCM2021-00575 June 3, 2021 Salmon Investments, LLC submitted an application for a Zoning Map Amendment. June 15, 2021 Petition PLNPCM2021-00575 was assigned to Krissy Gilmore, Senior Planner, for staff analysis and processing. June 23, 2021 Notice sent to Recognized Community Organizations informing them of the petition. Early notification of the project was also sent to property owners and residents within 300 feet of the proposal. August 3, 2021 The proposal was presented at the Westpointe Night Out community event. Planning staff was in attendance to answer questions about the proposal. August 11, 2021 Planning Commission public hearing notices emailed to interested parties and residents/property owners who requested notice. Agenda posted to the Planning Commission website and the State of Utah Public Notice webpage. August 19, 2021 Planning Commission Staff Report posted. August 25, 2021 Planning Commission held a public hearing and made a positive recommendation to the City Council to approve the proposed text amendment. 2) NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2021-00535 – Chad Salmon, property owner, has submitted a zoning map amendment to amend the existing AG-2 (Agricultural District) to M-1 (Light Manufacturing). The amendment is to implement the master plan zoning and to accommodate future commercial land uses. The subject property is located at 2060 North 2200 West. No specific site development proposal has been submitted at this time. Information on this proposal can be found in the staff report prepared for the Planning Commission accessible from this link - http://www.slcdocs.com/Planning/Planning%20Commission/2021/08.August/00575.2200WRezo ne.StaffReport.pdf As part of their study, the City Council is holding two advertised public hearings to receive comments regarding the petition. During these hearings, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider adopting the ordinance on the same night of the second public hearing. The hearing will be held electronically: DATE: Date #1 and Date #2 TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: **This meeting will not have a physical location. **This will be an electronic meeting pursuant to the Salt Lake City Emergency Proclamation. If you are interested in participating in the Public Hearing, please visit our website at https://www.slc.gov/council/ to learn how you can share your comments during the meeting. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801)535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Krissy Gilmore at 385-535-7780 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail at Kristina.gilmore@slcgov.com. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance in order to participate in this hearing. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. 3) PETITION APPLICATION 4) WRITTEN COMMENTS SUBMITTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION From: To:Planning Public Comments Cc:Rebollo, Joshua; Amy@treeutah.org; DennisFaris@gmail.com; Rogers, James; Norris, Nick; Gilmore, Kristina Subject:(EXTERNAL) Comments for Aug 25 Planning Commission mtg regarding PLNPCM2021-00575 (agenda item #5) Date:Tuesday, August 24, 2021 12:24:49 PM Importance:High Salt Lake City under Mayor Mendenhall has been very active in promoting the planting of trees on the westside in order to mitigate air pollution and improve the area. Additionally Ivory Homes has augmenting the City’s efforts with their own 30,000 tree planting initiative. It is therefore more than frustrating that the Planning Commission is now considering a re-zoning request which would unnecessarily destroy a mature tree canopy on 2200 West. (See attached photos). Therefore, members of the local Community Council, are submitting an objection to the AG-2 to M-1 rezoning at 2060 N. 2200 West. Consideration of such rezoning should be delayed until the updated North Point Master Plan is completed. Such planning will allow the City, in concert with residents, professional planners, and other stakeholders to determine whether it is in the City’s best interest to allow the numerous mature trees located on this parcel to be cut-down as part of an effort to construct a Maverick gas station on the site. The summary in the Aug 25th planning commission agenda (item #5) states the purpose of the change is “to implement the master plan zoning…” This is not just misleading but incorrect. The 2060 N 2200 West property lies within the Northpoint Small Area Master Plan whose stated goal is to “eliminate potential land use conflicts with the Salt Lake International Airport while preserving and enhancing the existing agricultural lifestyle.” This master plan, adopted in 2000, does NOT contain any M-1 zoning. Instead, the plan’s zoning map consists of parcels zoned BP (Business Park ), AG-2 and AG-5. Whether area properties should include M-1 zoning is one of the reasons both developers and residents agree on the need to update the Northpoint Small Area Master Plan. The community’s experience with Ivory Development in developing a BP zoning overlay for the area illustrated the need and ability to update the master plan with strategies that resolve existing problems. Not long afterward (Jan 2019) , the City Council agreed to fund such an update. Currently Salt Lake City has entered a $100,000 contract with Logan Simpson to update this master plan. Members of the consulting team have already attended community council meetings, manned booths at community events, and started discussions with a diverse steering committee of area stakeholders. This planning process needs to be supported rather than undermined. Such efforts should not be “undercut” by adopting premature re-zoning proposals. It is ironic that the Northpoint Small Area Master Plan came about as a result of circumstances similar to what we face today. According to the Plan’s historical Introduction when Salt Lake City took steps to rezone Northpoint for development residents pushed back. The City Council responded in 1999 by adopting “a six-month moratorium to allow the creation of a small area plan for Northpoint.” More than twenty years later, the residents of this unique area again ask the City to adopt a moratorium to ensure the update master planning process is successfully implemented. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Dorothy P. Owen, chair Westpointe Community Council MARY BETH THOMPSON Chief Financial Officer ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 245 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114 TEL 801-535-6403 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ____________________________ Date Received: __________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _____________ TO: Salt Lake City Council Amy Fowler, Chair DATE: December 29, 2021 FROM: John Vuyk, Budget Director ______________________________________ SUBJECT: RETRANSMIT - Council Consent Agenda #4 Items Fiscal Year 2021-22 Associated with Budget Amendment #6 STAFF CONTACTS: John Vuyk, Budget Director (801) 535-6394 or Mary Beth Thompson (801) 535-6403 DOCUMENT TYPE: Consent Agenda/Establish Grant Projects from Grant Holding Account RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that the City Council consent to the transfer of these grants and donations from the holding account and establish a project budget for them. BUDGET IMPACT: Grant Holding Account ($ 226,010.00) New Grant Project 226,010.00 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The grant holding account was established to fund grants between budget amendments with the understanding that the grants would be submitted as part of the next budget opening. Items transmitted are placed on a Council Consent agenda and then formally approved during the following budget amendment. On occasion, a similar process is employed for donations to the City. Where necessary, resolutions were previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept these grants and donations. EXHIBITS: Consent Agenda Detail Consent Agenda Summary Lisa Shaffer (Dec 29, 2021 11:32 MST) 12.29.2021 12.29.2021 Fund Expenditure Amount Revenue Amount Ongoing or One- time FTEs 1 Utah State Office of Education, Child and Adult Care Food Program - Youth After School Programs Misc Grants 46,000.00 46,000.00 One Time 0 2 Marathon Petroleum Thriving Communities Grant Program, Misc Grants 100,000.00 100,000.00 One Time 0 3 Mental Health First Responders Misc Grants 80,010.00 80,010.00 One Time 0 Total of Budget Amendment Items 226,010.00 226,010.00 0 Fiscal Year 2021-22 Consent Agenda #4 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Section G: Council Consent Agenda - Grant Awards Section I: Council Added Items Salt Lake City FY 2021-22 Consent Agenda #4 for Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 1 Section G: Council Consent Agenda – Grant Awards Utah State Office of Education, Child and Adult Care Food Program - Youth After School Programs Misc. Grants $46,000 Department: Public Services (Youth & Family) Prepared By: Kim Thomas / Melyn Osmond The Youth & Family Division of Public Services applied for and received a continuation grant offered annually by the Utah State Office of Education, under the Child and Adult Care Food Program. These funds are available to youth service providers as part of the At-Risk Snack Program to reimburse for the costs of snacks served to children participating in the after-school programs. Central City Rec. Center, Fairmont Park, Glendale Library, Liberty Park, Northwest Rec. Center, Ottinger Hall, the Youth and Family Division Office, and Sorenson Campus will receive reimbursement directly through the State Office of Education and will receive up to $46,000, based on qualified snack expenses. SLC is reimbursed on a monthly basis and only qualified healthy snacks and meals served to children participating in the after-school enrichment/education activities during the afterschool program hours are eligible for reimbursement. A public hearing will be held for the grant application. G-2: Marathon Petroleum Thriving Communities Grant Program, Marathon Petroleum Foundation Misc. Grants $100,000 Department: Public Services (Youth & Family) Prepared By: Ken Perko/ Melyn Osmond The Division of Youth & Family Services applied for and received $100,000 in grant funding for the Marathon Petroleum Thriving Communities Program. The funding will be used to purchase two 14-passenger vans that will be used by program staff to transport youth participants from a variety of neighborhood elementary schools to the YouthCity Northwest Recreation center site for afterschool programming. No match is required. A public hearing will be held for this grant application. G-3: Mental Health First Responders, Utah Department of Human Services Misc. Grants $80,010 Department: Human Resources Prepared By: Trent Steele / Melyn Osmond The Human Resource Dept. applied for and received $80,010 in grant funding for the Mental Health First Responders grant program from Utah Dept. of Human Services. The funding will be used to increase the capacity of the City's existing EAP (Employee Assistance Program), targeting first responders. The two clinicians currently under contract with ComPsych will increase their hours of availability to provide onsite, in person, telephone, and virtual counselling particularly emergency services for individuals who may be in crisis. The total hours will increase by 815 over the course of the pilot projecting. No match is required. A public hearing will be held for this grant application. Signature: Email: Garrrett A. Danielson (Dec 29, 2021 15:02 MST) Garrrett A. Danielson garett.danielson@slcgov.com ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ______________________________ Date Received: 1/10/2022 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 1/10/2022 TO: DATE: 1/10/2022 FROM: Salt Lake City Council Dan Dugan, Chair Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Arts Council Board STAFF CONTACT: Jessi Eagan jessi.eagan@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Arts Council Board. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Richard Taylor as a member of the Arts Council Board. / ( ) ,,,,,,,11111 ,,.,,,' ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 January 10, 2022 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 Dear Councilmember Dugan, Listed below is my recommendation for membership appointment to the Arts Council Board. Richard Taylor - to be appointed for a three year term ending starting from the date of City Council advice and consent. I respectfully ask your consideration and support for this appointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall, Mayor Cc: File .. Ji. .. '• / ;\ trfj \ .. l ,,,,, u111 ,v·' ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ______________________________ Date Received: 1/10/2022 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 1/10/2022 TO: DATE: 1/10/2022 FROM: Salt Lake City Council Dan Dugan, Chair Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Arts Council Board STAFF CONTACT: Jessi Eagan jessi.eagan@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Arts Council Board. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Ayanna Allen as a member of the Arts Council Board. / ( ) ,,,,,,,11111 ,,.,,,' ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 January 10, 2022 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 Dear Councilmember Dugan, Listed below is my recommendation for membership appointment to the Arts Council Board. Ayanna Allen - to be appointed for a three year term ending starting from the date of City Council advice and consent. I respectfully ask your consideration and support for this appointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall, Mayor Cc: File .. Ji. .. '• / ;\ trfj \ .. l ,,,,, u111 ,v·' Date/Time Opened Popular Topic Contact Name Comment My name is Joseph Bigler and my parents are staying at the Ramada by Road Home. I've been living with my parents and our cat for 15 years, the last 4 of which we have been homeless on and off. My parents are 68 and 71 years of age, I am 43 years old. I assumed when I attempted to get into the Ramada that I would go with my parents,yet I was deemed too young. I cannot even visit them in their room,and have not seen 1/26/2022 16:36 Homelessness Joey Bee my mom in nearly a week,as she is unable to walk far distances to the lobby.They do not even have a working phone in their room,so I am unable to call them. I have to wait for my dad to call from the lobby phone, hoping that I do not miss his call. I have severe depression and need to be with my parents.They help me daily,and I know that they need me as well. I need immediate help to get into the Ramada with my folks. Dear council members, I live relatively close to this segment of the city and have watched its development over the past 20 years. It's obvious that any stagnant building or buildings or blocks become nothing more then a transient home for the homelessness that is abound. Gentrification and growth opportunities for new businesses to meet the ever growing,working,tax paying influx is the smartest decision to make for this prime 1/27/2022 16:53 Homelessness John Huey real estate. I suggest using a portion of taxes gained for cleaning up this mess up now to propel a sanctuary or infrastructure for the homeless and needy elsewhere would be prudent.The west side has Vast amounts of property/dirt to house and try out new ideas, new plans such as this without disrupting an entire neighborhood. Build jobs, build business,support and build more places for mental and drug infirmity and let's build the best downtown city in the country or become another Seattle.Thank you for your time. Fleet Block represents a once-in-a-generation chance to do something amazing for Salt Lake City: Creating a new park.The$2M earmarked for additional improvements to Pioneer Park could be redirected to build a park for the residents of the booming Granary and Central Ninth neighborhoods.The park could include a space to 1/27/2022 16:54 Fleet Block Marcus Cazier memorialize the murals,and continue to act as gathering for social causes. It could have several walls dedicated to outdoor art,with different artists being invited to paint them over and over. We need housing and business spaces. But we also need green space to keep our city beautiful. Fleet Block is a blank canvas. Let's create something beautiful on it.Thanks, Marcus Cazier There has been a motor home parked in front of the Family Dollar on 800 E. 200 S.for over a month without moving. Living very close to this address I have called parking enforcement several times to ticket and have the vehicle removed. They are saying because its"occupied"there is nothing they can do and referred me to the Homeless Outreach team (HEART).When calling them,they are confused as to why they shoulld 2/1/2022 12:39 Andrew Ayrton be enforcing removal of a vehical. I understand people are homeless,and may purchase a vehical due to being priced out of rental or housing but its not ok to alow them to park in residential neighborhoods for over a month and live out of that vehical.The city needs to move these folks to a parking lot or find affordable housing for them to relocate to. In this situation they clearly are not staying close to family and therefore need to be moved. Please enforce the 48 hr rule of parking on ALL city streets. Dear Council members,The part of the block that contains the murals MUST be preserved.These murals are an important part of SLC and U.S. history,that must not be erased!!And of course, this is sacred ground for the families of police violence,who come there to mourn their loved one.And,the George Floyd mural represents the day that most of America became aware of our racist and brutal police system,as we watched in 2/1/2022 17:21 Fleet Block Cynda Nygaard horror as his life was snuffed out before us.This, too, is a part of our history that must never be forgotten by us and the world!And,that event resulted in finally seeing the wheel of justice moving, albeit slowly, but moving...towards police accountability.The decisions you all make on preserving these murals or not,will make a huge statement on what you stand for. I pray you make the right decision,for this city, and for this country...C. Nygaard SLC Tear down and remove the murals. Build some nice homes or business there, but get rid of those murals.They are highly offensive,trashy,and portray nothing but racism,and make salt lake look like nothing more than a back alley drug trade city.They are trashy and an complete eyesore! If those buildings had murals of white 2/1/2022 17:23 Fleet Block Dave NA people everywhere we would get blasted for portraying white supremacy,so why do we allow ethnic people a double standard?It's pure racism! No more murals that portray racism and make salt lake undesirable to visit. I and many I know do not visit that side of salt lake any longer because of how trashy those buildings look,and the double standard they portray. Hi there--I think it's important that any development of this area preserves the murals that were painted during the 2020 social justice movements.The murals themselves are stunning, and the area has kind of organically become a gathering place. I think we should formalize that-- 2/1/2022 17:27 Fleet Block ROBIN Richards add green space,shade, places for people to sit and ponder the murals.And given that the murals memorialize people killed by the government(i.e. the police), I think it would be incredibly disrespectful--and literal white-washing--for the government to develop the area in a way that destroys the murals.Sincerely, Robin Richards Draper