The URL can be used to link to this page

08/29/2022 - Formal Meeting - Meeting Materials (2)SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SPECIAL LIMITED FORMAL MEETING August 29, 2022 Monday 6:05 PM Immediately following the 6:00 p.m. meeting Council Work Room 451 South State Street Room 326 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 SLCCouncil.com CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: Dan Dugan, Chair District 6 Darin Mano, Vice Chair District 5 Victoria Petro-Eschler District 1 Alejandro Puy District 2 Chris Wharton District 3 Ana Valdemoros District 4 Amy Fowler District 7 Generated: 08:59:45 The Council has returned to a hybrid meeting approach. The hybrid meeting enables people joining remotely or in-person to listen to the Council meeting and participate during public comment items. Agenda & Registration Information: For more information, including Webex connection information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. Public Health Information: Masks are no longer required in City Facilities, but are welcome for any attendees who prefer to continue using them. We will continue to monitor the situation take any reasonable precautions for the public and staff. Please note: Dates not identified in the FYI - Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. WELCOME AND PUBLIC MEETING RULES A.OPENING CEREMONY: 1.Council Member Dan Dugan will conduct the special limited formal meeting. 2.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules. B.PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE. C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS: NONE. D.COMMENTS: NONE. E.NEW BUSINESS: NONE. F.UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 1. Ordinance: Budget Amendment No. 1 for Fiscal Year 2022-23 The Council will reconsider the motion taken on August 16, 2022 to close the public hearing relating to the ordinance that would amend the final budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2022-23. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and modifications. The proposed amendment includes transportation impact fees for reconstructing streets, pedestrian and bicycle improvements to the 600 North/700 North corridor transformation project among other things. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, August 16, 2022 and Tuesday, September 6, 2022 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, August 9, 2022 and Monday, August 29, 2022 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 6 p.m. and Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, August 16, 2022 and Tuesday, September 6, 2022 Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s). 2. Ordinance: Budget Amendment No. 1 for Fiscal Year 2022-23 The Council will set the date of Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 7 p.m. to continue the August 16 public hearing and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the final budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2022-23. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and modifications. The proposed amendment includes transportation impact fees for reconstructing streets, pedestrian and bicycle improvements to the 600 North/700 North corridor transformation project, transferring funds to governmental immunity, and transferring money from the Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund (EDLF) among other things. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, August 16, 2022 and Tuesday, September 6, 2022 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, August 9, 2022 and Monday, August 29, 2022 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 6 p.m. and Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, August 16, 2022 and Tuesday, September 6, 2022 Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s). th G.CONSENT: 1. Resolution: Reviewing the Public Benefits Analysis for The Other Side Village Pilot Project at 1850 West Indiana Avenue and Considering a Resolution to Authorize the Lease Rate and Term The Council will set the date of Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting a resolution that would authorize the Lease Rate and Term for The Other Side Village Pilot Project at 1850 West Indiana Avenue. This would allow the City to enter into a 40-year below-market ground lease agreement with The Other Side Academy, a Utah nonprofit corporation, in order to facilitate the construction of a tiny home village with approximately 54 units of affordable housing. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, September 6, 2022 Set Public Hearing Date - Monday, August 29, 2022 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD Staff Recommendation - Set date. 2. Ordinance: Rezoning to Facilitate Development of The Other Side Village at 1850 West Indiana Avenue The Council will set the date of Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning map to portions of City-owned properties at 1850 West Indiana Avenue and 1965 West 500 South to rezone the parcels from PL (Public Lands) to FB- UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood). The proposed uses on the approximately 37.1-acre site would include permanent supportive housing for homeless individuals as well as services and resources to include on-site healthcare, medical services, and community gathering spaces. This request only relates to the zoning designation of the property. No specific site development proposal has been submitted or is under consideration at this time and the Westside Master Plan is not being changed. Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics. Petition No.: PLNPCM2021-00787 FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, September 13, 2022 Set Public Hearing Date - Monday, August 29, 2022 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD Staff Recommendation - Set date. H.CLOSED SESSION: 1.Closed Session The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session. A closed meeting described under Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including, but not limited to: a. discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; b. strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; c. strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; d. strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; e. strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; f. discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and g. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. I.ADJOURNMENT: CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 5:00 p.m. on Friday, August 26, 2022, the undersigned, duly appointed City Recorder, does hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1) posted on the Utah Public Notice Website created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701, and (2) a copy of the foregoing provided to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others who have indicated interest. CINDY LOU TRISHMAN SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda, including but not limited to adoption, rejection, amendment, addition of conditions and variations of options discussed. The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. Order is completed for a Special Meeting pursuant to 10-3-502(2) SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Special City Council Limited Formal Meeting Order & Notice Meeting Date: Monday, August 29, 2022 Meeting Time: 6:00 p.m. City & County Building 451 South State Street Council Work Room, 326 Salt Lake City UT 84111 Order provided to the City Council Members & Mayor for signature via Adobe Sign on August 11 at 2:00 pm. ________________________ Dan Dugan, Council Chair ________________________ Victoria Petro-Eschler, District One ________________________ Alejandro Puy, District Two _________________________ Chris Wharton, District Three _______________________ Darin Mano, Council Vice Chair _______________________ Ana Valdemoros, District Four ________________________ Amy Fowler, District Seven Dan Dugan (Aug 11, 2022 14:05 PDT) Alejandro Puy (Aug 20, 2022 11:19 MDT) Ana Valdemoros (Aug 21, 2022 10:26 PDT)Victoria Petro-Eschler (Aug 22, 2022 11:54 MDT) Amy Fowler (Aug 23, 2022 08:03 MDT) Chris Wharton (Aug 23, 2022 16:11 MDT) Special Meeting Order - 08292022 Final Audit Report 2022-08-23 Created:2022-08-11 By:DeeDee Robinson (deedee.robinson@slcgov.com) Status:Signed Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAohnJLRdia9Vh0PR1mqBUDJomp4N7xI7s "Special Meeting Order - 08292022" History Document created by DeeDee Robinson (deedee.robinson@slcgov.com) 2022-08-11 - 8:16:48 PM GMT Document emailed to daniel.dugan@slcgov.com for signature 2022-08-11 - 8:17:51 PM GMT Document emailed to Darin Mano (darin.mano@slcgov.com) for signature 2022-08-11 - 8:17:52 PM GMT Document emailed to Victoria Petro-Eschler (victoria.petro-eschler@slcgov.com) for signature 2022-08-11 - 8:17:52 PM GMT Document emailed to ana.valdemoros@slcgov.com for signature 2022-08-11 - 8:17:52 PM GMT Document emailed to alejandro.puy@slcgov.com for signature 2022-08-11 - 8:17:52 PM GMT Document emailed to Amy Fowler (amy.fowler@slcgov.com) for signature 2022-08-11 - 8:17:52 PM GMT Document emailed to Chris Wharton (chris.wharton@slcgov.com) for signature 2022-08-11 - 8:17:53 PM GMT Email viewed by Victoria Petro-Eschler (victoria.petro-eschler@slcgov.com) 2022-08-11 - 8:18:08 PM GMT Email viewed by Darin Mano (darin.mano@slcgov.com) 2022-08-11 - 8:18:40 PM GMT Document e-signed by Darin Mano (darin.mano@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2022-08-11 - 8:18:51 PM GMT - Time Source: server Email viewed by alejandro.puy@slcgov.com 2022-08-11 - 8:19:36 PM GMT Email viewed by daniel.dugan@slcgov.com 2022-08-11 - 9:04:47 PM GMT Signer daniel.dugan@slcgov.com entered name at signing as Dan Dugan 2022-08-11 - 9:05:32 PM GMT Document e-signed by Dan Dugan (daniel.dugan@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2022-08-11 - 9:05:34 PM GMT - Time Source: server Email viewed by Amy Fowler (amy.fowler@slcgov.com) 2022-08-12 - 0:22:47 AM GMT Email viewed by ana.valdemoros@slcgov.com 2022-08-12 - 4:43:28 AM GMT Email viewed by Chris Wharton (chris.wharton@slcgov.com) 2022-08-12 - 6:12:24 AM GMT Email viewed by alejandro.puy@slcgov.com 2022-08-20 - 5:17:30 PM GMT Signer alejandro.puy@slcgov.com entered name at signing as Alejandro Puy 2022-08-20 - 5:19:15 PM GMT Document e-signed by Alejandro Puy (alejandro.puy@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2022-08-20 - 5:19:17 PM GMT - Time Source: server Email viewed by Amy Fowler (amy.fowler@slcgov.com) 2022-08-20 - 7:28:54 PM GMT Email viewed by ana.valdemoros@slcgov.com 2022-08-20 - 11:40:02 PM GMT Email viewed by Chris Wharton (chris.wharton@slcgov.com) 2022-08-21 - 5:27:38 AM GMT Email viewed by ana.valdemoros@slcgov.com 2022-08-21 - 5:25:17 PM GMT Signer ana.valdemoros@slcgov.com entered name at signing as Ana Valdemoros 2022-08-21 - 5:26:24 PM GMT Document e-signed by Ana Valdemoros (ana.valdemoros@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2022-08-21 - 5:26:26 PM GMT - Time Source: server Email viewed by Chris Wharton (chris.wharton@slcgov.com) 2022-08-22 - 5:04:24 AM GMT Email viewed by Victoria Petro-Eschler (victoria.petro-eschler@slcgov.com) 2022-08-22 - 6:13:51 AM GMT Document e-signed by Victoria Petro-Eschler (victoria.petro-eschler@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2022-08-22 - 5:54:21 PM GMT - Time Source: server Email viewed by Amy Fowler (amy.fowler@slcgov.com) 2022-08-23 - 1:46:33 AM GMT Email viewed by Chris Wharton (chris.wharton@slcgov.com) 2022-08-23 - 5:24:25 AM GMT Document e-signed by Amy Fowler (amy.fowler@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2022-08-23 - 2:03:47 PM GMT - Time Source: server Document e-signed by Chris Wharton (chris.wharton@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2022-08-23 - 10:11:58 PM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed. 2022-08-23 - 10:11:58 PM GMT Item F1 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY23 TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke and Sylvia Richards Budget Analysts DATE:August 29, 2022 RE: Budget Amendment Number One FY2023 Staff note: Per State Code 10-3-508, “any action taken by the governing body may not be reconsidered or rescinded at any special meeting unless the number of members of the governing body present at the special meeting is equal to or greater than the number of members present at the meeting when the action was approved.” MOTION 1A – REQUEST A VOTE RECONSIDERATION I move that the Council now reconsider our action on August 16 closing the Budget Amendment #1 public hearing. Staff note: If Motion 1A is successful, then the Council may proceed to reconsider the vote with Motion 1B below. MOTION 1B – RECONSIDER VOTE I move that the Council continue the public hearing to a future date. Staff note: The budget amendment remains open, and the Council will consider other items at a future date. MOTION 2 – NOT RECONSIDER VOTE I move that the Council proceed to the next agenda item. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY23 TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke, Sylvia Richards Budget and Policy Analysts DATE:September 6, 2022 RE: Budget Amendment Number One FY2023 ________________________________________________________________________________ NEW INFORMATION On August 16, the Council held the first briefing and a public hearing, then closed the public hearing and adopted two items: A-4: GO (General Obligation) Bond Public Education ($150,000 from General Fund Balance), and D-2: CIP Transfer for General Fund Security ($1,200,000 from CIP Fund to General Fund). There are two new Council- added items since the first briefing. In order to add the two new items to Budget Amendment No. 1, on August 29, the Council will reconsider the motion to close the public hearing on August 16th and set a continued hearing date for September 6th. During the August 16 briefing, the Council received an update on item I-3: Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation State Grant. The Administration confirmed receipt of final grant award notification from the State. The award is just under $2.75 million. Ongoing costs of $2.2 million are anticipated to be requested from the same grant funding in future years. See Attachment 1 for details on the 13 new grant funded FTEs, and the subaward to Volunteers of America. Council Members discussed the importance of performance metrics to show how the funds are making a positive impact and to support the City’s application next year. New Council Added Items: I-4: Governmental Immunity Fund Adjustment ($2 million from Insurance Payment) The Administration has asked the Council to adjust the Governmental Immunity Fund budget in recognition of a $2 million insurance payment. This item would recognize the revenue and expenditure within the Governmental Immunity Fund. I-5: Outdoor Business Activity Grant Pilot Program Transfer ($100,000 from the EDLF to General Fund) The Administration indicates that the one-time funding for the Outdoor Business Activity Grant program is currently residing in the Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF). The funding needs to be transferred to the General Fund because forgivable loans are not permitted by the EDLF guidelines. The Council held a briefing on August 16 about the proposed pilot program guidelines. The program would provide up to $5,000 for outdoor dining/retail costs or $10,000 for costs incurred in hosting an “Open Streets” event. The Council’s requested changes to the guidelines are listed below. At the time of publishing this staff report the Administration was working to update the guidelines to incorporate the Council’s policy feedback. 1. The Council requested a reporting mechanism, once applications close, to be included in a transmittal for a written briefing. The transmittal will include details of the applicants, such as their location, size, whether Project Timeline: Set Date: August 9, 2022 1st Briefing: August 16, 2022 Public Hearing & Partial Adoption: August 16, 2022 2nd Briefing: September 6, 2022 Public Hearing & Potential Vote: Sept. 6, 2022 Page | 2 all of the available funding was awarded to grantees. Future analytics would include how well the businesses performed; was it a fruitful investment? 2. The Council would like the grant funding to be made available to businesses to use for prior purchases as well as future expenses. 3. The Council would like to ensure that businesses which received the reduced leases be included in the notification process for the grant program. This information below was previously provided by the 8/16/22 briefing. It is provided again for convenience. Budget Amendment Number One includes sixteen proposed amendments and requested changes to four funds. Total expenditures coming from fund balance are $600,000. If all the items are adopted as proposed, then Fund Balance would be $16,278,448 or 16.83% above the 13% minimum target established by the Council in FY2020. Revenue for FY2023 Budget Adjustments The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for Fiscal Year 2023. As this is the first budget amendment of the new fiscal year, there are no revenue projection updates to report at this time. Fund Balance The Administration’s chart below shows the current General Fund Balance figures. Page | 3 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 July 1, 2022. As a result, the City is on- track with impact fee budgeting to have no refunds during all FY2023 and FY2024. The Administration reports work is nearing completion to update the fire and parks sections of the impact fee plan. The transportation section was updated last year. Eligible projects for police impact fees are being identified. Note that the Council is currently considering impact fee eligible projects as part of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget. Type Unallocated Cash “Available to Spend”Next Refund Trigger Date Amount of Expiring Impact Fees Fire $1,156,234 More than a year away - Parks $15,216,578 More than a year away - Police $846,150 More than a year away - Transportation $8,061,854 More than a year away - Note: Encumbrances are an administrative function when impact fees are held under a contract Section A: New Items (note: to expedite the processing of this staff report, staff has included the Administration’s descriptions from the transmittal for some of these items) Page | 4 A-1: Bridge to Backman Community Open Space Donation ($20,000 from Salt Lake Education Foundation to CIP Fund) Public Lands is requesting a budget amendment to allocate a $20,000 donation from the Salt Lake Education Foundation specifically to the Backman Open Space project, currently ongoing. Salt Lake Education Foundation received a $10,000 Governor's Office of Outdoor Recreation grant specifically for the Backman Community Open Space Project, which was matched with $10,000 by the Tony Finau Foundation. The desire is now for these funds to be donated to the City to be used for the project. To fulfill the requirements of the grant, the donation will have to be used for this specific project. Background - The Backman Community Open Space Project is developing a piece of Public Lands owned property just west of Backman Elementary and the Jordan River, at approximately 600 N. and 1500 W. This project follows the installation of a bridge between the Community Open Space and Backman Elementary, providing direct access to the school from a nearby nonprofit housing development. The open space, which is currently unutilized as park space and is overtaken by invasive vegetation, will be developed into an outdoor classroom that is also open to the public as a park. This project is projected to be completed in Fall 2022. The full scope of this project will not be able to be fulfilled without this donation, and to maximize efficiency of funding and construction, the project team sees great benefit in completing this project in one phase.. The Council approved over $1.1 million for the bridge and adjacent open space project. A-2: Purchase of Vehicles for New Community & Neighborhoods Department ($120,000 from General Fund Balance to Fleet Fund) Three vehicles that are requested are for the three new positions added in the 2023 budget. Two positions are for Building Inspections and one position is for Civil Enforcement. These vehicles were requested by CAN but not transferred into the original budget request. The numbers that have been provided are estimates due to the continual increase in cost and the lack of availability. Estimated cost for 3 vehicles (from Fleet) Inspections: $45,000 ea. x2 = $90,000 (4 wd needed) (2) Ford Hybrid Civil Enforcement: $30,000 - (1) Chevrolet Volt Total: $120,000 A-3: WITHDRAWN A-4: GO (General Obligation) Bond Public Outreach and Engagement ($150,000 from General Fund Balance) The Public Lands Department is requesting a budget amendment of $150,000 to hire a consultant to provide public engagement efforts related to the general obligation bond, or GO bond, to be voted on by Salt Lake City residents on the November 2022 ballot. The City may spend funds promoting the proposed GO bond by providing factual information about the proposition, delivering a voter information pamphlet, with neutral encouragement to get SLC residents out to vote. Public Lands is seeking engagement assistance to educate the public about how the GO bond will meet current and future open space, air and water quality needs of the City as well as relating the benefits to the Reimagine Nature Master Plan. Engagement Methods (Must be bilingual): 1. Online survey, project web page, FB Live(s), Community Council presentations, event tabling, intercept surveys in parks, business group presentations, stakeholder meetings, op-eds, board and commissions messaging 2. Video/Social on value of Public Lands 3. Ads, signage, paint stencils, logo, social media hashtag The Department identified $46,000 of unspent funds from a prior bond effort which could also be used for public education about the proposed GO bond. Staff note: The Council could consider closing the public hearing and voting to adopt this funding the same night on August 16 given the short time remaining between potentially placing the GO bond on the ballot and when vote by mail ballots are delivered to voters in October. A-5: Allocate Transportation Impact Fees for Street Reconstruction Projects ($3,111,335 from CIP Fund for Nine Projects) The following road projects are included in Engineering's six-year plan and are primarily funded by the $87 Million Page | 5 Road Bond. These road segments are all eligible for Impact Fees and are included in the amendment to the Impact Fee Facility Plan (IFFP) adopted by Council in the fall of 2020. The impact fees will help to supplement the projects as they exceed their original budget. Following is a list of the projects along with the eligible amount as listed in the IFFP and the percentage of the project that is eligible for use of Impact Fees. Project Name Eligible Amount Percent 200 South $ 915,151.oo 9.00% 300 North $ 154,739.00 8.00% 1100 East/Highland Drive $ 500,728.00 7.00% Virginia Street $ 141,663.00 9.00% 1300 East $ 812,805.00 7.00% West Temple $ 338,633.00 7.00% 900 South $ 171,944.00 6.00% 1700 East $ 158,570.00 7.00% 2100 South $ 660,410.00 8.00% Subtotal $3,854,643.00 Less Existing Cost Center 8420125 $ (743,308.00) TOTAL REQUEST $3,111,335.00 The Engineering Division is reviewing the eligibility for the street reconstruction projects to confirm the proposed budgets maximize the allowable use of transportation impact fees. If additional eligibility is identified, then the Division indicates a request will be included in a future budget opening. This may be the last batch of street reconstruction projects to use matching transportation impact fees with funds from the 2018 voter-approved $87 million General Obligation Bond. Note that some of the listed projects have funding gaps such as 900 South reconstruction with a nearly $2 million gap. Funding requests to cover the gaps are anticipated in future budget openings and CIP cycles. Existing Class C (gas tax) funding may also be used to fill the gaps. A-6: PULLED PRIOR TO TRANSMITTAL A-7: Rail Spur Removal ($205,000 from General Fund Balance) The rail spur at 600 West and 500 South was conveyed in 1997 by the City to a private party, with partial consideration for this conveyance being an easement to construct, operate, and maintain a railroad spur and associated facilities. Since the rail spur has not been used for over one year, the City is contractually obligated to remove it. There have been a couple similar rail spur removals in recent years. The Administration stated this is believed to be last rail spur removal in the area. Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section (None) Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section (None) Section D: Housekeeping D-1: UTA Contribution to 200 South Transit Corridor and Complete Street Improvements ($1,314,900 from UTA to CIP Fund) Salt Lake City is reconstructing 200 South in 2022 (Phase 1: 900 East to 200 East) and 2023 (Phase 2: 200 East to 400 West). UTA has participated in the planning and design activities of the project and has agreed to support the project by providing direct financial reimbursement to SLC for construction expenses that UTA has requested to include in the Project, such as installation of conduit/junction boxes for electric power and fiber optic communication to the bus boarding platforms. The contribution from UTA to cover these added expenses is estimated to be $1,314,900. As the current Interlocal is not yet signed, we would like to request Council post budgets to a holding account if the agreements are not signed by the time the budget amendment is reviewed by Council. Page | 6 The Administration states a draft interlocal agreement is currently being reviewing by the City and UTA. If the funding is placed in a holding account, then the Council would need to act in a future budget opening to release the funding. D-2: CIP Transfer for General Fund Security ($1,200,000 from CIP Fund to General Fund) As part of the budget adoption the City Council used funds that were transferred to CIP in BA#7 of FY22 for Building security. The transfer from the CIP fund back to the general fund was not included in the budget adoption. This amendment is to correct that. D-3: Dee Glen Tennis Surety Company Reimbursement ($705,016 to CIP Fund) In the Summer of 2020 the City hired Pine Tree Construction (Pine Tree) to build the Dee Glen Tennis Center. The project was funded by a grant from Salt Lake County. The City had to terminate their contract with Pine Tree in the Fall of 2021 as it became apparent that Pine Tree would no longer be able to fulfill their contractual obligations. The City immediately notified the Surety, Western National Mutual Insurance Company (WNMIC), holding the performance bond, as it intended to file a claim on the bond. Working with WNMIC, the claim was approved in early-2022. WNMIC, via their Consultant, J.S. Held, facilitated a bidding effort to identify a replacement contractor. Bids were received on April 28, 2022, and WNMIC recommended the City proceed to enter into a contract with Paulsen Construction (Paulsen). WNMIC, via a Tender Agreement with the City, provided this additional funding to the project to pay the City for the additional cost to have Paulsen complete the project as well a compensation the City for a few, minor expenses incurred by the City as a direct result of the Pine Tree termination. At the time of this budget amendment submittal, the City is nearly complete with the Paulsen agreement, and will use what exists in the remaining project funding to partially award the contract to Paulsen. This additional money received from WNMIC will be used to fund the remaining contract with Paulsen as well as pay for the remaining soft costs associated with the project. D-4: Re-appropriate FY2022 Fleet Vehicle Purchases ($3,891,360 from Fleet Fund Balance to Fleet Vehicle Replacement Fund) The Public Services Department is requesting the Council re-appropriate funds originally appropriated in FY2022 for vehicle purchases. These vehicles were unavailable to source before the end of FY2022 because of supply chain issues and limited ordering windows offered by vehicle manufacturers. The vehicles are still needed. If the re- appropriation is approved, then the vehicles would be ordered as soon as they become available. D-5: UDOT Contribution to Foothill Sunnyside Intersection Partial Reconstruction (Northeast corner Foothill Dr./Sunnyside Ave.) ($91,000 from UDOT to CIP Fund) Salt Lake City is partnering with UDOT and the University of Utah (Research Park) to reconstruct the northeast corner of Foothill Drive/ Sunnyside Avenue intersection. We are completing this project to improve pedestrian comfort and safety at this critically important location. This area is currently part of the Sunnyside Trail and will be part of the 9-Line trail in the future. UDOT has committed to contribute funding towards this project as demonstrated in the attached cooperative agreement. This budget amendment item is intended to reimburse our trails funding source for the portion of the project that UDOT contributed to. Note: After the transmittal was received, the City and UDOT signed an interlocal agreement for this contribution. D-6: UTA Contribution to Orange Street Mobility Hub ($1 million from UTA to CIP Fund) The Orange Street Mobility Hub is being constructed by Salt Lake City to support several frequent east-west bus routes that City Council identified as top priorities from the Transit Master Plan. The facility provides a location for buses to lay over for electric charging, operator breaks and to reverse direction, as well as for passengers to transfer between bus routes and other modes, such as the Westside On-Demand service and GreenBike. UTA has agreed verbally and via email to a contribution of $1 million for the facility, and we have been working with them in earnest to finalize a cost-sharing agreement. This amendment will accept that contribution into the City's budget. As the current Interlocal is not yet signed, the Administration would like to request Council post budgets to a holding account if the agreements are not signed by the time the budget amendment is reviewed by Council. The Administration states a draft interlocal agreement is currently being reviewing by the City and UTA. If the funding is placed in a holding account, then the Council would need to act in a future budget opening to release the funding. The mobility hub would support implementation of the Frequent Transit Network which is part of the Funding Our Future initiative. Page | 7 D-7: Rescope Allen Park Renovation and Facilities Roofing Project ($331,342 Bond Funding) This budget amendment requests a funding source rescope for two CIP projects; the Allen Park Renovations Project (8321404) and the Parks Building Roofing Project within the Facilities Capital Renewal fund (8322700). This budget amendment requests a change to project funding sources from bond funds to general funds to better align project deadlines with funding deadlines on these projects. Changing the funding source will allow the bond funds to be spent before the final bond expiration period. The amendment proposes to move the Facilities Parks Building Roofing Project funding to bond funding. This project is beginning and will be able to meet the time critical portion of the bond funding. The project has been determined to be bond eligible. The Allen Park Renovations Project will then be moved from bond funding to general funds allowing for the necessary time to complete the project in FY23. The Allen Park Projects in process include structural assessment of critical structures, roof repair of failing historic structure(s), and design and construction of water lines to provide critical irrigation, water and sewer, and fire suppression to the site. The bond funds proposed to be rescoped must be spent by October 2022. The proposed rescope to fully use the remaining bond funds on the Parks Building roof replacement will meet the deadline as the project has already begun construction. Note that the rescope request and existing bond funds are separate from the proposed $80 million GO Bond for Parks and Public Lands projects. D-8: Streets Reconstruction Bond Adjustments ($693,411 from Reconstruction Projects Completed Under Budget to 900 South Reconstruction Project) Local Streets Project - Cost Center 8320205 - These local street projects are complete and there are remaining funds in the amount of $178,623.04 in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 8320209 so they can be used on that project specifically. 900 East Project - Cost Center 8320207 - This project is nearing completion and does have remaining bond funds in the amount of $13,274.42 in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 8320209 so they can be used on that project specifically. 100 South Project - Cost Center 8320208 - This project is nearing completion and does have remaining bond funds in the amount of $501,513.01 in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 83202109 so they can be used on that project specifically. Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources E-1: Utah Dept. of Transportation 600/700 North Active Transportation Improvements ($2,400,000 from CIP Fund) Salt Lake City Division of Transportation nominated 600/700 North Active Transportation Improvements (2200 West to 300 West) for $2,400,000 from the TIF: Transit Projects funding. The project installs four mid-block pedestrian crossings, curb extensions at three intersections, and raised separated bicycle lanes. This grant has a match requirement of $1,600,000. The match will be funded through the cost center 83-22627 earmarked for the reconstruction project. Total funding for the project will be $4,000,000. A public hearing was held February 18, 2020 for the original grant application for this award. Section F: Donations (None) Section G: Council Consent Agenda No. 3 (None) Section I: Council Added Items I-1: CIP True Up ($191,540 from General Fund Balance to CIP Fund) This is a housekeeping item. After reviewing old CIP accounts, the Finance Department identified several items which did not correctly account for interfund transfers between the General Fund and the CIP Fund. As a result, $191,541 is being transferred from the General Fund Balance to CIP which will make the CIP Fund whole. I-2: FY2023 Additional Funding for CIP Projects ($81,000 from General Fund Balance and $799,563 from Parks Impact Fees to CIP Fund) This is the budget step to implement the Council’s CIP project specific funding decisions. During the July and Page | 8 August CIP briefings, the Council decided to fund projects with parks impact fees and General Fund dollars. Those additional funds needs to be transferred into CIP for the specific projects since the funding was not part of the FY2023 annual budget adoption. This funding will be used for three projects: - $81,000 to study and create designs for improvements to the intersection of 1000 West 500 North potentially including a traffic circle (Project #27 on the CIP Funding Log) - $300,000 to add lighting to the northeast baseball field at Riverside Park (Project #94 on the CIP Funding Log) - $499,563 to create the Gateway Triangle Park (Project #69 on the CIP Funding Log) I-3: PLACEHOLDER: Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation Grant The Council closed the public hearing, added this grant to the Grant Holding Account Batch No. 2 and approved as part of the consent agenda on August 9, 2022. This item will close out the last step in the budgetary process to receive the grant funds. See Attachment 1 for the staff report about the grant. ATTACHMENTS 1. Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation Grant Staff Report from August 9 Council Meeting ACRONYMS CAN – Department of Community & Neighborhoods CCJJ – Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice CIP – Capital Improvement Program FTE – Full Time Equivalent Position FY – Fiscal Year GF – General Fund GO Bond – General Obligation Bond IFFP – Impact Fee Facility Plan TIF – Transportation Investment Fund UTA – Utah Transit Authority WNMIC – Western National Mutual Insurance Company DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238 PO BOX145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455 TEL 801-535-6394 ERINMENDENHALL Mayor MARY BETHTHOMPSON Chief Financial Officer CITYCOUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ___________________________________Date Received: ________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO:Salt Lake City Council DATE: August 2, 2022 Dan Dugan, Chair FROM:Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT:Budget Amendment #1 - Revised SPONSOR: NA STAFF CONTACT:John Vuyk, Budget Director (801) 535-6394 or Mary Beth Thompson (801) 535-6403 DOCUMENT TYPE: Budget Amendment Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that, subsequent to a public hearing, the City Council adopt the following amendments to the FY2022-23 adopted budget. BUDGET IMPACT: REVENUE EXPENSE GENERAL FUND $ 0.00)$ 475,000.00 FLEET FUND 120,000.00 4,011,360.00 DONATION FUND 20,000.00 20,000.00 CIP FUND 5,530,916.00 9,842,251.00 TOTAL $ 5,670,916.00 $ 14,348,611.00 8/2/2022 8/2/2022 Lisa Shaffer (Aug 2, 2022 15:08 MDT) BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Revenue for FY 2022-23 Budget Adjustments The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for fiscal year 2023. Because of the timing of this budget amendment no updates for fiscal year 2023 projections are available. The City has begun closing out fiscal year 2022 and will provide updates to Council as the audit progresses. In c l u d i n g p r o p o s e d c h a n g e s f o r B A # 1 f u n d b a l a n c e w o u l d b e p r o j e c t e d a s f o l l o w s f o r F Y 2 0 2 3 : Ad j u s t e d f u n d b a l a n c e i s p r o j e c t e d t o b e a t 1 6 . 8 5 % . The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $5,670,916.00 of revenue and expense of $14,348,611.00. The amendment proposes changes in four funds, with no new FTEs. The amendment also includes the use of $475,000.00 from the General Fund fund balance. The proposal includes fifteen 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 (First amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2022-2023) An Ordinance Amending Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 32 of 2022 which adopted the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2022 and Ending June 30, 2023. In June of 2022, the Salt Lake City Council adopted the final budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the employment staffing document, effective for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2022, and ending June 30, 2023, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-118 of the Utah Code. 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 2022. SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including amendments to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes 2 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 July 1, 2022 and ending June 30, 2023, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128 of the Utah Code. SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including 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 ATTEST: _______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. _________ of 2022. Published: ___________________. Approved As To Form ___Jaysen Oldroyd________ Jaysen Oldroyd In i t i a t i v e N u m b e r / N a m e F u n d R e v e n u e A m o u n t E x p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t R e v e n u e A m o u n t E x p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t On g o i n g o r O n e - ti m e FT E s 1 Br i d g e t o B a c k m a n C o m m u n i t y O p e n S p a c e Do n a t i o n A l l o c a t i o n Do n a t i o n 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 1 Br i d g e t o B a c k m a n C o m m u n i t y O p e n S p a c e Do n a t i o n A l l o c a t i o n CI P 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 2 V e h i c l e s f o r N e w C A N P o s i t i o n s G F - 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 2 V e h i c l e s f o r N e w C A N P o s i t i o n s F l e e t 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 3 F o r e s t r y D i r e c t o r R e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n G F - - O n - G o i n g - 4 G O B o n d P u b l i c O u t r e a c h a n d E n g a g e m e n t G F - 1 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 5 I m p a c t F e e s f o r R o a d P r o j e c t s C I P - 3 , 1 1 1 , 3 3 5 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 6 P u l l e d P r i o r t o T r a n s m i t t a l - - O n e T i m e - 7 R a i l S p u r R e m o v a l G F - 2 0 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 1 20 0 S o u t h T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r a n d C o m p l e t e St r e e t CI P 1 , 3 1 4 , 9 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 3 1 4 , 9 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 2 C I P T r a n s f e r f o r G F S e c u r i t y C I P - 1 , 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 3 De e G l e n T e n n i s S u r e t y C o m p a n y Re i m b u r s e m e n t CI P 7 0 5 , 0 1 6 . 0 0 7 0 5 , 0 1 6 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 4 R e m a i n i n g F Y 2 2 F l e e t V e h i c l e P u r c h a s e s F l e e t - 3 , 8 9 1 , 3 6 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 5 F o o t h i l l S u n n y s i d e C I P 9 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 6 UT A C o n t r i b u t i o n t o O r a n g e S t r e e t M o b i l i t y Hu b CI P 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 7 Re s c o p e A l l e n P a r k R e n o v a t i o n a n d Fa c i l i t i e s R o o f i n g P r o j e c t CI P - - O n e T i m e - 8 R o a d B o n d A d j u s t m e n t s C I P - - O n e T i m e - Se c t i o n E : G r a n t s R e q u i r i n g N o N e w S t a f f R e s o u r c e s 1 Ut a h D e p t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , 6 0 0 / 7 0 0 N Ac t i v e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n I m p r o v e m e n t s CI P 2 , 4 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 , 4 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - - Co n s e n t A g e n d a # To t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t I t e m s 5 , 6 7 0 , 9 1 6 . 0 0 1 4 , 3 4 8 , 6 1 1 . 0 0 - - - Fi s c a l Y e a r 2 0 2 2 - 2 3 B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 1 Co u n c i l A p p r o v e d Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n P r o p o s e d Se c t i o n I : C o u n c i l A d d e d I t e m s Se c t i o n A : N e w I t e m s Se c t i o n D : H o u s e k e e p i n g Se c t i o n F : D o n a t i o n s Se c t i o n G : C o u n c i l C o n s e n t A g e n d a - - G r a n t A w a r d s Se c t i o n C : G r a n t s f o r N e w S t a f f R e s o u r c e s Se c t i o n B : G r a n t s f o r E x i s t i n g S t a f f R e s o u r c e s 1 Fi s c a l Y e a r 2 0 2 2 - 2 3 B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 1 In i t i a t i v e N u m b e r / N a m e F u n d R e v e n u e A m o u n t E x p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t R e v e n u e A m o u n t E x p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t On g o i n g o r O n e - ti m e FT E s To t a l b y F u n d C l a s s , B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 7 : Ge n e r a l F u n d GF - 4 7 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - - - Fl e e t F u n d Fl e e t 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 4 , 0 1 1 , 3 6 0 . 0 0 - - - Do n a t i o n F u n d Do n a t i o n 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - - - CI P F u n d CI P 5 , 5 3 0 , 9 1 6 . 0 0 9 , 8 4 2 , 2 5 1 . 0 0 - - - - - - To t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t I t e m s 5 , 6 7 0 , 9 1 6 . 0 0 1 4 , 3 4 8 , 6 1 1 . 0 0 - - - Cu r r e n t Y e a r B u d g e t S u m m a r y , p r o v i d e d f o r i n f o r m a t i o n o n l y FY 2 0 2 1 - 2 2 B u d g e t , I n c l u d i n g B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t s FY 2 0 2 2 - 2 3 Ad o p t e d B u d g e t BA # 1 T o t a l B A # 2 T o t a l B A # 3 T o t a l B A # 4 T o t a l B A # 5 T o t a l T o t a l R e v e n u e Ge n e r a l F u n d ( F C 1 0 ) 42 5 , 5 3 7 , 4 0 8 - 42 5 , 5 3 7 , 4 0 8 . 0 0 Cu r b a n d G u t t e r ( F C 2 0 ) 3, 0 0 0 3, 0 0 0 . 0 0 DE A T a s k F o r c e F u n d ( F C 4 1 ) 1, 7 6 2 , 5 6 0 1, 7 6 2 , 5 6 0 . 0 0 Mi s c S p e c i a l S e r v i c e D i s t r i c t s ( F C 4 6 ) 1, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 1, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 St r e e t L i g h t i n g E n t e r p r i s e ( F C 4 8 ) 4, 3 0 2 , 2 2 2 4, 3 0 2 , 2 2 2 . 0 0 Wa t e r F u n d ( F C 5 1 ) 10 8 , 1 9 6 , 3 6 8 10 8 , 1 9 6 , 3 6 8 . 0 0 Se w e r F u n d ( F C 5 2 ) 19 6 , 6 3 0 , 9 0 7 19 6 , 6 3 0 , 9 0 7 . 0 0 St o r m W a t e r F u n d ( F C 5 3 ) 13 , 4 7 6 , 7 3 3 13 , 4 7 6 , 7 3 3 . 0 0 Ai r p o r t F u n d ( F C 5 4 , 5 5 , 5 6 ) 30 2 , 2 6 8 , 6 0 0 30 2 , 2 6 8 , 6 0 0 . 0 0 Re f u s e F u n d ( F C 5 7 ) 21 , 4 5 8 , 1 0 5 21 , 4 5 8 , 1 0 5 . 0 0 Go l f F u n d ( F C 5 9 ) 11 , 5 6 0 , 6 7 6 11 , 5 6 0 , 6 7 6 . 0 0 E- 9 1 1 F u n d ( F C 6 0 ) 3, 9 2 5 , 0 0 0 3, 9 2 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Fl e e t F u n d ( F C 6 1 ) 28 , 8 2 6 , 9 9 2 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 28 , 9 4 6 , 9 9 2 . 0 0 IM S F u n d ( F C 6 5 ) 30 , 5 2 3 , 1 6 7 30 , 5 2 3 , 1 6 7 . 0 0 Co u n t y Q u a r t e r C e n t S a l e s T a x f o r Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n ( F C 6 9 ) 9, 6 0 0 , 0 0 0 9, 6 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 CD B G O p e r a t i n g F u n d ( F C 7 1 ) 4, 6 7 0 , 5 1 7 4, 6 7 0 , 5 1 7 . 0 0 Mi s c e l l a n e o u s G r a n t s ( F C 7 2 ) 34 , 1 5 8 , 9 1 8 34 , 1 5 8 , 9 1 8 . 0 0 Ot h e r S p e c i a l R e v e n u e ( F C 7 3 ) 30 0 , 0 0 0 30 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Do n a t i o n F u n d ( F C 7 7 ) 2, 9 2 0 , 2 5 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2, 9 4 0 , 2 5 0 . 0 0 Ho u s i n g L o a n s & T r u s t ( F C 7 8 ) 16 , 2 1 7 , 0 0 0 16 , 2 1 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 De b t S e r v i c e F u n d ( F C 8 1 ) 32 , 0 3 7 , 9 8 9 32 , 0 3 7 , 9 8 9 . 0 0 CI P F u n d ( F C 8 3 , 8 4 & 8 6 ) 35 , 4 6 0 , 3 8 7 5 , 5 3 0 , 9 1 6 . 0 0 40 , 9 9 1 , 3 0 3 . 0 0 Go v e r n m e n t a l I m m u n i t y ( F C 8 5 ) 3, 9 6 4 , 5 2 3 3, 9 6 4 , 5 2 3 . 0 0 Ri s k F u n d ( F C 8 7 ) 54 , 6 7 9 , 0 0 0 54 , 6 7 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 T o t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t I t e m s 1 , 3 4 4 , 1 8 0 , 3 2 2 5 , 6 7 0 , 9 1 6 . 0 0 - - - - 1, 3 4 9 , 8 5 1 , 2 3 8 . 0 0 Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n P r o p o s e d C o u n c i l A p p r o v e d 2 Fi s c a l Y e a r 2 0 2 2 - 2 3 B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 1 T o t a l E x p e n s e B A # 1 T o t a l B A # 2 T o t a l B A # 3 T o t a l B A # 4 T o t a l B A # 5 T o t a l T o t a l E x p e n s e Ge n e r a l F u n d ( F C 1 0 ) 42 5 , 5 3 7 , 4 0 8 4 7 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 42 6 , 0 1 2 , 4 0 8 . 0 0 Cu r b a n d G u t t e r ( F C 2 0 ) 3, 0 0 0 3, 0 0 0 . 0 0 DE A T a s k F o r c e F u n d ( F C 4 1 ) 1, 7 6 2 , 5 6 0 1, 7 6 2 , 5 6 0 . 0 0 Mi s c S p e c i a l S e r v i c e D i s t r i c t s ( F C 4 6 ) 1, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 1, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 St r e e t L i g h t i n g E n t e r p r i s e ( F C 4 8 ) 5, 7 5 7 , 8 2 5 5, 7 5 7 , 8 2 5 . 0 0 Wa t e r F u n d ( F C 5 1 ) 13 2 , 7 5 2 , 8 1 5 13 2 , 7 5 2 , 8 1 5 . 0 0 Se w e r F u n d ( F C 5 2 ) 25 5 , 9 1 4 , 5 8 0 25 5 , 9 1 4 , 5 8 0 . 0 0 St o r m W a t e r F u n d ( F C 5 3 ) 18 , 6 9 9 , 7 2 2 18 , 6 9 9 , 7 2 2 . 0 0 Ai r p o r t F u n d ( F C 5 4 , 5 5 , 5 6 ) 38 4 , 6 8 1 , 6 7 1 38 4 , 6 8 1 , 6 7 1 . 0 0 Re f u s e F u n d ( F C 5 7 ) 24 , 9 5 2 , 6 7 2 24 , 9 5 2 , 6 7 2 . 0 0 Go l f F u n d ( F C 5 9 ) 14 , 7 2 6 , 0 1 6 14 , 7 2 6 , 0 1 6 . 0 0 E- 9 1 1 F u n d ( F C 6 0 ) 3, 8 0 0 , 3 8 5 3, 8 0 0 , 3 8 5 . 0 0 Fl e e t F u n d ( F C 6 1 ) 30 , 4 2 6 , 0 3 2 4 , 0 1 1 , 3 6 0 . 0 0 34 , 4 3 7 , 3 9 2 . 0 0 IM S F u n d ( F C 6 5 ) 30 , 5 2 3 , 1 6 7 30 , 5 2 3 , 1 6 7 . 0 0 Co u n t y Q u a r t e r C e n t S a l e s T a x f o r Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n ( F C 6 9 ) 9, 4 5 8 , 7 4 8 9, 4 5 8 , 7 4 8 . 0 0 CD B G O p e r a t i n g F u n d ( F C 7 1 ) 4, 9 5 8 , 4 3 3 4, 9 5 8 , 4 3 3 . 0 0 Mi s c e l l a n e o u s G r a n t s ( F C 7 2 ) 26 , 6 1 4 , 1 5 3 26 , 6 1 4 , 1 5 3 . 0 0 Ot h e r S p e c i a l R e v e n u e ( F C 7 3 ) 30 0 , 0 0 0 30 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Do n a t i o n F u n d ( F C 7 7 ) 28 7 , 2 5 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 30 7 , 2 5 0 . 0 0 Ho u s i n g L o a n s & T r u s t ( F C 7 8 ) 25 , 7 7 9 , 2 5 3 25 , 7 7 9 , 2 5 3 . 0 0 De b t S e r v i c e F u n d ( F C 8 1 ) 33 , 6 5 8 , 5 5 8 33 , 6 5 8 , 5 5 8 . 0 0 CI P F u n d ( F C 8 3 , 8 4 & 8 6 ) 35 , 4 6 0 , 3 8 7 9 , 8 4 2 , 2 5 1 . 0 0 45 , 3 0 2 , 6 3 8 . 0 0 Go v e r n m e n t a l I m m u n i t y ( F C 8 5 ) 3, 1 6 9 , 7 6 7 3, 1 6 9 , 7 6 7 . 0 0 Ri s k F u n d ( F C 8 7 ) 54 , 6 7 9 , 0 0 0 54 , 6 7 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - T o t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t I t e m s 1 , 5 2 5 , 6 0 3 , 4 0 2 1 4 , 3 4 8 , 6 1 1 . 0 0 - - - - 1, 5 3 9 , 9 5 2 , 0 1 3 . 0 0 Bu d g e t M a n a g e r An a l y s t , C i t y C o u n c i l Co n t i n g e n t A p p r o p r i a t i o n 3 Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 1 Section A: New Items A-1:Bridge to Backman Community Open Space Donation Allocation CIP $20,000.00 Donation $20,000.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Kat Maus, Gregg Evans For Questions Please Include: Kristen Riker, Gregg Evans, Kat Maus Public Lands is requesting a budget amendment to allocate a $20,000 donation from the Salt Lake Education Foundation specifically to the Backman Open Space project, currently ongoing. Salt Lake Education Foundation received a $10,000 Governor's Office of Outdoor Recreation grant specifically for the Backman Community Open Space Project, which was matched with $10,000 by the Tony Finau Foundation. The desire is now for these funds to be donated to the City to be used for the project. To fulfill the requirements of the grant, the donation will have to be used for this specific project. The Backman Community Open Space Project is developing a piece of Public Lands owned property just west of Backman Elementary and the Jordan River, at approximately 600 N. and 1500 W. This project follows the installation of a bridge between the Community Open Space and Backman Elementary, providing direct access to the school from a nearby nonprofit housing development. The open space, which is currently unutilized as park space and is overtaken by invasive vegetation, will be developed into an outdoor classroom that is also open to the public as a park. The project includes installation of irrigation to allow for native plantings and trees, a looped path connecting the site to access points to the park, an outdoor, naturalized gathering and seating area with a shade structure, and associated amenities such as benches and picnic tables. This project is projected to be completed in Fall 2022. The full scope of this project will not be able to be fulfilled without this donation, and to maximize efficiency of funding and construction, the project team sees great benefit in completing this project in one phase. Public Lands has done due diligence and finds no reason to reject this donation proposal and specifically allocate the funding to the Backman Community Open Space project. A-2: Vehicles for New CAN Positions GF $120,000.00 Fleet $120,000.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Ken Thomas/Brent Beck For Questions Please Include: Blake Thomas, Brent Beck, Ken Thomas The three vehicles that are requested are for the three new positions we received in the 2023 budget. Two positions are for Building Inspections and one position is for Civil Enforcement. These vehicles were requested by CAN but not transferred into the original budget request. The numbers that have been provided are estimates due to the continual increase in cost and the lack of availability. Estimated cost for 3 vehicles (from Fleet) Inspections: $45,000 ea. x2 = $90,000 (4 wd needed) (2) Ford Hybrid Civil Enforcement: $30,000 (1) Chevrolet Volt Total: $120,000 A-3: Forestry Director Reclassification GF $0.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Gregg Evans For Questions Please Include: Kristen Riker, Gregg Evans Department of Public Lands is requesting a FY23 a $0 housekeeping budget amendment to reclassify the current Forestry Division Director to an appointed position (grade 35). Public Lands will reallocate existing budget to fund this item. The Forestry Division Director is a crucial position that manages all aspects of the City's urban forest growth and preservation needs. Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 2 The Urban Forestry Division Director manages a multi-million dollar budget and team of skilled trade professionals that provide individualized customer service to thousands of city residents every year. The position requires expertise in a specialized biological science and the ability to apply and relate that knowledge to diverse city priorities and challenges. Aside from working directly and regularly with numerous other City Departments and Divisions (including Public Utilities, Building Services, Planning, Public Services and Engineering) on City projects and priorities, the Urban Forestry Director must see to the delivery of professional grade productivity and quantifiable residential service. The combination of skills, productivity, publicity attached to the Urban Forestry Division Director position should merit a compensation class consistent with Division Directors throughout and Public Lands Departments. A-4: GO Bond Public Outreach and Engagement GF $150,000.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Kristen Riker/Gregg Evans For Questions Please Include: Lisa Shaffer, Kristen Riker, Gregg Evans The Public Lands Department is requesting a budget amendment of $150,000 to hire a consultant to provide public engagement efforts related to the general obligation bond, or GO bond. This general obligation bond, is a municipal bond to raise money for City Parks projects to be voted on by Salt Lake City residents on the November 2022 ballot. The terms of the GO bond will be to repay the entire funded amount in 20 years through a tax on residential properties and business owners. The City may spend funds promoting the proposed GO bond by providing factual information about the proposition, delivering a voter information pamphlet, with neutral encouragement to get SLC residents out to vote. Public Lands is seeking engagement assistance to advocate and educate the public about how the GO bond will meet current and future open space, air and water quality needs of the City as well as relating the benefits to the Reimagine Nature Master Plan. The efforts of this engagement will create City-wide understanding and talking points around the bond, why it is important and the benefits the bond will bring to residents. This project will help mitigate any confusion about why the City is interested in a bond and our intentions in how the funds will be spent. Engagement Methods (Must be bilingual): 1. Online survey, project web page, FB Live(s), Community Council presentations, event tabling, intercept surveys in parks, business group presentations, stakeholder meetings, op-eds, board and commissions messaging 2. Video/Social on value of Public Lands 3. Ads, signage, paint stencils, logo, social media hashtag Requested funding amount mirrors the Funding our Future effort with an adjustment (reduction in $$) to the time available to complete education engagement efforts. Approximately $400,000 was spent to assist the City with education about Funding our Future tax dollars. A-5: Allocate Impact Fees for Road Project CIP $3,111,335.00 Department: Prepared By: Dustin Peterson For Questions Please Include: Jorge Chamorro, Dawn Valente, Dustin Peterson The following road projects are included in Engineering's six-year plan and are primarily funded by the $87 Million Road Bond. These road segments are all eligible for Impact Fees and are included in the amendment to the Impact Fee Facility Plan (IFFP) adopted by Council in the fall of 2020. The impact fees will help to supplement the projects as they exceed their original budget. Following is a list of the projects along with the eligible amount as listed in the IFFP and the percentage of the project that is eligible for use of Impact Fees. Project Name Eligible Amount Percent 200 South $ 915,151.00 9.00% 300 North $ 154,739.00 8.00% Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 3 1100 East/Highland Drive $ 500,728.00 7.00% Virginia Street $ 141,663.00 9.00% 1300 East $ 812,805.00 7.00% West Temple $ 338,633.00 7.00% 900 South $ 171,944.00 6.00% 1700 East $ 158,570.00 7.00% 2100 South $ 660,410.00 8.00% Sub Total $ 3,854,643.00 Less Existing Cost Cemter 8420125 $ 743,308.00 TOTAL REQUEST: $ 3,111,335.00 A-6: Pulled Prior to Submission $0.00 A-7: Rail Spur Removal GF $205,000.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Shellie Peterson/Tammy Hunsaker For Questions Please Include: Blake Thomas, Tammy Hunsaker, Shellie Peterson, Brent Beck The property on which this rail spur is located was conveyed in 1997 by the City to a private party, with partial consideration for this conveyance being an easement to construct, operate, and maintain a railroad spur and associated facilities. Pursuant to an Amended and Restated Easement and Boundary Line Agreement, executed on July 3, 2000, the easement shall terminate if the City ceases to use the rail spur for more than one year, and that the City shall remove the xpense. Since the rail spur has not been used for over one year, the City is contractually obligated to remove it. Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section D: Housekeeping D-1: 200 South Transit Corridor and Complete Street CIP $1,314,900.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Brent Beck For Questions Please Include: Blake Thomas, Brent Beck, Salt Lake City is reconstructing 200 South in 2022 (Phase 1: 900 East to 200 East) and 2023 (Phase 2: 200 East to 400 West). UTA has participated in the planning and design activities of the project and has agreed to support the project by providing direct financial reimbursement to SLC for construction expenses that UTA has requested to include in the Project, such as installation of conduit/junction boxes for electric power and fiber optic communication to the bus boarding platforms. The contribution from UTA to cover these added expenses is estimated to be $1,314,900. As the current Interlocal is not yet signed, we would like to request Council post budgets to a holding account if the agreements are not signed by the time the budget amendment is reviewed by Council. Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 4 D-2: CIP Transfer for GF Security CIP $1,200,000.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: John Vuyk For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk As part of the budget adoption the City Council used funds that were transferred to CIP in BA#7 of FY22 for Building security. The transfer from the CIP fund back to the general fund was not included in the budget adoption. This amendment is to correct that. D-3: Dee Glen Tennis Surety Company Reimbursement CIP $705,016.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dustin Peterson For Questions Please Include: Jorge Chamorro, Dustin Peterson, Dawn Valente In the Summer of 2020 the City hired Pine Tree Construction (Pine Tree) to build the Dee Glen Tennis Center. The project was funded by a grant from Salt Lake County. Unfortunately, Pine Tree struggled from the beginning of the project. The City put forth their best effort to help Pine Tree succeed on the project, but unfortunately the City had to terminate their contract with Pine Tree in the Fall of 2021 as it became apparent that Pine Tree would no longer be able to fulfill their contractual obligations. The City immediately notified the Surety, Western National Mutual Insurance Company (WNMIC), holding the performance bond, as it intended to file a claim on the bond. Working with WNMIC, the claim was approved in early-2022. WNMIC, via their Consultant, J.S.Held, facilitated a bidding effort to identify a replacement contractor. Bids were received on April 28, 2022, and WNMIC recommended the City proceed to enter into a contract with Paulsen Construction (Paulsen). WNMIC, via a Tender Agreement with the City, provided this additional funding to the project to pay the City for the additional cost to have Paulsen complete the project as well a compensation the City for a few, minor expenses incurred by the City as a direct result of the Pine Tree termination. At the time of this BA submittal, the City is nearly complete with the Paulsen agreement, and will use what exists in the remaining project funding to partially award the contract to Paulsen. This additional money received from WNMIC will be used to fund the remaining contract with Paulsen as well as pay for the remaining soft costs associated with the project. D-4: Remaining FY22 Fleet Vehicle Purchases Fleet $3,891,360.00 Department: Public Services (Fleet) Prepared By: Dustin Peterson/Denise Sorenson For Questions Please Include: Jorge Chamorro, Nancy Bean, Dustin Peterson, Denise Sorenson Public Services Fleet is requesting for encumbrance rollover funds for FY22 vehicle purchases. These vehicles were unavailable to source in FY22 due to supply chain issues. Vehicles are still needed and will be ordered as soon as they become available. D-5: Foothill Sunnyside CIP $91,000.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Lynn Jacobs/Brent Beck For Questions Please Include: Blake Thomas, Lynn Jacobs, Brent Beck Salt Lake City is partnering with UDOT and the University of Utah (Research Park) to reconstruct the northeast corner of Foothill Drive / Sunnyside Avenue intersection. We are completing this project to improve pedestrian comfort and safety at this critically important location. This area is currently part of the Sunnyside Trail and will be part of the 9-Line trail in the future. UDOT has committed to contribute funding towards this project as demonstrated in the attached cooperative agreement. This budget amendment item is intended to reimburse our trails funding source for the portion of the project that UDOT contributed to. As the current Interlocal is not yet signed, we would like to request Council post budgets to a holding account if the agreements are not signed by the time the budget amendment is reviewed by Council. Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 5 D-6: UTA Contribution to Orange Street Mobility Hub CIP $1,000,000.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Julianne Sabula/Brent Beck For Question Please Include: Blake Thomas, Tammy Hunsaker, Julianne Sabula, Brent Beck The Orange Street Mobility Hub is being constructed by Salt Lake City to support several frequent east -west bus routes that City Council identified as top priorities from the Transit Master Plan. The facility provides a location for buses to lay over for electric charging, operator breaks and to reverse direction, as well as for passengers to transfer between bus routes and other modes, such as the Westside On-Demand service and GreenBike. UTA has agreed verbally and via email to a contribution of $1 million for the facility, and we have been working with them in earnest to finalize a cost-sharing agreement. This amendment will accept that contribution into the City's budget. As the current Interlocal is not yet signed, we would like to request Council post budgets to a holding account if the agreements are not signed by the time the budget amendment is reviewed by Council. D-7: Rescope Allen Park Renovation and Facilities Roofing Project CIP $0.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Gregg Evans/Dawn Valente For Questions Please Include: Kristen Riker, Gregg Evans This budget amendment requests a funding source rescope for two CIP projects; the Allen Park Renovations Project (8321404) and the Parks Building Roofing Project within the Facilities Capital Renewal fund (8322700). This budget amendment requests a change to project funding sources from bond funds to general funds to better align project deadlines with funding deadlines on these projects. Changing the funding source will allow the bond funds to be spent before the final bond expiration period. The amendment proposes to move the Facilities Parks Building Roofing Project funding to bond funding. This project is beginning and will be able to meet the time critical portion of the bond funding. The project has been determined to be bond eligible. The Allen Park Renovations Project will then be moved from bond funding to general funds allowing for the necessary time to complete the project in FY23. The Allen Park Projects in process include structural assessment of critical structures, roof repair of failing historic structure(s), and design and construction of water lines to provide critical irrigation, water and sewer, and fire suppression to the site. D-8: Road Bond Adjustments CIP $0.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dustin Peterson For Questions Please Include: Jorge Chamorro, Dawn Valente, Dustin Peterson Local Streets Project - Cost Center 8320205 - These local street projects are complete and there are remaining funds in the amount of $178,623.04 in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 8320209 so they can be used on that project specifically. 900 East Project - Cost Center 8320207 - This project is nearing completion and does have remaining bond funds in the amount of $13,274.42 in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 8320209 so they can be used on that project specifically. 100 South Project - Cost Center 8320208 - This project is nearing completion and does have remaining bond funds in the amount of $501,513.01in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 83202109 so they can be used on that project specifically. Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources E-1: Utah Dept. of Transportation, 600/700 N Active Transportation Improvements CIP $2,400,000.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: Ann Garcia Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 6 For Questions Please Include: John Vuyk, Mary Beth Thompson, Ann Garcia, Melyn Osmond Salt Lake City Division of Transportation nominated 600/700 North Active Transportation Improvements (2200 West to 300 West) for $2,400,000 from the TIF: Transit Projects funding. The project installs four mid-block pedestrian crossings, curb extensions at three intersections, and raised separated bicycle lanes. This grant has a match requirement of $1,600,000. The match will be funded through the cost center 83-22627 earmarked for the reconstruction project. Total funding for the project will be $4,000,000. A public hearing was held 02/18/2020 for the original grant application for this award. Section F: Donations Section G: Consent Agenda Consent Agenda Section I: Council Added Items Impact Fees Summary Confidential Data pulled 07/01/2022 Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area Area Cost Center UnAllocated Cash Notes: Impact fee - Police 8484001 846,150$ A Impact fee - Fire 8484002 1,156,234$ B Impact fee - Parks 8484003 15,216,578$ C Impact fee - Streets 8484005 8,061,854$ D 25,280,816$ Expiring Amounts: by Major Area, by Month 202107 (Jul2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202108 (Aug2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202109 (Sep2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202110 (Oct2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202111 (Nov2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202112 (Dec2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202201 (Jan2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202202 (Feb2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202203 (Mar2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202204 (Apr2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202205 (May2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Current Month 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 2024 0$ -$ -$ -$ 0$ Fiscal Quarter E = A + B + C + D Police Fire Parks Streets TotalCalendar Month Impact Fees Confidential Data pulled 07/01/2022 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 Expenditures Sum of Police Allocation Remaining Appropriation ReimbExcessPoliceCapacity IF 8422800 1,898,497$ -$ 1,898,497$ -$ Police'sConsultant'sContract 8419205 3,565$ -$ 3,565$ -$ Public Safety Building Replcmn 8405005 14,068$ 14,068$ -$ 0$ Eastside Precint 8419201 21,639$ -$ -$ 21,639$ Police Impact Fee Refunds 8421102 338,448$ -$ 100,842$ 237,606.45$ Grand Total 2,276,217$ 14,068$ 2,002,903$ 259,246$ A 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 Expenditures Sum of Fire Allocation Remaining Appropriation Fire'sConsultant'sContract 8419202 4,941$ 3,021$ 1,862$ 58$ FY20 FireTrainingFac. 8420431 56,031$ -$ -$ 56,031$ Fire Station #3 Debt Service 8422200 483,233$ -$ 483,233$ -$ Grand Total 1,045,105$ 3,021$ 985,995$ 56,089$ B Parks Allocation Budget Amended Allocation Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining AppropriationValues Description Cost Center Sum of Parks Allocation Budget Amended Sum of Parks Allocation Encumbrances Sum of Parks Allocation YTD Expenditures Sum of Parks Allocation Remaining Appropriation Cnty #2 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420426 88$ -$ 88$ -$ Warm Springs Off Leash 8420132 20,411$ -$ 20,411$ -$ Fairmont Park Lighting Impr 8418004 49,752$ -$ 49,752$ -$ Fisher Carriage House 8420130 1,098,764$ 261,187$ 837,577$ -$ Park'sConsultant'sContract 8419204 4,857$ 2,596$ 2,219$ 42$ 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$ 92,027$ 130,574$ 1,646$ Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 2,946$ -$ -$ 2,946$ ImperialParkShadeAcct'g 8419103 10,830$ -$ 4,433$ 6,398$ FY Rich Prk Comm Garden 8420138 12,795$ 4,328$ -$ 8,467$ Redwood Meadows Park Dev 8417014 9,350$ -$ -$ 9,350$ 9line park 8416005 21,958$ 855$ 2,692$ 18,411$ IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 58,014$ -$ 1,905$ 56,109$ UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 135,084$ 21,169$ 12,803$ 101,112$ Fisher House Exploration Ctr 8421401 523,889$ 374,573$ 39,040$ 110,276$ FY20 Bridge to Backman 8420430 722,920$ 116,388$ 480,599$ 125,933$ C Three Creeks West Bank NewPark 8422403 150,736$ -$ -$ 150,736$ 9Line Orchard 8420136 195,045$ 12,423$ 28,477$ 154,145$ RAC Playground with ShadeSails 8422415 180,032$ -$ -$ 180,032$ Cnty #1 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420424 388,477$ 16,762$ 117,939$ 253,777$ Trailhead Prop Acquisition 8421403 275,000$ -$ -$ 275,000$ Bridge to Backman 8418005 290,276$ 10,285$ 4,515$ 275,475$ SLC Foothills Land Acquisition 8422413 425,000$ -$ 105,861$ 319,139$ Parley's Trail Design & Constr 8417012 327,678$ -$ -$ 327,678$ Jordan Prk Event Grounds 8420134 431,000$ 24,953$ -$ 406,047$ Historic Renovation AllenParK 8422410 420,000$ -$ -$ 420,000$ Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 489,688$ 29,235$ 35,098$ 425,355$ Jordan Park Pedestrian Pathway 8422414 510,000$ 44,362$ -$ 465,638$ Green loop 200 E Design 8422408 610,000$ -$ -$ 610,000$ Emigration Open Space ACQ 8422423 700,000$ -$ -$ 700,000$ Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 1,094,430$ 33,364$ 47,318$ 1,013,749$ SLCFoothillsTrailheadDevelpmnt 8422412 1,304,682$ -$ -$ 1,304,682$ Pioneer Park 8419150 3,343,904$ 86,260$ 179,148$ 3,078,497$ GlendaleWtrprk MstrPln&Rehab 8422406 3,200,000$ 17,400$ 22,152$ 3,160,449$ Grand Total 17,281,123$ 1,174,504$ 2,142,322$ 13,964,297$ 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 Expenditures Sum of Street Allocation Remaining Appropriation 9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 152,500$ 68,924$ 83,576$ -$ 700 South Reconstruction 8415004 2,449$ -$ 2,449$ -$ Trans Master Plan 8419006 13,000$ 13,000$ -$ -$ Trans Safety Improvements 8419007 95,653$ 12,768$ 82,180$ 705$ 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$ 500 to 700 S 8418016 96,637$ -$ 73,893$ 22,744$ Corridor Transformations IF 8422608 25,398$ -$ -$ 25,398$ 900 South 9Line RR Cross IF 8422604 28,000$ -$ -$ 28,000$ Transportatn Safety Imprvmt IF 8422620 44,400$ 13,090$ -$ 31,310$ D 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$ Local Link Construction IF 8422606 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$ 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$ -$ 18,154$ 181,846$ TransportationSafetyImprov IF 8421500 302,053$ 53,713$ 9,608$ 238,732$ Street Improve Reconstruc 20 8420125 2,250,220$ 396,873$ 1,470,038$ 383,309$ IF Complete Street Enhancement 8421502 625,000$ -$ -$ 625,000$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8419008 221,688$ -$ 221,238$ 450$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8420105 300,000$ 77,706$ 222,294$ -$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 875,000$ 67,474$ 19,589$ 787,937$ Grand Total 5,967,404$ 840,578$ 2,220,710$ 2,906,116$ Total 26,566,261$ 2,032,171$ 7,348,343$ 17,185,748$ E = A + B + C + D TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE $1,156,234 UnAllocated Budget Amount 8484001 846,150$ 25,280,816$ 8484002 8484003 8484005 15,216,578$ 8,061,854$ 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/SLCFY23 TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke, Sylvia Richards Budget and Policy Analysts DATE:September 6, 2022 RE: Budget Amendment Number One FY2023 ________________________________________________________________________________ NEW INFORMATION On August 16, the Council held the first briefing and a public hearing, then closed the public hearing and adopted two items: A-4: GO (General Obligation) Bond Public Education ($150,000 from General Fund Balance), and D-2: CIP Transfer for General Fund Security ($1,200,000 from CIP Fund to General Fund). There are two new Council- added items since the first briefing. In order to add the two new items to Budget Amendment No. 1, on August 29, the Council will reconsider the motion to close the public hearing on August 16th and set a continued hearing date for September 6th. During the August 16 briefing, the Council received an update on item I-3: Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation State Grant. The Administration confirmed receipt of final grant award notification from the State. The award is just under $2.75 million. Ongoing costs of $2.2 million are anticipated to be requested from the same grant funding in future years. See Attachment 1 for details on the 13 new grant funded FTEs, and the subaward to Volunteers of America. Council Members discussed the importance of performance metrics to show how the funds are making a positive impact and to support the City’s application next year. New Council Added Items: I-4: Governmental Immunity Fund Adjustment ($2 million from Insurance Payment) The Administration has asked the Council to adjust the Governmental Immunity Fund budget in recognition of a $2 million insurance payment. This item would recognize the revenue and expenditure within the Governmental Immunity Fund. I-5: Outdoor Business Activity Grant Pilot Program Transfer ($100,000 from the EDLF to General Fund) The Administration indicates that the one-time funding for the Outdoor Business Activity Grant program is currently residing in the Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF). The funding needs to be transferred to the General Fund because forgivable loans are not permitted by the EDLF guidelines. The Council held a briefing on August 16 about the proposed pilot program guidelines. The program would provide up to $5,000 for outdoor dining/retail costs or $10,000 for costs incurred in hosting an “Open Streets” event. The Council’s requested changes to the guidelines are listed below. At the time of publishing this staff report the Administration was working to update the guidelines to incorporate the Council’s policy feedback. 1. The Council requested a reporting mechanism, once applications close, to be included in a transmittal for a written briefing. The transmittal will include details of the applicants, such as their location, size, whether Project Timeline: Set Date: August 9, 2022 1st Briefing: August 16, 2022 Public Hearing & Partial Adoption: August 16, 2022 2nd Briefing: September 6, 2022 Public Hearing & Potential Vote: Sept. 6, 2022 Page | 2 all of the available funding was awarded to grantees. Future analytics would include how well the businesses performed; was it a fruitful investment? 2. The Council would like the grant funding to be made available to businesses to use for prior purchases as well as future expenses. 3. The Council would like to ensure that businesses which received the reduced leases be included in the notification process for the grant program. This information below was previously provided by the 8/16/22 briefing. It is provided again for convenience. Budget Amendment Number One includes sixteen proposed amendments and requested changes to four funds. Total expenditures coming from fund balance are $600,000. If all the items are adopted as proposed, then Fund Balance would be $16,278,448 or 16.83% above the 13% minimum target established by the Council in FY2020. Revenue for FY2023 Budget Adjustments The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for Fiscal Year 2023. As this is the first budget amendment of the new fiscal year, there are no revenue projection updates to report at this time. Fund Balance The Administration’s chart below shows the current General Fund Balance figures. Page | 3 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 July 1, 2022. As a result, the City is on- track with impact fee budgeting to have no refunds during all FY2023 and FY2024. The Administration reports work is nearing completion to update the fire and parks sections of the impact fee plan. The transportation section was updated last year. Eligible projects for police impact fees are being identified. Note that the Council is currently considering impact fee eligible projects as part of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget. Type Unallocated Cash “Available to Spend”Next Refund Trigger Date Amount of Expiring Impact Fees Fire $1,156,234 More than a year away - Parks $15,216,578 More than a year away - Police $846,150 More than a year away - Transportation $8,061,854 More than a year away - Note: Encumbrances are an administrative function when impact fees are held under a contract Section A: New Items (note: to expedite the processing of this staff report, staff has included the Administration’s descriptions from the transmittal for some of these items) Page | 4 A-1: Bridge to Backman Community Open Space Donation ($20,000 from Salt Lake Education Foundation to CIP Fund) Public Lands is requesting a budget amendment to allocate a $20,000 donation from the Salt Lake Education Foundation specifically to the Backman Open Space project, currently ongoing. Salt Lake Education Foundation received a $10,000 Governor's Office of Outdoor Recreation grant specifically for the Backman Community Open Space Project, which was matched with $10,000 by the Tony Finau Foundation. The desire is now for these funds to be donated to the City to be used for the project. To fulfill the requirements of the grant, the donation will have to be used for this specific project. Background - The Backman Community Open Space Project is developing a piece of Public Lands owned property just west of Backman Elementary and the Jordan River, at approximately 600 N. and 1500 W. This project follows the installation of a bridge between the Community Open Space and Backman Elementary, providing direct access to the school from a nearby nonprofit housing development. The open space, which is currently unutilized as park space and is overtaken by invasive vegetation, will be developed into an outdoor classroom that is also open to the public as a park. This project is projected to be completed in Fall 2022. The full scope of this project will not be able to be fulfilled without this donation, and to maximize efficiency of funding and construction, the project team sees great benefit in completing this project in one phase.. The Council approved over $1.1 million for the bridge and adjacent open space project. A-2: Purchase of Vehicles for New Community & Neighborhoods Department ($120,000 from General Fund Balance to Fleet Fund) Three vehicles that are requested are for the three new positions added in the 2023 budget. Two positions are for Building Inspections and one position is for Civil Enforcement. These vehicles were requested by CAN but not transferred into the original budget request. The numbers that have been provided are estimates due to the continual increase in cost and the lack of availability. Estimated cost for 3 vehicles (from Fleet) Inspections: $45,000 ea. x2 = $90,000 (4 wd needed) (2) Ford Hybrid Civil Enforcement: $30,000 - (1) Chevrolet Volt Total: $120,000 A-3: WITHDRAWN A-4: GO (General Obligation) Bond Public Outreach and Engagement ($150,000 from General Fund Balance) The Public Lands Department is requesting a budget amendment of $150,000 to hire a consultant to provide public engagement efforts related to the general obligation bond, or GO bond, to be voted on by Salt Lake City residents on the November 2022 ballot. The City may spend funds promoting the proposed GO bond by providing factual information about the proposition, delivering a voter information pamphlet, with neutral encouragement to get SLC residents out to vote. Public Lands is seeking engagement assistance to educate the public about how the GO bond will meet current and future open space, air and water quality needs of the City as well as relating the benefits to the Reimagine Nature Master Plan. Engagement Methods (Must be bilingual): 1. Online survey, project web page, FB Live(s), Community Council presentations, event tabling, intercept surveys in parks, business group presentations, stakeholder meetings, op-eds, board and commissions messaging 2. Video/Social on value of Public Lands 3. Ads, signage, paint stencils, logo, social media hashtag The Department identified $46,000 of unspent funds from a prior bond effort which could also be used for public education about the proposed GO bond. Staff note: The Council could consider closing the public hearing and voting to adopt this funding the same night on August 16 given the short time remaining between potentially placing the GO bond on the ballot and when vote by mail ballots are delivered to voters in October. A-5: Allocate Transportation Impact Fees for Street Reconstruction Projects ($3,111,335 from CIP Fund for Nine Projects) The following road projects are included in Engineering's six-year plan and are primarily funded by the $87 Million Page | 5 Road Bond. These road segments are all eligible for Impact Fees and are included in the amendment to the Impact Fee Facility Plan (IFFP) adopted by Council in the fall of 2020. The impact fees will help to supplement the projects as they exceed their original budget. Following is a list of the projects along with the eligible amount as listed in the IFFP and the percentage of the project that is eligible for use of Impact Fees. Project Name Eligible Amount Percent 200 South $ 915,151.oo 9.00% 300 North $ 154,739.00 8.00% 1100 East/Highland Drive $ 500,728.00 7.00% Virginia Street $ 141,663.00 9.00% 1300 East $ 812,805.00 7.00% West Temple $ 338,633.00 7.00% 900 South $ 171,944.00 6.00% 1700 East $ 158,570.00 7.00% 2100 South $ 660,410.00 8.00% Subtotal $3,854,643.00 Less Existing Cost Center 8420125 $ (743,308.00) TOTAL REQUEST $3,111,335.00 The Engineering Division is reviewing the eligibility for the street reconstruction projects to confirm the proposed budgets maximize the allowable use of transportation impact fees. If additional eligibility is identified, then the Division indicates a request will be included in a future budget opening. This may be the last batch of street reconstruction projects to use matching transportation impact fees with funds from the 2018 voter-approved $87 million General Obligation Bond. Note that some of the listed projects have funding gaps such as 900 South reconstruction with a nearly $2 million gap. Funding requests to cover the gaps are anticipated in future budget openings and CIP cycles. Existing Class C (gas tax) funding may also be used to fill the gaps. A-6: PULLED PRIOR TO TRANSMITTAL A-7: Rail Spur Removal ($205,000 from General Fund Balance) The rail spur at 600 West and 500 South was conveyed in 1997 by the City to a private party, with partial consideration for this conveyance being an easement to construct, operate, and maintain a railroad spur and associated facilities. Since the rail spur has not been used for over one year, the City is contractually obligated to remove it. There have been a couple similar rail spur removals in recent years. The Administration stated this is believed to be last rail spur removal in the area. Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section (None) Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section (None) Section D: Housekeeping D-1: UTA Contribution to 200 South Transit Corridor and Complete Street Improvements ($1,314,900 from UTA to CIP Fund) Salt Lake City is reconstructing 200 South in 2022 (Phase 1: 900 East to 200 East) and 2023 (Phase 2: 200 East to 400 West). UTA has participated in the planning and design activities of the project and has agreed to support the project by providing direct financial reimbursement to SLC for construction expenses that UTA has requested to include in the Project, such as installation of conduit/junction boxes for electric power and fiber optic communication to the bus boarding platforms. The contribution from UTA to cover these added expenses is estimated to be $1,314,900. As the current Interlocal is not yet signed, we would like to request Council post budgets to a holding account if the agreements are not signed by the time the budget amendment is reviewed by Council. Page | 6 The Administration states a draft interlocal agreement is currently being reviewing by the City and UTA. If the funding is placed in a holding account, then the Council would need to act in a future budget opening to release the funding. D-2: CIP Transfer for General Fund Security ($1,200,000 from CIP Fund to General Fund) As part of the budget adoption the City Council used funds that were transferred to CIP in BA#7 of FY22 for Building security. The transfer from the CIP fund back to the general fund was not included in the budget adoption. This amendment is to correct that. D-3: Dee Glen Tennis Surety Company Reimbursement ($705,016 to CIP Fund) In the Summer of 2020 the City hired Pine Tree Construction (Pine Tree) to build the Dee Glen Tennis Center. The project was funded by a grant from Salt Lake County. The City had to terminate their contract with Pine Tree in the Fall of 2021 as it became apparent that Pine Tree would no longer be able to fulfill their contractual obligations. The City immediately notified the Surety, Western National Mutual Insurance Company (WNMIC), holding the performance bond, as it intended to file a claim on the bond. Working with WNMIC, the claim was approved in early-2022. WNMIC, via their Consultant, J.S. Held, facilitated a bidding effort to identify a replacement contractor. Bids were received on April 28, 2022, and WNMIC recommended the City proceed to enter into a contract with Paulsen Construction (Paulsen). WNMIC, via a Tender Agreement with the City, provided this additional funding to the project to pay the City for the additional cost to have Paulsen complete the project as well a compensation the City for a few, minor expenses incurred by the City as a direct result of the Pine Tree termination. At the time of this budget amendment submittal, the City is nearly complete with the Paulsen agreement, and will use what exists in the remaining project funding to partially award the contract to Paulsen. This additional money received from WNMIC will be used to fund the remaining contract with Paulsen as well as pay for the remaining soft costs associated with the project. D-4: Re-appropriate FY2022 Fleet Vehicle Purchases ($3,891,360 from Fleet Fund Balance to Fleet Vehicle Replacement Fund) The Public Services Department is requesting the Council re-appropriate funds originally appropriated in FY2022 for vehicle purchases. These vehicles were unavailable to source before the end of FY2022 because of supply chain issues and limited ordering windows offered by vehicle manufacturers. The vehicles are still needed. If the re- appropriation is approved, then the vehicles would be ordered as soon as they become available. D-5: UDOT Contribution to Foothill Sunnyside Intersection Partial Reconstruction (Northeast corner Foothill Dr./Sunnyside Ave.) ($91,000 from UDOT to CIP Fund) Salt Lake City is partnering with UDOT and the University of Utah (Research Park) to reconstruct the northeast corner of Foothill Drive/ Sunnyside Avenue intersection. We are completing this project to improve pedestrian comfort and safety at this critically important location. This area is currently part of the Sunnyside Trail and will be part of the 9-Line trail in the future. UDOT has committed to contribute funding towards this project as demonstrated in the attached cooperative agreement. This budget amendment item is intended to reimburse our trails funding source for the portion of the project that UDOT contributed to. Note: After the transmittal was received, the City and UDOT signed an interlocal agreement for this contribution. D-6: UTA Contribution to Orange Street Mobility Hub ($1 million from UTA to CIP Fund) The Orange Street Mobility Hub is being constructed by Salt Lake City to support several frequent east-west bus routes that City Council identified as top priorities from the Transit Master Plan. The facility provides a location for buses to lay over for electric charging, operator breaks and to reverse direction, as well as for passengers to transfer between bus routes and other modes, such as the Westside On-Demand service and GreenBike. UTA has agreed verbally and via email to a contribution of $1 million for the facility, and we have been working with them in earnest to finalize a cost-sharing agreement. This amendment will accept that contribution into the City's budget. As the current Interlocal is not yet signed, the Administration would like to request Council post budgets to a holding account if the agreements are not signed by the time the budget amendment is reviewed by Council. The Administration states a draft interlocal agreement is currently being reviewing by the City and UTA. If the funding is placed in a holding account, then the Council would need to act in a future budget opening to release the funding. The mobility hub would support implementation of the Frequent Transit Network which is part of the Funding Our Future initiative. Page | 7 D-7: Rescope Allen Park Renovation and Facilities Roofing Project ($331,342 Bond Funding) This budget amendment requests a funding source rescope for two CIP projects; the Allen Park Renovations Project (8321404) and the Parks Building Roofing Project within the Facilities Capital Renewal fund (8322700). This budget amendment requests a change to project funding sources from bond funds to general funds to better align project deadlines with funding deadlines on these projects. Changing the funding source will allow the bond funds to be spent before the final bond expiration period. The amendment proposes to move the Facilities Parks Building Roofing Project funding to bond funding. This project is beginning and will be able to meet the time critical portion of the bond funding. The project has been determined to be bond eligible. The Allen Park Renovations Project will then be moved from bond funding to general funds allowing for the necessary time to complete the project in FY23. The Allen Park Projects in process include structural assessment of critical structures, roof repair of failing historic structure(s), and design and construction of water lines to provide critical irrigation, water and sewer, and fire suppression to the site. The bond funds proposed to be rescoped must be spent by October 2022. The proposed rescope to fully use the remaining bond funds on the Parks Building roof replacement will meet the deadline as the project has already begun construction. Note that the rescope request and existing bond funds are separate from the proposed $80 million GO Bond for Parks and Public Lands projects. D-8: Streets Reconstruction Bond Adjustments ($693,411 from Reconstruction Projects Completed Under Budget to 900 South Reconstruction Project) Local Streets Project - Cost Center 8320205 - These local street projects are complete and there are remaining funds in the amount of $178,623.04 in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 8320209 so they can be used on that project specifically. 900 East Project - Cost Center 8320207 - This project is nearing completion and does have remaining bond funds in the amount of $13,274.42 in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 8320209 so they can be used on that project specifically. 100 South Project - Cost Center 8320208 - This project is nearing completion and does have remaining bond funds in the amount of $501,513.01 in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 83202109 so they can be used on that project specifically. Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources E-1: Utah Dept. of Transportation 600/700 North Active Transportation Improvements ($2,400,000 from CIP Fund) Salt Lake City Division of Transportation nominated 600/700 North Active Transportation Improvements (2200 West to 300 West) for $2,400,000 from the TIF: Transit Projects funding. The project installs four mid-block pedestrian crossings, curb extensions at three intersections, and raised separated bicycle lanes. This grant has a match requirement of $1,600,000. The match will be funded through the cost center 83-22627 earmarked for the reconstruction project. Total funding for the project will be $4,000,000. A public hearing was held February 18, 2020 for the original grant application for this award. Section F: Donations (None) Section G: Council Consent Agenda No. 3 (None) Section I: Council Added Items I-1: CIP True Up ($191,540 from General Fund Balance to CIP Fund) This is a housekeeping item. After reviewing old CIP accounts, the Finance Department identified several items which did not correctly account for interfund transfers between the General Fund and the CIP Fund. As a result, $191,541 is being transferred from the General Fund Balance to CIP which will make the CIP Fund whole. I-2: FY2023 Additional Funding for CIP Projects ($81,000 from General Fund Balance and $799,563 from Parks Impact Fees to CIP Fund) This is the budget step to implement the Council’s CIP project specific funding decisions. During the July and Page | 8 August CIP briefings, the Council decided to fund projects with parks impact fees and General Fund dollars. Those additional funds needs to be transferred into CIP for the specific projects since the funding was not part of the FY2023 annual budget adoption. This funding will be used for three projects: - $81,000 to study and create designs for improvements to the intersection of 1000 West 500 North potentially including a traffic circle (Project #27 on the CIP Funding Log) - $300,000 to add lighting to the northeast baseball field at Riverside Park (Project #94 on the CIP Funding Log) - $499,563 to create the Gateway Triangle Park (Project #69 on the CIP Funding Log) I-3: PLACEHOLDER: Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation Grant The Council closed the public hearing, added this grant to the Grant Holding Account Batch No. 2 and approved as part of the consent agenda on August 9, 2022. This item will close out the last step in the budgetary process to receive the grant funds. See Attachment 1 for the staff report about the grant. ATTACHMENTS 1. Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation Grant Staff Report from August 9 Council Meeting ACRONYMS CAN – Department of Community & Neighborhoods CCJJ – Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice CIP – Capital Improvement Program FTE – Full Time Equivalent Position FY – Fiscal Year GF – General Fund GO Bond – General Obligation Bond IFFP – Impact Fee Facility Plan TIF – Transportation Investment Fund UTA – Utah Transit Authority WNMIC – Western National Mutual Insurance Company DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238 PO BOX145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455 TEL 801-535-6394 ERINMENDENHALL Mayor MARY BETHTHOMPSON Chief Financial Officer CITYCOUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ___________________________________Date Received: ________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO:Salt Lake City Council DATE: August 2, 2022 Dan Dugan, Chair FROM:Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT:Budget Amendment #1 - Revised SPONSOR: NA STAFF CONTACT:John Vuyk, Budget Director (801) 535-6394 or Mary Beth Thompson (801) 535-6403 DOCUMENT TYPE: Budget Amendment Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that, subsequent to a public hearing, the City Council adopt the following amendments to the FY2022-23 adopted budget. BUDGET IMPACT: REVENUE EXPENSE GENERAL FUND $ 0.00)$ 475,000.00 FLEET FUND 120,000.00 4,011,360.00 DONATION FUND 20,000.00 20,000.00 CIP FUND 5,530,916.00 9,842,251.00 TOTAL $ 5,670,916.00 $ 14,348,611.00 8/2/2022 8/2/2022 Lisa Shaffer (Aug 2, 2022 15:08 MDT) BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Revenue for FY 2022-23 Budget Adjustments The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for fiscal year 2023. Because of the timing of this budget amendment no updates for fiscal year 2023 projections are available. The City has begun closing out fiscal year 2022 and will provide updates to Council as the audit progresses. In c l u d i n g p r o p o s e d c h a n g e s f o r B A # 1 f u n d b a l a n c e w o u l d b e p r o j e c t e d a s f o l l o w s f o r F Y 2 0 2 3 : Ad j u s t e d f u n d b a l a n c e i s p r o j e c t e d t o b e a t 1 6 . 8 5 % . The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $5,670,916.00 of revenue and expense of $14,348,611.00. The amendment proposes changes in four funds, with no new FTEs. The amendment also includes the use of $475,000.00 from the General Fund fund balance. The proposal includes fifteen 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 (First amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2022-2023) An Ordinance Amending Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 32 of 2022 which adopted the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2022 and Ending June 30, 2023. In June of 2022, the Salt Lake City Council adopted the final budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the employment staffing document, effective for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2022, and ending June 30, 2023, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-118 of the Utah Code. 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 2022. SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including amendments to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes 2 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 July 1, 2022 and ending June 30, 2023, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128 of the Utah Code. SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including 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 ATTEST: _______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. _________ of 2022. Published: ___________________. Approved As To Form ___Jaysen Oldroyd________ Jaysen Oldroyd In i t i a t i v e N u m b e r / N a m e F u n d R e v e n u e A m o u n t E x p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t R e v e n u e A m o u n t E x p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t On g o i n g o r O n e - ti m e FT E s 1 Br i d g e t o B a c k m a n C o m m u n i t y O p e n S p a c e Do n a t i o n A l l o c a t i o n Do n a t i o n 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 1 Br i d g e t o B a c k m a n C o m m u n i t y O p e n S p a c e Do n a t i o n A l l o c a t i o n CI P 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 2 V e h i c l e s f o r N e w C A N P o s i t i o n s G F - 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 2 V e h i c l e s f o r N e w C A N P o s i t i o n s F l e e t 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 3 F o r e s t r y D i r e c t o r R e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n G F - - O n - G o i n g - 4 G O B o n d P u b l i c O u t r e a c h a n d E n g a g e m e n t G F - 1 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 5 I m p a c t F e e s f o r R o a d P r o j e c t s C I P - 3 , 1 1 1 , 3 3 5 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 6 P u l l e d P r i o r t o T r a n s m i t t a l - - O n e T i m e - 7 R a i l S p u r R e m o v a l G F - 2 0 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 1 20 0 S o u t h T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r a n d C o m p l e t e St r e e t CI P 1 , 3 1 4 , 9 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 3 1 4 , 9 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 2 C I P T r a n s f e r f o r G F S e c u r i t y C I P - 1 , 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 3 De e G l e n T e n n i s S u r e t y C o m p a n y Re i m b u r s e m e n t CI P 7 0 5 , 0 1 6 . 0 0 7 0 5 , 0 1 6 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 4 R e m a i n i n g F Y 2 2 F l e e t V e h i c l e P u r c h a s e s F l e e t - 3 , 8 9 1 , 3 6 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 5 F o o t h i l l S u n n y s i d e C I P 9 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 6 UT A C o n t r i b u t i o n t o O r a n g e S t r e e t M o b i l i t y Hu b CI P 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - 7 Re s c o p e A l l e n P a r k R e n o v a t i o n a n d Fa c i l i t i e s R o o f i n g P r o j e c t CI P - - O n e T i m e - 8 R o a d B o n d A d j u s t m e n t s C I P - - O n e T i m e - Se c t i o n E : G r a n t s R e q u i r i n g N o N e w S t a f f R e s o u r c e s 1 Ut a h D e p t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , 6 0 0 / 7 0 0 N Ac t i v e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n I m p r o v e m e n t s CI P 2 , 4 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 , 4 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 O n e T i m e - - Co n s e n t A g e n d a # To t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t I t e m s 5 , 6 7 0 , 9 1 6 . 0 0 1 4 , 3 4 8 , 6 1 1 . 0 0 - - - Fi s c a l Y e a r 2 0 2 2 - 2 3 B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 1 Co u n c i l A p p r o v e d Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n P r o p o s e d Se c t i o n I : C o u n c i l A d d e d I t e m s Se c t i o n A : N e w I t e m s Se c t i o n D : H o u s e k e e p i n g Se c t i o n F : D o n a t i o n s Se c t i o n G : C o u n c i l C o n s e n t A g e n d a - - G r a n t A w a r d s Se c t i o n C : G r a n t s f o r N e w S t a f f R e s o u r c e s Se c t i o n B : G r a n t s f o r E x i s t i n g S t a f f R e s o u r c e s 1 Fi s c a l Y e a r 2 0 2 2 - 2 3 B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 1 In i t i a t i v e N u m b e r / N a m e F u n d R e v e n u e A m o u n t E x p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t R e v e n u e A m o u n t E x p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t On g o i n g o r O n e - ti m e FT E s To t a l b y F u n d C l a s s , B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 7 : Ge n e r a l F u n d GF - 4 7 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - - - Fl e e t F u n d Fl e e t 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 4 , 0 1 1 , 3 6 0 . 0 0 - - - Do n a t i o n F u n d Do n a t i o n 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - - - CI P F u n d CI P 5 , 5 3 0 , 9 1 6 . 0 0 9 , 8 4 2 , 2 5 1 . 0 0 - - - - - - To t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t I t e m s 5 , 6 7 0 , 9 1 6 . 0 0 1 4 , 3 4 8 , 6 1 1 . 0 0 - - - Cu r r e n t Y e a r B u d g e t S u m m a r y , p r o v i d e d f o r i n f o r m a t i o n o n l y FY 2 0 2 1 - 2 2 B u d g e t , I n c l u d i n g B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t s FY 2 0 2 2 - 2 3 Ad o p t e d B u d g e t BA # 1 T o t a l B A # 2 T o t a l B A # 3 T o t a l B A # 4 T o t a l B A # 5 T o t a l T o t a l R e v e n u e Ge n e r a l F u n d ( F C 1 0 ) 42 5 , 5 3 7 , 4 0 8 - 42 5 , 5 3 7 , 4 0 8 . 0 0 Cu r b a n d G u t t e r ( F C 2 0 ) 3, 0 0 0 3, 0 0 0 . 0 0 DE A T a s k F o r c e F u n d ( F C 4 1 ) 1, 7 6 2 , 5 6 0 1, 7 6 2 , 5 6 0 . 0 0 Mi s c S p e c i a l S e r v i c e D i s t r i c t s ( F C 4 6 ) 1, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 1, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 St r e e t L i g h t i n g E n t e r p r i s e ( F C 4 8 ) 4, 3 0 2 , 2 2 2 4, 3 0 2 , 2 2 2 . 0 0 Wa t e r F u n d ( F C 5 1 ) 10 8 , 1 9 6 , 3 6 8 10 8 , 1 9 6 , 3 6 8 . 0 0 Se w e r F u n d ( F C 5 2 ) 19 6 , 6 3 0 , 9 0 7 19 6 , 6 3 0 , 9 0 7 . 0 0 St o r m W a t e r F u n d ( F C 5 3 ) 13 , 4 7 6 , 7 3 3 13 , 4 7 6 , 7 3 3 . 0 0 Ai r p o r t F u n d ( F C 5 4 , 5 5 , 5 6 ) 30 2 , 2 6 8 , 6 0 0 30 2 , 2 6 8 , 6 0 0 . 0 0 Re f u s e F u n d ( F C 5 7 ) 21 , 4 5 8 , 1 0 5 21 , 4 5 8 , 1 0 5 . 0 0 Go l f F u n d ( F C 5 9 ) 11 , 5 6 0 , 6 7 6 11 , 5 6 0 , 6 7 6 . 0 0 E- 9 1 1 F u n d ( F C 6 0 ) 3, 9 2 5 , 0 0 0 3, 9 2 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Fl e e t F u n d ( F C 6 1 ) 28 , 8 2 6 , 9 9 2 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 28 , 9 4 6 , 9 9 2 . 0 0 IM S F u n d ( F C 6 5 ) 30 , 5 2 3 , 1 6 7 30 , 5 2 3 , 1 6 7 . 0 0 Co u n t y Q u a r t e r C e n t S a l e s T a x f o r Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n ( F C 6 9 ) 9, 6 0 0 , 0 0 0 9, 6 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 CD B G O p e r a t i n g F u n d ( F C 7 1 ) 4, 6 7 0 , 5 1 7 4, 6 7 0 , 5 1 7 . 0 0 Mi s c e l l a n e o u s G r a n t s ( F C 7 2 ) 34 , 1 5 8 , 9 1 8 34 , 1 5 8 , 9 1 8 . 0 0 Ot h e r S p e c i a l R e v e n u e ( F C 7 3 ) 30 0 , 0 0 0 30 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Do n a t i o n F u n d ( F C 7 7 ) 2, 9 2 0 , 2 5 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2, 9 4 0 , 2 5 0 . 0 0 Ho u s i n g L o a n s & T r u s t ( F C 7 8 ) 16 , 2 1 7 , 0 0 0 16 , 2 1 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 De b t S e r v i c e F u n d ( F C 8 1 ) 32 , 0 3 7 , 9 8 9 32 , 0 3 7 , 9 8 9 . 0 0 CI P F u n d ( F C 8 3 , 8 4 & 8 6 ) 35 , 4 6 0 , 3 8 7 5 , 5 3 0 , 9 1 6 . 0 0 40 , 9 9 1 , 3 0 3 . 0 0 Go v e r n m e n t a l I m m u n i t y ( F C 8 5 ) 3, 9 6 4 , 5 2 3 3, 9 6 4 , 5 2 3 . 0 0 Ri s k F u n d ( F C 8 7 ) 54 , 6 7 9 , 0 0 0 54 , 6 7 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 T o t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t I t e m s 1 , 3 4 4 , 1 8 0 , 3 2 2 5 , 6 7 0 , 9 1 6 . 0 0 - - - - 1, 3 4 9 , 8 5 1 , 2 3 8 . 0 0 Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n P r o p o s e d C o u n c i l A p p r o v e d 2 Fi s c a l Y e a r 2 0 2 2 - 2 3 B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 1 T o t a l E x p e n s e B A # 1 T o t a l B A # 2 T o t a l B A # 3 T o t a l B A # 4 T o t a l B A # 5 T o t a l T o t a l E x p e n s e Ge n e r a l F u n d ( F C 1 0 ) 42 5 , 5 3 7 , 4 0 8 4 7 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 42 6 , 0 1 2 , 4 0 8 . 0 0 Cu r b a n d G u t t e r ( F C 2 0 ) 3, 0 0 0 3, 0 0 0 . 0 0 DE A T a s k F o r c e F u n d ( F C 4 1 ) 1, 7 6 2 , 5 6 0 1, 7 6 2 , 5 6 0 . 0 0 Mi s c S p e c i a l S e r v i c e D i s t r i c t s ( F C 4 6 ) 1, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 1, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 St r e e t L i g h t i n g E n t e r p r i s e ( F C 4 8 ) 5, 7 5 7 , 8 2 5 5, 7 5 7 , 8 2 5 . 0 0 Wa t e r F u n d ( F C 5 1 ) 13 2 , 7 5 2 , 8 1 5 13 2 , 7 5 2 , 8 1 5 . 0 0 Se w e r F u n d ( F C 5 2 ) 25 5 , 9 1 4 , 5 8 0 25 5 , 9 1 4 , 5 8 0 . 0 0 St o r m W a t e r F u n d ( F C 5 3 ) 18 , 6 9 9 , 7 2 2 18 , 6 9 9 , 7 2 2 . 0 0 Ai r p o r t F u n d ( F C 5 4 , 5 5 , 5 6 ) 38 4 , 6 8 1 , 6 7 1 38 4 , 6 8 1 , 6 7 1 . 0 0 Re f u s e F u n d ( F C 5 7 ) 24 , 9 5 2 , 6 7 2 24 , 9 5 2 , 6 7 2 . 0 0 Go l f F u n d ( F C 5 9 ) 14 , 7 2 6 , 0 1 6 14 , 7 2 6 , 0 1 6 . 0 0 E- 9 1 1 F u n d ( F C 6 0 ) 3, 8 0 0 , 3 8 5 3, 8 0 0 , 3 8 5 . 0 0 Fl e e t F u n d ( F C 6 1 ) 30 , 4 2 6 , 0 3 2 4 , 0 1 1 , 3 6 0 . 0 0 34 , 4 3 7 , 3 9 2 . 0 0 IM S F u n d ( F C 6 5 ) 30 , 5 2 3 , 1 6 7 30 , 5 2 3 , 1 6 7 . 0 0 Co u n t y Q u a r t e r C e n t S a l e s T a x f o r Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n ( F C 6 9 ) 9, 4 5 8 , 7 4 8 9, 4 5 8 , 7 4 8 . 0 0 CD B G O p e r a t i n g F u n d ( F C 7 1 ) 4, 9 5 8 , 4 3 3 4, 9 5 8 , 4 3 3 . 0 0 Mi s c e l l a n e o u s G r a n t s ( F C 7 2 ) 26 , 6 1 4 , 1 5 3 26 , 6 1 4 , 1 5 3 . 0 0 Ot h e r S p e c i a l R e v e n u e ( F C 7 3 ) 30 0 , 0 0 0 30 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Do n a t i o n F u n d ( F C 7 7 ) 28 7 , 2 5 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 30 7 , 2 5 0 . 0 0 Ho u s i n g L o a n s & T r u s t ( F C 7 8 ) 25 , 7 7 9 , 2 5 3 25 , 7 7 9 , 2 5 3 . 0 0 De b t S e r v i c e F u n d ( F C 8 1 ) 33 , 6 5 8 , 5 5 8 33 , 6 5 8 , 5 5 8 . 0 0 CI P F u n d ( F C 8 3 , 8 4 & 8 6 ) 35 , 4 6 0 , 3 8 7 9 , 8 4 2 , 2 5 1 . 0 0 45 , 3 0 2 , 6 3 8 . 0 0 Go v e r n m e n t a l I m m u n i t y ( F C 8 5 ) 3, 1 6 9 , 7 6 7 3, 1 6 9 , 7 6 7 . 0 0 Ri s k F u n d ( F C 8 7 ) 54 , 6 7 9 , 0 0 0 54 , 6 7 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - T o t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t I t e m s 1 , 5 2 5 , 6 0 3 , 4 0 2 1 4 , 3 4 8 , 6 1 1 . 0 0 - - - - 1, 5 3 9 , 9 5 2 , 0 1 3 . 0 0 Bu d g e t M a n a g e r An a l y s t , C i t y C o u n c i l Co n t i n g e n t A p p r o p r i a t i o n 3 Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 1 Section A: New Items A-1:Bridge to Backman Community Open Space Donation Allocation CIP $20,000.00 Donation $20,000.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Kat Maus, Gregg Evans For Questions Please Include: Kristen Riker, Gregg Evans, Kat Maus Public Lands is requesting a budget amendment to allocate a $20,000 donation from the Salt Lake Education Foundation specifically to the Backman Open Space project, currently ongoing. Salt Lake Education Foundation received a $10,000 Governor's Office of Outdoor Recreation grant specifically for the Backman Community Open Space Project, which was matched with $10,000 by the Tony Finau Foundation. The desire is now for these funds to be donated to the City to be used for the project. To fulfill the requirements of the grant, the donation will have to be used for this specific project. The Backman Community Open Space Project is developing a piece of Public Lands owned property just west of Backman Elementary and the Jordan River, at approximately 600 N. and 1500 W. This project follows the installation of a bridge between the Community Open Space and Backman Elementary, providing direct access to the school from a nearby nonprofit housing development. The open space, which is currently unutilized as park space and is overtaken by invasive vegetation, will be developed into an outdoor classroom that is also open to the public as a park. The project includes installation of irrigation to allow for native plantings and trees, a looped path connecting the site to access points to the park, an outdoor, naturalized gathering and seating area with a shade structure, and associated amenities such as benches and picnic tables. This project is projected to be completed in Fall 2022. The full scope of this project will not be able to be fulfilled without this donation, and to maximize efficiency of funding and construction, the project team sees great benefit in completing this project in one phase. Public Lands has done due diligence and finds no reason to reject this donation proposal and specifically allocate the funding to the Backman Community Open Space project. A-2: Vehicles for New CAN Positions GF $120,000.00 Fleet $120,000.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Ken Thomas/Brent Beck For Questions Please Include: Blake Thomas, Brent Beck, Ken Thomas The three vehicles that are requested are for the three new positions we received in the 2023 budget. Two positions are for Building Inspections and one position is for Civil Enforcement. These vehicles were requested by CAN but not transferred into the original budget request. The numbers that have been provided are estimates due to the continual increase in cost and the lack of availability. Estimated cost for 3 vehicles (from Fleet) Inspections: $45,000 ea. x2 = $90,000 (4 wd needed) (2) Ford Hybrid Civil Enforcement: $30,000 (1) Chevrolet Volt Total: $120,000 A-3: Forestry Director Reclassification GF $0.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Gregg Evans For Questions Please Include: Kristen Riker, Gregg Evans Department of Public Lands is requesting a FY23 a $0 housekeeping budget amendment to reclassify the current Forestry Division Director to an appointed position (grade 35). Public Lands will reallocate existing budget to fund this item. The Forestry Division Director is a crucial position that manages all aspects of the City's urban forest growth and preservation needs. Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 2 The Urban Forestry Division Director manages a multi-million dollar budget and team of skilled trade professionals that provide individualized customer service to thousands of city residents every year. The position requires expertise in a specialized biological science and the ability to apply and relate that knowledge to diverse city priorities and challenges. Aside from working directly and regularly with numerous other City Departments and Divisions (including Public Utilities, Building Services, Planning, Public Services and Engineering) on City projects and priorities, the Urban Forestry Director must see to the delivery of professional grade productivity and quantifiable residential service. The combination of skills, productivity, publicity attached to the Urban Forestry Division Director position should merit a compensation class consistent with Division Directors throughout and Public Lands Departments. A-4: GO Bond Public Outreach and Engagement GF $150,000.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Kristen Riker/Gregg Evans For Questions Please Include: Lisa Shaffer, Kristen Riker, Gregg Evans The Public Lands Department is requesting a budget amendment of $150,000 to hire a consultant to provide public engagement efforts related to the general obligation bond, or GO bond. This general obligation bond, is a municipal bond to raise money for City Parks projects to be voted on by Salt Lake City residents on the November 2022 ballot. The terms of the GO bond will be to repay the entire funded amount in 20 years through a tax on residential properties and business owners. The City may spend funds promoting the proposed GO bond by providing factual information about the proposition, delivering a voter information pamphlet, with neutral encouragement to get SLC residents out to vote. Public Lands is seeking engagement assistance to advocate and educate the public about how the GO bond will meet current and future open space, air and water quality needs of the City as well as relating the benefits to the Reimagine Nature Master Plan. The efforts of this engagement will create City-wide understanding and talking points around the bond, why it is important and the benefits the bond will bring to residents. This project will help mitigate any confusion about why the City is interested in a bond and our intentions in how the funds will be spent. Engagement Methods (Must be bilingual): 1. Online survey, project web page, FB Live(s), Community Council presentations, event tabling, intercept surveys in parks, business group presentations, stakeholder meetings, op-eds, board and commissions messaging 2. Video/Social on value of Public Lands 3. Ads, signage, paint stencils, logo, social media hashtag Requested funding amount mirrors the Funding our Future effort with an adjustment (reduction in $$) to the time available to complete education engagement efforts. Approximately $400,000 was spent to assist the City with education about Funding our Future tax dollars. A-5: Allocate Impact Fees for Road Project CIP $3,111,335.00 Department: Prepared By: Dustin Peterson For Questions Please Include: Jorge Chamorro, Dawn Valente, Dustin Peterson The following road projects are included in Engineering's six-year plan and are primarily funded by the $87 Million Road Bond. These road segments are all eligible for Impact Fees and are included in the amendment to the Impact Fee Facility Plan (IFFP) adopted by Council in the fall of 2020. The impact fees will help to supplement the projects as they exceed their original budget. Following is a list of the projects along with the eligible amount as listed in the IFFP and the percentage of the project that is eligible for use of Impact Fees. Project Name Eligible Amount Percent 200 South $ 915,151.00 9.00% 300 North $ 154,739.00 8.00% Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 3 1100 East/Highland Drive $ 500,728.00 7.00% Virginia Street $ 141,663.00 9.00% 1300 East $ 812,805.00 7.00% West Temple $ 338,633.00 7.00% 900 South $ 171,944.00 6.00% 1700 East $ 158,570.00 7.00% 2100 South $ 660,410.00 8.00% Sub Total $ 3,854,643.00 Less Existing Cost Cemter 8420125 $ 743,308.00 TOTAL REQUEST: $ 3,111,335.00 A-6: Pulled Prior to Submission $0.00 A-7: Rail Spur Removal GF $205,000.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Shellie Peterson/Tammy Hunsaker For Questions Please Include: Blake Thomas, Tammy Hunsaker, Shellie Peterson, Brent Beck The property on which this rail spur is located was conveyed in 1997 by the City to a private party, with partial consideration for this conveyance being an easement to construct, operate, and maintain a railroad spur and associated facilities. Pursuant to an Amended and Restated Easement and Boundary Line Agreement, executed on July 3, 2000, the easement shall terminate if the City ceases to use the rail spur for more than one year, and that the City shall remove the xpense. Since the rail spur has not been used for over one year, the City is contractually obligated to remove it. Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section D: Housekeeping D-1: 200 South Transit Corridor and Complete Street CIP $1,314,900.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Brent Beck For Questions Please Include: Blake Thomas, Brent Beck, Salt Lake City is reconstructing 200 South in 2022 (Phase 1: 900 East to 200 East) and 2023 (Phase 2: 200 East to 400 West). UTA has participated in the planning and design activities of the project and has agreed to support the project by providing direct financial reimbursement to SLC for construction expenses that UTA has requested to include in the Project, such as installation of conduit/junction boxes for electric power and fiber optic communication to the bus boarding platforms. The contribution from UTA to cover these added expenses is estimated to be $1,314,900. As the current Interlocal is not yet signed, we would like to request Council post budgets to a holding account if the agreements are not signed by the time the budget amendment is reviewed by Council. Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 4 D-2: CIP Transfer for GF Security CIP $1,200,000.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: John Vuyk For Questions Please Include: Mary Beth Thompson, John Vuyk As part of the budget adoption the City Council used funds that were transferred to CIP in BA#7 of FY22 for Building security. The transfer from the CIP fund back to the general fund was not included in the budget adoption. This amendment is to correct that. D-3: Dee Glen Tennis Surety Company Reimbursement CIP $705,016.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dustin Peterson For Questions Please Include: Jorge Chamorro, Dustin Peterson, Dawn Valente In the Summer of 2020 the City hired Pine Tree Construction (Pine Tree) to build the Dee Glen Tennis Center. The project was funded by a grant from Salt Lake County. Unfortunately, Pine Tree struggled from the beginning of the project. The City put forth their best effort to help Pine Tree succeed on the project, but unfortunately the City had to terminate their contract with Pine Tree in the Fall of 2021 as it became apparent that Pine Tree would no longer be able to fulfill their contractual obligations. The City immediately notified the Surety, Western National Mutual Insurance Company (WNMIC), holding the performance bond, as it intended to file a claim on the bond. Working with WNMIC, the claim was approved in early-2022. WNMIC, via their Consultant, J.S.Held, facilitated a bidding effort to identify a replacement contractor. Bids were received on April 28, 2022, and WNMIC recommended the City proceed to enter into a contract with Paulsen Construction (Paulsen). WNMIC, via a Tender Agreement with the City, provided this additional funding to the project to pay the City for the additional cost to have Paulsen complete the project as well a compensation the City for a few, minor expenses incurred by the City as a direct result of the Pine Tree termination. At the time of this BA submittal, the City is nearly complete with the Paulsen agreement, and will use what exists in the remaining project funding to partially award the contract to Paulsen. This additional money received from WNMIC will be used to fund the remaining contract with Paulsen as well as pay for the remaining soft costs associated with the project. D-4: Remaining FY22 Fleet Vehicle Purchases Fleet $3,891,360.00 Department: Public Services (Fleet) Prepared By: Dustin Peterson/Denise Sorenson For Questions Please Include: Jorge Chamorro, Nancy Bean, Dustin Peterson, Denise Sorenson Public Services Fleet is requesting for encumbrance rollover funds for FY22 vehicle purchases. These vehicles were unavailable to source in FY22 due to supply chain issues. Vehicles are still needed and will be ordered as soon as they become available. D-5: Foothill Sunnyside CIP $91,000.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Lynn Jacobs/Brent Beck For Questions Please Include: Blake Thomas, Lynn Jacobs, Brent Beck Salt Lake City is partnering with UDOT and the University of Utah (Research Park) to reconstruct the northeast corner of Foothill Drive / Sunnyside Avenue intersection. We are completing this project to improve pedestrian comfort and safety at this critically important location. This area is currently part of the Sunnyside Trail and will be part of the 9-Line trail in the future. UDOT has committed to contribute funding towards this project as demonstrated in the attached cooperative agreement. This budget amendment item is intended to reimburse our trails funding source for the portion of the project that UDOT contributed to. As the current Interlocal is not yet signed, we would like to request Council post budgets to a holding account if the agreements are not signed by the time the budget amendment is reviewed by Council. Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 5 D-6: UTA Contribution to Orange Street Mobility Hub CIP $1,000,000.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Julianne Sabula/Brent Beck For Question Please Include: Blake Thomas, Tammy Hunsaker, Julianne Sabula, Brent Beck The Orange Street Mobility Hub is being constructed by Salt Lake City to support several frequent east -west bus routes that City Council identified as top priorities from the Transit Master Plan. The facility provides a location for buses to lay over for electric charging, operator breaks and to reverse direction, as well as for passengers to transfer between bus routes and other modes, such as the Westside On-Demand service and GreenBike. UTA has agreed verbally and via email to a contribution of $1 million for the facility, and we have been working with them in earnest to finalize a cost-sharing agreement. This amendment will accept that contribution into the City's budget. As the current Interlocal is not yet signed, we would like to request Council post budgets to a holding account if the agreements are not signed by the time the budget amendment is reviewed by Council. D-7: Rescope Allen Park Renovation and Facilities Roofing Project CIP $0.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Gregg Evans/Dawn Valente For Questions Please Include: Kristen Riker, Gregg Evans This budget amendment requests a funding source rescope for two CIP projects; the Allen Park Renovations Project (8321404) and the Parks Building Roofing Project within the Facilities Capital Renewal fund (8322700). This budget amendment requests a change to project funding sources from bond funds to general funds to better align project deadlines with funding deadlines on these projects. Changing the funding source will allow the bond funds to be spent before the final bond expiration period. The amendment proposes to move the Facilities Parks Building Roofing Project funding to bond funding. This project is beginning and will be able to meet the time critical portion of the bond funding. The project has been determined to be bond eligible. The Allen Park Renovations Project will then be moved from bond funding to general funds allowing for the necessary time to complete the project in FY23. The Allen Park Projects in process include structural assessment of critical structures, roof repair of failing historic structure(s), and design and construction of water lines to provide critical irrigation, water and sewer, and fire suppression to the site. D-8: Road Bond Adjustments CIP $0.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dustin Peterson For Questions Please Include: Jorge Chamorro, Dawn Valente, Dustin Peterson Local Streets Project - Cost Center 8320205 - These local street projects are complete and there are remaining funds in the amount of $178,623.04 in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 8320209 so they can be used on that project specifically. 900 East Project - Cost Center 8320207 - This project is nearing completion and does have remaining bond funds in the amount of $13,274.42 in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 8320209 so they can be used on that project specifically. 100 South Project - Cost Center 8320208 - This project is nearing completion and does have remaining bond funds in the amount of $501,513.01in the cost center. Staff is requesting to move these remaining funds to the 900 South cost center 83202109 so they can be used on that project specifically. Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources E-1: Utah Dept. of Transportation, 600/700 N Active Transportation Improvements CIP $2,400,000.00 Department: Finance Prepared By: Ann Garcia Salt Lake City FY 2022-23 Budget Amendment #1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 6 For Questions Please Include: John Vuyk, Mary Beth Thompson, Ann Garcia, Melyn Osmond Salt Lake City Division of Transportation nominated 600/700 North Active Transportation Improvements (2200 West to 300 West) for $2,400,000 from the TIF: Transit Projects funding. The project installs four mid-block pedestrian crossings, curb extensions at three intersections, and raised separated bicycle lanes. This grant has a match requirement of $1,600,000. The match will be funded through the cost center 83-22627 earmarked for the reconstruction project. Total funding for the project will be $4,000,000. A public hearing was held 02/18/2020 for the original grant application for this award. Section F: Donations Section G: Consent Agenda Consent Agenda Section I: Council Added Items Impact Fees Summary Confidential Data pulled 07/01/2022 Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area Area Cost Center UnAllocated Cash Notes: Impact fee - Police 8484001 846,150$ A Impact fee - Fire 8484002 1,156,234$ B Impact fee - Parks 8484003 15,216,578$ C Impact fee - Streets 8484005 8,061,854$ D 25,280,816$ Expiring Amounts: by Major Area, by Month 202107 (Jul2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202108 (Aug2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202109 (Sep2021)2022Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202110 (Oct2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202111 (Nov2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202112 (Dec2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202201 (Jan2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202202 (Feb2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202203 (Mar2022)2022Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202204 (Apr2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202205 (May2022)2022Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Current Month 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 2024 0$ -$ -$ -$ 0$ Fiscal Quarter E = A + B + C + D Police Fire Parks Streets TotalCalendar Month Impact Fees Confidential Data pulled 07/01/2022 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 Expenditures Sum of Police Allocation Remaining Appropriation ReimbExcessPoliceCapacity IF 8422800 1,898,497$ -$ 1,898,497$ -$ Police'sConsultant'sContract 8419205 3,565$ -$ 3,565$ -$ Public Safety Building Replcmn 8405005 14,068$ 14,068$ -$ 0$ Eastside Precint 8419201 21,639$ -$ -$ 21,639$ Police Impact Fee Refunds 8421102 338,448$ -$ 100,842$ 237,606.45$ Grand Total 2,276,217$ 14,068$ 2,002,903$ 259,246$ A 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 Expenditures Sum of Fire Allocation Remaining Appropriation Fire'sConsultant'sContract 8419202 4,941$ 3,021$ 1,862$ 58$ FY20 FireTrainingFac. 8420431 56,031$ -$ -$ 56,031$ Fire Station #3 Debt Service 8422200 483,233$ -$ 483,233$ -$ Grand Total 1,045,105$ 3,021$ 985,995$ 56,089$ B Parks Allocation Budget Amended Allocation Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining AppropriationValues Description Cost Center Sum of Parks Allocation Budget Amended Sum of Parks Allocation Encumbrances Sum of Parks Allocation YTD Expenditures Sum of Parks Allocation Remaining Appropriation Cnty #2 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420426 88$ -$ 88$ -$ Warm Springs Off Leash 8420132 20,411$ -$ 20,411$ -$ Fairmont Park Lighting Impr 8418004 49,752$ -$ 49,752$ -$ Fisher Carriage House 8420130 1,098,764$ 261,187$ 837,577$ -$ Park'sConsultant'sContract 8419204 4,857$ 2,596$ 2,219$ 42$ 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$ 92,027$ 130,574$ 1,646$ Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 2,946$ -$ -$ 2,946$ ImperialParkShadeAcct'g 8419103 10,830$ -$ 4,433$ 6,398$ FY Rich Prk Comm Garden 8420138 12,795$ 4,328$ -$ 8,467$ Redwood Meadows Park Dev 8417014 9,350$ -$ -$ 9,350$ 9line park 8416005 21,958$ 855$ 2,692$ 18,411$ IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 58,014$ -$ 1,905$ 56,109$ UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 135,084$ 21,169$ 12,803$ 101,112$ Fisher House Exploration Ctr 8421401 523,889$ 374,573$ 39,040$ 110,276$ FY20 Bridge to Backman 8420430 722,920$ 116,388$ 480,599$ 125,933$ C Three Creeks West Bank NewPark 8422403 150,736$ -$ -$ 150,736$ 9Line Orchard 8420136 195,045$ 12,423$ 28,477$ 154,145$ RAC Playground with ShadeSails 8422415 180,032$ -$ -$ 180,032$ Cnty #1 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420424 388,477$ 16,762$ 117,939$ 253,777$ Trailhead Prop Acquisition 8421403 275,000$ -$ -$ 275,000$ Bridge to Backman 8418005 290,276$ 10,285$ 4,515$ 275,475$ SLC Foothills Land Acquisition 8422413 425,000$ -$ 105,861$ 319,139$ Parley's Trail Design & Constr 8417012 327,678$ -$ -$ 327,678$ Jordan Prk Event Grounds 8420134 431,000$ 24,953$ -$ 406,047$ Historic Renovation AllenParK 8422410 420,000$ -$ -$ 420,000$ Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 489,688$ 29,235$ 35,098$ 425,355$ Jordan Park Pedestrian Pathway 8422414 510,000$ 44,362$ -$ 465,638$ Green loop 200 E Design 8422408 610,000$ -$ -$ 610,000$ Emigration Open Space ACQ 8422423 700,000$ -$ -$ 700,000$ Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 1,094,430$ 33,364$ 47,318$ 1,013,749$ SLCFoothillsTrailheadDevelpmnt 8422412 1,304,682$ -$ -$ 1,304,682$ Pioneer Park 8419150 3,343,904$ 86,260$ 179,148$ 3,078,497$ GlendaleWtrprk MstrPln&Rehab 8422406 3,200,000$ 17,400$ 22,152$ 3,160,449$ Grand Total 17,281,123$ 1,174,504$ 2,142,322$ 13,964,297$ 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 Expenditures Sum of Street Allocation Remaining Appropriation 9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 152,500$ 68,924$ 83,576$ -$ 700 South Reconstruction 8415004 2,449$ -$ 2,449$ -$ Trans Master Plan 8419006 13,000$ 13,000$ -$ -$ Trans Safety Improvements 8419007 95,653$ 12,768$ 82,180$ 705$ 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$ 500 to 700 S 8418016 96,637$ -$ 73,893$ 22,744$ Corridor Transformations IF 8422608 25,398$ -$ -$ 25,398$ 900 South 9Line RR Cross IF 8422604 28,000$ -$ -$ 28,000$ Transportatn Safety Imprvmt IF 8422620 44,400$ 13,090$ -$ 31,310$ D 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$ Local Link Construction IF 8422606 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$ 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$ -$ 18,154$ 181,846$ TransportationSafetyImprov IF 8421500 302,053$ 53,713$ 9,608$ 238,732$ Street Improve Reconstruc 20 8420125 2,250,220$ 396,873$ 1,470,038$ 383,309$ IF Complete Street Enhancement 8421502 625,000$ -$ -$ 625,000$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8419008 221,688$ -$ 221,238$ 450$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8420105 300,000$ 77,706$ 222,294$ -$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 875,000$ 67,474$ 19,589$ 787,937$ Grand Total 5,967,404$ 840,578$ 2,220,710$ 2,906,116$ Total 26,566,261$ 2,032,171$ 7,348,343$ 17,185,748$ E = A + B + C + D TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE $1,156,234 UnAllocated Budget Amount 8484001 846,150$ 25,280,816$ 8484002 8484003 8484005 15,216,578$ 8,061,854$ ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ________________________ Date Received: _________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Office Date sent to Council: _________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: August 19, 2022 Dan Dugan, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN) __________________________ SUBJECT: Informal Public Benefits Analysis for a tiny home village with ~54 units of affordable housing in exchange for a below-market 40-year land lease of approximately 8 acres of vacant City property located at approximately 1850 West Indiana Avenue. STAFF CONTACT: Tammy Hunsaker, Deputy Director, Community and Neighborhoods 801-535-7244, tammy.hunsaker@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Resolution RECOMMENDATION: Consideration of the attached resolution allowing the City to enter into a 40-year below-market ground lease agreement with The Other Side Academy, a Utah nonprofit corporation, in order to facilitate the construction of a tiny home village with ~54 units of affordable housing. BUDGET IMPACT: N/A BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Salt Lake City and the State of Utah are experiencing a widening housing affordability gap, one of the fundamental causes of homelessness. Resources at the federal and state level have proven vastly inadequate in addressing the housing crisis. As such, cities are left to stretch local dollars, implement innovative policy tools, and think outside of the box with project typologies. Research and experience have overwhelmingly demonstrated that investment in permanent housing solutions is effective in reducing homelessness. Long-term housing solutions, particularly solutions that are co-located with supportive services, not only stabilize lives but have been proven to be more cost effective than emergency shelters and care facilities. 8/19/2022 8/19/2022 In 2020, the Administration began to explore new, innovative solutions to addressing the homelessness crisis. At this time, an exploratory partnership was formed between the City and The Other Side Academy (“TOSA”), a Utah 501(c)3 non-profit organization, to analyze the feasibility of a tiny home village that provides housing for chronically homeless individuals. TOSA brings unique experience with operation of “therapeutic communities” that help those with long histories of addiction and criminal behavior stabilize their lives. As a result of this exploratory partnership, a tiny home village for individuals experiencing homelessness has been conceptualized and is proposed to be located on approximately 40 acres of City-owned property located at 1850 W Indiana Avenue and 1965 West 500 South (the “Property”). The Other Side Village (“TOSV”) is proposed to be a “recovery housing” model that aligns with National Alliance for Recovery Residence standards and is contemplated to eventually encompass the Property. Currently, the Administration and TOSA have narrowed the scope to a pilot project limited to approximately 8 acres (the “Pilot Site”) to demonstrate the feasibility of the concept, refer to Exhibit A: Site Map. This initial phase of the project will include approximately 54 deed-restricted tiny homes, 6 tiny homes for staff, 25 tiny homes to be offered as nightly rentals, community space, commercial space for social enterprise endeavors, and space for on-site services (the “Pilot Project”). The Administration and TOSA have negotiated project terms that include a below-market land lease of $1.00 per year for 40 years to assist in the financial viability of the Pilot Project. Pursuant to State law, the City shall first hold a public hearing followed by authorization by the City Council in order to execute a below-market land lease. Highlights of the Pilot Project are as follows, with additional detail included in Exhibit B: Resolution and Term Sheet and Exhibit C: Informal Public Benefits Analysis. I.Project Overview The Pilot Project is proposed to include the following: •At least 60 tiny homes to be used as permanent housing §A minimum of 54 units, or 90% of the total permanent housing units, shall be deed-restricted as affordable §Up to 6 units, or 10% of the total permanent housing units, may be used as staff living quarters •Up to 25 additional tiny homes may be used as a Community Inn offered as nightly rentals to generate income for TOSV operations •A ~ 2,000 square foot Neighborhood Center to house clubhouse type uses for TOSV residents •A ~10,000 square foot Social Enterprise Building to house social enterprise endeavors that generate income for the TOSV operations •A ~12,000 square foot Community Center building to house multi-purpose space, and supportive services for TOSV residents including a medical clinic, a mental health clinic, a social services clinic, administrative offices, and a security office •Utility service and related infrastructure; roads and curb/gutter II.Recovery Housing Model Utilizing the recovery housing model, TOSA plans to target individuals who are considered chronically homeless, generally defined as individuals experiencing homelessness for at least a year, or repeatedly, and struggling with a disabling condition such as a serious mental illness, substance use disorder, or physical disability. Similar to permanent supportive housing, recovery housing values independent living and voluntary clinical services. Where they differ is that recovery housing requires an alcohol and drug- free living environment and may require residents to participate in recovery activities as a condition for residency. This social model of recovery helps individuals relearn how to organize their lives, interact with others, and participate in community-based recovery activities. III.Affordable Housing & Tenant Selection An overview of the affordable housing and tenant selection terms are as follows: •Units shall primarily be available to persons or families that meet HUD’s definition of chronically homeless. If there are units available and no applications from chronically homeless individuals, TOSA may lease units to vulnerable homeless individuals. •An admission preference may be established for individuals with a commitment to sobriety. •All applicants shall go through the coordinated entry process used by the Salt Lake Valley Coalition to End Homelessness. •Tenants may be required to have employment or another source of income, such as social security disability or a tenant-based voucher, to be able to afford to pay rent. •Maximum rents shall be set for individuals and households at 25% of the area median income (“AMI”), adjusted annually for household size. For a single person based on 2022 HUD income limits, this would equate to $448 maximum monthly rent including basic utilities. •Maximum incomes shall be set for individuals and households at 30% of the AMI and below. Tenants must meet this income threshold, in addition to meeting homelessness criteria, upon entering into a lease. This equates to a maximum annual income of $21,510 for a single person based on 2022 HUD income limits. Tenants will only be required to meet this income threshold upon entering into a lease and may increasing their income subsequently. •TOSA intents to provide leases on a month-to-month basis, however, tenants may live in their homes as long as they meet the basic obligations of tenancy without a time limitation. IV.Supportive Services & Programming The Pilot Project will include supportive services to assist homeless persons in transitioning from homelessness, and to enable tenants to live as independently as possible. The scope and scale of on-site health and case-management services is yet to be finalized, as TOSA is working on building partnerships with service providers - refer to Exhibit D: Service Providers Letters of Interest for additional information. In addition to on-site services, TOSA plans to coordinate access to off-site specialty services that are tailored to unique needs that residents may have. In addition to health-related services, the Pilot Project will include programming to develop social and life-skills. Employment training will be available through the on-site social enterprise businesses. V.Site & Zoning The Property is currently zoned PL - Public Lands. The applicant is requesting to change the zoning of the Property to FB-UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood District). The Salt Lake City Planning Commission recommended approval of the zoning change on October 27, 2021, with the request currently being considered by the City Council through a transmittal from the Planning Division. The Property is vacant and will require significant infrastructure and site improvements to facilitate the Pilot Project. VI.Environmental Remediation Parts of the Property were previously used as a landfill. Environmental testing indicates that various levels of mitigation efforts need to occur in order for the Property to be safe for residential development. The extent of mitigation will depend on the placement of land uses and the utilization of environmental controls. The Department of Sustainability is involved with the identification, sampling, and site investigation process and will work with State and other cognizant agencies to ensure that requirements are met for site clean- up, remediation, and mitigation. VII.Development Viability TOSA estimates that the Pilot Project will cost an estimated $13.8 million, excluding land costs, as follows: TOSV PILOT PHASE - CAPITAL COSTS Environmental Remediation $232,500 Permit / Fees $400,000 Civil Work $1,045,440 Tiny Home Construction $4,350,000 Welcome Neighborhood Homes $875,000 Neighborhood Center $441,000 Community Center / Clinic $3,146,400 Social Enterprise Building $2,300,000 Landscaping $320,000 Architectural Fees $666,744 Total $13,777,084 Source: TOSA, dated 4/29/22 as provided to City staff on 6/24/22 Note: Excludes land costs The majority of costs will be covered by in-kind work and donations. According to TOSA, the fund-raising status is as follows as of July 6, 2022: •Almost $2.2 million in cash has been committed and received •Another $3.1 in cash has been pledged •The remaining balance is either committed or expected to be received through in- kind assets and services - Refer to Exhibit E: In Kind Letters for additional information The Administration will ensure that TOSA has adequate funds to move the project forward prior to closing on the land lease. If fundraising does not meet expectations or there are gaps in the receipt of charitable funds, Joseph Grenny, TOSA’s Chairman of the Board, and his wife have made a personal commitment of up to $5,000,000 to cover shortfalls - refer to Exhibit F: Construction Commitment Letter for additional information. VIII.Operating Viability & Social Enterprises Rent revenues are only estimated to cover about 10% of the annual operating costs – refer to Exhibit G: Pro Forma. The remaining revenue required to successfully operate the Pilot Project will be generated by social enterprise businesses that will be located on-site. These businesses are anticipated to be a motel (Community Inn), thrift store, and cookie- manufacturing enterprise. In addition to generating revenue to cover operating costs, these businesses will provide critical job training opportunities for residents. The Community Inn will include 25 stand-alone tiny homes offered as nightly rentals for the general public, thereby providing lodging opportunities for Pilot Project visitors and volunteers. While these businesses are yet to be established, TOSA has considerable experience with social enterprise businesses and has partnered with the founder of Lofthouse Cookies to advise on the cookie manufacturing business. If revues fall short, TOSA has committed to covering up to $1,000,000 annually to cover operating expenses –refer to Exhibit H: Operating Commitment Letter. PUBLIC PROCESS: 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 TOSA is a nonprofit entity, the City may waive the fair-market rental rates it would ordinarily be required to receive for use of City-owned property so long as the municipal legislative body first holds a public hearing regarding the waiver and authorizes the Administration to enter into the land lease for the below-market lease rates. While a formal public benefits analysis is not required pursuant to Utah law, an informal public benefits analysis is provided as Exhibit C: Informal Public Benefits Analysis to provide an analysis of the public benefits to be received in exchange for a waiver of the fair-market rents for a land lease. EXHIBITS: A.Site Map B.Resolution and Term Sheet C.Informal Public Benefits Analysis D.Service Provider Letters of Interest E.In Kind Letters F.Construction Commitment Letter G.Pro Forma H.Operating Commitment Letter EXHIBIT A: SITE MAP Note: Pilot Site is defined by the smaller blue boundary. Site plan is subject to change. RESOLUTION NO. _____ OF 2022 (Authorizing the Lease Rate and Term for The Other Side Village Pilot Project located at 1850 West Indiana Avenue, Salt Lake City) WHEREAS, The Other Side Academy (“TOSA”), a Utah nonprofit corporation, desires to develop a community of small homes, community space, support services, and commercial uses to provide affordable housing and life skill development for the City’s unsheltered population, to be known as The Other Side Village (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the first phase of the Project (the “Pilot Project”) will include affordable housing, supportive services, community space, social enterprise buildings, and additional tiny homes to be offered as nightly rentals, as further described on the attached term sheet (the “Term Sheet”); and WHEREAS, TOSA and the City desire to locate the Pilot Project on approximately 8 acres of the real property owned by the City and located at 1850 West Indiana Avenue, Salt Lake City (the “Pilot Site”); WHEREAS, the primary beneficiaries of the construction of the Pilot Project will be individuals experiencing chronic homelessness who are transitioning into housing as part of the City, County, and State’s efforts to address the homelessness and housing crisis in Salt Lake City; and WHEREAS, a below-market ground lease to TOSA will facilitate the development of the Pilot Project, which would otherwise be financially unfeasible; and WHEREAS, the City is willing to provide assistance to TOSA in the form of a ground lease rate for the Pilot Site in the amount of $1.00 per year for a term of 40 years, so long as the conditions of the ground lease between City and TOSA, or another nonprofit approved by City, are met (the “Lease Fee Waiver”); and EXHIBIT B: RESOLUTION & TERM SHEET 2 WHEREAS, Utah Code Section 10-8-2(1)(a)(i) allows public entities to provide nonmonetary assistance and waive fees to and for nonprofit entities after a public hearing; and WHEREAS, though Utah Code Section 10-8-2 does not require a study for such waiver or assistance, in this case the Administration voluntarily performed an analysis of the nonmonetary assistance to the nonprofit corporation (the “Analysis”); and WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted a public hearing relating to the foregoing, in satisfaction of the requirements of Utah Code Section 10-8-2; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the Analysis, and has fully considered the conclusions set forth therein, and all comments made during the public hearing; NOW, 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 all the reasons set forth in the Analysis, the Lease Fee Waiver is appropriate under these circumstances. 2.The terms outlined on the Term Sheet represent the approved terms for the Pilot Project, and the City Council hereby authorizes the City administration to negotiate the final terms consistent with the Term Sheet or more beneficial to the City, and execute the ground lease and any other relevant documents consistent with this Resolution and incorporating such other terms and agreements as recommended by the City Attorney’s office. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, on _________, 2022. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By: ______________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ____________________________ CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM: Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office By: ___________________________ Kimberly Chytraus, Senior City Attorney EXHIBIT TO RESOLUTION The Other Side Village Pilot Project Term Sheet AFFORDABLE HOUSING I.Unit Requirements TOSA shall develop and maintain the Pilot Site to include a minimum of 60 tiny home units. Of the total units: 1.Up to 10% may be unrestricted in rent and occupancy for utilization by staff. 2.A minimum of 90% shall be available and affordable to individuals or families meeting the HUD-adopted definition of chronically homeless and homeless, with a priority on chronically homeless. These units shall be designated as the “Affordable Units”. II.Occupancy Requirements TOSA must place into the Affordable Units individuals and families that meet the HUD-adopted definition of chronically homeless and homeless, prioritized as follows: 1.TOSA shall first make the units available to persons or families that meet HUD’s definition of chronically homeless as defined in section 401(2)(A) of the McKinney- Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11360(9)). In general, to meet this definition, a chronically homeless person or family’s head of household must be sleeping in a place not meant for human habitation or living in a homeless emergency shelter or safe haven, have a disabling condition, as defined in section 401(9) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11360(9)), and i.be continuously homeless for a year or more, OR ii.have had at least four episodes of homelessness in the past three years as long as the combined occasions equal at least 12 months. 2.If there are units available and no applications from chronically homeless individuals, TOSA may lease units to vulnerable homeless individuals, as “homeless” is then- currently defined by HUD, provided that applicants who have been homeless for the longest periods of time immediately preceding their application are given priority over applicants who have been homeless for lesser periods of time. III.Tenant Eligibility To determine whether a tenant is eligible, TOSA must verify that the prospective tenant meets HUD’s definition of chronically homeless or homeless and whose incomes have an aggregate annual income for all occupants that is 30% and below of the area median income for Salt Lake City Utah, HUD Metro FMR Area as adjusted for household size. IV.Tenant Selection 1.The Affordable Units shall be made available pursuant to federal and state fair housing laws and HUD guidance, including the following: i.TOSA may establish admission preferences, including a preference for individuals with a commitment to sobriety, but may not deny housing to protected classes pursuant to federal and state fair housing laws. ii.TOSA may regulate the occupancy of units based on unit size but may not unreasonably limit the ability of families with children to obtain housing. 2.TOSA must develop and make public written tenant selection policies and procedures that include descriptions of the eligibility requirements. The Tenant Selection Plan must include evidence of a contractual partnership with service provider(s) and whether there is a restriction or preference in the admission of tenants. The restriction or preference must cite the supporting documentation to ensure inclusion and nondiscrimination in the selection of tenants. 3. TOSA will ensure that all applicants for housing in the project will go through the coordinated entry process used by the Salt Lake Valley Coalition to End Homelessness to ensure coordination and efficiency with the current homelessness services system. 4. TOSA also will enter any new resident into the Homeless Management Information System (“HMIS”) coordinated entry system. 5. Preference will be given to Salt Lake City residents for placement into the development. V. Maximum Rents 1. The annualized rent (which includes all required housing costs such as utilities and other charges uniformly assessed to all Affordable Units, other than charges for optional services) per unit shall be set forth in a written lease and shall not exceed, for the term of the lease, 30% of the annual income limit for individuals and households with a maximum AMI of 25% AMI for the applicable Unit Type (i.e. studio or bedroom number). VI. Tenant Lease Requirements 1. Leases may be provided on a month-to-month basis, with the intent that tenants may live in their homes as long as they meet the basic obligations of tenancy without a time limitation. 2. TOSA shall comply with local, state, and federal laws, including the federal fair housing act, when approving applicants as tenants, evicting, terminating a lease, or providing a notice to quit. 3. TOSA must incorporate specific provisions into the lease agreement for each eligible tenant of the Affordable Units that establish the tenant's obligation to provide accurate information regarding household income and composition. VII. Record-Keeping and Reporting Requirements 1. Upon execution of a lease, TOSA must verify and document the tenant’s annual (gross) income. 2. TOSA must re-examine the income and household composition of tenants on an annual basis. 3. TOSA must submit annual compliance reports to the City. These reports shall document the occupancy and show whether TOSA is in compliance with tenant eligibility requirements. 4. TOSA must provide the City a written certification of compliance when the project reaches initial compliance and then with each annual report. SUPPORTIVE SERVICES The pilot project will include supportive services to assist homeless persons in transitioning from homelessness, and to promote the provision of supportive housing to enable homeless persons to live as independently as possible. Supportive services will include on-site case coordination or management that ensures tenants’ access to a wide variety of services and on-site location of services provided by professional service providers as evidenced through an agreement. Services shall be made available on a flexible and voluntary basis and may address the following: mental health, substance and alcohol use, health, case management, independent living skills, employment, peer support, and community involvement and support. Physical and mental health providers shall have the appropriate licenses, which other services may be provided by those with appropriate training and following industry best practices. PROGRAMMING The pilot project will include programming that includes peer mentoring and the life skill development. This will include opportunities for residents to obtain employment experience by working in a social enterprise to the best of their ability. While participation in these employment activities shall be encouraged, it is not a condition of living in the pilot project. TERM The term of the lease will be forty (40) years with an option to renew the lease within the last year of the lease subject to approval by the Salt Lake City Council for the reduced lease rate. LEASE RATE The lease rate for the property will be $1 per year for the term of the lease. 1 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council Members SUBJECT: Informal Analysis of Public Benefits Provided by The Other Side Village’s Small Home Project in Exchange for a Below-market Ground Lease of Property INTRODUCTION Salt Lake City (the “City”) owns real property located at approximately 1850 West Indiana Avenue, Salt Lake City, consisting of approximately 45 acres (the “City Property”). The Other Side Academy, a Utah nonprofit corporation (“TOSA”) desires to develop a community of small homes, community space, support services, and commercial uses to provide affordable housing and life skill development for the City’s unsheltered population (the “Project”). This informal public benefits analysis is only for the first phase of the Project (the “Pilot Project”), which is intended to be a lease of approximately 8 acres of the City Property (the “Pilot Site”) and development of approximately of 54 tiny homes that shall be deed restricted as affordable and co-located with supportive services and social enterprise uses. While the City’s primary interest in development of the Pilot Site is affordable housing and supportive services, TOSA intends to develop other uses including community space, social enterprise buildings, and additional tiny homes to be offered as nightly rentals. Prior to development, the Pilot Site may require environmental remediation and/or mitigation to allow for residential uses. TOSA has agreed to pay for all costs to remediate the Pilot Site and to develop and operate the Pilot Project. Any request to lease the remainder of the City Property for less than fair market value will be submitted to the City Council at a later time for a supplemental public benefit analysis. In exchange for the remediation, operation, and management of the Pilot Project, TOSA is seeking a discounted lease rate for a 40-year ground lease of the Pilot Site (the “Ground Lease”). Though a formal analysis of the benefits to be received by the City in exchange for the benefit provided to TOSA is not required under Utah Code ⸹10-8-2, this informal analysis has been prepared to help assist the City Council’s evaluation of the recommended action. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 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 TOSA is a nonprofit entity, the City may waive the fair-market rental rates it would ordinarily be required to receive for use of the City Property so long as the municipal legislative body first holds a public hearing regarding the waiver and authorizes the Administration to enter into the Ground Lease at the below-market lease rate. Utah Code §10-8-2(3) outlines the purposes for which a municipal body may appropriate funds as “for any purpose that, in the judgment of the municipal legislative body, provides for the safety, health, prosperity, moral well-being, peace, order, comfort, or convenience of the EXHIBIT C: INFORMAL PUBLIC BENEFITS ANALYSIS 2 inhabitants of the municipality.” The factors that must be considered in determining the propriety of such an appropriation or waiver if made to any type of entity or individual other than a nonprofit entity as set forth under Utah Code §10-8-2(3)(e). Here, it may be helpful to consider the same factors: (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. BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT AND CITY PROPERTY As an overview of the entire Project, to be named The Other Side Village, TOSA anticipates developing a community that will be a secure and self-reliant neighborhood designed to serve the most vulnerable of the City’s unsheltered individuals, particularly those that meet the definition of chronically homeless. The home sizes may range from approximately 280-400 square feet. The Pilot Project is anticipated to have onsite services similar to those provided with permanent supportive housing, such as onsite medical, dental, and mental health services. In addition, TOSA is proposing that the community will have a garden and gathering spaces to serve residents. TOSA plans to implement social enterprises so that the Project can support itself financially and allow residents to gain employment experience. TOSA’s purpose for the Project is to create a community for unsheltered residents of Salt Lake City following the recovery housing model. Similar to permanent supportive housing, recovery housing values independent living and voluntary clinical services. Where they differ is that recovery housing requires an alcohol and drug-free living environment and may require residents to participate in recovery activities as a condition for residency. TOSA’s intent is to instill a peer accountability model to keep the community safe, clean, and orderly, to run social enterprises within the non-profit so that the organization can eventually be operationally self-sufficient and not be dependent on the government or donors. The Administration worked with TOSA to identify a parcel suitable for development of the Project, which ideally requires at least 30 acres, access to public transportation, and reasonable proximity to services. There are very few parcels of sufficient size and geography available within Salt Lake City boundaries. The City Property was identified as one that will allow the community to be established and potentially expand as a diverse type of deeply affordable housing and accessible services. 3 The City Property was historically used as a landfill between 1923 and 1962. It is currently vacant property and requires significant environmental remediation/mitigation and cleanup of refuse prior to development of residential uses. TOSA is working with the City’s Sustainability Department and the State of Utah to determine the scope and scale of the efforts, and TOSA has agreed to pay for the entire cost and to accept full liability for the costs and claims related to the remediation/mitigation. Before committing to lease the entire City Property to TOSA for the Project, the City and TOSA agreed to phase the Project, starting with the Pilot Project using the Pilot Site for the development of a minimum of 60 tiny homes to be utilized as housing (the “Housing Units”). Of the anticipated 60 Housing Units, a minimum of 54, or 90% of the total Housing Units, will be available and affordable to individuals and/or households that align with fair housing occupancy standards who have experienced homelessness and have incomes at or below 30% of Salt Lake County’s average median income (“AMI”), the (“Affordable Units”). The remaining 6, or up to 10% of the total Housing Units, will be available for Pilot Project staff to live on-site to help provide 24-hour staff coverage. In addition to the Housing Units, TOSA plans to construct and utilize up to 25 tiny homes as nightly rentals (the “Community Inn”). The Community Inn will also function as a social enterprise to provide job training and revenue for TOSV operations. TOSA shall construct and operate supportive services for the residents to assist homeless persons in transitioning from homelessness, and to enable tenants to live as independently as possible. Finally, TOSA intends to construct community space and social enterprise buildings to provide job training and revenue for the Pilot Project’s operations. The Ground Lease will include the affordability requirements for the Pilot Project, as well as other requirements. The Pilot Project is anticipated to include development of the buildings, Housing Units, related infrastructure (curb and gutter), and will also include the related amenities. TOSA desires to eventually develop the entire City Property for the Project and anticipates submitting a separate request to lease the additional City Property after meeting certain metrics, including occupancy and confirmation that the Pilot Project does not have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood. If TOSA requests to lease the remaining City Property, it will accept full responsibility for the costs and liability to remediate and/or mitigate the additional City Property to standards for residential development. TOSA is requesting that the City approve the Ground Lease of the Pilot Site in exchange for the public benefits TOSA will be providing with the homeless services, environmental remediation, development, and operation of the Pilot Project. The Council has been asked to consider a zoning amendment for the City Property concurrent with consideration of the proposed below- market lease rate to allow development of the Pilot Project. TOSA intends to construct and operate the Pilot Project through donations from foundations, corporations, and private citizens. Eventually, TOSA hopes to obtain self-sufficiency through revenues generated from social enterprises, including the Community Inn. 4 TERMS OF THE GROUND LEASE AND PUBLIC BENEFITS PROVIDED I.Terms of Ground Lease; Costs to the City Under the proposed Ground Lease between the City and TOSA, the City will maintain ownership of the Pilot Site and the Pilot Project will be owned and developed by TOSA, or a non-profit entity approved by the City. The Ground Lease will be structured to require a $1.00 dollar per year payment over the 40-year lease term. The Ground Lease will require that the Pilot Site will be used solely for the development and operation of the small home community. The 2022 assessed value of the City Property is approximately $4.20 per square foot, which equates to about $8,230,000 for the City Property or $1,460,000 for the Pilot Site property, excluding remediation, mitigation, and cleanup costs. Remediation and mitigation of the Pilot Site acres of City Property will allow it to be utilized for residential purposes. The below-market lease terms are being offered as the City’s contribution to providing solutions for homeless services. The City will not have any responsibility for environmental remediation, construction, operation, or maintenance of the Pilot Site and Pilot Project. II.Public Benefits Provided by the Pilot Project. The Pilot Project as planned provides numerous benefits to the City and promotes the City’s reasonable goals of objectives to increase the availability of affordable housing, job training, and supporting the City’s unsheltered population on a path to secure housing. A wide array of affordable housing options is needed to create a path from shelter to housing. By the City maintaining ownership of the Pilot Site but leasing it to TOSA, the City will facilitate the development of housing and services for underserved populations in our City that need it most. Residents of the Pilot Project will have the opportunity to work with case managers and may receive support in the following areas: sober living; tenant responsibilities and housing stability; access to benefits and entitlements; access to healthcare providers; access to behavioral health services; access to education and employment supports; access to mental health services and medications; information and referral to community resources (including but not limited to food pantries, legal services, faith-based organizations, additional housing options); and other relevant services and supports. Regular engagement in case management services will assist tenants in developing and fine-tuning life skills. Further, the on-site social enterprise endeavors will provide job skill development for residents of the Pilot Project. The Pilot Project will help lower the cost of public care of unsheltered individuals by providing housing for people who likely have a history of utilizing emergency services within Salt Lake City. Once housed, residents will free up shelter beds and services for others in the community to access and help alleviate capacity restraints at the homeless resource centers. In addition, accessible housing may alleviate encampments within the city that require tremendous City and County resources to maintain the health and safety of the unsheltered individuals and the public. Some residences will be earmarked as deeply affordable recovery housing to provide needed assistance to the most vulnerable population in our community. These are greatly needed community benefits. 5 The unsheltered population typically have limited access to healthcare and may rely on emergency services for care. Connecting residents to accessible medical, dental, and mental health care within the community will allow for preventative care, reducing the need for emergency room visits and hopefully providing better health outcomes. Alleviating the current burden on emergency medical services and hospitals to provide continuing care for unsheltered individuals will benefit both the individual users and the public. III.Salt Lake City’s Purposes and Enhancing the Quality of Life for Residents. Through the services mentioned above, the Pilot Project aims to serve formerly unsheltered individuals through housing, healthcare, social enterprise, and community. By helping serve the needs of these individuals, it is anticipated that the impact to the City can be measured through improvement of life skills and health outcomes, reduction in area criminal activity, and new or increased employment of clients served by the Pilot Project. The neighborhood surrounding the Pilot Project may also benefit by activation of the currently vacant and former landfill space. Increasing the number of residences in the area may encourage additional investments in the neighborhood such as grocery and other retail stores, recreation, and transit. In addition, TOSA is committed to ensuring that the Pilot Project does not become a strain on the City’s public safety infrastructure and does not negatively impact the surrounding neighborhoods. IV.Accomplishing Salt Lake City’s Goals. The construction and operation of the Pilot Project is in line with the City’s Housing Plan, Growing SLC: a Five Year Housing Plan, 2018-2022. Growing SLC includes solutions to address housing for incomes below 40% AMI providing housing and services to the City’s most vulnerable populations. Growing SLC strongly encourages supporting residents living in poverty and making $20,000 per year or less. To do that, the plan sets the following actions items for the City: (1)Lead in the development of new affordable housing types, as well as construction methods that incorporate innovative solutions to issues of form, function, and maintenance. (2)Offer incentives to developers of affordable housing such as land discounts and primary financing options. (3)Work with housing partners and government entities to continue supporting and enhancing service models that meet the needs of the City’s most vulnerable households. The plan also adopts the City Council’s 2017 guiding principles for evaluating and appropriating City funds for housing. The priorities relevant to the Pilot Project are as follows: (1)Create a net increase in affordable housing units while: (i) Avoiding displacement of existing affordable housing to the extent possible, and (ii) Retaining and expanding the diversity of AMI and innovative housing types. (2)Create a spectrum of housing options for people of all backgrounds and incomes. 6 (3)Include collaboration with community and private sector partners to enable opportunities for in kind contributions, creative financing, and service delivery models. (4)Utilize city-owned land whenever possible. (5)Enable residents’ success to maintain housing through partnerships with providers of supportive services. (6)Identify tools to increase and diversify the total housing supply including housing types that the private market does not sufficiently provide such as … innovative housing types. The Pilot Project accomplishes several of the City’s goals and priorities by providing predictable, affordable housing and supports needs of its residents. CONCLUSION The development of the Pilot Project by TOSA will be a benefit to residents of the City. Providing a below-market Ground Lease for the Pilot Site is an appropriate use of City resources to achieve the City’s “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.” Further, the Pilot Project helps to achieve the City’s goals by creating a net increase in affordable housing stock while providing long-term housing services for very low-income residents who have experienced homelessness. 4460 S Highland Dr. Salt Lake City, UT 84124 888.949.4864 ValleyCares.com July 1, 2022 The Other Side Village 667 East 100 South Salt Lake City, UT 84102 To Whom it May Concern: It is my pleasure to provide this letter of support on behalf of Valley Behavioral Health, Inc (Valley). Valley has worked closely with The Other Side Village leadership team to create the Welcome Neighborhood which will temporarily house and prepare individuals experiencing chronic homelessness to transition from the street to Village life and connect them to resources and services needed, including mental health treatment, supportive housing, medication management, and targeted case management. Valley collaborates on the Salt Lake Valley Coalition to End Homelessness and the Housing Core Function Group. In addition, Valley’s homeless outreach program, Storefront, works closely with the three Homeless Resource Centers and the Midvale Family Shelter by providing regular outreach and connecting those staying at these centers to various community housing programs. We support The Other Side Village initiative and plan to provide onsite mental health services to the residents of the Village on a regular basis when it is operational. We look forward to continuing our combined efforts to make homelessness rare, brief, and non- recurring in our capital city by lifting individuals out of chronic homelessness through community and connection. Sincerely, Preston L. Cochrane Valley Behavioral Health, Inc Vice President of Housing & Support Services EXHIBIT D: SERVICE PROVIDERS LETTERS OF INTEREST June 17, 2022 Mr. Tim Stay The Other Side Village Executive Director Dear Mr. Stay, On behalf of Fourth Street Clinic, I am pleased to provide this letter of interest for The Other Side Village, a.k.a Tiny Village, as you move forward in your planning and approval phase to begin construction. Fourth Street Clinic is committed to providing high quality integrated health care services to those in our community experiencing homelessness. We believe that housing is a critical component of achieving and maintaining good health, and we are pleased to be included in the conversation on how we can partner to support those experiencing homelessness as they transition into housing. We look forward to continuing conversations as you embark on the planning process to discuss expand funding opportunities, defining and understanding the scope and timelines of the project, and engaging with additional partners to support our work. As community partners, we are keenly aware that partnerships are essential to extend and strengthen vital programs that ensure the health and well-being of those experiencing homelessness. Located in downtown Salt Lake City since 1988, Fourth Street Clinic has been the primary provider of health care services in Salt Lake County and its surrounding area. In 2021, 4,672 individuals received care at our downtown clinic as well as through our Medical Street Team and our Mobile Clinic. Fourth Street Clinic stands ready to look at ways in which our organizations can work collaboratively to maximize resources and to improve the health care for our homeless community. Fourth Street Clinic values the partnership of our organizations and applauds the work of The Other Side Village to address the many challenges of homelessness. I look forward to ongoing discussions and clarity on the Tiny Village project as plans are solidified. I can be reached directly at 801-364-0058 ext 1383 or janida@fourthstreetclinic.org. Sincerely, Janida Emerson CEO July 3, 2022 Salt Lake City Council Attn: Tim Stay 667 E 100 S Salt Lake City, UT 84120 RE: THE OTHER SIDE VILLAGE Dear City Council: The purpose of this letter is to document the commitment of Sego Homes to help with the funding and construction of the The Other Side Village. Sego Homes, along with their vendors and trade partners, has provided support to several charitable organizations over the past few years such as Operation Underground Railroad to whom we donated $121,000 and Hopes for Hope to whom we donated $101,000. We anticipate providing a similar level of support to The Other Side Village by building and donating several of the tiny homes proposed for this community. We respectfully request that the City Council approve this proposed community and facilitate the successful development of this innovative and much needed community. Sincerely, SEGO HOMES Wayne H. Corbridge CEO wayne@segohomes.com (801) 362-6228 EXHIBIT E: IN KIND LETTERS June 24, 2022 ATTN: Mr. Tim Stay The Other Side Academy 667 E 100 S Salt Lake City, UT 84102 Dear Tim, As you know, HomeAid is a 501(c)3 organization with 32 years experience in partnering with the homebuilding industry to provide discounted and in-kind construction and renovation services to organizations serving people experiencing homelessness. The HomeAid Utah affiliate has been in operation over 3 years and has enjoyed tremendous support in our fight to help alleviate human suffering within our community. We are supported by some of the largest homebuilders and industry associates locally, regionally and nationally. We are aware of and eager to participate in your new tiny home community project in Salt Lake City, The Other Side Village. Our sister affiliate, HomeAid Austin, has been very successful in their efforts at the Community First Village in Austin, Texas and will have completed 36 tiny-homes by the end of 2023. HomeAid Utah anticipates we can facilitate the construction of approximately 15-20 tiny homes, possibly an entire sub-village within the initial phase of the community. It is our goal that once completed and additional phases become available, we can be an ongoing contributor over the duration of the total project buildout facilitating the construction of several more homes. We are very much looking forward to participating with you on this worthy initiative. Sincerely, Don Adamson Executive Director, HomeAid Utah Cc: Nate Shipp, Affiliate President, HomeAid Utah t 801.595.6400 e4harchitecture.com |833 South 200 East, Salt Lake City, UT 84111 July 1, 2022 The Other Side Village Attn: Tim Stay 667 E 100 S Salt Lake City, UT 84102 Re: Support for the Other Side Village Project Dear Tim, At your request, I am writing to summarize our support to date for the Other Side Village project. Our architectural firm, E4H Environments for Health Architecture, is dedicated to improving the wellness of our communities including physical health, mental health, equality, and basic human needs. The charitable wing of our organization, E4Hcares, has been providing full architectural services for the Other Side Village project for well over a year. Our Salt Lake firm partner, David Dixon, has orchestrated the development of the site plan, buildings, and homes by leading a host of other design professionals, schools, and individuals in the planning of the Village while he fills in the gaps. To date, David has contributed well over 400 hours to this effort. At our standard billing rate of $250/hour for our firm partners, this would equate to a donation of over $100,000 in design services. We would estimate he and others in our firm will spend another equal amount of time seeing the project through to completion. We firmly believe the Other Side Village will be the best program anywhere for caring for our homeless neighbors and helping them to lead more productive lives. The leaders of the Village effort have a proven track record with the Other Side Academy and we hope the City will continue to offer their full support to bring this to fruition as quickly as possible. Best regards, David J. Dixon, AIA EXHIBIT F: CONSTRUCTION COMMITMENT LETTER 45 OPERATIONAL 15-YEAR PROFORMA FOR VILLAGE PILOT PHASE EXHIBIT G: PROFORMA 667 E 100 S Salt Lake City, UT 84102 TheOtherSideAcademy.com July 1, 2022 To Whom it May Concern : The board of The Other Side Academy has agreed to cover any operational shortfalls in funding from the operations of The Other Side Village in an amount up to $1 million per year. I also confirm that The Other Side Academy has the financial means to provide these funds if needed. Respectfully, Tim Stay CEO The Other Side Academy tim@theothersideacademy.com 801-362-8998 EXHIBIT H: OPERATING COMMITMENT LETTER 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: Amy Fowler, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: The Other Side Village Rezoning Application PLNPCM2021-00787 STAFF CONTACT: David J. Gellner, AICP, Senior Planner, david.gellner@slcgov.com (801) 535-6107 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve an Ordinance to amend the zoning map for the subject properties, changing them from PL (Public Lands to FB-UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood District). The Planning Commission recommendation of approval included the following additional recommendation: Whereas the community and the public should have the opportunity to plan the neighborhood with the large and potentially impactful project. We recommend that the Council ask the City staff to work with the applicant, businesses, and the community to prepare a development agreement prior to conveying the property. This plan needs to look at infrastructure, including transportation, services, Commercial development, and the buffering and protection of the existing business and the needs of the nearby residents. BUDGET IMPACT: None December 29, 2021 Lisa Shaffer (Dec 29, 2021 15:02 MST) 12/29/2021 12/29/2021 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Tim Stay, CEO of The Other Side Academy, is requesting that the City amend the zoning map for portions of the properties located at 1850 W Indiana Avenue and 1965 W 500 S respectively. Both properties are owned by Salt Lake City and are zoned PL - Public Lands. The applicant is requesting to change the zoning of the properties to FB-UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood District), in order to develop a walkable urban neighborhood of mixed uses to be known as “The Other Side Village”. The rezoning would be applied to approximately 28.5 acres of the property at 1850 W Indiana and approximately 8.6 acres of the property at 1965 S 500 W. The proposed uses on the approximately 37.1-acre site would include permanent supportive housing for homeless individuals, as well as services and resources to include on-site healthcare, medical services, and community gathering spaces. This zoning map amendment does not require an amendment to the Westside Master Plan. The subject properties are highlighted on the map exhibit below. PUBLIC PROCESS: • Notice of the project and a formal letter requesting comments was sent to the Chair of the Poplar Grove Community Council on August 13, 2021. • Notice sent to the Glendale CC Chair as a courtesy. The Glendale CC is outside of the 600 feet boundary for official notice but is the closest recognized organization adjacent to the project boundary. • Staff sent an early notification announcement postcard about the project to all residents and property owners located within 300 feet of the project site on August 13, 2021. The mailed notice included project details, that recognized community organizations were aware of the proposal and included information on how to access the online open house and 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 August 16, 2021 and ended on September 30, 2021. • Staff attended an online meeting for a West Side Community Councils Open Forum held on August 23, 2021. The applicant presented the proposal to the Forum and answered questions about the project. • The 45-day Recognized Organization comment period expired on September 30, 2021. • No formal comments were submitted to Staff by either the Poplar Grove or Glendale Community Councils. • Numerous public comments were submitted to staff in advance of the Planning Commission Hearing as well as after the staff report was published. The most commonly cited concerns about the proposal related to worries about how the village will impact crime and other activities in the area. There were also many comments in support of the proposal. The comments in support recognized this as an innovative approach to a complex problem. • The public comments can be found in the Planning Commission Records – Attachment C – Planning Commission Staff Report of October 27, 2021. • Additional written public comments received after the staff report was published can be found in Exhibit 5 - Written Comments Received after the Staff Report was Published. • A Planning Commission Public Hearing was held on October 27, 2021. By unanimous vote, the Planning Commission forwarded a Positive recommendation to City Council for the proposed zoning map change. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) PC Agenda of October 27, 2021 (Click to Access) b) PC Minutes of October 27, 2021 (Click to Access) c) Planning Commission Staff Report of August 11, 2021 (Click to Access Report) EXHIBITS: 1. Project Chronology 2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3. Original Petition 4. Mailing List 5. Written Comments Received after the Staff Report was Published SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2022 (Amending the zoning map pertaining to a portion of a City-owned parcel of property located at 1850 West Indiana Avenue and a portion of a City-owned parcel located at 1965 West 500 south to rezone the parcel from PL Public Lands to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood) An ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to a portion of a City-owned parcel located at 1850 West Indiana Avenue and a portion of a City-owned parcel located at 1965 West 500 South to rezone the property from PL Public Lands to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood pursuant to petition number PLNPCM2021-00787. WHEREAS, Tim Stay, CEO of the Other Side Academy submitted an application to rezone a portion of a City-owned parcel located at 1850 West Indiana Avenue and a portion of a City-owned parcel located at 1965 West 500 South, as more particularly described in “Exhibit A” attached hereto and incorporated by reference (the “property”), to rezone the property from PL Public Lands to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood pursuant to petition number PLNPCM2021-00787 (the “petition”); and WHEREAS, at its October 27, 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 petition; and WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter, the city council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending the 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 a portion of the City-owned parcel located at 1850 W Indiana Avenue (Tax ID No. 15-10-101-001-0000) and a portion of the City-owned property located at 1965 West 500 South (Tax ID No. 15-03-351-003-0000), more particularly described on Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated by reference, is rezoned from PL Public Lands to FB- UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately after it has been published in accordance with Utah Code §10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with Utah Code §10-3-713. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ___ day of ____________, 20__. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 20__ Published: ______________. APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date: _________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Hannah Vickery, Senior City Attorney By: ___________________________________ Paul Nielson, Senior City Attorney 12/9/2021 Exhibit “A” Legal description of the property parcels: Tax ID No 15-10-101-001-0000 - Identified as 1850 West Indiana Avenue A part or portion of that certain property as described in the Warranty Deed recorded September 2, 1944 as Entry No. 983619 in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder, located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 3 and the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a point located 903.56 feet North 89°52’50” East and North 00°05'12" West 21.99 feet from the Salt Lake County Survey monument found marking the Southwest Corner of Section 3, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian; thence North 89°54'48" East 748.00 feet: thence South 00°05'12" East 1337.85 feet to the Northerly right of way line of Indiana Avenue; thence South 89°53'01" West 304.90 feet along said line; thence South 89°53’18” West 198.52 feet along said line to the Northeasterly line of the Union Pacific Railroad right of way, thence North 74°11'41" West 991.63 feet along said line to the Easterly right of way of Interstate 215 and a point of non-tangency with a 4009.72 foot radius curve to the left (radius point bears North 89°12’57”W); thence northerly 350.00 feet along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 05°00'04" (chord bears North 01°42'59" West 349.89 feet); thence South 74°11'41" East 541.51 feet; thence North 53°06'04" East 247.67 feet; thence North 00°05'12" West 716.70 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Contains ± 28.914 acres, ± 1,259,476 sq. ft. Tax ID No. 15-03-351-003-0000- A portion of 1965 West 500 South A part or portion of that certain property as described in the Warranty Deed recorded September 2, 1944 as Entry No. 983619 in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder, located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 3 and the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a point located 483.50 feet North 00°01’30” West along the West line of the said Section 3, and 776.03 feet North 89°52’50” East from the Salt Lake County Survey monument found marking the Southwest Corner of Section 3, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, running thence North 89°52'50" East 875.01 feet to and along the South line of that certain parcel described in Entry No. 13021960 in the Office of the Salt Lake County Recorder; thence South 00°05'12" East 461.94 feet; thence South 89°54'48" West 748.00 feet; thence North 15°28'31" West 478.59 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Contains: ± 8.601 Acres, ± 374,678 SQ. FT. Both of these descriptions are graphically represented on the following pages. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Project Chronology 2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3. Original Petition 4. Mailing List 5. Written Comments Received after the Staff Report was Published 1. Project Chronology PROJECT CHRONOLOGY PETITION: PLNPCM2021-00787 – The Other Side Village Rezoning Application August 4, 2021 Petition for the zoning map amendment received by the Salt Lake City Planning Division August 16, 2021 Petition assigned to David Gellner, Senior Planner, for staff analysis and processing. August 13, 2021 Notice of the project and a formal letter requesting comments was sent to the Chair of the Poplar Grove Community Council on August 13, 2021 in order to solicit public comments and start the 45-day Recognized Organization input and comment period. Notice was also sent to the Glendale CC Chair as a courtesy. The Glendale CC is outside of the 600 feet boundary for official notice but is the closest recognized organization adjacent to the project boundary. August 13, 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 information about the proposal and how to give public input on the project. August 16, 2021 Staff hosted an online Open House to solicit public comments on the proposal. The Online Open House period started on August 16, 2021 and ended on September 30, 2021. August 23, 2021 Staff attended an online meeting for a West Side Community Councils Open Forum held on August 23, 2021. September 30, 2021 The 45-day public comment period for Recognized Organizations ended. No formal comments were submitted to staff by recognized organizations to date related to this proposal. October 14, 2021 Public notice posted on City and State websites and sent via the Planning list serve for the Planning Commission meeting and Public Hearing notice mailed. October 14, 2021 Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of the Planning Commission public hearing posted on the properties. October 27, 2021 The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on October 27, 2021. By unanimous vote, the Planning Commission forwarded a Positive recommendation to City Council for the proposed zoning map amendment. 2. Notice of City Council Public Hearing NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2021-00787 – Zoning Map Amendment for The Other Side Village at 1850 W Indiana Avenue and 1965 W 500 S – Tim Stay, CEO of The Other Side Academy is requesting that the City amend the zoning map for portions of the properties located at 1850 W Indiana Avenue and 1965 W 500 S respectively. Both properties are owned by Salt Lake City and are zoned PL - Public Lands. The applicant is requesting to change the zoning of the property to FB-UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood District) in order to develop a walkable urban neighborhood of mixed uses to be known as “The Other Side Village”. The rezoning would be applied to a 28.5 acres of the property at 1850 W Indiana and 8.6 acres of the property at 1965 S 500 W. The proposed uses on the approximately 37.1-acre site would include permanent supportive housing for homeless individuals as well as services and resources to include on-site healthcare, medical services, and community gathering spaces. This request only relates to the zoning designation of the property. No specific site development proposal has been submitted or is under consideration at this time and the Westside Master Plan is not being changed. The properties are located within Council District 2, represented by Dennis Faris. (Staff contact: David J. Gellner at (801) 535-6107 or david.gellner@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 electronically: 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 David Gellner at 801-535-6107 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail at david.gellner@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 Updated 7/1ϱ/Ϯϭ Zoning Amendment F Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance F Amend the Zoning Map OFFICE USE ONLY Received By: Date Received: Project #: Name or Section/s of Zoning Amendment: PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION Address of Subject Property (or Area): Name of Applicant: Phone: Address of Applicant: E-mail of Applicant:Cell/Fax: Applicant’s Interest in Subject Property: F Owner F Contractor F Architect F Other: Name of Property Owner (if different from applicant): E-mail of Property Owner:Phone: ©©Please note that additional information may be required by the project planner to ensure adequate information is provided for staff analysis. All information required for staff analysis will be copied and made public, including professional architectural or engineering drawings, for the purposes of public review by any interested party. AVAILABLE CONSULTATION ©©If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this application, please contact Salt Lake City Planning Counter at (801) 535-7700 prior to submitting the application. REQUIRED FEE ©DĂƉŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚ͗Ĩiling fee of $ϭ͕Ϭϳϱplus$121per acre in excess of one acre ©dĞǆƚŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚ͗ĨŝůŝŶŐĨĞĞŽĨΨϭ͕Ϭϳϱ͘ ©Plus additional fee for mailed public notices. SIGNATURE ©If applicable, a notarized statement of consent authorizing applicant to act as an agent will be required. Signature of Owner or Agent: Date: SA L T L A K E C I T Y P L A N N I N G Anna 08/04/2021 PLNPCM2021-00787 Other Side Village – Zoning Map Amendment – 1850 W Indiana Avenue The Other Side Academy Erin.Mendenhall@slcgov.com 1850 W Indiana Avenue, Salt Lake City 667 E 100 S Salt Lake City, UT 84102 Salt Lake City hƉĚĂƚĞĚϳͬϭϱͬϮϭ St a f f R e v i e w SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1. Project Description (please attach additional sheets.) A statement declaring the purpose for the amendment. A description of the proposed use of the property being rezoned. List the reasons why the present zoning may not be appropriate for the area. Is the request amending the Zoning Map? If so, please list the parcel numbers to be changed. Is the request amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance? If so, please include language and the reference to the Zoning Ordinance to be changed. WHERE TO FILE THE COMPLETE APPLICATION Mailing Address: Planning Counter PO Box 145471 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 In Person: Planning Counter 451 South State Street, Room 215 Telephone: (801) 535-7700 INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED ______ I acknowledge that Salt Lake City requires the items above to be submitted before my application can be processed. I understand that Planning will not accept my application unless all of the following items are included in the submittal package. x x x x TVS 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 145460, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5460 TEL 801.535.6230 August 4, 2021 Nick Norris Salt Lake City Planning Director Dear Nick, Salt Lake City authorizes The Other Side Academy to initiate a planning application for the proposed zone change for the property located at 1850 West Indiana Avenue which is owned by Salt Lake City Corporation. Please let me know if you need any additional information Sincerely, Dan Rip Policy and Program Manager Department of Community and Neighborhoods cc: Blake Thomas Orion Goff Shellie Finan Other Side Village – Zoning Map Amendment – 1850 W Indiana Avenue Rezoning Application PLNPCM2021-00787 A statement declaring the purpose for the amendment. 1850 W Indiana Avenue - The Other Side Village The purpose of the amendment is to rezone the parcel of ground currently designated as Public Lands (PL Zone) to a Formed Based District (FB-NU2) to accommodate the development of a walkable urban neighborhood of mixed uses. The proposed mixed-use village would consist of 400-500 small residential dwelling units of various typologies for the chronically homeless, including neighborhood and community centers, open spaces, general retail, commercial, and institutional uses. The property is currently located in the PL (Public Lands) zone which allo ws for a diversity of public facilities and public land uses. However, mixed use developments and residential uses are not permitted under the current PL land use zoning designation. Therefore, the property must be rezoned to allow The Other Side Village development as proposed. The zoning district which would likely best accommodate the proposed use is a Form Based District. The purpose of the Form Based District is to create walkable urban neighborhoods which provide people-oriented places, options for housing types, proximity to amenities and public transportation, and access to recreational and employment opportunities. In addition, the Form Based District ordinance provides specific zoning regulations that focus on the scale and form of development to create pedestrian oriented communities to live, work and play within a close proximity. The FB-UN2 subdistrict regulations provide the framework for a lower intensity urban neighborhood generally consisting of buildings up to four stories in height with taller buildings located on street corners, which may contain a single use, or mix of uses. This zone is currently mapped in the Central Ninth neighborhood. In considering the scope and development objectives of The Other Side Village, the FB -UN2 zone accomplish the goals of the proposal as stated. A description of the proposed use of the property being rezoned. The Village The Village is a permanent supportive housing development for the chronically homeless, where those coming out of chronic homelessness can find not only tiny homes to rent affordably, but services and resources to help them along the way, in a hand -up, not handout model. It is anticipated that the Village will house up to approximately 400+ residents in cottage homes and similar sized attached housing units as duplexes (two-family residences) and triplexes (row houses) as provided for in the FB-NU2 Zone. The support services for the Village will include on-site health care, dental, and social services along with a convenience store, deli, and pet supplies. In addition, community gathering spaces will include an auditorium, non- denominational church, and an amphitheater. Housing will be arranged in neighborhoods of approximately 30 homes each with neighborhood amenities to include a small pavilion, laundry, commercial kitchen, and a multipurpose room for social gatherings. To encourage self-sufficiency, social enterprises will be incorporated into the Village to provide opportunities for work and community service. The Homes The homes will be sized between 250 and 400 sf each. The majority will be stand -alone homes, but the development will have some duplexes and trip lexes. Each home will be attractively furnished, and will have a bed, a kitchen, with standard appliances, a bathroom with a shower, and heating and AC. This will be a gated community, where the residents will be able to come and go as necessary, but there can be controlled access of visitors to maintain safety and order within the Village. The homes will be situated in small neighborhoods of 25-35 homes to create the opportunities for close connected neighborhoods. Each neighborhood will be a mix of single units, duplex units, and triplex units. Connected to every 2-4 neighborhoods will be a Neighborhood Center. The Neighborhood Center will have a common area, a kitchen, laundry equipment, and a outdoor grill space with some picnic tables. Wrap-Around Services The Village will include facilities to provide services and resources for the residents of the Village in a Community Center. These services will include: • A medical exam room • A dental exam room • Mental health therapy rooms • A room big enough for a group session • A dog wash room • A veterinarian exam room • A room for employment services • Space for other supportive services, such as legal aid • A training room for finances literacy and other similar classes • Space for community gathers, meals, fitness activities (such as yoga or aerobics) • A commercial kitchen The medical, dental, and mental health services will be provided by third -party providers, who will provide these services directly to the residents. Community volunteers will be involved in providing many of the other services. Retail Services The Village will have a range of retail services, primarily focused on providing nearby services for the residents, but these will also be accessible to the surrounding neighborhoods. Planned retail services will include: • A small deli and coffee shop • A small grocery store • A hair salon and barbershop • A gift shop • A place that tells the Village story for tours These services will be situated outside of the gated community and will be located to have ea sy access and parking for clientele that will be frequenting these services from outside the Village. Community Amenities The Village will have the following amenities spread throughout the development for the benefit of the residents: • A small non-denominational chapel • A multi-use basketball/pickleball sports court • A cantina / food truck spot / coffee station near the center or north end of the village with an outdoor seating area nearby to be frequented primarily by the residents. • A picnic area • A memorial garden for residents that pass on • A memorial garden for pets • A horseshoe pit • A dog park • A Food Pantry (with access for Food Bank truck deliveries, storage and distribution space) • Open lawn space for active use • A fitness path that creates an integrated feel between neighborhoods with outdoor stations along the way. • A Children’s play area for visiting kids and grandkids • Trail systems that make for comfortable and natural movement between neighborhoods and attractive amenities spread between neighborhoods that encourage interaction. Performing Arts Center The Village will have a world-class 600 seat Performing Arts Center to host local and national performers as well as host plays, concerts, and community events. We are envisioning this facility to be able to have TV broadcast abilities as well as a recording studio so that this facility can be a revenue generating source for the Village. Residents would have access to the performances at free or significantly reduced rates and the surround ing community would be able to attend as well. The operations of the Performing Arts Center will also create employment opportunities for residents. One possibility for parking is to have parking up on the landfill for large events and have people walk down or have shuttles down, much like they do at USANA. Outdoor Amphitheater The Village will have an outdoor events space and amphitheater, where we can have performances, show movies, or have outdoor events, such as Farmer’s Markets, a Christmas Market or other such events. These would be available to both the residents as well as the surrounding community. This space will also create additional employment opportunities for the residents of the Village. We would want to be able to seat around 600 peopl e. We anticipate being able to have outside Food Trucks to be able to come onsite to provide additional food services. Social Enterprises The Village will have an onsite food production facility that will be manufacturing cookies to be sold through wholesale channel and retail channels. The facility will need access for delivery trucks. This social enterprise will provide employment opportunities for the residents of the Village. The Landfill Zone While the Landfill Zone would be challenging to build homes and structures upon it based upon the unstable material below the surface, there are still ways to utilize this difficult parcel. The Village would be able to utilize this land to create additional green space with trees and paths, construct a modest solar farm to provide electricity for the Village, and to provide additional parking for large community events at the Village. List the reasons why the present zoning may not be appropriate for the area. The site was the former location of the City’s landfill and as such was designated as Public Lands. While the west side of the parcel contains the buried landfill material and is not developable, the east half of the parcel has passed an environmental analysis and is appropriate for development. The proposed mixed-use development is ideally suited for this parcel that is bounded by I-215 on the west, the City’s Parks & Recreation property on the north, a wrecking yard on the east, and Indiana Avenue on the south with industrial development on the south side of the street. While the site is thus isolated from the residential neighborhoods east of Redwood Road, it will still serve as an integral part the Salt Lake community at large. The property is currently located in the PL (Public Lands) zone which allows for a diversity of public facilities and public land uses. However, mixed use developments and residential uses are not permitted under the current PL land use zoning designation. Based upon 21A.33.070: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses For Special Purpose Districts, the following uses are not permitted in a Public Lands zone: Not Permitted in Public Lands zone: • Agricultural Use • Amphitheater, formal • Veterinary office • Artisan Food production • Clinic (Medical, Dental) • Commercial Food Production • No Residential of any kind (except care taker residence) • Mixed Use Development • Performing Arts Production Facility • Philanthropic Use • Place of Worship • Restaurant • Retail Goods Establishment • Retail Sales Therefore, the property would need to be rezoned to allow The Other Side Village development as proposed. Is the request amending the Zoning Map? Yes. If so, please list the parcel numbers to be changed. All of this parcel: Parcel Record 15101010010000 Owner SALT LAKE CITY CORP Address 1850 W INDIANA AVE A portion of this parcel: Parcel Record 15033510030000 Owner SALT LAKE CITY CORP Address 1965 W 500 S Is the request amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance? No. Frequently Asked Questions What is the Village? The Other Side Village is a self-reliant, master-planned neighborhood that provides affordable, permanent quality housing, access to social services, and a robust and supportive community for men and women coming out of chronic homelessness. The Village is founded on the conviction that housing alone will never solve homelessness, but community will. The combination of high quality, permanent housing and a strong culture of personal growth, support and connection is the heart of our model. Who is it for? To be eligible to live in The Other Side Village, an individual must have experienced chronic homelessness. We expect many of our residents to have at least one disabling condition, either mentally or physically. We define chronic homelessness as any person with a disability who has been living unsheltered for the last 12 months continuously or on multiple occasions that cumulatively total at least 12 months. All potential residents are required to complete an assessment, be fingerprinted and agree to a criminal background check processed by the FBI. Those with past sex offenses or arson convictions are not eligible for residence. Who are we? And why do we think we can do it? For decades in Utah, we’ve wrung our hands about what to do with criminal offenders with long histories of addiction. Who would have thought that the solution was to have 100 longtime felons move into a home in downtown Salt Lake City? And yet, in 2015, that is exactly what began. Since then, The Other Side Academy has become one of Utah’s gems – a model of citizenship, cleanliness, professionalism and integrity. The students you see here have been arrested an average of 25 times. And yet when racial tension erupted into riots in downtown Salt Lake City in the summer of 2020, it was students of The Other Side Academy who rushed to the scene to clean up. When police spent sleepless nights preparing for civil unrest, it was students of The Other Side Academy who brought them coffee and encouragement. When the Salt Lake City Council was considering whether to give The Other Side Academy permission to remain in its downtown location, over fifty neighbors turned out to say that the neighborhood was better because they were there. And the police officials gave a report that crime had actually gone down since we moved into the neighborhood. And amazingly, all of this was done without any government funds. Students of The Other Side Academy pay their own way by running some of the most respected businesses in the state. For decades in Utah, we’ve wrung our hands about how to help the growing number of people experiencing homelessness in our cities. We believe the same principles that have enabled students at The Other Side Academy to create a model community point the way to what must be done. While those experiencing chronic homelessness face different challenges than TOSA students, we contend that there are universal principles for creating healthy communities that give us a responsibility to step in. Why? Because we understand what it is to be marginalized. We understand what it takes to become self-reliant. We have experience creating a peer community with strong values and shared accountability. And so, in coming months, The Other Side Academy is partnering with the City of Salt Lake to create The Other Side Village – a self-reliant, peer-led village that provides a safe, dignified and uplifting life for people who are chronically unsheltered, and which brings them and the larger community into mutually ennobling relationships. Just like The Other Side Academy. Why are we a Village and not a tiny home project? It is not about Tiny Homes. You’ll notice that residents live in what are called “Tiny Homes.” But be careful, the size of the homes is the least important part of this effort. Some communities are building tiny home neighborhoods that will likely become tiny slums in short order. The key is not the physical structures, but the social system. The primary ingredient for success, like at The Other Side Academy, is creating a strong culture that lifts and changes all who are part of it. This is what The Other Side Academy has learned to do. And we are committed to creating this same opportunity for our homeless brothers and sisters. The most important part is to create an environment, socially and physically, that facilitates connection with others. Homelessness is the result of a catastrophic loss of family. So the solution must be to build a new family. The second most important part is establishing a community with strong social norms. This is what brings out the best in all of us. These strong norms will invite all to strive to achieve their potential, allowing them the dignity of being part of the solution, not just a problem to be solved. Work and self-improvement are fundamental principles of happiness. As all are invited to contribute at the level of their ability, The Other Side Village will remain prosperous, safe and strong. The Other Side Village believes that the single greatest cause of homelessness is a profound, catastrophic loss of family. That’s why our focus at The Other Side Village is to do more than just provide adequate housing. We are developing a community with supportive services and amenities to help address an individual’s relational needs at a fraction of the cost of traditional housing initiatives. We seek to empower our residents to build relationships with others, and to experience healing and restoration as part of engaging with a broader community. What will the houses be like? One of the irreplaceable ingredients to solving homelessness is providing affordable, high quality, permanent housing. And that’s exactly what the homes in the Village will do. Our homes will provide approximately 350 to 400 square feet to each resident, including a bedroom, a living room, a bathroom with a shower, and a kitchen with all the appliances. If we intend to create a community where people can thrive, it must be centered on homes that provide the comfort and amenities that each of us expects for ourselves. What services will be provided at The Other Side Village? There is a broad range of services that will be available on-site to our residents with facilities designed specifically to accommodate their unique needs. These include: ● Full-time behavioral health case managers ● Primary healthcare service ● Social enterprise business opportunities through The Other Side Village Social Enterprises ● Regular farmers market to provide residents with healthy, nutritious, and free vegetables harvested from the Village’s main gardens ● Employment opportunities ● Supportive community services and activities What will be the rules of the Village? Individuals living in The Other Side Village are required to follow three primary community covenants. Residents must: 1. Pay rent on time. 2. Abide by civil law. 3. Follow the rules of the community itself (similar to HOA or Homeowners Association for a neighborhood). What was this site previously? Looking at the site, there is the historic landfill that was used from 1920 to 1962. This western portion on the site is the elevated portion on the parcel along the west side, adjacent to I-215. The landfill has been dormant for the last 60 years and has 5 feet of fill over the top of the landfill. We do not plan to build any housing or offices on the westside landfill portion of the parcel. We have already done a number of environmental tests on the site and we continue to do additional testing until we are satisfied that this is a safe and healthy place. The eastside of the parcel is largely native soil with some green waste at the southern and northern ends of the parcel. We plan to build the housing on the eastside of the parcel and avoid building on the western landfill portion. To date, none of the test results has disqualified the eastern portion of the site from being considered as a viable site. We continue to do further testing as well as working closely with local and state regulatory agencies, including the Salt Lake City Office of Sustainability and the Utah State Department of Environmental Quality. As we do continued testing, if we find anything that makes the site not viable for humans that cannot be safely remediated , we will abandon this site and pursue other locations. Are you concerned about crime in the Village? How will you police the community? One of our goals at The Other Side Village is to transform the way people view the stereotype of individuals who find themselves homeless. After years of serving and working with criminal addicts at The Other Side Academy as well as the homeless population in Salt Lake, we believe the stereotype of chronically homeless individuals as it relates to crime is actually wrong. Chronically homeless individuals are among the most vulnerable and most often are the victims of crime, as opposed to being the perpetrators of crime. Every neighborhood in any city at any time is susceptible to some level of criminal activity. Neighborhoods can mitigate potential criminal activity through strong vigilance. The very essence of The Other Side Village is neighbor looking after neighbor. We will have a robust Neighborhood Watch Program and will work to resolve as many issues as possible within the community. As a data point, crime statistics from the Salt Lake Police Department in the area surrounding The Other Side Academy shows a significant reduction in crime in the neighborhood after we moved in. It is also what has happened since Community First! Began building a village for formerly homeless individuals that will ultimately have over 1,500 tiny homes in it. The crime rate has dropped, neighbors are regular visitors to these campuses, and property values have been enhanced. We are confident that the same will happen with the establishment of the Village. 4. Mailing List OWN_FULL_NAME OWN_ADDR own_unit OWN_CITY OWN_STATE OWN_ZIP BAJR, LLC 3185 E DESERET DR ST GEORGE UT 84790 SALT LAKE CITY CORP PO BOX 145460 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114 MIRAMICHI PROPERTIES, LLC PO BOX 25906 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84125 BENEFICIAL INTERNATIONAL INC 1780 W 500 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104 MIRAMICHI PROPERTIES, LLC 1852 W 500 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104 VERTICAL SPACE, LLC 169 W 400 N SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103 SHACKLETON'S ENDURANCE, LLC 2471 S 150 W BOUNTIFUL UT 84010 SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 VERTICAL SPACE, LLC 1450 S 400 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 ISSB, LLC 2082 W GARDNER LN WEST JORDAN UT 84088 M‐13, LP LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 221 S 35TH AVE PHOENIX AZ 85009 ALVIE CARTER TRUST 1810 W INDIANA AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104 TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 1810 W INDIANA AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104 MANTAS INVESTMENTS, LLC 3380 S 500 W SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 C L W PROPERTIES, LLC 642 E EIGHTEENTH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103 JP GODWIN PROPERTIES IV, LLC PO BOX 1147 DUNN NC 28335 STEVEN M CLINGER; MARGARET K CLINGER (JT) 19839 N 85TH DR PEORIA AZ 85382 LIVAN, LLC 1036 W 1850 N WEST BOUNTIFUL UT 84087 BKR HOLDINGS, LLC 5845 CRESTRIDGE ROAD BILLINGS MT 59101 HILLCREST INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC 5230 S 900 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84117 Current Occupant 460 S ORANGE ST Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1990 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1850 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1784 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1853 W 400 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1965 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1855 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1965 W 500 S #1 Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1759 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1759 W 500 S #NFF1 Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 622 S REDWOOD RD Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1875 W 500 S #NFF1 Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1875 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1835 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1837 W 500 S #NFF1 Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1805 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1775 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1815 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1811 W 500 S Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 715 S DELONG ST Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 719 S DELONG ST Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 2105 W INDIANA CIR Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1850 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1818 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1816 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1804 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1808 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1806 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1802 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1802 W INDIANA AVE WEST Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 652 S REDWOOD RD Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1995 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1925 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1907 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1795 W INDIANA AVE Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 850 S REDWOOD RD Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1810 W REDWOOD DEPOT LN Salt Lake City UT 84104 Current Occupant 1830 W REDWOOD DEPOT LN Salt Lake City UT 84104 Salt Lake City Planning ‐ David Gellner PO BOX 145480 Salt Lake City UT 84114 5. Written Comments Received after the Staff Report was Published 1 Gellner, David From:Deborah Hunt <> Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 7:46 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) My comments in favor of Other Side Village I would like to speak at the meeting in favor of the Other Side Village. I live in the neighborhood (Poplar Grove) and would welcome the Village here. After 22 years away from Salt Lake City, I moved back from Denver, Colorado. I was shocked and disheartened to see the number of unhoused residents in the parkways and side streets on the near West side. In my neighborhood, I see many camped by the Jordan Parkway. I knew that Salt Lake City had received a "Housing First" grant a few years ago, as I had been involved with applying for a similar grant application in Denver. I really hoped that the housing situation in Salt Lake City had improved. I do appreciate the efforts of the city and the Mayor's office have made to reach out, educate the public, provide on site services, and work to provide shelter. Our city can and must do better. The Other Side Village is an essential, effective, and dignified approach. A similar tiny home project has been highly successful in Denver and other cities. Let's show our creativity, compassion, and flexibility to make Salt Lake City a model for providing cutting edge services to our unsheltered neighbors. Please adjust zoning to accommodate this project. Respectfully, Dr. Deborah Esquibel Hunt Poplar Grove resident 1 Gellner, David From:christopher dunn <> Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 7:18 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) The other side village I ask that you not change the zoning of this property. As a resident in close proximity I feel like the use that is being proposed would create a decrease in property value and I would feel unsafe in my neighborhood. 1 Gellner, David From:Deborah Beninati > Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 7:20 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) The Other Side Village Dear Commissioners: I am writing in support of zoning for The Other Side Village. The Other Side Village is an Integrated Community for people coming out of chronic homelessness. I have spent the past 18 months working directly with people facing homelessness in the Salt Lake City area. The Other Side Village offers the best possible solution to the overwhelming and complicated issues surrounding homelessness. This carefully planned community will provide access to social and medical services, including support for addiction recovery and employment opportunity. The ultimate goal of the community is to reach self‐sufficiency to cover operational expenses generated through social and business enterprises. I urge to support the zoning of this unique opportunity to assist our fellow citizens experiencing homelessness. Respectfully, Deborah Beninati 1 Gellner, David From:central9thcc@gmail.com Sent:Tuesday, October 26, 2021 11:22 PM To:Gellner, David; Planning Public Comments; Faris, Dennis; Representative Angela Romero; Mano, Darin; Valdemoros, Ana Cc:Zoning; Lopez, Eva; Clark, Weston; ; Central 9th 1; ; 'Jesse Hulse'; Ballpark; Senator Derek Kitchen; Cleveland, Ashley; 'Scott Howell'; Subject:(EXTERNAL) Zoning Map Amendment Proposal (PLNPCM2021-00787) FB‐UN2 Zoning Concerns – Zoning Map Amendment – 1850 W Indiana Avenue & 1965 West 500 South Zoning Map Amendment PLNPCM2021‐00787 Though we are supportive of The Other Side Academy and their Other Side Village proposal, we urge caution with regards to rezoning to FB‐UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood District). FB‐UN2 started as an experiment in what is now the Central 9th neighborhood of Salt Lake City, it dominates our zoning, and has proven to be flawed and unhealthy for the vibrant community we strive to achieve in Central 9th. As with any experiment at some point you must evaluate the results, fix problems, and address unintended consequences which become recognizable over time. Both our community and the city have recognized the problems created by FB‐UN2 for several years but seem unable to motivate the Planning Division or Administration to take necessary actions and correct the flaws in this zoning. Below are some of our main concerns and fears we have for this rezone proposal. We want to be certain the neighbors and community surrounding this location are aware of what FB‐UN2 may bring. 1. FB‐UN2 offers very generous use by right, 4 or 5 stories depending on location, minimal setbacks from neighboring properties, no greenspace, no parking, no ground level engagement, nor aesthetic requirements, removing the community from most planning discussion or participation. It is wonderful zoning for developers or planning department staff trying to reduce workloads, it is horrible from a neighborhood perspective. At 950 South Washington Street a developer was able to remove 3 single family homes and is replacing them with 200 microunits, no parking, no ground level community engagement, no greenspace benefitting the neighborhood, or any other feature improving community quality of life. Because they are building by right, based on FB‐UN2, the developer has not had to engage the community at all. Though Central 9th has reached out multiple times, we have been rebuffed by what this zoning allows. 200 microunits will forever alter the neighborhood, but we, the community, have no voice due to FB‐UN2. 2. FB‐UN2 discourages greenspace, and builders have found its flaws, constructing numerous poorly built multi story walk up units which already appear to be aging badly. Simply look at the microunits at 850 South West Temple to see what a 4th floor walkup with no elevators, parking, common space for residents, ground level engagement, or any greenspace can look like. What of the needs for accessible challenged individuals, let alone someone who would like to age in place or retire, FB‐UN2 offers them no refuge. If this is the future of zoning for Salt Lake, we are all in trouble. 3. Another major concern with regards to FB‐UN2 is the planning division's proposed Affordable Housing Overlay, which hardly touches much of the city but penalizes those of us already hosting density. The proposed overlay would allow up to 3 additional stories, meaning an 8‐story building could be built by right in FB‐UN2 zoned areas. There are simple fixes to what ails FB‐UN2. The zoning could be altered to say if a multi‐unit housing project is proposed for more than 20 units it should be required to go through design review, green space and ground level engagement should be mandatory, rooftop greenspace encouraged, and FB‐UN2 where it borders FB‐UN1 should not allow 2 additional height under the proposed housing overlay. We do not ever want to see an 8‐story building in FB‐UN2 bordering a maximum 30’ height home in FB‐UN1 but that is what is being proposed. We simply request Salt Lake City follow the Plan Salt Lake master plans as adopted by the city when it comes to zoning and its effects on our neighborhood and others where form‐based zoning is proposed. http://www.slcdocs.com/Planning/MasterPlansMaps/Downtown.pdf (Central 9th begins on page 130 at this link) With regards, Paul Johnson Chair, Central 9th Community Council 1 Gellner, David From:Adam Breen > Sent:Friday, October 22, 2021 1:12 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) 10/27 - Other Side Village's rezoning City Commissioners, I am typing this email as positive support for the application and rezone of the Other Side Village. As you are aware, our nation, our state, our city and our community continue to enlarge the gap between the upper class and the lower class due to economic pressures, growth and unforeseen disruption. Our forefathers vision of the American Dream is quickly becoming unreachable for many americans. The term "Attainable Housing" has slipped away and affordable housing (Government or deeds restricted) is becoming the only option for many individuals and families. Years of government leadership have believed urban sprawl and low density would keep home ownership alive and give people a healthy and happy life. This perceived notion of suburbia did appear to fulfill its purpose for about 30 years however we are now seeing this concept as one of many contributing factors to the large separation between socioeconomic classes. I have to praise Salt Lake City for your leadership and recognition in these issues. Salt Lake City currently is considering affordability and availability major issues and progressively acting by approving increased height, density, and growth through the city master plan and other individual application requests. The Other Side Village is a conceptual project that addresses these similar issues from the so‐called battle field. The Academy's vision of revitalizing individuals that have been priced out of society and have lost hope is a large step of re‐ inviting individuals to properly participate in our society. Giving these people a chance, whether it be a first or second or so on, will prove, with the right influence and help, that people are inherently good in nature and want to be a part of something larger. The Other Side Village will give these people without a place in life a place they can call home and restart a life they are proud of. I am not currently involved in this project or within the Other Side Academy with the exception of personally following this project due to my interest in the growth and positive changes in our community. I look forward to seeing this project gain steam and conceptualize into an amazing Village! Thank you for taking the time to read this and consider the positive impacts this project will make on our community and residents. ‐‐ Breen Homes Adam Breen 1 Gellner, David From: Sent:Monday, October 25, 2021 8:43 AM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) The Other Side Village Rezoning I support the rezoning request for The Other Side Village and full implementation of the program for these reasons: - It serves a worthy social purpose, providing safe, secure shelter for fellow human beings who at least temporarily are unable to do so for themselves. - The Other Side Academy (TOSA) has an excellent track record as a therapeutic community in helping troubled individuals become functioning, positive members of society., and has a clear, logical process for adapting its approach to the needs of homeless individuals. - TOSA has shown itself to be a self sustaining contributor to Salt Lake City, through its business entities and civic involvement. - TOSA's alumni, board, and supporters, represent tremendous intellectual, and economic resources, and include some of the finest business minds, social entrepreneurs, and philanthropists in the world. - The Other Side Village will consist of "tiny homes", a highly affordable and innovative approach to creating safe, secure, and comfortable housing that minimizes negative environmental impacts, and is sustainable. - I live in the Atlanta metro area and have worked as an urban planner and project director under Mayors Maynard Jackson, Shirley Franklin, and Kasim Reed, as well as The Martin Luther King Center, The, National Conference of Black Mayors, and the NAACP. Atlanta and every major American city can adapt The Other Side Village as a model to address our own growing and .seemingly intractable problems of homelessness and wasted human potential. Respectfully Submitted, Arthur Cole 1 Gellner, David From:David Dixon < Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 8:51 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) TOSV The City owns the property so the rezone and uses are very much controlled by the City until the development agreement is achieved. We are working with the DEQ on the environmental questions. Thanks, Dave Dixon architect for the Village. Sent from my iPhone 1 Gellner, David From: Sent:Thursday, October 21, 2021 12:55 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:FW: (EXTERNAL) The Other Side Village Proposal ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: David Dixon Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 12:22 PM To: Planning Public Comments <planning.comments@slcgov.com> Cc: Tim Stay Subject: (EXTERNAL) The Other Side Village Proposal Dear Planning Commissioners and staff, As an owner/partner of an architectural firm here in Salt Lake City, I have had interactions with homeless people for years around our building at 833 South 200 East. For the most part, they are passive people with mental health issues that live on our streets. I have spoken with many of them and found them to suffer from a chronic loss of family and connection with others, coupled with substance abuse issues for many that are not addressed. As you know, homelessness is a complex problem with no easy solutions. I became involved with the Other Side Academy a few years ago on some design options they were considering for their facilities downtown and they reached out to me a few months ago for design help on the proposed Other Side Village here in Salt Lake. I know of their tremendous success at TOSA dealing with former inmates and I believe that they can produce similar results with those selected to live in TOSV. As the managing architect for the Village design, I am serving without compensation and working with several architectural and land planning firms to master plan the Village and produce construction drawings. I agree that the Form Based Zoning is the proper designation for the Village in that it provides for the mixed uses contemplated and the housing types proposed. It promises to be a safe, inviting, community that will provide the services needed by the residents to improve their standard of living and address their underlying issues. I have read about and visited other similar villages across the country and have observed their successes and drawbacks. I know that TOSV's approach will lead to similar successes and avoid the pitfalls of other Villages by becoming self‐ sustaining, supportive, and better managed with a higher level of design and greater community services. Knowing what I know about this population and the design and management proposed for the Indiana Avenue site, I want to let you know of my support for the project as a trendsetting solution for a significant segment of our homeless community. I'm sure there will be those in surrounding communities that will be skeptical of what is being proposed with fears of increased crime rates, less safe neighborhoods, and a negative impact on property values. I have served as a planning commission chairman and a city council member in my hometown of Farmington. I know of the concerns of neighbors when changes or developments are proposed. I can say that in my visits to other Villages in Austin, Texas, and Kansas City, safety concerns were not observed there and TOSV will be even better managed. I would not hesitate to allow 2 TOSV to be constructed near my neighborhood and believe it to be one thing we can do right for the individuals selected to make it their permanent homes. Thank you, Dave David J. Dixon, AIA Partner . 1 Gellner, David From:Deborah Hunt < Sent:Tuesday, October 19, 2021 5:25 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) Link for October 27 meeting Hello, I would like to speak at the meeting in favor of the Other Side Village. I live in the neighborhood (Poplar Grove) and would welcome the Village here. After 22 years away from Salt Lake City, I moved back from Denver, Colorado. I was shocked and disheartened to see the number of unhoused residents in the parkways and side streets on the near West side. In my neighborhood, I see many camped by the Jordan Parkway. I knew that Salt Lake City had received a "Housing First" grant a few years ago, as I had been involved with applying for a similar grant application in Denver. I really hoped that the housing situation in Salt Lake City had improved. I do appreciate the efforts of the city and the Mayor's office have made to reach out, educate the public, provide on site services, and work to provide shelter. Our city can and must do better. The Other Side Village is an essential, effective, and dignified approach. A similar tiny home project has been highly successful in Denver and other cities. Let's show our creativity, compassion, and flexibility to make Salt Lake City a model for providing cutting edge services to our unsheltered neighbors. Please adjust zoning to accommodate this project. Dr. Deborah Esquibel Hunt 1 Gellner, David From:Fraser Nelson > Sent:Saturday, October 23, 2021 9:23 AM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) Support for the OtherSide Village Dear members, Please accept this letter of support for the Village rezoning request. I have long been involved in homelessness services though my work as Director of Data and Innovation for Mayor Ben McAdams, while a Managing Director of the Sorenson Impact Center and while leading the Community Foundation of Utah and the Disability Law Center. As a long time resident of downtown and now the Ballpark neighborhood I have talked with my unhoused neighbors about their struggles and hopes for a place they can be safe and regain lives that feel lost. I have also been engaged with The Other Side Academy since its inception and just this week used their moving services. All this is to say that I have great faith in their organization and truly hope that this innovative model can be brought to our community. Thank you, Fraser Nelson Salt Lake City UT 84101 1 Gellner, David From:Heidi Willis > Sent:Thursday, October 21, 2021 10:45 AM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) Support for Rezoning for Other Side Village As a long‐term Utah resident interested in strengthening and improving our community, I’m writing to express my enthusiastic support of the rezoning request for the Other Side Village which will be discussed in the 5:30 meeting on Oct 27. Thanks so much, Heidi Bennion Willis Sent from my iPhone 1 Gellner, David From:Jordan Frandsen <> Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 7:54 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) PLNPCM2021-00787: Zoning Map Amendment Comments I support the rezoning and development of the proposed locations on behalf of the Other Side Academy. The proposals, the outreach, and the presentations have convinced me that this will be a benefit both to my community (I live down the 9‐Line from this project) and to the whole city and state. I thank the commission again for hearing and approving my proposal (Alley Vacation) and support this proposal as well. Jordan Frandsen, Property Owner Salt Lake City, UT 84104 1 Gellner, David From:Kathy Smith Sent:Tuesday, October 26, 2021 2:16 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) The Other Side Academy Village rezone request Dear Commissioners, I've had the privilege of visiting The Other Side Academy twice and would be honored to have such a community in my neighborhood. I urge you to visit TOSA if you haven't already and to approve the rezone request for the property that the city already owns. This is a proven program for dramatically reducing recidivism and creating a social fabric for those who have suffered chronic homelessness or incarceration. I worked for the State of Utah when the state's 10-year plan for ending chronic homelessness was launched in the early 2000's. I was the director of the Commission on Volunteers. I can see opportunities for service that would be life-changing at TOSA; I've experienced it myself. I have also served as a planning commissioner and as a city council woman in northern Utah and thank you for your diligent and sometimes thankless service. Truly, Kathy Smith 1 Gellner, David From:Laurie Hopkins <> Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 3:29 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) 10/28 Planning Commission Meeting - The Other Side Village Dear Planning Commission, I am unable to attend the Public Hearing portion of the meeting, so am taking the opportunity to provide a general comment regarding the development of the tiny home village by The Other Side Academy. I understand there is an environmental evaluation being conducted at the proposed site and likely other issues that need to be and should be addressed for the project to be appropriately moved forward and viable. That said, I am in support of a projects that will add deeply affordable housing to the community, and that will specifically serve individuals that are experiencing homelessness find accessible and stable housing. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Laurie G. Hopkins Executive Director | Shelter the Homeless 1 Gellner, David From:Leslie Montgomery < Sent:Tuesday, October 26, 2021 10:49 AM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) The Other Side Village Hello, I write to share my support of the proposed Other Side Village project. As a mortgage professional for the past 35 years, I have seen homelessness grow beyond the “hobos” I saw on the streets of Seattle growing up. Over the last several years, Seattle has faced significant housing issues with unwanted tent camps and lack of understanding or social services to address the issues facing the city. A solution like The Other Side Village is an innovative and empowering answer to our challenges. There are individuals with mental challenges whether born with disabilities or locked in the grip of the addiction disease. The village will offer a community of support where the residents help one another and help the community sustain itself. As a founding board member for HomeAid Utah, I have learned the devastation that homelessness puts of families which is well beyond the myth of who we typically see on the streets. I am proud to be part of this organization helping the homeless population service providers with their facilities and projects. We have become a viable organization for good in the Salt Lake valley. We listened to a presentation earlier this year about The Other Side Village and unanimously agreed that it is a spectacular opportunity to make sustainable change within our community. I am also the President of Soroptimist International of Ogden, the largest and oldest women’s rights organization in the world. We celebrated our 100 ‐year anniversary on 10/3/2021. The pandemic has affected women in an extremely negative way, setting our progress back 30 years (my adult life) which is incredibly discouraging. Housing is one of these areas affected. If a woman must take care of the children and is the sole provider, she is in a no‐win situation when it comes to her ability to provide housing. These are real issues in our community which need to be solved. We, as human beings, must help care for those who cannot care for themselves. With gratitude, ! 1 Gellner, David From:Ronda Landa <> Sent:Tuesday, October 26, 2021 4:27 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) The Other Side Hi I wanted to reach out to comment on my support of the rezoning for The Other Side Village. As a downtown employee and as an individual that utilizes the vendors of downtown, I see this as a separate user within the city. Any city growing like our city is, what is critical is ‘smart’ planning. Bringing the community together that would live within this community is ‘smart’ planning. We need to plan for all types of housing within our city limits. Thank you. Regards, Ronda UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE, please do not overnight or deliver any documents to our office. If original documents need to be delivered to First American, please advise and an alternate address will be provided. We appreciate your Should we receive emailed wire instructions, please understand that we will need to telephone a trusted individual to confirm the authenticity of the instructions prior to releasing the wire. The safety of your funds is important to us, and with wire fraud on the rise, we want to add a layer of protection. ****************************************************************************************** This message may contain confidential or proprietary information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above or may contain information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, disseminating, distributing or copying this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message by mistake, please immediately notify us by replying to the message and delete the 1 Gellner, David From:Scott Sloan Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 11:17 AM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) The Other Side Village--request to approve rezoning Dear Planning Commission, I’m writing in support of the other side village, which has the potential to provide life‐changing housing for many. I understand that in order to move forward on this project the Council needs to approve a zoning change, which I fully support. Please join in supporting this change so that the work can continue. Sincerely, Scott Sloan CEO BaseCamp Franchising, LLC 1 Gellner, David From:Soren Simonsen > Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 8:27 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) Comments regarding The Other Side Village I have provided oral comments in support of The Other Side Village. I wish to also provide some written comments that don’t apply so much to The Other Side Village as to the community more broadly. Currently, almost the entirety of Redwood Road is zoned Commercial Corridor (CC). This corridor could be a wonderful gathering place for the community of residents and businesses, and that vision is clearly articulated in the West Salt Lake Master Plan, but it will not happen under the current CC zone. I urge the Planning Commission to not only rezone the parcels for The Other Side Village, but to consider applying the FB‐UN‐2 or another appropriate form based zone to all of the currently CC zoned properties and make meaningful transformation of this corridor to benefit the entire west side of Salt Lake City. Thank you ‐ Søren Simonsen | 1 Gellner, David From:Susan Klinker Sent:Tuesday, October 26, 2021 10:05 AM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) in support of The Other Side Village rezoning request Dear Planning Commission Members, I am writing in support of the Other Side Village's request for rezoning. I've been following the development of this project since it was first announced and have been very impressed with the project's leadership. The Other Side team has unique experience, and an amazing track record of helping people turn their lives around, one relationship at a time. They really care, and have quickly organized the resources and professional support to make an ambitious project like this happen. I believe they have the passion and skill at all levels, to create a caring & engaged community developed in partnership with the City. I am proud to live in a City that is leading the way in developing workable solutions to the problem of homelessness. "Be it ever so humble, there's no place like home." Thanks for your support of this important project, Susan Klinker ‐‐ 1 Gellner, David From:Anne Charles < Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 6:26 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) 1850 W Indiana Ave & 1965 W 500 S Comment Hello, Please read this within your public comment hearing. I am opposed to the amendment to this rezone. Firstly, I do not support this organization and their practices. I am Anne Charles, a clinical director at a substance use treatment center that works with previously incarcerated folks to prevent relapse and recidivism. I do not believe in the lack of resources provided by the Other Side academy, specifically in regards to the physical and mental health of their students. They do not have doctors or mental health clinicians provided for clients. If we are to create a supportive housing community I want to know that those living there will genuinely have support. Secondly, I do not believe the land itself should be used. This is said to be a space of those who are chronically homeless and part of the parcel is a former landfill. This is not only insulting, but also unsafe. A 2017 Department of Environmental Quality study found elevated levels of metals like, lead, mercury, copper, and nickle. There has been no further study since because there was no population or residences on the land and deemed unnecessary. The otherside village has said they are "very aggressive in their environmental testing." This proves to be untrue because we have seen the studies and know further testing should be done. I do not see the results of environmental testing in this proposal and would need to see this before feeling comfortable having folks live there. The argument I heard when these views have been expressed is "that only part of the parcel includes the formerlandfull and that part of the land will be developed with gardens and green space." People will still be in these gardens and green space and presumably consume the food and be exposed to the soils of this space. This is not an adequate solution and shows the lack of investment in ensuring the safety of those who have few options. Please ensure the safety of out community. Thank you, ‐‐ Anne Charles Clinical Director, LCSW Odyssey House of Utah, Meadowbrook 1 Gellner, David From:Carter McDaniels <> Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 11:45 AM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) Approve the Otherside Village David, Hopefully this email finds you well. My name is Carter McDaniels. I am an entrepreneurship and strategy major at the University of Utah. The Otherside village should be approved and the development of this village will be of paramount importance when it comes to combating Salt Lake’s ongoing homeless crisis. Something needs to be done to combat the current state of Utah's Homeless epidemic and while providing a solution to this issue is a daunting task to say the least, there is no better organization better suited to take on this challenge than the Otherside Academy. Best, Carter McDaniels 1 Gellner, David From:Courtney Giles <> Sent:Thursday, October 21, 2021 10:15 AM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) The Other Side Village Support To Whom it May Concern, Planning Commission I am writing this letter in support of The Other Side Village. I have actively worked with the homeless population in Salt Lake City for going on 15 years now. The issue has become unprecedented when it comes to safe, reliable and long‐term solutions for this demographic. The Other Side Village will offer a place of Community, family, solace, self sufficiency and above all a place to call home. The city has gone about affordable housing and options for our unsheltered community in some of the worst ways possible. We need a solid solution to address the real need for housing for the chronically homeless members of our community. It is vital and for some at this point life or death. Please consider this plea from a person who spends countless hours weekly with these people. Knowing that this project is underway is the only relief of helplessness I have felt in some time for our unsheltered family! I and many others support The Other Side Village. Thank you kindly, Be blessed Courtney Giles 1 Gellner, David From:Turner Bitton <> Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 3:26 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) The Other Side Village Support Hello, I am a resident of Glendale and serve as the Chair of the Glendale Community Council. I’m writing today in my personal capacity to express my support for locating The Other Side Village in my neighborhood. Glendale has long been a gateway to welcoming for many people. I bought my home in Glendale because it was affordable and rich in heritage. I love this neighborhood and believe The Other Side Village is a way to invest in Glendale’s legacy. Glendale is home to the International Peace Gardens and the Jordan River Peace Labyrinth, both of which are symbols of Glendale’s status as a gateway of welcoming. The Other Side Village will bring many needed amenities and development to an area of the neighborhood that is disconnected from the neighborhood. The increased transit resources that the village is working to secure along Indiana Avenue would benefit residents and bring new east‐west connections across the neighborhood. As I’ve spoken with my neighbors, I’ve learned that the vast majority of my neighbors support this innovative project. The addition of new residents seeking another chance is exciting and should be supported by the planning commission. Thanks, Turner C. Bitton 1 Gellner, David From:Richard Stowell <> Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 7:26 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) Comment on Rezoning application Though there is currently no development plan associated with this rezoning application, it is plain that the applicant has plans for a homeless village. This is troubling. The westside is becoming the part of the city where leaders can put their problems. It’s a dangerous trend. If such a large proportion of the county’s homeless population is coming into our neighborhood for services, whether or not they get them, it will result in families moving out. Businesses not moving in. It runs the risk of becoming a vicious cycle. Don’t let the state and county manipulate you into thinking our neighborhood is the only viable option for projects like this. RDA designations should come into play. According to the city website, the Redevelopment Agency is supposed to promote revenue-generating activity: “Our RDA encourages new development that will create jobs and generate tax revenue for the community to help revitalize the City.” This project would be at the lowest end of the revenue generation scale, and is much more likely to draw city revenue. This commission should only vote to rezone the property in extraordinary circumstances. Such circumstances should be limited to development that would clearly and unambiguously revitalize the west side. The applicant simply does not meet that threshold. Thank you. 1 Gellner, David From:Deborah Williams <> Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 7:12 PM To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) Rezoning property on Indiana Ave for the tiny village I have lived on Indiana Ave just a couple of blocks from the proposed site for over 30 years. I have grand children that visit frequently. Please do not allow this. I want to be able to feel safe in my own home. Thank you for your consideration Sent from my iPhone SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION SWORN STATEMENT SUPPORTING CLOSURE OF MEETING I, ____________ , acted as the presiding member of the _______________________________in which met on _________ Appropriate notice was given of the Council's meeting as required by §52-4-202. A quorum of the Council was present at the meeting and voted by at least a two-thirds vote, as detailed in the minutes of the open meeting, to close a portion of the meeting to discuss the following: §52-4-205(l)(a) discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; §52 -4-205(1 )(b) strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; §52-4-205(l )(c) strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; §52-4-205( l )(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; §52-4-205(l )(e) strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: ((A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) if 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; §52-4-205(1)(f) discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and §52-4-205(1)(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. Other, described as follows: ____________________________________________________________ The content of the closed portion of the Council meeting was restricted to a discussion of the matter(s) for which the meeting was closed. With regard to the closed meeting, the following was publicly announced and recorded, and entered on the minutes of the open meeting at which the closed meeting was approved: (a)the reason or reasons for holding the closed meeting; (b)the location where the closed meeting will be held; and (c)the vote of each member of the public body either for or against the motion to hold the closed meeting. The recording and any minutes of the closed meeting will include: (a)the date, time, and place of the meeting; (b)the names of members Present and Absent; and (c)the names of all others present except where such disclosure would infringe on the confidentiality necessary to fulfill the original purpose of closing the meeting. Pursuant to §52-4-206(6),a sworn statement is required to close a meeting under §52-4-205(1)(a) or (f), but a record by tape recording or detailed minutes is not required; and Pursuant to §52-4-206(1), a record by tape recording and/or detailed written minutes is required for a meeting closed under §52-4-205(1)(b),(c),(d),(e),and (g): A record was not made. A record was made by: : Tape recording Detailed written minutes I hereby swear or affin11 under penalty of perjury that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Presiding Member Date of Signature Salt Lake City CouncilDaniel Dugan August 29, 2022 4 4 4 4 Dan Dugan (Aug 29, 2022 18:43 MDT) Dan Dugan 08/29/2022 Closed Session - Sworn Statement Final Audit Report 2022-08-30 Created:2022-08-30 By:Michelle Barney (michelle.barney@slcgov.com) Status:Signed Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAz4irHD79IwQY5hSXslVEAzXbOz4XKDRM "Closed Session - Sworn Statement" History Document created by Michelle Barney (michelle.barney@slcgov.com) 2022-08-30 - 0:23:19 AM GMT Document emailed to daniel.dugan@slcgov.com for signature 2022-08-30 - 0:26:23 AM GMT Email viewed by daniel.dugan@slcgov.com 2022-08-30 - 0:43:03 AM GMT Signer daniel.dugan@slcgov.com entered name at signing as Dan Dugan 2022-08-30 - 0:43:22 AM GMT Document e-signed by Dan Dugan (daniel.dugan@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2022-08-30 - 0:43:24 AM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed. 2022-08-30 - 0:43:24 AM GMT