HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/19/2023 - Formal Meeting - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
FORMAL MEETING
September 19, 2023 Tuesday 7:00 PM
Council meetings are held in a hybrid meeting format. Hybrid meetings allow people to join online or in person at
the City & County Building. Learn more at www.slc.gov/council/agendas.
Council Work Room
451 South State Street, Room 326
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
SLCCouncil.com
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Darin Mano, Chair
District 5
Victoria Petro, Vice Chair
District 1
Alejandro Puy
District 2
Chris Wharton
District 3
Ana Valdemoros
District 4
Dan Dugan
District 6
Sarah Young
District 7
Generated: 14:41:00
Please note: Dates not identified in the FYI - Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet
determined.
WELCOME AND PUBLIC MEETING RULES
A.OPENING CEREMONY:
1.Council Member Dan Dugan will conduct the formal meeting.
2.Pledge of Allegiance.
3.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules.
4.The Council will approve the Truth-in-Taxation meeting minutes of August 15,
2023.
B.PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Items B1 & B2 will be heard as one public hearing.
1. Grant Application: Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant
Program
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the Police
Department to the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of
Justice Assistance. If awarded, the grant would fund professional travel and training for
sworn and civilian staff; pole cameras; high-speed license plate recognition
technology; climbing equipment; night vision goggles and mounts; optics; ballistic-rated
windshields; surveillance trailer maintenance and replacement; K9 GPS and narcotics
supplies; community policing and targeted enforcement overtime; subaward to Salt Lake
County and the Unified Police Department.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - n/a
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a
Staff Recommendation - Close and refer to future consent
agenda.
2. Grant Application: Jordan River Tree and Debris Removal
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the Trails &
Natural Lands Division to the Utah Division of Forestry, Fire, & State Lands. If awarded,
the grant would fund the removal of dead and obstructing trees, branches, and organic
debris from the Jordan River Water Trail corridor, which would enhance safe and
accessible non-motorized watercraft navigation.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - n/a
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a
Staff Recommendation - Close and refer to future consent
agenda.
3. Ordinance: Zoning Map Amendment at Approximately 2350 North and
Annexation at Approximately 2441 North Rose Park Lane
The Council will accept public comment and consider a request for an annexation and
zoning changes for properties located at approximately 2350 North Rose Park Lane. The
changes include:
Annexation into Salt Lake City approximately 28 acres of property generally
located at approximately 2441 North Rose Park Lane. The annexation requires
designating a zone for each property within the annexation area. The properties
are proposed to be zoned as follows:
•2440 N Rose Park Lane (City-owned) – OS, Open Space
•2441 N Rose Park Lane (Hunter Stables) – R-MU, Residential/Mixed-Use
•2462 N Rose Park Lane (State-owned) – OS, Open Space
Zoning Map Amendment at approximately 2350 North Rose Park Lane from AG-
2 – Agricultural to R-MU, Residential/Mixed Use. The property is currently
within Salt Lake City boundaries. Although the petitions propose specific zones
for the properties, the Council may consider other zones with similar
characteristics. The properties at 2350 and 2441 North are currently used for
horse boarding and outdoor equipment storage.
The changes would facilitate the future development of a mixed-use, multi-family
residential development with potentially 1800 dwelling units. Additional
properties at 2440 North (City-owned) and 2462 North Rose Park Lane (State-
owned) would be annexed into the City as part of the petition. Petition No.
PLNPCM2021-01124 & PLNPCM2021-01134.
For more information visit https://tinyurl.com/RoseParkLaneRezone.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, August 15, 2023
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, September 5, 2023
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, October 3, 2023
Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s).
C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS:
1. Resolution: Ivory University House Public Benefits Analysis
The Council will consider adopting a resolution that would adopt the conclusions of the
public benefit analysis and authorize impact and permit fee waivers and refunds for Ivory
University House L3C. In return, over a period of ten years, Ivory University House would
pledge need-based scholarships for Salt Lake City residents valued at the same amount as
the fee waivers and refunds.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, August 8, 2023
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, August 8, 2023
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s).
2. Ordinance: Budget Amendment No.1 for Fiscal Year 2023-24
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance amending the final budget of Salt Lake
City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2023-24. The
proposed amendment includes additional funding for downtown open streets events this
coming fall, local matching funds for Bipartisan Infrastructure Law grants to rebuild
bridges over the Jordan River, and funding expanded elements of the 2100 South
reconstruction project through the Sugar House Business District, among other items.
For more information on this item visit tinyurl.com/SLCFY24
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, August 15, 2023 and Tuesday, September 5, 2023
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, August 15, 2023
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s).
D.COMMENTS:
1.Questions to the Mayor from the City Council.
2.Comments to the City Council. (Comments are taken on any item not scheduled
for a public hearing, as well as on any other City business. Comments are limited
to two minutes.)
E.NEW BUSINESS:
NONE.
F.UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
NONE.
G.CONSENT:
1. Ordinance: Rezone and Master Plan Amendment at Approximately 1435
State Street
The Council will set the date of Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public
comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning of property
located at 1433 and 1435 South State Street and 1420 South Edison Street from CC
(Corridor Commercial) to FB-UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2), amending the
zoning of property located at 121 East Cleveland Avenue from R-1/5000 (Single Family
Residential) to FB-UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2). This proposal would also
amend the Central Community Future Land Use Map and amend Subsection
21A.27.050.C.3 of the Salt Lake City code to include additional land area eligible for
additional building height. The applicant's intent of these amendment requests is to
accommodate a redevelopment proposal to be submitted at a later date. Consideration
may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar
characteristics. The project is within Council District 5. Petitioner: Matthew Ratelle of
Colmena Group, representing the property owners. Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01183 &
PLNPCM2022-01184
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, September 5, 2023
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, October 17, 2023
Staff Recommendation - Set date.
2. Ordinance: Alley Vacation at Approximately 2167 South 800 East
The Council will set the date of Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public
comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would vacate a portion of a City-
owned alley situated adjacent to properties at 801 East, 809 East, 815 East, and 825 East
Wilmington Avenue. Located within Council District 7. Petitioner: Denise Vance, Petition
No.: PLNPCM2022-00802
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, September 12, 2023
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 7, 2023
Staff Recommendation - Set date.
3. Ordinance: Alley Vacation at Approximately 827 East Wilmington Ave
The Council will set the date of Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public
comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would vacate a portion of a City-
owned alley situated adjacent to properties at 825 East, 827 East, and 829 East
Wilmington Avenue, and 820 East, 826 East, and 830 East Elm Avenue. If approved, this
section of the alley would be divided and given to the property owners abutting the area
of the alley vacated. Petitioner: Russell Bollow, Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00225
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, September 12, 2023
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 7, 2023
Staff Recommendation - Set date.
4. Ordinance: Rezone and Master Plan Amendments at Approximately 135,
159, and 163 West Goltz Avenue and 1036 South Jefferson Street
The Council will set the date of Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public
comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning of properties
located at 135, 159, and 163 West Goltz Avenue and 1036 South Jefferson Street from
RMF-35 (Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential District) to R-MU (Residential
Mixed Use District). This proposal would also amend the Ballpark Station Area Master
Plan Future Land Use Designations from Medium-Density Residential to High-Density
Residential Mixed Use. The proposed amendments are intended to allow the property
owner to accommodate several multifamily developments. Future development plans
were not submitted by the applicant at this time. Consideration may be given to rezoning
the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics. The project is within
Council District 5. Petitioner: TAG SLC, LLC. Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01307,
PLNPCM2021-01308, PLNPCM2021-01309, PLNPCM2022-00198, PLNPCM2022-
00199, & PLNPCM2022-00207
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, October 17, 2023
Staff Recommendation - Set date.
5. Ordinance: The Anti-Gentrification and Displacement Plan, Thriving in
Place
The Council will set the date of Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public
comment and consider an ordinance that would adopt the Thriving in Place plan as part
of the City’s general plan. Thriving in Place is the City's proposed anti-displacement and
mitigation plan, developed with public engagement and feedback from experts and
community organizations.
For more information visit http://tinyurl.com/thrivinginplace.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, September 12, 2023
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, October 17, 2023
Staff Recommendation - Set date.
6. Ordinance: Budget Amendment No.2 for Fiscal Year 2023-24
The Council will set the date of Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 7 p.m. to accept public
comment and consider an ordinance amending the final budget of Salt Lake City,
including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2023-24. The proposed
amendment includes $24.8 million from the first issuance of the Parks, Trails & Open
Space bond for several projects, creation of a new Planning & Design Division in the
Public Lands Department, $2 million from the U.S. Treasury’s Emergency Rental
Assistance Program, and a new position to facilitate creation of Special Assessment Areas
or SAAs for business districts among other items. The proposed amendment also
includes an ordinance to amend the Annual Compensation Plan for Non-represented
Employees.
For more information visit https://tinyurl.com/SLCFY24.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, October 17, 2023
Staff Recommendation - Set date.
7. Board Appointment: Arts Council Board – Caitlin Tursic
The Council will consider approving the appointment of Caitlin Tursic to the Arts Council
Board for a term ending September 19, 2026.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, September 19, 2023
Staff Recommendation - Approve.
H.ADJOURNMENT:
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
On or before 5:00 p.m. on Friday, September 15, 2023, the undersigned, duly appointed City
Recorder, does hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1) posted on the Utah Public
Notice Website created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701, and (2) a copy of the foregoing provided
to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any
others who have indicated interest.
CINDY LOU TRISHMAN
SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER
Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda, including but
not limited to adoption, rejection, amendment, addition of conditions and variations
of options discussed.
The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for
reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary
aids and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request,
please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay
service 711.
PENDING MINUTES – NOT APPROVED
The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in Formal Session on Tuesday, August 15, 2023.
The following Council Members were present:
Ana Valdemoros, Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan, Chris Wharton, Alejandro Puy, Darin Mano,
Sarah Young
Present Legislative Leadership:
Cindy Gust-Jenson – Executive Director, Jennifer Bruno – Deputy Director, Lehua Weaver –
Associate Deputy Director
Present Administrative Leadership:
Mayor Erin Mendenhall, Rachel Otto – Chief of Staff, Lisa Shaffer – Chief Administrative
Officer
Present City Staff:
Katherine Lewis – City Attorney, Cindy Lou Trishman – City Recorder, Michelle Barney –
Minutes & Records Clerk, Thais Stewart – Deputy City Recorder, Isaac Canedo – Public
Engagement Communication Specialist, Taylor Hill – Constituent Liaison/Policy Analyst, Scott
Corpany – Staff Assistant, Ben Luedtke – Senior Public Policy Analyst
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, August 15, 2023
1
A.OPENING CEREMONY:
1.Council Member Darin Mano will conduct the formal meeting.
2.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules.
B.PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1.
Ordinances: Truth-in-Taxation Hearing for Fiscal Year 2023-24
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting one or more ordinances
adopting the final rate of tax levy, for all City funds including the Library Fund, in an
amount greater than the Certified Tax Rate, upon all real and personal property within
Salt Lake City made taxable by law for Fiscal Year 2023-24 and adopting the final budget,
including the Library Budget, for Fiscal Year 2023-24.
For more information on this item visit tinyurl.com/SLCFY24.
Ben Luedtke gave a brief overview of the proposal.
Bob Barr spoke to the notice of the proposed tax increase listed in the paper and the
nature of the notice.
Council Members and Ben Luedtke reiterated the meaning, reasoning and process of
the judgment levy that was notified in the paper.
Mayte Bastida asked why properties similar to her home were charged lower taxes.
Jim DeSanti protested his taxes and stated the tax levy was not appropriate.
Motion:
Moved by Council Member Dugan, seconded by Council Member Wharton to
close the public hearing and adopt Ordinance 48 of 2023, establishing the
final rate of tax levy, including the final levy for the Library Fund, upon all
real and personal property within Salt Lake City, made taxable by law for
fiscal year 2023-2024, and ratify the budget as adopted by the Council in
June. .
AYE: Ana Valdemoros, Victoria Petro, Daniel Dugan, Chris Wharton, Alejandro Puy,
Darin Mano, Sarah Young
Final Result: 7 – 0 Pass
C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS:
NONE.
D.COMMENTS:
NONE.
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, August 15, 2023
2
E.NEW BUSINESS:
NONE.
F.UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
NONE.
G.CONSENT:
NONE.
H.ADJOURNMENT:
MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, August 15, 2023
3
Meeting adjourned at 7:16 pm
Minutes Approved:
_______________________________
City Council Chair Darin Mano
_______________________________
City Recorder
Please refer to Meeting Materials (available at www.data.slc.gov by selecting Public Body
Minutes) for supportive content including electronic recordings and comments submitted prior
to or during the meeting. Websites listed within the body of the Minutes may not remain active
indefinitely.
This document along with the digital recording constitutes the official minutes of the City
Council Formal meeting held Tuesday, August 15, 2023 and is not intended to serve as a full
transcript. Please refer to the electronic recording for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-
4-203.
Item B1 & B2
Page 1
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst
DATE:September 19, 2023
RE: MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING
The Council will conduct a Public Hearing and may consider the following motion:
Motion 1 – Close and Refer
I move that the Council close the Public Hearing and refer Items B-1 and B-2 to a
future Consent Agenda for action.
Project Timeline:
Public Hearing: Sept. 19, 2023
NEW GRANT APPLICATIONS
FOR COUNCIL REVIEW
9/19/23
City
Match
Required?
Number of
FTEs
Requested
Grant Title Grant Purpose Status Annual
Grant
Total
Grant &
and FTE
Amount
Funding
Agency
Requested
By
1.No.None.FY23 Edward Byrne
Memorial Justice
Assistance Grant – Local
Solicitation
Funds travel/training for
sworn & civilian staff, pole
cameras, license plate
recognition systems, night
vision goggles, climbing
equipment, ballistic rated
windshields, surveillance
trailer maintenance &
replacement, community
policing & targeted enforce-
ment overtime, subawards
to Salt Lake County and
Unified Police Department
Needs a
public
hearing
Yes $386,620 U.S. Dept.
of Justice,
Office of
Justice
Programs,
Bureau of
Justice
Assistance
Police Dept.
2.No.None.Jordan River Recreation
Zone Project & Program
Grant
Funds the removal of dead
trees, branches, and debris
from the Jordan River
Needs a
public
hearing
No $200,000 Utah
Division of
Forestry,
Fire &
State
Lands
Parks /
Trails &
Natural
Lands
Division
The following information was provided by the Administration in answer to questions from Council staff:
A. Which police vehicles will receive the ballistic rated windshields? And how many vehicles will receive them? How is this different
than the make-ready vehicle improvements the Fleet Division already provides to new police vehicles?
1. Two (2) vehicles assigned to the Violent Crime Apprehension Team (VCAT) would receive ballistic windshields. These
windshields would replace the factory-installed windshields that came with the vehicles at the time of production. VCAT
actively seeks out violent criminals and are apprehending them often on the streets, so the ballistic windshields will provide
much better protection than the standard consumer vehicle windshields.
B. How many additional pole cameras and license plate readers would be purchased?
2. Four (4) license plate readers (LPRs) would be purchased with the grant. These cameras are for high speed, multi-lane roads
and will supplement the standard LPRs funded in the FY24 budget.
Grant Application Submission Notification Memo
TO: Jennifer Bruno, Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer, Mary Beth Thompson, Cindy Lou
Trishman
CC: Justin Anderson, Sarah Behrens, Mike Brown, Jennifer Covino, Shellie Dietrich, Amy Dorsey,
Elizabeth Gerhart, Taylor Hill, Sandee Moore, Jaysen Oldroyd, Melyn Osmond, Recorder Routing;
Sylvia Richards, DeeDee Robinson, Linda Sanchez, Lehua Weaver, Recorders All, Aaron Price
FROM: Laura Nygaard
DATE: August 23, 2023
SUBJECT: FY 2023 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program – Local Solicitation
FUNDING AGENCY: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice
Assistance
GRANT PROGRAM: FY 2023 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program –
Local Solicitation
REQUESTED AMOUNT: $386,620
DEPARTMENT APPLYING: Police Department
COLLABORATING AGENCIES: Salt Lake County / Unified Police Department
DATE SUBMITTED: August 22, 2023
SPECIFICS:
Equipment/Supplies
Technical Assistance (Training)
Provides FTE Position
Existing New Overtime Requires Funding After Grant
Explanation: Please see below.
Match Required: In-Kind and/or Cash
GRANT DETAILS: The Salt Lake City Police Department is requesting funding for the following:
• Professional Travel Training for Sworn and Civilian Staff - $40,125
• Pole Cameras - $20,000
• High Speed LPRs (+ accessories) - $22,970
• Climbing Equipment - $20,160
• Night Vision Goggles and Mounts - $53,733.80
• Optics - $11,192
• Ballistic Rated Windshields - $19,500
• Surveillance Trailer Maintenance and Replacement - $14,000
• K9 GPS and Narcotics Supplies - $6,132
• Community Policing and Targeted Enforcement Overtime - $76,100
• Subaward to Salt Lake County (BJA allocation) - $53,672
• Subaward to Unified Police Department (BJA allocation) - $53,671
Item B1 & B2
Page 1
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst
DATE:September 19, 2023
RE: MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING
The Council will conduct a Public Hearing and may consider the following motion:
Motion 1 – Close and Refer
I move that the Council close the Public Hearing and refer Items B-1 and B-2 to a
future Consent Agenda for action.
Project Timeline:
Public Hearing: Sept. 19, 2023
NEW GRANT APPLICATIONS
FOR COUNCIL REVIEW
9/19/23
City
Match
Required?
Number of
FTEs
Requested
Grant Title Grant Purpose Status Annual
Grant
Total
Grant &
and FTE
Amount
Funding
Agency
Requested
By
1.No.None.FY23 Edward Byrne
Memorial Justice
Assistance Grant – Local
Solicitation
Funds travel/training for
sworn & civilian staff, pole
cameras, license plate
recognition systems, night
vision goggles, climbing
equipment, ballistic rated
windshields, surveillance
trailer maintenance &
replacement, community
policing & targeted enforce-
ment overtime, subawards
to Salt Lake County and
Unified Police Department
Needs a
public
hearing
Yes $386,620 U.S. Dept.
of Justice,
Office of
Justice
Programs,
Bureau of
Justice
Assistance
Police Dept.
2.No.None.Jordan River Recreation
Zone Project & Program
Grant
Funds the removal of dead
trees, branches, and debris
from the Jordan River
Needs a
public
hearing
No $200,000 Utah
Division of
Forestry,
Fire &
State
Lands
Parks /
Trails &
Natural
Lands
Division
The following information was provided by the Administration in answer to questions from Council staff:
A. Which police vehicles will receive the ballistic rated windshields? And how many vehicles will receive them? How is this different
than the make-ready vehicle improvements the Fleet Division already provides to new police vehicles?
1. Two (2) vehicles assigned to the Violent Crime Apprehension Team (VCAT) would receive ballistic windshields. These
windshields would replace the factory-installed windshields that came with the vehicles at the time of production. VCAT
actively seeks out violent criminals and are apprehending them often on the streets, so the ballistic windshields will provide
much better protection than the standard consumer vehicle windshields.
B. How many additional pole cameras and license plate readers would be purchased?
2. Four (4) license plate readers (LPRs) would be purchased with the grant. These cameras are for high speed, multi-lane roads
and will supplement the standard LPRs funded in the FY24 budget.
Grant Application Submission Notification Memo
TO: Office of the City Council | Cindy Gust-Jenson, Jennifer Bruno, Taylor Hill, Sylvia Richards , Linda Sanchez,
Lehua Weaver
Office of the Mayor | Rachel Otto, Lisa Shaffer
Department of Finance | Mary Beth Thompson, Aaron Price, Elizabeth Gerhart, Amy Dorsey, Sandee
Moore
Office of the City Attorney | Jaysen Oldroyd, SLCRecorder@slcgov.com
EC: Department of Parks and Public Lands |Kristin Riker, Tyler Murdock, Tyler Fonarow
FROM: Sarah Behrens
DATE: July 17, 2023
SUBJECT: Jordan River Tree and Debris Removal
FUNDING AGENCIES: Utah Division of Forestry, Fire, & State Lands
GRANT PROGRAM: Jordan River Recreation Zone Project & Program Grant
REQUESTED GRANT AMOUNT: $200,000
DEPARTMENT: Parks | Trails & Natural Lands Division
COLLABORATING AGENCIES:
DATE SUBMITTED: July 13, 2023
SPECIFICS:
Equipment/Supplies Only
Technical Assistance
Provides Hourly Positions
Existing New Overtime Requires Funding After Grant
Explanation:
Match Required In-Kind Services and Cash
GRANT DETAILS:
** This is a new grant application for Jordan River Tree and Debris Removal**
Trails and Natural Lands is requesting funds to remove decades-worth of dead and obstructing trees, branches
and organic debris from the Jordan River Water Trail corridor to enhance safe and accessible non -motorized
watercraft navigation.
Item B3
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet
Policy Analyst
DATE:September 19, 2023
RE:North Rose Park Lane Annexation and
Zoning Map Amendments
Petitions PLNPCM2021-01124/01134
MOTION 1 – continue
I move the council continue the public hearing to a future Council meeting.
MOTION 2 – close and defer
I move the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future Council meeting.
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
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet
DATE:September 19, 2023
RE: North Rose Park Lane Annexation and
Zoning Map Amendments
Petitions PLNPCM2021-01124/01134
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing 1: August 15, 2023
Set Date: August 15, 2023
Public Hearing: Sept 19, 2023
Potential Action: TBD
Work Session Summary
During the August 15 briefing the Council discussed the proposed annexation and accompanying
zoning changes. There were some concerns that the proposed zoning district was out of place for the
location. The discussion included concerns about access to transit, noise pollution, sufficient
greenspace, infrastructure needed to make the project successful.
Additionally, the Council and applicant discussed the possibility of a development agreement that
could have conditions that would address some of the concerns raised by the Council, and city staff.
The applicant expressed support to continue discussion about a potential development agreement.
The Council will have a public hearing on this item on September 19.
The following information was provided for the August 15 work session briefing. It is
provided again for background purposes.
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will receive a briefing about annexation and zoning changes for properties located at
approximately 2350 North Rose Park Lane (see map page 2). The changes include:
Page | 2
1. Annexation into Salt Lake City about 28 acres of property generally located at approximately 2441
North Rose Park Lane. The annexation requires designating a zone for each property within the
annexation area. The properties are proposed to be zoned as follows:
•2440 N Rose Park Lane (City-owned) – OS, Open Space
•2441 N Rose Park Lane (Hunter Stables) – R-MU, Residential/Mixed-Use
•2462 N Rose Park Lane (State-owned) – OS, Open Space
2. Zoning Map Amendment at approximately 2350 North Rose Park Lane from AG-2 – Agricultural to
R-MU, Residential/Mixed Use. The property is currently within Salt Lake City
boundaries. Although the petitions propose specific zones for the properties, the Council may
consider other zones with similar characteristics. The properties at 2350 and 2441 North are
currently used for horse boarding and outdoor equipment storage.
The changes would facilitate the future development of a mixed-use, multi-family residential development
with potentially 1800 dwelling units. Additional properties at 2440 North (City-owned) and 2462 North
Rose Park Lane (State-owned) would be annexed into the City as part of the petition. The zoning of
properties annexed into the city receive their zoning designation during that process. They do not go
through the traditional rezone process. However, the annexation process includes substantial public
outreach all along the way.
This annexation and zoning amendments are not related to the Northpoint Small Area plan, a separate
petition that the Council is also considering at this time. That petition is for an area north/west of I-215.
Vicinity Map
Page 4 Planning Commission Staff Report
Page | 3
Proposed Project Description
The applicant’s project overview is found in the Planning Commission staff report. It is included in this
memo as Attachment A. It includes drawings of the draft site plan. They state the proposed plan would
include the following:
▪11 buildings (5 stories – less than 75’ in height);
▪164 units per building (500 sq. ft. minimum);
▪Total density of 1,804 units;
▪Building coverage of 29%;
▪Parking Provided: Podium (2 levels each building) (1,760 parking spaces), and Surface
▪(775 parking spaces) (total of 2,535 parking spaces);
Policy Questions
▪If the Council chooses to move forward with the annexation and zoning amendments, does the
Council support including the eleven conditions outlined in the staff report in the final ordinance?
Page | 4
▪The Council may wish to ask the applicant if any of the housing units will be designated affordable
or if they would be willing to consider including deed restricted affordable units in the
development.
▪The Council may wish to ask if this project would be eligible for funds from the Westside
Community Initiative. If yes, has the applicant talked with the Administration to see if that funding
could help include public benefits into this development.
▪The Council may wish to ask the Administration how the City could more consistently inform
developers of opportunity to participate in the Westside Community Initiative affordable housing
program
▪The Planning Transmittal notes the North Access Road, which would provide circulation to
Redwood Road, is planned by the City/State.
• The Council may wish to ask the Administration about the status of the planning and
funding for that proposed road.
▪If the Council is generally supportive of moving forward with the annexation and zoning
amendments, they may wish to ask the Administration to prepare an ordinance for the Public
Hearing.
Planning Commission Recommendation
The Planning Commission forwarded a negative recommendation by a vote of 6 to 4. The Commission’s
motion to recommend denial was based on the following: (Pages 2-3, Transmittal Letter)
1. The zoning map amendment, for the reason that it does not comply with the stated zoning goals
of the small area master plan (Rose Park Small Area Plan).
▪the Commission’s motion refers to the Rose Park Small Area Plan (2001) which has
policies that call for the Open Space or Agricultural zoning in the future for the rezone
and associated annexation property. The requested R-MU zone does not align with
those specific zones.
2. The annexation, based on Plan Salt Lake and the access to open space are not met. And the
2016 Salt Lake Housing Policy points of emphasizing the value of transit-oriented
developments and the livability of neighborhoods.
▪A Plan Salt Lake policy encourages access to parks and recreational spaces within a half
mile of all residents. In its discussion, the Commission noted that despite the property
being adjacent to the Regional Athletic Complex (RAC), use of the RAC is generally
restricted to organized groups, such as leagues, and future residents of the conceptual
1,800 dwelling unit development wouldn’t be able to freely use the facility.
▪Council “Housing Policy Statements” from 2016 that emphasize transit-oriented
development and livability of neighborhoods, emphasize the value of transit-oriented
development, transit accessibility, and proximity to services and address the livability of
neighborhoods and concentrations of aging adults, and plan and implement strategies
that will allow residents to Age in Place.
The Planning commission did not offer any concerns about the proposed zoning designation for the state
and City owned properties involved in the annexation.
Planning Staff Recommendation
Page | 5
Planning staff’s analysis found the application generally met applicable standards and recommended the
Planning Commission forward a favorable recommendation with eleven conditions. Those conditions are
outlined below. See pages 2-3 of the Planning Commission for the detailed list.
1.Traffic Impact Study Improvements – improvements noted in the traffic impact
study are completed prior to any certificate of occupancy being issued
2.Rose Park Lane Improvement - The developer shall make all public right of way
improvements for Rose Park Lane adjacent to the development, including but not limited
to road widening, paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, utilities, and park strip landscaping.
3.Sidewalk Improvements – sidewalk shall be installed adjacent to the site and offsite
to provide a complete pedestrian connection from each phase of the development to the
Regional Athletic Complex
4.Public Utility Improvements – comply with all public utility requirements
5.City Drain Usage – if development plans require discharge to city drains an offsite lift
station may be required as determined by the Public Utilities Director
6.City Drain (canal) Setback – a 50’ setback from the city drain and no buildings or
parking allowed within the setback
7.R-MU setback conflicts – Maximum front setback provisions of the R-MU do not
apply where a greater setback is required along the city drain, or the freeway scenic
landscape setback
8.Parking Requirement – must comply with the General Context minimum parking
requirements in Table 21A.44.040-A of the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance
9.Sound Attenuation – residential uses be built with at least 30 dBs of sound attenuation in
sleeping areas and 25 dBs in other areas due to proximity to the freeway
10.State Park Adjacent Landscaping - The landscaped setback requirements of the
“Freeway Scenic Landscape Setback” applied along the east property line where it is directly
across the street from the Jordan River OHV State Recreation Area (2462 N Rose Park Lane).
The requirement shall apply where new development occurs within 100' of that portion of the
east property line.
11.State Park Noise Disclosure – provide a disclosure to future residents, tenants and
owners regarding the potential for high levels of noise from the Jordan River OHS recreation
area
12.HVAC Filters: That air filters with a minimum rating of MERV 13, or equivalent, shall be
used in all HVAC equipment. This applies to any replacement filters. (This is intended to
reduce freeway pollution in resident's homes)
13.Construction Impacts: City Staff develop a condition to mitigate impacts on adjacent
properties from construction activity on the 2350 and 2441 properties. (This was to help
address a concern that construction activity would negatively impact a few residents toward
the north end of Rose Park Lane and other users of the road - fugitive dust was one impact
that we heard a lot about from residents with recent construction on 2200 West.)
Key Concepts Identified in the Plan
Page | 6
The zoning of a property can outlast the life of a building(s); therefore, any rezoning application should be
considered on the merits of changing the zoning of that property, not simply based on a potential project.
Even though there are draft plans pertaining to this project, it is not within the scope of the Council’s
responsibility to review the plans. However, the plans for a proposed project can help the Council weigh
options as they consider the annexation and zoning amendments.
The Planning Commission staff report includes summaries for each of the zoning districts being
considered: OS, AG and R-MU. They are included in this memo as Attachment B.
Pages 7-13 of the Planning Commission staff report outline five key considerations that were evaluated by
Planning staff. A short summary of each is provided below. Please see the Planning Commission staff
report for full analysis.
1. Plan Considerations for Zoning Designation/Zoning Amendment
a.Planning staff found the proposed rezones to OS and AG are consistent with the Rose Park
Small Area Plan. They also found the proposed rezone to R-MU Residential and low-
intensity commercial uses are compatible with recreational uses like the Regional Athletic
Complex. They also found other City plans support the proposed zoning amendments. See
Attachment C for full analysis of compatibility with City plans.
2. Traffic Impact Study and Recommended Improvements
a. The petitioner provided a traffic study that propose the following mitigation and
improvements be made:
i. Installation of I-215 interchange traffic lights and striping modifications (needed to
support existing traffic prior to development coming in 2025)
1. This would support 200 units on the site.
ii. Southbound left turn lane addition to the Rose Park Lane/I-215 access road
intersection
1. This would support up to 500 units.
iii. Installation of the North Access Road (provides circulation to Redwood Road and is
planned by the City/State)
1. This would support the remainder of the units.
b. Planning staff also recommends the following improvements be built to ensure the roadway
can support the proposed development
i. Widening of and improvements to Rose Park Lane that would be required for a
subdivision, including curb, gutter, paving, striping, and utilities. The current
roadway next to the property is roughly paved with asphalt and has no curb, gutter,
or striping.
ii. A pedestrian connection from the site to the existing sidewalk network at the RAC
across the street. This will require a crosswalk across Rose Park Lane and sidewalk
paving on the east side of Rose Park Lane and some along the development site.
3. R-MU Zone and Proposed Modification Conditions
a. Planning Staff recommends the following be included as a conditions of approval:
i. R-MU has no parking requirement. Staff proposes a parking requirement as a
condition due to the current lack of transit accessibility.
1. “General Context” requirements would apply, same as most RMF zones
ii. R-MU has a maximum front setback, conflicting with a proposed canal setback
1. Public Utilities is recommending a setback from the canal (City Drain)
Page | 7
2. Staff proposes waiving the maximum front setback where it conflicts with
canal
4. Freeway Proximity, Noise, and Pollution
a. Planning Staff recommends the following be included as a condition of approval:
i. A condition requiring noise attenuation improvements for any new buildings is
being recommended due to the proximity to the freeway.
ii. Special freeway landscaping will be required which can help mitigate pollution
impacts of the freeway.
iii. A requirement for a notice to residents/tenants/owners about potential noise from
the OHV State Park is also recommended.
iv. The freeway landscaping requirement is also proposed adjacent to the OHV State
Park to reduce the potential for fugitive dust impacts to residents.
5. Alternative Zones and Uses for the Site
a. The applicant originally proposed RMF-75. Planning staff was concerned about the lack of
walkable services with a single use zone, R-MU requires commercial/retail on the first
floor. Staff also considered the impacts of commercial or light industrial zones and found
they would have a negative impact on the Regional Athletic Complex.
Public Process
The Planning Commission staff report outlines the public process and public comments received during
the process. (It is included as Attachment D of this memo.)
•May 16, 2022: The Westpointe Community Council was sent the required 45-day notice for
recognized community organizations. The notice asked for input from the organization and
whether the organization would like the applicant to present at one of their meetings.
• May 16, 2022: An online open house webpage was posted to provide additional information
on the requests. A link as provided to the Westpointe Community Council and included in
mailed notifications to nearby property owners.
•May 17, 2022: Mailed early notifications were sent out to nearby property owners within 300
feet of the properties.
•Notice of the Planning Commission public hearing for the proposal included:
o February 8, 2023
▪Public hearing notice signs posted on the properties.
o February 8, 2023
▪Public hearing notice mailed.
▪Public notice posted on City and State websites and Planning Division listserv.
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
________________________ Date Received: _________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: April 5, 2023
Darin Mano, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
__________________________
SUBJECT: North Rose Park Lane Annexation and Zoning Map Amendment (Petitions
PLNPCM2021-01124 and PLNPCM2021-01134)
STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Echeverria, Senior Planner, daniel.echeverria@slcgov.com, 801-
535-7165
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of the
annexation and the requested zoning map amendment designation of R-MU for the two involved
private properties.
BUDGET IMPACT: No direct budget impact. If annexed, the properties would be subject to
receiving City services for such things as fire, police, and utilities.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
JWright Communities, LLC, property owner and applicant, is requesting a zoning map amendment
for an approximately 6-acre parcel of land located at 2350 N Rose Park Lane. The applicant is
requesting a rezone from the AG-2, Agricultural, zone to the R-MU, Residential/Mixed-Use zone.
The zoning is intended to support future development of an 1,800-unit multi-family residential
development. No formal plans have been submitted for that development. The property is currently
within Salt Lake City boundaries.
Lisa Shaffer (Apr 5, 2023 13:13 MDT)04/05/2023
04/05/2023
In conjunction with the rezone request, the property owner filed a petition to annex approximately
28 acres of property located at approximately 2441 N Rose Park Lane. The annexation process
requires that the City apply a zone at the same time a property is annexed into the City. The City
Council reviewed the annexation petition in April 2022 and referred the annexation petition to the
Commission for a recommendation on the proposed zoning.
The properties involved and the requested zones are below:
1. 2440 N Rose Park Lane
a. This is a City-owned property and
has been shown as a future Regional
Athletic Complex phase in City
plans.
b. The City proposed to zone the
property OS, Open Space, to support
future recreational use.
2. 2441 N Rose Park Lane (“Hunter Stables”)
a. This is a privately owned parcel,
owned by the applicant, JWright.
b. The applicant is proposing the R-
MU, Residential/Mixed-Use, zone to
support an 1,800 dwelling unit
development.
3. 2462 N Rose Park Lane
a. This is a State-owned property
utilized as part of the State’s Jordan
River Off-Highway Vehicle State
Park.
b. The City proposed to zone the
property OS, Open Space, to support
continued recreational use.
Planning Commission Hearing and Recommendation
The Planning Commission reviewed the zoning map amendment and annexation zoning requests
at their March 8th meeting and forwarded a negative recommendation on both requests. The
meeting can be viewed here with this particular item beginning at 1:55:53. The vote on the motion
was 6 to 4. The Commission’s motion to recommend denial was the following, recommending
denial of:
1. The zoning map amendment, for the reason that it does not comply with the stated zoning
goals of the small area master plan (Rose Park Small Area Plan).
Map of the rezone and annexation properties, showing
the OHV State Park, RAC, and a planned “North Access
Road.”
2. The annexation, based on Plan Salt Lake and the access to open space are not met. And the
2016 Salt Lake Housing Policy points of emphasizing the value of transit-oriented
developments and the livability of neighborhoods.
For the zoning map amendment, the Commission’s motion refers to the Rose Park Small Area
Plan (2001) which has policies that call for the Open Space or Agricultural zoning in the future
for the rezone and associated annexation property. The requested R-MU zone does not align with
those specific zones.
For the annexation, the Commission’s motion refers to the citywide plan, Plan Salt Lake, and one
of its policies that encourages access to parks and recreational spaces within a half mile of all
residents. In its discussion, the Commission noted that despite the property being adjacent to the
Regional Athletic Complex (RAC), use of the RAC is generally restricted to organized groups,
such as leagues, and future residents of the conceptual 1,800 dwelling unit development wouldn’t
be able to freely use the facility. The Commission’s motion also refers to the City Council’s
adopted “Housing Policy Statements” from 2016 that emphasize transit-oriented development and
livability of neighborhoods. The full referenced policies are as follows:
• Emphasize the value of transit-oriented development, transit accessibility, and proximity
to services;
• Address the livability of neighborhoods and concentrations of ageing adults, and plan and
implement strategies that will allow residents to Age in Place.
There are similar policies in both Plan Salt Lake and the City’s adopted housing plan Growing
SLC (2017.)
The Commission’s motion and discussion were focused on the R-MU requests and the
Commission did not offer any concerns regarding the proposed zoning designation of Open Space
for the City and State properties involved in the annexation; however, since the zoning of these
properties was included in the same petition, the Commission simply recommended denial of the
entire petition.
Nine individuals addressed the Commission during the public hearing, including a representative
of the Westpointe Community Council. Comments at the public hearing addressed limited resident
access to the RAC, traffic from the RAC, concerns with limited infrastructure, easement impacts
on the developable area of the property, loss of the horse boarding facility and agricultural lifestyle,
piecemeal annexations of this area of the City, safety related to mosquitoes and canals, parking
issues and congestion on Rose Park Lane, air quality impacts from I-215, and RAC/OHV negative
impacts on potential residents. A comment questioning why this area was appropriate for housing,
while properties to the west in the Northpoint area were not, was also made.
Planning Staff Recommendation to the Planning Commission
The Commission recommendation was opposite that of the Staff recommendation. The Staff
recommendation was to forward a positive recommendation with several conditions related to
infrastructure requirements, water quality, air quality, and noise. Those are detailed on the second
page of the staff report. Two additional conditions regarding HVAC system air filters to mitigate
health impacts from the freeway and mitigation of construction impacts on adjacent property
owners, were added after staff report publication in response to late arriving public comments.
These conditions are located on the attached Staff presentation slides (Exhibit 2b).
The Staff recommendation acknowledged the Rose Park Small Area Plan’s future land use map
designations of Open Space and Agriculture do not correspond with the requested R-MU zone, but
cited the plan’s policy reason for that zoning, which was to ensure those properties maintain
compatibility with the RAC and OHV properties. The recommendation noted that residential and
low-intensity commercial uses are generally compatible with recreational uses. The
recommendation also relied on general policies from Plan Salt Lake and Growing SLC that support
more housing throughout the City, including policies supporting housing with access to
recreational uses (RAC/Jordan River Trail), existing infrastructure (I-215 freeway, new “North
Access Road,”) and using underutilized properties for housing.
Since the Commission forwarded a negative recommendation, an ordinance has not been prepared
by the Attorney’s Office for the zoning map and annexation requests. If the City Council indicates
support for the requests, the Attorney’s Office will draft an ordinance at that time.
PUBLIC PROCESS:
The proposal followed the City’s public input requirements required for a zoning amendment. The
annexation was processed following the same input process. Details on that process are located in
Attachment H of the Planning Commission staff report.
The applicant met with the applicable community council on two occasions, but the community
council did not provide any formal written comments to Planning Staff. A community council
representative attended the Commission hearing and their comments focused on the limited or no
access to the RAC facility that any new residents would have due to the facility’s current use
policies.
Planning Commission (PC) Records
a) PC Agenda of March 8, 2023 (Click to Access)
b) PC Minutes of March 8, 2023 (Click to Access)
c) PC Staff Report of March 8, 2023 (Click to Access Report)
EXHIBITS:
1) Project Chronology
2) Planning Commission – March 8, 2023
a) Additional Written Public Comments
b) Staff Presentation
c) Applicant Presentation
3) Notice of City Council Hearing
4) Original Petitions
5) Mailing List
EXHIBITS
1. CHRONOLOGY
2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
3. PLANNING COMMISSION – March 8, 2023
a. Additional Public Comments
b. Staff Presentation Slides
c. Applicant Presentation Slides
4. ORIGINAL PETITIONS
5. MAILING LIST
1. CHRONOLOGY
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petitions: PLNPCM2021-01124 and PLNPCM2021-01134
November 1, 2021 Applicant submits original annexation petition that includes only
the applicant’s property at 2441 N Rose Park Lane.
November 3, 2021 Applicant submits rezone petition for 2350 N property to Planning
Division.
November 18, 2021 Applications assigned to John Anderson, Planning Manager.
Applications subsequently put on hold as applicant works with
City and County to adjust the boundary request of their
annexation to include the 2440 N (City) and 2462 N (State)
properties in order not to create a new peninsula of County land.
March 22, 2022 Salt Lake County Council approves resolution number 5956
agreeing to requested annexation to Salt Lake City. County Council
reviewed the annexation request as the annexation property leaves
a peninsula of County land. County resolution also encourages
City to annex additional land in the area.
March 24, 2022 Applicant resubmits annexation petition to City, now including the
2440 N and 2462 N properties.
April 5, 2022 Salt Lake City Council approves Resolution 6 of 2022 agreeing to
accept annexation petition for further consideration. Petition is
forwarded to Planning Division for a Planning Commission
recommendation on the zoning.
May 5, 2022 Applications re-assigned to Dave Gellner, Senior Planner, for
processing.
May 16, 2022 Notice sent to Westpointe community council. Open house
webpage posted to the Planning website.
May 17, 2022 Mailed noticed provided to nearby property owners within 300
feet of the properties.
October 4, 2022 Applications re-assigned to Daniel Echeverria, Senior Planner, for
processing.
February 8. 2023 For the February 22nd public hearing, public hearing notice signs
posted on the properties, notices mailed to properties and
residents within 300 feet, and notices posted on City and State
websites. Notices sent on Planning Division listserv.
February 22, 2023 Public hearing canceled due to weather.
February 23, 2023 Project re-noticed for March 8th public hearing. Notice signs,
mailers, online notice, and listserv notice all re-sent out.
March 8, 2023 Planning Commission holds public hearing and provides negative
recommendation on both the zoning amendment and annexation
requests.
2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering petitions PLNPCM2021-01124/01134:
JWright Communities, LLC, property owner, is requesting a zoning map amendment for a ~6 acre
parcel of land located at 2350 N Rose Park Lane. In conjunction with this request, the property owner
has filed a petition to annex approximately 28 acres of property located at approximately 2441 N Rose
Park Lane. The following petitions are associated with this proposal:
1. Annexation (PLNPCM2021-01124) – A petition to annex into Salt Lake City approximately
28 acres of property generally located at approximately 2441 N Rose Park Lane. The annexation
requires designating a zone for each property within the annexation area. The properties are
proposed to be zoned as follows:
a. 2440 N Rose Park Lane – OS, Open Space
b. 2441 N Rose Park Lane – R-MU, Residential/Mixed-Use
c. 2462 N Rose Park Lane – OS, Open Space
2. Zoning Map Amendment (PLNPCM2021-01134) – A petition to rezone property located at
approximately 2350 North Rose Park Lane from AG-2 – Agricultural to R-MU, Residential
Mixed Use. The zoning is intended to support future development of an 1,800-unit multi-family
residential development. The property is currently within Salt Lake City boundaries.
The annexation process requires that the City apply a zone at the same time a property is annexed.
Although the petition proposes specific zones for the properties, the Council may consider other zones.
The properties at 2350 and 2441 N are currently used for horse boarding and outdoor equipment
storage. The properties at 2440 N and 2462 N are currently vacant. The properties are in or near Council
District 1, represented by Victoria Petro-Eschler.
On March 8, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted to recommend denial of
the associated petitions by the City Council.
As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments
regarding the petitions. During the hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning
this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider adopting the ordinance
the same night of the public hearing. The hearing will be held:
DATE: TBD
TIME: 7:00 PM
PLACE: Electronic and in-person options.
451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah
** This meeting will be held via electronic means, while also providing for an in-person
opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located
at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, including
WebEx connection information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. Comments
may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an
email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are
shared with the Council and added to the public record.
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Daniel
Echeverria at 801-535-71765 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, or via e-mail at daniel.echeverria@slcgov.com.
The application details can be accessed at www.slcpermits.com, by selecting the “planning” tab
and entering the petition numbers PLNPCM2021-01124 or PLNPCM2021-01134. Additional
information is also available on the Planning webpage here: https://bit.ly/slc-openhouse-01124
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include
alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least
two make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com,
(801)535-7600, or relay service 711.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION – March 8, 2023
a. Additional Public Comments
From: cindy cromer
Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2023 5:09 PM
To: SLC Planning Commission
Subject: Fw: comments about Rose Park Lane
1 It is part of the piecemeal annexation process which guarantees poor enforcement and
coordination of services. Please ask for a briefing on how the Special Improvement District, not
the County, is in charge and what has to happen to get to a comprehensive process instead of
proceeding the way we have been. It is essential to the health of the Great Salt Lake that we
have coordination of governmental efforts near the Lake.
2 This staff report is amazing and contains one of the longest lists of conditions of approval I
have ever seen. But it doesn't require that the necessary road improvements occur PRIOR to
construction. We are seeing a nightmare play out in Northpoint on 2200 West as the trucks for
a million sq. ft. facility make their way down a country road which is no longer a safe place to
travel on foot or by bicycle. And the permits from the County were NOT in place. Neither was
the road you were promised, leading back to my first point about annexation.
3 It is inconceivable that you could conclude that there is no opportunity for housing in
Northpoint, west of 215, but room for 1800 units immediately east of the freeway. It is
unreasonable to decide that future airplane traffic above Northpoint makes it unusable for
residences, but the noise and pollution from the freeway is just fine on Rose Park Lane next to
an off-road vehicle park. It is hard for me to imagine a place more ill-suited for high density
residential use than this one. And you took all sort of precautions with a hotel property in
terms of noise attenuation when you removed it from the airport overlay at the expense of the
organization providing the supported housing, but I see nothing about measuring ambient
levels of sound here.
1
Echeverria, Daniel
From:Mark Sweet
Sent:Tuesday, February 21, 2023 3:54 AM
To:Echeverria, Daniel
Subject:(EXTERNAL) Rezoning 2441 N Rose Park Lane
Questions on purpose and funding.
Question the wisdom of cramming 1,800 condos onto 34 acres between I-215 and a flood control canal.(testing positive
for West Nile Virus).
Or will the DNR's ATV facility be used for this development?
The area is served by a dead end road that is barely two lanes wide. And the nearest fire station is four and half miles
away.
Is the developer paying the impact fees for the cost of;
1- water line upgrades
2- sewer lines.
3- power lines
4- the canal contains gasoline, diesel and Lord knows what other contaminants.
5- how many causeways/culverts will there be.
6- rebuilding/upgrading North Rose Park Lane
7- sound barriers along the freeway.
Will any of these units be designated low income?
The bond issue voted on 20 years ago for the Regional Athletic Complex; called for a dozen plus soccer fields and a
similar number of baseball/softball fields. Are the fields still to be built? Or are they to be replaced with high density
housing?
On days of soccer matches, traffic is terrible/obscene. Adding some 2,000 plus residents to the area will make it all the
more worse.
Mark Sweet
Dear Commission Members:
RE: PLNPCM2021-01124 and PLNPCM2021-01134: North Rose Park Lane
Annexation and Zoning Amendment
It has been well established in extensive research (cited herein) that residents,
schools, and workers close to major highways are hugely affected negatively
health wise. This new development proposal sits back to back on I 215, recently
opened to heavy diesel truck traffic. 1800 units speaks loudly to the number of
citizens that will be affected. There also will be a sound issue given heavy diesel
truck traffic.
While PM2.5 particulates are the major concern, it is known that some PM 2.5
contains black carbon (soot produced by incomplete combustion of fossil
fuels)
Additionally, the OHV park will be a major contributor to dust issues,
acknowledged by the staff report
This development needs to be required to:
1. Install the latest air filtration technology in every apartment and public
space in the development. Either have HEPA install a central system, or
provide each apartment with a HEPA filter system;
2. Require that UDOT plant a major pollution absorbing tree barrier on the
west side of the property;
3. The developers work with the state and Davis County to plant a tree
buffer at Jordan River OHV State Recreation Area; and,
4. Notice the applicants leasing/purchasing of the health risks associated
with living close to a major highway as is noted in the staff
recommendation for the sound issue.
https://www.healtheffects.org/publication/mortality-air-pollution-associations-
low-exposure-environments-maple-phase-2
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, JULY 14, 2022 – A comprehensive new study
published today by the Health Effects Institute (HEI) reports increased risks of
mortality in millions of Canadian citizens, including at the lowest levels of
exposure to fine particulate matter air pollution (PM2.5), levels that fall below
current U.S. and other ambient air quality standards. Long-term outdoor PM2.5
exposures as low as 2.5 micrograms per cubic meter were associated with
increased risk of death, suggesting that lowering regulatory standards could
yield further health benefits.
http://jhr.uwpress.org/content/57/3/747.short
ABSTRACT
We examine the effect of traffic pollution on student outcomes by leveraging
variation in wind patterns for schools the same distance from major highways.
We compare within-student changes in achievement for students transitioning
between schools near highways, where one school has greater levels of pollution
because it is downwind of a highway. As students graduate from
elementary/middle school to middle/high school, their test scores decrease,
behavioral incidents increase, and absence rates increase when they attend a
downwind school, relative to when they attend an upwind school in the same
zip code. Even within zip codes, microclimates can contribute to inequality.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-021-18458-3
Continual exposure to toxic metals through road dust might develop lifetime
cancer risk in local inhabitants.
1
Clark, Aubrey
From:Terry Marasco
Sent:Tuesday, February 21, 2023 4:56 AM
To:Clark, Aubrey
Cc:Mendenhall, Erin; Petro-Eschler, Victoria; Norris, Nick; Kevin Parke; Westpointe 2
Subject:(EXTERNAL) Re: Please pass this document to all Commissioners
Aubrey, please pass these also. Daniel Medoza at the U led these"
https://www.mdpi.com/1660‐4601/17/18/6931
More frequent peak exposures were associated with reduced math and ELA proficiency, as was greater school
disadvantage. High frequency peak exposures were more strongly linked to lower math proficiency in more advantaged
schools. Findings highlight the need for policies to reduce the number of days with peak air pollution.
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748‐9326/abbf7a
Pollution reduction benefits would be greatest in schools located in socioeconomically
disadvantaged areas. Heterogeneity in exposure, disproportionately affecting socioeconomically
disadvantaged schools, points to the need for fine resolution exposure estimation. The economic cost
of absences associated with air pollution is substantial even excluding indirect costs such as hospital
visits and medication. These findings may help elucidate the differential burden on individual schools
and inform local decisions about recess and regulatory considerations for localized pollution sources.
Terry Marasco
Salt Lake City, Utah
"Objects in the mirror are closer than they appear"
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 1:56 PM Terry Marasco <wrote:
Re: PLNPCM2021-01124 and PLNPCM2021-01134: North Rose Park Lane
Annexation and Zoning Amendment
Thank you!
Terry Marasco
Salt Lake City, Utah
"Objects in the mirror are closer than they appear"
PLANNING COMMISSION – March 8, 20233
b. Staff Presentation Slides
PLANNING COMMISSION // MARCH 8, 2023
NORTH ROSE PARK LANE ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT
2350, 2440, 2441, AND 2462 N ROSE PARK LANE
PLNPCM2021-01124/01134
•Requests by JWright Properties (2350/2441 N)
•Two requests:
•Zoning Map Amendment (2350 N Rose Park Lane)
•From AG-2, Agricultural
•To R-MU, Residential/Mixed Use
•Annexation from County to City –Zoning Requests
•Apply R-MU to 2441 N
•Apply OS to 2462 N
•Apply OS to 2440 N
•Intended to accommodate an 1,800 unit multi-family development
on the 2350 N and 2441 N properties
•City and State properties not involved in development
Recommendation: Staff is recommending a positive recommendation
to the City Council with several conditions
REQUEST
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
2441
(J Wright)
2350
(J Wright)
2440
(City)
2462
(State)
CONTEXT
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
2100 North
Interchange
(Access)
PROCESS AND ZONE
Zoning Map Amendment
•Requires review against standard City considerations
•Consistency with plans, compatibility, impacts to services
Annexation:
•No consideration standards
•City & State property included to comply with State law
regarding creating “peninsulas”
•Requires a zone be applied when annexed
•Council forwarded the annexation to Commission for a
zoning recommendation
•Staff utilized considerations for a rezone
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
ZONING AMENDMENT &ANNEXATION PROCESS
•Proposed Zone for J Wright (private)properties
•Height:
•Max.75'(multi-family/mixed-use),
•Max.45'(non-residential)
•Setbacks:
•No front/side;min.25%lot depth/up to 30'rear
setback
•Max.Setback/Build-to Line:
•Min.25%of building must be within 15'of front
lot line
•Open Space:20%of lot area
•Freeway Landscape Buffer:
•20'wide,shade tree for every 300 sq ft
(equivalent to every 15'feet)
•Allowed Use Examples:
•Multi-family,retail,restaurant,office
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
R-MU -RESIDENTIAL/MIXED USE
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
2440 (City) & 2462 (State):
•Rose Park Plan (2001) calls for Open Space (OS) or Agriculture (AG)
•Proposed OS –will be used for park/recreation -RAC and OHV facility
2350 & 2441 (JWright)
•Rose Park Plan policy:
•Zone properties OS or AG
•“to be compatible with the State recreational (OHV) and open space
land uses (RAC)”
•Residential compatible with recreational uses
•Citywide policies support additional housing throughout City
•Access to healthy lifestyle (recreational access –sports/trail)
•Redevelopment of underutilized property
•Locating near existing infrastructure (significant planned
improvements)
•Compatibility and Citywide policies support requested zone
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
F
S
t
r
e
e
t
2441
(J Wright)
2350
(J Wright)
2440
(City)
2462
(State)
•Traffic study shows need for road improvements
•Abutting roadway is only semi-improved (no curb/gutter/etc.)
•Inadequate utilities
•Recommended conditions:
•Phased improvements identified in traffic study
•Roadway improvements to widen/improve
adjacent street (Rose Park Lane)
•Sidewalks and crosswalk to link development to
existing sidewalks at RAC
•All necessary utility improvements
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
F
S
t
r
e
e
t
Turn Lane
Signal/
Turn Lanes
New Road
(Partially
funded)
•Improve/Widen
Road
•Add Sidewalk/
Crosswalk
•R-MU has no parking requirement
•Mostly mapped in higher transit areas
•Site has no current transit access
•Recommend “General Context” intended for low/no transit
access areas
•Ex: 1.25 parking stalls for 2-bedroom units, 2 spaces for
every 1,000 sq ft for retail
•R-MU has a maximum front setback (15')
•Public Utilities recommending condition for 50' setback for
canal water quality
•Setbacks conflict (15' vs 50’)
•Recommend condition waiving R-MU setback where canal
setback conflicts
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
R-MU ZONE CONDITIONS
•Freeway -Noise and pollution from vehicles
•Noise attenuation requirements condition
•30 dbs attenuation for bedrooms/25 dbs elsewhere
•Freeway landscaping (already required)help mitigate
pollution
•New condition not in report:
•MERV 13 rated air filters in HVAC systems to reduce
PM 2.5 air pollution from the freeway
•OHV Park (ATVs)-Noise and dust from ATVs:
•Intermittent noise can be very loud
•Dust has negative health impacts
•Recommend sound notice be provided to tenants/future
owners
•Recommend landscape buffer to help capture dust
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
FREEWAY NOISE/POLLUTION
I-215 bordering site on west
OHV State Park bordering site on east
•Applicant original RMF-75 zone request
•Concerns with single-use, no potential for local services (retail)
•Staff discussed with applicant
•Recommending the mixed-use residential zone to allow for services
•Considered other zones and impacts
•General Commercial/Industrial zones
•Higher impact uses, loud outdoor mechanical uses
•Residential/lower intensity commercial (office, retail, restaurant)
•Little to no negative impacts to recreational uses
•Additional recreational users
•Activity and eyes on the recreational spaces
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
ALTERNATIVE ZONES/USES
•Applicant included a concept plan,
showing 1,800 dwelling units
•Planned Development would be
required due to having buildings
without street frontage
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
CONCEPT SITE PLAN
•Two letters generally opposed to the residential zone
•One letter with conditions related to health/air quality
•No letter from community council
•RAC Use Clarification
•Doesn’t currently have drop-in play hours
•Use requires reservation and insurance policy
•Construction Mitigation
•Concerns regarding future construction activity
•Condition: Work on a condition regarding construction mitigation to limit impacts
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
PUBLIC INPUT
RECOMMENDATION
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
Staff recommends a positive recommendation to the City
Council with conditions as listed in the report:
1.Roadway/Traffic Improvements
2.Rose Park Lane Improvements
3.Sidewalk Improvements
4.Public Utility Improvements
5.City Drain Lift Station
6.City Drain Setbacks
7.R-MU Setback Modification
8.General Parking Requirement
9.Sound Attenuation
10.State Park Landscape Buffer
11.State Park Noise Disclosure
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
RECOMMENDATION
Additional conditions not in report:
12. HVAC Filters:
•That air filters with a minimum rating of MERV 13,
or equivalent, shall be used in all HVAC
equipment. This applies to any replacement filters.
13.Construction Impacts:
•That City Staff develop a condition to mitigate
impacts on adjacent properties from construction
activity on the 2350 and 2441 properties.
QUESTIONS
Salt Lake City // Planning Division
Daniel Echeverria // Senior Planner
daniel.echeverria@slcgov.com
PLANNING COMMISSION – March 8, 202333
c. Applicant Presentation Slides
Albuquerque | Boise | Denver | Las Vegas | Los Angeles | Los Cabos | Orange County | Phoenix | Portland | Reno | Salt Lake Ci ty | San Diego | Seattle | Tucson | Washington, D.C.
2350 N Rose Park Lane
North Rose Park Lane Annexation and
Zoning Amendment
PLNPCM2021-01124 and
PLNPCM2021-01134
Salt Lake City Planning Commission–
February 22, 2023
Context Aerial
2
Context Aerial
3
Applicant
Parcel to be
Rezoned
Salt Lake City
Parcel to be
Annexed
State of Utah
Parcel to be
Annexed
Applicant
Parcel to be
Annexed and
Zoned
City Boundary
Rose Park Small Area Plan (2001)
4
Rose Park Small Area Plan (2001)
-Policy:
•Retain existing agricultural land uses along Rose Park Lane.
-Policy:
•If properties in the County are annexed into the City, retain the existing
land use development by zoning the properties either agricultural or
Open Space.
-Discussion:
•If and when existing properties in the County are annexed into the City
they should be zoned for either agricultural or open space land uses to
be compatible with the State recreational and open space land uses
between Redwood Road and Interstate-215.
5
Current Zoning
AG-2
BP
PL
M-1
6
Salt Lake County
Zoning: A-5
Proposed Zoning
R-MU
BP
PL
M-1
7
Site Plan
8
Site Plan
9
Site Rendering
10
Conditions of Approval
11
1.That the owner of the 2350 N and 2441 N properties enter into a development agreement with the City that does
the following:
i.Traffic Impact Study Improvements: That the improvements noted in the transportation impact study
addendum (dated 12/23/22), or equivalent improvements as determined by the Transportation Director,
are completed prior to any Certificates of Occupancy being issued for development of the property. If
other uses are proposed on site that differ from those evaluated in the study, the Transportation Director
shall have the ability to require additional traffic studies and may require different off-site improvements
for traffic impacts identified in such studies. (See Consideration 2)
ii.Rose Park Lane Improvements: The developer shall make all public right of way improvements to the
adjacent street Rose Park Lane that would be required by a subdivision process for each phase of their
development in compliance with the improvement standards of Chapter 20.40 “Improvements and Flood
Control” and Chapter 20.12 “Design Standards and Requirements” including, but not limited to, road
widening, paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, utilities, and park strip landscaping. This may include additional
right-of-way improvement beyond the west-half of the adjacent Rose Park Lane right-of-way. (See
Consideration 2)
iii.Sidewalk Improvements: Sidewalk shall be installed both adjacent to the site and off-site to provide a
complete pedestrian connection from each phase of the development to existing sidewalk infrastructure
along the Regional Athletic Complex. Sidewalk shall have a minimum width of 5 feet. A crosswalk shall
also be installed across Rose Park Lane. The final configuration of the sidewalk and crosswalk is subject
to Transportation, Engineering, and Planning Director approval. (See Consideration 2)
iv.Public Utility Improvements: That the developer complies with all Public Utility Department requirements
to serve the development, including, but not limited to, installation of offsite water and sewer
improvements. (See Consideration 2)
v.City Drain Usage: If future development plans require discharging to City Drain, there may be offsite lift
station upgrades required as determined by the Public Utilities Director. (See Consideration 2)
vi.City Drain Setback: That a 50' setback from the City Drain apply to development of the property,
measured from the average high-water elevation of the City Drain. No buildings or parking pavement
shall be constructed within the setback. Fences, landscaping, sidewalks, and other improvements may
be located within the setback. (See Consideration 3)
Conditions of Approval
12
vii.R-MU Setback Conflicts: That the maximum front setback provisions of the R-MU ordinance in section
21A.24.170.E.8 do not apply where a greater setback is required along the City Drain (canal) or by the
Freeway Scenic Landscape Setback where conditioned to apply along Rose Park Lane. (See
Consideration 3)
viii.Parking Requirement: That any uses comply with the General Context minimum parking requirements
in Table 21A.44.040-A of the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance. This does not preclude modifications
through the options provided in the Zoning Ordinance. (See Consideration 3)
ix.Sound Attenuation: That residential uses be built with at least 30 dBs of sound attention in sleeping
areas and 25 dBs of attenuation in other areas, due to the proximity to the freeway and noise impacts.
A sound attenuation study would need to be provided to verify compliance, as described in City Code
18.88.020. (See Consideration 4)
x.State Park Adjacent Landscaping: That the landscaped setback requirements of the “Freeway Scenic
Landscape Setback” of 21A.48.110 (or its successor) be applied along the east property line where it
is directly across the street from the Jordan River OHV State Recreation Area (2462 N Rose Park
Lane). The requirement shall apply where new development occurs within 100' of that portion of the
east property line. (See Consideration 4)
xi.State Park Noise Disclosure: That a disclosure be provided to future residents, tenants, and owners
regarding the potential for high levels of noise from the Jordan River OHV State Recreation Area. (See
Consideration 4)
North Rose Park Lane Annexation and Zoning Amendment
PLNPCM2021-01124 and PLNPCM2021-01134
Salt Lake City Planning Commission –February 22, 2023
4. ORIGINAL PETITIONS
Updated 7/1/20
Zoning Amendment
Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance Amend the Zoning Map
OFFICE USE ONLY
Received By: Date Received: Project #:
Name or Section/s of Zoning Amendment:
PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
Address of Subject Property (or Area):
Name of Applicant: Phone:
Address of Applicant:
E-mail of Applicant:Cell/Fax:
Applicant’s Interest in Subject Property:
Owner Contractor Architect Other:
Name of Property Owner (if different from applicant):
E-mail of Property Owner:Phone:
Please note that additional information may be required by the project planner to ensure adequate
information is provided for staff analysis. All information required for staff analysis will be copied and
made public, including professional architectural or engineering drawings, for the purposes of public
review by any interested party.
AVAILABLE CONSULTATION
If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this application, please contact Salt Lake City
Planning Counter at (801) 535-7700 prior to submitting the application.
REQUIRED FEE
Map Amendment: filing fee of $1,058 plus $121 per acre in excess of one acre
Text Amendment: filing fee of $1,058, plus fees for newspaper notice.
Plus additional fee for mailed public notices.
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
IN
G
10/28/2021
X
n
JAW Development, LLC; Attn.: Jeffrey D. Wright, P.E. and Jay Bollwinkel 801-302-2200; 801-364-9696
jeff@jwright.biz; jayb@grassligroup.com 801-386-6820; 801-364-9696
n
jeff@jwright.biz 801-302-2200
2350 N. Rose Park Ln., Salt Lake City, Utah 84116
357 West 6160 South, Murray, UT 84107
JWright Communities
Updated 7/1/20
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
X
4842-6277-7292
EXHIBIT A
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. PURPOSE FOR THE AMENDMENT IN QUESTION:
•Acreage: 4.93 acres
•Address: 2350 N. Rose Park Ln., Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 (the “Property”)
•Current Zoning: Agricultural 2 Acre Minimum (AG-2)
•Proposed Zoning: High Density Multi-Family Residential District (RMF-75)
2. A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED USE OF THE PROPERTY BEING REZONED: The
Property is currently in Salt Lake City. The intention is to annex in adjoining land from
unincorporated Salt Lake County (the “Annexation Property”)1 and have a single, integrated
multifamily project located on the combined land. The requested rezone will facilitate the
development of this project, and will tie in infrastructure improvements intended for the area to
facilitate development. The conceptual site plan, attached hereto as Exhibit B, contemplates,
among other things for both the Property and Annexation Property:
•11 buildings (5 stories – less than 75’ in height);
•164 units per building (500 sq. ft. minimum);
•Total density of 1,804 units;
•Building coverage of 29%;
•Parking Provided: Podium (2 levels each building) (1,760 parking spaces), and Surface
(775 parking spaces) (total of 2,535 parking spaces);
•Parking coverage of 30%; and
•Landscaping coverage of 41%.
3. REASONS WHY THE PRESENT ZONING MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE
AREA:
•The Property is adjoined by the following zoning districts:
•North: N/A Unincorporated [Annexation Property (High Density Multi-Family
Residential District (RMF-75)) upon completion of annexation and rezone)]
•East: Open Space (OS)
•South: Single Family Residential (R-1-7000) separated by I-215 and Frontage Rd.
•West: Business Park (BP) separated by I-215
•The Property is located within an agricultural area of the Rose Park Small Area Plan
(adopted 2001), and other details therein are very limited. The Property is generally
located within the Northwest Jordan River/Airport Master Plan (adopted 1992) but the
exact location of the Property is not discussed within such Master Plan. The Northwest
Jordan River/Airport Master Plan highlights the importance of eliminating use conflicts
between adjacent properties. Multi-family residential housing does not conflict with the
surrounding uses detailed above. Further, we intend to preserve open space and existing
1 The Annexation Property adjoins the Property to the north (2441 N. Rose Park Ln., Salt Lake City, Utah 84116).
The Annexation Property is approximately 17.21 acres. Applicant is simultaneously seeking to annex the
Annexation Property into Salt Lake City with requested zoning of RMF -75.
4842-6277-7292
trees on the Property and the Annexation Property in accordance with the Salt Lake City
Urban Forestry.
•A rezone of the Property would support business park uses in the area, if they develop in
accordance with current zoning. The existing Salt Lake City Regional Athletic Complex
(RAC) to the east provides an adjacent, complimentary use. Multi-family residential
housing will involve efficient use of the Property and Annexation Property and
coordinate well with existing and planned public infrastructure.
•A rezone of the Property and the Annexation Property will support nearby developments,
including, without limitation, the RAC, and will provide infrastructure improvements for
the area to facilitate development. We have been in contact with the Utah Department of
Transportation, Salt Lake City Public Utilities, and others with respect to constructing
and/or contributing to: (i) Sports Park Boulevard, (ii) the upgrade of the intersection of
Sports Park Boulevard and Redwood Road, (iii) new water and sewer lines through
Sports Park Boulevard, and (iv) a Salt Lake City drain bridge on or near the Property.
The installation of Sports Park Boulevard and the upgrade of the aforementioned
intersection will reduce traffic congestion on Rose Park Lane after RAC sporting events.
The construction of new water and sewer lines and the drain bridge will facilitate
development in the area generally.
4.PARCEL NUMBERS TO BE CHANGED:
•Property: Parcel Id. No. 08153010030000; AG-2 to RMF-75
•Annexation Property: Parcel Id. No. 08151000240000; Unincorporated to RMF-75
4842-6277-7292
EXHIBIT B
SITE PLAN
[See Attached]
20
21
23
54
13
65
48
68
18
46
12
2
5
44
95
45
56
22
42
11
3
13
5
44
DW
N
10
%
DW
N
10
%
DW
N
10
%
DW
N
10
%
DW
N
10
%
DW
N
10
%
DW
N
10
%
DW
N
10
%
DW
N
10
%
DW
N
10
%
PARKING (
T
Y
P
)
25
'
25
'
25
'
25
'
40'Rose
P
a
r
k
L
a
n
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
Utah State Parks
Jordan River OHV Park
I-215
Sa
l
t
L
a
k
e
C
i
t
y
Club
House
PLAYGROUND
PERIMETER TRAIL
GATHERING AREA
FENCED DOG AREA
PERIMETER TRAIL
LAWN
SALT LAKE DRAIN
Pool
HUNTER STABLES APARTMENTS CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
12 MAY 2021SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
Scale: 1" = 100'-0"
0 50' 100'200'
Plotted: 5/12/21 at 9:42am By: dans
P:\Projects\19-103 Hunter Stables HD\02-Working\01-Drawings\01-SD\19-103 Site Plan MColor 210512.dwgFile Path:
SLC RAC
TRAIL CONNECTING TO
JORDAN RIVER AND
LEGACY PARKWAY TRAIL
ROAD CONNECTING TO
N REDWOOD RD
23
13
65
48
68
18
46
12
2
5
44
95
45
56
22
42
11
3
13
5
44
DWN
10%
DWN
10%
DWN
10%
DWN
10%
DWN
10%
DWN
10%
DWN
DWN
10%
PA
R
K
I
N
G
(
T
Y
P
)
25'
40
'
Ro
s
e
P
a
r
k
L
a
n
e
County
U
t
a
h
S
t
a
t
e
P
a
r
k
s
Jo
r
d
a
n
R
i
v
e
r
O
H
V
P
a
r
k
Salt Lake City
N
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
R
D
JO
R
D
A
N
R
I
V
E
R
SPOTS PARK BOULEVARD
Cl
u
b
Ho
u
s
e
JORDAN RIVER AND
LEGACY PARKWAY TRAIL
P
L
A
Y
G
R
O
U
N
D
S
A
L
T
L
A
K
E
D
R
A
I
N
Po
o
l
HUNTER STABLES APARTMENTS CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
13 APRIL 2120SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
Scale: 1" = 100'-0"
0 50' 100'200'
Plotted: 4/13/21 at 2:37pm By: tylerr
P:\Projects\19-103 Hunter Stables HD\02-Working\01-Drawings\01-SD\19-2013 Site Plan MColor.dwgFile Path:
SLC RAC
TRAIL CONNECTING TO
JORDAN RIVER AND
LEGACY PARKWAY TRAIL
ROAD CONNECTING TO
N REDWOOD RD
hƉĚĂƚĞĚϭϬͬϮϳͬϮϭ
$QQH[DWLRQWR6DOW/DNH&LW\
K&&/ h^ KE>z
WƌŽũĞĐƚη͗ZĞĐĞŝǀĞĚLJ͗ĂƚĞZĞĐĞŝǀĞĚ͗
WƌŽũĞĐƚEĂŵĞ͗
W> ^ WZKs/ d, &K>>Kt/E'/E&KZDd/KE
/ƐƚŚĞƐƵďũĞĐƚĂƌĞĂďŽƌĚĞƌŝŶŐƚŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚďŽƵŶĚĂƌŝĞƐŽĨ^Ăůƚ>ĂŬĞŝƚLJ͍ FzĞƐFEŽ
ZĞƋƵĞƐƚ͗
>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶŽĨ^ƵďũĞĐƚWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ͗
EĂŵĞŽĨƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ͗WŚŽŶĞ͗
ĚĚƌĞƐƐŽĨƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ͗
ͲŵĂŝůŽĨƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ͗Ğůůͬ&Ădž͗
ƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ͛Ɛ/ŶƚĞƌĞƐƚŝŶ^ƵďũĞĐƚWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ͗
Î WůĞĂƐĞŶŽƚĞƚŚĂƚĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŵĂLJďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚďLJƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚƉůĂŶŶĞƌƚŽĞŶƐƵƌĞĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞ
ŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŝƐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚĨŽƌƐƚĂĨĨĂŶĂůLJƐŝƐ͘ůůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĨŽƌƐƚĂĨĨĂŶĂůLJƐŝƐǁŝůůďĞĐŽƉŝĞĚĂŶĚ
ŵĂĚĞƉƵďůŝĐ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƉƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůŽƌĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐĚƌĂǁŝŶŐƐ͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐŽĨƉƵďůŝĐ
ƌĞǀŝĞǁďLJĂŶLJŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚĞĚƉĂƌƚLJ͘
s/>> KE^h>dd/KE
Î WůĂŶŶĞƌƐĂƌĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĨŽƌĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂƚŝŽŶƉƌŝŽƌƚŽƐƵďŵŝƚƚŝŶŐƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘WůĞĂƐĞĞŵĂŝů
njŽŶŝŶŐΛƐůĐŐŽǀ͘ĐŽŵŝĨLJŽƵŚĂǀĞĂŶLJƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŽĨƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘
t, Z dK&/> d, KDW> d WW>/d/KE
ƉƉůLJŽŶůŝŶĞƚŚƌŽƵŐŚƚŚĞŝƚŝnjĞŶĐĐĞƐƐWŽƌƚĂů͘dŚĞƌĞŝƐĂƐƚĞƉͲďLJͲƐƚĞƉŐƵŝĚĞƚŽůĞĂƌŶ
ŚŽǁƚŽƐƵďŵŝƚŽŶůŝŶĞ͘
Z Yh/Z &
&ŝůŝŶŐĨĞĞŽĨΨϭ͕ϯϰϰ
WůƵƐĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůĨĞĞĨŽƌƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƉƵďůŝĐŶŽƚŝĐĞƐǁŝůůďĞĂƐƐĞƐƐĞĚĂĨƚĞƌƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŝƐƐƵďŵŝƚƚĞĚ͘
^/'EdhZ
/ĨĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͕ĂŶŽƚĂƌŝnjĞĚƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚŽĨĐŽŶƐĞŶƚĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjŝŶŐĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚƚŽĂĐƚĂƐĂŶĂŐĞŶƚǁŝůůďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͘
^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞŽĨKǁŶĞƌŽƌŐĞŶƚ͗ĂƚĞ͗
6$
/
7
/
$
.
(
&
,
7
<
3
/
$
1
1
,
1
*
ϮϯϱϬE͘ZŽƐĞWĂƌŬ>Ŷ͕͘^Ăůƚ>ĂŬĞŝƚLJ͕hƚĂŚϴϰϭϭϲ
:tĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͕>>͖ƚƚŶ͗͘:ĞĨĨƌĞLJ͘tƌŝŐŚƚ͕W͘ ͘ĂŶĚ:ĂLJŽůůǁŝŶŬĞů ϴϬϭͲϯϬϮͲϮϮϬϬ͖ϴϬϭͲϯϲϰͲϵϲϵϲ
ũĞĨĨΛũǁƌŝŐŚƚ͘ďŝnj͖ũĂLJďΛŐƌĂƐƐůŝŐƌŽƵƉ͘ĐŽŵ
ϯϱϳtĞƐƚϲϭϲϬ^ŽƵƚŚ͕DƵƌƌĂLJ͕hdϴϰϭϬϳ
ϴϬϭͲϯϴϲͲϲϴϮϬ͖ϴϬϭͲϯϲϰͲϵϲϵϲ
y
ŶŶĞdžϮϴ͘ϮϴĂĐƌĞƐŝŶƚŽ^Ăůƚ>ĂŬĞŝƚLJ͕ĨƌŽŵƵŶŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚ^Ăůƚ>ĂŬĞŽƵŶƚLJ
KǁŶĞƌΘZĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƚŝǀĞ
March 24, 2022 (via email)Cindy Lou Trishman, City Recorder
Hunter Stables
PLNPCM2021-01124
hƉĚĂƚĞĚϭϬͬϮϳͬϮϭ
^ƚ
Ă
Ĩ
Ĩ
Z
Ğ
ǀ
ŝ
Ğ
ǁ
^hD/dd>Z Yh/Z D Ed^
ϭ͘>ĞƚƚĞƌƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŶŐƚŚĞŶŶĞdžĂƚŝŽŶ
ϭ͘ůĞƚƚĞƌƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŶŐƚŚĞŶŶĞdžĂƚŝŽŶƐŚŽƵůĚďĞĂĚĚƌĞƐƐĞĚƚŽƚŚĞDĂLJŽƌŽĨ^Ăůƚ>ĂŬĞŝƚLJ͘
Ϯ͘WůĞĂƐĞĂŶƐǁĞƌƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐŽŶĂŶĂƚƚĂĐŚĞĚƐŚĞĞƚͬƐ͗
ϭ͘ tŚĂƚŝƐƚŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƵƐĞŽĨƚŚĞůĂŶĚ͍
Ϯ͘ tŚĂƚƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐĂƌĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůLJƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚďLJĂŶŽƚŚĞƌŵƵŶŝĐŝƉĂůŝƚLJ͕ĐŽƵŶƚLJ͕ŽƌƐƉĞĐŝĂůĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ͍
ϯ͘ WůĞĂƐĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨLJĂŶLJůĞŐĂůŽƌĨĂĐƚƵĂůďĂƌƌŝĞƌƐƚŚĂƚǁŽƵůĚŶĞŐĂƚŝǀĞůLJĂĨĨĞĐƚƚŚĞƉƌŽďĂďŝůŝƚLJŽĨ
ĂŶŶĞdžĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ͍
ϯ͘WůĞĂƐĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͗
ϭ͘ĚŝŐŝƚĂů^ŝĚǁĞůůŵĂƉŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĞĂ͘
Ϯ͘ĚŝŐŝƚĂů;W&ͿĐŽƉLJŽĨƚŚĞŶŶĞdžĂƚŝŽŶWůĂƚ͘
ϯ͘dŚĞŶŶĞdžĂƚŝŽŶWůĂƚƐŚŽƵůĚƐŚŽǁƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ͗
Ă͘ƚŚĂƚŝƚŚĂƐďĞĞŶƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĚĂŶĚĐĞƌƚŝĨŝĞĚďLJĂůŝĐĞŶƐĞĚůĂŶĚƐƵƌǀĞLJŽƌ͖
ď͘ĂĐĐƵƌĂƚĞůLJĚƌĂǁŶƚŽƐĐĂůĞ͖
Đ͘ĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůĞŐĂůĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶƚŚĞĂƌĞĂ͖
Ě͘ƚŽƚĂůĂĐƌĞĂŐĞŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĞĂ͖ĂŶĚ
Ğ͘ƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞďůŽĐŬƐĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJ ŶŐŝŶĞĞƌ͕ŝƚLJƚƚŽƌŶĞLJ͕ŝƚLJZĞĐŽƌĚĞƌ͕
ĂŶĚ^Ăůƚ>ĂŬĞŽƵŶƚLJZĞĐŽƌĚĞƌ͘
ϰ͘EĂŵĞĂŶĚĂĚĚƌĞƐƐŽĨĂůůƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŽǁŶĞƌƐ͘
ϱ͘WĞƚŝƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞƐŽĨƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŽǁŶĞƌƐǁŚŽƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŚĞŶŶĞdžĂƚŝŽŶ͘
x ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞƐƐŚŽƵůĚďĞĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŽǁŶĞƌƐĂŶĚŶŽƚĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJƌĞŶƚĞƌƐ͘
x dŚĞƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶƐŚŽƵůĚŝŶĐůƵĚĞƚŚĞŵĂũŽƌŝƚLJŽĨĂůůƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŽǁŶĞƌƐ͘
&/>>/E't/d,^>d>< KhEdz> Z<͛^K&&/
Î WůĞĂƐĞŶŽƚĞƚŚĂƚĂĐŽƉLJŽĨƚŚĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŵƵƐƚĂůƐŽďĞĨŝůĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ^Ăůƚ>ĂŬĞŽƵŶƚLJůĞƌŬ͛Ɛ
KĨĨŝĐĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐZĞĐĞŝƉƚĂƚƚŚĞŝƚLJZĞĐŽƌĚĞƌ͛ƐŽĨĨŝĐĞ͘dŚĞŽƵŶƚLJůĞƌŬ͛ƐŽĨĨŝĐĞŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚĂƚ͗ϮϬϬϭ^ŽƵƚŚ^ƚĂƚĞ
^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ZŽŽŵ^ͲϭϭϬϬ
/EKDW> d WW>/d/KE^t/>>EKd Wd
ͺͺͺͺͺͺ/ĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞƚŚĂƚ^Ăůƚ>ĂŬĞŝƚLJƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐƚŚĞŝƚĞŵƐĂďŽǀĞƚŽďĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚĞĚďĞĨŽƌĞŵLJĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶĐĂŶďĞ
ƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĞĚ͘/ƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚƚŚĂƚWůĂŶŶŝŶŐǁŝůůŶŽƚĂĐĐĞƉƚŵLJĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƵŶůĞƐƐĂůůŽĨƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐŝƚĞŵƐĂƌĞ
ŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůƉĂĐŬĂŐĞ͘
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
hƉĚĂƚĞĚϭϬͬϮϳͬϮϭ
W d/d/KEdKEE yWZKW Zdz/EdK^>d>< /dz:hZ/^/d/KE
;ƚŚŝƐƉĂŐĞŵĂLJďĞĚƵƉůŝĐĂƚĞĚŝĨŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJͿ
EĂŵĞŽĨƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
ĚĚƌĞƐƐŽĨƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
ĂƚĞ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
127,&( 7KHUHZLOOEHQRSXEOLFHOHFWLRQRQWKHDQQH[DWLRQSURSRVHGE\WKLVSHWLWLRQEHFDXVH8WDKODZGRHV
QRWSURYLGHIRUDQDQQH[DWLRQWREHDSSURYHGE\YRWHUVDWDSXEOLFHOHFWLRQ
,I\RXVLJQWKLVSHWLWLRQDQGODWHUGHFLGHWKDW\RXGRQRWVXSSRUWWKHSHWLWLRQ\RXPD\ZLWKGUDZ\RXU
VLJQDWXUHE\VXEPLWWLQJDVLJQHGZULWWHQZLWKGUDZDOWRWKH6DOW/DNH&LW\5HFRUGHU,I\RXFKRRVHWR
ZLWKGUDZ\RXUVLJQDWXUH\RXVKDOOGRVRQRODWHUWKDQGD\VDIWHU6DOW/DNH&LW\UHFHLYHVQRWLFHWKDWWKH
SHWLWLRQKDVEHHQFHUWLILHG
ƐĂŶŽǁŶĞƌŽĨƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJƐƵƉƉŽƌƚŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚŶŶĞdžĂƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŽ^Ăůƚ>ĂŬĞŝƚLJ:ƵƌŝƐĚŝĐƚŝŽŶ͕/ĂŐƌĞĞƚŽƚŚĞ
ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĂŶŶĞdžĂƚŝŽŶ͘
ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
WƌŝŶƚEĂŵĞĚĚƌĞƐƐ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ ĂƚĞ
ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
WƌŝŶƚEĂŵĞĚĚƌĞƐƐ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ ĂƚĞ
ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
WƌŝŶƚEĂŵĞĚĚƌĞƐƐ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ ĂƚĞ
ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
WƌŝŶƚEĂŵĞĚĚƌĞƐƐ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ ĂƚĞ
ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
WƌŝŶƚEĂŵĞĚĚƌĞƐƐ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ ĂƚĞ
ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
WƌŝŶƚEĂŵĞĚĚƌĞƐƐ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ ĂƚĞ
ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
WƌŝŶƚEĂŵĞĚĚƌĞƐƐ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ ĂƚĞ
:tĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͕>>͖ƚƚŶ͗͘:ĞĨĨƌĞLJ͘tƌŝŐŚƚ͕W͘ ͘ĂŶĚ:ĂLJŽůůǁŝŶŬĞů
ϯϱϳtĞƐƚϲϭϲϬ^ŽƵƚŚ͕DƵƌƌĂLJ͕hdϴϰϭϬϳ
01/0 138z/7. 1z
233 z/ z53!z
/6-49z/ z2)3z)( vz
vz
vddz
"z oCz z z z ?CMZJz BlQrz do\bz BC^\dCz =ZBzd=rzeK=ez #z oCz =Vz =_Cz eKCz
\oZC_dz \DzeLCz ^_\z C_frz MBCZeMGCBz Mz eKCz =hg=@KCBz =^^QM@=eM\[z =[Bz eK=ez eKCz de=eCWCZedz KC_CMZz @\Ze=M[CBz
=[Bz eKCz MZH_X=fM\[z ^_\mMBCBz M[z eKCz =fg=@KCBz ^Q=Zdz =[Bz \eKC_z CpKM?Medz =_CzM[z =QQz _Cd^C@edz e_lCz =[Bz @\__C@ez
e\ez eKCz ?Cdez \EzWrz \l_z PZ\oQCBJC
z "z =Qd\z =@OZ\oQCBJCz eK=ez #z oCz K=mCz _C@CMmCBz o`MefC[z M[dkl@eM\Zdz
_CJ=_BMZJz eKCz ^_\@Cddz I_z oKM@Kz #z oCz =Wz =_Cz =^^QrM[Jz=ZBz eKCz2=Qez*=OCz Mfrz 0Q=[ZMZJz 2e=Fz K=nCz
MZBM@=eCBzeKCrz=_Cz=m=MQ=?QCze\z=ddMdezVCzMZzW=ON[JzeKNdz=^^QM@=eM\Zz
$ - +)-
%""-,'-
-
0_\^C_erz/o[C_z
0_]^C_irz/oZC_z
,\e=_rz
1CdMBMZJzM[z2=Sfz*=OCz\l[ftz 5e=Kz
+rz@\YMddM\[zCp^M_Cdz &zz
wz $z%z#z oCz<x A
Ta:z;z eKCz\oZC_zdz \DzeKCz_C=Qz ^_\^C`erz BCd@_M?CBz MZz eKCz =fj=@KCBz=^^QM@=eM\Zz B\z=leQz \_MuCBz=dzWrz\z _z =JC[edz '=sz\QQoMZPCRz z e\z_C^_CdCZezVCzldz
_CJ=_BMZJz eKCz =fj=@KCBz =^^QM@=eM\[z =[Bz g\z =^^C=_z \Zz Wrz z\l_z ?CK=QDz ?CH_Cz =[rz =BVM[Mde_=eMmCz \_z
QCJMdQ=eMmCz ?\Brz M[z eKCz Merz@\ZdMBC_MZJz eKMdz =^^QM@=eM\[z >Bze\z =@ez M[z=QQz _Cd^C@edz =dz \l_z =JCZez M[z V=eeC_dz
^C_f=MZMZJze\zeKCz=ef=@KCBz=^^QM@=eM\Zz
0_\^C_irz/o[C_z
0_\^C_erz/oZC_z
=hCyMdzB=rz\Dz
z z ^C_d\Z=Urz=^^C=_CBz ?CH_CzWCz
eKCz dMJZC_dz \DzeKCz =JCZez =lez cu=eM\Zz oKz BQrz =@P[\oQCBJCBz e\z XCz
eK=ezeKCrzCpC@leCBzeKCzd=WCz
$!!- + *-
&##-,(-
-
,\e=_tz
1CdMBMZJzMZz2=Qez*=OCz\lZerz5e=Kz
+rz@\VWNddM\ZzCq^M_Cdz
145 W 200 S – Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 – 801-364-9696 – www.grassligroup.com
0DUFK, 202
Mayor Mendenhall
Salt Lake City
451 S. State Street, Suite 306
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Subject: Annexation of Acres on 2664 North Rose Park Lane
Dear Mayor Mendehall,
We formally request the annexation of the above referenced parcel to be classified as RMF75
zoning. We have attended the Westpointe Community Council and presented our project twice
to gather input. We are now ready to proceed with Planning Commission review of our project.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Jay Bollwinkel, Principal
MGB+A, Inc.
145 W 200 S – Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 – 801-364-9696 – www.grassligroup.com
ϭ͘What is the current use of the land? – ŐƌŝĐƵůƚƵƌĞ
Ϯ͘What services are currently provided by another municipality, county, or special district? -
EŽŶĞ
ϯ͘Please identify any legal or factual barriers that would negatively affect the probability of
annexation of the subject property? – EŽŶĞ
tĞŚĂǀĞƌĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚĞĚƚŚŝƐĂŶŶĞdžĂƚŝŽŶƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶƚŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞƚŚĞĂŶŶĞdžĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚǁŽ;ϮͿƉƵďůŝĐůLJ
ƉĂƌĐĞůƐ͕ƉĞƌƚŚĞƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŽĨ^Ăůƚ>ĂŬĞŽƵŶƚLJ͘dŚĞƐĞƉĂƌĐĞůƐĂƌĞŽǁŶĞĚďLJ^Ăůƚ>ĂŬĞŝƚLJŽƌƉ͘
;ƉĂƌĐĞůηϬϴϭϱϭϬϬϬϯϬϬϬϬϬͿĂŶĚƚŚĞ^ƚĂƚĞŽĨhƚĂŚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶƐŽĨWĂƌŬƐΘZĞĐƌĞĂƚŝŽŶͲ;ƉĂƌĐĞůη
ϬϴϭϱϭϬϬϬϮϵϬϬϬϬͿ͘
Property Owners:
Jeff Wright
JWright Communities, LLC
357 W 6160 S
Murray, UT 84107
All ƉƌŝǀĂƚĞproperty owners support this annexation
1
PETITION FOR ANNEXATION
TO: CITY RECORDER’S OFFICE OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
COUNTY CLERK’S OFFICE OF SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH:
The undersigned owner (the “Petitioner”) of a portion of the Property (defined below)
submits this Petition for Annexation (this “Petition”) and respectfully represents the following:
1.This Petition is made in accordance with the requirements of Utah Code § 10-2-
403.
2.The real property subject to this Petition: (i) contains land that is privately-owned
by the Petitioner, (ii) contains land that is publicly owned by Salt Lake City Corp.
and the State of Utah Division of Parks and Recreation, (iii) contains
approximately 28.28 acres, (iv) is located within the unincorporated area of Salt
Lake County, (v) is contiguous to the northern boundary of Salt Lake City’s
limits, and (vi) is more particularly described on Exhibit “A” attached hereto (the
“Property”).
3.The signature affixed hereto is that of the Petitioner and who, by so affixing its
signature, states and confirms that:
a.the Petitioner is the owner of all private land area within the Property;
b. the Property is accurately described and depicted on the recordable map,
attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, which was prepared by a licensed surveyor
and which is made a part hereof by such reference;
c.in accordance with Utah Code § 10-2-403(2)(a)(i)(A), a notice of intent to
file a petition was properly filed with the City Recorder of Salt Lake City,
Utah, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “B”; and
d.in accordance with Utah Code § 10-2-403(2)(a)(i)(B), a notice was properly
mailed to each “affected entity”, including, without limitation, the public
entities that own a portion of the Property, a copy of which is attached
hereto as Exhibit “A” , as evidenced by that certificate of completion
attached hereto as Exhibit “C”.
4.The Petitioner hereby designates the following person as the sole sponsor, and the
contact sponsor, for this Petition. The sponsor’s contact information is as follows:
Jay Bollwinkel
145 W 200 S
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
jayb@grassligroup.com
5.The Property is not, in whole or in part, subject to any other petition for annexation
that was previously filed that has not been denied, rejected, or granted, in
accordance to Utah Code § 10-2-403(4).
2
WHEREFORE, Petitioner hereby requests that this Petition be considered, accepted, and
certified by the Salt Lake City Recorder in accordance with Utah Code § 10-2-405.
DATED this day of March 2022.
PETITIONER:
JWright Communities
By:
Name: Jeffery D. Wright
Its:
NOTICE: THERE WILL BE NO PUBLIC ELECTION ON THE ANNEXATION PROPOSED BY
THIS PETITION BECAUSE UTAH LAW DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR AN ANNEXATION TO
BE APPROVED BY VOTERS AT A PUBLIC ELECTION. IF YOU SIGN THIS PETITION AND
LATER DECIDE THAT YOU DO NOT SUPPORT THE PETITION, YOU MAY WITHDRAW
YOUR SIGNATURE BY SUBMITTING A SIGNED, WRITTEN WITHDRAWAL WITH THE
RECORDER OR CLERK OF SALT LAKE CITY. IF YOU CHOOSE TO WITHDRAW YOUR
SIGNATURE, YOU SHALL DO SO NO LATER THAN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER SALT
LAKE CITY RECEIVES NOTICE THAT THE PETITION HAS BEEN CERTIFIED.
CONTACT SPONSOR:
By:
Name: Jay Bollwinkel
Its:
23rd
3
EXHIBIT “A”
Recordable Map or Plat
[See Attached]
4
4852-6058-5424.4
5
EXHIBIT “B”
Notice of Intent to File Petition & Notice to Affected Entities
[See Attached]
6
7
8
9
10
11
EXHIBIT “C”
Certificate of Completion
[See Attached]
12
13
14
5. MAILING LIST
Name Mailing Address City/State ZIP
PROVO-JORDAN RIVER PARKWAY 1545 WEST 1000 NORTH SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
ATTN Nancy B Regier
UTAH DIVISION OF PARKS & RECREATION 1596 W North Temple SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
STATE OF UTAH AND PROVO-JORDAN RIVER
PARKWAY AUTHORITY STATE OFFICE BUILDING RM 404 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114
JWRIGHT COMMUNITIES 357 W 6160 S MURRAY UT 84107
ATTN RHONDA DEVEREAUX
HAPPY HORSE RANCH LLC 88 E EDGECOMBE DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
ERIC PORTER 2800 N ROSE PARK LN SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
ATTN: PROPERTY MANAGER
STATE OF UTAH DIVISION OF PARKS AND 1594 W NORTHTEMPLE ST # 116 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
ATTN: JEFF WRIGHT
JWRIGHT COMMUNITIES, LLC 357 W 6160 S MURRAY UT 84107
ATTN: PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION PO BOX 145460 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114
ETG LV TR 2125 N 2800 W BRIGHAM CITY UT 84302
ATTN: TAX ADM DIV 513-5346
ROSE PARK STAKE OF CHURCH OF JC OF LDS 50 E NORTHTEMPLE ST #2225 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84150
PARK MANAGEMENT II, LLC 1302 W MILLBRIDGE LN WEST BOUNTIFUL UT 84087
ATTN: HAMILTON PARTNERS
HAMILTON I-215 LOGISTIC CENTER LLC 222 S MAIN ST # 1760 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
LBA RVI-COMPANY XLIII, LLC PO BOX 847 CARLSBAD CA 92018
CURRENT RESIDENT 2441 N ROSE PARK LN SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2575 N ROSE PARK LN SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2800 N ROSE PARK LN SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2462 N ROSE PARK LN SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2440 N ROSE PARK LN SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2350 N ROSE PARK LN SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2280 N ROSE PARK LN SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2280 N ROSE PARK LN SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2280 N ROSE PARK LN SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2075 W 2670 N SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2075 W 2670 N SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2476 N 2200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2596 N 2200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2520 N 2200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2390 N 2200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2320 N 2200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
CURRENT RESIDENT 2220 N 2200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
ATTN DANIEL ECHEVERRIA
SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING DIVISION PO Box 145480 Salt Lake City UT 84114
Item C1
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Allison Rowland, Policy and Budget Analyst
DATE:September 19, 2023
RE: RESOLUTION: IVORY UNIVERSITY HOUSE PUBLIC BENEFITS ANALYSIS
MOTION 1 – AUTHORIZE RESOLUTION
I move that the Board adopt the conclusions set forth in the Public Benefit Analysis and authorize the
impact fee and permit fee waivers and refunds for Ivory University House L3C.
MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT
I move that the Council not adopt the resolution.
MARY BETH THOMPSON
Finance Director
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238
PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455 TEL 801-535-6394
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
________________________ Date Received: ___________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________
____________________________________________ ____________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: July 3, 2023
Darin Mano
FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer
Katherine Lewis, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Authorizing the refund of certain building fees and an exemption from impact
fees incurred in the development of a student housing project by Ivory University House L3C.
Ivory University House L3C will pledge to use these funds toward scholarships funded by the
operations of Ivory University House in an amount equal to the fees refunded: Public Benefit
Analysis under Utah Code Section 10-8-2.
SPONSOR: NA
STAFF CONTACT: Kimberly Chytraus, City Attorney (801) 535-7685
Blake Thomas, Director of Community & Neighborhoods Department
Randy Hillier, Policy and Budget Analyst (801) 535-6606,
DOCUMENT TYPE: Public Benefits Analysis and Recommendation
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Salt Lake City Council provide a refund of
certain building fees and an exemption from impact fees incurred in the development of a student
housing project by Ivory University House L3C (“University House”). Because of the timing of
development, University House has paid the fees described herein, so if the fee waiver is granted
the City will refund the paid amounts. University House has also committed that, if the fees are
refunded, it will pledge scholarships funded by the operations of Ivory University House in an
amount equal to the fees refunded (an amount over $2,400,000) for Salt Lake City residents to be
paid over a period of ten years.
A portion of the Impact Fees being refunded, specifically the Fire Fee in the amount of $79,515,
will need to be obtained from the general fund through an upcoming budget amendment since
these fees have already been spent.
Katherine Lewis (Jul 13, 2023 14:57 MDT)
Lisa Shaffer (Jul 13, 2023 15:02 MDT)07/13/2023
07/13/2023
BUDGET IMPACT: NA
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing
Alejandro Sanchez (Jul 13, 2023 15:01 MDT)
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council Members
SUBJECT: Analysis of Public Benefits Provided by Fee Waiver and Refund to Ivory
University House
INTRODUCTION
It is recommended that the Salt Lake City Council provide a refund of certain building fees and
an exemption from impact fees incurred in the development of a student housing project by Ivory
University House L3C (“University House”). Because of the timing of development, University
House has paid the fees described herein, so if the fee waiver is granted the City will refund the
paid amounts. University House has also committed that, if the fees are refunded, it will pledge
scholarships funded by the operations of Ivory University House in an amount equal to the fees
refunded (an amount over $2,400,000) for Salt Lake City residents to be paid over a period of ten
years.
University House is developing a student housing project at 434 South Mario Capecchi Drive,
Salt Lake City, Utah known as the Ivory University House (the “Project”). The Project is being
developed in two separate phases. University House paid the permit fees for the Project in the
amount of $754,483.23, broken down as follows:
Permit 1st Phase Fees
Paid
2nd Phase Fees
Paid
Total
Building Permit Fee $211,114.98 $211,117.77 $422,232.75
Plan Check Fee $137,224.74 $137,226.55 $274,451.29
Utah State Surcharge $2,111.15 $2,111.18 $4,222.33
Fire Sprinkler $3,398.41 $3,398.41 $6,796.82
Plumbing $8,080.71 $9,572.78 $17,653.49
Electrical $4,315.60 $5,805.61 $10,121.21
Mechanical $6,429.83 $12,575.51 $19,005.34
Fire Alarm Permit Not yet applied for Not yet applied for Not yet applied for
Total $372,675.42 $381,807.81 $754,483.23
University House initially applied for a permit fee waiver under Salt Lake City Code (“City
Code”) Section 18.20.220, but such waiver is only available to a nonprofit organization building
affordable housing (limited to households under 80% of the City’s average median income
(“AMI”))1. As discussed herein, because University House operates on a nonprofit basis and rent
1 Code Section 18.20.220 (E) establishes the standard for a fee waiver request by a nonprofit organization: “HAAB
[Housing Advisory and Appeals Board] may recommend granting the waiver or deferral if it finds that the project or
projects, and the sponsoring nonprofit organization furthers the city’s established low income housing goals to
provide housing for persons or families under eighty percent (80%) of the city ’s median income, as defined by the
United States department of housing and urban development, and also meets all applicable guidelines established for
any such programs by the United States department of housing and urban development. HAAB may recommend that
2
is considered affordable under the HUD standard described below, it is recommended that the
Project’s actual fees be refunded as described herein.
In addition, the Administration is seeking an exemption and reimbursement of impact fees for
the Project. Ivory paid the impact fees for the Project in the amount of $1,648,715, broken down
as follows for 465 units:
Impact Fee
Permit
Fee per
Unit
1st Phase Paid
(280 units)
2nd Phase Paid
(185 units)
Total
Fire Fee $171 $47,880 $31,635 $79,515
Park Fee $3,078 $861,840 $569,430 $1,431,270
Police Fee $59 $16,520 $10,915 $27,435
Roadway Fee $242 $67,760 $42,735 $110,495
TOTAL $994,000 $654,715 $1,648,715
City Code Section 18.98.060 provides for an exemption from the payment of impact fees for
housing that meets certain rent restrictions and income restrictions, ranging from 60% - 80%
AMI2. While the Project is not income restricted, it will be rent restricted and will address critical
affordable housing needs of students. It is recommended that the Project be granted an impact fee
waiver and the paid impact fees be refunded to University House, in the actual amount of the
impact fees, which is $1,648,715.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK
Utah Code section 10-8-2 states municipalities may appropriate funds for “corporate purposes
only.” Utah Code §10-8-2(1)(a)(i). Those purposes are, in the judgment of the municipal
legislative body, any purpose that “provides for the safety, health, prosperity, moral well-being,
peace, order, comfort, or convenience of the inhabitants of the city.” Utah Code § 10-8-2(3). A
municipal legislative body must determine that the “net value received for any money
appropriated” is “measured on a project-by-project basis over the life of the project.” Utah Code
§ 10-8-2(3)(a). The municipal legislative branch “may consider intangible benefits received by
the municipality in determining net value received.” Utah Code § 10-8-2(3)(c). Moreover, a
“determination of value received, made by the municipality’s legislative body, shall be presumed
valid unless it can be shown that the determination was arbitrary, capricious, or illegal.” Utah
Code § 10-8-2(3)(b).
Prior to the municipal legislative body making a decision to appropriate any funds for a
corporate purpose, a public hearing must be held. If the entity receiving the benefit from the City
waivers may be granted for remodeling or construction of offices for nonprofit housing cor porations if it finds that
such remodeling or construction will save the corporation money and that such savings will be applied to a specific
housing project.”
2 City Code Section 18.98.060 in relevant part provides: “The following housing may be exempt from the payment
of impact fees, to the following extent:
“1. A one hundred percent (100%) exemption shall be granted for rental housing for which the annualized rent
per dwelling unit does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the annual income of a family whose annual income
equals sixty percent (60%) of the median income for Salt Lake City, as determined by HUD;”
3
is a for-profit entity, then a study (“Study”) that demonstrates the purpose for the appropriation
must be undertaken and posted for review by the public at least 14 days before a public hearing
on the issue. Utah Code § 10-8-2(3)(e). The factors to be considered in the Study are set forth
under Utah Code as:
(i) what identified benefit the municipality will receive in return for any money or
resources appropriated;
(ii) the municipality’s purpose for the appropriation, including an analysis of the way
the appropriation will be used to enhance the safety, health, prosperity, moral well-being,
peace, order, comfort, or convenience of the inhabitants of the municipality; and
(iii) whether the appropriation is necessary and appropriate to accomplish the
reasonable goals and objectives of the municipality in the area of economic development,
job creation, affordable housing, blight elimination, job preservation, the preservation of
historic structures and property, and any other public purpose.
Utah Code § 10-8-2(3)(e)(i)-(iii). This Study examines each of these factors below.
BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT
The Developer. University House is a low-profit limited liability company, wholly owned by the
Ivory University House Trust, with the Clark and Christine Ivory Foundation as its beneficiary (a
501(c)(3) private foundation). University House leases the underlying real property from The
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is an express requirement of that Lease that
University House donate all profits to student scholarships at the University of Utah. This
contractual obligation that University House not retain any profits ensures that University House
will operate the Project on a nonprofit basis in order to continue leasing the property.
The Project. Ivory University House is the only privately funded, philanthropically driven
student housing project in Salt Lake City and Utah. The Project is located on 5.4 acres bordered
by South Campus Drive, Mario Capecchi Drive, and Research Road. The Project is financed
through conventional financing and a $10,000,000 personal donation from the Ivory family. The
total Project cost is estimated to be approximately $96,000,000. It will have four buildings and
465 apartments. There are three unit types: 144 studios with a full kitchen, 243 studios with a
kitchenette, and 78 units with 3 bedrooms and 3 bathrooms.
The Project will also include community rooms, classrooms, and outdoor study areas. The single
living structure is designed to allow students to focus on their studies with common areas to
promote student engagement. The Project is across the street from the University of Utah, with a
TRAX station a 3-minute walking distance and the Student Life Center a 5-minute walking
distance.
The Ground Lease. The property is owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,
and is ground leased to University House with a ground lease term of 99 years. The terms of the
ground lease require that all profits, i.e., “the amount gross revenue exceed the costs and
expenses associated with operating [the Project]” be donated by University House to a
4
scholarship fund and housing assistance for students attending the University of Utah. The
ground lease can only be assigned to a tax-exempt charitable organization (a 501(c)(3)).
Affordable Housing. The maximum rent per bed will be at or below 30% of the monthly
income limit set by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) for a single
person household of 80% AMI or below. Since the project is student housing, rents will be
calculated by bedroom rather than by unit, with a limit of one student occupant per bedroom.
There will be an additional utility fee of an initial maximum of $55 per month, which may
increase not more than 3% per year (note that utilities are usually included in the amount of
maximum rent under HUD’s limits). The rent restriction will be evidenced by a restrictive use
agreement recorded against the leasehold interest held by University House (meaning the
restriction is in place as long as University House is leasing the land). HUD considers rent for
persons at 80% of AMI as affordable for low-income households. The amount of rent may be
adjusted with changes to HUD’s schedule.
Maximum Monthly Rent Per Bedroom by Unit Type
Unit Type Maximum Rent per
Bedroom - AMI
2022 Maximum
Rent per Bedroom
# of
Bedrooms
Single Bedroom Unit: 440 - 455 sq ft 80% $1,434 144
Single Bedroom Unit: 345 sq ft 75% $1,344 243
3-Bedroom Unit (per bedroom) 55% $986 234
Source: AMI data as per HUD’s FY 22 Income Limit Documentation System for the Salt Lake City,
UT HUD Metro FMR Area
Note: Units will be rent restricted but not income restricted.
Note: Maximum rent is assessed per bedroom and based on 30% of income for the applicable AMI
for a household size of one and will be updated annually based on AMI data as per HUD’s Income
Limit Documentation System for the Salt Lake City, UT HUD Metro FMR Area.
In addition to voluntarily restricting rents across the board, University House and the University
and Utah have committed that no less than 25% of the Project residents will receive additional
housing assistance. This will ensure that even students with the most financial need will have the
opportunity to live at the Project.
The Scholarship Fund. All profits from the housing project will be donated to a new
scholarship fund called the Ivory University House Scholarship Fund and will provide
scholarships, internships, or housing assistance for students at the University of Utah. The fund
was seeded by an additional $6,000,000 gift from the Clark and Christine Ivory Foundation and
is administered by the University of Utah, with priority given to students with the most financial
need. Applications for the first year recently opened and the fund has already received over 450
5
applications, one third of which came from students with significant financial needs. University
House has committed that if the fees are refunded, it will pledge scholarships funded by the
operations of the Project in an amount equal to the fees waived for Salt Lake City residents to be
paid over a period of ten years.
TERMS OF ASSISTANCE AND PUBLIC BENEFITS PROVIDED
I. Terms of Assistance
A. Waiver of Permit Fees. Under the City Code, a request to waive permit fees is reviewed
by the Housing Advisory and Appeals Board (“HAAB”), who reviews the request in a public
meeting and forwards its recommendation to the Director of Community and Neighborhoods.
The waiver is available to nonprofit organizations who are developing housing for persons or
families under eighty percent (80%) of AMI. The Director may approve the waiver. The permit
fees are typically paid into the general fund to cover the cost of the services of reviewing and
administering the permit, including building inspections. With a waiver, those services are
provided by the City at no cost. Fees paid to Public Utilities may not be waived. The total
amount of fees waived by the City is calculated as $754,483.23, plus the actual costs of the fire
alarm permit fees.
B. Exemption of Impact Fees. An exemption of impact fees is also approved by the Director
of Community and Neighborhoods. A 100% exemption is available for rental housing for which
the annualized rent per dwelling unit does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the annual income
of a family whose annual income equals sixty percent (60%) of AMI. There are additional
exemptions available for nonrental housing with higher income restrictions. Such rent and
income restrictions are documented and enforced through the recordation of a restrictive use
agreement on the property. The City’s exemption is allowed pursuant to the Utah Code,3 which
provides that the City can give an exemption for “low income housing”. The Utah Code does not
provide a definition for “low income housing” and the City relies on its Code for the definition.
The total amount of the impact fees that could be waived is $1,648,715.
II. Public Benefits Provided by Fee Waiver and Exemption
The Project is not strictly eligible for the permit fee waiver or impact fee exemption under the
City Code because University House, as a L3C, is a for-profit entity, and the Project is not
income restricted to residents whose income is at or below 60% AMI. However, because the
Project will provide significant and much needed benefits to the City, the Administration
proposes the fee waiver and impact fee exemption as appropriate for the Project.
University House, while a low-profit entity, has agreed to donate all its profits to the University
of Utah for a scholarship fund. Therefore, any proceeds will be reinvested in the student
population and into the housing located in Salt Lake City. University House estimates that the
3 11-36a-403 Other provisions of impact fee enactment. (1) A local political subdivision or private entity may
include a provision in an impact fee enactment that: (a) provides an impact fee exemption for: (i) development
activity attributable to: (A) low income housing; . . . and (b) except for an exemption under Subsection (1)(a)(i)(A),
establishes one or more sources of funds other than impact fees to pay for that development activity.
6
benefit to the student population and community will be over $1 billion over the life of the
ground lease. Student housing is not typically eligible for affordable housing subsidies available
to other types of housing developments, however, creation of 465 units at affordable rent levels
brings a significant benefit to the Salt Lake City housing market.
Increasing the housing stock within Salt Lake City in the form of student housing contributes to a
decrease in demand for students in the Salt Lake City rental market. The rent restriction will help
insulate students from the massive rate increases that continue to impact the rental market, driven
in part by the housing demand.
The proposed development offers a significant public benefit to Salt Lake City. It includes the
construction of privately financed student housing, comprising 465 units with rents below 80%
of the area median income. Additionally, 100% of the units will be subject to a voluntary deeded
restrictive use agreement for the 99-year lease period, and 25% of students will receive
additional rental assistance. These efforts will provide crucial student support and access to
affordable housing, all without any current public subsidy. In view of these benefits, the fees
waived by the City for this development are proportionate to the public benefit it provides.
III. Ivory University House will Benefit Salt Lake City Residents
Ivory University House is a unique philanthropic project. As with any innovative project,
it doesn’t fit neatly into any existing box. It has taken collaboration between The Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints, the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, and University House to
make this project a reality. University House and the University of Utah intend to honor their
partnership with the City by pledging scholarships funded by the operations of the Project in
amount equal to fees waived (in an amount over $2,400,000) for Salt Lake City residents to be
paid over a period of ten years. Depending on a student’s needs, these scholarships may come in
the form of tuition stipends, paid internships, or housing assistance. In essence, University House
will invest the value of fees waived directly into the individual lives of some of the City’s
residents who otherwise lack financial access to opportunity.
IIV. Salt Lake City’s Purposes and Enhancing the Quality of Life for Residents.
The City places a high value on health and safety. Housing an additional 621 students in the
Project will reduce the number of cars commuting to campus, which has a positive
environmental impact on air quality. Fewer cars also means fewer accidents that could occur in
heavy campus traffic. Reducing campus traffic enhances the health and safety of the surrounding
communities. The Project is located within walking distance of a TRAX station, providing easy
access to public transportation to the students who will live in the Project. Additionally, every
student is provided a public transit pass.
V. Accomplishing Salt Lake City’s Goals.
Support of the Project helps accomplish the goals of the City in affordable housing. Salt Lake
City faces a critical housing shortage. The University of Utah draws students from all over to the
University, and similarly faces a housing shortage for its students. As of last year, the University
of Utah had a wait list of 2,280 students seeking an on-campus living experience. The
7
University’s housing shortage increases the pressure on the housing needs in Salt Lake City,
given the large numbers of students who need affordable housing. The Project is being
developed on a site that was not previously used for residential purposes, thus the redevelopment
of the site is a true increase in housing units without any displacement. The ability to house 621
students in the Project will mean there are 621 fewer people who need housing in Salt Lake City.
The Project is also better suited to meeting the needs of the student population that a typical
housing project in the city.
Growing SLC: A Five Year Housing Plan envisions Salt Lake City as a place for a growing,
diverse population to find housing opportunities that are safe, secure, and enrich lives and
communities, recognizes the changing nature of the city, and provides the foundation for creating
goals and strategies to manage the housing needs of tomorrow. The City’s support of the Project
through the fee waivers and refunds meets the housing plan goals by expanding housing
opportunities, addressing systematic failures in the rental market, and contributing to the diverse
housing types available for the student population. University House has created a new approach
to satisfy a fundamental need in our housing stock and this innovation is mutually beneficial to
the purposes in Growing SLC.
Within Growing SLC, the Council adopted policy statements to be used for evaluating and
appropriating City funds for housing. The priorities relevant to the 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) Include collaboration with community and private sector partners to enable opportunities
for in kind contributions, creative financing and service delivery models.
(3) Include affordable housing in transit-oriented developments because access to public
transit increases access to opportunities. Moderate increases in density should be encouraged
along transit corridors.
(4) Incentivize affordable housing within areas of high opportunity.
The project will also have the added benefit of providing scholarship assistance to Salt Lake City
residents.
CONCLUSION
Approval of a permit fee and impact fee waiver and refunds supports many of the City’s goals
with respect to the creation of affordable and diverse housing. Additionally, the Project will
create a broad public benefit through its philanthropic mission. Although the Project does not
meet the codified requirements for a permit fee waiver and impact fee exemption, the Project
fulfills a specific need and provides public benefits to the City that satisfy the requirements of
Utah Code § 10-8-2. For these reasons, the Administration requests that City Council approve
the requested permit fee and impact fee waiver and refunds.
8
REFERENCES This analysis has been available in the City Recorder’s Office, Room 415,
City & County Building, 451 South State Street since __________, 2023. The City Council
will hold a public hearing on whether to adopt a resolution approving the proposed study.
The public hearing will be held _______________.
RESOLUTION NO. _____ OF 2023
Authorizing Impact Fee and Permit Fee Waivers and Refunds
for Ivory University House L3C
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Department of Community and Neighborhoods has
proposed the waiver and refund of certain permit and impact fees (the “Fee Waiver”) paid by the
Ivory University House L3C, a low-profit limited liability company (“University House”); and
WHEREAS, University House is developing a student housing project at 434 South
Mario Capecchi Drive (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Project will offer 465 units for 621 University of Utah students with a
maximum rent per bed at or below 30% of the monthly income limit set by the Department of
Housing and Urban Development for a single person household of 80% area median income
(“AMI”) or below; and
WHEREAS, all profits from the Project will be donated to a new scholarship fund at the
University of Utah, with priority given to students with the most financial need, and if the Fee
Waiver is granted, then University House will pledge scholarships for Salt Lake City residents in
the amount of the Fee Waiver over a period of ten years; and
WHEREAS, the Project provides rent rates at or below 80% AMI and significant public
benefits but does not meet the City code requirements to waive permit fees or impact fees for
affordable housing because University House is legally a for-profit entity and the Project is not
income restricted as the residents will be students; and
WHEREAS, Utah Code section 10-8-2 states that municipalities may appropriate funds
for “corporate purposes only,” and those purposes are, in the judgment of the municipal
2
legislative body, any purpose that “provides for the safety, health, prosperity, moral well-being,
peace, order, comfort, or convenience of the inhabitants of the city.” Utah Code § 10-8-2(3); and
WHEREAS, Utah Code Section 10-8-2(3)(e) allows public entities to provide
nonmonetary assistance and waive fees to for-profit entities after a public hearing and conducting
a study to consider intangible benefits received by the municipality in determining net value
received for the appropriation; and
WHEREAS, the City performed an analysis (the “Analysis”) of the public benefits of
providing the Fee Waiver to University House, which Analysis was included in the transmittal to
the City Council before the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has, following the giving of not less than 14 days public
notice, conducted a public hearing relating to the foregoing, in satisfaction of the requirements of
Utah Code Section 10-8-2; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Analysis, and has fully considered the
conclusions set forth therein and all comments made during the public hearing;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, as
follows:
1. The City Council hereby adopts the conclusions set forth in the Analysis, and
hereby finds and determines that, for all the reasons set forth in the Analysis, the Fee Waiver is
appropriate under these circumstances.
2. The City Council hereby authorizes the City administration to waive and refund the
fees consistent with this Resolution and incorporating such other terms and agreements as
recommended by the City Attorney’s office.
3
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of ________ 2023.
SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
By: ______________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
____________________________
CITY RECORDER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
___________________________
Kimberly Chytraus, Senior City Attorney
Date: ______________________ June 5, 2023
Item C2
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
tinyurl.com/SLCFY24
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Ben Luedtke and Sylvia Richards
Budget Analysts
DATE:September 19, 2023
RE: Budget Amendment Number One FY2024
MOTION 1 – ADOPT MOST ITEMS (see Motion 2 for additional item voted on separately)
I move that the Council adopt an ordinance amending the Fiscal Year 2024 final budget of Salt Lake City
including the employment staffing document only for items as shown on the motion sheet.
Staff note: Council Members do not need to read the individual items being approved below; they are
listed for reference. Item A-3 is not approved in keeping with the Council’s separate vote on the
proposed public benefits analysis.
A-1: Donation for Northeast Ball Field Sports Lighting at Riverside Park ($218,000 Donation to the CIP
Fund)
D-1: AFSCME MOU Allocations (Budget Neutral – reallocating existing $511,001 Non-departmental
General Fund budget to the appropriate department budgets)
D-2: Consolidated Fee Schedule (CFS) Change (Budget Neutral)
D-3: Three Creeks West Roadway Rescope (Budget Neutral - $1,359,130 in the CIP Fund)
D-4: Reallocate Bond Funds from 1700 East to 2100 South Reconstruction ($1.5 Million Reallocation in
CIP Fund)
D-5: Rescope Bridge Rehabilitation Funding as Local Match to Federal Funding for Rebuilding Three
Bridges over the Jordan River, Relocating Public Utilities, and Partial Funding of 400 South Bridge
($6,348,507 in the CIP Fund)
D-6: Occupied Vehicle Mitigation Team Allocation (Budget Neutral – reallocating existing $45,000 in
Public Services to the Fleet Fund and IMS Fund)
D-7: Fleet Vehicle Purchases Re-appropriation ($14,424,993 from Fleet Fund Balance to Fleet Vehicle
Replacement Fund)
MOTION 2 – ADOPT ITEM A-2
I further move that the Council also approve item A-2.
A-2: One-time Additional Funding for Fall 2023 Downtown Open Streets Events ($250,000 from
General Fund Balance)
MOTION 3 – NOT ADOPT
I move that the Council proceed to the next agenda item.
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET
PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
MARY BETH THOMPSON
Chief Financial Officer
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
___________________________________ Date Received: _______________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: __________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: August 2, 2023
Darin Mano, Chair
FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT: RE-TRANSMITTING FY24 Budget Amendment #1
SPONSOR: NA
STAFF CONTACT: Lisa Hunt (801) 535-7926 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 FY24 adopted budget.
BUDGET IMPACT:
REVENUE EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND $-754,483.23 $250,000.00
CIP FUND 218,000.00 218,000.00
CIP: IMPACT FEE FUND -1,648,715.00 0.00
FLEET FUND 0.00 1,461,793.00
IMS FUND 0.00 9,000.00
TOTAL $-2,185,198.23 $ 1,893,793.00
08/03/2023
08/03/2023
Lisa Shaffer (Aug 3, 2023 09:54 MDT)
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Revenue for FY24 Budget Adjustments
The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for FY24.
Because of this budget amendment’s timing, there are no updates for Y24 projections available.
The City has begun closing out the FY23 and will provide updates to Council as the audit
progresses.
Revenue FY23-FY24 Annual Budget FY23-24 Amended Budget Revised Forecast
Amended Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Revenue FY22-FY23 Annual Budget FY22-FY23 Amended Budget Revised Forecast Amended Variance
Property Taxes 129,847,140 129,847,140 129,847,140 -
Sale and Use Taxes 117,129,000 117,129,000 117,129,000 -
Franchise Taxes 12,348,127 12,348,127 12,348,127 -
Payment in Lieu of Taxes 1,905,573 1,905,573 1,905,573 -
Total Taxes 261,229,840 261,229,840 261,229,840 -
Revenue FY22-FY23 Annual Budget FY22-FY23 Amended Budget Revised Forecast Amended Variance
Licenses and Permits 40,878,104 40,878,104 40,878,104 -
Intergovernmental Revenue 5,134,621 5,134,621 5,134,621 -
Interest Income 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000 -
Fines 4,063,548 4,063,548 4,063,548 -
Parking Meter Collections 2,801,089 2,801,089 2,801,089 -
Charges, Fees, and Rentals 4,881,922 4,881,922 4,881,922 -
Miscellaneous Revenue 3,502,359 3,502,359 3,502,359 -
Interfund Reimbursement 26,131,213 26,131,213 26,131,213 -
Transfers 9,938,944 9,938,944 9,938,944 -
Total W/O Special Tax 366,561,640 366,561,640 366,561,640 -
ObjectCodeDescription FY22-23 Annual Budget FY22-23 Amended Budget Revised Forecast Amended Variance
Additional Sales Tax (1/2%)49,084,479 49,084,479 49,084,479 -
Total General Fund 415,646,119 415,646,119 415,646,119 -
Fund balance has been updated to include proposed changes for BA#1.
Based on those projections adjusted fund balance is projected to be at 11.38%.
FOF GF Only TOTAL FOF GF Only TOTAL
Beginning Fund Balance 18,395,660 141,728,022 160,123,682 13,132,752 91,575,871 104,708,623
Budgeted Change in Fund Balance (2,100,608) (20,736,262) (22,836,870) (3,657,641) (29,211,158) (32,868,799)
Prior Year Encumbrances (3,162,300) (17,260,909) (20,423,209) (1,879,654) (10,259,789) (12,139,443)
Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 13,132,752 103,730,851 116,863,603 7,595,457 52,104,924 59,700,381
Beginning Fund Balance Percent 29.60%27.04%27.30%14.51%13.29%13.43%
Year End CAFR Adjustments
Revenue Changes - - - - - -
Expense Changes (Prepaids, Receivable, Etc.) (8,556,220) (8,556,220) (8,556,220) (8,556,220)
Fund Balance w/ CAFR Changes 13,132,752 95,174,631 108,307,383 7,595,457 43,548,704 51,144,161
Final Fund Balance Percent 29.60%24.81%25.30%14.51%11.10%11.51%
Budget Amendment Use of Fund Balance
BA#1 Revenue Adjustment - (475,000) (475,000) - (754,483) (754,483)
BA#1 Expense Adjustment - - - 205,000 205,000
BA#2 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#2 Expense Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#3 Revenue Adjustment - 6,000,000 6,000,000 - - -
BA#3 Expense Adjustment - (6,538,000) (6,538,000) - - -
BA#4 Revenue Adjustment - 194,600 194,600 - - -
BA#4 Expense Adjustment - (7,584,328) (7,584,328) - - -
BA#5 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#5 Expense Adjustment - (5,940,349) (5,940,349) - - -
BA#6 Revenue Adjustment - 19,120,198 19,120,198 - - -
BA#6 Expense Adjustment - (11,719,731) (12,219,731) - - -
BA#7 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#7 Expense Adjustment - - - - - -
Change in Revenue - - - - - -
Change in Expense
Fund Balance Budgeted Increase - - - - - -
- - Adjusted Fund Balance 13,132,752 88,232,021 100,864,773 7,595,457 42,999,220 50,594,677
Adjusted Fund Balance Percent 29.60%23.00%23.57%14.51%10.96%11.38%
Projected Revenue 44,364,490 383,650,846 428,015,336 52,338,120 392,166,803 444,504,923
FY2024 Budget
Salt Lake City
General Fund
TOTAL
FY2023 Budget Projected
Fund Balance Projections
The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $(2,185,198.23) in revenue and
$1,893,793.00 in expenses. The amendment proposes changes in 5 funds, with zero increases in
FTEs. The proposal includes 10 initiatives for Council review.
A summary spreadsheet outlining proposed budget changes is attached. The Administration
requests this document be modified based on the decisions of the Council.
The budget amendment 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 FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #1
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
1
Section A: New Items
A-1: Donation to CIP for Ball Field Sports Lighting at
Riverside Park CIP $218,000.00
Department: Public Services – Engineering Prepared By: Sean Fyfe, Mary Beth Thompson
For questions, please include Sean Fyfe, Mary Beth Thompson
The City will be receiving a donation for ball field sports lighting in Riverside Park. A budget of $300,000 currently exists
for the project, but the quote for the cost of the lighting is $368,000 . The installation of the lighting could start around
mid-September to mid-October.
The Administration, understanding that public comment is necessary before an official vote, would like to request a
straw poll to allow for the receipt of the contract for the entire project.
A-2: Funding for Open Streets Initiative GF $250,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Roberta Reichgelt
For questions, please include Lorena Riffo Jenson, Roberta Reichgelt, Mary Beth Thompson
The Department of Economic Development (DED) is requesting additional funding for the Open Streets event on Main
Street in downtown Salt Lake City this fall. Funding for infrastructure costs such as UTA Trax bollards, street maintenance,
and no-parking signage will cost an estimated $250,000, and after including operations and activation costs by The
Downtown Alliance totaling $500,000, the total costs exceed the $500,000 City Council allocated for the event. DED is
requesting funding for these additional costs in the amount of $250,000 for Open Streets infrastructure, which is a one-
time cost that will service the event for the year and for future Open Streets events.
A-3: Funding for Impact and Permit Fee Refund to
Ivory University House GF ($754,483.23)
CIP/Impact Fund ($1,648,715.00)
Department: CAN & Finance Prepared By: Randy Hillier
For questions, please include Mary Beth Thompson, Rachel Otto, Blake Thomas, Kimberly Chytraus,
Katie Lewis, Randy Hillier, Mike Atkinson
A Public Benefits Analysis has been transmitted to the Council pertaining to the refunding of building permits and impact
fees to Ivory University House L3C. The total amount being refunded is approximately $2.4 million. This amount consists
of $754,483 in building permit fees and $1,648,715 in impact fees. Should the Public Benefits Analysis be approved by the
Council, a budget will need to be in place for the refunds to happen. This will be accounted for by showing negative revenue
for both the Impact Fees and Permit Fees being refunded.
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Section D: Housekeeping
D-1: AFSCME MOU Allocations GF ($511,001.00)
AFSCME MOU Allocations – 911 Dispatch GF $104,175.00
AFSCME MOU Allocations – CAN GF $3,963.00
AFSCME MOU Allocations – Police GF $55,928.00
AFSCME MOU Allocations – Justice Courts GF $40.00
AFSCME MOU Allocations – Public Lands GF $36,737.00
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #1
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
2
AFSCME MOU Allocations – Public Services GF $310,158.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mary Beth Thompson
For questions, please include Mary Beth Thompson
Update the AFSCME MOU allocations for fiscal year 2024.
D-2: Consolidated Fee Schedule Change NA $0.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Lisa Hunt
For questions, please include Mary Beth Thompson, Lisa Hunt
Correction to CFS - Engineering Fees: During the FY24 budget, an increase in the engineering fee for lane closure was
recommended by the administration. The intent was to separate the fee for sidewalk and lane closures, charging a higher
rate for lane closures as justified by cost analysis. The increased fee was inadvertently applied to both sidewalk and lane
closures. This correction will create a separate line item for these two types of closures with the appropriate fee applied to
each.
D-3: Three Creeks West Roadway Rescope CIP $0.00
Department: Public Services – Engineering Prepared By: Josh Willie, Mark Stephens, JP
Goates, Dustin Petersen
For questions, please include Josh Willie, Mark Stephens, JP Goates, Dustin Petersen
The CIP application for "Three Creeks West - Roadways" includes only a single residential stretch of 1300 S, North of
California Ave. that fronts ten residential properties and the Jordan River. This constituent application was two -part, with
roadway reconstruction and utilities.
This FY22-23 CIP request was submitted as follows: "Reconstruct a block of 1300 South and a block of 1000 West along
Jordan River and install badly needed sewers. Will improve multimodal transportation, park access, public safety , and
basic sanitation, expanding on the success of Three Creek Confluence Park."
The subsequent estimate did not fully account for new utilities, nor was it eligible for utilities, as improvements for priva te
development (which the applicant would benefit from) are not paid for by the City. Furthermore, if the sewer line was
installed the property owners fronting a new line would be required by the health code to tie in at their own expense. After
the City engaged with the impacted property owners not all of them agreed. Therefore, we proposed to move forward with
this application with a scope limited to roadway reconstruction. No additional funds are required.
D-4: 1700 E. to 2100 S. Project Budget Reallocation CIP $0.00
Department: Public Services – Engineering Prepared By: Josh Willie, Mark Stephens, JP
Goates, Dustin Petersen
For questions, please include Josh Willie, Mark Stephens, JP Goates, Dustin Petersen
Public Services Engineering and CAN Transportation are recommending moving the bond funds from 1700 East to 2100
South to supplement the expanded scope and community-desired elements. The following are reasons that support the
delay in the funding for the construction of 1700 East:
1. There is a high likelihood that Highland High School will be rebuilt in the next few years, which would likely damage the
pavement and result in some needed design changes to accommodate the new school layout.
2. Public Utilities is planning a potential storm drain upgrade that would require significant roadway excavation shortly
after the original 1700 East reconstruction project timeline.
3. The remaining bond funding is not adequate to fully reconstruct the segment of roadway and safety improvements
necessary for a large school.
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #1
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
3
4. Certain elements of the desired 2100 South reconstruction project may not be funded without this request.
D-5: Bridge Projects Funding Rescope for UDOT
Match CIP $0.00
Department: Public Services - Engineering Prepared By: Josh Willie, Mark Stephens, JP
Goates, Dustin Petersen
For questions, please include Josh Willie, Mark Stephens, JP Goates, Dustin Petersen
City Council previously approved $2,648,507 in FY21 for the rehabilitation of the 650 N bridge over the Jordan River and
the 400 S bridge over the Jordan River. After the March 2020 earthquake, damage sustained to the 650 N bridge made it
necessary to replace/reconstruct the bridge, and rehabilitation was no longer recommended. Subsequently, the City
Council approved $3,700,000 in FY23 for the reconstruction of the 650 N bridge over the Jordan River. The combined
available CIP funding from FY 21 and FY23 for bridge replacements/rehabilitation is $6,348,507.
City Engineering received notice from UDOT in early July 2022 that the following three (3) bridges were eligible for
replacement with Federal Bridge Formula Program (BFP) funding: 1) 650 N bridge ov er the Jordan River, 2) 200 S bridge
over the Jordan River and 3) 500 S bridge over the Jordan River. The Engineering Division received a letter from UDOT
on June 29, 2023, that they would be proceeding with the approval of the proposed BFP funding for th e 650 N and 200 S
bridges since no potential habitats were found for an endemic orchid, as previously suspected. The total approved project
value for these two (2) bridge replacement projects is $14,400,000 which will require a 6.77% local match by Salt L ake
City. The 500 S bridge BFP funding should be approved in August/September 2023 however no local match will be
required since this bridge will be funded 100% by BFP funding.
For these bridge replacements, UDOT will serve as the funding administrator as well as perform the design and
construction of the bridges. Additionally, the City is required to coordinate private and public utility relocations prior to
the reconstruction of each bridge. Public utility relocation must be funded by the City.
As a result, Engineering is requesting that the $6,348,507 in available bridge CIP funding from FY21 and FY23 be made
available to pay for 1) 6.77% local match requirement and 2) any necessary public utility relocations (private utilities woul d
be required to relocate their respective utilities under their respective franchise agreements at no cost to the City). Any
remaining funding after the match and public utility relocation costs would be applied to the design and reconstruction of
the 400 S bridge over the Jordan River.
D-6: Compliance Mitigation Team – Fleet and IMS GF ($45,000.00)
Fleet $36,800.00
IMS $9,000.000
Department: Public Services - Compliance Prepared By: Dustin Petersen
For questions, please contact Dustin Petersen
For FY24, Salt Lake City Council approved 3 new FTEs for homelessness mitigation. One -time and ongoing funds were
placed in Public Services Compliance General Fund budget. Some one -time funding for items related to this team belongs
in other funds, namely Fleet and IMS. This request is to move the funds to the appropriate fund.
D-7: Fleet Encumbrances GF $1,424,993.00
Department: Public Services - Fleet Prepared By: Dustin Petersen
For questions, please contact Dustin Petersen
This is the Fleet encumbrance rollover for vehicles that were committed with the funds in FY23 or earlier but have not been
received or completed. A detailed list of vehicles is included in the Backup Documentation
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #1
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
4
Section E: Grants Requiring No Staff Resources
Section F: Donations
Section G: Consent Agenda
Consent Agenda
Section I: Council Added Items
Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 Donation to CIP for Ball Field Sports Lighting at
Riverside Park CIP 218,000.00 218,000.00 One-time -
2 Funding for Open Streets Initiative GF - 250,000.00 One-time -
3 Funding for Impact and Permit Fee Refund to Ivory
University House Impact Fee (1,648,715.00) - One-time -
3 Funding for Impact and Permit Fee Refund to Ivory
University House GF (754,483.23) - One-time -
1 AFSCME MOU Allocations - Non Dept GF - (511,001.00)Ongoing -
1 AFSCME MOU Allocations - 911 Dispatch GF - 104,175.00 Ongoing -
1 AFSCME MOU Allocations - CAN GF - 3,963.00 Ongoing -
1 AFSCME MOU Allocations - Police GF - 55,928.00 Ongoing -
1 AFSCME MOU Allocations - Justice Courts GF - 40.00 Ongoing -
1 AFSCME MOU Allocations - Public Lands GF - 36,737.00 Ongoing -
1 AFSCME MOU Allocations - Public Services GF - 310,158.00 Ongoing -
2 Consolidated Fee Schedule Change NA - - Ongoing -
3 Three Creeks West Roadway Rescope CIP - - One-time -
4 1700 E. to 2100 S. Project Budget Reallocation CIP - - One-time -
5 Bridge Projects Funding Rescope for UDOT Match CIP - - One-time -
6 Compliance Mitigation Team – Fleet and IMS GF - (45,000.00) One-time -
6 Compliance Mitigation Team – Fleet and IMS Fleet - 36,800.00 One-time -
6 Compliance Mitigation Team – Fleet and IMS IMS - 9,000.00 One-time -
7 Encumbrances - Fleet Fleet - 1,424,993.00 One-time -
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
-
Consent Agenda #
Total of Budget
Amendment Items
(2,185,198.23) 1,893,793.00 - - -
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment #1
Council ApprovedAdministration Proposed
Section I: Council Added Items
Section A: New Items
Section D: Housekeeping
Section F: Donations
Section G: Council Consent Agenda -- Grant Awards
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
1
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment #1
Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
Total by Fund, Budget Amendment #1:
General Fund GF (754,483.23) 205,000.00 - - -
Impact Fee Fund Impact Fee (1,648,715.00) - - - -
Fleet Fund Fleet - 1,461,793.00
CIP Fund CIP 218,000.00 218,000.00 - - -
IMS Fund IMS - 9,000.00 - - -
Total of Budget Amendment Items (2,185,198.23) 1,893,793.00 - - -
Current Year Budget Summary, provided for information only
FY 2023-24 Budget, Including Budget Amendments
FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total Total Revenue
General Fund (Fund 1000)448,514,917 (754,483.23) 447,760,433.77
Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000 3,000.00
DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)1,397,355 1,397,355.00
Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,700,000 1,700,000.00
Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)6,044,149 6,044,149.00
Water Fund (FC 51)177,953,787 177,953,787.00
Sewer Fund (FC 52)301,832,622 301,832,622.00
Storm Water Fund (FC 53)22,947,474 22,947,474.00
Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)520,438,997 520,438,997.00
Refuse Fund (FC 57)28,263,792 28,263,792.00
Golf Fund (FC 59)17,938,984 17,938,984.00
E-911 Fund (FC 60)3,800,385 3,800,385.00
Fleet Fund (FC 61)32,498,750 32,498,750.00
IMS Fund (FC 65)38,702,171 38,702,171.00
County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for
Transportation (FC 69)9,700,000 9,700,000.00
CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)5,597,763 5,597,763.00
Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)8,919,917 8,919,917.00
Other Special Revenue (FC 73)400,000 400,000.00
Donation Fund (FC 77)500,000 500,000.00
Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)10,212,043 10,212,043.00
Debt Service Fund (FC 81)34,894,979 34,894,979.00
CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)29,708,286 (1,430,715.00) 28,277,571.00
Governmental Immunity (FC 85)3,370,012 3,370,012.00
Risk Fund (FC 87)63,574,655 63,574,655.00
Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,768,914,038 (2,185,198.23) - - - - 1,766,728,839.77
Administration Proposed Council Approved
2
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment #1
Total Expense BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total Total Expense
General Fund (FC 10)425,537,408 205,000.00 425,742,408.00
Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000 3,000.00
DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)1,762,560 1,762,560.00
Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,700,000 1,700,000.00
Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)5,757,825 5,757,825.00
Water Fund (FC 51)132,752,815 132,752,815.00
Sewer Fund (FC 52)255,914,580 255,914,580.00
Storm Water Fund (FC 53)18,699,722 18,699,722.00
Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)384,681,671 384,681,671.00
Refuse Fund (FC 57)24,952,672 24,952,672.00
Golf Fund (FC 59)14,726,016 14,726,016.00
E-911 Fund (FC 60)3,800,385 3,800,385.00
Fleet Fund (FC 61)30,426,032 1,461,793.00 31,887,825.00
IMS Fund (FC 65)30,523,167 9,000.00 30,532,167.00
County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for
Transportation (FC 69)9,458,748 9,458,748.00
CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)4,958,433 4,958,433.00
Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)26,614,153 26,614,153.00
Other Special Revenue (FC 73)300,000 300,000.00
Donation Fund (FC 77)287,250 287,250.00
Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)25,779,253 25,779,253.00
Debt Service Fund (FC 81)33,658,558 33,658,558.00
CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)35,460,387 218,000.00 35,678,387.00
Governmental Immunity (FC 85)3,169,767 3,169,767.00
Risk Fund (FC 87)54,679,000 54,679,000.00
- Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,525,603,402 1,893,793.00 - - - - 1,527,497,195.00
Budget Manager
Analyst, City Council
Contingent Appropriation
3
Impact Fees - Summary Confidential
Data pulled 07/20/2023
Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area
Area Cost Center UnAllocated
Cash Notes:
Impact fee - Police 8484001 1,402,656$
Impact fee - Fire 8484002 273,684$ B
Impact fee - Parks 8484003 16,793,487$ C
Impact fee - Streets 8484005 6,304,485$ D
24,774,312$
Expiring Amounts: by Major Area, by Month
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 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Current Month
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 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202407 (Jul2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202408 (Aug2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202409 (Sep2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202410 (Oct2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202411 (Nov2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202412 (Dec2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202501 (Jan2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202502 (Feb2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202503 (Mar2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202504 (Apr2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202505 (May2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202506 (Jun2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202507 (Jul2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202508 (Aug2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202509 (Sep2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202510 (Oct2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202511 (Nov2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ 1,103,628$ 1,103,628$
202512 (Dec2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ 113,748$ 113,748$
202601 (Jan2026)2026Q3 -$ -$ -$ 3,960$ 3,960$
202602 (Feb2026)2026Q3 -$ -$ -$ 26,929$ 26,929$
202603 (Mar2026)2026Q3 -$ -$ -$ 95,407$ 95,407$
202604 (Apr2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ 1,065,383$ 1,065,383$
202605 (May2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ 95,762$ 95,762$
202606 (Jun2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ 53,972$ 53,972$
Total, Currently Expiring through Jun 2026 -$ -$ -$ 2,558,788$ 2,558,788$
FY
2
0
2
3
Calendar
Month
FY
2
0
2
4
FY
2
0
2
5
FY
2
0
2
6
Fiscal
Quarter
E = A + B + C + D
Police Fire Parks Streets
Total
Impact Fees Confidential
Data pulled 07/20/2023 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
IFFP Contract - Police 8423003 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$
Grand Total 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$
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 Training Center 8417015 (499,533)$ -$ (499,533)$ -$
Fire'sConsultant'sContract 8419202 3,079$ 3,021$ -$ 58.00
IFFP Contract - Fire 8423004 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$ B
IF Excess Capacity - Fire 8423006 2,200,000$ -$ 2,200,000$ -$
Grand Total 1,712,546$ 3,021$ 1,700,467$ 9,058.00
Parks Allocation
Budget Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures
Allocation
Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Description Cost Center
Sum of Parks Allocation
Budget Amended
Sum of Parks Allocation
Encumbrances
Sum of Parks Allocation YTD
Expenditures
Sum of Parks Allocation
Remaining Appropriation
Fisher Carriage House 8420130 261,187$ -$ 261,187$ -$
Emigration Open Space ACQ 8422423 700,000$ -$ 700,000$ -$
Waterpark Redevelopment Plan 8421402 16,959$ 1,705$ 15,254$ -$
JR Boat Ram 8420144 3,337$ -$ 3,337$ -$
RAC Parcel Acquisition 8423454 395,442$ -$ 395,442$ 0$
Park'sConsultant'sContract 8419204 2,638$ 2,596$ -$ 42$
Cwide Dog Lease Imp 8418002 23,262$ 23,000$ -$ 262$
Rosewood Dog Park 8417013 1,056$ -$ -$ 1,056$
Jordan R 3 Creeks Confluence 8417018 1,570$ -$ -$ 1,570$
9line park 8416005 16,495$ 855$ 13,968$ 1,672$
Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 2,946$ -$ -$ 2,946$
ImperialParkShadeAcct'g 8419103 6,398$ -$ -$ 6,398$
Rich Prk Comm Garden 8420138 12,431$ 4,328$ -$ 8,103$
FY IFFP Contract - Parks 8423005 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$
Redwood Meadows Park Dev 8417014 9,350$ -$ -$ 9,350$
9Line Orchard 8420136 156,827$ 132,168$ 6,874$ 17,785$
Trailhead Prop Acquisition 8421403 275,000$ -$ 253,170$ 21,830$
Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 1,042,694$ 240,179$ 764,614$ 37,902$
IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 56,109$ -$ 1,302$ 54,808$
Green loop 200 E Design 8422408 608,490$ 443,065$ 93,673$ 71,752$ C
FY20 Bridge to Backman 8420430 156,565$ 44,791$ 30,676$ 81,099$
Fisher House Exploration Ctr 8421401 555,030$ 52,760$ 402,270$ 100,000$
Cnty #1 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420424 254,159$ 133,125$ 13,640$ 107,393$
UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 122,281$ -$ 1,310$ 120,971$
Three Creeks West Bank NewPark 8422403 150,736$ -$ -$ 150,736$
Rose Park Neighborhood Center 8423403 160,819$ -$ 2,781$ 158,038$
Historic Renovation AllenParK 8422410 420,000$ 156,146$ 104,230$ 159,624$
RAC Playground with ShadeSails 8422415 179,323$ -$ 712$ 178,611$
Bridge to Backman 8418005 266,306$ 10,285$ 4,262$ 251,758$
900 S River Park Soccer Field 8423406 287,848$ -$ -$ 287,848$
Lighting NE Baseball Field 8423409 300,000$ -$ 678$ 299,322$
Open Space Prop Acq-Trails 8423453 300,000$ -$ -$ 300,000$
SLC Foothills Land Acquisition 8422413 319,139$ -$ -$ 319,139$
Parley's Trail Design & Constr 8417012 327,678$ -$ -$ 327,678$
Jordan Prk Event Grounds 8420134 428,074$ 5,593$ 23,690$ 398,791$
Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 446,825$ 18,467$ 14,885$ 413,472$
Open Space Prop Acq-City Parks 8423452 450,000$ -$ -$ 450,000$
Jordan Park Pedestrian Pathway 8422414 510,000$ 9,440$ 34,921$ 465,638$
Gateway Triangle Property Park 8423408 499,563$ -$ 106$ 499,457$
RAC Playground Phase II 8423405 521,564$ -$ -$ 521,564$
Mem. Tree Grove Design & Infra 8423407 867,962$ -$ 2,906$ 865,056$
Marmalade Plaza Project 8423451 1,000,000$ -$ 3,096$ 996,905$
SLCFoothillsTrailheadDevelpmnt 8422412 1,304,682$ 41,620$ 62,596$ 1,200,466$
GlendaleWtrprk MstrPln&Rehab 8422406 3,177,849$ 524,018$ 930,050$ 1,723,781$
Pioneer Park 8419150 3,149,123$ 69,208$ 94,451$ 2,985,464$
Glendale Regional Park Phase 1 8423450 4,350,000$ -$ -$ 4,350,000$
Grand Total 24,106,716$ 1,913,351$ 4,236,078$ 17,957,287$
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
Transportation Safety Improvem 8417007 1,292$ -$ 1,292$ -$
500/700 S Street Reconstructio 8412001 15,026$ 11,703$ 3,323$ -$
Trans Safety Improvements 8419007 13,473$ -$ 13,473$ -$
900 S Signal Improvements IF 8422615 70,000$ -$ 70,000$ -$
Corridor Transformations IF 8422608 25,398$ 25,398$ -$ -$
Trans Master Plan 8419006 13,000$ -$ 13,000$ -$
9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 63,955$ -$ 63,955$ -$
Local Link Construction IF 8422606 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ -$
Gladiola Street 8406001 16,109$ 12,925$ 940$ 2,244$
Transportatn Safety Imprvmt IF 8422620 44,400$ -$ 38,084$ 6,316$
Urban Trails FY22 IF 8422619 6,500$ -$ -$ 6,500$
Street'sConsultant'sContract 8419203 29,817$ 17,442$ -$ 12,374$
Complete Street Enhancements 8420120 35,392$ -$ 16,693$ 18,699$
500 to 700 S 8418016 22,744$ -$ -$ 22,744$ D
900 South 9Line RR Cross IF 8422604 28,000$ -$ -$ 28,000$
Transp Safety Improvements 8420110 58,780$ 17,300$ 11,746$ 29,734$
1700S Corridor Transfrmtn IF 8422622 35,300$ -$ -$ 35,300$
200S TransitCmpltStrtSuppl IF 8422602 37,422$ -$ -$ 37,422$
300 N Complete Street Recons I 8423606 40,000$ -$ -$ 40,000$
1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestr 8416004 42,833$ -$ -$ 42,833$
400 South Viaduct Trail IF 8422611 90,000$ -$ -$ 90,000$
Neighborhood Byways IF 8422614 104,500$ -$ -$ 104,500$
Transit Cap-Freq Trans Routes 8423608 110,000$ -$ -$ 110,000$
TransportationSafetyImprov IF 8421500 281,586$ 124,068$ 40,300$ 117,218$
Indiana Ave/900 S Rehab Design 8412002 124,593$ -$ -$ 124,593$
Bikeway Urban Trails 8418003 181,846$ -$ 542$ 181,303$
200 S Recon Trans Corridor IF 8423602 252,000$ -$ -$ 252,000$
Street Improve Reconstruc 20 8420125 780,182$ 46,269$ 393,884$ 340,029$
IF Complete Street Enhancement 8421502 625,000$ -$ -$ 625,000$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 836,736$ 55,846$ 45,972$ 734,918$
700 South Phase 7 IF 8423305 1,120,000$ -$ 166$ 1,119,834$
1300 East Reconstruction 8423625 3,111,335$ 1,192,649$ 224,557$ 1,694,129$
Grand Total 8,267,218$ 1,503,600$ 987,926$ 5,775,692$
Total 34,095,480$ 3,419,972$ 6,924,471$ 23,751,037$
E = A + B + C + D
TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE
8484002
24,774,312$
8484003
8484005
16,793,487$
6,304,485$
$273,684
UnAllocated
Budget
Amount
8484001
1,402,656$
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ______ of 2023
(First amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including
the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2023-2024)
An Ordinance Amending Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 29 of 2023 which adopted the
Final Budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2023, and Ending
June 30, 2024.
In June of 2023, 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,
2023, and ending June 30, 2024, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-118 of the
Utah Code.
The City’s Budget Director, acting as the City’s Budget Officer, prepared and filed with
the City Recorder proposed amendments to said duly adopted budget, including the amendments
to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate any staffing changes specifically
stated herein, copies of which are attached hereto, for consideration by the City Council and
inspection by the public.
All conditions precedent to amend said budget, including the employment staffing
document as provided above, have been accomplished.
Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the final budget of
Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized
by Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 29 of 2023.
SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including any
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 any
amendments to the employment staffing document described above, for the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128
of the Utah Code.
SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is
authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including any
amendments to the employment staffing document, in the office of said Budget Officer and in
the office of the City Recorder which amendments shall be available for public inspection.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of __________, 2023.
________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________
Mayor’s Action: ____ Approved ____ Vetoed
_________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. _________ of 2023.
Published: ___________________.
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
___ _______
Jaysen Oldroyd
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ______ of 2023
(First amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including
the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2023-2024)
An Ordinance Amending Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 29 of 2023 which adopted the
Final Budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2023, and Ending
June 30, 2024.
In June of 2023, 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,
2023, and ending June 30, 2024, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-118 of the
Utah Code.
The City’s Budget Director, acting as the City’s Budget Officer, prepared and filed with
the City Recorder proposed amendments to said duly adopted budget, including the amendments
to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate any staffing changes specifically
stated herein, copies of which are attached hereto, for consideration by the City Council and
inspection by the public.
All conditions precedent to amend said budget, including the employment staffing
document as provided above, have been accomplished.
Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the final budget of
Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized
by Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 29 of 2023.
SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including any
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 any
amendments to the employment staffing document described above, for the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128
of the Utah Code.
SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is
authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including any
amendments to the employment staffing document, in the office of said Budget Officer and in
the office of the City Recorder which amendments shall be available for public inspection.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of __________, 2023.
________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________
Mayor’s Action: ____ Approved ____ Vetoed
_________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. _________ of 2023.
Published: ___________________.
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
___ _______
Jaysen Oldroyd
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ___ of 2023
(Amendments to Lane and Sidewalk Closure Fees on the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee
Schedule)
An ordinance amending the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule to separately
address lane closures and sidewalk closures.
WHEREAS, on May 17, 2011 the City Council adopted Ordinances 2011-23, 2011-24
and 2011-25 to authorize and create the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule;
WHEREAS, it is now proposed that the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule be
amended to separately address fees related to lane closures and sidewalk closures as shown in the
attached Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds (i) the fees and fee information set forth in Exhibit A
are necessary, reasonable, and equitable in relation to regulatory and service costs incurred by the
City; and (ii) adoption of this ordinance reasonably furthers the health, safety, and general
welfare of the citizens of Salt Lake City.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. That the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule shall be, and hereby is,
amended, in pertinent part, to reflect the fees and corresponding fee information set forth in the
attached Exhibit A, and that a copy of the amended Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule
shall be published on the official Salt Lake City website.
SECTION 2. That this ordinance shall become effective upon publication.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this ___ day of ____________ 2023.
______________________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
_________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on ____________________________.
Mayor’s Action: _________ Approved. ____________ Vetoed.
_______________________________________
MAYOR
_________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. _______ of 2023.
Published: __________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Date:_______7/28/23_____________________
By: ___________________________________
EXHIBIT A
Public Way Obstruction Permits
Short term (One Week)
Sidewalk Canopy $19 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
Dumpster/pod $50 Each, Per Week (Construction
barricades)
14.32.405
Sidewalk closure $98 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
Lane closure $350 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
Long term (1 month increments)
Sidewalk Canopy $79 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
Dumpster/pod $198 Each, Per Week (Construction
barricades)
14.32.405
Sidewalk closure $394 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
Lane Closure $1,400 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ___ of 2023
(Amendments to Lane and Sidewalk Closure Fees on the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee
Schedule)
An ordinance amending the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule separately address
lane closures and sidewalk closures.
WHEREAS, on May 17, 2011 the City Council adopted Ordinances 2011-23, 2011-24
and 2011-25 to authorize and create the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule;
WHEREAS, it is now proposed that the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule be
amended to separately address fees related to lane closures and sidewalk closures as shown in the
attached Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds (i) the fees and fee information set forth in Exhibit A
are necessary, reasonable, and equitable in relation to regulatory and service costs incurred by the
City; and (ii) adoption of this ordinance reasonably furthers the health, safety, and general
welfare of the citizens of Salt Lake City.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. That the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule shall be, and hereby is,
amended, in pertinent part, to reflect the fees and corresponding fee information set forth in the
attached Exhibit A, and that a copy of the amended Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule
shall be published on the official Salt Lake City website.
SECTION 2. That this ordinance shall become effective upon publication.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this ___ day of ____________ 2023.
______________________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
_________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on ____________________________.
Mayor’s Action: _________ Approved. ____________ Vetoed.
_______________________________________
MAYOR
_________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. _______ of 2023.
Published: __________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
EXHIBIT A
Public Way Obstruction Permits
Short term (One Week)
Sidewalk Canopy $19 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
Dumpster/pod $50 Each, Per Week (Construction
barricades)
14.32.405
Lane or sSidewalk closure $350$98 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
Lane closure $350 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
Long term (1 month increments)
Sidewalk Canopy $79 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
Dumpster/pod $198 Each, Per Week (Construction
barricades)
14.32.405
Lane or sSidewalk closure $1,400$394 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
Lane Closure $1,400 Per Week (Construction barricades) 14.32.405
Signature:
Email:
Alejandro Sanchez (Aug 3, 2023 09:44 MDT)
alejandro.sanchez@slcgov.com
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
________________________ Date Received: ____________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ____________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: August 7, 2023
Darin Mano, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
________________________
SUBJECT: 1435 State Zoning Map and Master Plan Amendment
(PLNPCM2022-01183 & PLNPCM2022-01184)
STAFF CONTACT: Aaron Barlow, Principal Planner, 801-535-6182 or aaron.barlow@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follows the Planning Commission’s recommendation
and approves the requested Zoning Map and Master Plan amendments.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Matthew Ratelle, with the Colmena Group representing the property owner, has submitted the following
amendment requests:
1.Zoning Map Amendment (PLNPCM2022-01183): The applicant is requesting to rezone the
subject properties from CC Commercial Corridor and R-1/5,000 Single-family Residential to the
FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood zoning district and to add the northeast corner of
State Street and Cleveland Avenue to other sites/corners in the FB-UN2 district that allow
buildings up to 65 feet in height.
2.Master Plan Amendment (PLNPCM2022-00184): in order to keep the proposed rezone
consistent with the Central Community Master Plan, the applicant is also requesting to amend the
master plan designation for the properties in the Central Community Master Plan from Medium
Mixed Use and Low Density Residential to High Mixed Use.
The project area is approximately 1.52 acres or 66,211.2 square feet includes the following properties:
•1435 South State Street
•1433 South State Street
•1420 South Edison Street
•121 East Cleveland Avenue
Lisa Shaffer (Aug 8, 2023 16:33 MDT)08/08/2023
08/08/2023
A formal development petition has not been submitted at this time. Preliminary Plans, including the
applicant’s description of the proposal can be found in the Planning Commission Staff Report.
HOUSING LOSS MITIGATION
Per Chapter 18.97 of City Ordinance, any petition for a zoning change that would permit a nonresidential
use of land, that includes within its boundaries residential dwelling units, may not be approved until a
housing mitigation plan is approved by the city. The applicant submitted a housing loss mitigation plan,
which can be found in the Planning Commission Staff Report, that satisfied Housing Loss Mitigation
requirements by providing replacement housing. The final plan was evaluated and approved by the
Community and Neighborhoods Director, Blake Thomas, prior to the Planning Commission’s review of
this petition.
Address
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Current Future Land
Use Designation
Proposed Future
Land Use Designation
1435 South State Street CC FB-UN2 Medium Mixed Use High Mixed Use
1433 South State Street CC FB-UN2 Medium Mixed Use High Mixed Use
1420 South Edison Street CC FB-UN2 Medium Mixed Use High Mixed Use
121 East Cleveland Avenue R-1/5,000 FB-UN2 Low Density Residential High Mixed Use
Existing Future land use map designations
(Central Community Master Plan) Subject properties and current zoning
PUBLIC PROCESS:
• March 6, 2023 – Staff sent the 45-day required notice for recognized community organizations to
the Liberty Wells and Ballpark Community Council. Neither council provided feedback on the
proposal.
• March 6, 2023 – Property owners and residents within 300 feet of the development were
provided early notification of the proposal.
• March 6, 2023 – The project was posted to the Online Open House webpage.
• May 18, 2023 – Public hearing notice mailed. Public notice posted on City and State websites
and Planning Division listserv.
• May 19, 2023 – Public hearing notice sign posted on the property.
Planning Commission Hearing and Recommendation
On May 24, 2023, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and held a public hearing. The
hearing can be viewed here beginning at 2:26:52. The was one public comment. The individual asked
about project details and raised concerns about impacts on the neighborhood.
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward a recommendation of approval as proposed.
Planning Commission (PC) Records
a) PC Agenda of May 24, 2023 (Click to Access)
b) PC Minutes of May 24, 2023 (Click to Access)
c) Planning Commission Staff Report of May 24, 2023 (Click to Access Report)
EXHIBITS:
1) Project Chronology
2) Notice of City Council Public Hearing
3) Mailing List
4) Original Petitions
1
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. of 2023
(Amending the zoning of property located at 1433 & 1435 South State Street and 1420 South
Edison Street from CC Corridor Commercial to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2,
amending the zoning of property located at 121 East Cleveland Avenue from R-1/5000 Single
Family Residential to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2, and amending the Central
Community Future Land Use Map)
An ordinance pertaining to property located at 1433 & 1435 South State Street, 1420
South Edison Street, and 121 East Cleveland Avenue (collectively, “Property”), amending the
zoning map from CC Corridor Commercial to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2 for
the properties located at 1433 & 1435 South State Street and 1420 South Edison Street, and
amending the zoning map from R-1/5000 Single Family Residential to FB-UN2 Form Based
Urban Neighborhood 2 for the property located at 121 East Cleveland Avenue all pursuant to
Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01183; and amending the Central Community Master Plan Future
Land Use Map from Medium Residential/Mixed Use to High Mixed Use for the properties
located at 1433 & 1435 South State Street and 1420 South Edison Street, and from Low Density
Residential to High Mixed Use for the property located at 121 East Cleveland Avenue pursuant
to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01184.
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a
public hearing on May 24, 2023, regarding applications submitted by Matthew Ratelle of 1435
State Street, LLC (“Applicant”) to amend the zoning map from CC Corridor Commercial to FB-
UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2 for the properties located at 1433 & 1435 South State
Street and 1420 South Edison Street and amending the zoning map from R-1/5000 Single Family
Residential to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2 for the property located at 121 East
Cleveland Avenue pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01183; and amending the Central
2
Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map from Medium Residential/Mixed Use to High
Mixed Use for the properties located at 1433 & 1435 South State Street and 1420 South Edison
Street, and from Low Density Residential to High Mixed Use for the property located at 121 East
Cleveland Avenue pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01184.
WHEREAS, at its May 24, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of
forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said
applications; and
WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter, the City Council has determined that
adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted
by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be and
hereby is amended to reflect that the parcels located at 1433 & 1435 South State Street and 1420
South Edison Street (Tax ID Nos. 16-18-103-014-0000, 16-18-103-011-0000, & 16-18-103-006-
0000), as are more particularly described on Exhibit “A” attached hereto, are rezoned from CC
Corridor Commercial to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2, and the parcel located at
121 East Cleveland Avenue (Tax ID No. 16-18-103-015-0000), also described on Exhibit “A”, is
rezoned from R-1/5000 Single Family Residential to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood
2.
SECTION 2. Amending the Central Community Master Plan. The Future Land Use Map
of the Central Community Master Plan shall be and hereby is amended to change the future land
use designation of 1433 & 1435 South State Street and 1420 South Edison Street from Medium
3
Residential/Mixed Use to High Mixed Use, and change the future land use designation of 121
East Cleveland Avenue from Low Density Residential to High Mixed Use.
SECTION 3. Condition. Approval of this ordinance is conditioned upon the Applicant
entering into a development agreement requiring Applicant to replace any dwellings units
demolished on the Property with at least as many dwelling units as will be demolished.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately after it has
been published in accordance with Utah Code Section 10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with
Utah Code Section 10-3-713. The Salt Lake City Recorder is instructed not to publish or record
this ordinance until the condition set forth in Section 3 is satisfied as certified by the Salt Lake
City Planning Director or his designee.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ___ day of ____________, 2023.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2023
Published: ______________.
Ordinance rezoning 1433, 1435 S. State, 1420 S. Edison,
and 121 E. Cleveland
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:___________________________
By: ____________________________
Katherine D. Pasker, Senior City Attorney
July 10, 2023
4
EXHIBIT “A”
Affects properties located at
1433 South State Street
Tax ID No. 16-18-103-014-0000
1435 South State Street
Tax ID No. 16-18-103-011-0000
1420 South Edison Street
Tax ID No. 16-18-103-006-0000
121 East Cleveland Avenue
Tax ID No. 16-18-103-015-0000
Legal descriptions of property to be rezoned from CC Corridor Commercial to FB-UN2
Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2:
1433 South State Street/16-18-103-014-0000
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 6, BLOCK 6 OF THE CAPITOL
AVENUE ADDITION, A SUBDIVISION OF BLOCK 12, FIVE ACRE PLAT "A", BIG
FIELD SURVEY, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH; THENCE NORTH 150 FEET TO THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 11 OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE EAST 15 FEET TO
THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 12 OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 150
FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE
WEST 15 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
1435 South State Street/16-18-103-011-0000
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 2, BLOCK 6, CAPITOL AVENUE
ADDITION, A SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN BLOCK 12, FIVE ACRE PLAT "A", BIG
FIELD SURVEY AND RUNNING THENCE NORTH 0°02'11" WEST ALONG THE EAST
LINE OF STATE STREET 252.10 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 11 OF
SAID BLOCK 6; THENCE NORTH 89°54'32" EAST 150.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF
A 15.00 FOOT ALLEY; THENCE SOUTH 0°02'1 l" EAST ALONG SAID WEST LINE
252.10 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF CLEVELAND A VENUE AND THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE SOUTH 89°54'32" WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE
150.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ALSO, BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 15, BLOCK 6, CAPITOL
AVENUE ADDITION, A SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN BLOCK 12, FIVE ACRE PLAT "A",
BIG FIELD SURVEY AND RUNNING THENCE SOUTH 89°54'32" WEST 142.00 FEET TO
THE EAST LINE OF A 15.00 FOOT ALLEY; THENCE NORTH 0°02'11" WEST ALONG
SAID EAST LINE 100.00 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 12 OF SAID
BLOCK 6; THENCE NORTH 89°54'32" EAST 142.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF
EDISON STREET; THENCE SOUTH 0°02'11" EAST ALONG SAID WEST LINE 100.00
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
1420 South Edison Street/16-18-103-006-0000
LOTS 16 AND 17, BLOCK 6, CAPITOL AVENUE ADDITION, ACCORDING TO THE
OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF ON FILE AND OF RECORD IN THE SALT LAKE COUNTY
RECORDER'S OFFICE
Contains 1.40 acres, more or less.
5
Legal descriptions of property to be rezoned from R-1/5000 Single Family Residential to
FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2:
121 East Cleveland Avenue/16-18-103-015-0000
COMMENCING 107 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 6,
CAPITOL AVENUE ADDITION, THENCE WEST 35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 102.1 FEET;
THENCE EAST 35 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 102.1 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
TOGETHER WITH ALL THE VACATED ALLEY ABUTTING ON THE WEST
Contains 0.12 acres, more or less.
1
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2023
(An ordinance amending Subsection 21A.27.050.C.3 of the Salt Lake City code to include
additional land area eligible for additional building height.)
An ordinance amending Subsection 21A.27.050.C.3 of the Salt Lake City Code pursuant
to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01183 pertaining to additional land area eligible for additional
building height.
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a
public hearing on May 24, 2023 to consider an application submitted by Matthew Ratelle of
1435 State Street, LLC to amend Subsection 21A.27.050.C.3 of the Salt Lake City Code to
expand the area eligible for additional building height; and
WHEREAS, at its May 24, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of
transmitting a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said
application; and
WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that
adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.27.050.C.3.
That Subsection 21A.27.050.C.3 of the Salt Lake City Code shall be, and hereby is amended as
follows:
3. Multi-family Residential, Storefront, and Vertical Mixed-use building form
standards:
TABLE 21A.27.050.C.3
Building Regulation Regulation for Building Forms:
Multi-family Residential/Storefront/Vertical Mixed Use
2
H Height Maximum height of 50’.1 All heights measured from established
grade. Rooftop use is permitted and required railings and walls
necessary to comply with building code requirements are
permitted to encroach beyond the maximum height up to 5’.
GH Ground Floor
Height
Minimum ground floor height of 14’.
F Front and
Corner Side
Yard Setback
Ground Floor Residential Uses: A minimum of 10’ and a maximum
of 20’. Ground Floor occupied by retail, restaurants, taverns,
brewpubs, bar establishments, art galleries, theaters, or performing
art facilities: no minimum is required, provided no doors open into
the right of way. A maximum setback of up to 10’ is allowed. All
other ground floor uses: A minimum of 5’ and a maximum 10’. The
maximum may be increased due to existing utility easements in
which case the maximum setback shall be at the edge of the
easement.
This requirement may be modified through Design Review process
(Chapter 21A.59).
Provided front or corner side yard shall provide one tree for every
30 linear foot of front or corner side yard property line. The mature
tree canopy must cover at least 50% of the required yard area and
sidewalk area.
S Interior Side
Yard
Minimum of 6’ required, except when an interior side yard is
abutting a property in a zoning district with a maximum permitted
building height of 35’ or less, then the minimum shall be 15’. For
the purpose of this regulation, an alley that is a minimum of 10’ in
width that separates a subject property from a different zoning
district shall be counted towards the minimum setback.
R Rear Yard The rear yard minimum shall be 10’, except when rear yard is
adjacent to a zoning district with a maximum permitted building
height of 30’ or less, then the minimum is 20’. For the purpose of
this regulation, an alley that is a minimum of 10’ in width that
separates a subject property from a property in a different zoning
district shall be counted towards the minimum setback.
GU Ground Floor
Use
Requirements
900 South: The ground floor use space facing 900 South shall be
limited to the following uses: retail goods establishments, retail
service establishments, public service portions of businesses,
restaurants, taverns/brewpubs, bar establishments, art galleries,
theaters, or performing art facilities for a depth of 25’. Amenity
space for the occupants of the building shall account for no more
than 25% of the length of the ground floor space.
E Ground Floor
Dwelling
Entrances
Ground floor dwelling units adjacent to a street must have an
allowed entry feature. See Table 21A.27.030.B for allowed entry
features.
U Upper Level
Stepback
When adjacent to a lot in a zoning district with a maximum building
height of 30’ or less, the first full floor of the building above 30’
shall stepback 10’ from the building facade at finished grade along
the side or rear yard that is adjacent to the lot in the applicable
3
zoning district. This regulation does not apply when a lot in a
different zoning district is separated from the subject parcel by a
street or alley.
MW Midblock
Walkway
As part of the city’s plan for the downtown area, it is intended that
midblock walkways be provided to facilitate pedestrian movement
within the area. The city has adopted the Downtown Plan that
includes a midblock walkway map and establishes a need for such
walkways as the Downtown grows. Because the districts within the
downtown area allow maximum building heights that exceeds those
of other districts in the city, the requirement for the midblock
walkway is important to maintain the overall scale and pedestrian
nature of the downtown. This requirement implements the city’s
Downtown Plan and provides visual relief from the additional
height that is available in these zone districts when compared to the
remainder of the city. All buildings constructed after the effective
date hereof within this district shall conform to this officially
adopted plan for midblock walkways, in addition to the following
standards:
1. Any new development shall provide a midblock walkway if a
midblock walkway on the subject property has been identified
in a master plan that has been adopted by the city.
2. The following standards apply to the midblock walkway:
a. The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and
include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path.
b. The midblock walkway may be incorporated into the
building provided it is open to the public. A sign shall be
posted indicating that the public may use the walkway.
c. The following building encroachments are permitted in
midblock walkway. Under no circumstances shall a mid
block walkway be entirely covered.
(1) Colonnades;
(2) Staircases;
(3) Balconies – All balconies must be located at the third
story or above;
(4) Building overhangs and associated cantilever - These
coverings may be between 9 and 14’ above the level of
the sidewalk. They shall provide a minimum depth of
coverage of 6’ and project no closer to the curb than
3’;
(5) Skybridge – A single skybridge is permitted. All
skybridges must be located at the third, fourth, or fifth
stories; and
(6) Other architectural element(s) not listed above that
offers refuge from weather and/or provide publicly
accessible usable space.
4
BF Building
Forms Per
Lot
Multiple buildings may be built on a single lot provided all of the
buildings have frontage on a street. All buildings shall comply with
all applicable standards.
OS Open Space
Area
As required in Subsection 21A.27.030.C.1 “Open Space Area.”
DS Design
Standards
See Section 21A.27.030 and Chapter 21A.37 for other applicable
building configuration and design standards.
Footnotes:
1. Additional Building Height Regulations. Properties listed in this footnote shall have a
permitted building height of up to 65’ and 5 stories.
a. For legally existing parcels or lots as of January 1, 2023 located on the corners
of West Temple at 800 South or 900 South;
b. For legally existing parcels or lots as of January 1, 2023 located on the corners
of 200 West at 700 South, 800 South or 900 South;
c. For legally existing parcels or lots as of January 1, 2023 located on the corners
of West Temple at Fayette Avenue;
d. For legally existing parcels or lots as of January 1, 2023 located on the corners
of 300 West at 800 South or 900 South;
e. On the southeast corner of 1300 South and State Street.
f. On the northeast corner of Cleveland Avenue and State Street.
g. As indicated on the following map:
5
SECTION 10. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
first publication.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________,
2023.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
6
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2023.
Published: ______________.
Ordinance amending Subsection 21A.27.050.C.3
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:___________________________
By: ____________________________
Katherine D. Pasker, Senior City Attorney
July 10, 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1) PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
2) NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING
3) MAILING LIST
4) ORIGINAL PETITIONS
1. PROJECT
CHRONOLOGY
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petitions: PLNPCM2022-01183 & PLNPCM2022-01184
January 17, 2023 Applications submitted.
February 3, 2023 Petition assigned to staff.
March 6, 2023 Petition routed for Department Review Comments.
March 6, 2023 Staff sent the 45-day required notice for recognized community
organizations to the Community Councils.
March 6, 2023 Neighbors within 300 feet of the development were provided early
notification of the proposal.
March 6, 2023 Project posted for an online open house through April 28, 2023.
April 28, 2023 45-day public comment period for recognized organizations ended.
May 18, 2023 Public hearing notice mailed. Public notice posted on City and
State websites and Planning Division listserv.
May 19, 2023 Public hearing notice sign posted on the property.
May 24, 2023 Planning Commission held a public hearing and made a
recommendation to the City Council to approve the proposed
amendments.
June 23, 2023 Draft ordinance requested from City Attorney’s office.
July 10, 2023 Draft ordinance received from City Attorney’s office.
2. NOTICE OF CITY
COUNCIL HEARING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petitions PLNPCM2022-01183 and PLNPCM2022-01184
– 1435 State Zoning Map and Master Plan Amendments – Salt Lake City has received these
amendment requests, specified below, from Matthew Ratelle with the Colmena Group representing the
property owner. The intent of these amendment requests is to accommodate a redevelopment proposal
to be submitted at a later date. The project is within Council District 5, represented by Darin Mano.
A. Master Plan Amendment (Case number PLNPCM2022-01184)
1433 & 1435 South State Street and 1420 South Edison Street –Amend the Central Community
Master Plan’s Future Land Use designation from Medium Mixed Use to High Mixed Use.
121 East Cleveland Avenue – Amend the Central Community Master Plan’s Future Land Use
designation from Low Density Residential to High Mixed Use.
B. Zoning Map Amendment (Case number PLNPCM2022-01183)
1433 & 1435 South State Street and 1420 South Edison Street – rezone from CC Commercial
Corridor to FB-UN2 Form Based Urban Neighborhood and allow buildings up to 65 feet in height
at Northeast Corner of Cleveland Avenue and State Street.
121 East Cleveland Avenue – rezone from R-1/5,000 Single Family Residential to FB-UN2 Form
Based Urban Neighborhood.
As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments
regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning
this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be held:
DATE:
PLACE: Electronic and in-person options.
451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah
** This meeting will be held via electronic means, while also providing for an in-person
opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at
451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, including WebEx
connection information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. Comments may also
be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to
council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the
Council and added to the public record.
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Aaron
Barlow at 801.535.6182 between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, or by
e-mail at aaron.barlow@slcgov.com. The application details can be accessed at
https://citizenportal.slcgov.com, by selecting the “Planning” tab and entering the petition numbers
PLNPCM2022-01183 and PLNPCM2022-011840999.
The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for
reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids
and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please
contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service
711.
3. MAILING LIST
NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
JOHN N NIKOLS FAM TRNIKOLS, MICHAEL J; TR 2256 S LAKELINE CIR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109
MORSE LAURELWOOD PROPERTIES LC 223 W 700 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
CATALAN PROPERTIES, L.L.C 1383 S MAJOR ST #E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SOUZA LAND LLC 2230 DOC HOLLIDAY DR PARK CITY UT 84060
FOUNDRY PROPERTIES LLC 722 S STATE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111
WASATCH INN, LLC 1009 S MAIN ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111
1438 S PROPERTIES LLC 3424 S STATE ST #A SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115
SOUZA LAND LLC 2230 DOC HOLLIDAY DR PARK CITY UT 84060
GJACK ENTERPRISES LLC 59 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
1435 STATE STREET LLCCANYON RIM SHOPPING CENTER, LL 1201 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
GALLEGOS, JOSEPH M 127 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
HALL, JULIEANNE; TR(JH FAM TRUST) 131 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
BRADBURY, CHRISTOPHER W 135 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
1435 STATE STREET LLCCANYON RIM SHOPPING CENTER, LL 1201 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
STATE BUILDING OWNERSHIP AUTHORITY 450 N STATE ST #4110 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114
1435 STATE STREET LLC & CANYON RIM SHOPPING CENTER, LLC 1201 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
RASMUSSEN, L NEIL & SALLY A; TRS 7988 S STAUNING CV COTTONWOOD HTS UT 84121
ATK, LLC 1017 W HIDDEN COVE DR TAYLORSVILLE UT 84123
SUES ALTERATION UT INC 1441 E 2100 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
NGUYEN, VINH; JTVO, LOAN; JT 1774 W 3500 S WEST VALLEY UT 84119
MOUNTAIN SPORTS PROPERTIES LLC 1435 S STATE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
TARASEVICH, ROBIN; JTTARASEVICH, SUZANNE; JT 124 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SUGIYAMA, KEN TET AL 132 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
ROGERS, BRENDA S 1452 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SCHNEIDER, JEFFREY C 1456 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
CASE YONETANI TRET AL 1466 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
1470 S EDISON ST., A SERIESOF MAZR HAUS, LLC 1126 E GILMER DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
MID TOWN, LLC 1740 E PRINCETON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
LEWIS, KATELYN 1367 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
UTAH POWER & LIGHT COMPANY 825 NE MULTNOMAH ST #1900 PORTLAND OR 97232
OATWAY, DAVIS &BINNEBOSE, BRIANNA; JT 1409 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SEAR‐PITTS, SHANTELL; JTSEAR, SUSAN; JT 1419 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SPIN PROPERTIES, LLC 1421 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
HAPPY FAMILY HOME, LLC 956 E GALENA DR WHITE CITY UT 84094
BLAIR, SCOTT A 1431 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
LI, ZHONG XIN 145 E COATSVILLE AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
FALKNER, CATHY‐LIN 1404 S 200 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
JCOR PROPERTIES, LLC 721 N MAIN ST LAYTON UT 84041
HATA, GEORGE M. & KIYOKO 1420 S 200 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
KINNEY, EMILY‐IONE 165 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
MACKIN TRET AL 171 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
MICHAEL READ FORDHAM REV TRET AL 3567 E EASTCLIFF DR MILLCREEK UT 84124
STATE OF UTAH DIVISION OFFACILITIES CONSTRUCTION MGMNT 450 N STATE ST #4110 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114
HOWCRAFT, WAYNE A &JOHNNA; JT 150 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
LEE, MATTHEW E; JTCURTIS, NATASIA A; JT 156 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
MURPHY, AARON G 162 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
THOR UT XYZ, LLC 2058 W 8870 S WEST JORDAN UT 84088
BEETON, SHANE &ANDERSON, HAILEY; JT 1955 E PRINCETON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84108
BAKKEN, JENNIFER L 1455 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
EVANS, LINDA D L; JTMANN, CARRIE E; JT 1463 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
PORTER, WILLIAM S &TINA; JT 1469 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
VAN DE GRAAF, KARA A 1458 S 200 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
Current Occupant 1313 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1328 S EDISON ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1393 S MAJOR ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1397 S MAJOR ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1401 S MAJOR ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1405 S MAJOR ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1374 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1382 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1388 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1392 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1400 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1410 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1416 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1438 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1411 S MAJOR ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1421 S MAJOR ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1420 S EDISON ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1435 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1385 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1433 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 121 E CLEVELAND AVE Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 58 E CLEVELAND AVE Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1458 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1460 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1470 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1446 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1445 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1470 S EDISON ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1465 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1465 S STATE ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1373 S EDISON ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1425 S EDISON ST Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1376 S 200 E Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1410 S 200 E Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1396 S 200 E Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1402 S 200 E Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 1390 S 200 E Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 166 E CLEVELAND AVE Salt Lake City 84115 UT
Current Occupant 168 E CLEVELAND AVE Salt Lake City 84115 UT
4. ORIGINAL PETITIONS
MR
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
________________________ Date Received: _________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: April 27, 2023
Darin Mano, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
__________________________
SUBJECT: Petition PLNPCM2022-00802
2167 S. 800 E. – Alley Vacation Request
STAFF CONTACT: Diana Martinez, Principal Planner
(801) 535-7215 or diana.martinez@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follow the recommendations of the Planning
Commission to approve the alley vacation request.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Denise Vance, the property owner of 815 E. Wilmington
Avenue, is requesting an alley vacation for a 7.3-foot by 156.75-foot portion of the alley that
runs west to east within the block north of Wilmington Avenue. The alley is located between 800
East and 900 East. The property abutting this alley is zoned R-1/5,000 (Single-Family
Residential District) and is located within Council District 7, represented by Amy Fowler.
The application request for a partial alley vacation must meet one of four policy considerations
to be considered by the City. This application meets the first policy consideration: Lack of Use.
The portion requested to be vacated has been used as a driveway for the dwelling at 2167 S. 800
E. for over two decades. It is not passable for pedestrians or bicyclist, since it has been gated by
residents and therefore, it renders that section unusable as a public right-of-way.
Lisa Shaffer (Apr 27, 2023 16:39 MDT)04/27/2023
04/27/2023
PUBLIC PROCESS:
●Early Notification –
o Notification of the proposal was sent to all property owners and tenants located
within 300 feet of the subject parcels on November 22, 2022.
o Notification of the proposal was sent to Sugar House Community Council on
November 22, 2023. The Community Council supported the petition.
●Planning Commission Meeting – On February 8, 2023, the Planning Commission held a
public hearing regarding the proposed zoning map amendment. The Planning Commission
voted 10-1 to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council for decision.
PLANNING RECORDS:
a) PC Agenda of February 8, 2023 (Click to Access )
b) PC Minutes of February 8, 2023 (Click to Access)
c) PC Staff Report of February 8, 2023 (Click to Access )
EXHIBITS:
1.PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
2.NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
3.ORIGINAL PETITION
4.MAILING LIST
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
3. REVISED PETITION
4. MAILING LIST
5. ORDINANCE
1.PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petition: PLNPCM2022-00802 – approximately 2167 S. 800 E.
Alley Vacation Request
August 31, 2022 Petition for the alley vacation was received by the Salt Lake
City Planning Division.
September 20, 2022 Petition assigned to Diana Martinez, Principal Planner, for staff
analysis and processing.
Sept-Nov, 2022 Request application modified. Original applicant was not eligible to
make application for the alley vacation request. New application
submitted and process continued.
November 22, 2022 Information about the proposal was sent to the Chairs of the Sugar House
Community Council and the Sugar House Land Use Council. To solicit
public comments and start the 45-day Recognized Organization input
and comment period.
November 22, 2022 Staff sent an early notification announcement of the project to all
residents and property owners living within 300 feet of the project
site providing information about the proposal and how to give public
input on the project.
January 6, 2023 The 45-day public comment period for Recognized Organizations
ended. Formal comments were submitted to staff by the recognized
organizations to date related to this proposal.
January 26, 2023 Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of the
Planning Commission public hearing physically posted on the property.
February 3, 2023 Public notice posted on City and State websites and sent via the
Planning list serve for the Planning Commission meeting of
February 8, 2023. Public hearing notice mailed.
February 8, 2023 The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing February 8, 2023.
By a majority vote of 10-1 , the Planning Commission
forwarded a favorable recommendation to City Council for the
proposed alley vacation.
2. NOTICE OF CITY
COUNCIL HEARING
NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2022-00802 – Denise Vance, the
property owner of 815 E. Wilmington Avenue, is requesting an alley vacation for a 7.3-foot by
156.75-foot portion of the alley that runs west to east within the block north of Wilmington Avenue.
The alley is located between 800 East and 900 East. The property abutting this alley is zoned R-
1/5,000 (Single-Family Residential District) and is located within Council District 7, represented by
Amy Fowler. (Staff contact: Diana Martinez at 801-535-7215 or diana.martinez@slcgov.com)
As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive
comments regarding the petition. During the hearing, anyone desiring to address the City
Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may
consider adopting the ordinance the same night of the public hearing. The hearing will be
held:
DATE:
TIME: 7:00 pm
PLACE: 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah
** This meeting will be held in-person, to attend or participate in the hearing at the City
and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah.
For more information, please visit www.slc.gov/council. Comments may also be provided
by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to
council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared
with the Council and added to the public record.
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Diana
Martinez at 801-535-7215 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday,
or via e-mail at diana.martinez@slcgov.com. The application details can be accessed at
https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/, by selecting the “planning” tab and entering the petition
number PLNPCM2022-00802.
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include
aids and services. Please make requests at least advance. To make a request, please contact the
City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711.
3. REVISED PETITION
4. MAILING LIST
5. ORDINANCE
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ________ of 2023
(Vacating a portion of city-owned alley situated adjacent to properties located at 801 East, 809
East, 815 East, and 825 East Wilmington Avenue)
An ordinance vacating a portion of an unnamed, city-owned alley adjacent to properties
located at 801 East, 809 East, 815 East, and 825 East Wilmington Avenue, pursuant to Petition
No. PLNPCM2022-00802.
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a public hearing on February
8, 2023 to consider a request made by Denise Vance (“Applicants”) (Petition No.
PLNPCM2022-00802) to vacate a portion of an unnamed, city-owned alley adjacent to
properties located at 801 East, 809 East, 815 East, and 825 East Wilmington Avenue; and
WHEREAS, at its February 8, 2023 meeting, the planning commission voted in favor of
forwarding a positive recommendation on said petition to the Salt Lake City Council; and
WHEREAS, the portion of alley that is the subject of this petition was dedicated to public
use in the Forest Dale Addition Blocks 19 & 20 Subdivision plat, recorded in 1907, and is
situated on the northern perimeter of that subdivision; and
WHEREAS, the general rule prescribed by Utah Code Section 72-5-105 is that abutting
owners on each side of a vacated right-of-way vest with title to half of the width of the vacated
right-of-way, however, as explained in Fries v. Martin, 154 P.3d 184 (Utah Ct. App. 2006), when
a vacated right-of-way is situated on the perimeter of a subdivision, title to the entire width of
that right-of-way vests only in the abutting property owners within the subdivision; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds after holding a public hearing on this matter, that
there is good cause for the vacation of the alley and neither the public interest nor any person
will be materially injured by the proposed vacation.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Vacating City-Owned Alley. That an unnamed, city-owned alley adjacent
to properties located at 801 East, 809 East, 815 East, and 825 East Wilmington Avenue, which is
the subject of Petition No. PLNPCM2022-00802, and which is more particularly described on
Exhibit “A” attached hereto, hereby is, vacated and declared not presently necessary or available
for public use.
SECTION 2. Reservations and Disclaimers. The above vacation is expressly made
subject to all existing rights-of-way and easements of all public utilities of any and every
description now located on and under or over the confines of this property, and also subject to
the rights of entry thereon for the purposes of maintaining, altering, repairing, removing or
rerouting said utilities, including the city’s water and sewer facilities. Said closure is also subject
to any existing rights-of-way or easements of private third parties.
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
first publication and shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of
______________, 2023.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2023
Published: ______________.
Ordinance vacating alley adjacent to 2167 S 800 E
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney
April 7, 2023
EXHIBIT “A”
Legal description of the portion of unnamed, city-owned
alley to be vacated:
Beginning at the NW corner of Lot 28, Block 20, Forest Dale
subdivision and running thence North 7.3 ft. to the north line
of an alleyway; thence East 156.75 ft.; thence South 7.3 ft.;
thence West 156.75 ft. to the point of the beginning.
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: August 7, 2023
Darin Mano, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
__________________________
SUBJECT: Petition PLNPCM2023-00225
Approximate location -north of 827 S. Wilmington Ave. - Alley Vacation Request
STAFF CONTACT: Diana Martinez, Senior Planner
(801) 535-7215 or diana.martinez@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: The City Council follows the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to approve the Alley Vacation request.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Russell Bollow is requesting approval for an alley vacation,
located north of 827 E. Wilmington Ave, to vacate (or to give up public ownership of) a portion
of a public alley approximately 17.3 feet by 119 feet, starting at a point 156.75 ft from 800 East.
If approved, this section of the alley would be divided and given to the property owners abutting
the area of the alley vacated.
This requested portion of the alley being asked for vacation is an extension of a portion requested
to be vacated in a prior application -PLNPCM2022-00802 (shown in yellow in the aerial below).
The previous application came before the Planning Commission on February 8th, 2023, and a
favorable recommendation to be sent to the City Council was voted on 10-1.
This new portion, being requested to be vacated, has been blocked with a fence at the backside of
the applicant’s property, is not used as a public right-of-way, and is impassable to travel.
Lisa Shaffer (Aug 8, 2023 16:35 MDT)08/08/2023
08/08/2023
The remaining portion, not included in this vacation request, is used as a public right-of-way, and
there are a few properties that use it as an access point to their properties and garages from the
alleyway. Therefore, these properties would not be impacted by this proposed alley vacation.
As shown in the previous application PLNPCM2022-00802, the west end of the alleyway has
been used as a driveway for the dwelling at 2167 S. 800 E. for multi-decades. Therefore, the
alley has only been used partially between 800 East to 900 East. This new portion of the alley
has also been blocked off by added fencing and soil, which has increased the grade of the
alleyway.
Alley Vacation requests must fulfill one of four policy considerations in section 14.52.020 of the
City Code: Lack of Use, Public Safety, Urban Design, or Community Purpose. Requests are also
reviewed against the factors found in 14.52.030.B. Staff’s analysis of the policy considerations,
shows that the standards are met by vacating this portion of the alleyway, which would not create
detrimental impacts on abutting properties.
PUBLIC PROCESS:
● Early Notification –
o Notification of the proposal was sent to all property owners and tenants located
within 300 feet of the subject parcels on April 3, 2023.
o Notification of the proposal was sent to the Sugar House Community Council on
April 3, 2023. A letter in support of the alley vacation was received from the
Community Council on April 21, 2023.
● Planning Commission Meeting – On June 28, 2023, the Planning Commission held a
public hearing regarding the proposed zoning map amendment. The Planning Commission
voted 5-2 to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council for decision.
PLANNING RECORDS:
a) PC Agenda of June 28, 2023 (Click to access)
b) PC Minutes of June 28, 2023 (Click to access
c) PC Staff Report of June 28, 2023 (Click to access)
EXHIBITS:
1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
3. ORIGINAL PETITION
4. MAILING LIST
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
3. ORIGINAL PETITION
4. MAILING LIST
5. ORDINANCE
1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petition: PLNPCM2023-00225 – Located north of 827 E. Wilmington Ave.
Alley Vacation Request
March 27, 2023 Petition for the alley vacation application received by the Salt Lake
City Planning Division.
March 27, 2023 Petition assigned to Diana Martinez, Principal Planner, for staff
analysis and processing.
April 3, 2023 Information about the proposal was sent to the Chair of the Sugar House
Community Council to solicit public comments and start the 45-day
Recognized Organization input and comment period.
April 3, 2023 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.
May 15, 2023 The 45-day public comment period for Recognized Organizations
ended. Formal comments were submitted to staff by the recognized
organizations to date related to this proposal.
June 15, 2023 Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of the
Planning Commission public hearing physically posted on the property.
June 23, 2023 Public notice posted on City and State websites and sent via the
Planning list serve for the Planning Commission meeting of
June 28, 2023. Public hearing notice mailed.
June 28, 2023 The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on June 28, 2023. By
a vote of 5-2, the Planning Commission forwarded a favorable
recommendation to City Council for the proposed alley vacation.
2. NOTICE OF CITY
COUNCIL HEARING
NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2023-00225 – Russell Bollow is
requesting approval for an alley vacation, located north of 827 E. Wilmington Ave, to vacate (or
to give up public ownership of) a portion of a public alley approximately 17.3 feet by 119 feet,
starting at a point 156.75 ft from 800 East. If approved, this section of the alley would be
divided and given to the property owners abutting the area of the alley vacated.
As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to
receive comments regarding the petition. During the hearing, anyone desiring to
address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak.
The Council may consider adopting the ordinance the same night of the public
hearing. The hearing will be held:
DATE:
TIME: 7:00 pm
PLACE: 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah
** This meeting will be held in-person, to attend or participate in the
hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street,
Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, please visit
www.slc.gov/council. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-
Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to
council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source
are shared with the Council and added to the public record.
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call
Diana Martinez, Senior Planner at 801-535-7215 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m., Monday through Friday, or via e-mail at diana.martinez@slcgov.com. The application
details can be accessed at https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/, by selecting the “planning” tab
and entering the petition number PLNPCM2023-00225.
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include
aids and services. Please make requests at least advance. To make a request, please
contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or
relay service 711.
3. ORIGINAL PETITION
4. MAILING LIST
OWN_FULL_NAME OWN_ADDR OWN_CITY OWN_STATE OWN_ZIP
AURELIO RUELAS 1015 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
WASATCHRENTALPROPERTIES, LLC 110 MATTERHORN DR PARK CITY UT 84098
A SERIES OF 2172 S 11289 S WYNGATE LN SANDY UT 84092
DANIEL A STEPHENS; MEGAN M STEPHENS (JT) 1156 E BLAINE AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105
TRIBE OF DON LLC 1268 E 10 S LINDON UT 84042
SKH REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS LLC 1280 FOXCREST CT PARK CITY UT 84098
DALE F BONDARUK 1455 W WASATCH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84104
ELM AVENUE HOME LLC 1680 NAVAJO DR OGDEN UT 84402
Current Occupant 2141 S 800 E Salt Lake City UT 84106
Current Occupant 2147 S 800 E Salt Lake City UT 84106
ELIZABETH M HUELSKAMP 2151 S 800 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
MELISSA L SOUTHWICK 2152 S 800 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 2160 S 800 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 2165 S 800 E Salt Lake City UT 84106
Current Occupant 2166 S 800 E Salt Lake City UT 84106
TARTARO REVOCABLE LIVNG TRUST 06/17/2015 2167 S 800 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 2172 S 800 E Salt Lake City UT 84106
Current Occupant 2178 S 800 E Salt Lake City UT 84106
NELSON VALLE 2182 S 800 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 2186 S 800 E Salt Lake City UT 84106
GUY W PACE; EMILY C PACE (TC) 2195 S 800 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 2198 S 800 E Salt Lake City UT 84106
MATTHEW DALE; ADAM HALL (JT) 2201 S 800 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
BRIAN D HANNI & CELIA A HANNI FAMILY TRUST 04/26/2004 2204 S 800 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
ANDREA RADU 2205 S 800 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 2208 S 900 E Salt Lake City UT 84106
M/S SHOWROOM, LLC 2209 E LORITA WY
COTTONWOOD
HTS UT 84093
Current Occupant 2210 S 900 E Salt Lake City UT 84106
Current Occupant 2223 S 900 E Salt Lake City UT 84106
SUSAN M THORN; RUSSELL P BOLLOW (JT) 2734 E CANTON LN SANDY UT 84092
TRIBE OF DON LLC 345 E 3300 S SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115
MARK R MORRIS 35 E 100 S # 602 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111
GINA P YOUNG; MARK S YOUNG (JT) 3693 E ASTRO WY SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109
SPENCER C ELLIS 4465 S CAMILLE ST HOLLADAY UT 84124
RHAMA RENTALS LLC 60 PELHAM RD ROCHESTER NY 14610
Current Occupant 801 E SIMPSON AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
YVONNE BANNER 801 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 805 E SIMPSON AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
NAOMI S NESSEN; STEVEN F NESSEN 809 E SIMPSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
KRISTINA L HEITKAMP 809 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
DENISE M VANCE 815 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
MARGY P RUSSOTTO 816 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 818 E COMMONWEALTH AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
JEFFREY MARTIN LANG 819 E SIMPSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 820 E COMMONWEALTH AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111
ALICE U ESPINOSA 820 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 820 E WILMINGTON AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
Current Occupant 823 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
CARLA TUKE 824 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 825 E WILMINGTON AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
KIMIA GOLCHIN; MAGGIE NARTOWICZ (JT) 826 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
STACEY ANN COLLETT 826 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 827 E SIMPSON AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
Current Occupant 827 E WILMINGTON AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
MATTHEW A STEVENS; SUPRIYA APTE (JT) 828 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 829 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
MICHAEL F PECK; ELIZABETH M PECK (JT) 829 E SIMPSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
COREY BULLOUGH 829 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 830 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
DAVID E PETERSEN; ROSALIE B PETERSEN (JT) 830 WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84010
TEDDY ANDERSON 832 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
ALEXA LANGFORD 833 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
EMILY HAGN 835 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
ROBERT V HARRELL 836 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
SHAUN FUHRIMAN 837 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
BRETON WALSH TRUST 08/08/2022 837 E SIMPSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
LORI C ZOUN; ZOURN JACOB E (JT) 839 E SIMPSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
DEBRA S GRIMES 840 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
KAYCEE NIPPER; LANDY NIPPER; PAUL NIPPER (JT) 841 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
DAPHNE A PERRY 841 E SIMPSON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
VERN HARRINGTON; KELLI HARRINGTON (TC) 841 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
LA BREDIN LEGACY TRUST 9/15/2017 844 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 844 E WILMINGTON AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
EDDIE L BRIDGES 845 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
DREW B DILLMAN; JUDITH B DILLMAN (TC) 845 NORMANDY DR IOWA CITY IA 52246
Current Occupant 847 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
KAIA ANNE RAGNHILDSTVEIT; OYVIND RAGNHILDSTVEIT; TIFFANY
RAGNHILD 850 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
MATT A FORNELIUS 850 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 851 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
CAMDEN TAYLOR 853 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
BARBARA L MCCAULEY 854 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
CAROL E METZ TRUST 09/20/2021 856 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
DANA JONES; DAVID JONES (JT) 857 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 858 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
Current Occupant 859 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
STEVEN A JONES; JENNIFER JONES (JT) 861 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
Current Occupant 865 E WILMINGTON AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
Current Occupant 866 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106
3AS SUGARHOUSE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 867 N AMERICAN BEAUTY DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
BRUNO BEINTEMA LIVING TRUST 04/27/2021 920 IMPERIAL BEACH BLVD IMPERIAL BEACH CA 91932
DAVID G KEVITCH; STACEY FEARNLEY (JT) 979 E CRANDALL AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
SALT LAKE COUNTY PO BOX 144575 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114
SALT LAKE CITY PO BOX 145460 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114
JANEECE FIELDS REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 08/16/2021 PO BOX 45 SONOMA CA 95476
DEBRA GRIMES PO BOX 521354 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84152
IXCHEL, LLC PO BOX 522050 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84152
GRODBROS REAL ESTATE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP LLLP PO BOX 680365 PARK CITY UT 84068
Diana Martinez, Principal Planner SLC
451 S. State St., PO BOX
145480 SALT LAKE CITY UT
84114-
5480
5. ORDINANCE
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ________ of 2023
(Vacating a portion of city-owned alley situated adjacent to properties located at 825 East, 827
East, and 829 East Wilmington Avenue, and 820 East, 826 East, and 830 East Elm Avenue)
An ordinance vacating a portion of an unnamed, city-owned alley adjacent to properties
located at 825 East, 827 East, and 829 East Wilmington Avenue and 820 East, 826 East, and 830
East Elm Avenue, pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00225.
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a
public hearing on June 28, 2023 to consider a request made by Russell Bollow (“Applicant”)
(Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00225) to vacate a portion of an unnamed, city-owned alley
adjacent to properties located at 825 East, 827 East, and 829 East Wilmington Avenue, and 820
East, 826 East, and 830 East Elm Avenue; and
WHEREAS, at its June 28, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of
forwarding a positive recommendation on said petition to the Salt Lake City Council (“City
Council”); and
WHEREAS, the subject portion of alley consists of a 7.3-foot width that was dedicated to
public use in the Forest Dale Addition Blocks 19 & 20 Subdivision plat recorded in 1907 and is
situated on the northern perimeter of that subdivision (constituting the southern width of the
subject alley), and a 7.5-foot private dedication of land to public use from Isaac and Katherine
Brockbank (1911) by quitclaim deed (Book 7C Page 327) to the Town of Forest Dale (later
absorbed into Salt Lake City), which partitioned the 7.5-foot width from the southern boundary
of the Brockbanks’ property (constituting the northern width of the subject alley); and
WHEREAS, the general rule prescribed by Utah Code Section 72-5-105 is that abutting
owners on each side of a vacated right-of-way vest with title to half of the width of the vacated
right-of-way, however, as explained in Fries v. Martin, 154 P.3d 184 (Utah Ct. App. 2006), when
a vacated right-of-way is situated on the perimeter of a subdivision, title to the entire width of
that right-of-way vests only in the abutting property owners within the subdivision, and,
therefore, upon vacation the southern 7.3 feet of the alley’s width shall revert to the abutting
owners in the
Forest Dale Addition Blocks 19 & 20 subdivision; and
WHEREAS, it appears the intent of the Brockbanks’ deed was to add width to the subject
alley in order to serve their property, and, therefore, upon vacation the northern 7.5 feet of the
alley’s width shall revert to the Brockbanks’ successors-in-interest; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds after holding a public hearing on this matter, that
there is good cause for the vacation of the alley and neither the public interest nor any person
will be materially injured by the proposed vacation.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Vacating City-Owned Alley. That an unnamed, city-owned alley adjacent
to properties located at 825 East, 827 East, and 829 East Wilmington Avenue, and 820 East, 826
East, and 830 East Elm Avenue, which is the subject of Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00225, and
which is more particularly described on Exhibit “A” attached hereto, hereby is, vacated and
declared not presently necessary or available for public use.
SECTION 2. Reservations and Disclaimers. The above vacation is expressly made
subject to all existing rights-of-way and easements of all public utilities of any and every
description now located on and under or over the confines of this property, and also subject to
the rights of entry thereon for the purposes of maintaining, altering, repairing, removing or
rerouting said utilities, including the city’s water and sewer facilities. Said closure is also subject
to any existing rights-of-way or easements of private third parties.
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
first publication and shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of
______________, 2023.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2023
Published: ______________.
Ordinance vacating alley adjacent 827 E. Wilmington Ave
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney
July 18, 2023
EXHIBIT “A”
Legal description of the portion of unnamed, city-owned
alley to be vacated:
Beginning at the NE corner of Lot 18, Block 20, Forest Dale
Subdivision and running thence North 14.8 ft. to the north line
of an alleyway; thence West 119.25 ft. along said north line to
the Northwest Corner of a 7.5 ft alley deeded to Forest Dale
City in Book 7C, Page 327, in the Salt Lake County Recorder’s
Office; thence South 14.8 ft. to the south line of said
alleyway; thence East 119.25 ft. along said south line to the
point of the beginning.
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM:Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE:September 19, 2023
RE: 135, 159, 163 West Goltz Avenue, and 1036 South Jefferson Street
Zoning Map and Master Plan Amendments
PLNPCM2021-01307/01308/01309, PLNPCM2022-00198/00199/00207
The Council will be briefed about a proposal to amend the zoning map for properties at 135, 159, and 163
West Goltz Avenue, and 1035 South Jefferson Street from their current RMF-35 (Moderate Density
Multifamily Residential) zoning, with a maximum height of 35 feet, to R-MU (Residential Mixed Use)
which has a maximum residential building height of 75 feet (45 feet for non-residential buildings/uses). In
addition, the proposal calls for amending the 2022 Ballpark Station Area Plan future land use
designations from Medium-Density Residential to High-Density Residential Mixed Use. The proposed
amendments would allow the property owner to construct multifamily developments on the properties,
though no development plans have been submitted.
The petitioner initially submitted applications in 2021 to rezone the subject Goltz Avenue properties and
1061 South Jefferson Street from RMF-35 to FB-UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2). Following
several community comments to Planning staff, most of which opposed FB-UN2 zoning, the petitioner
revised their rezone proposal from FB-UN2 to R-MU, removed 1061 South Jefferson Street and added 1036
South Jefferson Street to the request. This is summarized in the table below.
Address Current
Zoning
Original
Proposed
Zoning
Current
Proposed
Zoning
Future Land Use
Designation
Proposed Future
Land Use
Designation
135 West Goltz
Avenue
(Vacant property)
RMF-35 FB-UN2 R-MU Medium-Density
Residential
High-Density
Residential
Mixed-Use
Item Schedule:
Briefing: September 19, 2023
Set Date: September 19, 2023
Public Hearing: October 3, 2023
Potential Action: October 17, 2023
Page | 2
159 West Goltz
Avenue
(Duplex)
RMF-35 FB-UN2 R-MU Medium-Density
Residential
High-Density
Residential
Mixed-Use
163 West Goltz
Avenue
(Duplex)
RMF-35 FB-UN2 R-MU Medium-Density
Residential
High-Density
Residential
Mixed-Use
1036 South
Jefferson Street
(Single-family)
RMF-35 N/A
(Not part of
original request)
R-MU Medium-Density
Residential
High-Density
Residential
Mixed-Use
1061 South
Jefferson Street
RMF-35 FB-UN2 N/A (Request
removed)
Medium-Density
Residential
N/A
(Request removed)
It is important to note that Mayor Mendenhall initiated a petition to implement Ballpark Station Area
Plan recommendations to rezone the Jefferson Park Mixed Use, Main Street, and Heart of the
Neighborhood areas. The subject parcels are within the Jefferson Park Mixed Use Area which the City
proposes rezoning to FB-UN1 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood 1).
The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal during its June 14, 2023 meeting and held a public
hearing at which seven people spoke, all in opposition to the proposal. Concerns cited include:
•Building scale and compatibility,
•Amending the recently adopted Ballpark Station Area Plan,
•Lack of parking, setbacks, required buffers, and R-MU design standards,
•Shadow and light impacts to adjacent properties,
•Loss of existing middle housing types, and opportunities for owner occupancy.
During their discussion, some Commissioners expressed support for high density development in the area
as there is existing public transit. Other Commissioners were opposed to the proposal stating that R-MU
zoning is too intense for the area. Commissioners opposing the proposal also noted the effort neighborhood
residents put into creation of the Ballpark Station Area Plan.
A motion was made to forward a positive recommendation to the Council for the proposed zoning map and
future land use map amendments. That motion failed due to a tie vote. A motion to forward a negative
recommendation to the Council also failed due to a tie vote. A third motion was made, again to
forward a negative recommendation to the Council. That vote passed with six
Commissioners in support, and four opposed. To provide context to the Council’s discussion,
Planning Staff recommended the Planning Commission forward a negative recommendation to the City
Council, noting several areas where the petition was either incompatible with the recently adopted master
plan or incompatible with adjacent properties.
Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed zoning and future land use map amendments, determine if
the Council supports moving forward with the proposal.
POLICY QUESTION
1. The Council may wish to ask the applicant if they plan to include any affordable housing in
potential future projects on the subject sites. If yes, is the Council interested in asking the applicant
if they would be willing to enter into a development agreement pertaining to affordable housing
units?
Page | 3
2. The Council may wish to discuss how the forthcoming Affordable Housing incentives overlay
proposal could be utilized to guarantee affordability is included in future projects on this property
that may be more compatible with surrounding properties.
3. The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration and petitioner if it would make sense to
request they consider a different zone if added housing units is desired, considering these are mid-
block properties adjacent to lower-scale development.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The Council is only being asked to consider rezoning the property and amending the future land use map.
No site plan has been submitted to the City, nor is it within the scope of the Council’s role to review the
plans. Because zoning of a property can outlast the life of a building, any rezoning application should be
considered on the merits of changing the zoning of that property, not simply based on a potential project.
Salt Lake City Planning provided the following Google Earth image showing the area development pattern
with subject properties outlined.
Existing Conditions
135 West Goltz Avenue
This property is vacant land that is approximately .18 acres. A single-family dwelling which used to be on
the property was demolished in 2022 in preparation for redevelopment. The home was demolished after
the rezone petition was filed but prior to review and approval of a housing loss mitigation plan.
Properties north and west of the property are a mix of low- and moderate-density residential uses.
Jefferson Park is located to the south and east of this property and is zoned Open Space.
159 West Goltz Avenue
A single-story duplex is on this approximately .15-acre parcel. Properties to the east and west of this parcel
are zoned RMF-35 and include low- and moderate-density residential uses. A fourplex is directly east of
Page | 4
this parcel, and a duplex is located directly to the west at 163 West Goltz Avenue. The duplex to the west is
owned by the petitioner and included in the proposed rezone and master plan amendment.
163 West Goltz Avenue
As noted above, this parcel is directly west of 159 West Goltz Avenue. It is approximately .15 acres and
includes a single-story duplex. The previously mentioned duplex to the east, and a single-family residential
dwelling to the west are both zoned RMF-35. A six-story multifamily development zoned R-MU is across
Goltz Avenue to the north, and Jefferson Park is located to the south of this property.
1036 South Jefferson Street
This .17-acre RMF-35 parcel is located mid-block and includes a single-family residential dwelling.
Surrounding uses are a mixture of low-, medium, and high-density residential. Properties immediately to
the north, south, and east are zoned RMF-35 include single-family residential dwellings. Properties to the
west are zoned R-MU and RMF-35. A four-story multifamily residential development and single-family
homes are on those properties.
Because homes on the subject properties will be demolished as part of the proposal, City Code requires
housing loss mitigations plans. These plans were reviewed and approved by the Community and
Neighborhoods Department Director and are included in Attachment H (pages 69-84) of the Planning
Commission staff report. The petitioner proposes constructing replacement housing to satisfy the loss of
existing dwelling units.
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
Planning staff identified two key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 9-18 of
the Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the
staff report.
Consideration 1 – How the proposal helps implement City goals and policies identified in
adopted plans.
Planning reviewed how the proposal aligns with Plan Salt Lake (2015), Growing SLC (2017), and the
Ballpark Station Area Plan (2022).
Plan Salt Lake (2015)
It is Planning staff’s opinion that the proposal aims to increase residential density near transit and open
space called for in Plan Salt Lake. It would also allow for retail, service commercial, and small office use,
adding neighborhood amenities that could be accessed by walking, bicycling, or transit.
However, Planning also noted that the subject properties are scattered mid-block within an established
neighborhood of primarily single-family, two-family, and small multifamily dwellings. The proposed R-MU
zoning would allow high-density buildings up to 75 feet tall, which would significantly impact the
neighborhood. It would reduce the mix of middle housing in the immediate area. Current structures on the
subject parcels are duplexes and a single-family home. Planning staff believes the existing dwellings are
naturally occurring affordable housing, due to their character rather than being restricted by covenant.
Losing these units would be a loss of affordable housing stock, which is already limited.
Growing SLC (2017)
Planning staff found the proposed zoning map and master plan amendments would result in reduced
alignment with policies found in Growing SLC that “promote diversifying housing options, increasing
Page | 5
housing options, restoring “missing middle” housing types, and enabling moderate density increases while
minimizing neighborhood impacts.”
Planning noted large areas of the Ballpark Station area are designed for high-density mixed-use
development. The only area designated for medium density development for missing middle housing is
where the subject properties are located. Approval of the proposal would eliminate the medium density
residential designation for the four properties and reduce housing options for the neighborhood and an
ability to restore missing middle housing.
Ballpark Station Area Plan (2022)
The recently adopted Ballpark Station Area Plan future land use map and descriptions calls for larger 5-7
story buildings to be located along corridors where large building forms are, along the TRAX line, or on
West Temple. The plan recommends smaller 2-3 story medium-density buildings in the Jefferson Park
area.
It is Planning staff’s opinion that the proposed zoning and future land use map amendments do not align
with the Ballpark Station Area Plan goals and strategies to provide a variety of housing types and balanced
mix of uses.
Consideration 2 – Compatibility with Adjacent Properties
Planning staff noted the proposed R-MU zoning designation would allow buildings up to 75 feet tall
adjacent to low- to medium-density residential structures with a current maximum height of 35 feet. R-MU
zoning does not include architectural or site design requirements such as building scale transitions or
required buffer yards. The Planning Commission staff report stated, “If the proposal is approved, new high-
density development on the subject properties would fragment the small-scale single family and middle
housing development pattern and character found within the interior of the block.” (Planning Commission
staff report page 18.)
It is Planning staff’s opinion that the proposed zoning map amendment from RMF-35 to R-MU, and the
associated future land use amendment from medium density residential to high density mixed use is not
compatible with adjacent properties, the block’s development pattern, or the neighborhood’s development
intent.
ZONING COMPARISON
Attachment D (pages 24-26) of the Planning Commission staff report includes the following table
comparing current and proposed zoning districts. It is replicated here for convenience.
Regulation Existing Zoning (RMF-35)Proposed Zoning (R-MU)
Lot Area/Width Multi-Family Dwellings 3-11 units:
9,000 SF/80 FT
Multi-Family Dwellings 12 or more
units: 26,000 SF/80 FT
Single-Family attached dwellings (3 or
more): 3,000 SF per unit/22 FT for
interior lot & 32 FT for corner lot
Single-Family detached dwellings:
5,000 SF
Twin home dwellings: 4,000 SF
Two-Family dwellings: 8,000 SF
Multi-Family Dwellings: No minimum
lot area required/50 FT
Single-Family Attached (3 or more):
3,000 SF per 1 unit/22 FT for interior
lot & 32 FT corner lot
Single-Family Detached: 5,000 SF/50
FT
Twin Home Dwelling: 4,000 SF/25 FT
Two-Family Dwelling: 8,000 SF/50FT
Non-Residential Uses: No
Minimum/No Minimum
Page | 6
Other permitted or conditional uses in
21A.33.020: 5,000 SF/50 FT
Other permitted or conditional uses in
21A.33.020 - 5,000 SF/50 FT
Minimum Front/Corner Side yard
Setback
All Uses: Min. 20 FT Front yard/ Min.
10 FT corner side yard
*All required front and corner side
yards shall be maintained as
landscape yards in conformance with
the requirements of chapter 21A.48 of
this title
Single-Family Detached, Single-
Family Attached, Two-Family, & Twin
Home: Min. 15 FT Front yard/ Min.
10 FT corner side yard
Multifamily Dwellings & Other
Residential Uses:
No front or corner side yard setback
required.
Nonresidential Development: No front
or corner side yard setback required
Maximum Front and Corner Side Yard
Setback
No specific maximum setback
requirements
Single-Family Detached, Single-
Family Attached, Two-Family, & Twin
Home: At least 25% of the building
façade must be located with 25 FT of
the front lot line.
All other uses: At least 25% of the
building façade must be located within
15 FT of the front lot line.
*Exceptions to this requirement may
be authorized through the Design
Review Process.
Interior Side Yard Setback Single-Family detached & two-family
dwellings: Corner Lot: Min. 4 FT,
Interior Lot: Min 4 FT on one side and
Min 10 FT on the other
Single-Family Attached: No interior
side yard required, if a yard is
provided it shall not be less than 4 FT
Two-Family: Corner Lot: Min. 4 FT,
Interior Lot: Min 4 FT on one side and
10 FT on the other
Twin Home: No interior side yard
required along one side, a Min. 10 FT
is required on the other side.
Multifamily Dwellings: Minimum 10
FT on each side
All other permitted and conditional
uses: Min. 10 FT on each side
Single-Family Detached, Corner Lot:
Min. 4 FT,
Interior Lot: Min 4 FT on one side and
Min 10 FT on the other
Single-Family Attached: No interior
side yard required, if a yard is
provided it shall not be less than 4 FT
Two-Family: Corner Lot: Min. 4 FT,
Interior Lot: Min 4 FT on one side and
10 FT on the other
Twin Home: No interior side yard
required along one side, a Min. 10 FT
is required on the other side.
Multifamily Dwellings & Other
Residential Uses:
No interior side yard setback required
Nonresidential Development: No
interior side yard setback required
Rear Yard Setback All Uses: Minimum of 25% of the lot
depth, up to 25 FT, but not less than
20 FT
Single-Family Detached, Min. 25% of
the lot depth, up to 20 FT
Single-Family Attached, Two-Family,
& Twin Home: Min. 25% of lot depth
or 25 FT, whichever is less
Multifamily Dwellings & Other
Residential Uses: Min. 25% of the lot
depth, up to 30 FT
Nonresidential Development: Min.
25% of the lot depth, up to 30 FT
Page | 7
Parking Setback Front and corner side lot lines:
Parking prohibited between front lot
line and corner side lot line.
Interior Side Lot Line: 0 FT or 10 FT
when abutting any 1-2 family
residential district.
Rear Lot Line: 0 FT
Front and Corner Side Lot Lines:
Surface Parking Lots: 30 FT minimum
landscape setback from the front
property or corner side property line.
Parking Structures – 45 FT minimum
landscape setback from a front or
corner side yard property line or be
located behind the primary structure.
Interior Side Lot Line: 0 FT or 10 FT
when abutting any 1-2 Family
Residential District.
Rear Lot Line: 0 FT or 10 FT when
abutting any 1-2 Family Residential
District
Building Height Maximum Building Height – 35 FT Residential Building Height –
Max. 75 FT
Non-Residential Buildings/Uses –
45 FT
(Maximum floor area coverage of
nonresidential uses in mixed use
buildings is limited to the first 3
floors)
Maximum Building Coverage of All
Principal and Accessory Buildings
Single-Family Detached: Max. 45%
Single-Family Attached: Max. 60%
Two-Family & Twin Home Dwellings:
Max. 50%
Multifamily Dwellings: Max 60%
Non-Residential Land Uses: Max 60%
No specific building coverage
regulations.
Open Space No specific open space regulations Residential uses and mixed uses
containing residential use a min. of
20% of the lot area shall be
maintained as an open space area.
Landscape Buffers When a lot abuts a lot in a Single
Family or Two Family residential
district, a 10-foot landscape buffer
shall be provided.
Analysis of Factors
Attachment E (pages 31-33) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines master plan and zoning map
amendment standards that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. Please see the Planning
Commission staff report for additional information.
Factor Finding
Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent
with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of
the city as stated through its various adopted
planning documents.
Does not comply.
Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the
specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance.
Does not comply.
Page | 8
The extent to which a proposed map amendment will
affect adjacent properties
Does not comply.
Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent
with the purposes and provisions of any applicable
overlay zoning districts which may impose additional
standards.
Not applicable.
The adequacy of public facilities and services
intended to serve the subject property, including, but
not limited to, roadways, parks and recreational
facilities, police and fire protection, schools,
stormwater drainage systems, water supplies, and
wastewater and refuse collection.
Complies
City Department Review
During City review of the petitions, no responding departments or divisions expressed objections to the
proposal, but additional comments will be provided if the property is developed.
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
• January 18, 2022 – Applications to rezone properties from RMF-35 to FB-UN2 submitted and
assigned to staff.
• February 10, 2022 – Planning staff determines the proposed FB-UN2 zone does not align with the
Central Community Master Plan future land use map. For consistency between the proposed
zoning district and the master plan, a master plan amendment would be necessary.
• April 4, 2022 – Master plan amendment petitions submitted and assigned to staff.
• April 12, 2022 – Public notice sent to chairs of the Ballpark and Central 9th Community Councils,
and surrounding property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the subject properties. Open
house page posted to the Planning Division website.
• May 5, 2022 – Applicant presents proposal to a joint Ballpark and Central 9th Community Council
meeting. Community members expressed concerns with density, parking, and building height.
• May 17, 2022 – Applicant requested the applications be put on hold to evaluate an alternative
zoning amendment proposal.
• October 2022 – Ballpark Station Area Plan adopted by the City Council.
• December 5, 2022 – Applicant informed Planning staff they would like to revise the rezone
proposal from FB-UN2 to R-MU, remove 1061 South Jefferson Street and add 1036 South
Jefferson Street to the application.
• January 2023 - February 2023 – Applicant worked with Planning staff to submit revised
applications to rezone the subject properties from RMF-35 to R-MU and amend the Ballpark
Station Area Plan future land use map land use designations for the subject properties from
medium-density residential to high-density residential mixed-use.
• March 6, 2023 – Public notice regarding the updated zoning map and master plan amendment
requests sent to Ballpark and Central 9th Community Council chairs, and to surrounding property
owners and occupants within 300 feet of the subject properties. Updated open house page posted
on the Planning Division website.
• May 11, 2023 – Notice of the Planning Commission public hearing sent to property owners and
occupants within 300 feet of the subject properties. Notice of the Planning Commission public
Page | 9
hearing property signs posted at the subject properties.
• May 17, 2023 – Applicant requests to postpone the public hearing to the next Planning
Commission agenda.
• June 1, 2023 - Notice of the Planning Commission public hearing is sent to property owners and
occupants within 300 feet of the subject properties. Notice of the Planning Commission public
hearing property signs posted at the subject properties.
• June 14, 2023 – Petitions reviewed by Planning Commission and a public hearing is held. The
Commission votes 6-4 to forward a negative recommendation to the City Council.
• June 23, 2023 – Draft ordinance requested of and received from the City Attorney’s Office.
• August 8, 2023-Transmittal received in City Council Office.
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
Date Received: 08/08/2023
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: 08/08/2023
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: August 7, 2023
Darin Mano, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
SUBJECT: TAG SLC Master Plan and Zoning Map Amendments at approximately 135, 159, and
163 W Goltz Avenue and 1036 S Jefferson Street – Petitions PLNPCM2021-01307,
PLNPCM2021-01308, PLNPCM2021-01309, PLNPCM2022-00198, PLNPCM2022-
00199, & PLNPCM2022-00207
STAFF CONTACT: Brooke Olson, Principal Planner
brooke.olson@slcgov.com or (801)-535-7118
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council follow the recommendation from the Planning
Commission and deny the requested zoning map and master plan amendments.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: TAG SLC, LLC is requesting the following Master Plan and
Zoning Map Amendments for the properties located at approximately 135, 159, and 163 W Goltz
Avenue and 1036 S Jefferson Street:
1. Ballpark Station Area Plan Amendments: To amend the Ballpark Station Area Plan,
Future Land Use Designations of the subject properties from Medium Density
Residential to High Density Residential Mixed Use.
2. Zoning Map Amendments: To rezone the subject properties from RMF-35 (Moderate
Density Multifamily Residential Zoning District) to R-MU (Residential Mixed Use).
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
Lisa Shaffer (Aug 8, 2023 16:36 MDT)
The proposed amendments are intended to allow the property owner to accommodate several
multifamily developments. Future development plans were not submitted by the applicant at this
time. The proposed Zoning Map and Master plan amendment request includes four properties.
Three of the four are located along the south side of Goltz Avenue. The other is located on the
west side of Jefferson Street. It should be noted that the applicant submitted the applications in
2021 with a request to rezone the properties at 135, 159, and 163 W Goltz Avenue and 1061 S
Jefferson Street from RMF-35 to FB-UN2 (Form Based Urban Neighborhood 2). Staff received
several comments from the community regarding the request to rezone the properties to FB-UN2
(see Attachment F in the staff report), the majority of which voiced opposition to the proposal. In
late 2022 the applicant revised their rezone proposal from FB-UN2 to R-MU, removed 1061 S
Jefferson Street and added 1036 S Jefferson Street to the request.
Vicinity Map
HOUSING LOSS MITIGATION:
The applicant was required to submit a housing loss mitigation plan as part of this request, per
Chapter 18.97 of the Zoning Ordinance, which requires that a housing loss mitigation plan is
approved by the city before any petition is approved for a zoning change that would permit a
nonresidential use of land, that includes within its boundaries residential dwelling units. A
housing loss mitigation plan is required for this petition because the R-MU zone allows
nonresidential uses.
Options for mitigating residential housing loss include providing replacement housing, paying a
fee to the City’s housing trust fund based on the difference between the housing value and
replacement cost of building new units, and, where deteriorated housing exists and is not caused
by deliberate indifference of the landowner, the petitioner may pay a flat fee to the City’s
housing trust fund. The applicant intends to provide replacement housing.
PUBLIC PROCESS:
• Previous rezone request – FB-UN2
• March 3, 2022 – The Ballpark and Central 9th Community Councils were sent the 45 day
required notice for recognized community organizations. Property owners and residents
within 300 ft of the development were provided early notification of the proposal.
• May 5, 2022 – The Ballpark and Central 9th Community Councils discussed the petitions
at a joint Community Council meeting. Several community members voiced concerns
regarding the density, height, and parking regulations of the FB-UN2 zoning district. In
general, the community voiced opposition to the proposal.
• March 2022 – March 2023 – The project was posted to the Online Open House webpage.
Current rezone request – R-MU
• March 6, 2023 - An early notification was sent to the Ballpark and Central 9th
Community Councils and all residents and property owners within 300 feet of the subject
property.
• April 20, 2023 - Staff met with the Ballpark and Central 9th Community Councils to
present the project and gather feedback from the community. The Community Councils
provided letters of opposition for the project.
• June 14, 2023 - The Planning Commission held a public hearing and forwarded a
negative recommendation to amend the zoning map and Ballpark Station Area Plan for
the subject properties to the City Council for their review and decision.
Planning Commission Hearing and Recommendation
On June 14, 2023 the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and held a public hearing.
The following are some of the key topics that were discussed. This is a summary only. The full
public hearing can be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IdalcOM0dg
• 7 members of the public spoke in opposition of the petitions including a representative of the
Ballpark and Central 9th Community Councils. Members of the public voiced concerns
regarding:
o Building scale and neighborhood compatibility
o Changing the recently adopted Ballpark Station Area Plan, which has not been implemented.
o Lack of parking, setbacks, buffer requirements and design standards of the R-MU zone.
o Shadow and light impacts on adjacent properties.
o Loss of existing housing, middle housing types, and opportunities for owner occupancy.
• A petition was submitted by neighbors within the vicinity of the project site (see attachments)
which includes 19 signatures in opposition of the proposal.
• During the Commission’s discussion, several commissioners voiced support for the proposal
with the determination that the area should support high density development due to the
existing public transit infrastructure in the area.
• Several commission members also voiced opposition to the proposal with the determinations
the development regulations of the R-MU zone are too intense for the subject properties and
surrounding area. The Commission members in opposition also acknowledged the time and
effort members of the neighborhood contributed to creating the Ballpark Station Area Plan,
and emphasized that the community’s recently established vision for the neighborhood
should be respected.
• The Commission voted threes times before a motion was passed. The first two motions failed
due to tied votes with 5 yes votes and 5 no votes. The third motion passed and the
Commission voted to forward a recommendation of denial to the City Council, with 6 yes
votes and 4 no votes.
Planning Commission (PC) Records
a) PC Agenda of June 14, 2023 (Click to Access)
b) PC Meeting Minutes of June 14, 2023 (Click to Access)
c) Planning Commission Staff Report of June 14, 2023 (Click to Access Report)
EXHIBITS:
1) Project Chronology
2) Notice of City Council Hearing
3) Comments received after the publication of the Planning Commission Staff Report
4) Ordinance
5) Original Petition
6) Mailing List
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
3. COMMENTS NOT INCLUDED WITH PC STAFF REPORT
4. ORDINANCE
5. ORIGINAL PETITIONS
6. MAILING LIST
1. Project Chronology
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Petitions: PLNPCM2021-01307, PLNPCM2021-01308, PLNPCM2021-01309,
PLNPCM2022- 00198, PLNPCM2022-00199, & PLNPCM2022-00207
Nov. 2021 Salt Lake City initiated the creation of a small area plan within the Ballpark
Neighborhood, The Ballpark Station Area Plan.
Jan. 18, 2021 Zoning Map Amendment petitions (PLNPCM2021-01307, -01308, & -01309) to
rezone the properties at 135, 159, and 163 W Goltz Avenue and 1061 South Jefferson
Street from RMF-35 to FB-UN2 are assigned to Brooke Olson, Principal Planner.
Feb. 10, 2022 Planning Staff determines that the proposed rezones to FB-UN2 do not align with the
applicable adopted Master Plan, the Central Community Master Plan’s Future Land
Use Map. For consistency between the proposed zoning district and the master plan, a
Master Plan Amendment petition would be necessary.
Feb. 22, 2022 Planning Staff Requests Housing Loss Mitigation Plan
Apr. 4, 2022 Master Plan Amendment petitions (PLNPCM2022- 00198, -00199, & -00207) are
assigned to Brooke Olson, Principal Planner
Apr. 5, 2022 Zoning Map and Master Plan Amendment petitions are deemed complete after the
applicant submits Master Plan Amendment and Housing Loss Mitigation Plans for the
proposal.
Apr. 12, 2022 Public notice regarding this request is sent to the chairs of the Ballpark and Central 9th
Community Councils, and to surrounding property owners and occupants within 300’
of the subject properties. An Open House page is also posted on the Division’s website.
May 5, 2022 The applicant presents the proposal at a joint Ballpark and Central 9th Community
Council meeting. Several community members voiced concerns regarding the density,
height, and parking regulations of the FB-UN2 zoning district. In general, the
community voiced opposition to the proposal.
May 17, 2022 The applicant contacted staff and requested to place the applications on hold to evaluate
an alternative zoning amendment proposal.
Oct. 2022 The Ballpark Station Area Plan was adopted by Salt Lake City Council.
Dec. 5, 2022 The applicant informed staff they were ready to move forward and revise their rezone
proposal from FB-UN2 to R-MU, Residential Mixed Use, remove 1061 South Jefferson
Street and add 1036 S Jefferson Street to the application.
Jan. 2022 –
Feb. 2023
The applicant worked with staff to submit their revised applications to rezone the
subject properties from RMF-35 to R-MU and to amend the Ballpark Station Area Plan,
future land use designations of the subject properties from medium density residential
to high density residential mixed use.
ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
Mar. 6, 2023 Public notice regarding the updated zoning map and master plan amendment requests
are sent to the chairs of the Ballpark and Central 9th Community Councils, and to
surrounding property owners and occupants within 300’ of the subject properties. An
updated Open House page is also posted on the Division’s website.
May 11, 2023 Notice of the Planning Commission public hearing is sent to property owners and
occupants within 300’ of the subject properties. Notice of the Planning Commission
public hearing property signs are also posted at the subject properties.
May 17, 2023 Applicant requests to postpone the public hearing for the petitions to the next Planning
Commission agenda.
June 1, 2023 Notice of the Planning Commission public hearing is sent to property owners and
occupants within 300’ of the subject properties. Notice of the Planning Commission
public hearing property signs are also posted at the subject properties.
June 14, 2023 The petitions are heard by the Planning Commission, and they vote 6 to 4 to forward a
recommendation of denial to the City Council regarding the proposed zoning map and
master plan amendments.
June 23, 2023 Draft ordinance requested and received from the City Attorney’s Office.
June 28, 2023 The Planning Commission ratifies the minutes for their meeting on June 14, 2023.
2. Notice of City Council Hearing
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petitions PLNPCM2021-01307, PLNPCM2021-01308,
PLNPCM2021-01309, PLNPCM2022-00198, PLNPCM2022-00199, & PLNPCM2022-00207–
TAG SLC, LLC is requesting the following Master Plan and Zoning Map Amendments for the properties
located at approximately 135, 159, and 163 W Goltz Avenue and 1036 S Jefferson Street:
1. Ballpark Station Area Plan Amendments: To amend the Ballpark Station Area Plan, Future Land Use
Designations of the subject properties from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential
Mixed Use. (Petitions PLNPCM2022-00198, PLNPCM2022-00199, & PLNPCM2022-00207)
2. Zoning Map Amendments: To rezone the subject properties from RMF-35 (Moderate Density
Multifamily Residential Zoning District) to R-MU (Residential Mixed Use). (Petitions
PLNPCM2021-01307, PLNPCM2021-01308, & PLNPCM2021-01309)
As part of their study, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments
regarding the petition. During the hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue
will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider adopting the ordinance the same night of
the public hearing. The hearing will be held:
DATE:
PLACE: Electronic and in-person options.
451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah
** This meeting will be held via electronic means, while also providing for an in-person
opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at
451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, including
WebEx connection information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. Comments
may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an
email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared
with the Council and added to the public record.
If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Brooke
Olson at 801-535-7118 or via e-mail at brooke.olson@slcgov.com. The application details can be
accessed at https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/, by selecting the “Planning” tab and entering the
petition numbers PLNPCM2021-01307, PLNPCM2021-01308, PLNPCM2021-01309,
PLNPCM2022-00198, PLNPCM2022-00199, or PLNPCM2022-00207
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include
alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least
two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at
council.comments@slcgov.com, (801)535-7600, or relay service 711.
3. Comments Received After Publication of
PC Staff Report
Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening
attachments.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Olson, Brooke
(EXTERNAL) 135, 159, 163 W Goltz Avenue, & 1036 S Jefferson Street Rezones and Ballpark Station Area Master
Plan Amendment
Tuesday, June 13, 2023 9:53:33 PM
Hello Brooke,
This letter is from an informal group of neighbors called Friends of Jefferson Park that live around and use the park. We are not in favor
of the Rezone and Master Plan Amendments that TAG SLC Is requesting on their lots on Goltz Ave and Jefferson Street. We do not feel
that the proposed rezones would have a positive impact on Jefferson Park or the greater neighborhood. The requested rezones increase
the density and height allowed on these lots dramatically over the surrounding lots. It would also allow much higher buildings abuting
Jefferson Park with little to no setbacks that would help preserve this unique and needed green space in the neighborhood. Jefferson
Park and the surrounding neighborhoods are quiet residential streets. The zoning road map laid out in the Ballpark Station Area Master
Plan should be adopted and followed. This ensures that future growth in these areas happens in a way that meshes with the current built
environment and allows for additional density and missing middle housing.
We are in favor of investment in the area and additional density and neighbors to use and love Jefferson Park. We don't think these
zoning changes should be made to individual lots that could impact neighbors and the Park so drastically. The zoning in the Ballpark
Station Area Master Plan seems to be the right fit for these lots and would encourage development that will someday enhance and be a
positive on Jefferson Park.
Please consider these comments from our neighborhood group and many other neighbors, and hopefully recommend against this rezone
to the Planning Commission.
Thank you for your time and hard work on this matter,
Friends of Jefferson Park
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
O so B ooke
(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Commun ty Council Letter on the TAG-SLC Rezones on Jefferson and Goltz Ave
Wednesday June 14 2023 12:55:40 PM
Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments.
Salt Lake City Planning Commission,
We, the Ballpark Community Council, wish to express our strong opposition to the proposed rezone and master plan amendments for the three properties mentioned: 135 W Goltz Avenue (Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01308), 159 & 163 W Goltz Avenue (Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01307), and 1036 S Jefferson Street (Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01309). After careful consideration and consultation with our community members, we have concluded that these changes are not in the best interest of our neighborhood.
Our concerns primarily revolve around the potential negative impacts of high-density residential mixed-use developments in this area. We believe that such developments would result in increased traffic congestion, decreased parking availability, and a strain
on existing infrastructure and resources. Also the proposed changes would allow for development that would no be consistent with properties already in the area, as you can see in the image attached to this email.
We urge the Commission to consider the views and concerns of the Ballpark Community Council and its residents before making any decisions regarding these zoning and master plan amendments. We believe that sustainable and responsible development should be prioritized, taking into account the well-being and livability of the existing community.
Sincerely,
Ballpark Community Council
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Olson, Brooke
(EXTERNAL) Letter for the TAG-SLC Rezones & Master Plan Amendments on Goltz and Jefferson St
Tuesday, June 13, 2023 9:40:09 PM
Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments.
To the Salt Lake City Planning Commission,
We, the Central 9th Community Council, wish to express our opposition
to the proposed master plan amendments for the three properties
mentioned: 135 W Goltz Avenue (Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01308), 159 &
163 W Goltz Avenue (Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01307), and 1036 S
Jefferson Street (Petition No. PLNPCM2021-01309). After careful
consideration and consultation with our community members, we have
concluded that these amendments are not in the best interest of our
neighborhood.
Our concerns primarily revolve around the fact that the master plan
for the area has not been finalized, and the proposed amendments would
prematurely dictate the future development of the neighborhood. We
believe it is essential to engage in a comprehensive and inclusive
planning process that involves meaningful community input before
making any significant amendments to the master plan. Rushing into
changes without a thorough understanding of the long-term implications
could have detrimental effects on the neighborhood's character,
livability, and sustainability.
Sincerely,
Central 9th Community Council
Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening
attachments.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Planning Public Comments
(EXTERNAL) TAG SLC Master Plan and Zoning Map
Wednesday, June 14, 2023 10:15:54 AM
Dear Planning Commission
I am writing you in reference to an item on the agenda for tonights meeting. The item is
PLNPCM2021-01307, PLNPCM2021-01308, PLNPCM2021-01309, PLNPCM2022- 00198,
PLNPCM2022-00199, & PLNPCM2022-00207 Zoning Map and Master Plan Amendments
I am writing in support of the staff recommendation to not permit the up-zone of the parcels in
question. As the Ballpark Station Area Plan notes this area is zoned for medium density
development, which I think is appropriate.
A salient point is that these proposed re-zone is adjacent to the only existing public park in the
neighborhood. A potential 7 or 8 story building allowed in the proposed RMU zoning,
looming over this park will adversely impact the park users experience very negatively in my
opinion. I believe a three story building would be much more appropriate for this location.
Thanks for considering my comments.
Best regards
Bill Davis - ex-officio Chair
Ballpark Community Council
Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments.
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Olson, Brooke
Re: (EXTERNAL) Request to meet
Tuesday, June 20, 2023 8:38:53 PM
image001.png
Hi Brooke
I am traveling on business but should be able to call from the airport Thursday around 2 — would that
work?
Fraser
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 5:43 PM Olson, Brooke <Brooke.Olson@slcgov.com> wrote:
Hi Fraser,
Thank you for reaching out. I would be happy to set up a call with you tomorrow or Thursday to discuss
the City’s process. I have availability tomorrow or Thursday afternoon. Please let me know what
timeframes will work for you.
Thank you,
BROOKE OLSON | (She/Her/Hers)
Principal Planner
PLANNING DIVISION | SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
Office: (801) 535-7118
Email: Brooke.olson@slcgov.com
WWW.SLC.GOV/PLANNING WWW.SLC.GOV
Disclaimer: The Planning Division strives to give the best customer service possible and to respond to questions as accurately
as possible based upon the information provided. However, answers given at the counter and/or prior to application are not
binding and they are not a substitute for formal Final Action, which may only occur in response to a complete application to the
Planning Division. Those relying on verbal input or preliminary written feedback do so at their own risk and do not vest any
property with development rights.
From: Fraser Nelson <
Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2023 5:53 PM
To: Olson, Brooke <brooke.olson@slcgov.com>
Subject: (EXTERNAL) Request to meet
Hi Brooke,
First I'd like to thank you for your presentation on Wednesday 6/17/2023 to the city council regarding
the TAG SLC, LLC rezones and that is the cause of my concern, the tiny section of the
Jefferson Park Mixed-Use Area that is contradictory worded and the entire basis of TAG SLC's
argument. Here is the text in full with what I believe the alterations should be:
Jefferson Park Mixed-Use Area
The area encompassing approximately east of the 200 West TRAX line to the West
Temple corridor and Paxton Avenue to Mead Avenue to the north is characterized by a
mix of housing types and commercial uses. Redevelopment of the area should support
a live/work/play community by providing a mix of uses and building scales. Larger
building forms are appropriate along corridors where large building forms are already
present or where it is abutting of the TRAX line on 200 West or along the West Temple
corridor. These larger building forms should consist of approximately 5-7 stories
and provide some commercial spaces/residential amenities. Smaller building scales
should be focused on areas adjoining Jefferson Street and avenue streets; smaller
building scales should generally consist of 2-3 stories and almost entirely comprised of
medium-density residential uses.
Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments.
The map above is the entire area used with the rezoning proposals later on, all 1.5 square blocks of it.
With these two things combined it is evident that the "spirit" of this description is that 5-7 story mixed
use type structures belong on West Temple and 200 W and 2-3 story residential structures on Jefferson
St (specifically mentioned above) and surrounding avenues: Fremont Ave, Goltz Ave, Mead Ave, and
Paxton Ave being the only 4 avenues in this area. Those 8 little words destroy this design/vision because
of C9 Flats existence and location, it currently gives developers the opening and justification to put 5-7
story mixed use type structures on ANY lot north of the park and in the future when a single R-MU
structure is built anywhere south of the park.
In conclusion, I would appreciate any information you could give me as to what I can do or can be done
in general to get this section amended before it is finalized.
Thank you for your time.
-Lee Anderson
m ub c RN P e W M
Caut on Th s s an xte na ma P e se be caut us wh n c ck g n s o open ng at achmen s
Good mo n ng B ooke
I went o can t ose pet t on pa es tod y ut I fo got my ew compu e w not wo k w th s sca ne I se d a co p e pho os but I an p obab y sc n t un h t me I w a so b ng Pe e on ocumen s o the meet ng oday
Tha k yo ! -Cha es But on
Th s s a pet t on a ga n t e on ng f om med um d ns ty to h gh ens ty s ent a m ed use Th se s gna u es a e f om ne ghbo s d ect y su ou d ng he ezon ng a eas th y a e not f e s gn tu es
4. Ordinance
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. of 2023
(Amending the zoning of properties located at 135, 159, and 163 W Goltz Avenue and 1036
South Jefferson Street from RMF-35 Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential District to
R-MU Residential Mixed Use District, and amending the Ballpark Station Area Master Plan
Future Land Use Descriptions)
An ordinance pertaining to properties located at 135, 159, and 163 West Goltz Avenue
and 1036 South Jefferson Street (the “Properties”) as legally described in Exhibit A, attached
hereto, amending the zoning map from RMF-35 Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential
District to R-MU Residential Mixed Use District pursuant to Petition Nos. PLNPCM2021-
01307, PLNPCM2021-01308, and PLNPCM2021-01309 and amending the Ballpark Station
Area Master Plan Future Land Use Descriptions from Medium Density Residential to High
Density Residential Mixed Use pursuant to Petition Nos. PLNPCM2022-00198, PLNPCM2022-
00199, and PLNPCM2022-00207.
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a
public hearing on June 14, 2023 on an application submitted by TAG SLC, LLC (“Applicant”) to
rezone Properties from RMF-35 Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential District to R-MU
Residential Mixed Use District pursuant to Petition Nos. PLNPCM2021-01307, PLNPCM2021-
01308, and PLNPCM2021-01309, and to amend the Ballpark Station Area Master Plan Future
Land Use Descriptions with respect to the Properties from Medium Density Residential to High
Density Residential Mixed Use pursuant to Petition Nos PLNPCM2022-00198, PLNPCM2022-
00199, and PLNPCM2022-00207; and
WHEREAS, at its June 14, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission voted to recommend
that the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) deny said applications; and
WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that
adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted
by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be and
hereby is amended to reflect that the Properties identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto shall be
and hereby are rezoned from RMF-35 Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential District to R-
MU Residential Mixed Use District.
SECTION 2. Amending the Ballpark Station Area Master Plan. The Future Land Use
Descriptions of the Ballpark Station Area Master Plan shall be and hereby is amended to change
the future land use designation of the Propertes identified in Exhibit “A” attached hereto from
Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential Mixed Use.
SECTION 3. Condition. Approval of this ordinance is conditioned upon the Applicant
entering into a development agreement requiring Applicant to replace any dwellings demolished
on the Property with at least as many dwelling units as will be demolished.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately after it has
been published in accordance with Utah Code Section 10-3-711 and recorded in accordance with
Utah Code Section 10-3-713. The Salt Lake City Recorder is instructed not to publish or record
this ordinance until the condition set forth in Section 3 is satisfied as certified by the Salt Lake
City Planning Director or his designee.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 2023.
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on .
Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed.
MAYOR
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. of 2023.
Published: .
Ordinance amending zoning and MP 135 159 163 W Goltz Ave
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date: June 23, 2023
By:
Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney
EXHIBIT “A”
Affects properties located at
135 West Goltz Avenue
Tax ID No. 15-12-428-016-0000
LOTS 16 17 & E 1/2 LOT 18 BLK 1 WEST BOULEVARD SUB
CONTAINS 8,276 SQUARE FEET OR 0.19 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
159 West Goltz Avenue
Tax ID No. 15-12-428-012-0000
LOTS 24 & 25 BLK 1 WEST BOULEVARD SUB
CONTAINS 6,534 SQUARE FEET OR 0.15 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
163 West Goltz Avenue
Tax ID No. 15-12-428-011-0000
LOTS 26 & 27 BLK 1 WEST BOULEVARD SUB
CONTAINS 6,534 SQUARE FEET OR 0.15 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
1036 South Jefferson Street
Tax ID No. 15-12-408-015-0000
LOTS 1 & 21, BLK 3, WEST DRIVE SUB
CONTAINS 7,405 SQUARE FEET OR 0.17 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
5. Original Petitions
8FTU (PMU[ "WFOVF
Signature of Owner or Agent: Date:
Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance Amend the Zoning Map
OFFICE USE ONLY
Received By: Date Received: Project #:
Name or Section/s of Zoning Amendment:
PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
Address of Subject Property (or Area): 135 W Goltz Ave, Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Address of Applicant: PO Box 520697, Salt Lake City, UT 84152
E-mail of Applicant: Cell/Fax:
Applicant’s Interest in Subject Property:
✔ Owner Contractor Architect
Other:
Name of Property Owner (if different from applicant):
E-mail of Property Owner: Phone:
Please note that additional information may be required by the project planner to ensure adequate
information is provided for staff analysis. All information required for staff analysis will be copied and
made public, including professional architectural or engineering drawings, for the purposes of public
review by any interested party.
AVAILABLE CONSULTATION
If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this application, please contact Salt Lake City
Planning Counter at zoning@slcgov.com prior to submitting the application.
REQUIRED FEE
Map Amendment: filing fee of $1,0ϳϱ plus $121 per acre in excess of one acre
Text Amendment: filing fee of $1,0ϳϱ, plus fees for newspaper notice.
Plus, additional fee for mailed public notices. Noticing fees will be assessed after the application is
submitted.
SIGNATURE
If applicable, a notarized statement of consent authorizing applicant to act as an agent will be required.
Updated ϴ/2ϭ/2ϬϮϭ
Zoning Amendment
SA
L
T
LA
K
E
CI
T
Y
PL
A
N
N
I
N
G
Name of Applicant:
TAG SLC, LLC
Phone:
WHERE TO FILE THE COMPLETE APPLICATION
INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED
1. Project Description (please electronically attach additional sheets. See Section 21A.50 for the
Amendments ordinance.)
A statement declaring the purpose for the amendment.
A description of the proposed use of the property being rezoned.
✔ List the reasons why the present zoning may not be appropriate for the area.
Is the request amending the Zoning Map?
If so, please list the parcel numbers to be changed.
Is the request amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance?
If so, please include language and the reference to the Zoning Ordinance to be changed.
Apply online through the Citizen Access Portal. There is a step-by-step guide to learn how to submit online.
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.
hƉĚĂƚĞĚ ϴ�ϮϭͬϮϬϮϭ
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
✔
St
a
f
f
Re
v
i
e
w
!" # $ %&' Ÿ ( $ #
) *+,-./-)012
3 4 56 789 : 3 4 56 9 &%!; 4 <9
= !"# $ %&' 9
>1-?/->@)A+B-CD-*)1)E+0F+0*)@G?C+)0
% $!"HIJ; 4 &%! % 8K!% % L9
yz{| }~€
= !" '54 9 ‚ƒ}„}…~†‡ˆ ‰„ & ! 9 Š‹yŒŽŠŒ‹
% $!" '54 9 ¡œ~¢{‹£Žˆ¤’€‰’“”„€¥ˆ¦‚Šy{
MN 5'!" '54 9 O 'PQ 9 ‘’“”•€’–—˜™˜~š zyŒ{‹ŒzŠy
'54 R$S % $ 5 HIJ; 4 &%! % 89
Ÿ TU % O! % 4 !% %4 5 4 T %9
= !"&%! % 8TU %K5" 5" % "%! '54 L9
>VWXYWZ[\W 5 5! '5 "!% 5! 8J % ]I5% J8 %!; 4 ' % ! $I% ]I
5 "!% 5! 5$ %!65 "!%$ " '8$5$^ '5 "!% 5! % ]I5% "!%$ " '8$5$U5'J 4! 5
IJ'54_5 4'I 5 ` %!" $5! ' %4 5 4 I% '!% `5 %5 ` % U5 `$_"!% I% !$ $!" IJ'54
% 65 U J8 85 % $ % 8^
?A?+1?a1-,)0/.1C?C+)0
&' %$ % 6 5' J' "!%4! $I' 5! %5!% !$IJ 5 5 ` 5$ '54 5! ^&' $ 5'
b! 5 `c$'4`!6^4! 5"8!I 6 8]I $ 5! $% ` % 5 ` % ]I5% $!" 5$ '54 5! ^
@-d.+@-B*-
Q5'5 `" !"efgh 'I$eiji % 4% 5 4 $!"! 4% ^
eik"!% U$ % ! 54 ^
&'I$_ 5 5! '" "!% 5' IJ'54 ! 54 $^# 5'5 `" $U5'J $ $ " % '54 5! 5$IJ 5 ^
/+F0?C.@-
l S" '54 J' _ ! %5b $ !"4! $ I !%5b5 ` '54 ! 4 $ ` U5'J % ]I5% ^
mn
o
p
o
n
q
r
s
t
p
u
v
o
n
w
w
t
wx
#$ %&'()*+,)-*&./+.'0123 4 56 7 89 346 4 3 5 :89 5 3;<=
>?@ABCD?EF?GBHGH@?IJK@E?BGLKMKJ?MIJ?MEN
O@EKE?J?MEI?ALKBCMPEF?GQBGH@?RHBEF?KJ?MIJ?MEN
S 53 : 6; 6 2: 4 9 T 4 :23 9: UV : 4 T 97 9W<
X4 6 : UV 4 T 97 9W 6 Y 97Z4 [ 2\
X 48]23 4 3 4 6 2 :5 39VT^ :4 8^ 56 9W 7<
X4 6 : UV 4 T 97 9W 6 _ 8 6 T 4 :23 9\
X 48]23 4 953V7 _ 5 3 9WV W 8^ 56 9W 7<
e 23;893 9 6:8VW6 6 d.+.f)0 *)-%'&+gh
+:+; +, -. /0 1 2 . 3 4 5 6 / 7 4 8 - - 8 - /
, / / 9 0 - 8 4 8 - 7 7 0 - / /
8 -. 0
<
<
<
<
801-478-0662
801-478-0662
Jake@tagslc.com
" @/7; C4 ED;71/BJ
DD;71/BJ I
)GCDCI32 )GCD3GJQ -I3
TAG SLC, LLC
Jacob Billitteri 03/08/2022
)G3 23@C;7J7CB *3137N32 Q !/J3 *3137N32
)GC931J '/@3
.CB7B5
22G3II C4 +K0931J )GCD3GJQ
'/@3 C4 DD;71/BJ
22G3II C4 DE;71/BJ
)6CB3
PO Box 520697, Salt Lake City, UT 84152
7B +K0931J )GCD3GJQ
% 3;; #/P
✔ (OB3G CBJG/1JCG G167J31J (J63G
'/@3 C4 )GCD3GJQ (OB3G 74 27443G3BJ 4GC@ /DD<71/BJ
" @/7< C4 )GCD3GJQ (OB3G )6CB3
Single-Family Residence (RMF-35)
Multi-Family Residence (FBUN-2)
7
B
4
C
G
@
/
J7
C
B
7
J
I
6
D
/
G
J
C
/
N
2
72
2
3
7J
2
7C
4
B
C
/
G
<
IJ
7B
/
4
4
C
4
G
/
@
B/
/
;
J
Q
7C
I7
B
I
@
/
<
Q
< 7
0
B
3
4C
G
G
3
@
F
/
K
J
7G
7C
3
B
2
G
0
3
Q
F
J
K
6
7G
3
3
D
2
G
4
C
C
9
G
31
I
J
J/
D
4
;
4
/
/
B
B
B
/
3
<
G
QI
J
7
C
I O
3B
7<
I
;
K
0
G
3
3
1
/
C
2
D
3
7
F
3
K
2 /
/
J
B
3
2
G
@
3
/
N
2
73
3
O
D
0
K0
Q
?
/
71
B
Q
7 B
7 B
1 ;
J
K
3
2
G
7
3
B
I
5
J 3
D
2
G C
D
4
/
3
G
I
J
I
Q
7
CB/< /G167J31JKG/< CG 3B57B33G7B5 2G/O7B5I 4CG J63 DKGDCI3I C4 EL0=71
T $4 /DD;71/0;3 / BCJ/G7R32 IJ/J3@3BJ C4 1CBI3BJ /KJ6CG7S7B5 /DD;71/BJ JC /1J /I /B /53BJ O7;< 03 G3FM7G32
+75B/JKG3 C4 (OB3G CG 53BJ
135 W Goltz Ave
"P7IJ7B5 )GCD3HJQ -I3
8FTU (PMU[ "WFOVF
Signature of Owner or Agent: Date:
Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance Amend the Zoning Map
OFFICE USE ONLY
Received By: Date Received: Project #:
Name or Section/s of Zoning Amendment:
PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
Address of Subject Property (or Area): 159-163 W Goltz Ave, Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Address of Applicant: PO Box 520697, Salt Lake City, UT 84152
E-mail of Applicant: Cell/Fax:
Applicant’s Interest in Subject Property:
✔ Owner Contractor Architect
Other:
Name of Property Owner (if different from applicant):
E-mail of Property Owner: Phone:
Please note that additional information may be required by the project planner to ensure adequate
information is provided for staff analysis. All information required for staff analysis will be copied and
made public, including professional architectural or engineering drawings, for the purposes of public
review by any interested party.
AVAILABLE CONSULTATION
If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this application, please contact Salt Lake City
Planning Counter at zoning@slcgov.com prior to submitting the application.
REQUIRED FEE
Map Amendment: filing fee of $1,0ϳϱ plus $121 per acre in excess of one acre
Text Amendment: filing fee of $1,0ϳϱ, plus fees for newspaper notice.
Plus, additional fee for mailed public notices. Noticing fees will be assessed after the application is
submitted.
SIGNATURE
If applicable, a notarized statement of consent authorizing applicant to act as an agent will be required.
Updated ϴ/2ϭ/2ϬϮϭ
Zoning Amendment
SA
L
T
LA
K
E
CI
T
Y
PL
A
N
N
I
N
G
Name of Applicant: Somewhere OTR, LLC
Phone:
WHERE TO FILE THE COMPLETE APPLICATION
INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED
1. Project Description (please electronically attach additional sheets. See Section 21A.50 for the
Amendments ordinance.)
A statement declaring the purpose for the amendment.
A description of the proposed use of the property being rezoned.
✔ List the reasons why the present zoning may not be appropriate for the area.
Is the request amending the Zoning Map?
If so, please list the parcel numbers to be changed.
Is the request amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance?
If so, please include language and the reference to the Zoning Ordinance to be changed.
Apply online through the Citizen Access Portal. There is a step-by-step guide to learn how to submit online.
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.
hƉĚĂƚĞĚ ϴ�ϮϭͬϮϬϮϭ
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
✔
St
a
f
f
Re
v
i
e
w
!" # $ %&' ¡ ( $ #
) *+,-./-)012
3 4 56 789 : 3 4 56 9 &%!; 4 <9
= !"# $ %&' 9
>1-?/->@)A+B-CD-*)1)E+0F+0*)@G?C+)0
% $!"HIJ; 4 &%! % 8K!% % L9
yz{|y}y~y}€ ‚ƒ„…
% $!" '54 9 ¢Œ ž‚£z”‘}{“†–ƒ„Ž–—ˆŸ„¤¥¦’yz” MN 5'!" '54 9 O 'PQ 9 y”|z‘|}y •–—ˆ˜„–™šƒ›œ›‚‡
'54 R$S % $ 5 HIJ; 4 &%! % 89
¡ TU % O! % 4 !% %4 5 4 T %9
= !"&%! % 8TU %K5" 5" % "%! '54 L9
>VWXYWZ[\W 5 5! '5 "!% 5! 8J % ]I5% J8 %!; 4 ' % ! $I% ]I
5 "!% 5! 5$ %!65 "!%$ " '8$5$^ '5 "!% 5! % ]I5% "!%$ " '8$5$U5'J 4! 5
IJ'54_5 4'I 5 ` %!" $5! ' %4 5 4 I% '!% `5 %5 ` % U5 `$_"!% I% !$ $!" IJ'54
% 65 U J8 85 % $ % 8^
?A?+1?a1-,)0/.1C?C+)0
&' %$ % 6 5' J' "!%4! $I' 5! %5!% !$IJ 5 5 ` 5$ '54 5! ^&' $ 5'
b! 5 `c$'4`!6^4! 5"8!I 6 8]I $ 5! $% ` % 5 ` % ]I5% $!" 5$ '54 5! ^
@-d.+@-B*-
Q5'5 `" !"efgh 'I$eiji % 4% 5 4 $!"! 4% ^
eik"!% U$ % ! 54 ^
&'I$_ 5 5! '" "!% 5' IJ'54 ! 54 $^# 5'5 `" $U5'J $ $ " % '54 5! 5$IJ 5 ^
/+F0?C.@-
l S" '54 J' _ ! %5b $ !"4! $ I !%5b5 ` '54 ! 4 $ ` U5'J % ]I5% ^
mn
o
p
o
n
q
r
s
t
p
u
v
o
n
w
w
t
wx
#$ %&'()*+,)-*&./+.'0123 4 56 7 89 346 4 3 5 :89 5 3;<=
>?@ABCD?EF?GBHGH@?IJK@E?BGLKMKJ?MIJ?MEN
O@EKE?J?MEI?ALKBCMPEF?GQBGH@?RHBEF?KJ?MIJ?MEN
S 53 : 6; 6 2: 4 9 T 4 :23 9: UV : 4 T 97 9W<
X4 6 : UV 4 T 97 9W 6 Y 97Z4 [ 2\
X 48]23 4 3 4 6 2 :5 39VT^ :4 8^ 56 9W 7<
X4 6 : UV 4 T 97 9W 6 _ 8 6 T 4 :23 9\
X 48]23 4 953V7 _ 5 3 9WV W 8^ 56 9W 7<
e 23;893 9 6:8VW6 6 d.+.f)0 *)-%'&+gh
+:+; +, -. /0 1 2 . 3 4 5 6 / 7 4 8 - - 8 - /
, / / 9 0 - 8 4 8 - 7 7 0 - / /
8 -. 0
<
<
<
<
4PVUI +FGGFSTPO 4USFFU
E-mail of Applicant: Cell/Fax:
E-mail of Property Owner: Phone:
Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance Amend the Zoning Map
OFFICE USE ONLY
Received By: Date Received: Project #:
Name or Section/s of Zoning Amendment:
PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
Address of Subject Property (or Area): 1036 S Jefferson St W, Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Name of Applicant:
TAG HOLDINGS, LLC
Phone:
Address of Applicant: PO Box 520697, Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Applicant’s Interest in Subject Property:
X Owner Contractor Architect Other:
Name of Property Owner (if different from applicant):
Please note that additional information may be required by the project planner to ensure adequate
information is provided for staff analysis. All information required for staff analysis will be copied and
made public, including professional architectural or engineering drawings, for the purposes of public
review by any interested party.
AVAILABLE CONSULTATION
If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this application, please contact Salt Lake City
Planning Counter at zoning@slcgov.com prior to submitting the application.
REQUIRED FEE
0DS $PHQGPHQW ILOLQJ IHH SOXV SHU DFUH H[FHVV RI RQH DFUH SOXV DGGLWLRQDO SXEOLF QRWLFH IHH
7H[W $PHQGPHQW ILOLQJ IHH SOXV DGGLWLRQDO SXEOLF QRWLFH IHH
3XEOLF QRWLFLQJ IHHV ZLOO EH DVVHVVHG DIWHU WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ LV VXEPLWWHG
SIGNATURE
If applicable, a notarized statement of consent authorizing applicant to act as an agent will be required.
Signature of Owner or Agent: Date:
Jordan Atkin
83'$7('
SA
L
T
LA
K
E
CI
T
Y
PL
A
N
N
I
N
G
FEE TITLE OWNER SIGNATURE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY
This is to certify that I am making an application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for
complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application will be processed under the name
provided below. By signing the application, I am acknowledging that I have read and understood the instructions
provided by Salt Lake City for processing this application. The documents and/or information I have submitted are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the documents provided are considered public records and
may be made available to the public. I understand that my application will not be processed until the application is
deemed complete by the assigned planner from the Planning Division. I acknowledge that a complete application
includes all of the required submittal requirements and provided documents comply with all applicable requirements for
the specific applications. I understand that the Planning Division will provide, in writing, a list of deficiencies that must
be satisfied for this application to be complete and it is the responsibility of the applicant to provide the missing or
corrected information. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this
application. I understand that a staff report will be made available for my review prior to any public hearings or public
meetings. This report will be on file and available at the Planning Division and posted on the Division website when it has
been finalized.
APPLICANT SIGNATURE
Name of Applicant:
TAG HOLDINGS, LLC
Application Type:
Mailing Address: PO Box 520697, Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Email: Phone:
Signature: Date:
AFFIRMATION OF SUFFICIENT INTEREST
I hereby affirm that I am the fee title owner of the below described property or that I have written authorization from
the owner to pursue the described action.
Legal Description of Subject Property:
LOTS 1 & 21, BLK 3, WEST DRIVE SUB. 8628-5902 8821-3856 8996-3014 9089-4504 9320-1902 9712-38
1N0a2m6e4-o9f 8O7w6ner: TAG HOLDINGS, LLC
Mailing Address
PO Box 520697, Salt Lake City, UT 84101 Street Address:
Signature: Date:
The following shall be provided if the name of the applicant is different than the name of the property owner:
1. If you are not the fee owner attach a copy of your authorization to pursue this action provided by the fee owner.
2. If a corporation is fee titleholder, attach copy of the resolution of the Board of Directors authorizing the action.
3. If a joint venture or partnership is the fee owner, attach a copy of agreement authorizing this action on behalf of
the joint venture or partnership
4. If a Home Owner’s Association is the applicant than the representative/president must attach a notarized letter
stating they have notified the owners of the proposed application. A vote should be taken prior to the submittal
and a statement of the outcome provided to the City along with the statement that the vote meets the
requirements set forth in the CC&Rs.
Be advised that knowingly making a false, written statement to a government entity is a crime under Utah Code
Chapter 76-8, Part 5. Salt Lake City will refer for prosecution any knowingly false representations made pertaining to
the applicant’s interest in the property that is the subject of this application.
Updated 9/14/22
_
WHERE TO FILE THE COMPLETE APPLICATION
INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED
1. Project Description (please electronically attach additional sheets. See Section 21A.50 for the
Amendments ordinance.)
A statement declaring the purpose for the amendment.
A description of the proposed use of the property being rezoned.
X 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.
Apply online through the Citizen Access Portal. There is a step-by-step guide to learn how to submit online.
_ 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.
83'$7('
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
X
St
a
f
f
Re
v
i
e
w
E-mail of Property Owner: Phone:
Signature of Owner or Agent:
Jacob Billitteri
Date:
02/25/22
Master Plan Amendment
Amend the text of the Master Plan ✔ Amend the Land Use Map
OFFICE USE ONLY
Received By: Date Received: Project #:
Name of Master Plan Amendment:
PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
Address of Subject Property (or Area):
1061 S Jefferson St. Salt Lake City, UT 84101 ***Application Updated to 1036 S Jefferson Street Per applicant request on March 3, 2023
Name of Applicant:
TAG Holdings, LLC
Phone:
Address of Applicant:
PO Box 520697, Salt Lake City, UT 84152
E-mail of Applicant: Cell/Fax:
Applicant’s Interest in Subject Property:
✔ Owner Contractor Architect Other:
Name of Property Owner (if different from applicant):
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
Planners are available for consultation prior to submitting this application. Please email
zoning@slcgov.com if you have any questions regarding the requirements of this application.
REQUIRED FEE
Filing fee of $ϭϬϬϴ plus $121 per acre in excess of one acre.
$100 for newspaper notice.
Plus, additional fee for mailed public notices. Mailing fees will be assessed after application is submitted.
SIGNATURE
If applicable, a notarized statement of consent authorizing applicant to act as an agent will be required.
Updated ϴ�ϭϲͬ20Ϯϭ
SA
L
T
LA
K
E
CI
T
Y
PL
A
N
N
I
N
G
WHERE TO FILE THE COMPLETE APPLICATION
INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED
1. Project Description (please attach additional sheets electronically.)
ĞƐĐƌŝďĞ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ŵĂƐƚĞƌ ƉůĂŶ ĂŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚ ͘
ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ĚĞĐůĂƌŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ƉƵƌƉŽƐĞ ĨŽƌ ƚŚĞ ĂŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚ ͘
Declare why the present master plan requires amending.
Is the request amending the Land Use Map?
If so, please list the parcel numbers to be changed.
Is the request amending the text of the master plan?
If so, please include exact language to be changed.
Apply online through the Citizen Access Portal. There is a step-by-step guide to learn how to submit online.
JB 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.
hƉĚĂƚĞĚ ϴ�ϭϲͬϮϬϮϭ
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
✔
✔
✔
✔
St
a
f
f
Re
v
i
e
w
22G3II C4 DE;71/BJ
)GCDCI32 )GCD3GJQ -I3
1061 S Jefferson St. **Application address updated to 1036 South Jefferson Street per applicant request on 03/03/2023
TAG Holdings, LLC
Jacob Billitteri 03/08/2022
)G3 23@C;7J7CB *3137N32 Q !/J3 *3137N32
)GC931J '/@3
.CB7B5
'/@3 C4 DD;71/BJ
PO Box 520697, Salt Lake City, UT 84152
)6CB3
" @/7; C4 ED;71/BJ % 3;; #/P
DD;71/BJ I $BJ3G3IJ 7B +K0931J )GCD3GJQ ✔ (OB3G CBJG/1JCG G167J31J (J63G
'/@3 C4 )GCD3GJQ (OB3G 74 27443G3BJ 4GC@ /DD<71/BJ
" @/7< C4 )GCD3GJQ (OB3G )6CB3
Single-Family Residence (RMF-35)
Multi-Family Residence (FBUN-2)
7
B
4
C
G
@
/
J7
C
B
7
J
I
6
D
/
G
J
C
/
N
2
72
2
3
7J
2
7C
4
B
C
/
G
<
IJ
7B
/
4
4
C
4
G
/
@
B/
/
;
J
Q
7C
I7
B
I
@
/
<
Q
< 7
0
B
3
4C
G
G
3
@
F
/
K
J
7G
7C
3
B
2
G
0
3
Q
F
J
K
6
7G
3
3
D
2
G
4
C
C
9
G
31
I
J
J/
D
4
;
4
/
/
B
B
B
/
3
<
G
QI
J
7
C
I O
3B
7 <
I
;
K
0
G
3
3
1
/
C
2
D
3
7
F
3
K
2 /
/
J
B
3
2
G
@
3
/
N
2
73
3
O
D
0
K0
Q
?
/
71
B
Q
7 B
7 B
1 ;
J
K
3
2
G
7
3
B
I
5
J 3
D
2
G C
D
4
/
3
G
I
J
I
Q
7
CB/< /G167J31JKG/< CG 3B57B33G7B5 2G/O7B5I 4CG J63 DKGDCI3I C4 EL0=71
T $4 /DD;71/0;3 / BCJ/G7R32 IJ/J3@3BJ C4 1CBI3BJ /KJ6CG7S7B5 /DD;71/BJ JC /1J /I /B /53BJ O7;< 03 G3FM7G32
+75B/JKG3 C4 (OB3G CG 53BJ
22G3II C4 +K0931J )GCD3GJQ
"P7IJ7B5 )GCD3HJQ -I3
*(# , + *!),!(' jZK>pK >tt>ER >HHStTeb>Z pRKKt
<mTttKb HKpEmTjtTeb eO tRK HKtKm_Tb>tTeb em _eHSOTE>tSeb eO K{TptTbP xpK tR>t Tp CKTbP
mKkxKptKH
(-+!' &) , , , & ', (-+"' !&) , +, , & ', + $%
0HKbtTO| tRK KppKbtT>Z >HyKmpK T_j>Etp eb tRK mKpTHKbtT>Z ER>m>EtKm eO tRK >mK> pxCVKEt eO tRK jKtTtTeb%
1HKbtSO| C| >HHmKpp >b| HzKZZTbP xbStp t>mPKtKH Oem HK_e[TtSeb OeZZezTbP tRK Pm>btTbP eO tRK jKtTtSeb&
8Kj>m>tKZ| Oem K>ER HzKZ[TbP xbTt t>mPKtKH Oem HK_e[StTeb pt>tK Ttp ExmmKbt O>Tm _>mXKt y>[xK TO tR>t
xbTt zKmK Sb > mK>peb>CZK pt>tK eO mKj>Tm >bH _Kt >ZZ >jj[TE>CZK CxT[HTbP OSmK >bH RK>\tR EeHKp&
8t>tK tRK bx_CKm eO pkx>mK OKKt eO [>bH ~ebKH Oem mKpTHKbtT>[ xpK uR>t zexZH CK mK~ebKH em
EebHStTeb>ZZ| jKm_SttKH te CK xpKH Oem jxmjepKp pexPRt Tb tRK jKtTtSeb etRKm tR>b mKpTHKbtS>Z RexpTbP
>bH >jjxmtKb>bt xpKp& >bH
8jKESO| > _TtTP>tTeb j[>b te >HHmKpp tRK Zepp eO mKpSHKbtS>Z ~ebKH [>bH mKpTHKbtT>[ xbTtp em mKpTHKbtS>[
ER>m>EtKm 5mH
6KtStTebKmp pxCVKEt te tRK mKkxTmK_Kbtp eO tRTp ER>jtKm _>| p>tSpO| tRK bKKH Oem _TtTP>tTeb eO >b|
mKpSHKbtT>[ RexpTbP xbSt [eppKp C| >b| ebK eO tRK OeZZezTbP _KtReHp!
) 7Kj[>EK_Kbt /expSbP" 9RK jKtTtTebKm _>| >PmKK Sb > ZKP>] Oem_ p>tSpO>Etem| te tRK ESt| >ttembK| te
EebptmxEt tRK p>_K bx_CKm eO mKpSHKbtS>Z HzK[[TbP xbTtp jmejepKH Oem HK_e[TtTeb zTtRTb#
9RK ETt| EexbET[ HTptmSEt Tb zRSER tRK [>bH pxCVKEt eO tRK jKtTtTeb Sp [eE>tKH' em
)b >HWeTbTbP EexbETZ HTptmTEt SO tRK `TtSP>tTeb pTtK Tp zTtRTb > ebK _TZK m>HTxp eO tRK HK_e[StTeb
pStK
)b| pxER >PmKK_Kbt pR>Z[ TbEZxHK >HKkx>tK pKExmTt| te Px>m>btKK Ee_jZKtTeb zTtRTb tze
|K>mp eO tRK Pm>btTbP eO > HK_e[StTeb jKm_Tt
* .KK *>pKH 5b ,SOOKmKbEK *KtzKKb /expSbP ;>[xK )bH 7KjZ>EK_Kbt +ept# 9RK jKtStTebKm _>| j>| te
tRK ESt| RexpTbP tmxpt OxbH tRK HSOOKmKbEK CKtzKKb tRK O>Tm _>mXKt y>[xK eO tRK RexpTbP xbTtp j[>bbKH te
CK K[T_Tb>tKH em HK_e[TpRKH >bH tRK mKjZ>EK_Kbt Eept eO CxT[HTbP bKz xbTtp eO pT_T[>m pkx>mK Oeet>PK
>bH _KKtSbP >ZZ K{TptTbP CxT[HSbP OTmK >bH etRKm >jjZTE>C]K [>z K{E[xHTbP [>bH y>ZxKp
+ .KK <RKmK ,KtKmTem>tKH /expTbP -{Tptp 4et +>xpKH *| ,K[TCKm>tK 0bHSOOKmKbEK 5O 2>bHezbKm#
7KkxKpt *| 6KtStTebKm .em .Z>t .KK +ebpSHKm>tTeb$ 1b tRK KyKbt tR>t > mKpTHKbtS>Z HzK[ZTbP xbSt
Tp t>mPKtKH em jmejepKH Oem HK_e[TtSeb >bH Tp Tb > HKtKmTem>tKH pt>tK Ome_ b>txm>Z E>xpKp pxER >p
( =lx>YK en >QKH eCpe^KpEKcEK vR?t Tq bft gFG@rThbLI D} vRMJK[TCKmAwN BEus ho haUppSidp
te >Et eb tRK j>mt eO tRK jKtTtSebKm em RTp jmKHKEKppemp Sb TbtKmKpt zRTER HKtmS_Kbt>Z EebHTtSeb
mKHxEKp > HzK[[TbP xbTt p O>Sm _>mXKt y>[xK em R>CTt>CS[Tt| >p > mKpTHKbtS>[ HzK[[TbP xbTt uRK
jKtStSebKm _>| mKkxKpt >b K{K_jtTeb Ome_ tRK >CeyK tze _KtReHp eO _TtTP>tSeb Ome_ tRK
HSmKEtem eO tRK ESt| p HKj>mt_Kbt eO Ee__xbSt| >bH KEebe_TE HKyKZej_Kbt >p jmeySHKH CK[ez
) VxHP_Kbt >p te zRKtRKm HKtKmSem>tTeb R>p eEExmmKH >p tRK mKpx[t eO HK[SCKm>tK TbHSOOKmKbEK
pR>Z[ CK C>pKH eb > jmKjebHKm>bEK eO KyTHKbEK
7KkxTmKH .>Etp 5O 4>txm>[ ,KtKmSem>tTeb 1bEmK>pK .>Sm 3>mXKt ;>ZxK 5O :bStp 9e *K
,K_eZSpRKH! 9RK jKtStSebKm _>| pxC_St te tRK HTmKEtem eO tRK ETt| p HKj>mt_Kbt eO Ee__xbSt|
>bH KEebe_TE HKyKZej_Kbt KyKm| O>Et Xbezb te pxjjemt tRK jmejepTtTeb tR>t tRK mKpTHKbtS>Z
HzKZ[SbP xbStp zKmK bet jxmjepK[| >Z[ezKH te HKtKmTem>tK C| Z>EX eO mK>peb>C[K _>TbtKb>bEK
6. Mailing List
WEST BROOKLYN, LLC 1141 N OAK FOREST RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
WEST BROOKLYN, LLC 1141 N OAK FOREST RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
WEST BROOKLYN, LLC 1141 N OAK FOREST RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
WEST BROOKLYN, LLC 1141 N OAK FOREST RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
TWO HUNDRED WEST, LLC 720 N REXFORD DR BEVERLY HILLS CA 90210
EZE FAM REV TRUST 1102 S 200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
MARATHON PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, LLC 3731 W SOUTHJORDAN PKWY #102Ͳ505 SOUTH JORDAN UT 84009
JIMMIE E LONG 1049 S 200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
DANIELLE HILDEBRAND; MARCUS A LONARDO (JT) 160 E FORT UNION BLVD MIDVALE UT 84047
KATHLEEN M ROBERTS 175 W MEAD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
DAN E MYLECRAINE 171 W MEAD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
SS CAPITAL, LLC 35 E 100 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111
ELK RIDGE MANAGEMENT, LLC 376 800 S AMERICAN FORK UT 84003
KRISTIE GILES 1022 S JEFFERSON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
AMRA PASIC 1032 S JEFFERSON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
TAG HOLDINGS, LLC PO BOX 520697 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84152
TAG HOLDINGS, LLC PO BOX 520697 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84152
CHARLES EDWIN BUTTON 1052 S JEFFERSON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
LERNICE CABRERA 1056 S JEFFERSON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
JAMIE L THORPE 1058 S JEFFERSON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
TENFIFTEEN PARTNERS, LLC 3045 E LOUISE AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109
DE ANZAͲC9 LP 960 N SAN ANTONIO RD #114 LOS ALTOS CA 94022
KATHRYN A CAUSEY 923 LONGLEAF DR NORTH SALT LAKE UT 84054
BRYCE K JOHNSON 126 W MEAD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
AKBAR MATINKHAH 2618 E SKYLINE DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84108
CARNEGIE HOLDINGS LLC 4019 S OLYMPIC WY HOLLADAY UT 84124
R AND J PROPERTIES AND INVESTMENTS LLC 5288 S COMMERCE DR #BͲ150 MURRAY UT 84107
INTERMOUNTAIN LAND COMPANY LLC 5288 S COMMERCE DR #BͲ150 MURRAY UT 84107
GREGORY C KETCH 655 E 100 N ALPINE UT 84004
R AND J PROPERTIES AND INVESTMENTS LLC 5288 S COMMERCE DR #BͲ150 MURRAY UT 84107
GONZALEZ B, RUBEN A & LOPEZ V, TIMOTEO S; JT
(JT)
1035 S JEFFERSON ST
SALT LAKE CITY
UT
84101
JKBRT; GRBRT 639 MOUNTAIN VIEW CIR NORTH SALT LAKE UT 84054
DAVID P MIDGLEY 1051 S JEFFERSON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
DOUGLAS FLAGER; MARCUS WRIGHT (JT) 134 W GOLTZ AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
CARLETON J ALLEN 128 W GOLTZ AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
CARL CONNELLY 2263 E HIGH MOUNTAIN DR SANDY UT 84092
VADIM DMITRIYEVICH KOMAROV; CHRISTOPHER 1002Ͳ1006 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
RACHELLE LAM 1008 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
RICHARD ERIC BROWN 1010 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
400 EAST/WT APARTMENTS, LLC 11589 S SUMMERFIELD CIR SANDY UT 84092
STEVEN CHASE ADAMS 1042 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
DAVID M BEMIS 8479 S 1380 E SANDY UT 84093
JOSEPH L HERNANDEZ 1047 S JEFFERSON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
TAG HOLDINGS, LLC 2223 S HIGHLAND DR #E6Ͳ375 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106
ANDREW BURT; CYNTHIA BURT (JT) 133 W MEAD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
ISMAEL G SIERRA; JESUS J OJEDA (JT) 1001 S JEFFERSON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
DARIN MASAO MANO 1058 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
DARIN MANO; KEVIN RANDALL (JT) 1064 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
KRISTEN MORTENSEN FAMILY TRUST 05/16/2013 13818 S VESTRY RD DRAPER UT 84020
RALPH S GATHERUM & DONETA MCGONIGLE
GATHERUM FAMILY TRUST DATED 1
1697 N FORT LN
LAYTON
UT
84041
SKI BUM LLC 440 W 900 S #12 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
GUADALUPE FLORES 1091 S 200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
GUADALUPE FLORES 1091 S 200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
TERESA PEREZ; PASCUAL CARDENAS (JT) 1121 S 200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
LARISSA M HUNT 167 W GOLTZ AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
SOMEWHERE OTR, LLC PO BOX 9874 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109
SOMEWHERE OTR, LLC PO BOX 9874 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109
JAMES C TAYLOR; JESSICA M TAYLOR (JT) 3556 S 5600 W # 1Ͳ533 WEST VALLEY UT 84120
JOB G GOWON 145Ͳ147 W GOLTZ AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
LEE ANDERSON 137 W GOLTZ AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
TAG SLC, LLC PO BOX 520697 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84152
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SALT LAKE CITY CORP PO BOX 145460 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
SALT LAKE CITY 1530 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
TAG SLC, LLC PO BOX 520697 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84152
DOHENYͲVIDOVICH PARTNERS 960 N SAN ANTONIO RD #114 LOS ALTOS CA 94022
ALLEN L CARLSON; ELAINE R CARLSON (JT) 1089 S 200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
PASCUAL CARDENAS; MARIA T PEREZ (JT) 1121 S 200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
PEDRO CARDENAS PEREZ 1127 S 200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
JESSICA LARSON 1131 S 200 W SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
BRETT MATESEN 169 W FREMONT AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
ESTEBAN R. TINOCO; SOPHIE R. TINOCO 4628 W 4695 S WEST VALLEY UT 84120
KATHLEEN LOIS COCHRAN REVOCABLE TRUST 09Ͳ03Ͳ
2008
347 N CENTER ST
SALT LAKE CITY
UT
84103
TRUST NOT IDENTIFIED 347 N CENTER ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103
DAN O GARZARELLI 950 HARBOR AVE HENDERSON NV 89002
JUAN R BUSTAMANTE; GRISELDA A RAMIREZ (JT) 139 W FREMONT AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
HOUSING AUTHORITY OF SALT LAKE CITY 1776 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
LAKE LIMITED 8350 S VIA RIVIERA WY COTTONWOOD HTS UT 84093
HOUSING AUTHORITY OF SALT LAKE CITY 1776 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115
N C CARRIDO INC 1085 N NOCTURNE DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116
PATRICK QUINN; ERIN HAMILTON (JT) 1124 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
MORTENSENͲMAHYERA LIVING TRUST 01/05/2017 1122 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
CAITLIN ARNWINE; MATTHEW ARNWINE (JT) 1120 S WESTTEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
LEAH THOMAS 353 E 1500 N OREM UT 84057
ROWHAUS CONDOMINIUMS HOMEOWNERS 262 E 3900 S # 200 MURRAY UT 84107
SCOTT SORENSON 121 W FREMONT AVE # 17 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
KRISHEILA OCAMPO 123 W FREMONT AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
DARREN GONZOL; TARA MLEYNEK (JT) 125 W FREMONT AVE # 119 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
JESSE C WALKER; MARK HOFELING (JT) 127 W FREMONT AVE # 120 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
NATHAN THOMAS PASKETT; ADAM TROY WHITE
(JT)
129 W FREMONT AVE
SALT LAKE CITY
UT
84101
HENRY S MASTAIN 131 W FREMONT AVE # 122 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
MARCUS MCBRIDE 133 W FREEMONT AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84701
WHITNEY MARIE FINLINSON 135 W FREMONT AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101
ROWHAUS CONDOMINIUMS HOWMEOWNERS 262 E 3900 S # 200 MURRAY UT 84107
PARKSIDE CONDOS, LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOS,LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOS, LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOS, LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOS, LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOS, LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOS, LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOS, LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOS, LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOS, LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOS, LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOS, LLC 1944 E QUARTZRIDGE DR SANDY UT 84092
PARKSIDE CONDOMINIUM HOMEWONERS 7931 BLAZE TRAIL CT ORANGEVALE CA 95662
Current Occupant 230 W BROOKLYN AVE NFF1 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 230 W BROOKLYN AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1018 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1024 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1050 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1098 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1039 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1055 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 165 W MEAD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 151 W MEAD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1036 S JEFFERSON ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1046 S JEFFERSON ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1015 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1075 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1062 S JEFFERSON ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 120 W MEAD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 130 W MEAD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 129 W MEAD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 127 W MEAD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 111 W MEAD AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1025 S JEFFERSON ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1043 S JEFFERSON ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 124 W GOLTZ AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1002 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1008 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1010 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1012 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1042 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1068 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1061 S JEFFERSON ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1058 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1064 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1095 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1101 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1103 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 175 W GOLTZ AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 163 W GOLTZ AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 159 W GOLTZ AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 149 W GOLTZ AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 147 W GOLTZ AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 135 W GOLTZ AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 125 W GOLTZ AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 121 W GOLTZ AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 168 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 158 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 154 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 148 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 142 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 136 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 130 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 126 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 122 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 110 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1089 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1085 S 200 W Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 185 W GOLTZ AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 163 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 157 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 151 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 145 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1099 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 995 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1011 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1117 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1124 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1122 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1120 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1118 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1118 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 121 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 125 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 127 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 131 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 133 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 125 W FREMONT AVE Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 1 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 2 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 3 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 4 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 5 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 6 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 7 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 8 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 9 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 10 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 11 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST 12 Salt Lake City UT 84101
Current Occupant 1028 S WEST TEMPLE ST Salt Lake City UT 84101
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: August 14, 2023
Darin Mano, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods
__________________________
SUBJECT: Thriving in Place Draft Plan
STAFF CONTACT: Blake Thomas, Director, Community and Neighborhoods, 801-718-7949,
blake.thomas@slcgov.com
Angela Price, Policy Director, Community and Neighborhoods, 801-599-3850,
angela.price@slcgov.com
Sooz Lundmark, Transportation Planner III, 801-535-6112, Susan.Lundmark@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: Council adoption of Thriving in Place as recommended by the
Planning Commission.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This transmittal follows up on a transmittal sent on May 9,
2023. Thriving in Place (“TIP” or “the Plan”) is the City's proposed anti-displacement and
mitigation plan, which has been developed with significant public engagement and support from
a broad coalition of residents and community organizations. The Plan comprises five guiding
principles:
1.Prioritize tenant protections;
2.Partner with those most impacted;
3.Increase housing everywhere;
4. Focus on affordability; and
Lisa Shaffer (Aug 14, 2023 16:16 MDT)08/14/2023
08/14/2023
5. Build an ecosystem for action.
These guiding principles run throughout the entire Plan, informing the six goals and 22 action
items described in the Plan. While the action items are categorized by the goals that they support,
many of the action items address multiple goals.
The goals of Thriving in Place are:
1. Protect the most vulnerable from displacement;
2. Preserve the affordable housing we have;
3. Produce more housing, especially affordable housing;
4. Expand capacity for tenant support and affordable housing;
5. Partner and collaborate to maximize impact; and
6. Advocate for tenants at the state level.
Based on the City Council's direction received at a briefing on TIP on December 13, 2022 and
January 3, 2023, the Administration is working on policies in the Two-Year Action Plan (Exhibit
B) including items adopted in the FY24 budget, and replacing the Housing Loss Mitigation
ordinance with the Community Benefit Policy.
An overview of the Near-Term Action Items that are in development is provided in the table
below. It is important to note that Near-Term Action Items that require legislative action will be
processed separately from the Draft TIP Plan and will have an individualized transmittal, public
engagement process, and public hearing with the Planning Commission and formal
recommendation, where applicable.
Near-Term Action Items
• Develop New Funding / Leverage Existing Funding (4A)
• Adopt Community Benefit Policy (2A)
• Tenant Relocation Assistance Program (1A)
• Displaced Tenant Preference Policy (1B)
• Data Collection and In-Lieu Fee Analysis (4B)
• Create Tenant Resource Center + Navigation Service (1D)
• Establish City Implementation Team (5A)
• Help Tenants Become Owners (1E)
• Invest in Community Land Trusts (2C)
• Utilize Publicly Owned Property (3D)
• Acquire & Rehabilitate Unsubsidized Housing (2B)
• Make Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) Easier and Less Expensive to Build (3B)
• Adopt the Affordable Housing Incentives (3A)
Community Engagement
As presented to the City Council on July 12, 2022 and outlined in the Phase 1 Report, TIP has
undergone a thorough public engagement process. From February 2022 to July 2022, the TIP
team heard from 2,150 residents through a survey (online and in-person), conducted focus
groups with 50 participants, conducted 70 in-depth interviews, and engaged with 200 students in
schools from elementary through high school. Additionally, the TIP team has held regular
meetings with a Community Working Group, comprised of over 20 participants from various
community organizations, and convened a City Steering Committee representing 16 departments
and divisions. Furthermore, a Core Policy Team consisting of staff from the Redevelopment
Agency, Housing Stability Division, Transportation Division, and the Planning Division worked
collaboratively to ensure the goals and action items aligned with the responsibilities of their
respective divisions and departments. The feedback received from these various partners
contributed to the development of the draft Plan.
In response to comments received from the Planning Commission and to public comments
received during the 45-day public comment period, the following changes were made to the draft
plan:
• Changes to include create quantifiable metrics.
o Added a new page (p. 14) showing how Housing SLC goals and Thriving in Place
strategy align.
• Changes to include language about use of publicly owned land.
o Added language to Strategic Priority 3D to make the connection between publicly
owned land and affordable housing more explicit.
• Developed materials to increase accessibility.
o Added an overview video to web site.
o Developed a graphic overview of Two-Year Action Plan.
PUBLIC PROCESS: The following is a list of public meetings that have been held, and other
public input opportunities, related to the proposed project since the 45-day public comment
period commenced:
• May 12, 2023 – All recognized community organizations in the city were sent the 45-day
required notice. Other stakeholders and members of the community working group were
sent 45-day notice. Comments were received from one recognized community
organization.
• May 12 – June 30, 2023 – A full draft of the plan was available for review at
www.thrivinginplaceslc.org/draft-strategy along with a comment form. Social media
posts and newsletter mailings were also used to advertise the availability to comment.
• May 25, June 7, June 8, 2023 – Presentation to three recognized community
organizations (by request).
• June 3, 2023 – Tabling at Utah Asian Festival.
• June 9, 2023 - Tabling at Homeless Resource Fair.
• June 13 and June 27, 2023 – Tabling at Partners in the Park. (Jordan Park and Poplar
Grove Park)
• June 14, 2023 – Planning Commission briefing was held to provide the Planning
Commission an opportunity to offer feedback and to inform the public on the plan.
• July 26, 2023 - Planning Commission public hearing
o At the Public Hearing, there were three public comments. All comments were in
support of the proposed plan. There were two supportive public comments
submitted via email.
• August 1, 2023 – Presentation to Salt Lake City Human Rights Commission
Summary of Public Comment
To date, 28 responses have been collected through the online comment form and two comments
have been received to a dedicated email inbox. One of the comments received to the inbox was
from a recognized community organization and one was from an individual. Three comments
were delivered at the Planning Commission public hearing (all in support), one of which was
also emailed to staff. Additionally, one community member was not able to attend the public
hearing but asked that an op-ed in support of the Plan be included as public comment.
Respondents who used the online comment form were asked to comment on which priorities
stood out as especially important, what they thought was missing, their level of support for the
Plan, and what additional factors should be considered as the Plan is finalized, along with
demographic information.
A majority (75 percent) of respondents identified their current housing situation as Renters (46
percent) or Other (29 percent), with a few identifying as owners (18 percent). This information is
important to note because Thriving in Place is a plan that will primarily impact renter households
and households in other, often more precarious, housing situations.
Overall support for the Plan was high, with 82 percent of respondents supporting the Plan. A
mere 7 percent of respondents indicated opposition to the Plan and 11 percent were ambivalent.
Those who supported the Plan “as-is” cited the need for more affordable housing, the need for
increased tenant support, and the need for larger units as important factors for consideration.
Those who support the Plan but would like to see changes pointed to the need to overlap services
along with the anti-displacement strategies (such as daycare, vocational rehab, etc.).
Additionally, there were concerns about how difficult it can be to find and get into affordable
housing.
The main opposition to the Plan was opposition to government intervention in the housing
market and a preference for broad upzoning.
Generally, the comments received through email were supportive. The response from the
recognized community organization identified areas of concern, including the long-term viability
of the tenant relocation assistance, the lack of inclusionary affordable housing requirements, and
concerns about short term rentals with additional ADU and other zoning changes that are
promoted. The long-term viability of the tenant relocation assistance is something that staff are
currently considering. That a pilot program was funded this year in the annual budget is a
significant step forward. The lack of inclusionary zoning requirements is due primarily to state
preemption. However, the Community Benefits Policy in the draft Plan incorporates density
bonuses in exchange for affordable housing in certain circumstances. The concern about short
term rentals has also been at least partially addressed through the creation of two new
enforcement positions that were funded in the annual budget.
The resident email posed questions about strategies for keeping senior residents in their homes in
the face of rising property taxes. While not contemplated explicitly in TIP, strategies such as
community land trust opportunities as well as strategies outlined in Housing SLC have the
potential to help.
The comments received through email and a spreadsheet of the survey responses have been
attached to this transmittal (Exhibit D) as part of the public record.
Planning Commission (PC) Records
a) PC Agenda for July 26, 2023 (click to access)
b) PC Meeting Summary of Actions for July 26, 2023 (click to access)
c) PC Meeting Minutes for July 26, 2023 (click to access)
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A – Thriving in Place At-a-Glance
Exhibit B – Thriving in Place Two-Year Action Plan
Exhibit C – Ordinance Adopting Thriving in Place Draft
Exhibit D – Public Comments Received During 45-Day Comment Period and Public Hearing
Exhibit A
Thriving in Place At-a-Glance
Thriving in Place at-a-glance a one-page overview of Salt Lake City’s Anti-Displacement Strategy
From the Phase 1 Report:
Displacement in Salt Lake City is
significant and getting worse.
There are no “more affordable”
neighborhoods in Salt Lake City
where families can move once
displaced.
Salt Lake City is growing and
there aren’t enough affordable
units for low-income families.
Plus a shortage of units overall is
creating more competition for
lower cost units
Almost half of Salt Lake City
households are rent burdened.
More than half of all families
with children live in
displacement risk
neighborhoods.
Latinx and Black households
have median incomes that are
lower than what is required to
afford rent in the city.
Displacement affects more than
half of White households in Salt
Lake City and disproportionately
affects households of color.
Many areas experiencing high
displacement risk were redlined
in the past and are still highly
segregated today.
Community members are very
concerned about displacement
and its impacts. They want more
affordable housing and support
for those being impacted.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES: prioritize tenant protections / partner with those most impacted / increase housing everywhere / focus on affordability / build an eco-system for action
Caveats: there are no magic fixes (it will be hard work) / we will build on what we are already doing / state pre-emption limits what we can do / we have finite resources + things we don’t control / the housing crisis is regional / we must work together
2 PRESERVE the affordable
housing we have
2A Develop and Adopt a
Community Benefit Policy
2B Acquire and Rehabilitate
Unsubsidized Housing
2C Invest in Community Land Trust
Models
2D Address Short-Term Rentals’
Impacts on Housing
6 ADVOCATE for tenants
at the state level
6A Work to Advance Tenant
Rights and Affordable
Housing at the State Level
6 Interrelated Goals / 22 Strategic Priorities
3 OUTCOME GOALS: Protect – Preserve – Produce
3 SUPPORTING GOALS: Expand Capacity – Partner + Collaborate – Advocate
3 PRODUCE more housing,
especially affordable housing
3A Adopt the Affordable Housing
Incentives Policy
3B Make ADUs Easier and Less
Expensive to Build
3C Create More Diverse Housing
Choices in All Areas
3D Utilize Publicly Owned Property
3E Prioritize Long-Term
Affordability, Support Services,
and Transit Access
5 PARTNER + COLLABORATE
to maximize impact
5A Form a City Implementation Team
5B Work with Partners to Convene a
Regional Anti-Displacement
Coalition
5C Launch an Ongoing Community
Partnership to Coordinate Action +
Investment in the Highest Risk Areas
4 EXPAND CAPACITY for tenant
support + affordable housing
4A Develop New Funding Sources and
Leverage Existing Resources
4B Define Indicators to Track
Displacement and Develop Data
Systems to Track Progress
4C Strengthen the City’s Capacity to
Enforce Deed-Restricted Housing
Commitments
1 PROTECT the most
vulnerable from displacement
1A Develop a Tenant Relocation
Assistance Program
1B Adopt a Displaced Tenants
Preference Policy
1C Improve and Expand Tenant
Resources and Services
1D Create a Tenant Resource Center
and Navigation Service
1E Help Tenants Become Owners
1F Promote Affordable Living and
Better Jobs
Near-Term Action Priorities
Support Tenants
1A Develop a Tenant Relocation
Assistance Program
Provide support to tenants directly
impacted by redevelopment.
1B Adopt a Displaced Tenants
Preference Policy
Design and put in place a policy
for eligible deed-restricted units so
that displaced tenants are given a
preference when those units
become available.
1C Improve and Expand Tenant
Resources and Services
Increase awareness of tenant
resources; innovate on service
delivery; make changes to the
Landlord Tenant Initiative.
1D Create a Tenant Resource Center
and Navigation Service
Partner to create a Tenant
Resource Center website; develop
and launch a navigation service to
connect tenants with the
resources and support they need.
Preserve + Create Affordability
2A Adopt a Community Benefit Policy
Mitigate the loss of existing affordable
housing on redevelopment sites
through an incentives approach.
3A Adopt the Affordable Housing
Incentives Policy
Incentivize the creation of affordable
housing in new development.
2B Acquire/Rehab Unsubsidized Housing
Partner to acquire priority sites to
create long-term affordability.
3B Make ADUs Easier + Less Expensive
Facilitate the creation of more ADUs.
3D Utilize Publicly Owned Property
Identify key properties that can be used
to create affordable housing.
2C Invest in Community Land Trusts
Grow the Community Land Trust model
for long-term affordability.
1E Help Tenants Become Owners
Invest in shared equity programs that
help tenants build wealth, improve
financial security, and help them
become owners.
Partner for Action
5A Form a City Implementation Team
Create a cross-department team to
oversee implementation of the
Thriving in Place strategy.
4B Define Indicators / Develop Data
Systems
Define key indicators and put in place
needed data systems to track progress.
5B Partner to Convene a Regional Anti-
Displacement Coalition
Regularly convene key partners to
coordinate regional action on anti-
displacement initiatives and housing.
4A Develop New Funding Sources and
Leverage Existing Resources
Ensure ongoing funding to provide
needed resources for affordable
housing and tenant assistance.
5C Launch Ongoing Community
Partnership
Create cross-dept. team to coordinate
investments and work in partnership
with community to counter
displacement (in Westside, Ballpark,
Central City, and Liberty Wells areas).
Exhibit B
Thriving in Place Two-Year Action Plan
2023 2025 2024
THRIVING in PLACE / Salt Lake City’s Anti-Displacement Strategy
Two-Year Action Plan Overview RESOURCES + PARTNERSHIPS TENANT SUPPORT TEAM AFFORDABLE HOUSING TEAM POLICY TEAM
5A - Form City Implementation Teams
2A - Develop and Adopt Community Benefit Policy
1A - Develop Tenant Relocation Assistance Program
1B - Adopt Displaced Tenants Preference Policy / Develop Program
2C - Adopt Community Land Trust (CLT) Legislative Policy
4A - Finalize Funding Needs / Prioritize New Funding Sources
JULY 2023
Public Review
and Input
5A Implementation
Teams
2A Community
Benefit Policy
3B ADU Policy
+ Programs
1A Tenant Relocation
Assistance
3A Affordable Housing
Incentives Policy
1B Displaced Tenant
Preference Policy
2C CLT Policy +
Investements
First Things First - Review + Adopt Plan / Form Teams Foundations - Adopt Key Policies / Support Displaced Tenants / Develop Data Systems Investment + Action - Strengthen Tenant Supports / Create More Affordable Housing / Grow Shared Equity Models
2B Acquire + Rehab
Unsubsidized Housing1C Expand Tenant
Resources + Services
1D Launch Tenant
Navigation Service
4B Indicators +
Data Systems
3D Utilize Publicly-
Owned Properties
1E Help Tenants
Become Owners
Council
Adoption
2C - Prioritize CLT Investment Opportunities
5B - Work with Partners to Form Regional Anti-Displacement Coalition
5C - Launch Community Partnership
4A - Implement Funding Plan / Develop and Leverage New Resources
3A - Finalize and Adopt Affordable Housing Incentives Policy
4B - Finalize Indicators / Develop Data Systems and Reporting Mechanisms
5C - Manage Partnership
1C + 1D - Expand Tenant Resources / Develop and Launch Tenant Resource Center and Navigation Service
1E - Help Tenants Become Owners / Identify Shared Equity Housing Priorities
3D - Identify Priority Publicly Owned Lands for Housing
3B - Improve Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Processes and Resources
1E - Implement Priority Projects and Investments
3D - Develop Projects / Partnerships
2B - Expand Investment in Acqusition and Rehabilitation of Unsubsidized Housing
5B - Manage Regional Anti-Displacement Coalition
Exhibit C
Ordinance Adopting Thriving in Place Draft
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2023
(Adopting the Thriving in Place plan)
An ordinance adopting the Thriving in Place plan as part of Salt Lake City’s general plan.
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a hearing on July 26, 2023 on
a petition to adopt the Thriving in Place plan as part of Salt Lake City’s general plan as governed
by Part 4 of Utah Code Chapter 10-9a; and
WHEREAS, at its July 26, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of
forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said
petition; and
WHEREAS, after holding a public hearing on this matter, the City Council has
determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Adopting the Thriving in Place plan. That the Thriving in Place plan
provided in Exhibit “A” attached hereto is adopted as part of Salt Lake City’s general plan as
governed by Part 4 of Utah Code Chapter 10-9a. The adoption of this plan serves to identify the
goals and objectives identified within the plan, all of which are subject to future budget
appropriations.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its
first publication.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________,
2023.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________.
Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. ________ of 2023.
Published: ______________.
Ordinance adopting Thriving in Place plan
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Date:__________________________________
By: ___________________________________
Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney
August 4, 2023
EXHIBIT “A”
Thriving in Place plan
SALT LAKE CITY’S
ANTI -DISPLACEMENT
STRATEGY
Why It’s Needed | Strategi c Priorities | Two-Year Action Plan
JULY 2023
UPDATED DRAFT for COUNCIL REVIEW
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Message From the Mayor 2
MESSAGE FROM
THE MAYOR
Salt Lake City is an incredible place that’s
home to families who have been here for
generations and recent transplants alike. But as
we’ve grown, many of our friends, neighbors, and
families have been priced out of the communities they love.
I initiated the ‘Thriving in Place’ project to help us better understand the factors driving gentrification and
displacement in our communities, and to identify actionable strategies that could help our residents who are at
risk of displacement to stay here and thrive.
We were humbled by and so grateful for the level of community engagement and input, and the personal stories
that were shared during the development of this plan. Thousands of residents gave their time, perspectives, and
ideas as part of this process. This resulting anti-displacement strategy is dedicated to all of you: the people who
make Salt Lake City such a great place to be, and give us hope for an even better future.
There is a lot of work ahead that will build on the important efforts already underway to preserve and improve
the housing we have, grow our supply of affordable housing, increase our support for renters, and partner more
closely with communities that are being the most impacted.
None of this work could happen without the dedication of our amazing City team who put in countless hours to
make sure that this process was deliberate, reflective of our community’s values and desires, and focused on
policies that will make a real, tangible difference to our residents for generatio ns to come. Thank you, team!
The road ahead will be challenging. There are no easy solutions. But as the Spanish poet Antonio Machado
reminds us in his poem about pilgrimage: we make the road by walking. Let’s continue walking and working
together, to create a more just and secure future for all of us.
MAYOR ERIN MENDENHALL
Caminante, son tus huellas
el camino y nada mas;
Caminante, no hay camino,
se hace camino al andar.
Wanderer, your footsteps
the road, and nothing more;
Wanderer, we have no road,
we make the road by walking.
from poem by Antonio Machado;
translated from the original Spanish
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Acknowledgements 3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CITY COUNCIL
Victoria Petro, Vice Chair, District 1
Alejandro Puy, RDA Chair, District 2
Chris Wharton, District 3
Ana Valdemoros, District 4
Darin Manio, Chair, District 5
DAN DUGAN, District 6
AMY FOWLER, District 7
CITY STEERING COMMITTEE
Arts Council Felicia Baca; Renato Olmedo-Gonzalez
Building & Licensing Services William Warlick
City Attorney’s Office Kimberly Chytraus; Paul Nielsen
City Council Office Allison Rowland; Nick Tarbet
Civic Engagement Rachel Paulsen; Jamie Stokes
Communities and Neighborhoods Tammy Hunsaker;
Ruedigar Matthes; Angela Price; Blake Thomas
Economic Development Cathie Rigby
Finance Elias Ayon; Jennifer Madrigal
Housing Stability Erik Fronberg; Tony Milner
Mayor’s Office Ashley Cleveland; Dirie Fatima*;
Andrew Johnston; Kaletta Lynch*; Hannah Regan
Parks & Public Lands Tyler Murdock; Kristin Riker
Planning Nick Norris; Mayara Lima, Kelsey Lindquist;
Michaela Oktay; Kristina Gilmore
Public Services Jorge Chamorro
Public Utilities Holly Lopez; Marian Rice
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City Ashley
Ogden
Sustainability Debbie Lyons; Sophia Nicholas; Maria
Schwarz
Transportation Susan Lundmark
Youth & Family Services Kim Thomas
*employee no longer works for Salt Lake City
COMMUNITY WORKING GROUP
Communidas Unidas, Mayra Cedano
Community Development Corporation of Utah,
Mike Akerlow
Crossroads Urban Center, Bill Tibbitts
Disability Law Center, Karlee Stauffer
Giv Development, Chris Parker
Industry/Q Factor, Vinny Johnson
Neighborhood House, Rosa Bandeirinha, Jennifer
Bean, Sarah Scott
NeighborWorks Salt Lake, Maria Garciaz, Sara Hoy,
Jasmine Walton
Pandos, Our Unsheltered Relatives, Carl Moore
People’s Legal Aid, Marcus Degan, Danielle Stevens,
Emily Blakeley
PIK2AR, Jakey Siolo, Susi Feltch-Malohifo’ou
Property Owner/Community Advocate, Cindy Cromer
The Road Home, Downy Bowles, Tessa Nicolaides,
Tyeson Rogers, and Meredith Vernick
Salt Lake City Human Rights Commission,
Esther Stowell
Salt Lake County Aging and Adult Services,
Kelly Roemer
Salt Lake Valley Coalition to End Homelessness,
Randy Chappell
University Neighborhood Partners, Jarred Martinez
Urban Indian Center of SLC, Alan Barlow,
Maurice Smith
Utah Community Action, Sahil Oberoi
Utah Housing Coalition, Tara Rollins
Utah League of Cities and Towns, Karson Eilers
Wasatch Front Regional Council, Megan Townsend
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Acknowledgements 4
PROJECT TEAM
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND
NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas Director
Tammy Hunsaker Deputy Director
Angela Price Policy Director;
Project Co-Manager
Susan Lundmark Transportation Planner;
Project Co-Manager
Ruedigar Matthes Policy and Program Manager;
Housing SLC lead
PROJECT CONSULTANT TEAM
COMMUNITY PLANNING COLLABORATIVE
(formerly BAIRD + DRISKELL COMMUNITY PLANNING)
David Driskell Principal and Project Manager
Victor Tran Associate Planner
Bowen Close, Creative Director /Document Design
UNIVERSITY OF UTAH, DEPARTMENT OF CITY AND
METROPOLITAN PLANNING
Ivis Garcia Zambrana, PhD Assistant Professor
Alessandro Rigolon, PhD Assistant Professor
Caitlin Cahill, PhD Visiting Professor
THE URBAN DISPLACEMENT PROJECT (UDP) AT
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY
Tim Thomas, PhD Research Director
Julia Greenberg Research Manager
FOR MORE INFORMATION: thrivinginplaceslc.org • thrivinginplace@slcgov.com
GRATITUDE
A huge thanks to the thousands of residents who gave their time, input, and constructive ideas to this
effort, and to the dozens of students at the University of Utah’s Department of City and Metropolitan
Planning who helped make the broad and deep community engagement process a reality: putting up posters,
surveying residents, attending community meetings, doing research, analyzing data, facilitating focus
groups, and summarizing what they heard.
The City is also deeply grateful to the many community partners, including those on the Community Working
Group, our Community Liaisons, and everyone who helped host events, convene meetings, facilitate
outreach, and shape the final policy and program recommendations.
This Thriving in Place strategy is the result of your input and collective effort, underscoring our
community’s tremendous assets and what can be achieved when we work together.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Table of Contents 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Message From the Mayor 2
Acknowledgements + Gratitude 3
Thriving in Place at-a-glance 6
1 About Thriving in Place 7
What This Plan Is About 7
How Community Input Shaped the Plan 8
Plan Overview and How to Use It 9
2 Why We Need an Anti-Displacement Strategy 10
What We Mean When We Talk About Displacement 10
What We Heard and Learned About Displacement in Salt Lake City 11
What This Plan Does (with caveats) 13
Alignment Between Housing SLC's Goals and Thriving in Place 14
3 Salt Lake City’s Anti-Displacement Strategy 15
Five Guiding Principles 15
Six Interrelated Goals 17
22 Strategic Priorities 18
Attachment A: Two-Year Action Plan + Graphic Summary 69
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Thriving in Place At -a -Glance 6
THRIVING IN PLACE at-a-glance a one-page overview of Salt Lake City’s Anti-Displacement Strategy Thriving in Place at-a-glance a one-page overview of Salt Lake City’s Anti-Displacement Strategy
From the Phase 1 Report:
Displacement in Salt Lake City is
significant and getting worse.
There are no “more affordable”
neighborhoods in Salt Lake City
where families can move once
displaced.
Salt Lake City is growing and
there aren’t enough affordable
units for low-income families.
Plus a shortage of units overall is
creating more competition for
lower cost units
Almost half of Salt Lake City
households are rent burdened.
More than half of all families
with children live in
displacement risk
neighborhoods.
Latinx and Black households
have median incomes that are
lower than what is required to
afford rent in the city.
Displacement affects more than
half of White households in Salt
Lake City and disproportionately
affects households of color.
Many areas experiencing high
displacement risk were redlined
in the past and are still highly
segregated today.
Community members are very
concerned about displacement
and its impacts. They want more
affordable housing and support
for those being impacted.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES: prioritize tenant protections / partner with those most impacted / increase housing everywhere / focus on affordability / build an eco-system for action
Caveats: there are no magic fixes (it will be hard work) / we will build on what we are already doing / state pre-emption limits what we can do / we have finite resources + things we don’t control / the housing crisis is regional / we must work together
2 PRESERVE the affordable
housing we have
2A Develop and Adopt a
Community Benefit Policy
2B Acquire and Rehabilitate
Unsubsidized Housing
2C Invest in Community Land Trust
Models
2D Address Short-Term Rentals’
Impacts on Housing
6 ADVOCATE for tenants
at the state level
6A Work to Advance Tenant
Rights and Affordable
Housing at the State Level
6 Interrelated Goals / 22 Strategic Priorities
3 OUTCOME GOALS: Protect – Preserve – Produce
3 SUPPORTING GOALS: Expand Capacity – Partner + Collaborate – Advocate
3 PRODUCE more housing,
especially affordable housing
3A Adopt the Affordable Housing
Incentives Policy
3B Make ADUs Easier and Less
Expensive to Build
3C Create More Diverse Housing
Choices in All Areas
3D Utilize Publicly Owned Property
3E Prioritize Long-Term
Affordability, Support Services,
and Transit Access
5 PARTNER + COLLABORATE
to maximize impact
5A Form a City Implementation Team
5B Work with Partners to Convene a
Regional Anti-Displacement
Coalition
5C Launch an Ongoing Community
Partnership to Coordinate Action +
Investment in the Highest Risk Areas
4 EXPAND CAPACITY for tenant
support + affordable housing
4A Develop New Funding Sources and
Leverage Existing Resources
4B Define Indicators to Track
Displacement and Develop Data
Systems to Track Progress
4C Strengthen the City’s Capacity to
Enforce Deed-Restricted Housing
Commitments
1 PROTECT the most
vulnerable from displacement
1A Develop a Tenant Relocation
Assistance Program
1B Adopt a Displaced Tenants
Preference Policy
1C Improve and Expand Tenant
Resources and Services
1D Create a Tenant Resource Center
and Navigation Service
1E Help Tenants Become Owners
1F Promote Affordable Living and
Better Jobs
Near-Term Action Priorities
Support Tenants
1A Develop a Tenant Relocation
Assistance Program
Provide support to tenants directly
impacted by redevelopment.
1B Adopt a Displaced Tenants
Preference Policy
Design and put in place a policy
for eligible deed-restricted units so
that displaced tenants are given a
preference when those units
become available.
1C Improve and Expand Tenant
Resources and Services
Increase awareness of tenant
resources; innovate on service
delivery; make changes to the
Landlord Tenant Initiative.
1D Create a Tenant Resource Center
and Navigation Service
Partner to create a Tenant
Resource Center website; develop
and launch a navigation service to
connect tenants with the
resources and support they need.
Preserve + Create Affordability
2A Adopt a Community Benefit Policy
Mitigate the loss of existing affordable
housing on redevelopment sites
through an incentives approach.
3A Adopt the Affordable Housing
Incentives Policy
Incentivize the creation of affordable
housing in new development.
2B Acquire/Rehab Unsubsidized Housing
Partner to acquire priority sites to
create long-term affordability.
3B Make ADUs Easier + Less Expensive
Facilitate the creation of more ADUs.
3D Utilize Publicly Owned Property
Identify key properties that can be used
to create affordable housing.
2C Invest in Community Land Trusts
Grow the Community Land Trust model
for long-term affordability.
1E Help Tenants Become Owners
Invest in shared equity programs that
help tenants build wealth, improve
financial security, and help them
become owners.
Partner for Action
5A Form a City Implementation Team
Create a cross-department team to
oversee implementation of the
Thriving in Place strategy.
4B Define Indicators / Develop Data
Systems
Define key indicators and put in place
needed data systems to track progress.
5B Partner to Convene a Regional Anti-
Displacement Coalition
Regularly convene key partners to
coordinate regional action on anti-
displacement initiatives and housing.
4A Develop New Funding Sources and
Leverage Existing Resources
Ensure ongoing funding to provide
needed resources for affordable
housing and tenant assistance.
5C Launch Ongoing Community
Partnership
Create cross-dept. team to coordinate
investments and work in partnership
with community to counter
displacement (in Westside, Ballpark,
Central City, and Liberty Wells areas).
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY About Thriving in Place 7
1 ABOUT THRIVING IN PLACE
What This Plan Is About
The project is in response to growing community concern about gentrification and displacement ,
driven by an increasingly severe shortage of affordable housing and a sense that new market-driven
development is catering to higher income newcomers and contrib uting to displacement.
Through a community-driven engagement process, the City worked with its partners to develop th is
Anti-Displacement Strategy, which recommends policies, programs, and actions to counter
displacement while strengthening long-term community stability and access to opportunity for all.
The strategy and its actions aim to balance growth and investment in new housing with the
preservation of existing housing, tenant protections , and a focus on equitable development that
benefits all residents, including those most at-risk of displacement. Through the process of
developing the strategy and its proposed actions, Thriving in Place seeks to combat
involuntary displacement, help all residents benefit from new development and
investments, and continue making Salt Lake City a great place to call home.
Thriving in Place is focused on understanding the forces and impacts of gentrification
and displacement in Salt Lake City, and on identifying priority actions that the City
can take to help people stay and thrive in our community as we grow.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY About Thriving in Place 8
How Community Input Shaped the Plan
Thriving in Place engaged those most impacted by displacement in understanding it and
identifying what to do. It happened in two phases.
PHASE ONE:
LISTENING AND LEARNING
Starting in late 2021, the project team
partnered with community groups, service
agencies, and residents to understand and
document the impacts of gentrification and
displacement across Salt Lake City. This
involved gathering and analyzing a lot of data,
including stories and perspectives from nearly
2,500 residents via surveys, interviews, focus
groups, and workshops.
The results—including analysis and mapping
from a leading-edge model that measures
displacement risk across Salt Lake City and the
region—were summarized and presented to the
community and City Council in July 2022.
PHASE TWO:
CRAFTING COLLABORATIVE SOLUTIONS
Starting in Fall 2022, the project team worked
with City staff and community partners to
develop the Anti-Displacement Strategy: first
as a high-level framework, and then refined
and detailed to set forth interrelated strategic
priorities in response to what was learned in
Phase One.
The draft framework, strategic priorities, and
near-term actions were shared on the project
website for community feedback; discussed
with members of the Community Working
Group; shared at a Westside community
meeting; and discussed through further
community engagement undertaken as part of
the Housing SLC process in Fall 2022 by
students from the University of Utah.
The Draft Strategy was presented for public
review in May and June 2023, with minor
refinements incorporated based on community
feedback, which are reflected in this final
draft for Council’s consideration and adoption.
APA AWARD FOR UNIVERSITY OF UTAH TEAM
The Department of City and Metropolitan Planning at the
University of Utah—a key part of the Thriving in Place project
team—was recognized by the Utah Chapter of the American
Planning Association with their 2022 “High Achievement Award.”
The award is well-deserved recognition for the CMP student and
faculty work facilitating the project’s extensive community
engagement as well as their project contributions through
research, analysis, and documentation. Congratulations, and
thanks for a job extremely well done!
Visit the project website to read about what
we heard and learned in Phase One and dig
deep into the data and community input.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY About Thriving in Place 9
Plan Overview and How to Use It
The plan is presented in three sections, plus an overview and a two-year workplan:
THRIVING IN PLACE “AT-A-GLANCE”
A one-page overview of the strategy and its key co mponents.
1 ABOUT THRIVING IN PLACE
A brief overview of how the plan was developed and what it’s about
2 WHY WE NEED AN ANTI-DISPLACEMENT STRATEGY
A brief overview of what we mean when we talk about displacement, why a strategy is needed,
and the core values and principles that guide it (plus some important caveats to keep in mind).
3 SALT LAKE CITY’S ANTI-DISPLACEMENT STRATEGY
This is the core of the plan, presenting six interrelated goals and 22
strategic priorities to counter displacement and secure a more
equitable future. Each priority includes details on why it is needed,
who will lead it, the budget and timeline, implementation steps, and
relevant case studies.
ATTACHMENT A: TWO-YEAR ACTION PLAN + GRAPHIC SUMMARY
Timing, resources, and roles for near-term actions.
"THRIVING IN PLACE” AND “HOUSING SLC” —
WORKING TOGETHER TO ACHIEVE THE CITY’S HOUSING GOALS
Thriving in Place is an anti -displacement strategy focused on those most
vulnerable to involuntary displacement.
Housing SLC is the City’s five-year action plan for moderate- and lower-
income housing, as required under state law.
These two plans are companion documents that work in tandem to
define priorities for investment, action, and partnership , to create more
affordable housing options, and to help the most vulnerable tenants
access and remain in affordable living situations.
See how the Housing SLC goals and metrics align with Thriving in Place in
the summary on page 14.
The Thriving in Place plan is both a strategy and an action plan.
As a strategy, it identifies key areas of work necessary to address the multiple factors that drive
displacement and to create long-term solutions that can help residents and communities remain in
place, particularly lower income renters who are most susceptible to invol untary displacement.
As an action plan, it defines near-term priority actions and structures for supporting ongoing
collaboration, implementation, and monitoring of success over time . For ease of use and updating, the
initial two-year action plan is presented as a stand-alone document, included as Attachment A.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Why We Need an Anti -Displacement Strategy 10
2 WHY WE NEED AN ANTI-
DISPLACEMENT STRATEGY
What We Mean When We Talk About Displacement
Salt Lake City has seen significant growth and investment in recent years, but not all are benefitting
from it, and in some cases people who have been a part of our community —sometimes for many
years—are having to leave because they can no longer afford to live here.
When growth happens and new development doesn’t keep pace with demand, housing prices go up.
While this is a complicated process driven by a combination of factors, the end result is that housing
can become unaffordable for many residents—especially lower income residents and those on fixed
incomes. Evictions and foreclosures become more common, along with people doubling up or finding
other ways to make their income stretch to meet the cost of living. Some people can find no
alternative and must then live in their vehicle or on the street.
Most often, people move out before they face eviction because they can’t afford a recent rent
increase or they’ve had a personal crisis (like a job loss or medical emergency) that drains their
resources. They have to move to find a place they can afford.
In some cases, lower cost housing units and commercial spaces are demolished to make way for new
(and needed) housing, but the new housing and retail spaces are higher priced, catering to higher
income households. While desired amenities and neighborhood improvements might be created, the
people and communities who used to live in the area are forced out and experience the loss of a
place they loved.
In short, when incomes and housing costs are out of sync, people are displaced: to a different
neighborhood, a different city, or—far too often—to the street, with deep and lasting impacts on
them, their children, and our entire community.
In developing the Thriving in Place strategy , three types of displacement were
considered:
DIRECT DISPLACEMENT
This is when households are forced to move because they are evicted or because
their building was torn down, often to make way for new and more expensive
development. This is not as widespread as indirect displacement, but it is highly
visible and extremely disruptive in people’s lives.
INDIRECT DISPLACEMENT
When rents get too high for families, particularly low -income households, they are
compelled to move to a more affordable living situation that is sometimes far from
their social networks, jobs, schools, and places of worship. When a low er income
household is already paying over half their income on rent, even a rent increase of
$50 to $100 a month can be the breaking point. This is the largest force of
displacement, and often hard to measure or effectively counteract.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Why We Need an Anti -Displacement Strategy 11
CULTURAL DISPLACEMENT
Both direct and indirect displacement can result in neighborhood changes, as current
residents and businesses are replaced with new ones. The people who are displaced
are often lower income households of color and immigrants, while the people moving
in are often higher income and white. As a result, even people who are able to stay
may feel a sense of loss as their friends and neighbors leave, familiar businesses
close, and their neighborhood transforms. This is the aspect of displacement that
affects everyone, even those who can afford to remain in place.
What We Heard and Learned About Displacement in Salt Lake City
In Phase One of the Thriving in Place planning process, we heard from thousands of people
throughout the community and had hundreds of hours of conversation. We also dug deep into the
data, documenting the extent of displacement risk and its realities, helping to develop a more
complete and robust understanding of displacement in Salt Lake City and to build a shared
understanding of the problem we are working to solve.
The results were profound:
• Displacement in Salt Lake City is significant and getting
worse, and is an issue of high concern in the community.
• There are no “more affordable” neighborhoods in Salt
Lake City where lower income families can move once
displaced. This is a particularly striking finding, that the
research team at the Urban Displacement Project has not seen
before in their work around the country.
• Salt Lake City is growing and there are not enough housing
units overall, and a significant lack of affordable units
for low-income families—an issue that is occurring along the
entire Wasatch Front.
• Over half of Salt Lake City’s renter households are rent
burdened, spending more than 30 percent of their income on
housing and making them highly vulnerable to displacement
when rents increase.
• Displacement affects more than half of White
households in Salt Lake City and disproportionately affects households of color.
• The patterns of displacement reflect historic patterns of discrimination and
segregation, with areas experiencing high displacement risk closely aligning with areas that
were redlined in the past.
A recent report from the Kern C. Gardner Policy Institute (The Changing Dynamics of the Wasatch
Front Apartment Market, September 2022) underscores these trends and their significant impa cts.
The full Phase One report details
what we did, who we heard from,
what they said, and what we
learned from the data analysis.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Why We Need an Anti -Displacement Strategy 12
The Phase One Summary Report tells the whole story. Key aspects of that work included:
ENSURING AN INCLUSIVE PROCESS
Interviews with community stakeholders and
leaders as a very first step in the process to
get their input about key issues and shape the
engagement strategy.
A City Steering Committee representing 16
departments and divisions to ensure input and
coordination.
A Community Working Group of over 20
stakeholders to help direct the engagement
strategy, serve as a sounding board, and
provide input on the project’s work.
DOCUMENTING AND ANALYZING THE DATA
Modeling, analysis, mapping and ground -
truthing by the Urban Displacement Project to
better understand and document displacement
risk and trends.
Review of current City policy and programs
plus documentation of “best practices” from
other places.
BROAD OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT
A bilingual project website, in English and
Spanish, as a platform for education and
engagement.
An online and in-person survey, also in English
and Spanish, that engaged over 2000
respondents.
Email blasts, social media, and 4000+ multi-
lingual flyers, postcards, and door hangers,
plus stenciling the project name and website
info over 150 times on walkways around
different neighborhoods.
Presentations at 14 community events or
gatherings and at 13 community council
meetings to let people know about the project
and encourage them to participate.
REACHING THE MOST AT-RISK
Six Community Liaisons (trusted members of
the community) engaged to talk with folks
they know about experiences of displacement
and neighborhood change.
Five focus groups and nearly 70 interviews to
hear people’s stories and delve into their
experiences, perspectives, and ideas.
Seven youth workshops with over 200 students
to hear their thoughts about changes in their
neighborhoods and how to make the city a
better place for everyone.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Why We Need an Anti -Displacement Strategy 13
What This Plan Does (with caveats)
The Thriving in Place process has been a valuable opportunity to better understand the causes,
extent, and impacts of displacement in Salt Lake City. Adoption and implementation of the Thriving
in Place plan will be an important next step toward addressing displacement in a more impactful way
and—as part of that—building a more collaborative and inclusive approach to understanding and
acting on the needs of Salt Lake’s most vulnerable community members.
As we launch into implementation of the Thriving in Place strategy, several important caveats
must be stated:
• There are no magic fixes; success will be incremental. It will requ ire hard, ongoing work and
difficult decisions.
• We will build on what we are already doing; this is the next step. Sequencing and coordination of
actions will be key.
• State preemption limits the range of potential action. We will work to change that but there will
be limits and it will take time.
• We have finite resources and capacity. The need will continue to be much greater than the
resources we have.
• The affordable housing crisis is nationwide as well as regional in scale, the result of many forces
that we do not control.
• It’s not just what we do, but how we do it. We must work together, build trust, be transparent,
and have honest conversations.
ca·ve·at /ˈkavēˌät/
Noun. A warning or proviso of specific stipulations, conditions, or limitations.
Five key things that the Thriving in Place plan aims to do:
1 Elevate anti-displacement as a citywide priority.
2 Increase City investment and services to help lower income tenants avoid
eviction and remain in Salt Lake City.
3 Prioritize creation of more affordable housing, especially “community -
owned” and shared-equity housing that will be affordable long-term.
4 Change how the City works with impacted communities and key partners.
5 Call for new policies and tools that utilize land use decisions to
incentivize affordable housing and public benefit.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Why We Need an Anti -Displacement Strategy 14
Alignment between Housing SLC’s Goals and Thriving in Place
Thriving in Place sets out the City’s strategy for countering the forces of displacement. While the
Two-Year Action Plan (page 69) provides a magnitude-of-cost estimate for each near-term priority,
the strategy document does not establish specific budget amounts o r funding requests. Those
amounts are developed and agreed to through the City’s annual budget process.
Similarly, the strategy does not establish specific quantified targets for each area of action, but
leaves that level of detail to subsequent action planning efforts. For example, determining the
number of affordable housing units that can be created through the use of publicly owned properties
(Strategic Priority 3D) will require a more detailed inventory of opportunity sites.
Housing SLC is the five-year action plan for moderate- and lower-income housing, as required under
state law. As an action plan, Housing SLC does establish quantified goals for housing production and
tenant assistance. Those goals have been informed by the work of Thriving in Place, and are shown in
the graphic below, mapped to the most relevant strategic priorities of Thriving in Place.
Additionally, Thriving in Place’s “Strategic Priority 4D: Define Displacement Indicators and Develop
Data Systems” outlines draft indicators (page 60) that will be further developed and refined in the
initial year of the strategy’s implementation, providing a better system for tracking progress and
informing future goal-setting for the City’s housing and anti-displacement efforts.
THESE “HOUSING SLC” GOALS
10,000
low-income individuals
assisted annually through programs
that increase housing stability
10,000
new housing units
entitled throughout the city
5,500
deeply affordable homes
(progress toward closing the gap)
1A Tenant Relocation Assistance
1B Displaced Tenants Preference
Policy
1C Tenant Resources and Services
1D Tenant Navigation Service
6A Tenant Rights and Affordable Housing
at State Level
1,000
low-income households
able to attain affordable homeownership
and equity-building opportunities
1E Help Tenants Become Owners
ALIGN WITH THESE “THRIVING IN PLACE” STRATEGIES
2A Community Benefit Policy
2B Acquire/Rehab Unsubsidized Housing
3A Affordable Housing Incentives Policy
3B Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
3C More Diverse Housing Choices
3D Publicly Owned Property
3E Long-Term Affordability and Integrated Services
4A New Funding/Leveraged Resources
6A Tenant Rights and Affordable Housing
at State Level
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 15
3 SALT LAKE CITY’S ANTI-
DISPLACEMENT STRATEGY
Five Guiding Principles
The Thriving in Place strategy was guided by five foundational principles:
Salt Lake City’s workforce includes many service employees who work hard but do not earn
enough to meet rising housing costs. There are also residents on fixed incomes: retirees, people
with disabilities, and others. Many of these folks are renters and at very high risk of
displacement. While creating more affordable housing is a critical long -term solution, that will
take time. The City will do what it can, as soon as it can, to advocate for changes in state law to
strengthen tenant rights, expand investment in tenant assistance, and deliver needed services
through strong community partnerships.
The City and its partners need to ensure a coordinated investment and action strategy in
neighborhoods facing the highest displacement risk, working across departments and sectors and
in close collaboration with community representatives to align on priorities, leverage
investments, and maximize community benefi t. In addition to housing-focused actions and
support for tenants, holistic solutions are needed to help keep local businesses, community
services, and cultural institutions in place as neighborhoods grow and change.
1 PRIORITIZE AND STRENGTHEN TENANT PROTECTIONS, ESPECIALLY FOR THE MOST VULNERABLE
Work to strengthen tenant rights and continue to invest in tenant assistance, especially for
those most at risk.
2 PARTNER WITH THE MOST IMPACTED TO DEVELOP HOLISTIC SOLUTIONS
Work with those facing high displacement risk to coordinate comprehensive action beyond
housing to keep communities in place and help them thrive.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 16
Salt Lake City has a shortage of housing at every income level, but an especially significant
shortage of housing affordable to lower income households. The analysis of displacement risk has
highlighted that those risks are greatest in what has historically been the city’s lower cost
neighborhoods, where the combination of developer interest, land prices, and land use policies
are driving investment and redevelopment. The City needs to support po licies that help create
more housing in every neighborhood, including new rental housing in neighborhoods where lower
income people have been excluded, while stabilizing neighborhoods facing the highest
displacement pressure (see Guiding Principle 2).
More affordable housing is needed, of different types, and in every neighborhood. While every
affordable unit that can be created has value, the most valuable are units that will be affordable
in perpetuity. The City should prioritize using its resources (land, money, time, and partnerships)
to create “community owned housing” that can provide stable, healthy, and affordable housing
for the long term. This includes housing that is owned and operated by nonprofits, the housing
authority, land trusts, and by tenants themselves under various forms of shared equity ownership.
Implementing Thriving in Place will require a coordinated response that spans multiple City
departments and divisions, other agencies, and partners in both the private and nonprofit
sectors. The affordable housing crisis is regional and complex. While the Cit y has an important
role to play, it cannot address the challenge on its own —nor should it. Importantly, the people
most impacted by the forces of gentrification and displacement are also the best positioned to
inform, shape, and help implement effective responses. Creating structures for ongoing dialogue,
collective problem solving, and coordinated action will help ensure that new policies and
programs work and that limited resources are effectively leveraged and deployed.
5 BUILD AN ECO-SYSTEM FOR ACTION
Work with regional and state partners, the private and nonprofit sectors, and affected
communities to coordinate action and advance shared priorities.
3 INCREASE HOUSING EVERYWHERE
Create more housing overall, and more affordable housing specifically, while minimizing
displacement and countering historic patterns of segregation.
4 FOCUS ON AFFORDABILITY
Create and preserve rental housing and ownership options in all part of the city, especially
housing that is affordable in perpetuity.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 17
Six Interrelated Goals
To effectively counter the forces of displacement, Thriving in Place proposes core
actions for each of “The Three P’s” (Protect, Preserve and Produce):
All three of these core goals are advanced by supporting actions to:
The diagram below illustrates the interrelationships between these six goal areas.
1 PROTECT tenants from displacement, especially the most vulnerable.
2 PRESERVE the affordable housing we have.
3 PRODUCE more housing, especially affordable housing.
4 EXPAND FUNDING for tenant support and affordable housing.
5 PARTNER + COLLABORATE for maximum impact.
6 ADVOCATE for tenants at the state level.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 18
22 Strategic Priorities
For each goal area, strategic priorities are defined to help achieve the goal by:
• Modifying, expanding, or scaling a program or practice already in place;
• Creating new policies, programs, or practices in response to identified areas of need; and /or
• Developing a new structure or process for collaboration, partnership, and management of the
strategy over time.
As a strategic plan, the overview of each priority is fairly high level but provides direction and
pertinent details for ensuring there is clarity about the purpose and scope of the proposed action and
the steps to implement it, including:
Where appropriate, the relationship to other priorities is called out and additional information
provided, including:
The proposed sequencing and timing of the near-term priorities as well as a discussion of staff and
budget needs is provided in the Two-Year Action Plan, presented in Attachment A on page 69.
All of the priorities are summarized in the “At-a-Glance” overview, included just after the Table of
Contents at the beginning of this document.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
PURPOSE Why the priority is needed and the outcomes it will help achieve.
CONTEXT A brief overview of key findings and pertinent background information .
STEPS What needs to happen to develop and implement it.
LEAD Which City department or division will be the lead coordinator or implementor.
PARTNERS Other City departments or divisions plus other agencies and organizations to involve.
SCHEDULE Approximate timing for implementation.
RESOURCES Staffing or investment that will be needed to support implementation
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Pertinent examples from other communities
Links to relevant articles and other resources
Critical areas of focus for the first year of implementation
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 19
REPLACING THE HOUSING LOSS MITIGATION ORDINANCE
MITIGATING UNIT LOSS, SUPPORTING TENANTS , AND INCENTIVIZING AFFORDABILITY
The Thriving in Place work was initially launched, in part, by concerns regarding the City’s Housing
Loss Mitigation Ordinance. The purpose of that ordinance is to offset the loss of residential units
due to new development, but it has been largely ineffective for a number of re asons, which were
outlined to the City Council on April 12, 2022 (agenda item 10 at that meeting). Community
concerns about new market-rate developments resulting in the removal and loss of older affordable
housing has been one of the major drivers in the Thriving in Place work.
Through the actions proposed in the Thriving in Place strategy, the Housing Loss Mitigation Ordinance
will be replaced by a set of new policies, programs, and practices, including related code changes,
rather than by a single ordinance. Collectively, the goals of these actions are to:
• Support tenants who are impacted by the demolition of existing affordable housing due to
new development by providing relocation assistance;
• Retain, replace, or mitigate the loss of existing affordable housing when it is on properties
being rezoned for redevelopment, including “naturally occurring affordable housing” as well
as deed-restricted housing;
• Incentivize creation of more affordable housing citywide, especially units affordable at 50
percent of the area median income and below; and
• Ensure a workable strategy that is easy to implement, provides clarity, consistency, and
predictability, and is not precluded by state law.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 20
Both the Community Benefit and Affordable Housing Incentives policies rely on an incentives
approach that gives additional development capacity in return for affordable housing, as permitted
under state law. Even with all these policies and programs in place, a developer can decide to
proceed with redevelopment under the zoning already in place for their property and not be subject
to any requirement for mitigating the loss of existing units. However, the affected tenants would
still be eligible for relocation assistance (Priority 1A) and, when possible, given priority for deed-
restricted affordable housing in the local area (Priority 1B).
It’s important to note that the loss of existing units to new development is a fairly small contributor
to displacement, affecting less than one percent of housing units in the city between January 2020
and December 2022 (about 300 older units were demolis hed out of a total housing stock of about
88,000 units, while nearly 3,300 new units were created on those same properties).
By far the largest driver of displacement is rising rents and the growing gap between incomes and
housing prices. In the short-term, continuing to provide support for rental assistance and other
tenant services is critical, while in the long-term creating deed-restricted affordable housing will
help more people have secure housing that is not subject to rising market rents. These key
priorities—strengthening tenant protections and services while working to advance affordable
housing—have also been the focus of recent federal action, reflecting the fact that Salt Lake City is
not alone in facing these challenges and working to address them.
To achieve these goals, Thriving in Place proposes the following actions:
DEVELOP A TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM (PRIORITY 1A) to help lower income
renters cover the cost of relocating when they
are displaced by new development and helping
them find alternative housing that they can
afford and meets their needs.
ADOPT A PREFERENCE POLICY FOR DISPLACED
TENANTS (PRIORITY 1B) so that they have
priority in returning to new affordable units on
the redeveloped sites from which they were
displaced (when such units are created or
preserved due to the Community Benefit Policy)
or to other income-qualified affordable housing
units within the local area.
TRACK RENT AND AFFORDABILITY DATA (AS PART
OF PRIORITY 4B) to provide more robust and up-
to-date information for use in analyses that can
inform ongoing development review and decision
making.
ADOPT A COMMUNITY BENEFIT POLICY (PRIORITY
2A) to guide development review and decision
making for development proposals that seek a
change in zoning and/or master plan
amendment, helping ensure that affordable units
which might otherwise be demolished are
retained, replaced, or mitigated, and that the
supply of affordable housing is not reduced as
the result of new development. In addition to the
policy adoption, changes to city code will be
required.
ADOPT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES
POLICY (PRIORITY 3A) to encourage (through an
incentives-based approach) affordable housing in
new residential development.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 21
PROTEC T
PURPOSE Help tenants who are directly impacted by new development to find new living
arrangements they can afford and offset the cost of relocation.
CONTEXT While units lost to demolition are a fairly
small part of the displacement challenge (affecting less
than one percent of the city’s housing stock between
January 2020 and December 2022), the impact on
tenants who were living in those units can be profound.
Through the Phase One community engagement, we heard multiple accounts of people’s lives being
upended as they had to relocate due to demolition of their housing to make way for new
development, often feeling like they were the last ones to know what was going on and not knowing
who they could turn to for help. Many also described friends and neighbors having to move to
another neighborhood or other community, sometimes far from their current jobs, schools, and
support networks, while absorbing the cost of moving and facing the challenge of finding something
they can afford in an increasingly unaffordable market. The impact of such displacement and housing
insecurity generally can have long-lasting impacts on children’s health and well-being.
STEPS
1 Work with partners to develop the Relocation Assistance Program’s parameters,
requirements, and operating principles, helping ensure clarity on who it will serve, the
level of need, how it will operate, and the level of staffing and resources needed. Fa ctors to
consider include:
• How tenant information will be collected as part of the development review and demolition
permitting process.
• Whether to include other displacement triggers as making tenants eligible for relocation
assistance (such as being dislocated due to substantial building rehabilitation or due to a rent
increase of 10 percent or greater).
• How to ensure notification of tenants that might be impacted, making them aware of the
likely timeline for displacement and the assistance that is available to them.
• Establishing income guidelines to determine eligibility for assistance (likely set at 80% AMI).
• Working with eligible households to locate suitable new housing that meets their needs.
• The appropriate level of financial assistance to offset the costs of relocation and help them
enter into a new lease.
• Provision of relocation assistance, up to the program limits, even if the eligible household
decides to relocate outside of Salt Lake City.
• Whether the assistance program should be provided directly by the City or operated through a
community-based partner.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 1A
Develop a Tenant Relocation Assistance Program
Develop a Tenant Relocation Assistance Program to help those impacted by new
development find and afford living situations that meet their needs.
“It’s been an absolute nightmare since
being forced out of our home….”
FROM THRIVING IN PLACE INTERVIEW WITH WOMAN
DISPLACED DUE TO DEMOLITION FOR A NEW DEVELOPMENT
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 22
PROTEC T
Consider building off the structure already established in City code (Section 18.99.040, which
addresses tenants displaced when housing is closed by City action ) and in the Redevelopment
Agency’s current practices, which provide relocation assistance consistent with federal guidelines
(established in the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act, or URA).
2 Develop the program and establish the Relocation Assistance Fund for a two-year pilot
period, initially utilizing existing federal pass-through funds available to the City. These funds
can be supplemented or replaced by developer contributions following implementation of the
Community Benefits Policy (Priority 2A).
As currently envisioned, this fund would specifically focus on providing financial support and
assistance for relocation of income-qualified households. Ongoing rental assistance would be
through other sources (see Priority 1C).
If delivering the assistance program through a community partner, conduct a competitive process
that evaluates proposers based on qualifications, capacity, track record and cost in relation to
program parameters, operational needs, and criteria for success.
3 Launch the Relocation Assistance Program based on the outcome of Steps 1 and 2, and
ensure information about it is provided proactively to community partners, developers, landlords,
and tenant groups.
4 Evaluate, adjust and extend toward the end of the two-year pilot period, making adjustments
to the program based on lessons learned and establishing an ongoing program with adequate
resources and ongoing management systems.
LEAD Housing Stability Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
PARTNERS City Attorney’s Office; Planning Division, CAN; Redevelopment Agency (RDA);
plus community partners
SCHEDULE Launch by December 2023.
RESOURCES Staffing for program administration by community partner plus funds for relocation assistance.
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
The City of Seattle has had a Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance since 1990 to provide financial
assistance to low-income renters displaced by demolition, substantial renovation, or change in use (e.g., an
apartment building becoming a hotel). Under the ordinance, a property owner or developer must get a
Tenant Relocation License and then pay half of the relocation assistance provided to income-qualified
renters. The amount of assistance in 2022 was $4,486, with the developer paying half ($2,243) and the City
paying the other half. The fee is adjusted annually. More information on Seattle’s program is here.
More recently, the City of Austin adopted a Tenant Notification and Relocation Ordinance in 2016, for many
of the same reasons driving consideration of such an ordinance in Salt Lake City. Under Austin’s ordinance,
applicants for a demolition permit or discretionary land use approval for sites with five or more residential
units must provide information about the units and the tenants being impacted, show proof that notification
was provided to the tenants using City -provided information packets, and then pay relocation assistance
based on an approved fee calculation methodology (rather than a set fee amount, as in the Seattle program).
More information about Austin’s ordinance and its requirements can be found here.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 23
PROTEC T
PURPOSE Establish a preference policy for displaced tenants to return to the site or neighborhood
from which they were displaced when deed -restricted affordable housing units become available.
CONTEXT “Deed-restricted” housing units provide affordable living opportunities for their residents,
with rents set in relation to household income (typically at about 30 percent of their income). To live
in these affordable units, a household needs to have an inc ome below a set amount, which varies
based on the size of their household and the specifics of the deed restriction. Some units are
restricted to households making 80 percent or less of the area median income (AMI), some are set at
50 percent AMI, and so on. Some units are also specifically for seniors or for people with disabilities,
but generally affordable units must be available to anyone who meets the income qualifications, to
help counter discrimination and meet fair housing requirements.
To help ensure that local residents impacted by rising rents and displacement are given a priority for
affordable units, some communities have adopted a preference policy that gives qualified applicants
“extra points” in their application. This proposed policy would e stablish a preference for tenants
displaced from unsubsidized housing due to demolition, rehabilitation, or rising rents so that they
have the opportunity to return to the site or area from which they were displaced when deed -
restricted units become available. It works in conjunction with Priority 1A, the Tenant Relocation
Assistance Program, as well as 4C, Develop Capacity to Enforce and Manage Deed-Restricted Units.
STEPS
1 Establish a working group of City staff and key partners to outline the details of the policy
proposal and procedures for its ongoing implementation, including:
• What units and placement processes the policy would apply to (or could apply to by
establishing partnership agreements with managers of deed-restricted units that do not
receive City funds);
• Who would qualify for the preference and how their eligibility wo uld be documented;
• How the policy would apply to specific redevelopment sites where residents are being
displaced and deed-restricted units are being created.
2 Review and refine the draft policy, including proposed implementation procedures ,
with key stakeholders, including affordable housing managers, tenant groups and housing
advocates. Ensure that the policy is consistent with federal fair housing laws, state law, and
other City policies.
3 Conduct public review and policy adoption to ensure opportunities for public input and
refinement of the policy as needed prior to adoption.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 1B
Adopt a Displaced Tenants Preference Policy
Adopt a Displaced Tenants Preference Policy so that lower income tenants displaced due
to new development or rising rents are given priority for moving into deed-restricted units
created on the site or within the area from which they were displaced.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 24
PROTEC T
4 Work with partners to put the policy into practice, including updates to application forms
as necessary and mechanisms for ensuring that information about the policy is provided to
tenants displaced by new development (see Priority 1A).
LEAD Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
PARTNERS Housing Stability Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods; City Attorney’s
Office; Redevelopment Agency (RDA); Salt Lake City Housing Authority;
plus community partners
SCHEDULE Design and adopt policy by March 2024.
RESOURCES Will require staff time, but no ongoing budget commitment.
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
Portland, OR adopted a Preference Policy in 2015 for affordable housing in the city’s historically Black
neighborhoods in the North/Northeast parts of the city (referred to as the N/NE Preference Policy). The
purpose of the policy was to give priority to families that had been displaced from these neighborhoods to
return as new affordable housing was created. Details about the program can be foun d here, and an
evaluation of its first five years of operation can be foun d here, in a research paper published by Portland
State University that found the policy to be overall effective in advancing its goals.
More recently, in September 2022 the City of Denver adopted a preference policy to prioritize households
at risk of or who have been displaced from their neighborhood or from Denver with priority access to newly
developed or preserved housing.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 25
PROTEC T
PURPOSE Help tenants remain in their housing whenever possible by educating them and their
landlords about their rights and about the resources available to help them, including rent
assistance, mediation, and legal services, while expanding investment in those resources and
innovating in how they are delivered.
CONTEXT More than half (52 percent) of Salt Lake City’s residents are renters—and that percentage
continues to grow. But legal protections and resources for renters are limited, at best.
In the Thriving in Place survey, focus group conversations, and interviews, residents repeatedly
pointed to the limited tenant rights as a critical issue a nd concern. They feel like the deck is stacked
against them, and that renters are seen as second-class citizens, even as they face the reality of
never being able to attain homeownership given the disparity between incomes and home prices. As
rents have risen, many lower income renters have had no recourse other than to move farther away,
double up with family or friends, or live in their vehicle or on the street. Even in situations where
they have the legal right (like requesting repairs to address unsafe conditions), they do not exercise
it because they are afraid of retaliation via rent increases or eviction.
There are important changes to state law that could improve tenants’ rights (see Priority 6A), plus
expanding the supply of affordable housing is a critical long-term solution (see Priorities 2A and 2B
plus all of the priorities in Goal 3). But those actions will take time. In the near-term, improving and
expanding tenant resources, including legal assistance, is essential for helping to reduce evicti ons
and counter displacement.
STEPS
1 Increase awareness of funding for tenant assistance, including rent assistance, legal
services, and outreach, including:
• Solidify an ongoing source for rent assistance, as needed, including a set-aside fund for
relocation assistance to support tenants being dislocated as a result of housing demolitions
associated with redevelopment (see Priority 1A).
• Work with partners to pursue federal, state, and philanthropic grants and funding
opportunities, leverage community and university resources, and build political support for
expansion of resources and services to better meet the needs of low income renters who are
most at-risk from the growing gap between incomes and housing costs.
2 Innovate on service delivery, including how legal services are provided, to ensure
timely access to legal advice and support, including mediation services, that can help head -off
evictions.
• Continue and strengthen partnerships with other service agencies and funders as well as
community-based organizations that work directly with those most at -risk of displacement
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 1C
Improve and Expand Tenant Resources and Services
Improve and Expand Tenant Resources, Access to Legal Services, and Landlord Training
to better meet the level of need and protect tenant rights.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 26
PROTEC T
and in need of support, helping ensure that tenants are aware of and have access to legal
advice and mediation services as well as assistance that can help avoid eviction and increase
their housing security.
• Continue to work at the state level to secure greater tenant rights and protections, including
tenants’ right to counsel (see Priority 6A).
3 Make changes to the Landlord Tenant Initiative, also referred to as the “Good Landlord
Program,” to help landlords better understand tenant rights. This will help position them as
partners in reducing the risk of eviction by connecting tenants to the assistance that is available
to them and proactively reaching out to the City and partners when help is needed. In addition to
updating training materials, update forms that participants fill out to include information on
current rent levels in their properties as one additional means of having more up -to-date data
(with the data then aggregated for reporting purposes so that the property -specific information is
protected).
LEAD Housing Stability Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods
PARTNERS Business Licensing Division, Department of Finance; Salt Lake County Aging and Adult
Services; and community partners
SCHEDULE • Work with the Landlord Tenant Initiative to update forms and training materials by
July 2024.
• Work with legal service providers to identify unmet needs and explore innovations
in service delivery by July 2024.
RESOURCES Ongoing staffing and funding for tenant assistance and services, including legal services
and landlord training enhancements.
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
The City of Portland’s Rental Services Office provides
training for both landlords and tenants to help both
parties understand legal requirements as well as the
resources and services available from the City, other
agencies, and community partners to help resolve
disputes, provide assistance, avoid eviction, and
ensure compliance with local and state laws. The
office also provides a staffed help desk to help people
easily find what they need and provide referrals,
similar to the resource center concept in Priority 1D.
Photo by Chris Liverani on Unsplash
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 27
PROTEC T
PURPOSE Facilitate the process of connecting
lower income residents, especially renters,
with the resources and services that can help
them live more affordably and remain in their
housing.
CONTEXT Tenants who receive eviction notices
often do not know their rights and are not
familiar with the services or resources
available to help them. Helping them quickly
find and access available services can help
them stay in place or connect with resources
that can help improve their housing security.
Similarly, lower income homeowners are often
unaware of the programs and resources
available to help them meet their housing and
living costs, whether in the form of home repair loans, weatherization services, lower utility rates
and more.
The issue of not knowing about or having difficulty accessing available services was brought up by
residents during the Thriving in Place focus groups and interviews. While there are websites and
numbers to call that provide a list of programs, it is then time-consuming to wade through all the
details and sometimes even then it is hard to find what they need. This is especially true when
experiencing the stress of potential eviction.
This proposed action is in direct response to their input. It aims to create not only a centralized
clearinghouse and access point for helpful programs and services, but also a knowledgeable ally
committed to helping facilitate the process of connecting people to the help they need. This same
service can also help landlords understand the programs and services available to support their
tenants and help keep people in their housing during challenging times.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 1D
Create a Tenant Resource Center and Navigation Service
Create a Tenant Resource Center and Navigation Service to connect people to the services
they need, including affordable living resources and eviction prevention services.
The City’s Housing Stability Division maintains a list of affordable housing resources on its website,
including resources for homeowners and buyers, renters, seniors, people with disabilities, and more.
The Thriving in Place website also provides a list of City and partner resources (towards the bottom
of this page) aimed at helping lower income households meet their housing needs, including legal
services, as well as resources to achieve more affordable living, like reduced transit fares, food
access programs, and healthcare assistance. These are examples of the resources already available
that could be incorporated into the proposed program.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 28
PROTEC T
STEPS
1 Form a small working group of key City staff and partner representatives to develop a
more detailed vision for the resource center (both website and physical location), tenant support
team, and related navigation service, detailing the scope of work to develop and implement it.
Engage people who the program aims to serve in developing the vision and specific expectations.
2 Seek expressions of interest from those qualified to build the website and develop and staff
the resource center and navigation service. To the extent possible, include community
representatives in the selection process.
3 Create a Tenant Resource Center website with information about pertinent resources and
an intuitive interface that can be understood and navigated by people with limited computer
literacy and in multiple languages. Resourc es should include but not be limited to:
• Information on tenant rights under Utah and Salt Lake City law.
• Key resources for people facing potential eviction as well as people who have been evicted.
• Affordable housing and resources for people with special housing needs.
• “Affordable living” resources, such as reduced utility rate programs, reduced transit fare
programs, affordable childcare, mental health services, etc.
4 Develop and launch the navigation service in an easily accessible and visible community
space as a two-year pilot program to help people locate and access needed resources, not just
providing information but taking them through the process of accessing it and connecting to the
right people. The service could be housed within City government (physically located in a
community center or library space) but may work better in a community-based organization with
established ties of trust in the communities facing high displacement pressure. Note that this
action’s focus is on helping people access resources ; Priority 1c focuses on expanding resources.
5 Ensure effective marketing of the website and service to those who need it, working in
close collaboration with community-based partners to get the word out through channels,
formats and messaging that will reach those in need.
LEAD Housing Stability Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods
PARTNERS Public Utilities; Youth and Family Services; Transportation; UTA; Salt Lake County Aging
and Adult Services; and community partners
SCHEDULE Launch new Tenant Resource Center website, physical space, and navigation service by
March 2024.
RESOURCES Funding for two-year pilot to develop website, program information, and marketing
materials and to fund a community-based staff position as the navigator. Alternatively,
utilize an existing City staff position in a community -accessible location and repurpose
existing resources.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
This type of “one-stop shop” idea is not new, and has been applied in various aspects of government service
delivery in cities around the US and elsewhere. More recently, the idea of a “no-stop shop” has been
proposed as a data-driven service delivery model that delivers information and services directly to residents
based on information already known about them , with minimal or no intake forms and other barriers. A good
introduction to this concept can be found here, in a 2019 article in Governing Magazine.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 29
PROTEC T
PURPOSE Develop and invest in shared equity housing and other programs that can provide income-
qualified renters with the opportunity to build wealth, improve their financial security, and access
opportunities to become homeowners.
CONTEXT Homeownership is a fundamental way in which
many Utahns have grown their wealth, helping to provide
greater financial security not only for themselves but for
their kids and future generations. However, the growing gap
between incomes and home prices has made it increasingly
difficult—often impossible—for current generations of
residents to achieve homeownership.
It used to be a general rule of thumb for home purchasing
that you could afford a home about three times your annual
income. However, home prices in many cities today are
more than 10 times the median income. In Salt Lake City,
the median home sale price hovered just over $500,000 in
2021 (redfin.com), which was about 7.5 times the 2021
median household income of $66,658 (US Census Bureau,
American Community Survey).
Of course, this gap between incomes and costs also impacts renters—especially lower income renters
who may end up spending half or more of their income on rent. For these households, saving up for a
down payment is extremely challenging, especially when home prices get further out of reach. To
help address this gap, the City has provided a first-time homebuyer program and has started
investing in “shared equity” models of housing can help create pathways to o wnership and the many
benefits that entails (see Priority 2C). Having more deed-restricted rental housing where households
pay a fixed 30 percent of their income on rent also helps, providing more financial security and the
ability to save money over time (see Priority 2B and all of Goal 3, and the Action Highlight on page
31).
While the focus of Thriving in Place is on those most vulnerable to involuntary displacement (lower
income renters), the community survey and community conversations also highlighted the
displacement impact that many people feel when they try to become homeowners , realizing that
making the shift to homeownership will require looking elsewhere for a home. While this form of
displacement is voluntary, it is nonetheless impactful on those who feel they are forced to leave due
to the lack of affordable for-sale homes. It also has a significant community impact over time as the
housing market becomes more inequitable, with only those who are high income being able to
achieve homeownership. Helping more tenants become owners and build wealth is an important part
of a long-term anti-displacement strategy.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 1E
Help Tenants Become Owners
Help Tenants Become Owners to provide greater housing security and help them grow
equity and wealth over time.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 30
PROTEC T
STEPS
1 Convene key partners and stakeholders to identify near- and mid-term priorities for
investment in shared equity housing in Salt Lake City, including expansion of the Community Land
Trust (Priority 2C), new or preserved deed-restricted housing (Priorities 2A, 2B, 3A and 3D), or
other equity-building programs in addition to continuation of the City’s homebuyer assistance
program.
2 Identify funding goals, resource needs, and
investment priorities for the 2023/2024 period as well
as development priorities for the coming five years. In
developing a plan of action, consider:
• City-owned and other land resources that could be
prioritized for use in development of shared equity
housing.
• Strategies to ensure that units remain affordable over
time so that future lower income homebuyers can
benefit, too.
• Partnerships with organizations focused on helping
tenants build equity and become owners (see
example in the Action Highlight on page 31).
• Balancing the need for near-term rent assistance and
other services to head-off pending evictions with the
long-term priority of creating more shared equity
housing opportunities.
3 Review the priorities and balance of planned investments with members of the Anti-
Displacement Coalition (Priority 5B).
4 Coordinate investments, property development, outreach, and management of
shared equity units to leverage resources, achieve efficiencies, and maximize impact. Priority
4C is focused on developing the City’s capacity for managing and enforcing deed-restricted units.
Residents of the Oak Hill manufactured home
community in Taunton, MA celebrate the
purchase of their 247-homes thanks to help
from the Cooperative Development Institute.
LEAD Redevelopment Agency (RDA)
PARTNERS Housing Stability Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods; Housing
Authority of Salt Lake; Utah Housing Corp.; and community partners
SCHEDULE Identify shared equity housing priorities by 2024.
RESOURCES Funding to invest in more shared-equity housing models will be needed plus staff time
to work with partners and oversee program activities.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 31
PROTEC T
ACTION HIGHLIGHT
To advance the priority of helping lower income renters build equity, the City is considering a
partnership with Utah’s Perpetual Housing Fund and has proposed investing $10 million to help
capitalize their work in support of Salt Lake City renters.
The Perpetual Housing Fund is establishing a series of nonprofit tenant organizations that will each
have a 75 percent ownership stake in their building. Residents then build equity by being part-owners
of the building, essentially retaining a portion of their rent payment as an equity stake in addition to
gaining equity through building appreciation. The longer they stay in the building, the more equity
they accrue. The City’s investment will be combined with other funding sources (such as tax credits)
to capitalize projects, helping to reduce the project’s debt burden and enable affordable rents. The
program’s concept is illustrated below and described in more detail on their website.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
There are many, many examples of shared equity housing to learn from, as well as many groups that
provide training and technical assistance. Some good places to start include resources at the National
Housing Conference website and Grounded Solutions Network as well as this 2018 article from
ShelterForce on The State of Shared-Equity Homeownership. Locally, Perpetual Housing Fund (see
above) and Rocky Mountain Homes Fund also offer great models.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 32
PROTEC T
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
This 2010 research paper from The Urban Institute summarizes the investment and impact of 14 years of a
shared equity program operated by Thistle Community Housing in Boulder, CO. The paper provides
considerable details on the program’s investm ents and operations, through which 103 units were acquired
and 172 families served. In short, the research found Thistle’s program of providing homeownership
opportunities to low and moderate income families to be “outstanding,” serving homeowners who on a verage
earned 46 percent of the area median income; providing a median internal rate of return of 22 percent for
the homeowners (between purchase and resale), and 72 percent of the participants using their earnings to
subsequently purchase a market-rate home even as the homes in the shared equity program held their
affordability for subsequent participants.
Shared equity workforce housing developed by Thistle Community Housing.
A more recent program being developed in Durham, NC by the Durham Community Land Trustees combines
a land trust model with development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The program, called CLTplusOne, is
described in this case study brief from AARP. It combines the sale of a land trust home with creation of an
ADU, with the main home then selling to an income-qualified household at 80 percent of the area median
income (AMI) or below, and the ADU renting to a tenant at 60 percent AMI or below (while the land remains
in the ownership of the land trust). The model creates two housing units where only one was before; creates
an additional income stream for the homeowner; and creates an affordable rental unit for a lower income
household, too. The program launch was funded by a $50,000 grant from NeighborWorks in 2020. It is too
early to know its impact, but is a great example of an innovative approach that is advanc ing multiple
community housing goals.
Another way in which communities are helping to facilitate the process of tenants becoming owners is
through Tenant and/or Community Opportunity to Purchase policies and programs, which establish a right
of first refusal for tenants or community organizations to purchase a building when that building is put on the
market. This is a strategy that was first adopted in Washington, DC in 1980, subsequently helping preserve
nearly 1,400 units of affordable housing between 2002 and 2013. While this strategy may not be viable in
Salt Lake City at this time, it could be a useful strategy to consider in the future.
Photo by Sally Moser via Thistle Communities
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 33
PROTEC T
PURPOSE Help connect lower income renters in Salt Lake City with education and job training
opportunities that can lead to increased incomes, and continue to invest in affordable living
resources like high quality transit-oriented development, transit services, and energy -efficient
housing that can help reduce monthly living costs.
CONTEXT In addition to providing rental assistance and
other services that can help people stay in their homes, it
is important to help people save money in other aspects
of their lives, improve their incomes through education
and job training, and get paid more fairly for the work
they do.
Salt Lake City’s Department of Economic Development
works to develop educational pathways for youth,
providing more exposure to good jobs that they might not
otherwise be thinking of, while the State of Utah’s
Department of Workforce Services (DWS) provides tools
and resources for adult job training and career
development. DWS has also started providing short-term
rental assistance to low-income individuals to help them
cover their costs while in short-term training programs.
Other resources are also available via Salt Lake County and the Salt Lake Community College.
Additionally, where people live can have a significant impact on their transportation costs as well as
their access to opportunities like good schools and jobs. Being able to walk, bike, or take transit can
contribute to overall affordability and make the difference between being able to afford rent or
having to move—which can have many hidden costs apart from just the cost of housing.
Based on 2021 data from the US Census’ American Community Survey, about 7,500 renter households
in Salt Lake City do not own a car (about 18 percent of renter households). For these residents,
where they live and the transport options they have access to has a big impact. The City’s work to
create mixed-use communities and more transit-oriented development as well as program s to create
and support car-sharing and other mobility solutions are a key part of supporting affordable living
and helping people thrive.
STEPS
1 Include economic development and job training partners in the Anti-Displacement
Coalition (Priority 5B) and in the offerings of the Tenant Resource Center (Priority
1D) to help connect lower income residents with the resources already available and to help
facilitate co-development of new opportunities and resources.
2 Build in job training and “connection” opportunities for lower income residents
whenever possible in the development of new affordable housing (like construction jobs) and
the delivery of services. Be aware of the potential barriers to participating in job training and
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 1F
Grow People’s Incomes
Promote Affordable Living and Better Jobs to help bridge the gap between what people
earn and what housing costs.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 34
PROTEC T
career development opportunities, and work with partners to help overcome them. For example ,
taking a class typically means a drop in work hours and compensation. Helping lower income
residents access rent assistance during short-term training commitments can help make their
participation feasible. State DWS provides this kind of assistance, but it is not often utilized.
3 Integrate services in affordable housing and continue to support transit-oriented
development (Priority 3E), including services such as affordable childcare, health clinics,
training rooms, arts programs, job-training opportunities, and carshare programs so that they are
easily accessible and a part of people’s daily lives.
4 Consider piloting a local Guaranteed Income program (see “Food for Thought”) in
collaboration with local nonprofits and monitor the cost and benefits as a strategy for improving
families’ financial stability as well as their health, employment, and housing security.
LEAD Workforce Development Manager, Economic Development Department
PARTNERS Housing Stability Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods;
Redevelopment Agency (RDA); Utah Transit Authority (UTA); Public Utilities; Salt Lake
City Arts Council; Utah Department of Workforce Services; Salt Lake Community
College; University of Utah; and community partners
SCHEDULE Ongoing
RESOURCES Will need to be determined on a program-by-program basis for new initiatives.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
A growing number of communities are developing local
programs to provide a “guaranteed income,” provided as a
cash payment directly to individuals. These “no strings
attached” unconditional payments supplement rather than
replace other forms of assistance to provide financial
stability that helps low-income families achieve housing
security and mental and emotional wellbeing. The City of
Tacoma recently completed a year-long pilot program -–
Growing Resilience in Tacoma, or GRIT –- in collaboration
with Pierce County United Way and Mayors for a
Guaranteed Income that supported 110 families with a $500
per month payment. In return, the families agreed to
participate in research about the program’s impacts, being
led by the Center for Guaranteed Income Research at the
University of Pennsylvania. The preliminary impacts of
the program are consistent with pilots that have been
conducted elsewhere, including in Stockton, CA, with
participants reporting lower income volatility, higher rates
of employment and overall improvements in health,
including less depression and anxiety.
Participants in the 2019 Stockton Economic
Empowerment Demonstration (SEED) program
received $500 a month for two years, no strings
attached, and documented the impact on their job
prospects, financial stability, and overall well-
being. The program’s impacts are summarized in
this NPR article.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 35
PRESERVE
PURPOSE Establish a Community Benefit Policy by which new developments preserve, replace, or
otherwise mitigate the demolition of existing housing units in return for an increase in development
capacity, with a focus on retaining or replacing affordability.
CONTEXT As explained at the start of this section, the City’s Housing Loss Mitigation Ordinance was
originally adopted in response to housing being lost to new development. Over the years, however,
the structure and mechanisms of the ordinance have come into question, and while it is focused on
mitigating the loss of units, it does not focus specifically on the affordability of those units.
When the City considers changes to zoning designations and amendments to master plans requested
by developers, it does so through a discretionary review process that is memorialized in a
development agreement. This agreement outlines the conditions for approval: that is, what public
benefit the development must provide in order to receive the increase in deve lopment capacity. The
final agreement is approved by the City Council and becomes part of the property’s entitlement (so
that if the property is sold, it carries with it the approved zoning as well as the conditions of
approval).
The purpose of the Community Benefit Policy is to guide developers, residents, staff and decision
makers in the development agreement process, setting expectations for public benefits to be
provided in return for changes to zoning and master plans. In this case, the specific benefi t to be
advanced is the preservation of affordable units that already exist on a property or the replacement
of those units with new units that are similar in size and affordability, as well as on ensuring
relocation assistance for the impacted tenants (see Priority 1A).
So for example if there are two older duplexes (4 units) on a property for which a developer is
seeking approval to rezone for development of a 40-unit apartment building, 4 of the units in the
new building would need to be affordable at a similar level as to what the duplexes were renting for,
and with the same number of bedrooms. Alternatively, if the site’s configuration allows it, the
duplexes could be retained and preserved as affordable units in conjunction with development of the
new apartments. In situations where the new development is not residential or creating the
affordable units on-site is problematic, an in-lieu fee could be calculated to be approximately the
same as the cost of providing the affordable unit on -site, but allowing the unit or units to be built on
another site via the City’s Housing Development Fund.
The City could also allow for other ways to provide the affordable housing benefit, like a land
donation (via another site or through subdivision of the site being developed), with the value of the
donated land being similar in value to the calculated in -lieu fee. Another option would be to
establish a deed restriction on unsubsidized units in another property (through purchase and
rehabilitation or other means). These options and how they would apply would be outlined in the
Community Benefits Policy and included in the City’s code, and then determined and applied through
the voluntary development agreement process.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 2A
Develop and Adopt a Community Benefit Policy
Adopt a Community Benefit Policy to prioritize preservation or replacement of affordable
housing as a condition of approval for changes to zoning designations and master plans.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 36
PRESERVE
Important Note: When new development happens that can be implemented “by right,” without a
change in zoning or master plan, it may proceed without any mitigation for the impacted units
(although Tenant Relocation Assistance—Priority 1A—would still be available to support the impacted
tenants).
STEPS
1 Convene a Working Group of key City staff, housing experts, and community partners to work
together in undertaking the steps outlined below.
2 Craft a Community Benefit Policy and related code changes that factor in and address:
• Definition of Affordability. Define “affordable units” to include both deed-restricted housing
and lower rent unsubsidized housing (often referred to as “naturally occurring affordable
housing”) based on rent levels and area median incomes, with a focus on preserving or
replacing affordable units serving households at 80 percent of Area Median Income and below.
• Documentation of Impacted Units. Establish a process by which the size and affordability of
units proposed for demolition will be documented. This can be via City data related to the
property and the affordability of older housing units in the area (See Priority 4B, which calls
for collecting and tracking data that could be used for this purpose) and/or via information
provided by the developer in their application, including unit size and age as well as
substantiated rent data.
• Definition of Community Benefit. Define community benefit in the City’s code (Title 21A),
focused on the retention and expansion of affordable housing for lower income households
(80% of AMI and below). Include the payment of an in-lieu fee or land donation as options for
how an affordable housing community benefit may be provided in return for the increase in
development capacity and loss of existing affordable units. Establish a sliding scale that
factors the number of impacted units on the site as well as their size and affordability, and
relate the level of community benefit to the level of increase in development capacity.
• Options In-Lieu of On-Site Units. In addition to preserving or creating affordable units on-
site, define other options to meet the community benefit requirement:
o In-Lieu Fee Payment. Engage a consultant to analyze and establish a payment amount
roughly equivalent to the cost of preserving or replacing a unit on -site that the
developer could pay instead of providing the on-site unit. This is different than a
“nexus” fee study or impact fee study used to justify a fee that is being levied on a
project. The purpose of this fee is to provide the developer with flexibility in how t o
provide community benefit in return for an increase to the property’s allowed
development intensity. The fee calculation can be as simple as “square footage of the
impacted units multiplied by the current year’s average per -square-foot construction
cost” for the relevant type of development (e.g., mid -scale multi-family
development). Or it could be based on an annual survey of typical affordable housing
development costs, by type and size.
o Land Donation. The in-lieu fee calculation can also be used to establish an equivalent
land value if the developer would prefer to donate land rather than pay to
build/preserve the units on-site or pay the fee. This could be achieved through
subdivision of the subject property to create a separate site for affordable housing, or
through provision of another site in the area. The property chosen for donation must
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 37
PRESERVE
be agreed to by the City as a suitable housing site that the City and its partners can
use to create as many or more affordable units than the number being lost due to
demolition and is in a desirable location for affordable housing.
o Deed Restriction of Unsubsidized Units on Another Site. As a variation of the land
donation or fee payment option, the Community Benefit Policy could allow developers
to pay for deed restriction of unsubsidized units on another site, ideally one identified
by the City as a site or area where naturally occurring affordable housing is present
and could be preserved via purchase, rehabilitation and/or recording of a restrictive
covenant to preserve affordability for income qualified households.
• Tenant Relocation Support. Include a per-unit contribution to the Tenant Relocation Fund as
part of the community benefit package whenever income-qualified tenants are being
displaced as a result of unit demolition or reconstruction.
• Legislative Process. Establish a structure, criteria, and process for legislative approval of
zoning changes and master plan amendments in return for the retention or replacement of
affordable housing as a community benefit. While other community benefits (e.g., pedestrian
amenities, community green space, etc.) may be identified in the code and provided as part
of a specific development agreement, the primary objective should be focused on the
retention and creation of affordable housing.
• Business Process. Develop intake forms, guidance for evaluation of applications and
development of agreements, clarity on roles/responsibilities between divisions, clarity on
where in-lieu fees are paid and who manages them, and procedu res for documentation and
enforcement of agreements.
3 Adopt the Community Benefit Policy and related updates to codes, repealing the existing
Housing Loss Mitigation Ordinance.
LEAD Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
PARTNERS City Attorney’s Office; Redevelopment Agency (RDA); Planning Division, CAN; Housing
Stability Division, CAN; Building Services
SCHEDULE Develop and adopt by December 2024, including needed code updates.
RESOURCES Will require reprioritization of the Planning Division’s work plan and/or funding for
consultant support (for the in-lieu fee analysis) and/or staffing. Ongoing funding for
policy implementation, including enforcement and ongoing program management, will
be determined through the work steps outlined above.
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
The City of Boulder, CO established a new Community Benefit Program in 2019 that in creases the affordable
housing requirements (from what is already required under its inclusionary housing program) for
developments that seek a modification to the City’s height limits. The program was put in place through
amendments to the City’s code for site review, as detailed in the Ordinance adopted by City Council.
Boulder is now undertaking Phase 2 of the program’s development.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 38
PRESERVE
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Community Benefit Programs vary in how they are structured and implemented, but are based on the core
concept of “value capture.” This white paper from the California Planning Roundtable on Best Practices for
Implementing a Community Benefits Program provides an overview of that concept and guidance on how to
approach development of a program. Further, in defining “Community Benefit,” some might wonder how
affordable housing fits. This article in Forbes magazine, How Whole Communities Benefit from Affordable
Housing, outlines the multiple community benefits that can be realized by the retention and creation of
affordable housing.
COMMUNITY BENEFIT AGREEMENTS
CAPTURING COMMUNITY VALUE FROM LARGE, IMPACTFUL INVESTMENTS
Similar in concept to the Community Benefit Policy, but different in its process and mechanisms, is a
displacement mitigation tool called Community Benefit Agreements, or CBAs. These project-specific
agreements are created through direct negotiation between community organizations representing residents
who will be impacted by the project (including those who will be directly displaced) and the developer or
agency undertaking the project.
CBAs are often associated with large-scale projects like a new stadium or convention center, a highway or
roadway widening, a large transit project or a multi -block redevelopment project. Because these projects
are often located in areas where historically marginalized communities live, they provide a valuable
mechanism for those communities to have a direct voice in how impacts are addressed and help ensure that
at least some of the value being created is applied to their benefit. The resulting legally binding agreements
often address issues like resident relocation, creation or preservation of affordable housing, construction
jobs for local workers, mitigation of construction impact s, and creation or preservation of community
facilities like parks, community centers or schools.
A CBA could be applied in any large-scale redevelopment
or infrastructure project that requires a rezone and/or
where public funds are being applied. Further information
about CBAs can be found in this 2005 paper titled
Community Benefits Agreements: Making
Development Projects Accountable, and even on the
website of the Federal Highway Administration, which
includes case studies like Atlanta’s Beltline (shown at
right) and the Gates-Cherokee Redevelopment in Denver.
The Utah Department of Transportation’s proposed
widening of Interstate 15 presents a near-term
opportunity for the State and City to collaborate on ensuring that the Westside communities that will be
directly impacted by the project have a direct voice in deciding how to best mitigate its impacts. These
communities have experienced decades of neglect from redlining and its associated disinvestment, and now
are bearing the brunt of gentrification and displacement’s impacts. The I-15 project and others like it
provide an opportunity to change this dynamic and ensure that public investments create benefits not only
for the larger region but also for those communities that most bear the impacts of the investment.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution / Jenni Gurtman
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 39
PRESERVE
PURPOSE Invest in the rehabilitation and deed restriction of existing unsubsidized housing in places
where it already exists, helping to stabilize neighborhoods at high risk of displacement.
CONTEXT Many older housing units rent for prices that lower income households can afford, without
any subsidy or restriction. They are typically more affordable due to their age, quality, and/or
location, and are referred to as “naturally occurring affordable housing.”
However, as rents have risen, many of these units are becoming unaffordable. The frequency and
impact of rising rents was brought up over and over during the Thrivin g in Place community
conversations and survey, and identified as a core driving factor in the displacement risk analysis.
Sometimes rents rise because improvements are made to the building or unit or because overall
expenses have risen due to inflation, but sometimes rents are just increased because there is more
demand than supply and there are people willing and able to pay more. This dynamic —of people with
higher incomes renting lower cost units—was highlighted in the Urban Displacement Project’s work.
While rent stabilization policies are not currently possible in Utah, the City and its partners can
invest in purchasing existing housing and then establish “deed restrictions” so that rents are set to
correspond with the incomes of the renter. This is already being done by the City and its partners,
but could be increased, as it is typically less costly than building affordable housing from scratch. It
also has the benefit of maintaini ng the existing neighborhood fabric and creating affordable housing
where lower income renters already live.
The Redevelopment Agency has a Housing Development Loan Program that can be used to incentivize
the preservation of affordable units, offered on an annual, competitive basis. It also allocates funds
to acquire properties within project areas, including the acquisition and preservation of existing
housing. These activities and investments could be expanded, and could be targeted to focus on
specific areas or properties with high displacement risk.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 2B
Acquire and Rehabilitate Unsubsidized Housing
Invest More in the Acquisition and Rehabilitation of Unsubsidized Affordable Housing to
maintain it as a long-term community asset.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 40
PRESERVE
STEPS
1 Continue and expand funding for the acquisition, rehabilitation, and preservation of older
housing units.
• Set aside a higher proportion of City and Redevelopment Agency funds for acquisition and
rehabilitation, including grants or forgivable loans to small landlords in return for putting a
deed restriction in place.
• Pursue more state, federal, and philanthropic grant funds.
2 Identify priority acquisition opportunities working in partnership with community
organizations, with a particular focus on neighborhoods facing high displacement risk (Priority 5C)
or specific buildings where affordable units might otherwise be lost . Focus in particular on
opportunities in areas where other City or public agency inv estments might contribute to rising
property values and eventual displacement, and on meeting special housing needs, especially in
buildings where seniors, people with disabilities, and others already reside. Keep some funds
aside to support being nimble in response to unforeseen opportunities.
3 Develop a small landlord incentive program that provides low- or no-interest financing
and/or grants for rehabilitation of unsubsidized units in return for placing an affordability deed
restriction on the units.
4 Issues Notices of Funding Availability (NOFAs) or Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for
partner organizations to bid on acquisition opportunities or for landlords to apply for
rehabilitation funds. To the extent possible leverage other funding to undertake rehabilitation
and support ongoing management of the improved units as long-term affordable housing.
5 Ensure that partners work with tenants in acquired properties to identify priority
improvements and to develop strategies for managing building rehabilitation in a manner that
minimizes disruptions and displacement.
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
Enterprise Community Partners is a national nonprofit that works with local governments and communities to
create and preserve affordable housing for low-income families. This report, Preserving Affordability,
Preventing Displacement, provides an overview of their work in three Bay Area communities to acquire and
rehabilitate unsubsidized affordable housing and make it a part of each community’s long -term affordable
housing supply. It also summarizes key lessons from their work in these and other communities that can be
applied in further developing Salt Lake City’s acquisition and rehabilitation program.
LEAD Redevelopment Agency (RDA)
PARTNERS Housing Stability, Department of Community and Neighborhoods; Housing Authority of
Salt Lake City; Utah Housing Corporation; Utah Housing Preservation Fund ; and
community partners
SCHEDULE Ongoing, with annual or bi-annual identification of priorities and issuance of Notices of
Funding Availability (NOFAs).
RESOURCES Will need to be determined, guided by goal of expanding investment in this are a (see
Strategic Priority 4A and Attachment A).
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 41
PRESERVE
PURPOSE Grow the City’s Community Land Trust and support similar community -based initiatives to
help leverage land assets for long-term affordability.
CONTEXT Community Land Trusts (CLTs) are a form of shared equity housing (see Priority 1E) that
can support long-term affordability and wealth building. In a CLT, the underlying land stays in
community ownership while the homes on that land are sold at affordable prices, providing an
opportunity for lower income households to become homeowners and to build equi ty, eventually
selling their home to another income-qualified homeowner at an affordable price. CLTs can also
support long-term affordability in multi -family rentals, as well as other types of desired community
development, like affordable commercial spaces for local businesses. There are over 250 CLTs
around the US.
Salt Lake City created a CLT in 2017. With Council’s adoption of Resolution 12 that year (which
satisfied the requirements of Utah Code Section 10-8-2), they authorized the City to sell properties
at below-market value to facilitate affordable homeownership opportunities. City-owned property,
which is currently limited to single-family homes, is placed into the trust; homebuyers purchase the
housing unit and lease the land from the City at a below -market rate. When a homeowner decides to
sell, the homeowner and City share the accumulated equity.
The City’s CLT leverages its Homebuyer Program, which has been in operation since the 1990s. That
program provides mortgage financing for low and moderate-income households to achieve
homeownership. The City currently holds approximately 215 mortgages with about $19 million in
outstanding debt. Approximately two to three new mortgages are issued on an annual basis, although
escalating home prices has made finding suitable properties more challenging in recent years. If
homeowners that have a mortgage through the program want to sell within the first 15 years, they
must offer the home to the City for purchase pursuant to buyback provisions in the mortgage
agreement. Housing Stability has purchased several of these home s and placed them in the CLT to
ensure perpetual affordability. The City has a significant opportunity to continue to grow the CLT by
acting on the buyback provision as the homeowners elect to sell their homes.
In addition to the City’s program, NeighborWo rks Salt Lake operates a new CLT, and there is the
potential to expand the City’s current program to include multi -unit buildings as well as mixed use
projects that can support affordable commercial space in addition to shared equity housing.
Resources for growing the CLT model can include City-owned properties and other public agency
properties that are dedicated to affordable housing development (keeping the l and in the CLT while
partnering with developers to build affordable for-sale or rental units); land donations via the
Community Benefit Policy (Priority 2B) or via land set-asides in Redevelopment Agency Project Areas;
and philanthropic donations. Importantly, the Redevelopment Agency is currently in the process of
developing a Westside Community Initiative that proposes using tax increment funds and shared
equity housing models to help ensure long-term affordability for projects.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 2C
Invest in Community Land Trusts
Invest in Community Land Trust Models to support long-term affordability and equitable
development.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 42
PRESERVE
STEPS
1 Convene a City working group to develop and refine the City’s CLT strategy and
legislative policy, helping to build alignment across the organization on the City’s vision and
goals for growth of its CLT and how it will be managed over time as it grows. This could be done
via the City Implementation Team (Priority 5A) or as an ad-hoc group.
2 Build Council and community awareness of the CLT model and how it contributes to
achieving long-term community goals. Highlight how the program operates; its current and
planned assets; and the strategy for growing the CLT program over time.
3 Ensure that City-owned lands contributed for affordable housing and related
development are held by the CLT or similar mechanism to ensure that the housing created
remains affordable in perpetuity as a community-serving asset.
4 Build the necessary capacity to manage CLT assets as they grow, through investment in
the City’s program management or through partnership with a suitable mission -driven
organization.
5 Seek private and philanthropic land donations that can add to the CLT’s holdings and
support the community’s long-term affordable housing goals, providing as possible tax benefits
for the donations.
6 Work with partners to grow and sustain other community -based CLTs, helping them to
fund, develop, and manage CLT-owned housing and other community-serving amenities that
advance equitable development.
LEAD Housing Stability Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods
PARTNERS Redevelopment Agency (RDA); Real Estate Services; Salt Lake City Housing Authority;
City Attorney’s Office; and community partners
SCHEDULE Adopt Community Land Trust (CLT) legislative policy by December 2023.
RESOURCES Will need to be determined, guided by goal of expanding investment in this area (see
Strategic Priority 4A and Attachment A). Publicly owned lands prioritized for affordable
housing (Priority 3D) can also be placed into the CLT.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
The Grounded Solutions Network grew out of what used to be the National Community Land Trust Network.
Its website provides a great place to learn more about the Community Land Trust model and to access
resources like their Startup Hub, Resource Library, and Community Land Trust Technical Manual. Another
great resource is this Guide for Local Governments from the National League of Cities as well as this white
paper by two of the Grounded Solution Network’s leaders, Emily Thaden and Tony Pickett, that provides an
overview of the CLT model, its benefits, and lessons learned from three case studies in Boston, Minneapolis
and Houston.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 43
PRESERVE
PURPOSE Develop a cohesive policy for short-term rentals, with a focus on mitigating their impact on
the city’s rental housing and residential neighborhoods, with a workable enforcement mechanism.
CONTEXT Under the City’s zoning code it is illegal to have short-term rentals (STRs, i.e., housing
rented for less than 30 days, via Airbnb, VRBO, and similar services) in any part of Salt Lake City that
does not allow hotel/motel uses, which means they are not allowed in residential areas. However,
everyone knows that such rentals occur throughout the city, with a particularly high frequency in
some neighborhoods. According to a June 2022 Policy Brief, Short-Term-Rental Inventory, from the
Kern C. Gardner Policy Institute, there were 1,358 STRs in Salt Lake City in 2021, represe nting 1.4
percent of the city’s housing stock.
In some ways, short-term rental of a room in a house, a basement apartment, or a backyard cottage
can help households supplement their income, making it possible to afford housing that might
otherwise be out of reach. However, because the nightly rate for short-term rentals is higher than
what would be possible from a longer-term rental (i.e., renting for more than 30 days, under a
typical lease agreement), they can erode the supply of what would otherwise be l onger term rentals
and put upward pressure on rent prices in general (see this Harvard Business Review article from
2019, Research: When Airbnb Listings in a City Increase, So Do Rent Prices). Short-term rentals
also impact neighborhoods in other ways, with people having to live with hotel -like uses as their
neighbors.
Under current state law, it is extremely difficult for the City to monitor and enforce STR restrictions
because it is illegal to monitor STR online listings for enforcement. Despite the small percentage of
housing impacted (per the Kern C. Gardner Policy Institute’s report), there is value in developing a
long-term policy and enforcement strategy for STRs. At a minimum, the City should have a
mechanism for capturing revenue from these rentals to help mitigate their impact by funding
affordable housing initiatives. Beyond that, having a workable mechanism to monitor short-term
rentals and enforce where they are located and how they are managed will benefit everyone.
STEPS
1 Convene a working group with key internal and external stakeholders, including
representatives from landlord groups, the hospitality indus try, and neighborhood organizations.
2 Understand the extent of the issue and options for addressing key areas of concern,
including impacts on the rental housing supply, impacts on neighborhoods, and benefits to
property owners. Look to examples from other communities for options about how to structure a
local regulatory framework, including licensing requirements, limitations on types of properties
and locations, inspections, taxes and fees, and enforcement mechanisms.
3 Seek community input on options and trade-offs.
4 Develop policy and program recommendations and seek Council approval.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 2D
Address Short-Term Rentals’ Impacts
Develop an Enforceable Strategy to Address the Impact of Short-Term Rentals on the
city’s rental housing stock.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 44
PRESERVE
5 Enact the new rules and ensure consistent enforcement, with monitoring and reporting to
support program adjustments over time in response to lessons learned and changing context.
LEAD Planning Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
PARTNERS Housing Stability Division, CAN; City Attorney’s Office; Building Services; Business
Licensing; Civil Enforcement
SCHEDULE Initiate in 2024
RESOURCES Will likely require consultant support to complete a study and community process plus
staff time for project management, policy adoption process and implementation
(ongoing costs could potentially be covered by licensing fees or STR tax).
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
Nearby Summit County is highly impacted by STRs, with the Kern C. Gardner Policy Institute’s report
estimating that 21.5 percent of the county’s housing units are STRs. Both the County and Park City have
adopted regulations for STRs, and have been actively considering additional regulations within the limits
established by State law (while lobbying the State to adjust those limit ations). When Salt Lake City begins to
develop its STR policy and enforcement strategy, these communities will be a valuable resource given that
they are operating under the same state regulatory framework.
Another community to learn from is Denver, CO, which like many communities requires STRs to be
someone’s primary residence (i.e., they cannot be undertaken as a business) and that they be licensed,
inspected, and taxed. This publication from Granicus can also be helpful: A Practical Guide to Effectively
Regulating Short-Term Rentals on the Local Government Level.
Photo by Romolo Tavani on Getty Images / iStockphoto
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 45
PRODUCE
PURPOSE Incentivize the creation of affordable units in new market-rate residential developments.
CONTEXT The City’s Planning Division is developing a proposal for Council’s consideration that would
incentivize the creation of affordable housing in the city’s residential zoning districts by providing
developers with choices that would provide them with benefits (additional development capacity) in
return for including affordable units in their development. The proposal is similar t o inclusionary
housing programs in other communities but operates on an incentive basis, in keeping with Utah
state law. Developers would not be required to utilize the incentive and could proceed to develop
their property under the regulations already in place for that zone district, without including any
affordable units.
The project is already in process, with anticipated adoption in 2024. The proposed changes would
advance the Thriving in Place strategy’s goal of producing more affordable housing and work in
conjunction with other priority actions aimed at creating more affordable housing in other ways
(e.g., through direct City and partner investment, use of public lands, etc.).
STEPS
1 Support adoption of the proposed Affordable Housing Incentives being developed by the
Planning Division, with refinements as needed based on community input and Council
deliberations.
2 Clarify how the Affordable Housing Incentives do or do not apply when the proposed
Community Benefit Policy is being applied to a new residential development that has
existing affordable housing on the site. Would retaining the existing housing be allowed to count
towards the affordability requirement in the incentives? If the units are replaced, do the new
units need to be of comparable size?
3 Ensure appropriate support for the policy’s implementation as well as for the
monitoring and enforcement of deed-restricted units created as a result of the policy (see
Strategic Priority 4C).
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 3A
Adopt the Affordable Housing Incentives Policy
Adopt the Affordable Housing Incentives Policy to encourage the construction of additional
affordable housing in market-rate developments.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
LEAD Planning Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
PARTNERS City Attorney’s Office; Housing Stability Division, CAN; Redevelopment Agency (RDA)
SCHEDULE Anticipate adoption by June 2024.
RESOURCES Current effort is already staffed; however support will be needed for implementation.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strate gy 46
PRODUCE
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
There are many examples of inclusionary housing programs around the country. While many establish
requirements for inclusion of affordable units, others are set-up as an opt-in incentive (often referred to as
density bonuses). For example, in California the State adopted a statewide density bonus law th at creates an
incentive for developers to include affordable housing in new developments as well as a path for going above
locally established density limits. Based on the law, a developer can apply for an increase in development
intensity in any jurisdiction in the state in return for including affordable housing. This table summarizes
the different levels of incentive. In addition developers can request up to three variances from standards
that might prevent them from achieving the higher density (e.g., height, setbacks, parking).
This webpage at Local Housing Solutions provides a helpful overview of how these programs work, along
with multiple case studies from around the country, including incentive -focused policies (like the
“Affordability Unlocked” program in Austin, TX, where mandatory inclusionary zoning is also prohibited at
the state level).
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 47
PRODUCE
PURPOSE Support the development of accessory dwelling units
(ADUs) in Salt Lake City to create new rental housing
opportunities in existing neighborhoods and provide income
generation for homeowners, with particular focus on helping
lower income homeowners create ADUs.
CONTEXT ADUs help add rental housing in established
neighborhoods, create more neighborhood diversity, and can
help owners generate income to offset other costs . While
ADUs are sometimes used for non-housing purposes (a home
office, a guest room, or an illegal short-term rental) they are
often used for their intended purpose: as a second housing
unit on a property where there was previously just one.
Creating ADUs can be challenging. Most homeowners don’t even know where to begin: how to
evaluate the financial costs and benefits; how to navigate city codes and processes; how to find a
designer and financing, or even how to go about being a landlord.
The City can make it easier and less expensive to build ADUs through improved information that is
understandable to homeowners; by helping connect homeowners to ADU designers and low - or no-
cost plans; by reducing fees; and by making review processes transparent, fast, a nd efficient. The
City can also support homeowners—especially lower income homeowners—by connecting them to
low-interest financing and having an identified ADU liaison to be their ally through the process.
There are also opportunities to encourage homeowners to rent their ADUs to income-qualified
renters.
The State has enacted some recent code changes to remove obstacles to ADU development, and the
City has been working on updates to its ADU ordinance as well. An ADU taskforce of City staff from
multiple departments currently meets quarterly to coordinate on ADU-related work efforts. Further
steps can be taken, as outlined below, to expand upon these efforts.
STEPS
1 Continue and expand upon the work of the City’s ADU taskforce, completing the work
already underway to update the City’s ADU ordinance, to identify a nd implement cost-reduction
strategies for new ADUs (such as utility fees), and to streamline the ADU review and approval
process.
2 Consider designating an ADU Liaison position within the City organization to assist
homeowners in understanding and navigating the City’s process, accessing ADU resources, and
coordinating the City’s ADU work efforts.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 3B
Make ADUs Easier and Less Expensive to Build
Improve information, resources, and processes to help support the creation of accessory
dwelling units (ADUs) as a strategy for infill housing in existing neighborhoods.
Photo by Daniel McCullough on Unsplash
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 48
PRODUCE
3 Explore the potential for creating a staffed ADU Resource Center that could serve Salt
Lake City and other communities in the region to support homeowners, assist jurisdictions with
ADU policies and programs, and grow the ADU marketplace (see Food for Thought, below).
LEAD Planning Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
PARTNERS Redevelopment Agency (RDA); Housing Stability Division, CAN; Building Services; Public
Utilities; Fire Department
SCHEDULE Adopt updates to the ADU Ordinance by 2023; other work continues.
RESOURCES May require additional staffing to implement some ideas and/or funding to support
development of specific ADU tools and resources .
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
The City of San Jose, CA has prioritized development of more
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) as part of their response to an
extreme shortage of affordable housing. To make ADU development
as easy as possible, they have established a pre-approved ADU
plans program that provides a variety of ADU designs that have
already been reviewed for building code compliance as well as
same-day permit issuance. To make this possible, the City’s ADU
review team (which includes fire and utilities along with planning
and building) meets all together one day a week (ADU Tuesdays!) so
that applicants can schedule an appointment to bring thei r
completed materials in for review and —if everything is in order—
walk out the door with their permit in hand.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
The Napa Sonoma ADU Center was launched in
2019 to serve the 16 jurisdictions of Napa and
Sonoma counties, north of San Francisco. Formed
under the auspices of the Napa Valley Community
Foundation, the center was made possible through
grant funding and jurisdiction contributions. It
works to train and support staff from all of the
jurisdictions to improve their ADU information and
processes while serving as a trusted ally and
advocate for homeowners. The Center provides
free or low-cost consults for homeowners exploring the idea of creating an ADU, helping them to
understand what’s possible and how much it might cost; provides regular training and information
programs; hosts events where homeowners can meet ADU designers and companies; and has a built a rich
resource library of tools, from a “Can I Build” tool and ADU calculator to a growing gallery of standard
plans that helps homeowners find designs and connect with ADU professionals.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Stra tegy 49
PRODUCE
PURPOSE Support zoning and code changes as well as City
investments that help to create more middle housing types
in neighborhoods throughout the city.
CONTEXT Older neighborhoods often have a rich mix of
housing types—single family homes, backyard cottages,
garden apartments, duplexes, fourplexes, and more—often
all within the same block, or at least within the immediate
area. However, over time both the market and City
regulations have driven two predominant housing outcomes:
single family homes and larger apartment buildings. This is
true in cities throughout the US, including Salt Lake City.
In recent years there has been a growing awareness of this
gap in our housing, referred to as “the missing middle,” and
a desire to create more diverse housing choices in new
construction. The City Council’s recent adoption of changes
to the RMF-30 zone district and upcoming consideration of
code changes related to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are
both efforts that will increase the diversity of housing
choices. As these changes take effect, the City will need to monitor their effectiveness and consider
further potential changes to create more middle housi ng types.
During the Thriving in Place outreach, many people talked about the need for housing that was not
only affordable but that also met their needs. They talked about the large number of small one
bedroom and studio apartments being built in large ap artment buildings, which meets some people’s
needs, but not others. Creating more diverse housing choices can help respond to these community
concerns.
Last, but very importantly, the spatial patterns of segregation and disinvestment in Salt Lake City
reflect an intentional historic pattern that was the result of redlining and other discriminatory
policies and practices. As the City works to advance priority actions in the Thriving in Place strategy
and create more inclusive communities, attention must be given to ensuring that a diversity of
housing types for all income levels are created and preserved in all neighborhoods, including in areas
with high access to opportunity.
STEPS
1 Implement the RMF-30 code changes in conjunction with other aspects of the Thriving in
Place strategy focused on helping to mitigate displacement impacts and potential loss of existing
affordable housing.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 3C
Facilitate Creation of More Diverse Housing Choices
Create More Diverse Housing Choices in All Areas so that people can find housing that
meets their needs in locations that work for them.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 50
PRODUCE
2 Adopt and implement additional middle housing policies and programs as part of the
Housing SLC plan and in conjunction with other Thriving in Place actions to ensure a diversity of
housing types in the city’s supply of affordable housing. This can also include the ADU policies,
tools, and resources described in Strategic Priority 3B.
LEAD Planning Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
PARTNERS Housing Stability Division, CAN; Redevelopment Agency (RDA); Building Services
SCHEDULE Steps 1 and 2 are already in motion; completion is anticipated in 2023.
RESOURCES Addressed in existing efforts; new efforts may require additional funding and/or staff
support.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
There are a large number of resources available to help understand, communicate, analyze, and implement
“missing middle” housing, including the missing middle housing website developed by Opticos Design (their
principals literally wrote the book about it). A recent working group convened by the Association of Bay Area
Governments in collaboration with Community Planning Collaborative engaged Opticos Design as well as the
economics firm EcoNorthwest to look specificall y at zoning strategies, affordability strategies and tools for
“myth busting” about middle housing and its impacts.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 51
PRODUCE
PURPOSE Leverage the value of underutilized and surplus City-
owned and other publicly owned properties for affordable
housing and related community-serving uses, ensuring that they
provide for long-term affordability.
CONTEXT There are a variety of city-owned lands as well as lands
owned by other public agencies that could be utilized for
housing, including vacant rights of way, surplus lands, and
underutilized properties that could be developed with a mix of
affordable housing along with other community-serving uses.
These are significantly valuable assets that can be leveraged to
achieve community priorities like affordable housing with or
even without additional public investment.
There are many examples from other communities as well as from Salt Lake City where publicly
owned lands have been repurposed or integrated with housing, including joint developments of
facilities such as libraries, community centers, parks, schools, and even fire stations. The City is
currently in the process of doing such a repurposing of a city -owned property on the Fleet Block, an
8.1-acre property in the Granary District that was previously used for fleet storage and maintenance
that is being rezoned for redevelopment with a mix of uses, including affordable housing.
The Sorenson Impact Center at the University of Utah’s David Eccles School of Business is piloting a
Putting Assets to Work Program to work with communities interested in inventorying and
understanding their assets and then develop a plan for leveraging those assets into desired
community outcomes. Related to this work, a study done in 2022 (described in this article)
documented approximately nine square miles of publicly owned land within a five-minute walk of
light rail stations in Salt Lake County and estimated that six square miles of that land would be
feasible for new development—meaning that it was underutilized, on suitable terrain, and had little
community importance (by their determination). Working with the County to utilize even a portion of
these land assets to help meet the region’s need for affordable housing could represent one of the
largest potential investments in affordable housing without needing to raise any new revenues.
STEPS
1 Build a database of City-owned and other public agency properties that could be
prioritized for affordable housing and related community-serving development, working
across departments and with partner agencies to determine which to move forward as near -term
priorities and which might be land-banked for future opportunities. Be certain that identified
properties can be used for housing (some properties have restrictions depending on their funding
source).
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 3D
Utilize Publicly Owned Property
Utilize Publicly Owned Property to leverage land assets in support of long-term
affordability and equitable development.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 52
PRODUCE
2 Define the desired development program for priority properties and deve lop
partnerships for implementation through an RFP process or via existing development
relationships. Ensure engagement of community representatives in defining the desired mix of
housing types, income levels to be served, special needs to be met, and non -housing amenities to
incorporate (including but not limited to community green space, supportive services such as
daycare centers or community center space, and affordable retail space).
3 Establish the necessary zoning and other enabling policies to facilitate the desired
development outcome on the prioritized properties.
4 Ensure that publicly owned lands utilized for affordable housing and related
development remain in some form of community ownership and control, like a
Community Land Trust (see Priority 2D), and that structures are in place to ensure the housing
created remains affordable in perpetuity as a community-serving asset.
LEAD Redevelopment Agency (RDA)
PARTNERS Real Estate Services; Planning Division and Housing Stability Division, Department of
Community and Neighborhoods; Salt Lake City Housing Authority; City Attorney’s Office
SCHEDULE Ongoing, with initial priorities identified by June 2024.
RESOURCES Staff and/or consultant time will be needed for Steps 1 and 2. Steps 3 and 4 will require
staff time.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
This Local Housing Solutions website offers many relevant resources for local housing strategies, including a
page focused specifically on the use of publicly owned property for affordable housing. The page provides
guidance for identification and use of publicly owned properties as well as several case studies from
Maryland, Washington State, and Washington, DC.
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
In the Puget Sound region of Washington State, the regional transit agency, Sound Transit, is in the process
of planning and building one of the largest infrastructure investments in the State’s history . With
substantial property acquisition needed to build the regional light rail system, the State Legislature
established a requirement for the disposition of surplus lands from the project (i.e., lands acquired to
facilitate construction but then not needed once the light rail is built). The policy is referred to as the 80-
80-80 policy: 80 percent of surplus lands (including air rights) that are suitable for housing must be offered
to qualified entities (local governments, nonprofit developers, and housing authorities) to build housing
where at least 80 percent of the units are affordable to those earning 80 percent of the area median income
or below. The legislature’s action subsequently led Sound Transit’s board and staff to develop and adopt
their Equitable Transit Oriented Development Policy and is already resulting in taxpayer-funded transit
investments helping to create hundreds (and eventually thousands) of new transit-oriented affordable
housing units.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 53
PRODUCE
PURPOSE Create housing that will be affordable in perpetuity , supports lower-cost living, and that is
integrated with needed services.
CONTEXT Depending on how deed-restricted affordable housing units are created and funded, the
term of their affordability restriction may vary from 15 years up to “in perpetuity.” While a minimum
term of 15 years is required for developments utilizing Low Income Housing Tax Credits, an extended
compliance period of 30 years can be required under the program’s guidelines. Whe n projects also
receive local financial support or other forms of assistance, even longer terms can be required.
Units with any term of deed restriction help to meet Salt Lake City’s affordable housing needs, but
they present a future challenge when deed restrictions expire and the units shift to market rate
rents. While the general logic is that those units will then be older and therefore lower cost than
comparable new units, the experience in many strong market communities is that the expiration of
rent restrictions translates into rent increases and displacement of lower income renters.
To help avoid the future challenge of expiring deed restrictions (and the need for additional public
investment to extend affordability), the City and its partners should prioritize longer deed
restrictions whenever possible, with the aim of having units “affordable in perpetuity.” In practical
terms, this often translates into a 99-year deed restriction or ensuring that long-term ownership and
management of affordable units is under a mission-driven nonprofit dedicated to maintaining long-
term affordability.
Additionally, City investments and land donations should prioritize housing developments in areas
that are walkable and with good transit access, so that lower income residents can access
opportunity without having to own a car. And whenever possible , affordable housing should be
integrated with needed services, and developed and managed by partners with a long-term
commitment to supporting tenants. Examples of services that could be integrated with housing
include daycare centers, health clinics, job training centers, arts programs, and community space,
depending on the population being served in the housing development.
STEPS
1 Identify key opportunities for changes to City and partner policies and practices that
can create longer term deed restrictions. This includes maximizing the period of deed
restriction that can be achieved through policies such as the Affordable Housing Incentives
(Priority 3A) and Community Benefit Policy (Priority 2A) as well as requirements for projects that
receive City funding or land contributions (Priority 3D).
2 Work with mission-driven development partners and service providers to identify the
highest areas of need and key opportunities for delivering housing integrated with
support services. This can be advanced as part of the proposed community partnership
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 3E
Prioritize Long-Term Affordability , Integrated Services, and
Transit Access
Prioritize Long-Term Affordability, Integration of Support Services, and Access to Transit
and Other Amenities to create stable living environments where lower income families and
residents can thrive.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 54
PRODUCE
program in Strategic Priority 5C as well as in conjunction with the acquisition and rehabilitation
investments of Strategic Priority 2B and the Community Land Trust (2C).
3 Incorporate identified priorities in Notices of Funding Availability and Requests for
Proposals in City and Redevelopment Agency funding and land development
opportunities. Identified priorities could also be connected to potential agreements developed
as part of Priorities 2B and 3A, through which developers could acquire and deed -restrict
unsubsidized housing (or currently subsidized housing with expiring deed restrictions) in return
for an increase in development capacity on another property.
LEAD Redevelopment Agency (RDA)
PARTNERS Planning Division and Housing Stability Division, Department of Community and
Neighborhoods; Housing Authority of Salt Lake City; Economic Development Department
(including the Arts Council)
SCHEDULE Ongoing
RESOURCES This is more focused on how existing resources are applied. However, expanding
investment in long-term affordability will require additional resources (both funding and
staffing): see Strategic Priority 4A and Attachment A.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
The Grounded Solutions Network provides guidance on affordability preservation and various mechanisms—
deed restrictions, covenants, ground leases —for achieving it in both rental and homeownership affordability
programs. They also provide case studies, more information on why long-term affordability matters, and
examples of different approaches for shared equity resale formulas.
Photo via Grounded Solutions Network
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 55
EXPAND FUNDING
PURPOSE Ensure that the City and its partners have the resources needed to implement the Thriving
in Place strategy.
CONTEXT Many of the actions outlined in the Thriving in Place strategy will require financial and
other resources for implementation. While some of the desired outcomes can be achieved by working
or investing differently, others will require reprioritization of existing resources (budget, staffing,
work plans), working with partners to leverage each other’s resources, and additional funding to
support investments and staffing.
The City is fortunate to have a strong base on which to build, including funds generated through the
Redevelopment Agency’s Project Areas and via the Funding Our Future sales tax. Some of these
resources are managed via the Redevelopment Agency’s Housing Development Loan Program while
others flow through various programs focused on delivering assistance or other services to those in
need (managed by the Housing Stability Division in the Department of Community and Neighborhoods
and others, often channeled through community partners who are contracted to do service delivery
through competitive bidding processes).
City staff estimate an average of $13 million has been invested annually in recent years by the City
to support affordable housing (for development, acquisition, and rehabilitation) and $6.5 million a
year has been spent on rental assistance and tenant support services (about $2.5 million from
Funding Our Future sales tax proceeds and about $4 million from federal entitlement funds , not
including pandemic-related federal funds like Emergency Rental Assistance). However, additional
funding will be needed to advance the Thriving in Place strategies. While new federal funds that are
anticipated from recent legislation as well as new state funding opportunities, additional City
investment will be needed. See the Two-Year Action Plan in Attachment A.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 4A
Develop New Funding / Leverage Existing Resources
Develop New Funding Sources and Leverage Existing Resources to better meet the level
of need in supporting tenants at-risk of displacement and expanding the supply of deed-
restricted affordable housing.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 56
EXPAND FUNDING
STEPS
1 Convene a City working group to review current and potential funding sources to
support implementation of Thriving in Place priorities as well as Housing SLC
implementation.
2 Evaluate options for new or expanded revenue sources that could create substantial and
ongoing funding for affordable housing and anti-displacement programs. Some of these options
will require additional research to determine viability, and all of them should be evaluated to
determine their relative strengths, including:
• Political viability – can it be structured to work within the state’s legal frameworks and
garner support from City Council and the community?
• Relevance – does it capture revenue from activities that are contributing to the community’s
displacement and affordability challenges?
• Fairness – does it distribute costs in a fair and equitable manner, such that no one person or
group is over-burdened,
• Equity - does it help reduce inequity when considering where the costs will apply and where
the benefits will flow?
• Return on investment – does the amount of revenue that could be generated justify the
effort needed to put it in place and manage it over time?
• Longevity and resilience – does it create a long-term funding stream, and will it withstand
fluctuating market conditions? Ideally, at least part of the City’s funding stream should
generate revenue to invest in affordable housing when the development market is down and
costs are lower.
• Scale of impact – does it create enough revenue to make a difference?
Not all options need to perform high on every factor, but together the mix of funding sources
should position the City to have the desired impact even (or especially) during economic
downturns.
Options to consider and evaluate include a potential new tax on short-term rentals; an additional
increment to the City’s transient occupancy tax (temporary lodging tax); a vacant property tax or
fee; and/or an affordable housing bond measure. Determination of funding needs should also
factor in projected in-lieu fees paid by developers as part of the proposed Community Benefit
Policy’s implementation.
3 Leverage potential contributions from new development through expanded incentives
programs and community benefit linkages, recognizing that policies which create expanded
development capacity are generating significant wealth, a portion of which can be channeled to
help meet the community’s affordable housing needs.
4 Pursue state, federal and philanthropic resources in collaboration with key partners,
including funds focused on energy efficiency and transit-oriented development that can be
targeted to affordable housing.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 57
EXPAND FUNDING
5 Work closely with partners to coordinate investments, pursue funding opportunities
and leverage each other’s resources. For example combining funds to acquire key
properties; jointly pursuing grant opportunities, or partnering to create new affordable housing
on city-owned lands.
6 Ensure strong and transparent management of City funds and investments, including
funds invested in and through the Redevelopment Authority’s Housing Development Fund,
Community Land Trust and other mechanisms. Ensure alignment and coordination between these
different mechanisms via the work of the City Implementation Team.
LEAD City Implementation Team (see Priority 5A)
PARTNERS Salt Lake City Housing Authority plus community and regional partners
SCHEDULE Evaluate and prioritize long-term funding options by December 2023; implement in
2024/25.
RESOURCES See overview of resource needs in Attachment A.
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
In 2019 nearly 80 percent of voters in Durham,
NC voted in favor of a $95 million bond
referendum to fund the City’s Affordable
Housing Bond Investment Plan. The bond’s
principal and interest would be paid back by a
1.6 cents per $100 of assessed value, which
would translate into about $37 a year for a the
City’s median assessed home value of
$229,266. Based on the City’s plan and
comprehensive housing strategy, the bond
funds would be would bring in approximately
$443 million in additional capital and $130
million in contracting opportunities while
creating 1600 new deed-restricted affordable
housing units, preserving 800 affordable rental
units, supporting 400 first-time homeowners,
transitioning 1700 homeless households into
permanent housing, and stabilizi ng 3000 low-
income renters. Durham’s story and other case
studies can be found on the Local Housing
Solutions website.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacemen t Strategy 58
EXPAND FUNDING
PURPOSE Agree on key indicators for tracking displacement work and ensure efficient and workable
systems are in place to collect needed data and provide regular reports.
CONTEXT Success of the Thriving in Place strategy relies on having reliable, shared, and easily
accessible data to track progress, inform policy development, and make it possible to course -correct
as needed as conditions change. This action is focused on establishing key metrics to track conditions
over time and ensuring that investment is made in devel oping the necessary data systems.
Phase One of Thriving in Place documented the extent of displacement in Salt Lake City as well as its
community impacts, providing data that informed important conversations about how best to
respond to the challenges of displacement. That data shaped this strategy. While undertaking a year-
long study and engagement process was important, the strategy going forward needs to be more
nimble. Key parts of the strategy are focused on ensuring structures for ongoing dialogue and
partnership (all of the actions in Goal 5) and on setting up better systems to track key data metrics.
Page 59 provides a draft of key indicators for tracking displacement and potential sources for
collecting the needed data. This can serve as a starting point for developing a web -based dashboard,
overseen by the City Implementation Team (Priority 5A) and Anti-Displacement Coalition (Priority 5B)
as part of their work to track and report on progress and identify new and emerging needs.
STEPS
1 Refine the list of displacement indicators that the City team will track and report on,
using the list on page 59 as a starting point. Ensure that the list is robust enough to provide a
meaningful understanding of progress as well as current and emerging trends, and tha t it is as
streamlined as possible to make the data collection a manageable task. This work should be led
by the City Implementation Team (Priority 5A) and reviewed, refined and confirmed with
members of the Anti-Displacement Coalition (Priority 5B).
2 Develop manageable systems for collecting the needed data, automating it as much as
possible and drawing upon existing, easily available data even if it’s “close but not perfect.”
3 Develop a web-based dashboard for reporting the latest data on each indicator and
provide an annual report to Council and the community in conjunction with recommendations
on next-up action priorities, policy or program revisions, and annual budget needs to support
continued progress.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 4B
Define Displacement Indicators + Develop Data Systems
Define Indicators to Track Displacement and Develop Systems to Track Progress to better
know where and how the City’s anti-displacement policies and actions are working.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 59
EXPAND FUNDING
TRACKING PROGRESS ON THRIVING IN PLACE: DRAFT LIST OF INDICATORS
Tracking key indicators of displacement and affordability help measure progress. They also help
inform course corrections and the evolution of policies and practices that can more effectively
create a community where all residents can stay and thrive even as the city grows. As always,
striking the right balance is key: knowing enough to inform and shape meaningful action while
prioritizing resources for actually doing something about the issues being highlighted.
Following is a draft list of indicators and data sources for tracking progress on implementation of
Thriving in Place. These will be reviewed and vetted by the City Implementation Team (Priority 5A)
and members of the Anti-Displacement Coalition (Priority 5B) to ensure a robust but streamlined
approach to measuring progress, with the aim of informing effective action and refinement of key
policies and practices.
LEAD Housing Stability Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
PARTNERS Business Licensing, Department of Finance; Planning Division, CAN; Building Services;
Information Management Services
SCHEDULE Develop systems and launch initial reporting by March 2024.
RESOURCES Will require funding for initial data systems / dashboard development plus ongoing
staffing to update and report out on data on a regular basis.
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
The City of Seattle has been one of the fastest growing large cities in the US over the past decade, with
significant increases in rents and home prices driving unprecedented neighborhood change and displacement.
These impacts have been particularly profound for communities of co lor, who have faced extremely high
rates of displacement in the city’s historically Black and immigrant neighborhoo ds.
In response the City undertook a number of actions, including an analysis of its growth strategy in
conjunction with an update to its Comprehensive Plan, Seattle 2035. The resulting report, Growth and
Equity: Analyzing Impacts on Displacement and Opportunity Related to Seattle’s Growth Strategy , was
developed in conjunction with the City’s first Equitable Development Implementation Plan in 2016 and
launch of the City’s Equitable Development Initiative. A more recent (May 2021) analysis revisits the 2016
analysis in preparation for the City’s Comprehensive Plan update currently in process.
As directed by the 2016 plan, the City subsequently developed the Equitable Development Monitoring
Program, leading to the September 2020 Community Indicators Report and the Displacement Risk
Indicators Dashboard. That webpage tracks nine displacement metrics across three types of displacement,
with the data sources for each indicator identifi ed along with the ability for any user to access the data via
the City’s open data platform.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 60
EXPAND FUNDING
THRIVING IN PLACE INDICATORS
Indicator Purpose Data Sources
NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION AND INCLUSION
• % change in households by income, by neighborhood
(including by race and by owner/renter)
• Is the trend of lower income household displacement being
stopped and/or reversed?
• Is neighborhood diversity and inclusion being advanced?
US Census American
Community Survey
HOUSING COST BURDEN
• By race/ethnicity (owner/renter)
• % renters that are cost burdened
• % renters severely cost burdened
• % owners that are cost burdened
• % owners severely cost burdened
• Map by area
• Is the incidence of people overpaying for housing being
reduced?
US Census American
Community Survey
AFFORDABILITY + AVAILABILITY OF RENTAL UNITS
• Average and median rents by age of unit,
size and location
• # + % of renter households by income
• # + % of rental units by rent bracket
• Ratio of affordable units to households
• Approx. % of rental units licensed
• Approx. # of short-term rentals
• Map by area
• Are the supply and cost of rental units being more
responsive to the community's needs?
US Census American
Community Survey
Business Licensing
TENANT ASSISTANCE
• No. of households that received Tenant
Relocation Assistance
• No. of households that received rent
assistance (one time and ongoing)
• No. of households that received legal
and/or mediation services
• Requests for assistance unmet due to
lack of resources
• Map by area to extent possible
• Are renter households at-risk of displacement receiving
support to help them remain in place or find alternative
housing?
Housing Stability Division
DIRECT DISPLACEMENT
• No. of evictions
• No. of foreclosures
• Map by area
• No. of units lost to new development + No. of units
created on the same sites, by level of affordability
• Is the incidence of households being directly displaced by
eviction, foreclosure, and/or demolition being reduced?
• Are the affordable units being lost to development being
replaced?
UT Courts Eviction Filings
Salt Lake County Recorder
(Foreclosures)
Building Services Division
HOUSING PRODUCTION + CHOICE
• Total no. of housing units by type,
tenure, size, and location
• Construction permits for new housing
units (no., type, + location)
• % increase by type, tenure, size and
location
• Map by area
• Is new housing development (existing and pipeline) helping
to create more diverse housing options throughout the city
(are we losing diversity, gaining diversity, or holding
steady)?
Building Services Division
DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES
• No. of developments that opted in for
Affordable Housing Incentives
• No. of AHI units created by type, size and AMI
• No. of development proposals subject to the
Community Benefit Policy
• No. of CBP units created or
preserved by type, size, and AMI +
amt of in-lieu fees
• Map by area
• Are developers being responsive to the affordable housing
incentives available to them?
• Are the incentives helping to achieve affordable housing
goals?
• Is the Community Benefit Policy serving as an effective tool
for mitigating the loss of affordable units?
Planning Division
DEED-RESTRICTED UNITS
• No. of deed-restricted units by tenure, size, AMI, and length of restriction
• No. of pipeline units by tenure, size, AMI, and length of restriction
• % of housing stock under long-term affordability restrictions
• No. of households placed in deed-restricted units using the Displaced Tenants
Preference Policy
• Waiting lists for deed-restricted units
• Map by area
• Is the supply of deed-restricted housing in the city
expanding and better meeting the level of need?
• Is the goal of increasing the number of units affordable “in
perpetuity” being achieved?
• Are deed-restricted units being dispersed throughout the
community?
Housing Stability Division
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacem ent Strategy 61
EXPAND FUNDING
PURPOSE Ensure that deed-restricted units are managed in accordance with their established
requirements and fair housing laws, and that they are maintained as long -term, high-quality
community assets
CONTEXT Many of the actions in the Thriving in Place strategy and current City work efforts and
investments will create hundreds (hopefully thousands) of new affordable housing units in Salt Lake
City. Some of these units will be scattered among new market-rate developments with differing
lengths of deed restriction and affordability requirements. Other units will be in 100 percent
affordable rental buildings managed by mission-driven nonprofits, but also with differing lengths of
restriction and levels of affordability, and sometimes intended for specific populations (e.g., seniors,
families, or people with disabilities). Some will be single
family homes or townhomes for income-qualified
homeowners that also will have specific requirements
attached to them.
Effectively managing these units will require that the
City grow its housing management capacity —internally,
with key partners, and potentially with contractors—to
ensure compliance with each development’s and unit’s
established requirements, consistency with fair housing
laws to ensure nondiscrimination, and maintenance of
the long-term quality and affordability of these valuable
community assets. This will likely include, for example:
training for staff across multiple divisions to ensure that
development agreements and affordability covenants are
properly written and archived, data and management
systems to track assets and affordability requirements, training and systems for property managers
to certify the income qualifications of tenants and owners, procedures for ongoing compliance
checks and enforcement actions, and more.
STEPS
1 Convene a working group to review current capacities, identify gaps, and define a
shared vision for how deed-restricted units are managed to inform development of both a l ong-
term strategy and near -term actions to move toward the vision, including staffing needs, system
needs, budget needs, and organizational structure and practices.
2 Ensure consistency in how deed restrictions are written to help clarify management
practices and facilitate implementation and enforcement.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 4C
Strengthen the City’s Capacity to Enforce Deed-Restricted Housing
Commitments
Develop Capacity to Enforce Deed-Restricted Housing Commitments to ensure that
agreements are upheld, maintain quality and affordability, and meet fair housing
requirements.
Photo of deed restricted affordable housing via Park City, UT
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 62
EXPAND FUNDING
3 Determine City and partner roles and where the management of deed -restricted units should
be located within the City organization.
4 Regularly report on the status of deed-restricted units, ensuring at a minimum that the
metrics established through the Displacement Indicators (Priority 4B) are tracked and reported on
a regular basis and available via the Displacement Indicators Dashboard.
LEAD Housing Stability Division, Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
PARTNERS Redevelopment Agency (RDA); City Attorney’s Office; Planning Division, CAN; Building
Services; Business Licensing, Department of Finance
SCHEDULE Identify near-term capacity-building priorities by December 2023.
RESOURCES Will require staff time and potentially consultant support to develop management
strategy plus funding for ongoing staffing (City staff or community partner) to oversee.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
The Local Initiatives Support Corporation, or LISC, provides a resource library that includes white papers and
case studies related to affordable housing management, among many other topics. A couple key resources
include their Scattered Site Single-Family Rental Property Management Guide and Against All Odds: The
Business of Managing Affordable Housing.
There are also national organizations and networks focused on supporting governments, nonprofits, and
private sector groups engaged in affordable housing management. These include the Affordable Housing
Professional Certificate Program from NeighborWorks America, the National Affordable Housing
Management Association, which provides training and other resources and includes a Rocky Mountain
Heartland chapter, and the National Center for Housing Management, established in 1972 by an Executive
Order of President Nixon to help meet the country’s housing management and training needs .
Photo of deed restricted affordable housing via Park City, UT
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 63
PARTNER + COLLABORATE
PURPOSE Ensure clarity on departmental and division roles and responsibilities for implementation of
Thriving in Place, and an ongoing structure and process for coordination, oversight, and course
corrections to support success.
CONTEXT Achieving the priority actions of Thriving in Place will be a significant undertaking,
requiring ongoing coordination, engagement, resources, decision making, and problem solving. It is
critical that everyone knows who “owns” implementation of the strategy and its various components,
and that those charged with its ownership are empowered to convene, facilitate, delegate, and act.
STEPS
1 Review and finalize the list of core and on-call team members for the implementation
team and secure the buy-in of leadership and participation of key staff.
2 Convene key leadership and staff of the Implementation Team’s members to articulate and
agree on the team’s purpose, authorities, roles and responsibilities, operating agree ments,
meeting schedule, budget needs, and decision making framework, including how conflicts will be
resolved. Determine who will be responsible for convening and coordinating the team’s work.
3 Develop a Team Charter, summarizing all of the information from Step 2, and have it signed
by department directors to ensure clarity and agreement. Revisit and update the charter on at
least an annual basis to ensure it remains a relevant and useful tool.
4 Commit to an initial two-year pilot period for the team, with continuation and changes to
the team’s membership and Charter in response to lessons learned, achievements, and emerging
needs.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 5A
Form a City Implementation Team
Form a City Implementation Team to oversee and coordinate implementation of the
priority actions in the Thriving in Place strategy, monitor progress, engage partners, and
identify needed updates and next steps.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
LEAD Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
PARTNERS Core: Housing Stability Division, CAN; Planning Division, CAN; Building Services;
Redevelopment Agency (RDA); Civic Engagement; Business Licensing, Department of
Finance
On Call: City Attorney’s Office; Economic Development (including the Arts Council);
Parks and Public Lands; Public Services; Public Utilities; Sustainability; Transportation;
Youth and Family Services
SCHEDULE Form team by June 2023.
RESOURCES Will require prioritization of existing staff’s time on the Implementation Team and a
lead staff person for the effort.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displac ement Strategy 64
PARTNER + COLLABORATE
PURPOSE Provide a regular platform for communication, coordination, and collaboration across the
key agencies and organizations working on displacement -related issues, projects, and programs in
Salt Lake City and across the region.
CONTEXT Effective action to address displacement and stabilize neighborhoods takes time,
coordination, and persistence. The City is one part of a regional ecosystem that needs to work
closely together to achieve goals related to housing affordability and neighborhood stabilization. This
ecosystem includes other governmental agencies, nonprofits, community organizations, research
centers, private sector developers, financers, and others. During the community engagement
process, multiple stakeholders identified the need for the agencies and ind ividuals working on
displacement issues to meet regularly to share information, coordinate action, problem -solve, and
build trust. Many also pointed to the regional nature of the housing affordability challenge, and the
need for engaging with regional partners to identify shared priorities for action.
STEPS
1 Identify groups and individuals to include in an initial meeting of the proposed Anti-
Displacement Coalition, ensuring representation from key governmental partners, nonprofits,
service providers, tenant groups, and those involved with developing and managing affordable
housing and related facilities and services in Salt Lake City and the region.
2 Extend an invitation to participate in a launch meeting of the Coalition.
3 Host a launch meeting to engage the group in defining the group’s purpose, membership,
frequency of meetings, agenda-setting, coordination/facilitation, and potential priorities for
their first year. Use as an opportunity to share the Thriving in Place priorities and identify near -
term priorities for coordination and collaboration. Identify a chair or co -chairs to serve as the
group’s lead conveners and to work with staff in developing the Coalition’s meeting agendas.
4 Establish a regular meeting schedule based on the outcome of Step 3 and provide staff and
facilitation support as needed, working with the chair or co -chairs to develop agendas,
coordinate meeting preparation, facilitate, take notes, and follow up on key a ction items.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 5B
Work with Partners to Form a Regional Anti-Displacement Coalition
Work with regional partners to convene a Wasatch Front Anti-Displacement Coalition as
an ongoing platform for cross-agency and cross-sector discussion and collaboration on priority
actions, tracking of progress, collective problem solving, and responding to emerging issues and
challenges.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
LEAD City Implementation Team (see Priority 5A)
PARTNERS TBD
SCHEDULE Convene group and have first meeting in fourth quarter of 2023.
RESOURCES Will require at least a portion of a staff person’s time to coordinate outreach and
communications, manage logistics, prepare meeting information, and follow up.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 65
PARTNER + COLLABORATE
PURPOSE Establish an ongoing interdepartmental structure and process for meeting regularly with
community representatives in areas experiencing the highest displacement risk to share and discuss
the City’s work efforts, identify new and emerging needs, and partner on priority actions.
CONTEXT Communities facing the brunt of displacement experience its impacts in “real time.” While
studies and engagement to develop a strategy like Thriving in Place have value in ensuring that
actions are driven by data, they also take time. Developing strong ongoing partnerships are essential
to ensuring ongoing communication and alignment, allowing implementation work to respond more
nimbly to changing realities, new challenges, and emerging opportunities.
In addition, City-led work efforts are often very department-specific, while effectively countering
the forces and challenges of displacement require holistic, well-coordinated cross-departmental and
cross-sectoral action. At a minimum, all of the relevant departments as well as community partners
and other agencies need to be aware of what everyone else is working on, enabling them to
coordinate and leverage efforts and investments whenever possible.
The focus of this action is on ensuring a structure and process for place -based partnership that can
support better coordination on anti-displacement efforts in Salt Lake City’s most impacted
neighborhoods, with an initial focus on the Westside and in the Ballpark/Central City/Liberty Wells
area. This work can build upon valuable structures already in place or being developed, like the
Redevelopment Agency’s Westside Community Initiative, the University of Utah’s University
Neighborhood Partners program, and the My Hometown Initiative (a volunteer-led, interfaith
initiative already operating in Poplar Grove and Rose Park, based on the program model in West
Valley City).
While communication and coordination are key, a true partnership also creates opportunities for
collaboration and co-creation, leveraging actions and investments by working together and co -
investing to maximize impact.
STEPS
1 Convene key stakeholders and draft the partnership’s charter, bringing together
departmental and division representatives as well as community stakeholder representatives —to
define the purpose, membership, structure, staffing, and operating agreements of t he
partnership. Consider establishing the partnership for an initial two -year period, subject to
extension by mutual agreement of all involved.
2 Define the partnership’s goals, priority actions, and measures of success, building off
priorities already in place from City capital investment plans and key partner agencies, and
identifying opportunities to coordinate and leverage actions and investments as well as to
identify what’s missing. Clarify immediate/near-term priorities for coordination and mid - or long-
term priorities that might take additional time for planning, budgeting and fundraising.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 5C
Launch an Ongoing Community Partnership to Coordinate Action
Partner with Impacted Communities to Coordinate Action and Investment to preserve
affordability and counter displacement.
★ NEAR-TERM PRIORITY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 66
PARTNER + COLLABORATE
3 Coordinate community engagement via the partnership whenever possible to avoid the
“participation fatigue” that is prevalent in the current project-by-project approach to community
outreach and input, while recognizing that some City policy projects or processes (such as private
petitions) have defined schedules that must be adhered to.
4 Provide an annual report to Council and the community on the partnership’s work,
highlighting accomplishments, identifying upcoming priorities, and providing an opportunity for
reflection on what is working, what is not working, and how the partners hip could be
strengthened.
LEAD Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN) with Mayor’s Office and Civic
Engagement Team
PARTNERS Planning Division, CAN; Housing Stability Division, CAN; Redevelopment Agency (RDA);
Economic Development (including the Arts Council); Parks and Public Land;
Sustainability; Public Services; Public Utilities; Transportation; and community partners
SCHEDULE Launch partnership by December 2023.
RESOURCES Will need staffing for a lead convener/facilitator as well as commitment of staff time
for each participating department. Ideally will also have budget set-aside for smaller
community-defined project initiatives that can leverage other resources in addition to
the major capital projects that will be coordinated with and through the partnership.
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
Seattle’s South Park and Georgetown neighborhoods have
some of the city’s most vulnerable neighborhoods and
populations when it comes to displacement pressures,
environmental impacts, racial inequities, and risks
associated with climate change. In 2015/2016, a
combination of major initiatives and investments in
addition to several community assessments and planning
efforts led the City to launch a new multi-department
community partnership initiative to “work differently” in
planning and delivering multi-benefit outcomes through
City investments and other activities.
The resulting Duwamish Valley Program was jointly led by the City’s Department of Environment and Office
of Planning and Community Development with members from multiple City departments as well as King
County, the Army Corps of Engineers, and multiple community groups. The program’s prioriti es and action
plan work together as an environmental justice, equitable development, and anti -displacement strategy. As
of 2021 the partnership was focusing on advancing their goals through a Resilience District concept and had
achieved a number of hard-won victories in pairing investments in parks and affordable housing with efforts
to address flooding and other environmental issues—all through a strong ongoing community partnership
model.
Seattle’s Mayor with Duwamish Youth Corps at Earth Day celebration of
Duwamish Alive! Photo by Alberto Rodríguez
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displ acement Strategy 67
ADVOCATE
PURPOSE Continue to ensure that Salt Lake City’s priorities are supported and advanced in state
legislation, working with regional and state partners to achieve changes in state law as well as
commitments of state funding that help counter displacement, stabilize neighborhoods, and create
long-term affordability.
CONTEXT A number of actions that could be taken and are used in cities in other states to help
stabilize neighborhoods are not possible in Salt Lake City due to e xisting state laws that prohibit or
limit potential local policies and actions. During the Thriving in Place community and stakeholder
engagement processes, the issue of state preemption was raised repeatedly along with the
perception that the state legislature is overwhelmingly pro-landlord and that even small
improvements in tenant rights would be hard to win.
At the same time, the state has been increasingly concerned about housing affordability statewide,
with increases in funding for affordable housing development and to address homelessness as well as
passage of legislation like Senate Bill 174, House Bill 364, and House Bill 406 in the last legislative
session, all of which focus on streamlining housing appr ovals and making development more
predictable.
While alignment on housing affordability poli cies and funding holds significant promise, it will be
important to keep working on changes that can better support tenants to avoid eviction from rising
rents and to preserve existing affordable housing. It will also continue to be important to help
community members understand the limits on City action from state preemption and how they can
help lobby for change.
STRATEGIC PRIORITY 6A
Tenant Rights and Affordable Housing at the State Level
Work to Advance Tenant Rights and Affordable Housing at the State Level to remove state
preemption obstacles where possible, develop a stronger state -level policy framework for countering
displacement, and expand resources committed to housing affordabilit y and neighborhood
stabilization.
Photo by Michael Hart on Unsplash
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 68
ADVOCATE
STEPS
1 Work with the City Council, City Implementation Team, Anti-Displacement Coalition,
and other partners to identify priority policy initiatives for each legislative session
that can help support and advance the City’s anti -displacement work.
2 Collaborate with state agency partners to facilitate the delivery of investments, projects
and programs in Salt Lake City that help to advance the priori ties of Thriving in Place and Housing
SLC.
3 Partner with other agencies and community partners to pursue state resources that
can preserve housing, support tenants, build new affordable and transitional housing, provide
supportive services, and advance other priorities.
4 Report back to the community and adjust City policies and programs as changes in
state law occur and new opportunities emerge.
LEAD Department of Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
PARTNERS Mayor's Office; City Attorney’s Office; Council Office; and partners
SCHEDULE Annually
RESOURCES Utilizes existing staffing; additional funding or staffing may be identified as -needed.
LEARNING FROM OTHERS
Like the Utah Housing Coalition, Housing Colorado is a member organization that advocates for state law
changes, supports professional development, and provides technical assistance for Colorado’s affordable
housing community. While the political cultures of Utah and Colorado differ, they share a border, a similar
geography, and a very similar set of affordable housing challenges. Ongoing exchange between these sibling
networks as well as between similar groups in other states can provide valuable learning and the opportunity
to shape more effective advocacy and action.
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 69
ATTACHMENT A:
TWO-YEAR ACTION PLAN
+ GRAPHIC SUMMARY
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti -Displacement Strategy 70
TWO-YEAR ACTION PLAN Key Steps Toward Implementing Salt Lake City’s Anti-Displacement Strategy
Implementation of Thriving in Place will require staff time, increased and redirected investment, new forms of partnership, nimbleness, hard work, and persistence. Adoption of the strategy isn’t the end of the work, it is the beginning.
Form Action Teams
There’s a lot to do, and it can’t all happen at once—even for the near-term
priorities. Critical first steps toward effective implementation include:
u Form the City Implementation Team (5A) and ensure it is adequately staffed
and resourced. Create the team in conjunction with the plan’s adoption. It will
be the main coordinating body for implementation of Thriving in Place, and will
form the action teams listed below, bringing in additional partners as necessary.
This team will also update and refine the action plan and overall strategy as
necessary in response to new information and emerging challenges.
u Organize Action Teams of Key Staff and Partners to lead groupings of near-
term priorities. See “Commit Needed Resources” for specific resource needs to
support the teams’ work. Actions highlighted in bold are part of the package of
actions to replace the Housing Loss Mitigation Ordinance.
TENANT SUPPORT TEAM
This team will lead the near-term priorities focused on
better supporting tenants facing displacement:
§ Develop Tenant Relocation Assistance Program (1A)
§ Adopt a Displaced Tenants Preference Policy (1B)
§ Improve / Expand Tenant Resources and Services (1C)
§ Create the Tenant Resource Center and Navigation
Service (1D)
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TEAM
This team will expand affordable housing opportunities
through City investments and partnerships:
§ Help Tenants Become Owners (1E)
§ Acquire and Rehabilitate Unsubsidized Housing (2B)
§ Invest in Community Land Trust Models (2C)
§ Make ADUs Easier and Less Expensive (3B)
§ Utilize Publicly Owned Property (3D)
ANTI-DISPLACEMENT POLICY TEAM
This team will put in place the tools to track progress and
policies to incentivize preservation and creation of
affordable housing:
§ Adopt a Community Benefit Policy (2A)
§ Adopt the Affordable Housing Incentives Policy (3A).
§ Define Indicators to Track Displacement and Develop
Data Systems to Track Progress (4B)
Commit Resources
Some priorities can be advanced by repurposing existing resources, but more
investment will be needed. Exact figures will be determined through the budget
process. Here is an overview of where resources will be needed in the near term:
u Partnership staff and resources for the the City Implementation Team (5A),
Regional Anti-Displacement Coalition (5B) and Community Partnership (5C).
u Consultant support to develop the data and reporting mechanisms for tracking
progress (4B), complete the in-lieu fee study for the Community Benefit Policy
(2B), and support implementation of the Affordable Housing Incentives Policy.
u Tenant support funding for Tenant Relocation Assistance (1A) and expanded
services (1C, 1D).
u Development funding to increase near-term investment in affordable housing,
including acquisition/rehab (2B), helping tenants become owners (1E), and
Community Land Trusts (2C). These areas of investment will be the primary
focus for developing new funding sources (4A).
Prioritize Partnership
Thriving in Place was developed in partnership with those who are experiencing
and working daily to counter the impacts of displacement in the community.
Successful action will require continued investment of time and resources in
those partnerships as well as continued listening, collective problem solving, and
relationship building.
u Work with partners to create a Regional Anti-Displacement Coalition (5B) and
identify key priorities that the group can work on together in addition to serving
as a sounding board for City-led actions and platform for regional collaboration.
This will require staff time and budget.
u Organize and launch the Community Partnership (5C) with key representatives
from the Westside, Ballpark, Central City and Liberty Wells neighborhoods. This
will require a staff lead as well as set-aside funds to support action on
community-defined priorities in addition to coordinating on City-led initiat
GUIDING PRINCIPLES: prioritize tenant protections / partner with those most impacted / increase housing everywhere / focus on affordability / build an eco-system for action
The table at left
identifies the lead,
resource needs, and
timing for each near-
term action priority.
For resource needs:
$ = less than $200k
$$ = $200k - $1m
$$$ = $1m - $5m
$$$$ = more than $5m
THRIVING IN PLACE SALT LAKE CITY Salt Lake City’s Anti-Displacement Strategy 71
Exhibit D
Public Comments Received During 45-Day Comment Period and Public Hearing
26 June 2023
RE: Thriving in Place Proposal – ELPCO Response
Dear Chair and Members of the Planning Commission,
We write on behalf of our residents as members of the East Liberty Park Community Organization Land
Use Committee (ELPCO LUC) in response to the Thriving In Place (TIP) proposal. We were grateful to
have the opportunity to hear from Susan Lundmark about the proposal and ask questions at our May
meeting. We appreciate the deep complexities surrounding displacement and are ourselves committed to
improved and equitable housing. To that end, we see great promise in the ethos behind Thriving In Place
but remain concerned regarding immediate impact for the most vulnerable and potential for further
displacement in the short term.
ELPCO is excited by number of the city’s proposals held in TIP. Community land trusts (2C), displaced
tenant preference (1B), and programs to help tenants become owners (1E) provide innovative long-term
strategies that do a great deal to address future displacement. These proposals help place displaced persons
at the center of anti-displacement efforts and ELPCO commends the city for that human-centered approach.
We also deeply support the work of TIP to provide initial support of $5000 to those displaced through the
development of Tenant Relocation Assistance. That is a significant improvement and can serve as a
necessary transition fund for those who are forced to move. However, ELPCO has some concerns about the
fund’s long-term viability. With rents as they currently stand that cushion may only provide first month’s
rent and a deposit at a new location for a displaced person and not provide support for , nor address, the
potentially increased monthly payments at their new location. As the TIP proposal states, there are no “more
affordable” places for people to move thereby effectively guaranteeing an increase in rent to the displaced
person(s) or family and thus increasing long-term displacement (TIP Proposal 11). In addition, this fund is
reliant on its ability to be refilled to continue to serve displaced persons which is by no means guaranteed,
and, depending on use, it could be depleted before the current need was met let alone future need.
An additional concern held by ELPCO LUC is that for development s not owned by the city there are no
requirements for affordable housing. While ELPCO LUC recognizes the constraints placed on the city
regarding private developments due to “existing state laws that prohibit or limit potential local processes
and actions” (TIP Proposal 66), the desire to build tenant navigation services and to provide priority to
displaced tenants (sections 1C and 1B) only work if there are more affordable units built immediately for
them to move into; more/continuous development without purposeful and mandated affordable housing
simply increases displacement. One avenue the ELPCO LUC would suggest investigating in order to
address this gap in TIP is adaptive reuse and building affordable housing into adaptive reuse projects in
order for them to receive approval, expanding on the ideas highlighted in 2A and aligning with the plans in
2B. While we recognize that adding affordable housing criteria to adaptive reuse may impact developers
willingness to engage in reuse over demolition, ELPCO LUC supports further investigation and exploration
ELPCO (East Liberty Park Community Organization) elpcoslc@gmail.com
www.facebook/com/ELPCO
of this as a potential avenue due to its potential for faster housing availability and an opportunity for the
city to mandate a percentage go to affordable housing jumpstarting the relocation of displaced residents.
Finally, the expansion of access to ADU permits and RMF 30 changes promoted in 3B and 3C of TIP are
exciting possibilities, however ELPCO LUC is concerned about how those ADUs and more diverse housing
units would be monitored to make sure they were utilized for housing, rather than short-term rentals. As it
stands ELPCO is suffering under a vast number of short-term rentals which adversely effect the full-time
housing market and increase displacement. The opportunity to expand ADU permitting and RMF 30 zoning
and increase lower cost housing in neighborhoods like ELPCO is necessary, but the ELPCO LUC remains
concerned that enforcement remains a major hurdle and without expansion in oversight and monitoring
could in fact reduplicate the negative outcomes already felt in ELPCO and further displace residents.
Again, we commend the city for critically engaging in the pursuit of affordable housing and are excited by
the steps TIP takes to improve the current situation, the plan is multi-faceted and inventive, and we
appreciate the human-centered approach. We also hope to see more immediate and creative solutions that
help improve the lives of our currently displaced neighbors and to actively prevent displacement or provide
alternate housing options to those on the precipice of displacement.
Sincerely,
East Liberty Park Community Organization – Land Use Committee:
Kristina Robb – ELPCO Chair
Jeanette Young – ELPCO Secretary
Jeff Larsen – ELPCO Land Use Chair
Marshall Bailie – ELPCO Land Use Sustainability Coordinator
Judi Short – ELPCO Land Use Advisor
Alicia Cunningham-Bryant – ELPCO Land Use Committee Member
About ELPCO
ELPCO is the East Liberty Park Community Organization—a local, city-sanctioned community
organization that represents the residents and businesses in the East Liberty Park area of Salt Lake City.
The area covered by ELPCO is defined by the boundaries of 700 E to 1300 E and 800 S to 1700 S.
ELPCO meets online via Zoom on the fourth Thursday of every month starting at 7:00 p.m. and live-
streams its meetings on our Facebook page at www.facebook/com/ELPCO
7/20/23, 12:16 PM (EXTERNAL) Just an older citizen - Matthes, Ruedigar - Outlook
about:blank 1/1
(EXTERNAL) Just an older citizen
Tess Karen Leiker <tess_lovecpa@yahoo.com>
Fri 6/2/2023 9:54 PM
To:Thriving In Place <ThrivingInPlace@slcgov.com>
Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments.
Hello, I see you have a thriving in place plan. Are you going to address how the elderly, who aren’t at poverty level incomes, are going to be able to stay in our homes? You’ve increased the taxes
on my house 2 times in the last three years. I’m 65. I live off of social security. It doesn’t matter how much my home is worth to me, I want to stay and not have to leave the only home I’ve ever
had. You are forcing me out. Please consider property tax breaks for over 65, that doesn’t require me to be at poverty level. Thanks Karen leiker
1
Matthes, Ruedigar
From:cindy cromer <3cinslc@live.com>
Sent:Tuesday, July 25, 2023 11:00 PM
To:nick norris; john.armstrong@slcgov.com
Cc:Thompson, Amy; Matthes, Ruedigar; Lundmark, Susan; Price, Angela
Subject:(EXTERNAL) written comment for the PC hearing on Thriving
Nick and John-I'm assuming that one of you will attend the PC meeting but have copied Amy in case I'm
wrong. Please read the following short comment into the record Wednesday night. I regret that after all of
these years, I am sidelined for the hearing. Thanks, cindy c.
Members of the Planning Commission-
After several years as a cheerleader for this project, I regret being unable to speak in person tonight.
For 25 years, I've complained about the City's junk ordinance for housing loss mitigation. Now the sobering
data are in. The next steps are critical. We have to implement the recommendations with speed, especially
the community benefit program and the shorter-term safety nets for tenants. The consultants and staff have
outlined a clear path forward; we must hurry.
Some well-deserved kudos: To the team in CAN, to the walk-on-water consultants from out of state, to the
members of the working group and the City's interdepartmental team, to the students and faculty at the
University of Utah, and to the thousands of people who participated, donating their time to explain how
widespread the pain associated with housing is in this community
Cindy Cromer, 7/26/23
Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments.
What else would you like us to know
as we work to finalize the strategy
What statement best reflects your
perspective about the Draft Thriving in
Place Strategy You can explain why in
the next openresponse question
Please share more information about
why you selected your choice for the
previous question
what is your
age optional
what is your
household
income level
optional
what is your
housing
situation
optional
what is your
race or
ethnicity
optional
what priorities do not make sense
or seem unnecessary
what zip code
do you live in
optional
The plan is very detailed, which
indicates the SLC government is already
planning to move forward with it, so I'm
just screaming into the wind. But I'm
begging you, read some economic
history about what extensive
government interventions in the
housing market tend to create. The
2008 financial collapse. New York City
ever since the 70s. The Bay Area. All of
the United States during WWII. They are
ideas that come from a place of
compassion, from a place of wanting to
help people, but that does not mean
they work.
I do not think the strategy should be
adopted.
I think we need to move as fast as
possible to make up for lost time. We're
already in a deep affordability crisis. To
fix it we need massive amounts of new
supply as quickly as possible. This could
be accomplished with the stroke of a
pen by upzoning* the entire city. I know
the richest and supposedly most
progressive areas of the city would
never go for that because it would
decrease their property values, but
that's the real solution, and this
proposal doesn't do anything on that
front.
* Get rid of square foot minimums, R1
becomes R2, make density possible,
ADUs by right, etc.
Affordable housing, in the sense of
non-market rate housing, prevents
the market from efficiently reducing
prices.
It's not terrible, but upzoning the
whole city will actually make an
enormous difference. Non-market
rate housing will not.
Again, nothing new here under the sun.
Probably just a ploy to get the do-
nothing mayor re-elected. Truly a
shame.
I do not think the strategy should be
adopted.
There is nothing new to this plan/policy!
Remember when Buspiski advertised
she was going to "end homelessness"?
Billboards all over I15. Same
policy/plan. No changes. Start with
enforcing the laws! Stopping the flow of
drugs into this country! Protecting one
people group over another simply
cannot provide justice for all.Own
Prioritizing one group of people
over another. We are all equal
under the law. You cannot
"prioritize tenant protections" while
protecting the rights of those who
stay employed and pay their rent,
nor the owner of the property. You
will drive the responsible person
away, harming them with the
expense of moving, and the
property owner because they lose
paying renters.84106
Prioritize people over developers and
economy
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.18 - 21 $0 - $14,999 Rent White n/a 84102
Work with environmental justice
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.51 - 60 $150,000+Own White N/A 84106
I don’t have a strong feeling about it.41 - 50 $0 - $14,999 Other
Black or
African
American None
More outreach
I support the strategy, but would like to
see some changes.
More help for us homeless that are just
down on our luck
That you have to be mental or old
to qualify for housing
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.Being supportive 31 - 40
$50,000 -
$74,999 Rent White 84119
I support the strategy, but would like to
see some changes.51 - 60
$25,000 -
$49,999 Rent White Stigma
Get affordable housing and soon
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.
I live in a motel,so affordable housing is
very important for me 51 - 60 $0 - $14,999 Rent White 84116
I support the strategy, but would like to
see some changes.61 or older $0 - $14,999 Other White 3b 84119
Tenants should be able they can do
more then everyone thinks
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.
It’s the best for the people even if
leaders say other wise 31 - 40 Other White None 84119
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.31 - 40
$75,000 -
$99,999 Rent White
People need affordable housing I mean
really affordable housing not make
three times the rent to be able to get in.
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.The entire plan is great let’s do it!!!!!41 - 50 $0 - $14,999 Other White None 84104
I feel 90% or more of the solution to
homelessness is finding a way to
spread out deposit and first months
rent… it’s the initial financial burden
keeping most of us homeless. I see
housing going up all over yet I’ve been
on a “list” for 18 months. Why so slow
when there are empty units
EVERYWHERE?!?I don’t have a strong feeling about it.
Does not apply.
Thanks,
Truth.31 - 40 $0 - $14,999 Other White For me, all.8404
I don’t have a strong feeling about it.41 - 50
$15,000 -
$24,999 Other White Tenant’s on a state level 84101
I never had a social worker that actually
helped with anything.
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.41 - 50 $0 - $14,999 Other White Everything seems good 84104
How to get more housing and jobs for
homeless
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.Because I’m homeless 41 - 50 $0 - $14,999 Other
Native
Hawaiian or
Pacific Islander 84119
Keep in mind there are kinds trying to
grow up in the same neighborhood as
their parents
I support the strategy, but would like to
see some changes.Homeowner 22 - 30
$25,000 -
$49,999 Rent White Less focus on parks
More info out to the community n
general about your effort
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.61 or older
$25,000 -
$49,999 Rent White They all are worhwhle 84124
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.31 - 40
$100,000 -
$150,000 Rent White Need example of advocacy 84070
N/a
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.22 - 30
$25,000 -
$49,999 Rent
Hispanic or
Latino (of any
race)They are all great priorities.84105
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.
Make sure there’s not racially
motivated. They have high expectations
for people of color because they are
offering help compared to a white
personal they would just give help to.
I support the strategy, but would like to
see some changes.
I think we need more community I put
while making the plan.61 or older
$50,000 -
$74,999 Rent
Black or
African
American
No they are all good. Housing is
number one 84123
More houses; bigger houses with 5 or 6
bedrooms
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.41 - 50
$50,000 -
$74,999 Rent
Black or
African
American They all seem necessary.84104
I support the strategy, but would like to
see some changes.
Information that easily accessible and
easy to find online or in other places
would be great (including what is
needed to qualify for affordable
housing; if it is for 75% or less AMI how
do I find out if I am making 75% or less
AMI? Do I need paystubs, birth
certificate, or anything?). As a college
student, I would qualify for many
affordable housing options, but I
wouldn't know where those housing
areas are or what I'd need to do to get a
unit there.22 - 30
$75,000 -
$99,999 Rent White
5B and 5C seem unnecessary. They
might be helpful, but unsure how.84106
61 or older
$100,000 -
$150,000 Own White
Prioritize more availablity of
condominiums and townhomes for
sale. I listened on City Cast SL to a
person very knowledgable about
the renters and home situation in
Salt Lake City and he stated that
new construction is favoring the
building of rentals. Please address
the issue of limiting investors
buying properties that prevent
individuals and families from
purchasing their homes.84109
I have lived through the gentrification of
several neighborhoods. I unfortunately
do not see people staying and thriving.
At best we are boxed up under
corporate rules. No voice. Always
worried about eviction.
I support the strategy, but would like to
see some changes.
I am the Vice-chair of the downtown
community council. Westside
representative. I am also a lived expert
with SLVCEH. I live at Artspace. 5th w.
2nd so. Too many problems to get into.
Raising teenage grandson on my own.61 or older $0 - $14,999 Rent 84101
Consider educating city councils all over
utah (not just Salt Lake City) to change
zoning laws from only allowing single
family housing, to slightly lower density
for the duplex or triplex size. The
“missing middle” is important. Right
now the choice is huge multi family
dwelling then skips to single family, with
nothing in the middle. Changing zoning
laws will greatly impact affordable
housing.
I strongly support the strategy and its
proposed actions. It should be adopted
and implemented.
Educating city council about the
“missing middle” need to be included,
so zoning changes can be made.
Studies are showing, not just utah, but
other states also need to make this
change. Some states the zoning laws
are something like 92% of residential is
zoned for single family. It’s classic
NIMBY “Not In My Backyard” but if
every Neighborhood says this, then
where does this affordable option
reside. Current duplexes and triplexes
are mostly 20-30 years old. Zoning
changes have prevented new units to
be built -classic supply vs demand also
impacts these becoming affordable.41 - 50 $150,000+Own White Nice words, next is action!84042
have resources for people to succeed
like daycare, voc reahab etc in place
with displacement strategies
I support the strategy, but would like to
see some changes.
Displacement should be avoided and at
the end of the plan 41 - 50
$75,000 -
$99,999 Own White
why are you displacing people first?
Have the space to move the
displaced people that is within their
community.84105
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
tinyurl.com/SLCFY24
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Ben Luedtke, Sylvia Richards
Budget and Policy Analysts
DATE: September 19, 2023
RE: Budget Amendment Number 2 of Fiscal Year (FY) 2024
Budget Amendment Number Two includes 28 proposed amendments, $41,675,718 in revenues and $42,576,118 in
expenditures of which $233,050 is from General Fund Balance and requesting changes to six funds. Additionally,
the transmittal indicates there is an increase of eight FTE’s. Five of the eight FTEs are being requested in Items A-1
& E-3 - State Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation Grant for FY2024 ($3,107,201). The Council will be holding a
public hearing for this grant on September 19th, the same night as the Budget Amendment No. 2 public hearing.
Fund Balance
If all the items are adopted as proposed, then General Fund Balance would be projected at 13.96% which is
$4,263,736 above the 13% minimum target of ongoing General Fund revenues. Note: this figure includes both
General Fund and Funding our Future fund balances. The projected Fund Balance does not include unused
FY2023 budgets that drop to Fund Balance at the end of the fiscal year. The General Fund typically sees $2 million
to $3 million drop to Fund Balance annually, which would increase the fund balance percentage. It also does not
include actual revenues through the end of the last fiscal year. The comprehensive annual financial audit will
confirm the actual Fund Balance through the end of FY2023. The annual audit is typically completed in December.
This updated 13.96% combined Fund Balance is higher than estimated during the annual budget deliberations in
June and Budget Amendment #1 last month due to finance department clarification on best practices for what to
include or not include in Fund Balance calculations. The revised estimate did not impact the Funding Our Future
portion of Fund Balance which remains at 14.51% which is $791,501 above the 13% minimum target.
Two Straw Poll Requests
The Administration is requesting straw polls for two items due to impending reimbursement deadlines: E-1 TANF
(Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) Capacity Building Grant Adult Education Program for $1,229,681, and
E-2 TANF Capacity Building Grant – Youth Development $1,391,672.
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
Project Timeline:
Set Date: September 19, 2023
1st Briefing: September 19, 2023
Public Hearing: October 3, 2023
2nd Briefing: October 3, 2023 (if needed)
Potential Action: October 17, 2023
Council Request: Tracking New Ongoing General Fund Costs Approved in Midyear Budget Amendments
Council staff has provided the following list of new ongoing costs to the General Fund. Many of these are new FTE’s approved during this fiscal
year’s budget amendments, noting that each new FTE increases the City’s annual budget if positions are added to the staffing document. Note that
some items in the table below are partially or fully funded by grants. If a grant continues to be awarded to the City in future years, then there may
not be a cost to the General Fund but grant funding is not guaranteed year-over-year.
Budget
Amendment Item
Potential Cost
to FY2025
Annual Budget
Full Time Employee
(FTEs)Notes
#2
Item A-1: Homeless
General Fund
Reallocation Cost
Share for State
Homeless Mitigation
Grant
$53,544
0.5 FTE Community
Development
Grant Specialist for
Homelessness Engagement and
Response Team (HEART)
This position is proposed to be half funded
from the State Homeless Shelter Cities
Mitigation Grant and half by the General Fund
for FY2024. The $107,088 reflects the fully
loaded annual cost for the FTE.
#2
Item A-5: Create a
Public Lands Planning
& Design Division $11,139
Reclassify an existing FTE to a
higher pay grade and director of
new division. Request position
be appointed in a future budget
opening.
Transfer all four (4) full-time landscape
architect positions and associated operating
budget ($543,144) from the Engineering
Division (Public Services Department) to this
new division in the Public Lands Department.
#2
A-6 Sorenson
Janitorial and County
Contract - Senior
Community Programs
Manager
Budget Neutral
(see note to the
right)
1 Senior Community Programs
Manager
This item requires amending an existing
interlocal agreement with the County. At the
time of publishing this report, staff is checking
whether the amendment could result in
additional funding needs to maintain current
levels of service. The item might not be budget
neutral depending on the agreement changes.
#2
A-7: Economic
Development Project
Manager Position $122,000
1 Economic Development Project
Manager
Would be focused on the creation of Special
Assessment Areas or SAAs for business
districts and renewal every three to five years.
#2 A-9: Know Your
Neighbor Program
Expenses
$6,500
Program expenses were inadvertently left out
of the last annual budget
#2 A-10: Love Your
Block Program
Expenses
$55,750
Program expenses were inadvertently left out
of the last annual budget
Budget
Amendment Item
Potential Cost
to FY2025
Annual Budget
Full Time Employee
(FTEs)Notes
#2
Item E-3: Homeless
Shelter Cities
Mitigation Grant
Award
$3,107,201
13 Existing FTEs:
- 2 Police sergeants
- 10 police officers
- 1 Business & community
liaison
4.5 New FTEs:
- 1 Sequential Intercept Case
Manager in the Justice Court
- 0.5 Grant Specialist in CAN
(half grant funded and half by
the General Fund in item above)
- 1 Police sergeant
- 2 police officers
Admin expects to apply for grant funding
annually to cover these costs. General Fund
would not need to cover costs if the State grant
is awarded to the City to fully cover the costs.
Note: Justice Court FTE is part of the City’s
contribution towards implementation of the
“Miami Model” of diversion out of the
homelessness system.
#2
G-1: Greater Salt Lake
Area Clean Energy
and Air Roadmap
Coordinator Position $482,915
(funding is to
cover four years
of new FTE)
1 Coordinator
Four years of salary and benefits. The position
would be responsible for facilitating the
sustained involvement of jurisdiction partners,
managing consultants, assisting with
community engagement, coordinating
stakeholder and public engagement activities
and presentations, and tracking task
completion and achievement.
TOTALS $3,356,134 21 FTEs of which 8 are New Does not include the cost of item G-1
Revenue for FY 2023-24 Budget Adjustments
The Administration indicates that there are no revenue projection updates yet for FY2024.
Fund Balance Chart
The Administration’s chart below shows the current General Fund Balance figures. Fund balance has been updated to include proposed changes for Budget
Amendment #2. Based on those projections the adjusted fund balance is projected to be at 13.96%. The Administration is requesting a budget amendment
totaling $41,675,718 in revenue and $42,576,118 in expenses. The amendment proposes changes in six funds, with eight increases in FTEs. The proposal
includes 27 initiatives for Council review and a potential Council-added item.
A summary spreadsheet outlining proposed budget changes is attached to the transmittal. The
Administration requests that 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
Impact Fees Update
The Administration’s transmittal provides an updated summary of impact fee tracking. The information is current as
of 7/20/23 and has taken into account impact fees appropriated by the Council on August 15 as part of the FY2024
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) . As a result, the City is on-track with impact fee budgeting to have no refunds
during all of FY2024 and FY2025. The transportation section of the City’s Impact Fees Plan was updated in October
2020. The Administration is working on updates to the fire, parks, and police sections of the plan.
Type Unallocated Cash
“Available to Spend”Next Refund Trigger Date Amount of Expiring
Impact Fees
Fire $273,684 More than two years away -
Parks $14,064,637 More than two years away -
Police $1,402,656 More than two years away -
Transportation $6,064,485 More than two years away -
Note: Encumbrances are an administrative function when impact fees are held under a contract
Section A: New Items
Note: to expedite the processing of this staff report, staff has included the Administration’s descriptions from the
transmittal for some of these items.
A-1: 50% Cost Share for a New FTE Community Development Grant Specialist in the Housing
Stability Division (Budget Neutral – Shifting $44,620 in the General Fund from Street
Ambassador Program to New FTE)
See item E-3 for the FY2024 Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation State Grant write-up which is proposed to fund
50% of the new FTE
The Administration is requesting a new FTE Community Development Grant Specialist to improve contract
management of City funding for homeless services. The new FTE is 50% eligible for the state homeless grant
funding which reflects the proportion of work related to the State grant. The other half of the position would be
funded from the General Fund. This item proposes to shift $44,620 in the General Fund’s for Street Ambassador
to instead go to the new FTE. An equivalent $44,620 from the State grant would go to the Street Ambassador
program to maintain current service levels. The total $1,384,101 funding for the Street Ambassador program
would remain unchanged. The Downtown Alliance is aware of and supports this proposed funding source change.
The total $89,240 for the new FTE would cover 10 months. If the State grant is not available next fiscal year, then
the next annual budget would need $107,088 to cover the fully loaded annual cost (salary and benefits).
A-2: U.S. Treasury Emergency Rent Assistance Program Funding ($2,339,009 to Misc. Grants
Fund)
In Budget Amendment #5 of FY2023 the Council appropriated $2 million for rental assistance distributed in
partnership with the State through the Utah Rent Relief portal. The State has since closed the portal and gradually
ended the program. At the briefing, the Council stated a preference to also use the remaining funding from the
Treasury for direct rental assistance. The funding could be awarded to the Housing Authority of Salt Lake City as
the sole source provider. A potential advantage of this approach is simpler tracking and compliance reporting to
the federal government. Another option is an open and competitive process for interested organizations to apply.
The Council could request the Administration (the mayor and/or an advisory board) make funding
recommendations based on the applications and then the Council would decide final funding awards.
Eligible expenses per federal guidance are security deposits, rent, past due rent, utilities, past due utilities, and
some other housing related costs such as application fees. September 30, 2025 is the deadline to spend these
funds or return them to the U.S. Treasury. Federal guidance requires the funds be awarded to recipients
negatively impacted by covid, recipients are limited to 18 months of rental assistance total, and the application
process must be open to all eligible households. The City has received and distributed $20,867,592 through the
U.S. Treasury’s Emergency Rent Assistance Program. The Treasury reallocated funding from low performing to
high performing jurisdictions like Salt Lake City. Earlier this year, the Administration requested additional
funding and the Treasury released another $339,009 in addition to the $2 million the City has yet to budget for
use. No additional funding is anticipated to be made available by the Treasury through this program.
Policy Question:
➢Housing Authority Sole Source Provider Approach or Open and Competitive Process? The Council may
wish to discuss with the Administration the pros and cons of the two approaches or discuss other options
before selecting how to distribute the funds.
A-3: Liberty Park Basketball Court Donation from Utah Jazz ($100,000 to CIP Fund)
In FY2022 CIP, the Council approved $99,680 for a constituent application to resurface the basketball court in the
center of Liberty Park and replace the two basketball hoops. The court has deteriorated to an extent where resurfacing
is no longer a recommended option. The Utah Jazz offered a $100,000 donation to reconstruct the court in honor of
their 50th anniversary season. The total project budget of nearly $200,000 would also allow fencing and seating to be
installed. The Utah Jazz logo would be included on the court.
A-4: Rescope Miller Park Trail ADA Access Improvements and Historic Structure Preservation
(Budget Neutral in the CIP Fund)
See Attachment 1 for the Miller Park Engagement Report June 2023
In FY2024 CIP, the Council approved $425,000 for a constituent application Miller Park trail ADA access
improvements and historic structure preservation. This item would rescope the remaining $365,012. This proposal
would not close any informal or “social” trails that exist in the park. The original goals of the project included
expanding ADA accessibility, eliminating hazardous steep trail sections, protecting, and restoring historic structures
such as the Works Progress Administration walls, and installing a walking bridge. The Public Lands Department hired
a consultant who obtained geotechnical and structural engineers, who determined that the recommended projects in
the original scope would not fulfill the goals stated, and instead recommended projects that would fulfill the stated
goals. The Department is requesting a rescope to use the remaining funds on the new projects recommended by the
engineers.
Attachment 1 includes a summary of engagement for this item. Some of the organizations that were included in that
process were the Yalecrest Neighborhood Council, Salt Lake City Public Utilities, the City’s Risk Management
Attorney, a national trail-building firm, American Trails, the State Historic Preservation Officer, the Mayor’s ADA
coordinator, and the Disability and Accessibility Commission. While some stakeholders expressed support for the
department’s proposed way forward, other stakeholders prefer to find ways to make the original scope work.
The Department provided the below list of projects (#1 being the highest priority) based on the results of public
engagement. Rescoped funds would first be used for project #1 and then proceed down the list until funding runs out.
If projects could be done more efficiently in tandem, then they might not strictly follow the priority order.
1. Repairing the historic crib walls to increase wall and trail stability
2. Stabilize exposed wall foundation with soil nails and cover foundation where feasible, and to prevent erosion with
adjacent properties
3. Reinforce walls with buttresses on the east side of the creek, and replace crib wall on creek side to reduce
concentrated drainage
4. Improve running and cross slopes for accessibility located near the entrance on 900 South and on the east side of
the creek, and other accessibility improvements as there are efficiencies with other projects
5. Improve cross slope near Bonneview Drive Entrance and explore adding stairs and a handrail
6. Reconstruct existing stairs to improve safety
7.Add curb cut and ramp from Bonneview Drive
A-5: Create a Public Lands Planning & Design Division (Transfer $543,144 and Four FTEs from the
Engineering Division)
Staff note: Council and Administrative Staff are working on additional clarification on this item.
New information may be available for the briefing on Tuesday. The following write-up is based on
the transmittal originally sent to the Council, but a revised/clarified proposal may be forthcoming:
The Administration is proposing to create a new division in the Public Lands Department. The request has three parts:
1. Creating the Planning & Design Division
2. Transfer four existing landscape architect FTEs from the Engineering Division in the Public Services Department
to the new division in Public Lands
a. The four FTEs are one Senior Landscape Architect (Grade 34), two Landscape Architect IIIs (Grade 30),
and one Landscape Architect II (Grade 27)
b. The landscape architects would join two project managers currently in the Public Lands Department.
3. Reclassify an existing Planning Manager FTE in Public Lands to be the director of the new division at a higher pay
grade (from 33 to 34 and then 35 in the next annual budget) and as a merit, non-appointed position. The
Administration intends to request this position be appointed in the next annual budget. Vacancy savings would be
used to cover the increased compensation for the new division director. The next annual budget would need to
include $12,113 for the position.
The Department stated the need for this new division is caused by the increase in the number and complexity of
capital improvement projects for parks, trails, and open spaces from the voter-approved parks bond (first issuance is
item D-5 in this budget amendment), the 2022 Sales Tax Revenue Bond, annual CIP funding, and a growing number
of grants and donations.
Closer coordination and operational savings are potential benefits of the FTE transfer is that the positions planning
and designing new capital assets would work in the same department as the employees responsible for maintenance of
the assets. The Public Lands Department would be responsible for all planning, prioritization, funding, public and
stakeholder engagement, design, consultant management, overall project management, and, ultimately, on-going
maintenance of every project.
Policy questions:
➢Timely Completion of Capital Projects – The Council may wish to ask the Administration are existing
resources and system sufficient to deploy capital projects in a timely manner and meet the policy goal of
completing CIP projects within three years?
➢Merit vs Appointed Policy Guidance for Division Directors – The Council may wish to discuss with the
Administration whether to provide police guidance on the employment status (merit vs appointed) for
division directors. Appointed positions are as such to give the Mayor maximum flexibility to implement
his/her policy goals, which means merit positions have employment protections that appointed positions do
not. Most division directors in the City are appointed but there are a few in a merit status. It’s unclear why
there is a mix, although it is likely due to historical practices and evolving policy goals. Staff is clarifying with
HR. Department directors and deputy directors are appointed. Legally a merit employee cannot be forced into
an appointed status. For this reason, it’s easier to make a position appointed before hiring the employee.
Historically, the City has provided increased compensation to appointed positions in recognition that certain
employment rights available to merit positions are unavailable to appointed positions. Some options might be
placing policy guidance into the annual compensation ordinance for non-represented employees and/or in
City Code.
➢Amending City Code to Create New Division – The Council may wish to ask the Attorney’s Office to clarify
whether Section 2.08.130 Administrative Organization of the Public Lands Department needs to be amended
to formally create the new division. The section currently lists the four divisions of the Public Lands
Department: Parks, Golf, Trails & Natural Lands, and Urban Forestry. The Budget Amendment #2 transmittal
did not include an ordinance amendment.
➢Parks Bond Reimburse General Fund for Landscape Architect Work – The Council may wish to ask the
Administration to explore whether the Parks Bond could reimburse the General Fund for eligible work on
bond project implementation by the landscape architects. The first issuance of the bond includes reimbursing
the General Fund for two planner positions work on bond projects in the Public Lands Department and a
senior project manager in Engineering (currently vacant).
New Project Delivery Process
See Attachment for a graphic of the Double Diamond project delivery process
The Public Lands Department and the Engineering Division shared the following information about two tenets of the
new project delivery process that is being developed.
(1) “One Project Manager: Currently, every public lands project has two project managers, with tasks divided
between at least the Engineering Division’s PLACES Team (landscape architects) and the Public Lands
Department’s Planning Team (planners). Project ownership and accountability have been unclear. This requested
structural change and the new project delivery process will help rectify that by allowing the Public Lands
Department to identify the best project manager for each project (whether a landscape architect or a planner).
They will lead each project from start to finish and ultimately manage the staff and consultants that will assist
during each phase. This will improve accountability, predictability, and equitable outcomes.”
(2) “Double Diamond: The new project delivery process is based on the “double diamond” design process model.
It encourages public engagement in the most impactful phases of the project, preventing feedback from being
collected too early or too late. It allows for sufficient time for everyone involved in each project to “diverge”, or
engage in expansive, creative thinking, and the development of several design alternatives. But it also requires
projects to “converge” (at least twice), to synthesize and to move forward once enough information has been
collected. Ultimately, the project manager will lead projects from start to finish and depend on project team
members for their expertise (e.g., construction managers, designers, civic engagement specialists, etc.). Specifics
of the Public Lands Department’s process can be shared with the Council once it has been refined by all project
managers within the next few months.”
A-6: New FTE Senior Community Programs Manager (Budget Neutral – Shifting $113,798 from
County Contract for Sorenson Center Services to New Position)
The Administration is requesting a new FTE senior community programs manager at pay grade 26 in the Youth and
Family Division of the Community and Neighborhood Department. The total budget for County contracted services at
the Sorenson center will be reduced from $1,014,800 to $901,002. The difference of $113,798 would pay for the new
FTE. The City Council and County Council would need to amend the existing interlocal agreement to reflect this new
budget. The County has requested that the City take on child care and custodial services at the Sorenson Campus. The
new FTE will help maintain existing levels of services for childcare functions. The Public Services Department expects
to contract with a third party for cleaning and maintenance at existing frequencies at the same or lower cost.
In March of 2018, the City and County entered an interlocal agreement (ILA) that defines the responsibilities of the
respective entities for programming, operation, and maintenance of the Sorenson Unity Center. The facility is owned
by the City, and the City leads educational and community-based programming while the County leads recreational
programming. The City is responsible for utilities, security, and maintenance of the facility and the County is
responsible for custodial services. Currently, all parties agree that it would be more efficient if the ILA is amended so
that responsibility for certain programming and custodial services be transferred from the County to the City. As such,
this is a revenue neutral budget request that will rescope the Sorenson budget and facilitate an amendment to the ILA
to modify terms relating to childcare programming and custodial responsibilities.
A-7: New FTE Economic Development Project Manager to Facilitate Special Assessment Areas (SAAs)
($128,000 from General Fund Balance)
The Administration is requesting a new FTE project manager at pay grade 29 in the Economic Development
Department. The position would facilitate creation of SAAs for business districts and renewal of SAAs every three to
five years. The position may also assist with other business districts support efforts managed by the Economic
Development Department. The City’s only current SAA is the Central Business Improvement Area which is authorized
until April 2025. The City is currently exploring the creation of an SAA in the Sugar House Business District. The
Council also funded $60,000 in the last annual budget for a study of a potential SAA in the Granary District. The new
position would facilitate these two new potential SAAs and do outreach to other business districts that may be
interested in exploring SAAs too.
The Administration stated that the Economic Development Department would be the lead for the potential creation
and renewal of SAAs. Initial facilitation of discussions with property owners would be handled by the new FTE and the
required consultant study of boundaries and assessment methods (note: consulting studies for future SAAs may
require additional budget). Then responsibility could be transferred to another department such as Engineering for
public infrastructure improvement SAAs. SAAs are a flexible financing tool where property owners agree to tax
themselves in exchange for collective benefits. SAAs are allowed to address several types of activity under state law
including economic promotion (like the current Central Business Improvement Area), public infrastructure
improvements, enhanced maintenance or operation services, environmental remediation, and utilities.
State law has many requirements for creating an SAA. There are approximately 50 steps that can take a year to
complete based on the last renewal of the Central Business Improvement Area. It should be noted that an SAA cannot
be formed without the support of 60% of the property owners, and that the last SAA the City attempted to implement
along North Temple did not meet that threshold (the General Fund covered those improvements). The Attorney’s
Office, Finance Department, and sometimes Engineering Division also have important roles for the creation and
renewal of SAAs. The Finance Department has an ongoing role in the administration of funds for an SAA (not just
creation and renewal every three to five years) including annual invoices, payments, tracking, and collections. Some of
the steps to authorize an SAA include the intent to designate resolution, a public hearing, the Board of Equalization
Appointment, a second public hearing, publishing a Request for Proposal (RFP) to appoint SAA contractor, contract
award facilitation and ongoing contract management.
Policy questions:
➢One-time vs Ongoing Workload between Departments Supporting SAAs – The Council may want to ask the
Administration are existing resources and systems sufficient to handle the ongoing workload in the Finance
Department for administering SAAs compared to the one-time workload in other departments for creating
and renewing SAAs every three to five years? Is the potentially increasing number of SAAs in the City
anticipated to need additional resources?
➢Policy Guidance for SAAs – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration whether policy guidance
would be helpful to identify SAAs and activities the City supports (promotion, infrastructure, utilities, etc.),
preferred terms, and best practices.
A-8: Central Business Improvement Area Assessment Funds to the Downtown Alliance ($664,294
from Special Assessment Fund)
This is a legally required financial true up, that would transfer one-time funds from remaining cash balances to the
Downtown Alliance as the contract holder for the Central Business Improvement Area (a type of SAA downtown
renewed every three years since 1991). The funds accrued over multiple years from late payments by property owners
in previous three-year cycles of the downtown SAA dating from 2000 to 2018. It’s important to note that the City
passthrough payments of property owner assessments were made to the contract holder as required in prior years.
Some of the funds may also have been a result of greater than expected property owner assessments such as higher
collection rates. Financial true ups for 2019 and after will be handled in a future budget opening.
Policy Question:
➢Resources to Provide More Frequent SAA Financial True-ups – The Council may wish to ask the
Administration what resources and/or system changes could help provide more frequent SAA financial true-
ups to prevent a similar situation from happening again.
A-9: Know Your Neighbor Program Expenses ($6,500 from General Fund Balance)
The Administration is requesting this budget amendment to recognize all expenses associated with the Know Your
Neighbor Program. During the last annual budget these expenses were presented to the Council but inadvertently not
included in the Mayor’s recommended budget. The ongoing expenses are:
- $2,000 for Dues & Publications – Volunteer Sign-up Platform, Canvas
- $2,000 for Language Services, Transportation, Child Care, Brand Development
- $1,500 for Printed Materials, Advertising, and Promotional Items/Swag
- $500 for Food/Refreshments
- $500 for Material and Supplies
A-10: Love Your Block Program Expenses ($55,750 from General Fund Balance)
The Administration is requesting this budget amendment to recognize all expenses associated with the Know Your
Neighbor Program. During the last annual budget these expenses were presented to the Council but inadvertently not
included in the Mayor’s recommended budget. The ongoing expenses are:
- $25,000 for Mini-Grants
- $12,000 for Neighborhood Cleanup Trailer
- $6,000 for Training
- $3,000 for Food/Refreshments
- $2,500 for Materials & Supplies
- $2,000 for Equipment and Tools
- $2,000 for Specialty Contracts, Dues and Publications
- $1,500 for Printing and Promotion
- $1,000 for Phones/Other
- $750 for Uniforms
A-11: Proposed Ordinance Amending the FY 2023- 2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-
Represented Employees (Budget Neutral)
Note that the transmittal includes a separate ordinance to amend the annual compensation plan for non-
represented employees. The votes on Budget Amendment #2 and amending the compensation plan will be listed
separately on a Council formal meeting agenda.
The Administration provided the below summary of some changes to the plan. These changes will impact the
Department of Public Services’ Snowfighter and the new Safety & Security Director’s pay specifically and will also
make changes to the Justice Court Judges salaries as well. The remainder of the changes will have impacts generally
throughout the City.
- Revising Subsection IV(H) (“Snowfighter Pay”) of Section III (“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay
Allowances”) – Changes include insertion of the same pay amounts adopted for AFSCME-covered employees eligible
to receive Snowfighter Pay. In the original redlined copy of the Plan transmitted to City Council, comments stated the
specific amounts included in these subsections would be matched and added after the new rates negotiated and
adopted in the new AFSCME MOU were known. There wasn’t enough time to update the specific amounts in the Plan
between adoption of the annual budget and the conclusion of negotiations and ratification of a new agreement with
AFSCME. This also applied to additional items listed below.
- Revising Subsection VI(A) (“Other Pay Allowances; Meal Allowance”) of Section III (“Work Hours,
Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) – Changes include insertion of the same pay amounts adopted for
AFSCME-covered employees eligible to receive Meal Allowance.
- Revising Appendix A (“Salt Lake City Corporation General Employee Pay Plan (GEPP)”) – New rates
indicated correct rounding errors discovered in calculation of range minimums, midpoints, and maximums for
salaried employees. Corrected rates match pay range information loaded for salaried employees in Workday
without fiscal impact.
- Revising Appendix B (“Appointed Employees by Department”) – Corrects pay levels shown for certain
job titles to match those included in the plan originally transmitted to City Council. The latest copy of the Appointed
Pay Plan intended only to show the addition of the new Safety & Security Director for Public Services, but
inadvertently included incorrect pay level changes for Justice Court Judges and the Justice Court Administrator.
- Revising Appendix D (“Utah State Retirement Contributions FY 2023-2024”) – Specific edits include
adjustments to employer contributions required for employees covered under the Tier 1 – Firefighter Retirement
System. Notice of these changes was not received from URS until after this Plan was originally transmitted to City
Council.
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
(None)
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
(None)
Section D: Housekeeping
D-1: Emergency Demolition Fund Reset ($65,472 from Special Revenue Fund)
This request is to reset the 'Emergency Demolition Fund' back to its original budget of $200,000 The fund has
been working as intended and paid for the demolition of homes affected by fire on Major Street. The property
owner has reimbursed the city for the cost of demolition.
D-2: 300 North Pedestrian Bridge - Funding Passthrough ($500,000 from Union Pacific to the CIP
Fund)
Engineering is ready to bill Union Pacific for their agreed upon contribution of $500,000 towards the 300 N
pedestrian bridge project. Under the terms of the agreement, this contribution will be paid to the City. Since this
contribution was accounted for as a funding source for the project, this budget amendment records the incoming
revenue from Union Pacific's contribution and records the expense as the funds will be used as payment to the
contractor.
D-3: Withdrawn Prior to Transmittal
D-4: RDA Housing Funds Transfer to Miscellaneous Grants ($6,476,014 to Misc. Grants)
Funding was transferred in the FY2024 annual budget to the RDA but is now being returned to Misc Grants to better
track according to federal guidelines. Note that the Administration’s transmittal inadvertently listed $6.4 million even.
The dollar amount has been updated to match the funding transfer from the last annual budget.
D-5: General Obligation Series 2023 Bonds ($24,885,893 from the First Bond Issuance to the CIP
Fund)
In November 2022, voters authorized the issuance of up to $85 million in general obligation bonds to fund eight
Parks, Trails, and Open Space projects. The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2023 were sold in August 2023 as the
first issuance of the authorization. This amendment creates the revenue budget for the receipt of bond proceeds and
the expenditure budget to pay for renovation of the park projects associated with the bonds.
There will be eleven project funds in Cost Center 10508 to which bond proceeds will be allocated.
•One allocation will be $9,000,0000 for the Glendale Regional Park (1200 West 1700 South) project.
•The second allocation will be $2,000,000 for Liberty Park Playground (600 East 900 South) project.
•The third allocation will be $850,000 for Allen Park (1900 South).
•The fourth allocation will be $5,000,000 for Folsom Trail Completion & Landscaping projects.
•The fifth will be $600,000 for the Fleet Block Park project.
•The sixth allocation will be $500,000 for the Fairmont Park (1040 East Sugarmont Drive) project.
•The seventh allocation will be $1,050,000 for Reimagine Neighborhood Parks, Trail, or Open Spaces (various
Locations with at least one in each Council District) projects.
•The eighth allocation will be $600,000 for the Jordan River Corridor (various locations) project.
•There will be a unique Fund for the bond's Contingencies/Program Management that will be allocated
$3,332,000.
•There will also be a unique Fund for Art Allowance that will be allocated $294,000.
•There will be an allocation for the bond's cost of issuance. This allocation will receive $225,893.25.
•There will be a unique Fund for the bond's Salaries, Benefits and Operational costs for 3 FTE's for 3 years. This
allocation will receive $1,434,000 that is slated to be reimbursed to the General Fund. The timing and actual
amounts of these reimbursements will be according to tracking of permitted expenses.
Policy Question:
➢Reimbursing the General Fund for FY2023 Costs – Note that this funding does not reimburse the General
Fund for fronting the $302,600 in FY2023 to hire the three FTEs dedicated to implementing the bond
projects. The Council may wish to request that the Administration explore the option for the bond to
reimburse the General Fund for those FY2023 expenses. It’s worth noting that one of the three positions, a
senior project manager in Engineering, has not been filled nine months after it was authorized and funded.
D-6: RV Enforcement Team Budget to Non-departmental for Transfer to IMS and Fleet ($45,800 from
Non-departmental)
In Budget Amendment #1, funds were redirected from the Compliance Mitigation team funding to be transferred to
IMS and Fleet for various related one-time costs. The funds were moved from Compliance but were not moved to
Non-departmental to be transferred to IMS and Fleet. This amendment adds that budget to Non-departmental for the
transfer to happen. Funding for the FTEs will remain in the Public Services Department.
Section E: Grants Requiring No Staff Resources
E-1: TANF Capacity Building Grant-Financial Capability ($1,229,681 from Misc. Grants)
The Administration has requested a straw poll for this item because of upcoming reimbursement deadlines
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program is designed to help low-income families achieve self-
sufficiency. States receive block grants to design and operate programs that accomplish one of the purposes of the
TANF program. The award period for this award is from July 1,2023 to June 30,2026.
E-2: TANF Capacity Building Grant-Youth Development ($1,391,672 from Misc. Grants)
The Administration has requested a straw poll for this item because of upcoming reimbursement deadlines
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program is designed to help low-income families achieve self-
sufficiency. States receive block grants to design and operate programs that accomplish one of the purposes of the
TANF program. The award period for this award is from July 1,2023 to June 30,2026.
E-3: State Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation FY 24 ($3,107,201 to the Misc. Grants Fund)
This item is to recognize the annual State grant award in the amount of $3,107,201 for eligible costs associated with
homeless resource centers within the City. This is a formula grant subject to annual appropriations by the State
Legislature. The City was not required to apply but submitted proposed uses and was awarded by the State. This grant
requires no local matching funds. The total award is $357,201 more than last year. The Administration provided the
below details of the five new FTEs proposed to be paid by the State grant. At the time of publishing this report, it
appears that 13 existing FTEs would continue to be paid from the State grant (two police sergeants, 10 police officers,
and a business & community liaison).
Five New FTEs
- Job Title: Sequential Intercept Case Manager
o Pay grade: 26
o Job descriptions is pending but is expected to be based on the existing Homeless Strategies Outreach
Coordinator
o Annual fully loaded cost: $107,088
o Mitigation grant covers 100% of effort for 10 months
o This position will work to implement the Sequential Intercept model (Miami model) with the Salt Lake
City Justice Court. The case manager will coordinate access to community resources with high utilizers of
the Justice Court.
- Job Title: HEART Grant Program Specialist
o Pay grade: 26
o Job descriptions is pending but is expected to be based on the existing Grant Specialist
o Annual fully loaded cost: $107,088
o Mitigation grant is estimated to cover 50% of the cost of this position. General funds are sought to cover
the other 50% (see item A-1 in this budget amendment), which is offset by increasing Mitigation award to
the Downtown Alliance for the Expanded Ambassador Program.
o This position will manage all aspects of contracting, invoicing, reporting, performance monitoring, and
will serve as liaison for all grantees of City homeless services general funds, as well as the State Office of
Homeless Services and Mitigation subawardees. This work is currently spread out among several
members of the HEART team, and the team's ability to monitor contractors for performance is very
limited.
- Job Title: Police Officer
o Pay grade: 25
o Annual fully loaded cost: $117,854
o Mitigation grant is estimated to cover 100% of the cost of this position.
o This position will increase police services staffing and call response at the Homeless Resource Centers and
surrounding areas. The total police staffing on this grant will be 15.
- Job Title: Sergeant
o Pay grade: 29
o Annual fully loaded cost: $184,995
o Mitigation grant is estimated to cover 100% of the cost of this position.
o This position will increase police services staffing and call response at the Homeless Resource Centers and
surrounding areas. The total police staffing on this grant will be 15.
Policy Questions:
➢Grant Briefing and Additional Details – The Council may wish to schedule a briefing to learn more and discuss
the annual Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation State Grant. The FY2023 grant was $2.75 million of which $2.2
million was ongoing for 13 FTEs. The FY2024 grant is $3,107,201. At the time of publishing this report, staff
was trying to clarify how the $272,322 used for one-time expenses in the FY2023 grant is proposed to be used
in the FY2024 grant such as for new vehicles, equipment, and other one-time supplies.
➢Homeless Services Funding Needs vs Available Funding – The Council may wish to ask the Administration
whether any excess funding related to homeless resource centers and homeless services exists, and how the
funding need compares to available funding.
Section F: Donations
(None)
Section G: Grant Consent Agenda
G-1: Greater Salt Lake Area Clean Energy and Air Roadmap Grant ($1 million from Misc. Grants)
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $1,000,000
for the purpose of developing a comprehensive, economy-wide climate mitigation plan or update an existing plan
in collaboration with air pollution control districts, large and small municipalities statewide and tribal
governments that will support actions to reduce greenhouse gases and harmful air pollutants and to conduct
meaningful engagement with low income and disadvantaged communities. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) agrees to pay for 100% of all approved budget period costs incurred up to the $1,000,000 award. 1
New FTE: Four years of salary and fringe benefits for one FTE. The position would be responsible for facilitating
the sustained involvement of jurisdiction partners, managing consultants, assisting with community engagement,
coordinating stakeholder and public engagement activities and presentations, and tracking task completion and
milestone achievement. A Public Hearing was held on July 11,2023.
G-2: Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry Fire and State Lands ($50,000 from Misc.
Grants)
The Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands of the Utah Department of Natural Resources is giving Public
Lands an extra $50,000 in funding for the purpose of removing navigational hazards, including downed trees,
garbage, and other debris, from the Jordan River from 2100 South to 2400 North. No match is required. Since the
City did not apply for this funding, this item appeared on the September 5, 2023 Consent Agenda during the
Council’s formal meeting.
G-3: Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry Fire and State Lands ($150,000 from Misc.
Grants)
The Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands of the Utah Department of Natural Resources is giving Public
Lands a $150,000 grant for the purpose of removing navigational hazards, including downed trees, garbage, and
other debris, from the Jordan River from 2100 South to 2400 North. No match is required. The Public Hearing
was held May 16,2023.
G-4: State of Utah Division of Outdoor Recreation ($150,000 from Misc. Grants)
The Division of Outdoor Recreation is giving Public Lands a $150,000 grant for the purpose of removing
navigational hazards, including downed trees, garbage, and other debris, from the Jordan River from 2100 South
to 2400 North. No match is required. The Public Hearing was held June 6, 2023.
G-5: Backman Community Open Space ($200,000 from Misc. Grants)
Salt Lake City's Department of Public Lands will improve the open space adjacent to Backman Elementary. The
design will likely include intentional landscaping and safety improvements, multiple nature playground amenities,
watchable wildlife areas, an outdoor gathering area and permaculture garden and/or similar amenities. This open
space area is covered with thick, invasive vegetation and remains virtually unused by the surrounding community.
The current conditions create safety concerns for families whose children use the existing trail and bridge to walk
to school. An analysis by the University of Utah of census block data shows that this natural area could provide
children and their families greater access to nature than any other single natural open space in the city, making
the site an unprecedented public asset for hundreds of local children and families in the City's Rose Park
neighborhood and users of the Jordan River Parkway by improving a blighted section of the trail. 50% match is
required. The Public Hearing was held May 16, 2023.
G-6: Utah Office for Victims of Crime-VOCA Misc Grants ($92,846 from Misc. Grants)
Salt Lake City Prosecutor's Office was awarded $92,846 for a two-year grant to pay partial salary for a victim
advocate. This grant does not require any new positions as the victim advocate was partially paid for the last two
years by a previous VOCA award. The Public Hearing was held June 6, 2023. The other portion of the Victim
Advocate's salary will be used to satisfy the 25% match.
G-7: YouthCity Summer Food Service Program - Utah State Board of Education ($11,000 from Misc.
Grants)
This grant will be used to pay for snacks for the Youth & Family locations throughout the City. No FTEs are paid
for by the grant. Employee staff time is being used as a match. The Public Hearing was held September 5, 2023.
Section I: Council-Added Items
I-1: Placeholder - Additional Funding for Sanctioned Camping ($TBD)
The Council may wish to hold further discussions regarding the potential need for additional one-time funding for
the pilot sanctioned campground, related public safety, and cleaning expenses. Staff is working with the
Administration to identify potential sources should additional funding be necessary. Given that this project will
need to move quickly, and that it is an important policy goal for the Mayor and Council to demonstrate the
viability of this idea, the Council could choose to appropriate a dollar amount (for example $1 million) to an
account that is subject to final Council release of funds, but available as needed on a more immediate basis. The
Council appropriated one-time $500,000 as part of the FY2024 annual budget into a holding account for a
sanctioned campground.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Miller Park Engagement Report June 2023
2. Double Diamond Project Delivery Process Graphic
ACRONYMS
AFSCME – American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees
CAFR – Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
CAN – Department of Community and Neighborhoods
CIP – Capital Improvement Program Fund
EMS – Emergency Medical Services
EPA – U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ERAP – Emergency Rental Assistance Program
FTE – Full Time Employee
FY – Fiscal Year
GF – General Fund
FOF – Funding Our Future
IMS – Information Management Services
Misc. – Miscellaneous
MOU – Memorandum of Understanding
RDA – Redevelopment Agency
RFP – Request for Proposals
SAA – Special Assessment Area
TANF – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
TBD – To Be Determined
UDOT – Utah Department of Transportation
VOCA – Victims of Crime Act
Miller Park Engagement
Trail Access Improvement & Historic Preservation
June 2023
1
Table of Contents
Background………………………………………………………………………………. 2
Engagement Approach………………………………………………………………. 3
Survey Results………………………………………………………………………….. 4
In-Person Engagement Results………………………………………………….. 9
Common Themes in Open Comments………………………………………… 12
Assessment of Original CIP Request…………………………………………… 14
Next Steps……………………………………………………………………………….. 15
Appendix A: Information about the Proposed Projects………………… 21
Appendix B: Engagement Materials…………………………………..………. 25
2
Background
In FY 2018-2019, a constituent submitted a Capital Improvement Project application and
received funding for Miller Park to accomplish the following two goals: preserve the historic
structures and improve the accessibility of the trail system that navigates the park.
To achieve these goals, the application originally proposed the following three projects:
restoration of a trail alignment that was re-routed to a higher elevation in 2014, installation of a
walking bridge over Red Butte Creek, and stabilization of the historic WPA walls. Upon the
hiring of a consultant, Salt Lake City obtained geotechnical and structural engineering reports
that recommended projects to fulfill the stated goals of preserving historic structures and
improving trail accessibility. With the new information gathered, the three originally proposed
projects were deemed infeasible as they could not accomplish the stated goals. Therefore, based
on the new information and recommendations from the engineering reports, 12 new projects
were proposed to fulfill the two original goals to a greater extent. These projects include
improvements in the following areas:
• Trail Slope Improvement Projects: Projects add access amenities like handrails and
stairs. These projects also aim to level out the trail slope and protect the wall foundation.
• Accessibility Improvement Projects: Adds access amenities like handrails and ramps to
entrances and stairways along the trail.
• Wall Foundation Protection Projects: Projects to preserve historic walls by covering
exposed foundations and adding stabilization.
• Manage Structural Loads on Historic WPA walls: Projects will remove the weight being
placed on walls to extend their lifespan and remove stress.
• Trail Protection: Projects will improve the infrastructure of the trails and address erosion
and access issues, including retaining wall repairs.
3
Engagement Approach
The goals of this engagement effort were as follows:
➢ Identify which projects the public prioritize.
➢ Identify concerns and gather feedback.
➢ Inform the public about the proposed projects, how they were selected, and how to
access the survey, focusing a majority of engagement efforts on the Yalecrest
neighborhood, immediate neighbors, and park users.
An online survey and tabling events were held to accomplish the engagement goals. In
addition, the City mailed notices of the survey opening to approximately 3 39 residents
adjacent to the park and canvassed the adjacent residents to inform them of the survey. The
survey was available from February through March 2023. A total of 169 survey responses
were recorded through the online survey and approximately 30 individuals participated in
the in-person tabling sessions. Project information and the survey were distributed through
the following channels:
➢ A project page on the Public Lands website was developed with project information, in-
person engagement opportunities, a survey link, and project manager contact
information.
➢ A presentation was made at the March 9th Yalecrest Neighborhood Council meeting
informing attendees of the survey and providing information on the project process and
content of the survey.
➢ 339 mailers with a QR code and information about the survey were sent out to
households near Miller Park.
➢ Survey information was promoted on SLC Public Lands’ social media accounts such as
Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, as well as the Yalecrest Neighborhood Council
Webpage.
➢ Yard signs with survey QR codes were posted at the park and in the Yalecrest
neighborhood.
➢ Door-to-door canvassing was conducted in the Yalecrest neighborhood to inform nearby
residents how to complete the survey.
➢ Three in-person tabling sessions were held: one at Rowland Hall and two at the
Anderson-Foothill Library on separate days. Individuals had the opportunity to learn
about proposed projects and vote on their high-priority projects.
➢ Emailed survey information to Tracy Aviary, Preservation Utah, Seven Canyons Trust,
Utah State Historic Preservation Office, Utah Open Lands, and Mayor’s Office of Equity
& Inclusion to distribute.
4
Survey Results
Question 1
Survey respondents were first asked, “Based on the goals of the Miller Park CIP application,
which goal would you like prioritized?” The two goals, again, are to preserve the historic
structures and improve the accessibility of the trail system that navigates the park. Results
showed there are about an equal number of respondents that either want to solely prioritize
historic structures or view the two CIP goals equally important. There were fewer responses
favoring only prioritizing improvements to make the trail system more accessible. The pie chart
(Figure 1) shows the results of how people responded.
Figure 1: Goal Prioritization (Note: the number of responses to this question was 160).
Preserve historic
structures
37.87%
Improve accessibility of
the trail system
19.53%
Equally
important
37.28%
Based on the goals of the Miller Park CIP application, which
goal would you like prioritized
5
Questions 2-4
Participants were then asked to select and rank three of the five proposed project themes. The
survey provided respondents with a drop-down option for the listed project themes. This section
of the survey revealed that most respondents preferred to prioritize projects that focused on trail
improvements, which is different from the results of the previous question (see Figure 1). The
responses to this question also revealed that participants prefer projects that protect and make
further trail improvements rather than making the trail more accessible.
In the ranking section, where respondents were asked to select the proposed project theme they
most highly prioritize, trail protection projects were voted the highest, with 38.46% in favor. The
second most popular project theme was trail slope improvements with 24.85% in favor. Lastly,
21.89% of participants selected wall foundation projects as the third most important project
theme. These results are featured in Figure 2 below which shows the project themes and how
they were prioritized. It is important to note that wall foundation projects and projects to
manage structural loads on historic walls were closely ranked in each category with wall
foundation projects receiving slightly more votes.
Figure 2: Participants were asked to select three projects and rank them by priority. The chart
shows the results of how projects were ranked in each category.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Priority One Priority Two Priority Three
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
V
o
t
e
s
Question: Rank which projects you would like prioritized
Trail Slope Improvements
Accessibility Improvements
Wall Foundation Protection
Manage Structural Loads on
Historic Walls
Trail Protection
6
Question 5
The comments responding to the survey question, “Do you have any recommendations for the
proposed projects?” reveal that people are concerned that if historic projects are not prioritized,
it will soon be too late to restore. However, many people also stated how parts of the trail are
dangerous to walk on, especially when it rains or snows. While people do want to see trail
improvements to ensure safety, there is concern that these improvements will take away from
the natural feel of the park and cause negative impacts on the environment. Throughout the
project selection, planning and design process, projects that maintain the natural feel of the park
will be prioritized. In addition, while minimizing negative impacts to the greatest extent
possible, the incorporating elements that enhance the natural environment, where possible, will
be a priority. Figure 3 shows other themes that were identified in the open comments for the
question, “Do you have any recommendations for the proposed projects?”.
Figure 3: Recommendations for Proposed Project. Total number of comments submitted was
54.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Improve maintenance
Other
Comments related to budget
Improve Safety
Concerns related to Erosion
Original CIP Project
Concerns about off-leash dogs
Historic Preservation
Improve Accessibility
No changes
Restore/preserve wildlife & environmental features
Trail Projects
Keep Natural
Number of times themes were mentioned in comments
Do you have any recommendations for the proposed projects?
7
Question 6
Figure 4 below shows the most common themes identified in the open comments for the
question, “Are there other projects you would like to see prioritized that were not identified?”.
Like the results in Figure 3, many participants expressed how they would like to see projects that
improve the vegetation and habitat of the park. Participants also commented on how they would
like to restore Miller Park as a bird refuge and believe that improving the environmental
conditions can help attract birds to the park. Additionally, comments expressed wanting to see
greater enforcement for off-leash dogs at the park.
Figure 4: Other Projects Proposed. Total number of comments submitted was 55.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Safety
Keep Natural
Signage
Trail Safety
Historic Preservation
Other
Focus on Maintenance
No changes
Trail Projects
Original CIP
Amenities
Creek Improvements
Mitigate Invasive Species
Irrigation
Birds
Dog Issues
Improve Revegetation/ Habitat
Number of times themes were mentioned in comments
Are there other projects you would like to see prioritized that
were not identified?
8
In-Person Engagement Results
The public was notified through the Yalecrest Neighborhood Council and Salt Lake City Public
Land’s website about in-person tabling sessions. Each proposed project had a printout
(Appendix A) with information that included the estimated project cost, the purpose of the
proposed project, and an image of the project site. Participants were asked to select which
projects they would like to see prioritized by adding a marble to a cup with the corresponding
project letter (e.g., “Project A”, “Project B”) on the proposed project printout, simulating the
same questions being asked in the survey. A total of 30 individuals participated in the tabling
events, 10 of whom were individuals that participated at the Anderson-Foothill library and 20 of
whom were students from Rowland Hall.
Collectively, results from the in-person engagement showed individuals preferred prioritizing
projects B, D, and G. Project B falls under trail protection projects and Project D is under trail
slope improvement projects, while Project G focuses on making accessibility improvements.
Projects B and D are in line with the online survey results that individuals would like to see
prioritized. Below, Figure 5 shows the voting results from all the in-person engagement sessions.
Figure 5: Prioritized Projects at Tabling Events (Note: total number of participants was 30)
However, participants at the Anderson-Foothill Library and participants from Rowland Hall
showed differences in the projects they would like prioritized. Potential reasons for this
difference could be due to age and familiarity with the park as participants from the library were
older and knew more about the history and progression of the park. Project H, which improves
accessibility of the park, received the highest number of votes for prioritization at the Anderson-
Foothill Library. Projects A, C, and E were the second priority, and all were ranked equally.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Project
B
Project
G
Project
D
Project
A
Project
E
Project
I
Project
K
Project
C
Project
L
Project
F
Project
H
Project
J
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
V
o
t
e
s
Proposed Projects
Prioritized Projects at Tabling Events
9
Project A focuses on trail protection while projects C and E aim to make trail slope
improvements. The bar chart, Figure 6 below, displays how the total number of participants at
the Anderson-Foothill Library voted to prioritize proposed projects.
Figure 6: Prioritized Projects at Anderson-Foothill Library. (Note: total number of
participants at the Anderson-Foothill Library on February 15 and 21, 2023 was 10)
In comparison, students at Rowland Hall prioritized Project B highest which focuses on trail
protection. Project G was the second most prioritized project which improves trail accessibility.
Lastly, Project D, which makes trail slope improvements was the third prioritized project. Figure
7 below shows the voting results from the engagement at Rowland Hall.
Figure 7: Prioritized Projects at Rowland Hall (note: total number of participants at Rowland
Hall was 20 participants)
1
2
3
4
Project
H
Project
A
Project
C
Project
E
Project
K
Project
L
Project
B
Project
D
Project
F
Project
G
Project
I
Project
J
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
V
o
t
e
s
Proposed Projects
Prioritized Projects at Anderson-Foothill Library
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Project
B
Project
G
Project
D
Project
E
Project
I
Project
A
Project
K
Project
F
Project
J
Project
L
Project
C
Project
H
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
V
o
t
e
s
Proposed projects
Prioritized Projects at Rowland Hall
10
Common Themes in Open Comments
The following are themes identified in the open comments from the online survey and in-person
engagements, and the City’s response to each is in italics.
• Some comments communicated a community preference to see the lower trail by the
creek restored.
o Please see page 12, “Assessment of Original CIP” section for more information
on the lower trail alignment.
• Participants expressed they would like to preserve the natural feel and look of the park
and are concerned that some of the proposed projects such as the stairs, will cause
negative impacts on the wildlife, and vegetation, and accelerate erosion.
o Public Lands has prioritized projects that minimize the addition of significant
infrastructure that will impact the natural feel of the park.
• Participants see a need for proper irrigation systems to be installed and for trees to be
planted once the irrigation system is in place.
o Public Lands acknowledges the need for improvement of irrigation throughout
the park. While irrigation replacement is not an eligible project (see original
goals) for this scope of work, the City also believes that, as trail improvements
are made, associated irrigation may be addressed, as well.
• Participants would like to see projects that help attract birds to Miller Park and restore
water levels in the river.
o Public Lands is very supportive of projects contributing to wildlife and stream
health. While those types of projects are not eligible projects within this scope of
work (see original goals), Public Lands will continue to work with the
community to identify other sources of funding to accomplish these goals.
• Some comments expressed how parts of the trail are dangerous to walk, especially
during the winter or rainy seasons, and would like it if the park was safe to walk on year-
round.
o Trail improvement projects that address hazards and safety have been
prioritized based on public engagement.
• While some participants may see the benefit of the trail slope improvement projects, they
and others have expressed that they would not like these improvements to be made with
cement or loose gravel and suggested using wood chips instead.
o Public Lands acknowledges these comments and will engage the community
further during the detailed design of the projects regarding trail materials.
• Survey respondents noted that there need to be more restrictions for off-leash dogs, or
that off-leash dogs be prohibited altogether.
o Public Lands acknowledges this concern in the park (and others like it) and will
continue to work with the community to address these needs. However,
addressing restrictions for dog regulations is not eligible within this scope of
work and funding (see original goals).
• Participants also expressed how they would not like to see the buttress in Project B
extend into the trail and believe the buttress will not be effective in supporting the weight
placed on the wall.
o If this project is pursued within this scope of work and funding source, Public
Lands will ensure that adequate trail clearance and access are provided along
11
with improvements to the buttress. Public Lands will consult structural
engineers and experts throughout the process to ensure effective and
structurally sound improvements.
• There are some concerns that some of the proposed projects will encroach on private
property.
o Public Lands will do all necessary due diligence prior to any physical
improvements on public property and will not pursue any projects that occur
outside of the park’s boundaries.
Main Takeaways
Based on the results from the online survey and in-person engagement, trail slope improvement
projects and trail protection projects have been consistently prioritized. Project that have
minimize negative environmental impacts on the park and maintain the park’s character and
purpose will be prioritized. Additionally, projects that both serve to improve trail safety and
preserve historic structures will be prioritized so long as they do not impede on private property
or extend into natural spaces.
12
Assessment of Original CIP Request
Throughout this project’s engagement process (including the most recent engagement activities
in 2023 outlined in this report), interest in the original proposal to re-align the original, lower
trail that was along the creek prior to 2014, was of particular interest. While the geotechnical
and structural reports noted the infeasibility of the re-creation of this trail and that specific
project’s inability to fulfill either of the goals of the original proposal, the City consult ed with
various experts to confirm these findings and solidify Salt Lake City Public Lands’
recommendation to no longer pursue this particular project. The following are additional
considerations that make the relocation of the trail to the original, pre-2014 alignment
infeasible:
- Flood control measures: the proximity of the lower trail alignment to Red Butte Creek
poses potential for the trail to flood, and poses potential dangerous situations for trail
users (Salt Lake City Public Lands, Salt Lake City Public Utilities).
- Ecological health: erosion control and creek/creekbank health could be improved
through revegetating the bank (including the original alignment) with native vegetation
(Salt Lake City Public Lands, Trails and Natural Lands).
- Risk assessment: The high priority projects for the City Attorney’s Office in relation to
risk are included within the twelve proposed projects below. The priority areas for Risk
related to the types of claims most filed include crib wall repairs, retaining wall repairs
and erosion mitigation along the creek, and reducing trip hazards on the trail by
ensuring irrigation and water meters are level with the ground (Salt Lake City Attorney’s
Office, Risk Manager).
- Trail sustainability: A sustainable trail would not be possible given the original trail
alignment’s proximity to the creek. The minimum regulatory width of an accessible trail
(36”) would require the concrete bulwark downstream of the culvert to be extended
approximately 30” at the existing height for an appropriate gradient. This amount of fill
within the floodplain could constrain flood flows and induce stream bed and bank scour
and degrade trout habitat. Additionally, a retaining wall would have to be installed
downstream to create the level grade of minimum regulatory width required. This would
reduce flood storage outside of the main channel and could induce similar scour. This
would be very costly and impact the natural resources negatively (American Trails
Association).
- ADA Access: The lower, creek-side trail alignment has many areas that do not meet
technical width requirements, but the current, higher trail alignment does meet or
exceed the minimum width requirements. The entrance to the lower trail section has a
running slope of 15%, which is higher than the technical requirements for slope, whereas
the highest possible grade cannot exceed 12%. Most of the post-2014, upper trail already
meets slope requirements. Those segments that do not will be made compliant as part of
the other twelve project recommendations, including covering the exposed rock wall
foundation in project C. Most of the upper trail tread already consists of crusher
fines/decomposed granite that is preferable to bare dirt (for accessibility purposes and to
avoid deterioration and erosion). Additionally, the potential recommended project
improvements related to the upper trail will make a majority of the park accessible by a
trail that complies with trail accessibility guidelines. The remaining parts of the park
trails are either un-sanctioned trails or have stairs or access points with a slope outside
13
of the technical requirements that could be altered during this project anyway (Salt Lake
City Mayor’s Office, ADA Coordinator).
- Historic Preservation: It is not believed that moving the trail away from the walls will
solve any preservation problems, and may have the potential to exacerbate issues with
the historic walls by moving routine maintenance and inspection away from them (State
Historic Preservation Office, State Historic Preservation Officer).
14
Next Steps
In the open comments section of the online survey, and during the in-person events, it is evident
that improving vegetation, and habitat and keeping Miller Park a natural area is a priority for
the community. This funding source is specifically allocated for access improvements and
historic preservation, so it is not able to be used for naturalization and restoration projects.
However, these comments will be considered as other funding becomes available or is able to be
completed in other capacities. (i.e., through the Trails & Natural Lands team’s regular
operations and maintenance in the park).
Additionally, many of the open comments expressed concerns about increasing the amount of
formalized infrastructure in the park and reducing the natural feel and intent of the space.
Because of this, Public Lands will consciously minimize additional infrastructure, such as
handrails and impervious surfaces, to the greatest extent possible as projects move forward
through the design and construction processes.
Finally, other comments received in the survey were not relevant to these projects specifically
but pertained to the overall management of the park. These comments will be considered by
Public Lands and will be passed along to the City Council.
Upon thorough analysis of the results of the public engagement, the projects have been
prioritized in the following order (beginning on page 14).
Please note that not all projects will be able to be completed with current funding. Projects will
be prioritized from top to bottom until the current project budget, $367,000, is depleted. All
projects will go through a detailed design process prior to construction which will include
property surveying, utility assessment, types of materials that will be used, other design
processes, and additional public engagement. If there are efficiencies gained by completing
multiple projects or project elements at once, those will be considered in the detailed design
process.
15
1. Project A: Repairs and replaces crib walls to provide stability.
Justification: This project is prioritized as
first for three reasons. First, “Preserve
historic structures” was the top goal ranked
by the community engagement process, a
goal which this project would achieve.
Second, it also falls under a “Trail
Protection” project, which was ranked as
the highest priority through the online
survey. Finally, it ranked as one of the top
five project priorities through the in-person
engagement. Additionally, many of the
open comments emphasized the need for
trail projects that have minimal impact on
the natural feel of the space, which this
project accomplishes.
Likely to be funded with current
budget.
Goals it fulfills:
Preserve Historic Structures
Trail Protection
2. Project K: Stabilizes exposed wall foundation with soil nails and covers
foundation where feasible.
Justification: This project fulfills the
highest priority goal identified in the public
engagement, “Preserve historic structures”
and is considered a “Wall Foundation
Protection” project which was identified as
the second highest priority theme after
projects A and B, falling within the “Trail
Protection” category. Finally, open
comments in the online survey emphasized
the importance within the community of
preserving the historic walls, and keeping
the park’s natural feel. This project will
protect the walls, and maintain the current
natural look and feel of the park.
Likely to be funded with current
budget.
Goals it fulfills:
Preserve Historic Structures
Wall Foundation Protection
16
3. Project L: Covers exposed wall foundation to prevent erosion with adjacent
properties.
Justification: This project fulfills the
highest priority goal identified in the public
engagement, “Preserve historic structures”
and is considered a “Wall Foundation
Protection” project which was identified as
the second highest prioritized theme after
projects A and B, falling within the “Trail
Protection” category. Open comments in
the online survey emphasized the
importance within the community of
preserving the historic walls.
Likely to be funded with current
budget.
Goals it fulfills:
Preserve Historic Structures
Wall Foundation Protection
4. Project B: Reinforce walls with buttresses on the east side of the creek.
Replaces crib wall on creek side to reduce concentrated drainage.
Justification: This project falls under a
“Trail Protection” project, which was
ranked as the highest priority through the
online survey, and fulfills the goal to
preserve historic structures. However, from
an assessment by the State Historic
Preservation Office, the timber walls are
less historically significant than the stone
walls, hence the lower priority than other
wall protection projects. Finally, it ranked
as the top improvement project coming out
of the in-person tabling events. Finally,
projects prioritizing historic preservation
was a consistent theme in the open
comments which were considered during
project prioritization, which would be
accomplished with the replacement of the
concrete crib wall.
Likely to be funded with current
budget
Goals it fulfills:
Preserves Historic Structures
Trail Protection
17
5. Project D: Improve running and cross slopes for accessibility located near
the entrance on 900 South.
Justification: Project D is a “Trail Slope
Improvement Project” which ranked
highest as a second priority in the online
survey, and was the highest rated trail
slope improvement project throughout the
tabling events. For the online survey, the
total count for “Wall Foundation
Protection” projects listed as a priority one
or two was higher than “Trail Slope
Improvement Improvements,” which
resulted in those projects being prioritized
over Project D. Project D is also a high
priority to minimize safety risks associated
with access, resulting in high prioritization
within the trail slope improvement project
category. Based on the open comments, the
addition of the handrails may be
reconsidered during design to minimize
additional infrastructure within the park.
Project D is also expected to have a positive
impact towards protecting the wall
foundations.
Potentially funded with current
project budget.
Goals it fulfills:
Trail Slope Improvement
6. Project C: Covers exposed rock wall foundation and corrects steep cross slope on
east side of creek.
Justification: Project C is a “Trail Slope
Improvement Project” which ranked
highest as a second priority in the online
survey. Project C will additionally protect
the wall foundations, which was a high
priority in both the online and in-person
surveys. Finally, Project C is also a high
priority to minimize safety risks associated
with access by mitigating the steep cross
slopes.
Potentially funded with current
project budget.
Goals it fulfills:
Trail Slope Improvement
18
7. Project E: Correct cross slope near Bonneview Drive entrance, and add stairs and
handrail.
Justification: Project E is a “Trail Slope
Improvement Project” which ranked
highest as a second priority in the online
survey. Project E is also a high priority to
minimize safety risks associated with
access by mitigating the steep cross slopes.
Finally, Project E will set the groundwork
for improving wheelchair access from
Bonneview Drive and will lead in to
accomplishing Project H if funding allows.
Slope improvements within this project will
be prioritized over the construction of the
stairs and rails. Additional feasibility
assessment and engagement will be needed
to install stairs and handrails.
Potentially funded with current
project budget.
Goals it fulfills:
Trail Slope Improvement
8. Project G: Reconstruct stairs to make steps even and add handrail.
Justification: Project G is lower on the
priority list because “Accessibility
Improvement Projects” were not prioritized
highly by the public in the online survey.
However, it was the second highest
prioritized project at the in-person event,
so it is prioritized higher than all other
access improvement projects proposed.
Additionally, Project G would mitigate
safety concerns with the current stairs, and
would improve year-round access which
was a repeated concern in the open
comments of the online survey.
Less likely to be funded with current
budget.
Goals it fulfills:
Accessibility Improvement
19
9. Project H: Add curb cut and ramp from Bonneview Drive
Justification: Project H is lower on the
priority list because “Accessibility
Improvement Projects” were not prioritized
highly by the public in the online survey.
Additionally, in order to improve
wheelchair access to the park, making the
project impactful, other cross slope
projects, such as Project C, D and E, would
be required prior in order for people be
able to navigate the trail. However, if this
project may be incorporated with a higher-
priority project, it may be considered
earlier in the process to increase access to
the park.
Less likely to be funded with current
budget.
Goals it fulfills:
Accessibility Improvement
10. Project I, J and F: Remove concrete wall on 900 South entrance, remove non -
native trees upon historic wall, and construct new stairs and handrails on east
side of creek.
Justification: It is very unlikely that
funding will allow the City to explore these
low-priority projects. Additionally, due to
concerns relayed through the public
engagement process by the community,
additional feasibility studies and
community engagement would be required
to move forward with these projects.
Therefore, the City at this time will not be
moving forward with exploration of these
three potential projects.
The current budget is likely
insufficient to construct these
projects.
Goals it fulfills:
Preserve Historic Structures
Accessibility Improvements
20
Appendix A: Information about Proposed Projects
Figure A1 to Figure A6 are the documents used to display at tabling events to inform
participants about the proposed projects.
Figure A1: Instructions and project description.
21
Figure A2: Description of proposed trail protection projects.
Figure A3: Description of proposed trail slope improvement projects.
22
Figure A4: Description of proposed accessibility improvement projects.
Figure A5: Description of proposed projects to remove weight on historic walls.
23
Figure A6: Description of proposed projects to protect wall foundation
24
Appendix B: Engagement Materials
Image 1: The image below was used to create the yard signs, mailers, and flyers for
canvassing.
25
Image 2: Project Website
26
Image 3: Post used for social media.
27
Attachment 2 – Double Diamond Project Delivery Graphic
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET
PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
MARY BETH THOMPSON
Chief Financial Officer
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
___________________________________ Date Received: _______________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: __________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: September 12, 2023
Darin Mano, Chair
FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT: FY24 Budget Amendment #2-Revised
SPONSOR: NA
STAFF CONTACT: Lisa Hunt (801) 535-7926 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 FY24 adopted budget.
BUDGET IMPACT:
REVENUE EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND $0.00 $187,250.00
CIP FUND $25,485,893.25 $25,485,893.25
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND $62,416.00 $65,472.00
IMS FUND $6,000.00 $6,000.00
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FUND $0.00 $664,293.70
MISCELLANEOUS GRANTS FUND $16,121,409.00 $16,121,409.00
TOTAL $41,675,718.25 $42,576,117.95
Alejandro Sanchez (Sep 12, 2023 16:08 MDT)
Lisa Shaffer (Sep 12, 2023 16:18 MDT)09/12/2023
09/12/2023
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Revenue for FY24 Budget Adjustments
The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for FY24.
Because of this budget amendment’s timing, there are no updates for Y24 projections available.
The City has begun closing out the FY23 and will provide updates to Council as the audit
progresses.
Revenue FY23-FY24 Annual Budget FY23-24 Amended Budget Revised Forecast
Amended Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Revenue FY22-FY23 Annual Budget FY22-FY23 Amended Budget Revised Forecast Amended Variance
Property Taxes 129,847,140 129,847,140 129,847,140 -
Sale and Use Taxes 117,129,000 117,129,000 117,129,000 -
Franchise Taxes 12,348,127 12,348,127 12,348,127 -
Payment in Lieu of Taxes 1,905,573 1,905,573 1,905,573 -
Total Taxes 261,229,840 261,229,840 261,229,840 -
Revenue FY22-FY23 Annual Budget FY22-FY23 Amended Budget Revised Forecast Amended Variance
Licenses and Permits 40,878,104 40,878,104 40,878,104 -
Intergovernmental Revenue 5,134,621 5,134,621 5,134,621 -
Interest Income 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000 -
Fines 4,063,548 4,063,548 4,063,548 -
Parking Meter Collections 2,801,089 2,801,089 2,801,089 -
Charges, Fees, and Rentals 4,881,922 4,881,922 4,881,922 -
Miscellaneous Revenue 3,502,359 3,502,359 3,502,359 -
Interfund Reimbursement 26,131,213 26,131,213 26,131,213 -
Transfers 9,938,944 9,938,944 9,938,944 -
Total W/O Special Tax 366,561,640 366,561,640 366,561,640 -
ObjectCodeDescription FY22-23 Annual Budget FY22-23 Amended Budget Revised Forecast Amended Variance
Additional Sales Tax (1/2%)49,084,479 49,084,479 49,084,479 -
Total General Fund 415,646,119 415,646,119 415,646,119 -
Fund balance has been updated to include proposed changes for BA#2.
Based on those projections adjusted fund balance is projected to be at 13.96%.
FOF GF Only TOTAL FOF GF Only TOTAL
Beginning Fund Balance 18,395,660 141,728,022 160,123,682 13,132,752 97,374,345 110,507,097
Budgeted Change in Fund Balance (2,100,608) (20,736,262) (22,836,870) (3,657,641) (29,211,158) (32,868,799)
Prior Year Encumbrances (3,162,300) (17,260,909) (20,423,209) (1,879,654) (10,259,789) (12,139,443)
Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 13,132,752 103,730,851 116,863,603 7,595,457 57,903,398 65,498,855
Beginning Fund Balance Percent 29.60%27.04%27.30%14.51%14.76%14.74%
Year End CAFR Adjustments
Revenue Changes - - - - - -
Expense Changes (Prepaids, Receivable, Etc.) (2,257,746) (2,257,746) (2,257,746) (2,257,746)
Fund Balance w/ CAFR Changes 13,132,752 101,473,105 114,605,857 7,595,457 55,645,652 63,241,109
Final Fund Balance Percent 29.60%26.45%26.78%14.51%14.19%14.23%
Budget Amendment Use of Fund Balance (754,483) (754,483)
BA#1 Revenue Adjustment - (475,000) (475,000) - (204,200) (204,200)
BA#1 Expense Adjustment - - - -
BA#2 Revenue Adjustment - - - - -
BA#2 Expense Adjustment - - - - (233,050) (233,050)
BA#3 Revenue Adjustment - 6,000,000 6,000,000 - - -
BA#3 Expense Adjustment - (6,538,000) (6,538,000) - - -
BA#4 Revenue Adjustment - 194,600 194,600 - - -
BA#4 Expense Adjustment - (7,584,328) (7,584,328) - - -
BA#5 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#5 Expense Adjustment - (5,940,349) (5,940,349) - - -
BA#6 Revenue Adjustment - 19,120,198 19,120,198 - - -
BA#6 Expense Adjustment - (12,219,731) (12,219,731) - - -
BA#7 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#7 Expense Adjustment - - - - - -
Change in Revenue - - - - - -
Change in Expense
Fund Balance Budgeted Increase - - - - - -
- - Adjusted Fund Balance 13,132,752 94,030,495 107,163,247 7,595,457 54,453,919 62,049,376
Adjusted Fund Balance Percent 29.60%24.51%25.04%14.51%13.89%13.96%
Projected Revenue 44,364,490 383,650,846 428,015,336 52,338,120 392,166,803 444,504,923
Salt Lake City
General Fund
TOTAL
Fund Balance Projections
FY2024 BudgetFY2023 Budget Projected
The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $41,675,718.25 in revenue and
$42,576,117.95 in expenses. The amendment proposes changes in six funds, with eight increases
in FTEs. The proposal includes 27 initiatives for Council review.
Among the amendments is a proposed ordinance change that would amend the FY 2023-2024
Annual Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees. These changes will impact the
Department of Public Services’ Snowfighter and the new Safety & Security Director’s pay
specifically and will make changes to the Justice Court Judges salaries as well. The remainder of
the changes will have impacts generally throughout the City. Further details on the changes are
contained in the amendment documents.
A summary spreadsheet outlining proposed budget changes is attached. The Administration
requests this document be modified based on the decisions of the Council.
The budget amendment is separated in eight different categories:
A. New Budget Items
B. Grants for Existing Staff Resources
C. Grants for New Staff Resources
D. Housekeeping Items
E. Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
F. Donations
G. Council Consent Agenda Grant Awards
I. Council Added Items
PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ______ of 2023
(Second amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including
the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2023-2024)
An Ordinance Amending Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 29 of 2023 which adopted the
Final Budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2023, and Ending
June 30, 2024.
In June of 2023, 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,
2023, and ending June 30, 2024, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-118 of the
Utah Code.
The City’s Budget Director, acting as the City’s Budget Officer, prepared and filed with
the City Recorder proposed amendments to said duly adopted budget, including the amendments
to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate any staffing changes specifically
stated herein, copies of which are attached hereto, for consideration by the City Council and
inspection by the public.
All conditions precedent to amend said budget, including the employment staffing
document as provided above, have been accomplished.
Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the final budget of
Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized
by Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 29 of 2023.
SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including any
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 any
amendments to the employment staffing document described above, for the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128
of the Utah Code.
SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is
authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including any
amendments to the employment staffing document, in the office of said Budget Officer and in
the office of the City Recorder which amendments shall be available for public inspection.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of __________, 2023.
________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________
Mayor’s Action: ____ Approved ____ Vetoed
_________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. _________ of 2023.
Published: ___________________.
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
___ _______
Jaysen Oldroyd
Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 Homeless General Fund Reallocation Cost Share for
State Homeless Mitigation Grant GF - (44,620.00)Ongoing -
1 Homeless General Fund Reallocation Cost Share for
State Homeless Mitigation Grant GF - 44,620.00 Ongoing 0.50
2 Treasury ERAP 2 Additional Allocations Misc Grants 2,339,009.00 2,339,009.00 One-time -
3 Liberty Park Basketball Court Utah Jazz Donation CIP 100,000.00 100,000.00 One-time -
4 Scope Change for Miller Park Trail Access
Improvements & Historic Structures Preservation CIP - - One-time -
5 Create a Public Lands Planning & Design Division GF - (543,144.00)Ongoing (4.00)
5 Create a Public Lands Planning & Design Division GF - 543,144.00 Ongoing 4.00
6 Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract - Senior
Community Programs Manager GF - (113,798.00)Ongoing -
6 Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract - Senior
Community Programs Manager GF - 110,798.00 Ongoing 1.00
6 Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract - Senior
Community Programs Manager GF - 3,000.00 One-time -
6 Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract - Senior
Community Programs Manager IMS 3,000.00 3,000.00 One-time -
7 Economic Development Project Manager Position GF - 122,000.00 Ongoing 1.00
7 Economic Development Project Manager Position GF - 3,000.00 One-time -
7 Economic Development Project Manager Position IMS 3,000.00 3,000.00 One-time -
8 SAA Funds to the Downtown Alliance Spec Assessment - 664,293.70 One-time -
9 Know your Neighbor Program Expenses GF - 6,500.00 Ongoing -
10 Love Your Block Program Expenses GF - 55,750.00 Ongoing -
11
Proposed Ordinance Amending the FY z2023-2024
Annual Compensation Plan for Non-Represented
Employees
NA - - - - Ongoing -
1 Emergency Demolition Fund Reset Special Rev 62,416.00 65,472.00 One-time -
2 300 N Pedestrian Bridge - Funding Pass-through CIP 500,000.00 500,000.00 One-time -
3 Withdrawn prior to transmittal
4 RDA Housing Funds Transfer to Misc Grants Misc Grants 6,400,000.00 6,400,000.00 One-time -
5 GO 2023 Parks Bond CIP 24,885,893.25 24,885,893.25 One-time -
6 Budget to Non-Departmental Transfer for Transfer to
IMS and Fleet GF - 45,800.00 One-time
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
1 TANF Capacity Building Grant-Financial Capability Misc Grants 1,229,681.00 1,229,681.00 Ongoing -
2 TANF Capacity Building Grant-Youth Development Misc Grants 1,391,672.00 1,391,672.00 Ongoing -
3 State Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation FY 24 Misc Grants 3,107,201.00 3,107,201.00 Ongoing 4.50
-
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Council ApprovedAdministration Proposed
Section A: New Items
Section D: Housekeeping
Section F: Donations
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
1
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Consent Agenda #1
1 Greater Salt Lake Area Clean Energy and Air Roadmap Misc Grants 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Ongoing 1.00
2 Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry Fire
and State Lands
Misc Grants 50,000.00 50,000.00 One-time -
3 Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry Fire
and State Lands
Misc Grants 150,000.00 150,000.00 One-time -
4 State of Utah Division of Outdoor Recreation Misc Grants 150,000.00 150,000.00 One-time -
5 Backman Community Open Space Misc Grants 200,000.00 200,000.00 One-time -
6 Utah Office for Victims of Crime-VOCA Misc Grants 92,846.00 92,846.00 One-time -
7 Utah State Board of Education Misc Grants 11,000.00 11,000.00 One-time -
Total of Budget Amendment
Items
41,675,718.25 42,576,117.95 - - 8.00
Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
Total by Fund, Budget Amendment #1:
General Fund GF - 233,050.00 - - 2.50
Special Revenue Fund Special Rev 62,416.00 65,472.00 - - -
CIP Fund CIP 25,485,893.25 25,485,893.25 - - -
IMS Fund IMS 6,000.00 6,000.00 - - -
Special Assessment Fund Spec Assessment - 664,293.70 - - -
Miscellaneous Grants Misc Grants 16,121,409.00 16,121,409.00 - - 5.50
Total of Budget Amendment Items 41,675,718.25 42,576,117.95 - - 8.00
Administration Proposed Council Approved
Section I: Council Added Items
Section G: Council Consent Agenda -- Grant Awards
2
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Current Year Budget Summary, provided for information only
FY 2023-24 Budget, Including Budget Amendments
Revenue FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget
- Revenue BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total Total Revenue
General Fund (Fund 1000)448,514,918 (754,483.23) - 447,760,434.77
Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000 3,000.00
DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)1,397,355 1,397,355.00
Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,700,000 - 1,700,000.00
Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)4,681,185 4,681,185.00
Water Fund (FC 51)176,637,288 176,637,288.00
Sewer Fund (FC 52)289,941,178 289,941,178.00
Storm Water Fund (FC 53)19,865,892 19,865,892.00
Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)403,513,000 403,513,000.00
Refuse Fund (FC 57)25,240,459 25,240,459.00
Golf Fund (FC 59)12,710,067 12,710,067.00
E-911 Fund (FC 60)3,925,000 3,925,000.00
Fleet Fund (FC 61)32,108,969 36,800.00 32,145,769.00
IMS Fund (FC 65)36,254,357 9,000.00 6,000.00 36,269,357.00
County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for
Transportation (FC 69)9,700,000 9,700,000.00
CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)5,597,763 5,597,763.00
Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)8,919,917 16,121,409.00 25,041,326.00
Other Special Revenue (FC 73)400,000 62,416.00 462,416.00
Donation Fund (FC 77)500,000 500,000.00
Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)14,659,043 14,659,043.00
Debt Service Fund (FC 81)32,341,586 32,341,586.00
CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)30,199,756 (1,430,715.00) 25,485,893.25 54,254,934.25
Governmental Immunity (FC 85)3,888,581 3,888,581.00
Risk Fund (FC 87)60,932,137 60,932,137.00
Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,623,631,451 (2,139,398.23) 41,675,718.25 - - - 1,663,167,771.02
3
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Expenditure FY 2023-24 Adopted
Budgetg - Expense BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total Total Expense
General Fund (FC 10)448,514,918 204,200.00 233,050.00 448,952,168.00
Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000 3,000.00
DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)1,397,355 1,397,355.00
Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,700,000 664,293.70 2,364,293.70
Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)6,044,119 6,044,119.00
Water Fund (FC 51)177,953,787 177,953,787.00
Sewer Fund (FC 52)301,832,622 301,832,622.00
Storm Water Fund (FC 53)22,947,474 22,947,474.00
Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)520,438,997 520,438,997.00
Refuse Fund (FC 57)28,263,792 28,263,792.00
Golf Fund (FC 59)17,938,984 17,938,984.00
E-911 Fund (FC 60)3,800,385 3,800,385.00
Fleet Fund (FC 61)32,498,750 14,461,793.00 46,960,543.00
IMS Fund (FC 65)38,702,171 9,000.00 6,000.00 38,717,171.00
County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for
Transportation (FC 69)9,700,000 9,700,000.00
CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)5,597,763 5,597,763.00
Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)8,919,917 16,121,409.00 25,041,326.00
Other Special Revenue (FC 73)400,000 65,472.00 465,472.00
Donation Fund (FC 77)500,000 500,000.00
Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)10,212,043 10,212,043.00
Debt Service Fund (FC 81)34,894,979 34,894,979.00
CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)29,708,286 218,000.00 25,485,893.25 55,412,179.25
Governmental Immunity (FC 85)3,370,012 3,370,012.00
Risk Fund (FC 87)63,574,655 63,574,655.00
- Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,768,914,009 14,892,993.00 42,576,117.95 - - - 1,826,383,119.95
Budget Manager
Analyst, City Council
Contingent Appropriation
4
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
1
Section A: New Items
A-1: Homeless General Fund Reallocation Cost Share
for State Homeless Mitigation Grant GF ($44,620.00)
GF $44,620.00
Department: CAN-Housing Stability Prepared By: Tony Milner
For questions, please include Tony Milner, Blake Thomas and Tammy Hunsaker
This Budget Amendment is requesting a shift in funding to allow the Housing Stability Division to recruit a Community
Development Grant Specialist FTE for the Homelessness Engagement and Response Team (HEART). The City sought to
fully cover the cost of this FTE with the State's FY24 Cities Mitigation Grant; however, since the position will fulfill
administrative duties, the State is only allowing a partial billing for this position based on the hours the position works o n
the Cities Mitigation Grant itself.
In order to provide holistic, active contract management for all recipients of City homeless services funds, City General
Funds are being sought to supplement the full cost of the position by moving award money from an existing City General
Fund grant recipient and backfilling that cost with Cities Mitigation Grant dollars.
This request is budget neutral to the City. The Downtown Alliance Street Ambassador program is set to receive both Cities
Mitigation Grant and City General Fund awards in FY24. This request seeks to move $44,620 from the Downtown
Alliance's FY24 Homeless Services General Fund award to Housing Stability staffing. An increase of $44,620 would be
added to the amount of funding the Street Ambassador program will receive from the Cities Mitigation Grant, which is an
allowable expense under the grant. The amount of funding the Street Ambassador program will receive will remain at its
total of $1,384,101; this request will only change the funding source a portion of the award comes from. General Fund
award to Housing Stability staffing. An increase of $44,620.00 has been added to the amount of funding the Street
Ambassador program will receive from Cities Mitigation, which is an allowable expense under the Mitigation grant. The
amount of funding the Street Ambassador program will receive will remain at its total of $1,384,101.00, this request will
only change the funding source a portion of the award come from.
This position would be a Grade 26 Community Development Grant Specialist. The annual cost for this position is
$107,088. This Budget Amendment contemplates covering the cost of 50% of the position's effort for 10 months or
$89,240. In summary, $44,620 for the position is requested to be moved from the Downtown Alliance's FY24 Street
Ambassador award to Housing Stability, and the remaining $44,620 will be funded by the City's FY24 Cities Mitigation
Grant from the State Office of Homeless Services is requested to be moved from the Downtown Alliance's F Y24 Street
Ambassador award to Housing Stability and the remaining $44,620.00 will be funded by SLC's FY24 Cities Mitigation
award from the State Office of Homeless Services.
A-2: Treasury ERAP 2 Additional Allocations Misc Grants $2,339,009.00
Department: CAN-Housing Stability Prepared By: Tony Milner
For questions, please include Tony Milner, Blake Thomas and Tammy Hunsaker
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's additional allocation of the American Rescue Plan Act, Treasury
Emergency Rent Assistance Program 2 (ERAP 2) funds, in the amount of $2,339,009, for the purpose of assisting in the
stabilization and recovery of COVID-affected, low-income residential renters in Salt Lake City.
This budget amendment is separate from previous Council-approved City ERAP allocations: ERAP 1 Initial Award
($6,067,033), ERAP 1 Additional Allocation ($3,000,000), ERAP 1 Additional Allocation ($5,000,000), ERAP 2 Initial
Award ($4,800,559.40), and ERAP 2 Additional Allocation ($2,000,000).
Past ERAP 1 & 2 funds were disbursed in partnership with the State Department of Workforce Services through the unified
Utah Rent Relief portal. The Utah Rent Relief portal closed in March 2023 after ERAP funds at the State level were
exhausted and will not open to new applicants.
At the time Council last reviewed remaining ERAP 2 funds in March 2023, Council partially approved $2,000,000 for
rental assistance through the Utah Rent Relief portal and requested additional information regarding eligible uses for the
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
2
remaining funds and directed the administration to explore the potential for using these funds for direct client rental
assistance.
Treasury defines direct client rental assistance as: deposits, rent, utilities, rent arrears, utility arrears, and oth er housing
related costs (e.g. applications fees).
The administration is seeking direction from Council regarding the preferred process for disbursing these funds to a sole
source provider or through public competitive process that would receive applicati ons from multiple providers.
Note: All ERAP 2 funds must be obligated by September 30, 2025.
A-3: Liberty Park Basketball Court Utah Jazz
Donation CIP $100,000.00
Department: Public Lands-Trails & Natural Lands Prepared By: Makaylah Maponga
For questions, please include Makaylah Maponga, Kristin Riker and Gregg Evans
Public Lands is requesting a budget amendment to allocate a $100,000 donation from the Utah Jazz to the Liberty Park
Basketball Court project PRJ-230295. This project had significant funding constraints due to the failed condition of the
court. With this donation, Public Lands will be able to fully execute the project which will completely reconstruct the court
as well as install additional amenities to promote the court as a community gathering space.
The Liberty Basketball Court project was funded as a Constituent CIP project cost center 83 -22405 in FY2021-22 for
resurfacing. After initial evaluation of the court, it was determined that the cracks were too significant, and the court
needed complete reconstruction. Public Lands initially reached out to the Utah Jazz to partner on this project in the fall o f
2022. The Jazz followed up in Spring 2023 with interest in donating funds to the reconstruction in honor of their 50th
anniversary season. With this donation, Public Lands is able to cover the funding deficit and expand the scope to include
the addition of fencing and new seating areas. This is in line with the constituent's vision for the court as a host location for
an annual community tournament. This project is projected to be completed in Fall 2023. This project is projected to be
completed in Fall 2023. Public Lands will be recognizing the donation by including the Jazz Logo on the final court.
Public Lands has done due diligence and finds no reason to reject this donation proposal and specifically allocate the
funding to the Liberty Park Basketball Court project.
A-4: Scope Change for Miller Park Trail Access
Improvements & Historic Structures Preservation
CIP $0.00
Department: Public Lands-Trails & Natural Lands Prepared By: Kat Maus
For questions, please include Kristin Riker, Kat Maus and Gregg Evans
The Public Lands Department is requesting a scope change for the remaining $365,012.40 in the CIP cost center 83-18048
(PRJ-230184) (CC30004) to amend the project implementation list to accomplish proposed goals. This proposal to revise
the Miller Park capital project and associated funds do not close any informal or "social" trails that may exist. In FY 2017 -
18, a constituent submitted an application for funding to address the following goals at Miller Park: preserve the historic
structures, such as the WPA masonry walls, foot bridge, and stairways constructed during the Great Depression; and
improve accessibility of the trail system that navigates the park. To achieve these goals, the constituent proposed three
projects: restore a trail alignment (creekside) that was rerouted in 2014, install a bridge over Red Butte Creek, and stabili ze
the WPA walls. Public Lands hired a consultant who obtained geotechnical and structural engineers, who determine d that
the recommended projects in the original proposal would not fulfill the goals stated, and instead recommended projects
that would fulfill the stated goals. Public Lands is requesting a scope change for the remaining funds to remove the original
three projects proposed from the scope of work, and add the new projects recommended by the engineers. Public Lands
engaged extensively with community organizations and subject -matter experts to confirm the projects recommended in
the new scope, and confirm that the originally-proposed projects would not in fact fulfill the stated goals, including
Yalecrest Neighborhood Council, Salt Lake City Public Utilities, the City's Risk Management Attorney, a national trail -
building firm, American Trails, the State's Historic Preservation Officer, and the Mayor's Office ADA Coordinator and
Disability and Accessibility Commission. In addition, Public Lands conducted several periods of public engagement in
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
3
2021 and 2023 to determine the community's priorities for the new proposed projects. Please see the attached report for
the full synopsis and overview of the engagement and project recommendations.
While the budget is not expected to be able to complete all twelve projects, Public Lands is proposing starting from the
highest-priority recommended project, and working through the list (top-down) until the funding has been spent. The full
description of the prioritized list of recommended projects and justification for selection is included in the engagement
report. Anticipated projects, beginning with the highest priority, to be completed include:
1. Repairing the historic crib walls to increase wall and trail stability
2. Stabilize exposed wall foundation with soil nails and cover foundation where feasible, and to prevent erosion with
adjacent properties
3. Reinforce walls with buttresses on the east side of the creek, and replace crib wall on creek side to reduce concentrated
drainage
4. Improve running and cross slopes for accessibility located near the entrance on 900 South and on the east side of the
creek, and other accessibility improvements as there are efficiencies with other projects
5. Improve cross slope near Bonneview Drive Entrance, and explore adding stairs and a handrail.
6. Reconstruct existing stairs to improve safety
7. Add curb cut and ramp from Bonneview Drive
Completing these projects would make nearly 75% of the park accessible to wheelchair access, far exceeding the ADA
requirements for natural areas, and would protect a majority of the historic wall s for years into the future. Some projects
may be completed out of order if there are efficiencies with other projects.
A-5: Create a Public Lands Planning & Design
Division
GF ($543,144.00)
GF $543,144.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Kristin Riker
For questions, please include Kristin Riker and Gregg Evans
This cost-neutral budget amendment request will transfer the landscape architecture design and project management
functions from the Engineering Division to the Public Lands Department.
This request is three-fold:
1. Create a new Planning & Design Division within the Public Lands Department.
2. Transfer all four (4) full-time landscape architect positions and associated operating budget ($543,144) from the
Engineering Division (Public Services Department) to this new division within the Public Lands Department. The FTEs
include: one Senior Landscape Architect (Grade 34), two Landscape Architect IIIs (Grade 30), and one Landscape
Architect II (Grade 27).
3. Reclassify the Public Lands Department's Planning Manager position (Grade 33) as the Planning & Design Division
Director (Grade 34; merit, non-appointed). This position's appointment will be requested with the general budget request
in the following fiscal year (FY 24/25).
Past and Current Realities:
- In the past, the City's Public Lands Department and Engineering Division (Public Services Department) managed $1M
to $2M in parks, trails, and open space projects each year. They are now fortunate to be tasked with delivering nearly
$200M in new projects from various funding sources (i.e., Sales Tax Revenue Bond, GO Bond, CIP, and ot hers) over the
next 10 years.
- Currently, each of the City's 100+ parks, trails, and open space projects essentially has two project managers. Their
responsibilities overlap significantly. This requested change and new process would help rectify that.
Solutions:
- Our departments propose that the currently separate teams become one Planning & Design Division within the Public
Lands Department.
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
4
- The Public Lands Department would be responsible for all planning, prioritization, funding, public and st akeholder
engagement, design, consultant management, overall project management, and, ultimately, on-going maintenance of every
project.
- The Engineering Division of the Public Services Department would be responsible for the construction and contractor
management, and many of the most technical details of each project. Even this work will still be overseen by each project's
manager.
- These staffing changes will be combined with a new project delivery process (drafted by staff and leadership from bot h
departments) as well as even stronger, more effective coordination for each public lands project between the new Public
Lands Planning & Design Division and the Engineering Division.
A-6: Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract -
Senior Community Programs Manager
GF ($113,798.00)
GF $110,798.00
GF $3,000.00
IMS $3,000.00
Department: CAN Prepared By: Tammy Hunsaker / Kim Thomas
For questions, please include Tammy Hunsaker, Blake Thomas, Kim Thomas and Brent Beck
In March of 2018, the City and County entered into an interlocal agreement (ILA) that defines the responsibilities of the
respective entities for programming, operation, and maintenance of the Sorenson Unity Center. The facility is owned by
the City, and the City leads educational and community-based programming while the County leads recreational
programming. The City is responsible for utilities, security, and maintenance of the facility and t he County is responsible
for custodial services. Currently, all parties agree that it would be more efficient if the ILA is amended so that responsibi lity
for certain programming and custodial services be transferred from the County to the City. As such, t his is a revenue
neutral budget request that will rescope the Sorenson budget and facilitate an amendment to the ILA to modify terms
relating to child care programming and custodial responsibilities. If the budget rescope is approved, County and City staff
will finalize a draft amendment to the ILA and will coordinate an adoption process pursuant to state and city code.
Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract current budget $1,014,800, reduced by the FTE $901,002 – Note: this budget
will be used to pay both the County contract and for custodial services procured by Public Services. The split between the
two is currently unknown right now, but the total will not exceed this budget amount.
Senior Community Programs Manager FTE, grade E26: $113,798 fully loaded
A-7: Economic Development Project Manager
Position
GF $122,000.00
GF $3,000.00
IMS $3,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Lorena Riffo-Jenson, Jolynn Walz
For questions, please include Lorena Riffo-Jenson, Jacob Maxwell, Jolynn Walz
Since the creation of the Department of Economic Development (DED), the Division of Business Development has seen a
significant increase in program administration. This increase comes from the transfer of existing programs (i.e., the
Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF) and Special Assessment Areas (SAAs)) and being charged with the creation of
new programs for the business community such as the Construction Mitigation Grant Pro gram and the Outdoor Dining
Grant Program.
Currently, DED manages the Special Assessment Area (SAA) in the Central Business Improvement District (Downtown
SAA) and is administering the creation of a second SAA in Sugarhouse. Phase 1 of the Sugarhouse SA A creation has
extended to almost two-years, and completion of the due diligence is expected to finalize in 2024. The second phase of the
Sugarhouse SAA will entail extensive administrative work required by state statute that governs the SAA process that
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
5
includes: the intent to designate resolution, a public hearing, the Board of Equalization Appointment, a second public
hearing, publishing a Request for Proposal (RFP) to appoint SAA contractor, contract award facilitation and ongoing
contract management.
In 2023, DED received a request from property owners in the Granary District to begin the due diligence investigatory
process to establish a third SAA. Salt Lake City Council has allocated funding for the consultant to conduct the due
diligence work for the Granary SAA. DED is charged with this initial phase that requires management of the consultant
(that provides the valuation numbers and tax scenarios) and due diligence reporting to the City Council.
In addition to the creation of two more SAAs, Sugarhouse and the Granary District, DED every three years is required to
manage the renewal of the Central Business Improvement District SAA (Downtown). The steps in renewal process are
similar to the process listed above to create an SAA (the intent to designate resolution, a public hearing, the Board of
Equalization Appointment, a second public hearing, publishing a Request for Proposal (RFP) to appoint SAA contractor,
contract award facilitation and ongoing contract management). Should additional areas be approved for assessment, and
the renewal of the contract for each SAA is every 3 to 5 years which is required by state statute; the demands of managing
the SAAs will require significant administration and full-time support.
In addition to the management of the Special Assessment Areas in the City, this position would support Salt Lake City’s
commercial corridors that host formal and informal business communities. The manager would work with the business
communities and corridors on outreach and engagement to create new districts while also providing ongoing support to
existing districts. Examples of these include the Midtown District, Granary District Alliance, River District Business
Alliance, and North Temple Community Improvement Group. To s upport these efforts, DED will partner with the RDA to
provide a community grants program that would make funds available to support emerging business districts and thus
increase their chance of success and long-term viability. This work would translate to more vibrant, active, and thriving
business districts/commercial corridors in Salt Lake City.
The impact of this position to further bolster Salt Lake City’s business and commercial corridors would benefit the City’s
residents and visitors while also contributing to the tax base. The Special Assessment Area is an important economic
development tool that can transform a neighborhood by bolstering business development, improving a commercial area’s
quality of life, and has proven to increase the commercial property values. As the City continues to grow, there will be
further opportunities and interest for various types of business district support. This will ultimately lead to more dynamic
neighborhoods and destinations for residents and visitors to enjoy.
A-8: SAA Funds to the Downtown Alliance Spec Assessment $664,293.70
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mary Beth Thompson
For questions, please include Mary Beth Thompson
Remaining cash balances in previous SAAs which are now being remitted back to the Downtown Alliance.
A-9: Know Your Neighbor Program Expeses GF $6,500.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: Sandee Moore / Tracy Patillo
For questions, please include Sandee Moore and Tracy Patillo
The Administration is requesting this budget amendment to recognize all expenses associated with the Know Your
Neighbor Program.
During the FY24 Budget Development and Budget Presentations, the Know Your Neighbor Program was presented to the
City Council with the total required expenses. Ho wever, the expenses were inadvertently not recognized on the FY24
presented Key Changes.
A-10: Love Your Block Program Expenses GF $55,750.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: Sandee Moore / Tracy Patillo
For questions, please include Sandee Moore and Tracy Patillo
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
6
The Administration is requesting this budget amendment to recognize all expenses associated with the Love Your Block
Program.
During the FY24 Budget Development and Budget Presentations, the Love Your Block Program was presented to the City
Council with the total required expenses. However, the expenses were inadvertently not recognized on the FY24 presented
Key Changes.
A-11: Proposed Ordinance Amending the FY 2023-
2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-
Represented Employees
NA No Budgetary Impact
Department: Human Resources Prepared By: David Salazar / Jonathan
Pappasideris
For question, please include David Salazar and Jonathan Pappasideris
The ordinance is attached to the transmittal. Further details on the reasons for the change are listed below.
- Revising Subsection IV(H) (“Snowfighter Pay”) of Section III (“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay
Allowances”) – Changes include insertion of the same pay amounts adopted for AFSCME-covered employees
eligible to receive Snowfighter Pay. (NOTE: In the original redlined copy of the Plan transmitted to City
Council, comments alerted city council the specific amounts included in these subsections would be matched and
added after the new rates negotiated and adopted in th e new AFSCME MOU were known.)
- Revising Subsection VI(A) (“Other Pay Allowances; Meal Allowance”) of Section III (“Work Hours,
Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) - Changes include insertion of the same pay amounts adopted for
AFSCME-covered employees eligible to receive Meal Allowance. (NOTE: In the original redlined copy of the Plan
transmitted to City Council, comments alerted city council the specific amounts included in these subsections
would be matched and added after the new rates negotiated and adopted in the new AFSCME MOU were known.)
- Revising Appendix A (“Salt Lake City Corporation General Employee Pay Plan (GEPP)”) - New rates
indicated correct rounding errors discovered in calculation of range minimums, midpoints, and maximums f or
salaried employees. Corrected rates match pay range information loaded for salaried employees in Workday
without fiscal impact.
- Revising Appendix B (“Appointed Employees by Department”) - Corrects pay levels shown for certain
job titles to match those included in the Plan originally transmitted to City Council. The latest copy of the
Appointed Pay Plan transmitted to city council intended only to show addition of the new Safety & Security
Director for Public Services, but inadvertently included incorrect pay level changes for Justice Court Judges and
Justice Court Administrator.
- Revising Appendix D (“Utah State Retirement Contributions FY 2022 -2023”) – Specific edits include
adjustments to employer contributions required for employees covered under the Tier 1 – Firefighter Retirement
System. Notice of these changes was not received from URS until after this Plan was originally transmitted to City
Council.
These changes will impact the Department of Public Services’ Snowfighter and the new Safety & Security Director’s pay
specifically and will also make changes to the Justice Court Judges salaries as well. The remainder of the changes will have
impacts generally throughout the City.
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
7
Section D: Housekeeping
D-1: Emergency Demolition Fund Reset Special Rev $65,472.00
Department: Fire Prepared By: Clint Rasmussen
For questions, please include Clint Rasmussen
This request is to reset the 'Emergency Demolition Fund' back to its orig inal budget of $200,000 The fund has been
working as intended and paid for the demolition of homes affected by fire on Major Street. The property owner has
reimbursed the city for the cost of demolition.
D-2: 300 N Pedestrian Bridge - Funding Pass-
through CIP $500,000.00
Department: Public Services-Engineering Prepared By: JP Goates / Josh Willie
For question, please include JP Goates, Josh Willie Jorge Chamorro
Engineering is ready to bill Union Pacific for their agreed upon contribution of $500,000 towards the 300 N pedestrian
bridge project. Under the terms of the agreement, this contribution will be paid to the City.
Since this contribution was accounted for as a funding source for the project, this budget amendment records the incoming
revenue from the Union Pacific's contribution and records the expense as the funds will be used as payment to the
contractor.
D-3: Withdrawn Prior to Transmittal
D-4: RDA Housing Funds Transfer to Miscellaneous
Grants Misc Grants $6,400,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mary Beth Thompson
For questions, please include Mary Beth Thompson
Funding was transferred to the RDA but is now being returned to Misc Grants to better track according to federal
guidelines.
D-5: General Obligation Series 2023 Bonds CIP $24,885,893.25
Department: Finance-Treasurer Prepared By: Gaby Ewell / Marina Scott
For questions, please include Gaby Ewell, Marina Scott and Samantha Kenney
In November 2022, voters authorized the issuance of up to $85 million in general obligation bonds to fund eight Parks,
Trails and Open Space projects. The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2023 were sold in August 2023 as the first issuance
of the authorization. This amendment creates the revenue budget for the receipt of bond proceeds and the expenditure
budget to pay for renovation of the park projects associated with the bonds.
There will be eleven project funds in Cost Center 10508 to which bond proceeds will be allocated.
• One allocation will be $9,000,0000 for the Glendale Regional Park (1200 West 1700 South) project.
• The second allocation will be $2,000,000 for Liberty Park Playground (600 East 900 South) project.
• The third allocation will be $850,000 for Allen Park (1900 South).
• The fourth allocation will be $5,000,000 for Folsom Trail Conpletion & Landscaping projects.
• The fifth will be $600,000 for the Fleet Block Park project.
• The sixth allocation will be $500,000 for the Fairmont Park (1040 East Sugarmont Drive ) project.
• The seventh allocation will be $1,050,000 for Reimagine Neighborhood Parks, Trail, or Open Spaces (various
locations) projects.
• The eighth allocation will be $600,000 for the Jordan River Corridor (various locations) project.
• There will be a unique Fund for the bond's Contingencies/Program Management that will be allocated $3,332,000.
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
8
• There will also be a unique Fund for Art Allowance that will be allocated $294,000.
• There will be a unique Fund for the bond's Salaries, Benefits and Operational costs for 3 FTE's for 3 years. This
allocation will receive $1,434,000 that is slated to be reimbursed to the general fund. These reimbursements will
be according to tracking of permitted expenses.
• Finally, there will an allocation for the bond's cost of issuance. This allocation will receive $225,893.25.
D-6: Budget to Non-Departmental Transfer for
Transfer to IMS and Fleet GF $45,800.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Randy Hillier
For question, please include Mary Beth Thompson and Randy Hillier
In budget amendment #1 funds were redirected from the Compliance Mitigation Team funding to be transferred to IMS
and Fleet for various Fleet and IMS related costs. The funds were moved from Compliance but were not moved to Non-
Departmental to be transferred to IMS and Fleet. This amendment adds that budget to Non-Departmental for the transfer
to happen appropriately.
Section E: Grants Requiring No Staff Resources
E-1: TANF Capacity Building Grant-Financial
Capability
Misc Grants $1,229,681.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
For question, please include Amy Dorsey
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program is designed to help low-income families achieve self-
sufficiency. States receive block grants to design and operate programs that accomplish one of the purposes of the TANF
program. The award period for this award is from July 1,2023 to June 30,2026.
The Administration is requesting that the Council conduct a straw poll due to impending
reimbursement deadlines.
E-2: TANF Capacity Building Grant-Youth
Development
Misc Grants $1,391,672.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
For question, please include Amy Dorsey
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program is designed to help low-income families achieve self-
sufficiency. States receive block grants to design and operate programs that accomplish one of the purposes of the TANF
program. The award period for this award is from July 1,2023 to June 30,2026.
The Administration is requesting that the Council conduct a straw poll due to impending
reimbursement deadlines.
E-3: State Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation FY 24 Misc Grants $3,107,201.00
Department: CAN-Housing Stability Prepared By: Amy Dorsey / Michelle Hoon
For question, please include Amy Dorsey and Michelle Hoon
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $3,107,201 for the
purpose of deferring costs associated with having an eligible homeless shelter within the City. This is a formula grant the
City was not required to apply, but was awarded by the State.
This grant requires no match and would require thr ee new positions in the Police Department. One new position would be
funded in CAN. This potition would be half funded by the grant , and half funded by the general fund. The FTE for this
position is associated with item A-1 of the amendment that contains the general fund half of the funding. Finally, the grant
will fund one new position in the Justice Court.
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
9
Section F: Donations
Section G: Consent Agenda
Consent Agenda
G-1: Greater Salt Lake Area Clean Energy and Air
Roadmap
Misc Grants $1,000,000.00
Department: Sustainability Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $1,000,000 for the
purpose of developing a comprehensive, economy-wide climate mitigation plan or update an existing plan in collaboration
with air pollution control districts, large and small municipalities statewide and tribal governments that will support
actions to reduce greenhouse gases and harmful air pollutants and to conduct meaningful engagement with low income
and disadvantaged communities.
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agrees to pay for 100% of all approved budget period costs incurred up to
the $1,000,000 award.
1 New FTE: Four years of salary and fringe benefits for one FTE. The position would be responsible for facilitating the
sustained involvement of jurisdiction partners, managing consultants, assisting with community engagement, coordinatin g
stakeholder and public engagement activities and presentations, and tracking task completion and milestone achievement.
Public Hearing was held on July 11,2023
G-2: Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry
Fire and State Lands
Misc Grants $50,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
The Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands of the Utah Department of Natural Resources is giving Public Lands a
$50,000 grant for the purpose of removing navigational hazards, including downed trees, garbage, and other debris, from
the Jordan River from 2100 South to 2400 North. No match is required.
G-3: Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry
Fire and State Lands
Misc Grants $150,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
The Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands of the Utah Department of Natural Resources is giving Public Lands a
$150,000 grant for the purpose of removing navigational hazards, including downed trees, garbage, and other debris, from
the Jordan River from 2100 South to 2400 North. No match is required.
G-4: State of Utah Division of Outdoor Recreation Misc Grants $150,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
The Division of Outdoor Recreation is giving Public Lands a $150,000 grant for the purpose of removing navigational
hazards, including downed trees, garbage, and other debris, from the Jordan River from 2100 South to 2400 North. No
match is required.
G-5: Backman Community Open Space Misc Grants $200,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
Salt Lake City's (City) Department of Public Lands will improve the open space adjacent to Backman Elementary. The
design will likely include intentional landscaping and safety improvements, multiple nature playground amenities,
watchable wildlife areas, an outdoor gathering area and permaculture garden and/or similar amenities. This open space
area is covered with thick, invasive vegetation and remains virtually unused by the surrounding community. The current
conditions create safety concerns for families whose children use the existing trail and bridge to walk to school. An analysis
by the University of Utah of census block data shows that this natural area could provide children and their families greater
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
10
access to nature than any other single natural open space in the city, making the site an unprecedented public asset for
hundreds of local children and families in the City's Rose Park neighborhood and users of the Jordan River Parkway by
improving a blighted section of the trail. 50% match is required.
Public hearing was held on May 16,2023.
G-6: Utah Office for Victims of Crime-VOCA Misc Grants $92,846.00
Department: Police Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
Salt Lake City Prosecutor's Office was awarded $92,846 for a two-year grant to pay partial salary for a victim advocate.
This grant does not require any new positions as the victim advocate was partially paid for the last two years by a previous
VOCA award.
Public Hearing was held June 6, 2023.
The other portion of the Victim Advocate's salary will be used to satisfy the 25% match.
G-7: Utah State Board of Education Misc Grants $11,000.00
Department: CAN – Youth & Family Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
This grant will be used to pay for snacks for the Youth & Family locations throughout the City. No FTEs are paid for by the
grant. Employee staff time is being used as a match.
Section I: Council Added Items
Impact Fees - Summary Confidential
Data pulled 07/20/2023
Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area
Area Cost Center UnAllocated
Cash Notes:
Impact fee - Police 8484001 1,402,656$
Impact fee - Fire 8484002 273,684$ B
Impact fee - Parks 8484003 16,793,487$ C
Impact fee - Streets 8484005 6,304,485$ D
24,774,312$
Expiring Amounts: by Major Area, by Month
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 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Current Month
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 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202407 (Jul2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202408 (Aug2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202409 (Sep2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202410 (Oct2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202411 (Nov2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202412 (Dec2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202501 (Jan2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202502 (Feb2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202503 (Mar2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202504 (Apr2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202505 (May2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202506 (Jun2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202507 (Jul2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202508 (Aug2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202509 (Sep2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202510 (Oct2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202511 (Nov2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ 1,103,628$ 1,103,628$
202512 (Dec2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ 113,748$ 113,748$
202601 (Jan2026)2026Q3 -$ -$ -$ 3,960$ 3,960$
202602 (Feb2026)2026Q3 -$ -$ -$ 26,929$ 26,929$
202603 (Mar2026)2026Q3 -$ -$ -$ 95,407$ 95,407$
202604 (Apr2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ 1,065,383$ 1,065,383$
202605 (May2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ 95,762$ 95,762$
202606 (Jun2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ 53,972$ 53,972$
Total, Currently Expiring through Jun 2026 -$ -$ -$ 2,558,788$ 2,558,788$
FY
2
0
2
3
Calendar
Month
FY
2
0
2
4
FY
2
0
2
5
FY
2
0
2
6
Fiscal
Quarter
E = A + B + C + D
Police Fire Parks Streets
Total
Impact Fees Confidential
Data pulled 07/20/2023 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
IFFP Contract - Police 8423003 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$
Grand Total 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$
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 Training Center 8417015 (499,533)$ -$ (499,533)$ -$
Fire'sConsultant'sContract 8419202 3,079$ 3,021$ -$ 58.00
IFFP Contract - Fire 8423004 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$ B
IF Excess Capacity - Fire 8423006 2,200,000$ -$ 2,200,000$ -$
Grand Total 1,712,546$ 3,021$ 1,700,467$ 9,058.00
Parks Allocation
Budget Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures
Allocation
Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Description Cost Center
Sum of Parks Allocation
Budget Amended
Sum of Parks Allocation
Encumbrances
Sum of Parks Allocation YTD
Expenditures
Sum of Parks Allocation
Remaining Appropriation
Fisher Carriage House 8420130 261,187$ -$ 261,187$ -$
Emigration Open Space ACQ 8422423 700,000$ -$ 700,000$ -$
Waterpark Redevelopment Plan 8421402 16,959$ 1,705$ 15,254$ -$
JR Boat Ram 8420144 3,337$ -$ 3,337$ -$
RAC Parcel Acquisition 8423454 395,442$ -$ 395,442$ 0$
Park'sConsultant'sContract 8419204 2,638$ 2,596$ -$ 42$
Cwide Dog Lease Imp 8418002 23,262$ 23,000$ -$ 262$
Rosewood Dog Park 8417013 1,056$ -$ -$ 1,056$
Jordan R 3 Creeks Confluence 8417018 1,570$ -$ -$ 1,570$
9line park 8416005 16,495$ 855$ 13,968$ 1,672$
Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 2,946$ -$ -$ 2,946$
ImperialParkShadeAcct'g 8419103 6,398$ -$ -$ 6,398$
Rich Prk Comm Garden 8420138 12,431$ 4,328$ -$ 8,103$
FY IFFP Contract - Parks 8423005 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$
Redwood Meadows Park Dev 8417014 9,350$ -$ -$ 9,350$
9Line Orchard 8420136 156,827$ 132,168$ 6,874$ 17,785$
Trailhead Prop Acquisition 8421403 275,000$ -$ 253,170$ 21,830$
Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 1,042,694$ 240,179$ 764,614$ 37,902$
IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 56,109$ -$ 1,302$ 54,808$
Green loop 200 E Design 8422408 608,490$ 443,065$ 93,673$ 71,752$ C
FY20 Bridge to Backman 8420430 156,565$ 44,791$ 30,676$ 81,099$
Fisher House Exploration Ctr 8421401 555,030$ 52,760$ 402,270$ 100,000$
Cnty #1 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420424 254,159$ 133,125$ 13,640$ 107,393$
UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 122,281$ -$ 1,310$ 120,971$
Three Creeks West Bank NewPark 8422403 150,736$ -$ -$ 150,736$
Rose Park Neighborhood Center 8423403 160,819$ -$ 2,781$ 158,038$
Historic Renovation AllenParK 8422410 420,000$ 156,146$ 104,230$ 159,624$
RAC Playground with ShadeSails 8422415 179,323$ -$ 712$ 178,611$
Bridge to Backman 8418005 266,306$ 10,285$ 4,262$ 251,758$
900 S River Park Soccer Field 8423406 287,848$ -$ -$ 287,848$
Lighting NE Baseball Field 8423409 300,000$ -$ 678$ 299,322$
Open Space Prop Acq-Trails 8423453 300,000$ -$ -$ 300,000$
SLC Foothills Land Acquisition 8422413 319,139$ -$ -$ 319,139$
Parley's Trail Design & Constr 8417012 327,678$ -$ -$ 327,678$
Jordan Prk Event Grounds 8420134 428,074$ 5,593$ 23,690$ 398,791$
Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 446,825$ 18,467$ 14,885$ 413,472$
Open Space Prop Acq-City Parks 8423452 450,000$ -$ -$ 450,000$
Jordan Park Pedestrian Pathway 8422414 510,000$ 9,440$ 34,921$ 465,638$
Gateway Triangle Property Park 8423408 499,563$ -$ 106$ 499,457$
RAC Playground Phase II 8423405 521,564$ -$ -$ 521,564$
Mem. Tree Grove Design & Infra 8423407 867,962$ -$ 2,906$ 865,056$
Marmalade Plaza Project 8423451 1,000,000$ -$ 3,096$ 996,905$
SLCFoothillsTrailheadDevelpmnt 8422412 1,304,682$ 41,620$ 62,596$ 1,200,466$
GlendaleWtrprk MstrPln&Rehab 8422406 3,177,849$ 524,018$ 930,050$ 1,723,781$
Pioneer Park 8419150 3,149,123$ 69,208$ 94,451$ 2,985,464$
Glendale Regional Park Phase 1 8423450 4,350,000$ -$ -$ 4,350,000$
Grand Total 24,106,716$ 1,913,351$ 4,236,078$ 17,957,287$
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
Transportation Safety Improvem 8417007 1,292$ -$ 1,292$ -$
500/700 S Street Reconstructio 8412001 15,026$ 11,703$ 3,323$ -$
Trans Safety Improvements 8419007 13,473$ -$ 13,473$ -$
900 S Signal Improvements IF 8422615 70,000$ -$ 70,000$ -$
Corridor Transformations IF 8422608 25,398$ 25,398$ -$ -$
Trans Master Plan 8419006 13,000$ -$ 13,000$ -$
9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 63,955$ -$ 63,955$ -$
Local Link Construction IF 8422606 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ -$
Gladiola Street 8406001 16,109$ 12,925$ 940$ 2,244$
Transportatn Safety Imprvmt IF 8422620 44,400$ -$ 38,084$ 6,316$
Urban Trails FY22 IF 8422619 6,500$ -$ -$ 6,500$
Street'sConsultant'sContract 8419203 29,817$ 17,442$ -$ 12,374$
Complete Street Enhancements 8420120 35,392$ -$ 16,693$ 18,699$
500 to 700 S 8418016 22,744$ -$ -$ 22,744$ D
900 South 9Line RR Cross IF 8422604 28,000$ -$ -$ 28,000$
Transp Safety Improvements 8420110 58,780$ 17,300$ 11,746$ 29,734$
1700S Corridor Transfrmtn IF 8422622 35,300$ -$ -$ 35,300$
200S TransitCmpltStrtSuppl IF 8422602 37,422$ -$ -$ 37,422$
300 N Complete Street Recons I 8423606 40,000$ -$ -$ 40,000$
1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestr 8416004 42,833$ -$ -$ 42,833$
400 South Viaduct Trail IF 8422611 90,000$ -$ -$ 90,000$
Neighborhood Byways IF 8422614 104,500$ -$ -$ 104,500$
Transit Cap-Freq Trans Routes 8423608 110,000$ -$ -$ 110,000$
TransportationSafetyImprov IF 8421500 281,586$ 124,068$ 40,300$ 117,218$
Indiana Ave/900 S Rehab Design 8412002 124,593$ -$ -$ 124,593$
Bikeway Urban Trails 8418003 181,846$ -$ 542$ 181,303$
200 S Recon Trans Corridor IF 8423602 252,000$ -$ -$ 252,000$
Street Improve Reconstruc 20 8420125 780,182$ 46,269$ 393,884$ 340,029$
IF Complete Street Enhancement 8421502 625,000$ -$ -$ 625,000$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 836,736$ 55,846$ 45,972$ 734,918$
700 South Phase 7 IF 8423305 1,120,000$ -$ 166$ 1,119,834$
1300 East Reconstruction 8423625 3,111,335$ 1,192,649$ 224,557$ 1,694,129$
Grand Total 8,267,218$ 1,503,600$ 987,926$ 5,775,692$
Total 34,095,480$ 3,419,972$ 6,924,471$ 23,751,037$
E = A + B + C + D
TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE
8484002
24,774,312$
8484003
8484005
16,793,487$
6,304,485$
$273,684
UnAllocated
Budget
Amount
8484001
1,402,656$
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2023
(Amending the FY 2023-2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees)
An ordinance amending the FY 2023-2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-
Represented Employees.
PREAMBLE
The City Council, in Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 29B of 2023, approved the FY 2023-
2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees of Salt Lake City
Corporation. However, the City Council, in order to meet the operational needs of Salt Lake City
Corporation, wishes to amend the FY 2023-2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-
Represented Employees of Salt Lake City Corporation by:
i) revising Subsection II (“Employee Compensation for Fiscal Year
2023”) of Section II (“Employee Wages, Salaries & Benefits”) to
increase employee base pay and elected official salaries by an
additional half-percent;
ii) revising Subsection IV(B)(2) (“Wage Differentials & Additional
Pay; Standby Pay; Standby for Police Sergeants”) of Section III
(“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) to reduce the
amount of straight time compensation from two hours per twelve-
hour period to thirty (30) minutes per twelve-hour period;
iii) revising Subsection IV(H) (“Snowfighter Pay”) of Section III
(“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) to provide a
pay differential equal to fifteen percent of an eligible employee’s
regular weekly base pay;
iv) revising Subsection VI(A) (“Other Pay Allowances; Meal
Allowance”) of Section III (“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay
Allowances”) to increase the meal allowance amount from $10.00
to $15.00;
v) removing Subsection I(E) (“Holidays; Holiday Exceptions”) of
Section IV (“Holiday, Vacation & Leave Accrual”);
2
vi) revising Subsection III(B) (“Sick and Other Related Leave or
Personal Leave; Plan ‘B’”) of Section IV (“Holiday, Vacation &
Leave Accrual”) to provide that eligible employees shall receive
personal leave hours on November 1 of each calendar year and
clarify how such hours may be used and converted;
vii) revising Appendix A (“Salt Lake City Corporation General
Employee Pay Plan (GEPP)”) to reflect the correct pay rates and
rectify rounding error;
viii) revising Appendix B (“Appointed Employees by Department”) to
reflect changes to certain job titles and grades and to add the new
appointed position of “Safety & Security Director” in the Public
Services Department;
ix) revising Appendix C (“Elected Officials Salary Schedule”) to
reflect the correct annual salary amount;
x) revising Appendix D (“Utah State Retirement Contributions FY
2022-2023”) to reflect required changes; and
xi) making other technical and conforming changes.
Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this ordinance is to approve the attached
amended FY 2023-2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees of Salt
Lake City Corporation. Three copies of the attached amended FY 2023-2024 Annual
Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees of Salt Lake City Corporation shall be
maintained in the City Recorder’s Office for public inspection.
SECTION 2. EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION. Subsection II (“Employee
Compensation for Fiscal Year 2023”) of Section II (“Employee Wages, Salaries & Benefits”) is
hereby amended to increase employee base pay and elected official salaries by an additional half-
percent.
SECTION 3. STANDBY PAY FOR POLICE SERGEANTS. Subsection IV(B)(2)
(“Wage Differentials & Additional Pay; Standby Pay; Standby for Police Sergeants”) of Section
3
III (“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) is hereby amended to reduce the amount
of straight time compensation from two hours per twelve-hour period to thirty (30) minutes per
twelve-hour period.
SECTION 4. SNOWFIGHTER PAY. Subsection IV(H) (“Snowfighter Pay”) of Section
III (“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) is hereby amended to provide a pay
differential equal to fifteen percent of an eligible employee’s regular weekly base pay.
SECTION 5. MEAL ALLOWANCE. Subsection VI(A) (“Other Pay Allowances; Meal
Allowance”) of Section III (“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) is hereby
amended to increase the meal allowance amount from $10.00 to $15.00.
SECTION 6. HOLIDAY EXCEPTIONS. Subsection I(E) (“Holidays; Holiday
Exceptions”) of Section IV (“Holiday, Vacation & Leave Accrual”) is hereby removed.
SECTION 7. PLAN “B.” Subsection III(B) (“Sick and Other Related Leave or Personal
Leave; Plan ‘B’”) of Section IV (“Holiday, Vacation & Leave Accrual”) is hereby amended to
provide that eligible employees shall receive personal leave hours on November 1 of each
calendar year and clarify how such hours may be used and converted.
SECTION 8. GENERAL EMPLOYEE PAY PLAN. Appendix A (“Salt Lake City
Corporation General Employee Pay Plan (GEPP)”) is hereby amended to reflect the correct pay
rates and rectify rounding error.
SECTION 9. APPOINTED EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT. Appendix B
(“Appointed Employees by Department”) is hereby amended to reflect changes to certain job
titles and grades and to add the new appointed position of “Safety & Security Director” in the
Public Services Department.
4
SECTION 10. ELECTED OFFICIAL SALARY SCHEDULE. Appendix C (“Elected
Officials Salary Schedule”) is hereby amended to reflect the correct annual salary amount.
SECTION 11. UTAH STATE RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS. Appendix D (“Utah
State Retirement Contributions FY 2022-2023”) is hereby amended to reflect required changes.
SECTION 12. OTHER REVISIONS. The FY 2023-2024 Annual Compensation Plan
for Non-Represented Employees of Salt Lake City Corporation is hereby amended to reflect
other technical and conforming changes.
SECTION 13. APPLICATION. The attached amended FY 2023-2024 Annual
Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees of Salt Lake City Corporation shall not
apply to non-represented employees of Salt Lake City Corporation whose employment
terminated prior to the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 14. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective upon
adoption.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of _______________,
2023.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________________.
Mayor’s Action: _____Approved. _____Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
5
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. _____ of 2023.
Published: ____________________.
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved as to Form
Date: _______________
By: ____________________
Jonathan Pappasideris
Division Chief
Senior City Attorney
August 29, 2023
Jonathan Pappasideris
ANNUAL COMPENSATON PLAN
FOR NON-REPRESENTED
EMPLOYEES
FY2023-2024
i
FY 2024 COMPENSATION PLAN FOR SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
Table of Contents
EFFECTIVE DATE ....................................................................................................................................... 1
EMPLOYEES COVERED BY THIS PLAN ................................................................................................ 1
AUTHORITY OF THE MAYOR ................................................................................................................. 1
APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS .................................................................................................................... 1
MODIFICATION, SUSPENSION, OR REVOCATION OF PROVISIONS ........................................... 1
SECTION I: DEFINITIONS ......................................................................................................................... 2
SUBSECTION I - DEFINITION OF TERMS ............................................................................................. 2
SECTION II: EMPLOYEE WAGES, SALARIES & BENEFITS ............................................................ 2
SUBSECTION I - COMPENSATION PROGRAM & SALARY SCHEDULES ....................................... 2
A. Determination ................................................................................................................................... 2
B. Salary Schedules ............................................................................................................................... 2
C. Other Compensation ......................................................................................................................... 3
SUBSECTION II - EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023 ..................................... 3
SUBSECTION III - EMPLOYEE INSURANCE ........................................................................................ 3
SUBSECTION IV - WORKERS’ COMPENSATION ................................................................................ 3
SUBSECTION V - SOCIAL SECURITY EXCEPTION FOR POLICE & FIRE ....................................... 4
SUBSECTION VI - RETIREMENT ............................................................................................................ 4
SECTION III: WORK HOURS, OVERTIME & OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES ................................. 4
SUBSECTION I – WORK HOURS ............................................................................................................. 4
SUBSECTION II- OVERTIME COMPENSATION ................................................................................... 4
SUBSECTION III - LONGEVITY PAY ..................................................................................................... 5
SUBSECTION IV - WAGE DIFFERENTIALS & ADDITIONAL PAY ................................................... 6
SUBSECTION V - EDUCATION AND TRAINING PAY ........................................................................ 9
SUBSECTION VI – OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES .................................................................................. 9
SUBSECTION VII - SEVERANCE BENEFIT ......................................................................................... 11
SECTION IV: HOLIDAY, VACATION & LEAVE ACCRUAL ............................................................ 13
SUBSECTION I – HOLIDAYS ................................................................................................................. 13
SUBSECTION II - VACATION LEAVE .................................................................................................. 14
SUBSECTION III - SICK AND OTHER RELATED LEAVE OR PERSONAL LEAVE ....................... 17
A. Plan “A ” ............................................................................................................................................ 17
1. Sick Leave .......................................................................................................................................... 17
ii
2. Hospitalization Leave ......................................................................................................................... 19
3. Dependent Leave ................................................................................................................................ 20
4. Career Incentive Leave, Plan “A” ........................................................................................................... 21
5. Retirement Benefit, Plan “A” ................................................................................................................. 21
B. Plan “B” .................................................................................................................................................. 21
SUBSECTION IV - PARENTAL LEAVE ................................................................................................ 24
SUBSECTION V - BEREAVEMENT LEAVE ......................................................................................... 25
SUBSECTION VI - MILITARY LEAVE .................................................................................................. 26
SUBSECTION VII - JURY LEAVE & COURT APPEARANCES .......................................................... 26
SUBSECTION VIII - INJURY LEAVE (SWORN POLICE AND FIRE EMPLOYEES ONLY)............ 27
SUBSECTION IX - ADDITIONAL LEAVES OF ABSENCE ................................................................. 28
SUBSECTION X - EMERGENCY LEAVE .............................................................................................. 28
APPENDIX A – GENERAL EMPLOYEE PAY PLAN (GEPP) ............................................................. 29
APPENDIX B – APPOINTED EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT ....................................................... 31
APPENDIX C – ELECTED OFFICIALS SALARY SCHEDULE .......................................................... 34
APPENDIX D- UTAH STATE RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS FY 2021-2022 ............................. 35
DISCLAIMER
City employment is subject to City ordinances, policies, practices and
procedures as well as state law, federal law, and constitutional limitations on
the City as a governmental entity. The policies, procedures, and practices of
the City and its departments and workgroups do not limit, affect, or alter any
legal or constitutional rights the City or its employees may have.
The City’s policies, procedures, and practices do not create any contractual
rights, either express or implied, or any other obligation or liability on the
City. The City also expressly reserves the right to amend or change its
policies, procedures, and practices at any time, with or without notice, and to
amend or change its ordinances, with the notice required by law.
1
FY 2024 COMPENSATION PLAN FOR NON-REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES
of SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
EFFECTIVE DATE
The provisions of this plan shall be effective commencing June 25, 2023, unless otherwise noted.
EMPLOYEES COVERED BY THIS PLAN
This plan applies to all full -time city employees. This plan does not apply to employees classified
as: seasonal, hourly, temporary, part-time or those covered by a memorandum of understanding.
AUTHORITY OF THE MAYOR
Employees covered by this compensation plan may be appointed, classified, and advanced under
rules and regulations promulgated by the mayor within budget limitations established by the city
council.
Furthermore, the mayor may authorize leave not specified in this compensation plan to provide
for operational flexibility, so long as the additional leave does not exceed the equivalent of eight
hours of leave per employee, per year. However, with the exception of a benefit created or
expanded pursuant to Section IV, Subsection X (“Emergency Leave”), the mayor may not
otherwise create a new benefit or expand an existing benefit for employees covered by this
compensation plan if doing so will result in a direct, measurable cost. A direct, measurable cost
includes a circumstance where the total cost of the new benefit or expansion of an existing benefit
exceeds appropriated funds. Further, city council input and approval is required if the creation of
a new benefit has policy implications or is already addressed in this compensation plan.
APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS
All provisions in this compensation plan are subject to the appropriation of funds by the city
council.
MODIFICATION, SUSPENSION, OR REVOCATION OF PROVISIONS
If a local emergency is declared, any provision in this compensation plan may be temporarily
modified, suspended, or revoked for the duration (or any portion thereof) of the period of local
emergency, if so authorized by the mayor and/or city council .
2
SECTION I: DEFINITIONS
SECTION II: EMPLOYEE WAGES, SALARIES & BENEFITS
SUBSECTION I - COMPENSATION PROGRAM & SALARY SCHEDULES
The city’s compensation system and program, in conjunction with this plan, is intended to
attract, motivate and retain qualified personnel necessary to effectively meet public service
demands.
A. Determination
1. The mayor shall develop policies and guidelines for the administration of the
pay plans.
2. To the degree that funds permit, employees shall be paid compensation that:
a. Is commensurate with the skills and abilities required of the position;
b. Achieves equal pay for equal work;
c. Attains comparability and is competitive with the compensation paid
by other public and/or private employers with whom the city compares
and/or competes for personnel recruitment and retention.
3. To the extent possible, market surveys shall be used to assess and evaluate the
city’s competitiveness with a cross section of organizations with whom the city
competes for personnel recruitment and retention. This may include one or more of
the following:
a. Compensation surveys, including actual pay and other cash
allowances paid to employees.
b. Benefits surveys, including paid leave, group insurance plans,
retirement, and other employer-provided and voluntary benefits.
c. Regular review of the city’s compensation plans and pay structures to
ensure salary ranges and regular pay practices provide for job growth and
encourage employee productivity.
B. Salary Schedules
1. All Employees covered under this plan (except for those designated as
“Elected Officials”) shall be paid base wages or salaries according to the General
Employee Pay Plan attached as Appendix “A.” Wages and salaries shall not be less
than the established range minimum or higher than the range maximum, unless
otherwise approved by the mayor or mayor’s designee.
3
2. Appointed Employees: The specific pay level assignments for Appointed
Employees are shown in Appendix “B.”
3. Elected Officials: Elected officials shall be paid annual compensation according
to schedule attached as Appendix "C."
C. Other Compensation
The mayor or the city council may distribute appropriated monies to city employees as
discretionary retention incentives or retirement contributions, or special lump sum
supplemental payments. Retention incentives or special lump sum payments are subject
to the mayor’s or city council’s approval.
SUBSECTION II - EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024
For employees covered under this plan, the city will increase each employee’s base pay by five
percent. Salaries for elected officials will, also, be increased by five percent.
The city’s living wage for regular, full-time employees is set and shall be no less than $15.11 per
hour.
SUBSECTION III - EMPLOYEE INSURANCE
The city will make available group medical, health and flex savings plans, dental, life, accidental
death & dismemberment, long-term disability insurance, voluntary benefits and an employee
assistance program (EAP) to all eligible employees and their eligible spouse, adult designee,
dependents and dependents of adult designee pursuant to city policy.
A. Employer-Paid Contributions. Effective July 1, 2023, the city’s contribution toward
the total premium for group medical will be 95% for the high -deductible Summit Star
Plan. For employees enrolled in the high-deductible Summit Star Plan, the city will also
contribute a one-time total of $750 into a qualified health savings account (HSA) or a
Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) for those enrolled for single coverage and
$1,500 for those enrolled for double or family coverage per plan year. Health savings
account or Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) contributions will be pro-rated for
any employee hired after July 1, 2023.
B. 501(c) (9) Post-Employment Health Reimbursement Account. The city will
contribute $24.30 per bi-weekly pay period into each employee’s Post Employment
Health Reimbursement Account. For any year in which there are 27 pay periods, no
such contribution will be made in the 27th pay period.
SUBSECTION IV - WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
The city will provide workers’ compensation coverage to employees as required by applicable
law.
4
SUBSECTION V - SOCIAL SECURITY EXCEPTION FOR POLICE & FIRE
All sworn employees in the Police and Fire departments covered under this plan are exempt from the
provisions of the federal Social Security System unless determined otherwise by the city or
required by applicable law.
SUBSECTION VI - RETIREMENT
A. Retirement Programs. The city hereby adopts the Utah State Retirement System for
providing retirement benefits to employees covered by the plan. The city may permit or
require the participation of employees in its retirement program(s) under terms and
conditions established by the mayor and consistent with applicable law. Such programs
may include:
1. The Utah State Public Employees (Contributory and Non-Contributory);
Public Safety Retirement Systems; or, the Utah Firefighters Retirement System; or,
2. Deferred compensation programs.
B. The 2023-2024 fiscal year retirement contribution rates for employees, including
elected officials, are shown in Appendix “D.”
SECTION III: WORK HOURS, OVERTIME & OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES
SUBSECTION I – WORK HOURS
A. The city’s standard work week begins Sunday at 12:00am and ends the following
Saturday at 11:59pm. Alternatives to the standard work week may be authorized and
adopted for specific work groups, such as:
1. The standard work schedule for combat Fire Battalion Chiefs, which
includes two consecutive 24-hour shifts immediately followed by 96 hours off.
SUBSECTION II- OVERTIME COMPENSATION
A. Overtime Compensation. The city will pay non-exempt employees overtime
compensation as required by the FLSA. The city will pay overtime hours at 1 ½ times
the employee’s regular hourly rate or, at the employee’s request and with their
department director’s approval, provide compensatory time off at a rate of 1½ hours for
each overtime hour in lieu of overtime compensation.
1. Employees may accrue compensatory time up to a maximum amount as
determined by their department director.
5
2. The city may elect at any time to pay an employee for any or all accrued
compensatory hours.
3. The city will includ e only actual hours worked and holiday leave hours when
calculating overtime.
4. When used, personal leave and compensatory time will not be included in
the calculation of overtime.
5. The city will pay out all accrued compensatory hours whenever an
employee’s status or position changes from FLSA non-exempt to exempt.
B. Labor Costs— Declared Emergency— Overtime Compensation for FLSA Exempt
Employees. The city may pay exempt employees overtime pay for any hours worked
over forty (40) hours in a workweek at a rate equivalent to their regular base hourly rate
of pay during periods of emergency. The city shall only make such payment when all of
the following conditions occur:
1. The mayor or the city council has issued a “Proclamation of Local Emergency”
or the city responds to an extraordinary emergency; and,
2. Exempt employees are required to work over forty (40) hours for one or more
workweek(s) during the emergency period: and,
3. The mayor and/or the city council approve the use of available funds to cover
the overtime payments.
The city shall distribute any overtime payments consistently with a pre-defined standard
that treats all exempt employees equitably. Hours worked under a declared or
extraordinary emergency must be paid hours and cannot be accrued as compensatory
time.
SUBSECTION III - LONGEVITY PAY
A. Eligibility. With the exception of elected officials, the city will pay a monthly
longevity benefit to full-time employees based on the most recent date an employee
began full -time employment as follows:
1. Employees who have completed six (6) consecutive years of employment with
the city will receive $50;
2. Employees who have completed ten (10) consecutive years of employment with
the city will receive $75;
3. Employees who have completed sixteen (16) full years of employment wit h the
city will receive $100; and,
6
4. Employees who have completed twenty (20) full years of employment with the
city will receive $125.
B. Pension Base Pay. Longevity pay will be included in base pay for purposes of
pension contributions.
C. Longevity While on an Unpaid Leave of Absence. Employees do not earn or receive
longevity payments while on an unpaid leave of absence. When an employee returns
from an approved unpaid leave of absence, longevity payments will resume.
SUBSECTION IV - WAGE DIFFERENTIALS & ADDITIONAL PAY
Eligible employees receive certain wage differentials as follows:
A. Call Back and Call Out Pay. Non-exempt employees will be paid Call Back or Call
Out pay based upon department director approval and the following guidelines:
1. Call Back Pay: Non-sworn, non-exempt employees who have been released
from normally scheduled work and standby periods, and who are directed by an
appropriate department head or designated representative to return to work prior to
their next scheduled normal duty shift, will be paid for a minimum of three (3)
hours straight-time pay and, in addition, will be guaranteed a minimum four (4)
hours work at straight-time pay.
2. Call Out Pay for Police Sergeants. Sergeants who have been released from their
scheduled work shifts and have been directed by an appropriate division head or
designated representative to perform work without at least 24 hours advance notice
or scheduling, shall be compensated as follows:
a. Sergeants who are directed to report to work shall receive a minimum of
four (4) hours compensation at one and one -half times their hourly wage
rate, or one and one-half times their hourly wage rate for actual hours
worked, whichever is greater.
b. Sergeants who are assigned to day shift, and who are directed to perform
work within eight (8) hours prior to the beginning of their regularly
scheduled shift shall receive a minimum of four (4) hours compensation at
one and one-half times their hourly wage rate, or one and one-half times
their hourly wage rate for actual hours worked, whichever is greater.
c. Sergeants who are assigned to afternoon or graveyard shifts, and who are
directed to perform work within eight (8) hours following the end of their
regularly scheduled shift shall receive a minimum of four (4) hours
compensation at one and one-half times their hourly wage rate, or one and
one-half times their hourly wage rate for actual
hours worked, whichever is greater.
7
B. Standby Pay : Non-exempt employees are eligible to receive Standby pay based
upon the following guidelines.
1. Standby for Non-Sworn Employees: Non-exempt, non-sworn employees
who have been released from normally scheduled work but have not been released
from standby status will be paid either two (2) hours of straight time pay for each 24
hour period of limited standby status; or two (2) hours straight time pay for each 12-
hour period of standby status if they are Department of Airports or Public Utilities
Department employees.
a. First Call to Work. An eligible employee who is directed to return to his
or her normal work site during an assigned Standby period by a department
head or designated representative without advanced notice or scheduling will
be paid a guaranteed minimum of four (4) hours, which may include any
combination of hours worked and/or non-worked straight-time pay.
b. Additional Calls to Work. An eligible employee will be paid an
additional guaranteed minimum of two (2) hours, which may include any
combination of hours worked and/or non-worked straight-time pay, for each
additional occasion he or she is called to work during the same twenty-four
(24) or twelve (12) hour standby period.
c. Exclusion for Snow Fighters. Any employee on standby as a member of
the Snow Fighter Corps shall not receive standby/on-call pay or shift
differential when on standby or called back to fight snow.
2. Standby for Police Sergeants: Police Sergeants directed by their division
commander or designee to keep themselves available for city service during
otherwise off-duty hours shall be compensated 30 minutes of straight time for each
12-hour period of standby status. This compensation shall be in addition to any
callout pay or pay for time worked the employee may receive during the standby
period.
C. Extra-Duty Shifts for Police Sergeants. "Extra-duty shifts" are defined as scheduled
or unscheduled hours worked other than the sergeant's normally scheduled work shifts.
"Extra-duty shifts" do not include extension or carry over of the sergeant's normally
scheduled work shift.
1. Any sergeant required by the city to work extra-duty shifts shall receive a
minimum of three (3) hours compensation at one and one -half times their regular
base hourly rate, or time worked paid at one and one-half times their regular hourly
base wage rate, whichever is greater.
D. Shift Allowance, not including Police Sergeants & Lieutenants. Only non- exempt
employees who perform afternoon/ swing or evening shift work are eligible to receive a
shift allowance.
8
1. The city will include all shift allowance when computing overtime. An
employee who receives Snow Fighter Corps differential pay is not eligible to also
receive shift allowance.
2. Day Shift: No allowance will be paid for work hours which are part of a regular
day shift.
3. Eligible Hours: For each non-day shift hour worked between the hours of 6:00
p.m. and 6:00 a.m., the city will pay an eligible non-exempt employee a differential
of $1.00 per hour.
E. Shift Differential for Police Sergeants & Lieutenants: The city will pay Police
sergeants & lieutenants shift differentials according to the shift actually worked. Actual
shift differential rates are determined as follows:
1. Day Shift: No differential pay for hours worked during day shift, which begins
at 0500 hours until 1159 hours.
2. Swing Shift: A differential of 2.5% in addition to the regular day rate shall be
paid for swing shift, which begins at 1200 hours until 1759 hours.
3. Graveyard Shift: A differential of 5.0% in addition to the regular day rate shall
be paid for graveyard shift, which begins at 1800 hours until 0459 hours.
F. K-9 Squad Allowance: Police sergeants assigned to the K-9 squad will be
compensated as follows:
1. Police sergeants shall be allowed ten (10) hours per month to care for the
police service dog. Such hours shall be counted as part of the Police sergeant's
regular work shift(s).
2. Police sergeants shall be provided ten (10) hours per month while off duty,
at the rate of one-and-one-half (1 ½) times their wage rate, to care for the police
service dog. No more than ten (10) hours per month shall be spent off duty to
care for the police service dog unless authorized by the Police Chief or designee.
G. Acting/Working out of Classification. A department head may elect to grant
additional compensation to an employee for work performed on a temporary basis,
whether in an acting capacity or otherwise, beyond the employee’s regular job
classification for any period lasting 20 or more working days. Unless approved by the
mayor or mayor’s designee, acting pay shall be limited to no more than 90 calendar days
from the start date and paid separately from regular earnings on each employee’s wage
statement. Compensation adjustments may be retroactive to the start date of the
temporary job assignmen t. Exceptions may be approved by the mayor or mayor’s
designee.
1. Acting pay shall be excluded when calculating any leave payouts, including
vacation, holiday, and personal leave.
9
H. Snowfighter Pay. The city will pay employees designated by the department head,
or designee, as members of the Snow Fighter Corps a pay differential equal to 15% of
an eligible employee’s regular weekly base pay for work related to snow removal. This
pay shall be separate from regular earnings on each employee’s wage statement.
SUBSECTION V - EDUCATION AND TRAINING PAY
A. Education Incentives. The mayor may adopt programs to promote employee
education and training, provided that all compensation incentives are authorized within
appropriate budget limitations established by the city council.
1. Police Sergeants, Lieutenants, and Captains are eligible for a $500 per year job-
related training allowance.
2. Fire Battalion/Division Chiefs are eligible for incentive pay following
completion of degree requirements at a fully accredited college or university and
submission of evidence of a diploma. The city will pay monthly allowances
according to the educational degree held, as follows:
Doctorate………….. $100.00
Masters………..…... $75.00
SUBSECTION VI – OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES
A. Meal Allowance. When approved by management, employees may receive meal
allowances in the amount of $15.00 when an employee works two or more hours
consecutive to their normally scheduled shift. Employees may also be eligible to
receive $15.00 for each additional four-hour consecutive period of work which is in
addition to the normally scheduled work shift.
1. Fire and police department employees shall be provided with adequate food
and drink to maintain safety and performance during emergencies or extraordinary
circumstances.
B. Business Expenses. City policy shall govern the authorization of employee
advancement or reimbursement for actual expenses reasonably incurred while
performing city business. Advance payment or reimbursement for expenses shall be
approved only when the amounts are documen ted and within the budget limitations
established by the city council.
C. Automobiles
1. The mayor may authorize, subject to the conditions provided in city policy, an
employee to utilize a city vehicle on a take-home basis and may require an
employee to reimburse the city for a portion of the take -home vehicle cost as
provided in city ordinance.
10
2. Employees who are authorized to use privately-owned automobiles for
official city business will be reimbursed for the operation expenses at the rate
specif ied in city policy.
3. The city will provide a car allowance to department directors, the mayor’s
chief of staff, the mayor’s chief administrative officer, up to three additional employees
in the mayor’s office, and the city council Executive Director at a rate not to exceed
$400 per month. A car allowance may be paid to specific appointed employees at a
rate not to exceed $400 per month as recommended by the mayor and approved by
the city council.
D. Uniform Allowance. The city will provide employees who are required to wear
uniforms in the performance of their duties a monthly uniform allowance as follows:
1. Non-sworn Police and Fire Department employees—$65.00
2. Watershed Management Division employees—$65.00
3. Fire: Battalion Chiefs will be provided with uniforms and other job -related
safety equipment, as needed. Employees may select uniforms and related
equipment from an approved list. The total allowance provided shall be $600 per
year, or the amount received by firefighter employees, whichever is greater.
Appointed employees shall be provided uniforms or uniform allowances to the
extent stated in Fire department policy.
a. Dangerous or contaminated safety equipment shall be cleaned,
repaired, or replaced by the Fire department.
4. Police: Police sergeants, lieutenants, and captains in uniform assignments,
as determined by their bureau commander, will be enrolled in the department’s
quartermaster system.
a. The quartermaster system will operate as follows:
i. Necessary uniform and equipment items, including patrol uniforms,
detective uniforms, duty gear, footwear, cold- weather gear, headwear,
etc. will be provided to Police sergeants, lieutenants, and captains by the
department’s quartermaster pursuant to department policy.
ii. A full inventory of items that the quartermaster will provide to Police
sergeants, lieutenants and captains within the quartermaster system and
the manner in which they will be distributed will be stated in department
policy.
iii. Police sergeants, lieutenants and captains in the quartermaster system
will be paid the sum of One Hundred Dollars ($100) each fiscal year for
the purpose of independently purchasing any incidental uniform item or
11
equipment not provided by the quartermaster system. Payment will be
made each year on the first day of the pay-period that includes August
15.
b. The city will provide for the cleaning of uniforms as described in Police
department policy.
c. Police sergeants, lieutenants, and captains in plainclothes assignments,
as determined by their bureau commander, are provided a clothing and
cleaning allowance totaling $39.00 per pay period. Sergeants, lieutenants,
and captains who are transferred back to a uniform assignment will return to
the quartermaster system upon transfer.
d. Uniforms or uniform allowances for appointed Police employees will be
provided to the extent stated in Police department policy.
E. Allowances for Certified Golf Teaching Professionals. The mayor may, within
budgeted appropriations and as business needs indicate, authorize golf lesson revenue
sharing between the city and employees recognized as Certified Golf Teaching
Professionals as defined in the Golf Division’s Golf Lesson Revenue Policy. Payment
to an employee for lesson revenue generated shall be reduced by: 1) a ten (10%) percent
administrative fee to be retained by the Golf division, and 2) the employee’s payroll tax
withholding requirements in accordance with applicable law.
F. Other Allowances. The mayor or the city council may, within budgeted
appropriations, authorize the payment of other allowances in extraordinary
circumstances (as determined by the mayor or the city council).
SUBSECTION VII - SEVERANCE BENEFIT
Subject to availability of funds, any current appointed employee who is not retained, not
terminated for cause and who is separated from city employment involuntarily shall receive
severance benefits based upon their respective appointment date.
A. Severance benefits shall be calculated using the employee’s salary rate in effect on
the employee’s date of termination. Receipt of severance benefits is contingent upon
execution of a release of all claims approved by the city attorney’s office.
1. Employees appointed on or after January 1, 1989 and before January 1, 2000
shall receive a severance benefit equal to one months’ base salary for each
continuous year of city employment in an appointed status before January 1, 2000.
Severance shall be calculat ed on a pro-rata basis for a total benefit of up to a
maximum of six m onths.
2. Current department heads, along with the mayor’s chief of staff and the
executive director of the city council office, appointed on or after January 1, 2000
shall receive a severance benefit equal to two month’s base salary after one full year
of continuous city employment in an appointed status; four months’ base salary
12
after two full years of continuous city employment in an appointed status; or, six
months’ base salary after three full years or more of continuous city employment in
an appointed status.
3. Current appointed employees who are not department heads, and who were
appointed on or after January 1, 2000 shall receive a severance benefit equal to one
week’s base salary for each year of continuous city employment in an appointed
status, calculated on a pro-rata basis, for a total benefit of up to a maximum of six
weeks.
B. Leave Payout: Appointed employees with leave hour account balances under Plan A
or Plan B shall, in addition to the severance benefit provided, receive a severance
benefit equal to the “retirement benefit” value provided under the leave plan of which
they are a participant (either Plan A or Plan B), if separation is involuntary and not for
cause.
C. Not Eligible for Benefit. An appointed employee is ineligible to be paid severance
benefits under the following circumstances:
1. An employee who, at the time of termination of employment, has been
convicted, indicted, charged or is under active criminal investigation concerning a
public offense involving a felony or moral turpitude. This provision shall not
restrict the award of full severance benefits should such employee subsequently be
found not guilty of such charge or if the charges are otherwise dismissed.
2. An employee who has been terminated or asked for a resignation by the
mayor or department director under bona fide charges of nonfeasance, misfeasance
or malfeasance in office.
3. An employee who fails to execute a Release of All Claims approved by the
city attorney’s office, where required as stipulated above.
4. An employee who is hired into another position in the city prior to their
separation date.
In the event an employee is hired into another position in the city after their
separation date and prior to the expiration of the period of time for which the
severance benefit was provided, the employee is required to reimburse the City (on
a pro-rata basis) for that portion of the severance benefit covering the period of time
between the date of rehire and the expiration of the period of time for which the
severance benefit was provided.
13
SECTION IV: HOLIDAY, VACATION & LEAVE ACCRUAL
Benefits-eligible employees shall receive pay for holidays, vacation and other leave as provided in
this section. Employees do not earn or receive holiday and vacation benefits while on unpaid
leave of absence. However, employees on an unpaid military leave of absence may be entitled to
the restoration of such leave benefits, as r equired by applicable law.
SUBSECTION I – HOLIDAYS
A. The following days are recognized and observed as holidays for covered employees.
Eligible employees will receive pay for non-worked holidays equal to their regular rate
of pay times the total number of hours which make a regularly scheduled shift. Except
as otherwise noted in this subsection, an employee may not bank a worked holiday.
1. New Year's Day, the first day of January.
2. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day (Human Rights Day), the third Monday of
January.
3. President's Day, the third Monday in February.
4. Memorial Day, the last Monday of May.
5. Juneteenth National Freedom Day, June 19
a. If June 19 is on a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday, the
holiday will be observed on the immediately preceding Monday. If June 19
is on a Saturday or Sunday, the holiday will be observed on the immediately
following Monday.
6. Independence Day, July 4.
7. Pioneer Day, July 24.
8. Labor Day, the first Monday in September.
9. Veteran's Day, November 11.
10. Thanksgiving Day, the fourth Thursday in November.
11. The Friday after Thanksgiving Day
12. Christmas Day, December 25.
13. One personal holiday per calendar year, taken upon request of an employee
and as approved by a supervisor.
14
B. When any holiday listed above falls on a Sunday, the following business day is
considered a holiday. When any holiday listed above falls on a Saturday, the preceding
business day is considered a holiday. In addition to the above, any day may be
designated as a holiday by proclamation of the mayor or the city council.
C. All holiday hours, including personal holidays, must be used in no less than regular
full day or shift increments.
1. A Fire battalion/division chief may be allowed to use a holiday in less than a
full shift increment only when converting from a “support” to “operations” work
schedule results in the creation of a half-shift.
D. No employee will receive more than the equivalent of one workday or a regular
scheduled shift as holiday pay for a single holiday. Employees must either work or be in
an authorized paid leave status a working day before and a working day after the
holiday to qualify for holiday pay.
1. An employee who is off work and in a paid status covered by short-term
disability or parental leave receives regular pay as a benefit and, therefore, is not
entitled to bank a holiday while off work.
E. Police Sergeant, Lieutenant, & Captain Holiday Hours Worked: When a day
designated as a holiday falls on a scheduled workday, a Police sergeant, lieutenant, or
captain may elect to take the day off work, subject to the approval of their supervisor, or
receive their regular wages for such days worked and designate an alternate day off
work to celebrate the holiday. For a Police sergeant whose assignment requires staffing
on either the graveyard shift prior to, or the day and afternoon shift on Thanksgiving
Day or Christmas Day, all hours worked will be compensated at a rate of one-and-one-
half (1 ½) times the employee’s regular base wage rate.
F. Police Sergeant, Lieutenant, & Captain Accrued Holiday Leave Payout: Police
sergeants, lieutenants, and captains who retire or separate from city employment for any
reason shall be compensated for any holiday time accrued and unused during the
preceding 12 months. Employees will not be compensated for any unused holiday time
accrued before the 12 months preceding the employee’s retirement or separation.
1. Any Police sergeant, lieutenant, or captain who is transferred or promoted to
a higher-level position within the department, including Deputy Chief, Assistant
Chief, or Police Chief, or to a position in another city department will be paid out at
their current base pay rate for any holiday time accrued and unused during the
preceding 12 months.
SUBSECTION II - VACATION LEAVE
The city will pay eligible employees their regular salaries during vacation periods earned and
taken in accordance with the following provisions. Except as provided for expressly in either city
policy or this plan, vacation leave hours are ineligible to be cashed out or used to exceed the total
15
number of hours for which an employee is regularly compensated during a work week or a pay
period.
Vacation hours may be used on the first day of the pay period following the period in which the
vacation hours are accrued.
A. Full-Time employees and appointed employees (except for those noted in
paragraphs B and C of this subsection) accrue vacation leave based upon years of city
service as follows:
Years of Hours of Vacation Accrued
City Service Per Bi-Weekly Pay Period
0 to end of year 3 3.73
4 to end of year 6 4.42
7 to end of year 9 4.81
10 to end of year 12 5.54
13 to end of year 15 6.15
16 to end of year 19 6.77
20 or more 7.69
B. Department directors, the mayor’s chief of staff, the mayor’s chief administrative
officer, up to two additional senior positions in the mayor’s office as specified by the
mayor, the executive director of the city council, and justice court judges will accrue
7.69 hours each bi-weekly pay period.
C. Fire battalion chiefs in the Operations division of the Fire department will accrue
vacation leave according to the following schedule:
Years of Accrued Hours of Vacation
City Service Per Pay Period
0 to end of year 3 5.54
4 to end of year 6 6.46
7 to end of year 9 7.38
10 to end of year 12 8.31
16
13 to end of year 14 9.23
15 to end of year 19 10.15
20 or more 11.54
D. For any plan year in which there are 27 pay periods, no vacation leave hours will be
awarded in the 27th pay period.
E. Years of city service are based on the most recent date the person became a full-
time salaried employee.
F. Full-time employees re-hired by the city are eligible to receive prior service credit
for previous full-time city employment and time worked with other public jurisdictions
without a break in service. Prior service credit is applicable for vacation accrual, personal
leave accrual, short-term disability benefits, layoff, and awarding of employee service
awards and service certificates only. Prior service credit does not apply to longevity
pay.
G. Full-time and appointed employees (except those listed in Paragraph B of this
subsection) may accumulate vacations, according to the length of their full-time years
of city Service, up to the following maximum limits:
Up to and including 9 years Up to 30 days/ 15 shifts/ 240 hours
After 9 years Up to 35 days/ 17.5 shifts/ 280 hours
After 14 years Up to 40 days/ 20 shifts/ 320 hours
For purposes of this subsection, "days" means "8-hour" days and “shifts” means
“24-hour” combat shifts.
H. Department directors and those included in Paragraph B of this subsection may
accumulate up to 320 hours of vacation without regard to their years of employment
with the city.
I. Any vacation accrued beyond the allowable maximums, including any Plan A sick
leave hours converted to vacation, will be deemed forfeited unless used before the end
of the pay period in which an employee’s designated longevity date occurs. However,
in the case of an employee’s return from an unpaid military leave of absence, leave
hours may be restored according to requirements under applicable law.
J. Vacation Payout at Termination: An employee separating from employment may not
exhaust more than 80 hours of any combination of accrued vacation, personal leave, or banked
(holiday or vacation) leave prior to their last day of employment. Employees shall be paid at
their base hourly rate for any unused accrued vacation leave time following termination
of employment, including retirement.
17
K. Vacation Allowance: As a recruiting incentive, the mayor or t he city council may
provide a one-time allowance of up to 120 hours of vacation leave.
SUBSECTION III - SICK AND OTHER RELATED LEAVE OR PERSONAL LEAVE
Benefits in this section are for the purpose of income replacement for employees during
absence from work due to illness, accident, or personal reasons. Some of these absences
may qualify under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA). Although the city
requires use of accrued paid leave prior to taking unpaid FMLA leave, employees will be
allowed to reserve up to 80 hours of non-lapsing leave as a contingency for future use by
submitting a written request to Human Resources. Employees are not eligible to earn or
receive leave benefits while on an unpaid leave of absence.
However, employees on an unpaid military leave of absence may be entitled to the
restoration of such leave benefits, as provided by applicable law.
Employees hired on or after November 16, 1997 receive personal leave benefits under Plan
B. All other employees receive personal leave benefits pursuant to the plan they participated
in as of November 15, 1998. Employees hired before November 16, 1997 shall receive
personal leave benefits under Plan B if they elected to do so during any city - established
election period occurring in 1998 or later.
A. Plan “A ”
1. Sick Leave
a. Sick leave is provided for full-time employees under Plan “A” as
insurance against loss of income when an employee is unable to perform
assigned duties because of illness or injury. The mayor may e stablish rules
governing the interfacing of sick leave and workers’ compensation benefits
and avoiding, to the extent allowable by law, duplicative payments.
b. Each full-time employee accrues sick leave at a rate of 4.62 hours per
pay period. For any plan year in which there are 27 pay periods, no sick
leave hours will be awarded in the 27th pay period. Authorized and unused
sick leave may be accumulated from year to year, subject to the limitations
of this plan.
1. Sick Leave Accrual for Fire Battalion Chiefs – Each covered
employee shall be entitled to 15 days of sick leave each calendar year,
except for members of the Operations division who shall be entitled to
7.5 shifts of sick leave each calendar year. The City shall credit a
covered employee’s sick leave account in a lump sum (either 15 days
or7.5 shifts) during the first month of each calendar year. Authorized
and unused sick leave may be accumulated from year to year subject to
the limitations of this plan.
c. Under this Plan “A,” Full-Time employees who have accumulated
18
240 hours of sick leave may choose to convert up to 64 hours of the sick
leave earned and unused during any given year to vacation. Any sick leave
used during the calendar year reduces the allowable conversion by an equal
amount.
1. Sick Leave Conversion for Fire Battalion Chiefs – Fire Battalion
Chiefs who have accumulated 15 shifts (for Operations employees), or
240 hours (for non-Operations employees) may choose to convert a
portion of the year sick leave grant from any given year to vacation, as
follows—
Number of Sick Leave Shifts
Used During Previous Calendar
Year (Operations Only)
Number of Sick Leave Shifts
Available for Conversion
(Operations Only)
No shifts used 5 shifts
One shift used 4 shifts
Two shifts used 3 shifts
Three shifts used 2 shifts
Four shifts used 1 shift
Five or more shifts used No shifts
Number of Sick Leave Shifts
Used During Previous Calendar
Year (Support Only)
Number of Sick Leave Shifts
Available for Conversion
(Support Only)
No days used 9 days
One day used 8 days
Two days used 7 days
Three days used 6 days
Four days used 5 days
Five or more days used 0 days
d. Conversion at the maximum allowable hours will be made unless the
employee elects otherwise. Any election by an employee for no conversion,
or to convert less than the maximum allowable sick leave hours to vacation
time, must be made by notifying the employee’s department timekeeper or
the city payroll administrator, in writing, not later than the second pay period
of the new calendar year (or the November vacation draw for Fire Battalion
Chiefs). Otherwise, the opportunity to waive conversion or elect conversion
other than the maximum allowable amount will be deemed waived for that
calendar year. In no event may sick leave days be converted from other than
the current year's sick leave allocation.
e. Any sick leave hours, properly converted to vacation benefits as
above described, must be taken before any other vacation hours to which the
employee is entitled; however, in no event is an employee, upon the
employee’s separation from employment, entitled to any pay or
compensation for any sick leave converted to vacation. An employee
19
forfeits any sick leave converted to vacation remaining unused at the date of
separation from employment.
f. Sick Leave Benefits Upon Layoff. Employees who are subject to
layoff because of lack of work or lack of funds will be paid at 100% of their
hourly base wage rate as of the date of termination for each accumulated
unused sick leave hour.
2. Hospitalization Leave
a. Hospitalization leave is provided for full-time employees under Plan
“A,” in addition to sick leave authorized hereunder, as insuran ce against loss
of income when an employee is unable to perform assigned duties because of
scheduled surgical procedures, urgent medical treatment, or hospital
inpatient admission.
b. Employees are entitled to 30 days of hospitalization leave each
calendar year. Hospitalization leave does not accumulate from year to year.
Employees may not convert hospitalization leave to vacation or any other
leave, nor may they convert hospitalization leave to any additional benefit at
time of retirement.
c. Employees who are unable to perform their duties during a shift due
to preparations (such as fasting, rest, or ingestion of medicine), for a
scheduled surgical procedure, may report the absence from the affected shift
as hospitalization leave, with the prior approval of their division head or
supervisor.
d. An employee who must receive urgent medical treatment at a
hospital, emergency room, or acute care facility, and who is regularly
scheduled for work or unable to perform their duties during a shift (or work
day) due to urgent medical treatment, may re port the absence from the
affected shift as hospitalization leave. Similarly, an employee who is absent
from work while on approved leave is also allowed to claim hospitalization
leave.
1. An employee who wishes to claim hospitalization leave is responsible
to report the receipt of urgent medical treatment to the employee’s
division head or supervisor as soon as practical.
2. For purposes of use of hospitalization leave, urgent medical
treatment includes at-home care directed by a physician immediately
after the urgent medical treatment and within the affected shift.
e. Employees who, because they are admitted as an inpatient to a
hospital for medical treatment, are unable to perform their duties, may report
the absence from duty while in the hospital as hospitalization leave.
20
f. Medical treatment consisting exclusively or primarily of post -injury
rehabilitation or therapy treatment, whether conducted in a hospital or other
medical facility, shall not be counted as hospitalization leave.
g. An employee requesting hospitalization leave under this section may
be required to provide verification of treatment or care from a competent
medical practitioner.
3. Dependent Leave
a. Under Plan “A,” dependent leave may be requested by a full-time
employee for the following reasons:
1. Becoming a parent through birth or adoption of a child.
2. Placement of a foster child in the employee’s home.
3. Due to the care of the employee’s child, spouse, spouse’s child, adult
designee, adult designee’s unmarried child under age 26, or parent with
a serious health condition.
b. Under Plan “A,” dependent leave may also be requested by a full-
time employee to care for an employee’s child, spouse, spouse’s child, adult
designee, an adult designee’s unmarried child under age 26, or a parent who
is ill or injured but who does not have a serious health condition.
c. The following provisions apply to the use of dependent leave by a
full- time employee:
1. Dependent leave may be granted with pay on a straight time basis.
2. If an employee has available unused sick leave, sick leave may be
used as dependent leave.
3. An employee is required to give notice of the need to take dependent
leave, including the expected duration of leave, to his or her supervisor
as soon as possible.
4. Upon request of a supervisor, an employee will be required to
provide a copy of a birth certificate or evidence of child placement for
adoption, or a letter from the attending physician in the event of
hospitalization, injury, or illness of a child, spouse, spouse’s child, adult
designee, adult designee’s child, or parent within five calendar days
following a return from leave.
5. An employee’s sick leave shall be reduced by the number of hours
21
taken by an employee as dependent leave.
4. Career Incentive Leave, Plan “A”
Full-Time employees, who have been in continuous full-time employment with the
city for more than 20 years, and who have accumulated to their credit 1500 or more
sick leave hours, may make a one-time election to convert up to 160 hours of sick
leave into 80 hours of paid Career Incentive Leave . Career Incentive Leave must
be taken prior to retirement. Sick leave hours converted to Career Incentive Leave
will not be eligible for a cash payout upon termination or retirement even though
the employee has unused Career Incentive Leave hours available. This leave can
be used for any reason. Requests for Career Incentive Leave must be submitted in
writing to the appropriate department director and be approved subject to the
department’s business needs (e.g., work schedules and workloads).
5. Retirement Benefit, Plan “A”
a. Employees who meet the eligibility requirements of the Utah State
Retirement System and who retire from the city will be paid at their base
hourly rate for 50% of their accumulated sick leave hours balance based on
the schedule below:
Retirement Month 50% sick leave will be:
January 1st – June 30th Contributed to 501(c)9 Health Reimbursement
Account Plan
(premium-only account) July 1st – December 31st Cash to retiree
B. Plan “B”
1. . Under Plan “B,” paid personal leave is provided for employees as insurance
against loss of income when an employee needs to be absent from work because of
illness or injury, to care for a dependent, or for any other emergency or personal
reason. Each eligible employee will receive personal leave on November 1st of each
calendar year. P e r s o n a l l e a v e h o u r s a r e i n e l i g i b l e t o b e
u s e d t o e x c e e d t h e t o t a l n u m b e r o f w o r k h o u r s f o r
w h i c h a n e m p l o y e e i s r e g u l a r l y c o m p e n s a t e d d u r i n g a
w o r k w e e k o r a p a y p e r i o d. Where the leave is not related to the
employee’s own illness or disability—or an event that qualifies under the FMLA—
a personal leave request is subject to supervisory approval based on the operational
requirements of the city and any policies regarding the use of such leave adopted by
the department in which the employee works. Accrued personal leave hours may be
used on the same day the hours are received.
2. Each full-time employee under Plan “B” is awarded personal leave hours based
on the following schedule:
22
Months of
Consecutive Hours of
City Service Personal Leave
Less than 6 40
Less than 24 60
24 or more 80
Employees hired during the plan year are provided paid personal leave on a pro-
rated basis.
3. Not later than October 15th of each calendar year, employees covered by Plan
“B” may elect, by notifying their department timekeeper or the city payroll
administrator in writing, to:
a. Convert any unused personal leave hours availab le as of October 31st
to a lump sum payment equal to the following: For each converted hour, the
employee will be paid 50 percent of the employee’s regular hourly base
wage rate (not including acting pay) in effect on the date of conversion. In
no event will total pay hereunder exceed 40 hours of pay (80 hours at 50%);
or
b. Carryover to the next calendar year up to 80 unused personal leave
hours; or
c. Convert a portion of unused personal leave hours, to a lump sum
payment as provided in subparagraph (3)(a), above, and carry over a portion
as provided in subparagraph (3)(b), above.
4. Maximum Accrual. A maximum of 80 hours of personal leave may be carried
over to the next plan year. Any personal leave hours unused at the end of the plan
year in excess of 80 will be converted to a lump sum payment as provided in
subparagraph 3(a) above.
5. Termination Benefits. An employee separating from employment may not exhaust
more than 80 hours of any combination of accrued vacation, personal leave, or banked
(holiday or vacation) leave prior to their last day of employment. At termination of
employment for any reason, accumulated unused personal leave hours, minus any
adjustment necessary after calculating the “prorated amount,” shall be paid to the
employee at 50 percent of the regular hourly base wage rate (not including acting
pay) on the date of termination for each unused hour. For purposes of this
paragraph, “prorated amount” shall mean the amount of personal leave credited at
the beginning of the plan year, multiplied by the ratio of the number of pay periods
worked in the plan year (rounded to the end of the pay period which includes the
separation date) to 26 pay periods. If the employee, at the time of separation, has
23
used personal leave in excess of the prorated amount, the value of the excess
amount shall be reimbursed to the city and may be deducted f rom the employee’s
paycheck.
6. Conditions on Use of Personal Leave include:
a. Minimum use of personal leave, with supervisory approval, must be
in no less than quarter-hour increments.
b. Except in unforeseen circumstances, such as emergencies or the
employee’s inability to work due to illness or accident or an unforeseen
FMLA-qualifying event, an employee must provide their supervisor with
prior notice to allow time for the supervisor to make arrangements necessary
to cover the employee’s work.
c. For leave due to unforeseen circumstances, the employee must give
their supervisor as much prior notice as possible.
d. Except as provided for expressly in either city policy or this plan,
personal leave hours are ineligible to be cashed out or used to exceed the
total number of hours for which an employee is regularly compensated
during a work week or a pay period.
7. Career Enhancement Leave, Plan “B”: A full-time employee covered under
this Plan “B” is eligible, after 15 years of full-time service with the city, to be
selected to receive up to two weeks of career enhancement leave. This one -time
leave benefit could be used for formal training, informal course of study, job-related
travel, internship, mentoring or other activity that could be of benefit to the city and
the employee’s career development. Selected employees will receive their full
regular salary during the leave. Request for this leave must be submitted in writing
to the appropriate department head, stating the purpose of the request and how the
leave is intended to benefit the city. The request must be approved by the
department head and by the Human Resources director (who will review the request
to ensure compliance with these guidelines).
8. Retirement/Layoff (RL) Benefit, Plan “B”
a. Full-Time employees currently covered under Plan “B” who were
hired before November 16, 1997, and who elected to be covered under Plan
“B,” shall have a retirement/layoff (RL) account equal to sixty percent of
their accumulated unused sick leave hours available on November 16,
1997, minus any hours withdrawn from that account since it was established.
b. Full-Time employees who were hired before November 16, 1997 and
who elected in 1998 to be covered under Plan “B,” shall have a
retirement/layoff (RL) account equal to fifty percent of their accumulated
unused sick leave hours available on November 14, 1998, minus any hours
withdrawn after the account is established.
24
c. Full-Time employees who were hired before November 16, 1997 and
who elected in 2007 or later during any period designated by the city to be
covered under Plan “B,” shall have a retirement /layoff (RL) account equal
to forty percent of their accumulated unused sick leave hours available on
the date that Plan B participation began, minus any hours withdrawn after
the account is established.
d. Payment of the RL Account.
1. All hours in an employee’s RL account shall be payable upon
retirement or as a result of layoff. In the case of layoff, 100% of R/L
hours shall be paid to the employee according to the employee’s base
hourly rate of pay on date of layoff. Any employee who quits, resigns, is
separated, or is terminated for cause is not eligible to receive payment
for RL account hours.
2. In cases of retirement, an eligible employee shall be paid at their base
hourly rate for 100% of their RL account balance based on the schedule
below:
Retirement Month 100% RL hours will be:
January 1st – June 30th Contributed to 501(c)9 Health Retirement
Account Plan
(premium-only account) July 1st – December 31st Cash to retiree
e. Hours may be withdrawn from the RL account to cover an
employee’s absence from work due to illness or injury, need to care for a
dependent, any emergency or to supplement Workers’ Compensation
benefits after all Personal Leave hours are exhausted. RL account hours,
when added to the employee’s workers’ compensation benefit, may not
exceed the employee’s regular net salary.
9. Short-Term Disability Insurance, Plan “B”: Protection against loss of income
when an employee is absent from work due to short -term disability shall be
provided to full-time employees covered under Plan “B” through short-term
disability insurance (SDI). There shall be no cost to the employee for SDI. SDI
shall be administered in accordance with the terms determined by the city.
SUBSECTION IV - PARENTAL LEAVE
A. Full-time employees who become parents through birth, adoption, or foster care
may take up to six consecutive weeks of paid parental leave to care for and bond with
the child. An employee may be allowed to take parental leave up to one year from the
date of a child’s birth or, in the case of adoption or foster care, the date a child is placed
in the employee’s home. Parental leave may be taken during a new employee’s
25
probationary period. The probationary period will be extended by an amount of time
equivalent to the parental leave taken.
B. Parental leave will run concurrently (during the same period of time) with FMLA
and SDI (if applicable). Parental leave is limited to six weeks per twelve-month period.
For employees approved for short-term disability, parental leave will make up the
difference between 100% pay and 66 2/3% pay (if applicable) for up to six weeks.
SUBSECTION V - BEREAVEMENT LEAVE
A. An employee who suffers the loss of an immediate family member including a(n):
current spouse, domestic partner, or adult designee; child, mother, father, brother, sister;
current father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law,
sister-in-law; grandparent; current step-grandfather, step-grandmother; grandchild, or
current step grandchild, stepchild, stepmoth er, stepfather, stepbrother or stepsister,
grandfather-in-law, grandmother-in-law; or, domestic partner’s or adult designee’s
relative as if the domestic partner or adult designee were the employee’s spouse is
eligible to be released from work for bereavement, including attendance at a funeral,
memorial service, or related event(s).
B. In the event of death of an immediate family member, the city will provide an
employee with up to five working days of paid leave for bereavement, including
attendance at a funeral, memorial service, or related event(s). The employee will be
permitted one additional day of bereavement leave if the employee attends a funeral,
memorial service or equivalent event that is held more than 150 miles from Salt Lake
City and the day following the memorial service or equivalent event is a regular
working shift.
C. In the event of death of a first-line extended relative of an employee, or of an
employee’s spouse, domestic partner, or adult designee’s relative as if the adult
designee were the employee’s spouse not covered in paragraph A above (such as an
uncle, aunt or cousin), the city will provide an employee with up to one work shift for
bereavement, including attendance at a funeral, memorial service, or related event(s).
The employee will be permitted one additional day of bereavement leave if the
employee attends a funeral, memorial service or equivalent event that is held more than
150 miles from S alt Lake City and the day following the memorial service or equivalent
event is a regular working shift.
D. In the event of death of a friend, an employee may be allowed to use vacation or
personal leave for time off to attend the funeral or memorial service, as approved by an
immediate supervisor.
E. In the event of death of any covered family member while an employee is on
vacation leave, an employee’s absence may be extended and authorized as bereavement
leave.
26
F. In the event of a miscarriage or stillbirth, the employee, employee’s spouse or
partner, or employee to be an adoptive parent, the city will provide an employee with
up to three working days of paid leave for bereavement.
SUBSECTION VI - MILITARY LEAVE
A. Leave of absence for employees who enter uniformed service. An employee who
enters the uniformed services of the United States, including the United States Army,
United States Navy, United States Marine Corps, United States Air Force,
commissioned Corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, United
States Coast Guard, or the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service, is entitled
to be absent from his or her duties and servic e from the city, without pay, as required by
applicable l law. Leave will be granted in accordance with the Uniformed Services
Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA).
B. Leave while on duty with the armed forces or Utah National Guard. An employee
who is or who becomes a member of the reserves of the federal armed forces, including
the United States Army, United States Navy, United States Marine Corps, United States
Air Force, and the United States Coast Guard, or an y unit of the Utah National Guard, is
allowed military leave for up to 15 working days per calendar year for time spent on
active or reserve duty. Military leave may be in addition to vacation leave and need not
be consecutive days of service. To be covered, an employee must provide
documentation demonstrating a duty requirement.
SUBSECTION VII - JURY LEAVE & COURT APPEARANCES
A. Jury Leave: An employee will be released from duty with full pay when, in
obedience to a subpoena or direction by proper authority, the employee is required to
either serve on a jury or appear as a witness for the United States, the state of Utah, or
other political subdivision.
1. Employees are entitled to retain statutory fees paid for service in a federal court,
state court, or city/county justice court.
2. On any day that an employee is required to report for service and is thereafter
excused from such service during his or her regular worki ng hours from the city, he
or she must forthwith return to and carry on his or her regular city employment.
Employees who fail to return to work after being excused from service for the day
are subject to discipline.
B. Court Appearances. A Police sergeant is eligible to receive compensation as a
witness subpoenaed by the city, the State of Utah, or the United States for a court or
administrative proceeding appearance as follows:
1. Appearances in court or administrative proceeding made while on-duty will be
compensated as normal hours worked.
27
2. In the event an appearance extends beyond the end of an employee's regularly
scheduled shift, time will be counted as normal work time for the purpose of
computing an employee's overtime compensation.
3. Employees are entitled to retain statutory witness fees paid for service in a
federal court, state court, or city/county justice court.
4. Appearances made while off-duty will be compensated as follows:
(a) The city will pay employees for two hours of preparation time plus
actual time spent in court or in an administrative hearing at one and one-half
times their regular hourly rate. Lunch periods granted are not considered
compensable time. Compensation for additional preparation time for any
subsequent appearance during the same day is allowed only when there is at
least two hours between the employee’s release time from a prior court or
administ rative proceeding and the start of the other.
(b) If the time spent in court or administrative proceeding extends into the
beginning of the employee's regularly scheduled work shift, time spent in
court or in administrative proceeding will be deemed ended at the time such
shift is scheduled to begin.
5. An employee is required to provide a copy of the subpoena, including the
beginning time and time released from the court or administrative hearing, with
initials of the prosecuting or another court representative within seven working days
following the appearance.
6. Any employee failing to appear in compliance with the terms of a formal notice
or subpoena may be subject to disciplinary action.
SUBSECTION VIII - INJURY LEAVE (SWORN POLICE AND FIRE EMPLOYEES ONLY)
The city has established rules governing the administration of an injury leave program for sworn
public safety personnel under the following qualifications and restrictions:
A. The disability must have resulted from an injury arising out of the discharge of
official duties or while exercising some form of necessary job-related activity as
determined by the city;
B. The employee must be unable to return to work due to the injury, as verified by a
medical provider acceptable to the city;
C. The leave benefit may not exceed the value of the employee's net sala ry during the
period of absence due to the injury, less all amounts paid or credited to the employee as
workers’ compensation, Social Security, long-term disability or retirement benefits, or
any form of governmental relief whatsoever;
D. The value of benefits provided to employees under this injury leave program may
28
not exceed the total of $5,000 per employee per injury, unless approved in writing by
the employee’s department head after receiving an acceptable treatment plan and
consulting with the city’s risk manager;
E. The city's risk manager is principally responsible for the review of injury leave
claims, except that appeals from the decision of the city’s risk manager may be
reviewed by the Human Resources director, who may make recommendations to the
mayor for final decisions;
F. If an employee is eligible for workers’ compensation as provided by law and is not
receiving injury leave pursuant to this provision, an employee may elect to use either
accumulated sick leave or hours from the RL account, if applicable, and authorized
vacation time to supplement workers’ compensation. The total value of leave hours or
hours from an RL account combined with a workers’ compensation benefit may not
exceed an employee's regular net salary.
SUBSECTION IX - ADDITIONAL LEAVES OF ABSENCE
Additional leaves of absence may be requested in writing and granted as identified in policy
to an employee at the discretion of a department director.
SUBSECTION X - EMERGENCY LEAVE
The city may provide additional paid leave to employees if: i) the mayor has declared a
local emergency; and ii) the mayor and/or city council authorize and approve the use of
available funds for such purposes during the period of local emergency.
Emergency leave may also be provided as a form of income replacement for part -time
(hourly) and/or seasonal employees whose work hours are either red uced or discontinued
temporarily, so long as there is an expectation they will return to work after the emergency
period is ended.
29
APPENDIX A - SALT LAKE CITY COR PORATION
GENERAL EMPLOYEE PAY PLAN (GEPP)
Effective June 25. 2023
GRADE MINIMUM CITY MARKET MAXIMUM
SEAX/HRLY $12.46 $70.00
10 $13.23 $17.28 $21.33
11 $13.87 $18.15 $22.42
12 $14.57 $19.21 $23.85
13 $15.31 $20.02 $24.72
14 $16.07 $20.94 $25.81
15 $16.86 $22.16 $27.45
16 $17.70 $23.45 $29.20
17 $18.60 $24.41 $30.21
18 $19.53 $25.94 $32.34
19 $20.50 $27.08 $33.66
20 $21.54 $28.24 $34.93
21 $21.72 $29.63 $37.54
22 $22.84 $31.15 $39.45
23 $23.97 $32.71 $41.44
24 $25.17 $34.33 $43.48
25 $26.42 $36.03 $45.64
26 $27.75 $37.85 $47.94
27 $29.12 $39.75 $50.38
28 $30.57 $41.76 $52.94
29 $32.12 $43.85 $55.58
30 $33.72 $46.04 $58.36
31 $35.41 $48.35 $61.29
32 $37.17 $50.75 $64.33
33 $39.04 $53.31 $67.57
34 $40.99 $55.97 $70.95
35 $43.03 $58.77 $74.50
36 $45.18 $61.71 $78.23
37 $47.45 $64.79 $82.12
38 $49.82 $68.03 $86.23
39 $52.32 $109.88
40 $54.93 $115.35
41 $57.68 $187.12
30
GRADE MINIMUM CITY MARKET MAXIMUM
SEAX/HRLY $25,924.08 $83,494.32
10 $27,518.40 $35,948.64 $44,357.04
11 $28,850.64 $37,739.52 $46,628.40
12 $30,313.92 $39,945.36 $49,598.64
13 $31,842.72 $41,627.04 $51,411.36
14 $33,415.20 $43,548.96 $53,682.72
15 $35,075.04 $46,082.40 $57,089.76
16 $36,822.24 $48,768.72 $60,737.04
17 $38,678.64 $50,756.16 $62,833.68
18 $40,622.40 $53,944.80 $67,267.20
19 $42,631.68 $56,325.36 $70,019.04
20 $44,793.84 $58,727.76 $72,661.68
21 $45,186.96 $61,632.48 $78,078.00
22 $47,502.00 $64,777.44 $82,052.88
23 $49,860.72 $68,031.60 $86,202.48
24 $52,350.48 $71,394.96 $90,439.44
25 $54,949.44 $74,954.88 $94,938.48
26 $57,723.12 $78,711.36 $99,721.44
27 $60,562.32 $82,686.24 $104,788.32
28 $63,576.24 $86,857.68 $110,117.28
29 $66,808.56 $91,203.84 $115,599.12
30 $70,128.24 $95,768.40 $121,386.72
31 $73,644.48 $100,573.20 $127,480.08
32 $77,313.60 $105,574.56 $133,813.68
33 $81,201.12 $110,881.68 $140,540.40
34 $85,263.36 $116,429.04 $147,572.88
35 $89,500.32 $122,216.64 $154,954.80
36 $93,977.52 $128,353.68 $162,708.00
37 $98,694.96 $134,752.80 $170,810.64
38 $103,630.80 $141,479.52 $179,350.08
39 $108,828.72 $228,555.60
40 $114,245.04 $239,934.24
41 $119,967.12 $389,210.64
Annual Rates
31
APPENDIX B – APPOINTED EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT
Effective June 25, 2023
911 BUREAU Job Title Grade
911 DISPATCH DIRECTOR 041X
911 COMMUNICATIONS DEPUTY DIRECTOR 032X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
AIRPORT
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF AIRPORTS 041X
CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, AIRPORT 040X
DIRECTOR AIRPORT DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 039X
DIRECTOR AIRPORT MAINTENANCE 039X
DIRECTOR FINANCE/ACCOUNTING AIRPORT 039X
DIRECTOR OF AIRPORT ADMINISTRATION/COMMERCIAL SERVICES 039X
DIRECTOR OF AIRPORT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 039X
DIRECTOR OF AIRPORT PLANNING & CAPITAL PROJECTS 039X
DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS - AIRPORT 039X
DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONAL READINESS & TRANSITION 039X
DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS & MARKETING 038X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY ATTORNEY 041X
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY 040X
CITY RECORDER 035X
CITY COUNCIL
COUNCIL MEMBER-ELECT N/A*
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL OFFICE 041X
COUNCIL LEGAL DIRECTOR 039X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR - CITY COUNCIL 039X
ASSOCIATE DEPUTY DIRECTOR COUNCIL 037X
LEGISLATIVE & POLICY MANAGER 037X
SENIOR ADVISOR CITY COUNCIL 037X
SENIOR PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 033X
COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL 031X
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST III 031X
COMMUNITY FACILITATOR 031X
OPERATIONS MANAGER & MENTOR – CITY COUNCIL 031X
PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 031X
POLICY ANALYST/PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 028X
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST II 028X
CONSTITUENT LIAISON/POLICY ANALYST 027X
CONSTITUENT LIAISON 026X
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST I 026X
ASSISTANT TO THE COUNCIL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 025X
COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT/AGENDA 024X
COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 021X
COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 041X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 037X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY SERVICES 037X
32
DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (ENGINEER) 037X
PLANNING DIRECTOR 037X
BUILDING OFFICIAL 035X
DIRECTOR OF HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 035X
DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (PLANNER) 035X
YOUTH & FAMILY DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 041X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 037X
ARTS DIVISION DIRECTOR 033X
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT DIVISION DIRECTOR 033X
FINANCE
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 041X
CITY TREASURER 039X
DEPUTY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 039X
CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER 036X
FIRE
FIRE CHIEF 041X
DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF 037X
ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF 035X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
HUMAN RESOURCES
CHIEF HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICER 041X
DEPUTY CHIEF HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICER 037X
CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARD INVESTIGATOR 035X
TRANSITION CHIEF OF STAFF 041X*
TRANSITION COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR 039X*
TRANSITION EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X*
INFORMATION MGT SERVICES
CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 041X
CHIEF INNOVATIONS OFFICER 039X
DEPUTY CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 039X
JUSTICE COURTS
JUSTICE COURT JUDGE 038X
JUSTICE COURT ADMINISTRATOR 037X
MAYOR
CHIEF OF STAFF 041X
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 041X
COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR 039X
DEPUTY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 039X
DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF 039X
SENIOR ADVISOR 039X
COMMUNICATIONS DEPUTY DIRECTOR 030X
POLICY ADVISOR 029X
REP COMMISSION POLICY ADVISOR 029X
COMMUNITY LIAISON 026X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
OFFICE MANAGER - MAYOR'S OFFICE 024X
COMMUNITY OUTREACH - EQUITY & SPECIAL PROJECTS
COORDINATOR 024X
33
COMMUNICATION AND CONTENT MANAGER - MAYOR'S OFFICE 021X
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 019X
CONSUMER PROTECTION ANALYST 016X
POLICE
CHIEF OF POLICE 041X
ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE 039X
DEPUTY CHIEF POLICE 037X
ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR - COMMUNICATIONS 037X
ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR - INTERNAL AFFAIRS 037X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
PUBLIC LANDS
PUBLIC LANDS DIRECTOR 041X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR, PUBLIC LANDS 037X
GOLF DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
PARKS DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
URBAN FORESTRY DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
PUBLIC SERVICES
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES 041X
CITY ENGINEER 039X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS 038X
SAFETY & SECURITY DIRECTOR 037X
FACILITIES DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
FLEET DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
STREETS DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
COMPLIANCE DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
PUBLIC UTILITIES
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC UTILITIES 041X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC UTILITIES 039X
FINANCE ADMINISTRATOR PUBLIC UTILITIES 039X
CHIEF ENGINEER - PUBLIC UTILITIES 037X
WATER QUALITY & TREATMENT ADMINSTRATOR 037X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
DIRECTOR, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 041X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 037X
SUSTAINABILITY
SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTOR 041X
SUSTAINABILITY DEPUTY DIRECTOR 037X
WASTE & RECYCLING DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
Except for a change in job title or reassignment to a lower pay level, no appointed position on this pay
plan may be added, removed or modified without approval of the City Council.
* Compensation for transitional positions, including city council member -elect, is set as provided under Chapter 2.03.030 of the
Salt Lake City Code. Benefits for transitional employees are equivalent to those provided to full-time employees. Except for
leave time, benefits for city council members-elect are also equivalent to those provided to full-time employees.
34
APPENDIX C – ELECTED OFFICIALS SALARY SCHEDULE
Annual Salaries
Effective June 25, 2023
Mayor $168,067
Council Members $42,017
Except for leave time, benefits for the mayor and city council members are equivalent to those provided to
full-time employees.
35
APPENDIX D- UTAH STATE RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS FY 2023-2024
Tier 1 Defined Benefit System
System Employee
Contribution Employer Contribution Total
Public Employees Contributory System 6.0% 13.96% 19.96%
Public Employees Noncontributory System 0 17.97% 17.97%
Public Safety Noncontributory System 0 46.71% 46.71%
Firefighters Retirement System 0 23.05% 23.05%
Tier 1 Post Retired
System
Post Retired Employment
After 6/30/10 – NO 401(k)
Amortization of UAAL*
Post Retired Employment Before
7/1/2010
Optional 401(k)
Public Employees Noncontributory System 6.11%
11.86%
Public Safety Noncontributory System 24.20% 22.51%
Firefighters Retirement System 0% n/a
Tier 2 Defined Benefit Hybrid System
Employee
Contribution
Employer
Contribution 401(k) Total
Public Employees Noncontributory System 0% 16.01% 0.18% 16.19%
Public Safety Noncontributory System
(for entry and two year pay steps only) 2.59% (city paid) 38.28% 6.00% 46.87%
Public Safety Noncontributory System
(for pay steps year four or more) 2.59% (city paid) 38.28% 0% 40.87%
Firefighters Retirement System 2.59% (city paid) 14.08% 0% 16.67%
Tier 2 Defined Contribution Only
Employee
Contribution
Employer
Contribution 401(k) Total
Public Employees Noncontributory System 0% 6.19% 10.00% 16.19%
Public Safety Noncontributory System
(for entry and two year pay steps only) 0% 24.28% 22.27% 46.55%
Public Safety Noncontributory System
(for pay steps year four or more) 0% 24.28% 14.00% 38.28%
Firefighters Retirement System 0% 0.08% 14.00% 14.08%
36
Executive Non-Legislative
Position Employer Contribution
Public Employees Noncontributory System
Department Heads, Mayor,
Mayor’s Chief of Staff, Chief
Administrative Officer, Up to Two
Additional Senior Executives in the
Mayor’s Office, Executive Director
for City Council
Normal contribution into Utah Retirement
System (URS)with 3% into 401(k)
– OR –
If Tier 1 and exempt from system or Tier II and
exempt from vesting, 401k contribution equal to
the applicable URS system contribution plus 3%
Public Safety Noncontributory System Department Head Same as above
Firefighters Retirement System Department Head Same as above
Council Members Elected with prior service in the Utah Retirement System
(Tier 1 Defined
Benefit)
System Employee
Contribution Employer Contribution Total
Public Employees Noncontributory System 0 17.97% 17.97%
If exempt… 0 10% base salary to 401(k) 10%
Council Members Elected After July 1, 2011 with no prior service in the Utah Retirement
System (may exempt from vesting)
Tier 2 Defined Contribution
Only
Employer 401K Total
6.19% 10% 16.19%
Tier 2 Defined Benefit Hybrid
System
Employer 401K Total
16.01% 0.18% 16.19%
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET
PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
MARY BETH THOMPSON
Chief Financial Officer
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
___________________________________ Date Received: _______________
Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date sent to Council: __________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: August 31, 2023
Darin Mano, Chair
FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT: FY24 Budget Amendment #2
SPONSOR: NA
STAFF CONTACT: Lisa Hunt (801) 535-7926 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 FY24 adopted budget.
BUDGET IMPACT:
REVENUE EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND $0.00 $187,250.00
CIP FUND $25,485,893.25 $25,485,893.25
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND $62,416.00 $65,472.00
IMS FUND $6,000.00 $6,000.00
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FUND $0.00 $664,293.70
MISCELLANEOUS GRANTS FUND $16,131,437.00 $16,131,437.00
TOTAL $41,685,746.25 $42,540,345.95
rachel otto (Aug 31, 2023 10:55 MDT)
Alejandro Sanchez (Aug 31, 2023 11:02 MDT)
08/31/2023
08/31/2023
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Revenue for FY24 Budget Adjustments
The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for FY24.
Because of this budget amendment’s timing, there are no updates for Y24 projections available.
The City has begun closing out the FY23 and will provide updates to Council as the audit
progresses.
Revenue FY23-FY24 Annual Budget FY23-24 Amended Budget Revised Forecast
Amended Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Revenue FY22-FY23 Annual Budget FY22-FY23 Amended Budget Revised Forecast Amended Variance
Property Taxes 129,847,140 129,847,140 129,847,140 -
Sale and Use Taxes 117,129,000 117,129,000 117,129,000 -
Franchise Taxes 12,348,127 12,348,127 12,348,127 -
Payment in Lieu of Taxes 1,905,573 1,905,573 1,905,573 -
Total Taxes 261,229,840 261,229,840 261,229,840 -
Revenue FY22-FY23 Annual Budget FY22-FY23 Amended Budget Revised Forecast Amended Variance
Licenses and Permits 40,878,104 40,878,104 40,878,104 -
Intergovernmental Revenue 5,134,621 5,134,621 5,134,621 -
Interest Income 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000 -
Fines 4,063,548 4,063,548 4,063,548 -
Parking Meter Collections 2,801,089 2,801,089 2,801,089 -
Charges, Fees, and Rentals 4,881,922 4,881,922 4,881,922 -
Miscellaneous Revenue 3,502,359 3,502,359 3,502,359 -
Interfund Reimbursement 26,131,213 26,131,213 26,131,213 -
Transfers 9,938,944 9,938,944 9,938,944 -
Total W/O Special Tax 366,561,640 366,561,640 366,561,640 -
ObjectCodeDescription FY22-23 Annual Budget FY22-23 Amended Budget Revised Forecast Amended Variance
Additional Sales Tax (1/2%)49,084,479 49,084,479 49,084,479 -
Total General Fund 415,646,119 415,646,119 415,646,119 -
Fund balance has been updated to include proposed changes for BA#2.
Based on those projections adjusted fund balance is projected to be at 14.09%.
FOF GF Only TOTAL FOF GF Only TOTAL
Beginning Fund Balance 18,395,660 141,728,022 160,123,682 13,132,752 97,874,345 111,007,097
Budgeted Change in Fund Balance (2,100,608) (20,736,262) (22,836,870) (3,657,641) (29,211,158) (32,868,799)
Prior Year Encumbrances (3,162,300) (17,260,909) (20,423,209) (1,879,654) (10,259,789) (12,139,443)
Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 13,132,752 103,730,851 116,863,603 7,595,457 58,403,398 65,998,855
Beginning Fund Balance Percent 29.60%27.04%27.30%14.51%14.89%14.85%
Year End CAFR Adjustments
Revenue Changes - - - - - -
Expense Changes (Prepaids, Receivable, Etc.) (2,257,746) (2,257,746) (2,257,746) (2,257,746)
Fund Balance w/ CAFR Changes 13,132,752 101,473,105 114,605,857 7,595,457 56,145,652 63,741,109
Final Fund Balance Percent 29.60%26.45%26.78%14.51%14.32%14.34%
Budget Amendment Use of Fund Balance
BA#1 Revenue Adjustment - (475,000) (475,000) - (754,483) (754,483)
BA#1 Expense Adjustment - - - 204,200 204,200
BA#2 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - (754,483)
BA#2 Expense Adjustment - - - - 187,250 187,250
BA#3 Revenue Adjustment - 6,000,000 6,000,000 - - -
BA#3 Expense Adjustment - (6,538,000) (6,538,000) - -
BA#4 Revenue Adjustment - 194,600 194,600 - - -
BA#4 Expense Adjustment - (7,584,328) (7,584,328) - - -
BA#5 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#5 Expense Adjustment - (5,940,349) (5,940,349) - - -
BA#6 Revenue Adjustment - 19,120,198 19,120,198 - - -
BA#6 Expense Adjustment - (11,719,731) (12,219,731) - - -
BA#7 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - -
BA#7 Expense Adjustment - - - - - -
Change in Revenue - - - - - -
Change in Expense
Fund Balance Budgeted Increase - - - - - -
- - Adjusted Fund Balance 13,132,752 94,530,495 107,163,247 7,595,457 55,782,619 62,623,593
Adjusted Fund Balance Percent 29.60%24.64%25.04%14.51%14.22%14.09%
Projected Revenue 44,364,490 383,650,846 428,015,336 52,338,120 392,166,803 444,504,923
FY2024 BudgetFY2023 Budget Projected
Salt Lake City
General Fund
TOTAL
Fund Balance Projections
The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $41,685,746.25 in revenue and
$42,540,345.95 in expenses. The amendment proposes changes in six funds, with nine increases
in FTEs. The proposal includes 26 initiatives for Council review.
Among the amendments is a proposed ordinance change that would amend the FY 2023-2024
Annual Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees. These changes will impact the
Department of Public Services’ Snowfighter and the new Safety & Security Director’s pay
specifically and will make changes to the Justice Court Judges salaries as well. The remainder of
the changes will have impacts generally throughout the City. Further details on the changes are
contained in the amendment documents.
A summary spreadsheet outlining proposed budget changes is attached. The Administration
requests this document be modified based on the decisions of the Council.
The budget amendment is separated in eight different categories:
A. New Budget Items
B. Grants for Existing Staff Resources
C. Grants for New Staff Resources
D. Housekeeping Items
E. Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
F. Donations
G. Council Consent Agenda Grant Awards
I. Council Added Items
PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. ______ of 2023
(Second amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including
the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2023-2024)
An Ordinance Amending Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 29 of 2023 which adopted the
Final Budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2023, and Ending
June 30, 2024.
In June of 2023, 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,
2023, and ending June 30, 2024, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-118 of the
Utah Code.
The City’s Budget Director, acting as the City’s Budget Officer, prepared and filed with
the City Recorder proposed amendments to said duly adopted budget, including the amendments
to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate any staffing changes specifically
stated herein, copies of which are attached hereto, for consideration by the City Council and
inspection by the public.
All conditions precedent to amend said budget, including the employment staffing
document as provided above, have been accomplished.
Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the final budget of
Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized
by Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 29 of 2023.
SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including any
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 any
amendments to the employment staffing document described above, for the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128
of the Utah Code.
SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is
authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including any
amendments to the employment staffing document, in the office of said Budget Officer and in
the office of the City Recorder which amendments shall be available for public inspection.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of __________, 2023.
________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________
Mayor’s Action: ____ Approved ____ Vetoed
_________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. _________ of 2023.
Published: ___________________.
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
___ _______
Jaysen Oldroyd
Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 Homeless General Fund Reallocation Cost Share for
State Homeless Mitigation Grant GF - (44,620.00)Ongoing -
1 Homeless General Fund Reallocation Cost Share for
State Homeless Mitigation Grant GF - 44,620.00 Ongoing 1.00
2 Treasury ERAP 2 Additional Allocations Misc Grants 2,339,009.00 2,339,009.00 One-time -
3 Liberty Park Basketball Court Utah Jazz Donation CIP 100,000.00 100,000.00 One-time -
4 Scope Change for Miller Park Trail Access
Improvements & Historic Structures Preservation CIP - - One-time -
5 Create a Public Lands Planning & Design Division GF - (543,144.00)Ongoing (4.00)
5 Create a Public Lands Planning & Design Division GF - 543,144.00 Ongoing 4.00
6 Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract - Senior
Community Programs Manager GF - (113,798.00)Ongoing -
6 Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract - Senior
Community Programs Manager GF - 110,798.00 Ongoing 1.00
6 Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract - Senior
Community Programs Manager GF - 3,000.00 One-time -
6 Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract - Senior
Community Programs Manager IMS 3,000.00 3,000.00 One-time -
7 Economic Development Project Manager Position GF - 122,000.00 Ongoing 1.00
7 Economic Development Project Manager Position GF - 3,000.00 One-time -
7 Economic Development Project Manager Position IMS 3,000.00 3,000.00 One-time -
8 SAA Funds to the Downtown Alliance Spec Assessment - 664,293.70 One-time -
9 Know your Neighbor Program Expenses GF - 6,500.00 One-time -
10 Love Your Block Program Expenses GF - 55,750.00 One-time -
11
Proposed Ordinance Amending the FY z2023-2024
Annual Compensation Plan for Non-Represented
Employees
NA - - - - Ongoing -
1 Emergency Demolition Fund Reset Special Rev 62,416.00 65,472.00 One-time -
2 300 N Pedestrian Bridge - Funding Pass-through CIP 500,000.00 500,000.00 One-time -
3 Withdrawn prior to transmittal
4 RDA Housing Funds Transfer to Misc Grants Misc Grants 6,400,000.00 6,400,000.00 One-time -
5 GO 2023 Parks Bond CIP 24,885,893.25 24,885,893.25 One-time -
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
1 TANF Capacity Building Grant-Financial Capability Misc Grants 1,229,681.00 1,229,681.00 Ongoing -
2 TANF Capacity Building Grant-Youth Development Misc Grants 1,391,672.00 1,391,672.00 Ongoing -
3 State Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation FY 24 Misc Grants 3,107,201.00 3,107,201.00 Ongoing 5.00
4 Marathon Community Investment Fire Department Misc Grants 5,000.00 5,000.00 One-time -
5 Utah Department of Health & Human Services - EMS
Grant Misc Grants 8,014.00 8,014.00 One-time -
-
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Council ApprovedAdministration Proposed
Section A: New Items
Section D: Housekeeping
Section F: Donations
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
1
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Consent Agenda #1
1 Greater Salt Lake Area Clean Energy and Air Roadmap Misc Grants 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 Ongoing 1.00
2 Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry Fire
and State Lands
Misc Grants 50,000.00 50,000.00 One-time -
3 Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry Fire
and State Lands
Misc Grants 150,000.00 150,000.00 One-time -
4 State of Utah Division of Outdoor Recreation Misc Grants 150,000.00 150,000.00 One-time -
5 Backman Community Open Space Misc Grants 200,000.00 200,000.00 One-time -
6 Utah Department of Health & Human Services Misc Grants 8,014.00 8,014.00 One-time -
7 Utah Office for Victims of Crime-VOCA Misc Grants 92,846.00 92,846.00 One-time -
Total of Budget Amendment
Items
41,685,746.25 42,540,345.95 - - 9.00
Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount Revenue Amount
Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
Total by Fund, Budget Amendment #1:
General Fund GF - 187,250.00 - - 3.00
Special Revenue Fund Special Rev 62,416.00 65,472.00 - - -
CIP Fund CIP 25,485,893.25 25,485,893.25 - - -
IMS Fund IMS 6,000.00 6,000.00 - - -
Special Assessment Fund Spec Assessment - 664,293.70 - - -
Miscellaneous Grants Misc Grants 16,131,437.00 16,131,437.00 - - 6.00
Total of Budget Amendment Items 41,685,746.25 42,540,345.95 - - 9.00
Administration Proposed Council Approved
Section I: Council Added Items
Section G: Council Consent Agenda -- Grant Awards
2
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Current Year Budget Summary, provided for information only
FY 2023-24 Budget, Including Budget Amendments
FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total Total Revenue
General Fund (Fund 1000)448,514,918 (754,483.23) - 447,760,434.77
Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000 3,000.00
DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)1,397,355 1,397,355.00
Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,700,000 - 1,700,000.00
Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)4,681,185 4,681,185.00
Water Fund (FC 51)176,637,288 176,637,288.00
Sewer Fund (FC 52)289,941,178 289,941,178.00
Storm Water Fund (FC 53)19,865,892 19,865,892.00
Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)403,513,000 403,513,000.00
Refuse Fund (FC 57)25,240,459 25,240,459.00
Golf Fund (FC 59)12,710,067 12,710,067.00
E-911 Fund (FC 60)3,925,000 3,925,000.00
Fleet Fund (FC 61)32,108,969 36,800.00 32,145,769.00
IMS Fund (FC 65)36,254,357 9,000.00 6,000.00 36,269,357.00
County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for
Transportation (FC 69)9,700,000 9,700,000.00
CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)5,597,763 5,597,763.00
Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)8,919,917 16,131,437.00 25,051,354.00
Other Special Revenue (FC 73)400,000 62,416.00 462,416.00
Donation Fund (FC 77)500,000 500,000.00
Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)14,659,043 14,659,043.00
Debt Service Fund (FC 81)32,341,586 32,341,586.00
CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)30,199,756 (1,430,715.00) 25,485,893.25 54,254,934.25
Governmental Immunity (FC 85)3,888,581 3,888,581.00
Risk Fund (FC 87)60,932,137 60,932,137.00
Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,623,631,451 (2,139,398.23) 41,685,746.25 - - - 1,663,177,799.02
3
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Total Expense BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total Total Expense
General Fund (FC 10)448,514,918 204,200.00 187,250.00 448,906,368.00
Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000 3,000.00
DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)1,397,355 1,397,355.00
Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,700,000 664,293.70 2,364,293.70
Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)6,044,119 6,044,119.00
Water Fund (FC 51)177,953,787 177,953,787.00
Sewer Fund (FC 52)301,832,622 301,832,622.00
Storm Water Fund (FC 53)22,947,474 22,947,474.00
Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)520,438,997 520,438,997.00
Refuse Fund (FC 57)28,263,792 28,263,792.00
Golf Fund (FC 59)17,938,984 17,938,984.00
E-911 Fund (FC 60)3,800,385 3,800,385.00
Fleet Fund (FC 61)32,498,750 14,461,793.00 46,960,543.00
IMS Fund (FC 65)38,702,171 9,000.00 6,000.00 38,717,171.00
County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for
Transportation (FC 69)9,700,000 9,700,000.00
CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)5,597,763 5,597,763.00
Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)8,919,917 16,131,437.00 25,051,354.00
Other Special Revenue (FC 73)400,000 65,472.00 465,472.00
Donation Fund (FC 77)500,000 500,000.00
Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)10,212,043 10,212,043.00
Debt Service Fund (FC 81)34,894,979 34,894,979.00
CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)29,708,286 218,000.00 25,485,893.25 55,412,179.25
Governmental Immunity (FC 85)3,370,012 3,370,012.00
Risk Fund (FC 87)63,574,655 63,574,655.00
- Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,768,914,009 14,892,993.00 42,540,345.95 - - - 1,826,347,347.95
Budget Manager
Analyst, City Council
Contingent Appropriation
4
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
1
Section A: New Items
A-1: Homeless General Fund Reallocation Cost Share
for State Homeless Mitigation Grant GF ($44,620.00)
GF $44,620.00
Department: CAN-Housing Stability Prepared By: Tony Milner
For questions, please include Tony Milner, Blake Thomas and Tammy Hunsaker
This Budget Amendment is requesting a shift in funding to allow the Housing Stability Division to recruit a Community
Development Grant Specialist FTE for the Homelessness Engagement and Response Team (HEART). The City sought to
fully cover the cost of this FTE with the State's FY24 Cities Mitigation Grant; however, since the position will fulfill
administrative duties, the State is only allowing a partial billing for this position based on the hours the position works o n
the Cities Mitigation Grant itself.
In order to provide holistic, active contract management for all recipients of City homeless services funds, City General
Funds are being sought to supplement the full cost of the position by moving award money from an existing City General
Fund grant recipient and backfilling that cost with Cities Mitigation Grant dollars.
This request is budget neutral to the City. The Downtown Alliance Street Ambassador program is set to receive both Cities
Mitigation Grant and City General Fund awards in FY24. This request seeks to move $44,620 from the Downtown
Alliance's FY24 Homeless Services General Fund award to Housing Stability staffing. An increase of $44,620 would be
added to the amount of funding the Street Ambassador program will receive from the Cities Mitigation Grant, which is an
allowable expense under the grant. The amount of funding the Street Ambassador program will receive will remain at its
total of $1,384,101; this request will only change the funding source a portion of the award comes from. General Fund
award to Housing Stability staffing. An increase of $44,620.00 has been added to the amount of funding the Street
Ambassador program will receive from Cities Mitigation, which is an allowable expense under the Mitigation grant. The
amount of funding the Street Ambassador program will receive will remain at its total of $1,384,101.00, this request will
only change the funding source a portion of the award come from.
This position would be a Grade 26 Community Development Grant Specialist. The annual cost for this position is
$107,088. This Budget Amendment contemplates covering the cost of 50% of the position's effort for 10 months or
$89,240. In summary, $44,620 for the position is requested to be moved from the Downtown Alliance's FY24 Street
Ambassador award to Housing Stability, and the remaining $44,620 will be funded by the City's FY24 Cities Mitigation
Grant from the State Office of Homeless Services is requested to be moved from the Downtown Alliance's F Y24 Street
Ambassador award to Housing Stability and the remaining $44,620.00 will be funded by SLC's FY24 Cities Mitigation
award from the State Office of Homeless Services.
A-2: Treasury ERAP 2 Additional Allocations Misc Grants $2,339,009.00
Department: CAN-Housing Stability Prepared By: Tony Milner
For questions, please include Tony Milner, Blake Thomas and Tammy Hunsaker
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's additional allocation of the American Rescue Plan Act, Treasury
Emergency Rent Assistance Program 2 (ERAP 2) funds, in the amount of $2,339,009, for the purpose of assisting in the
stabilization and recovery of COVID-affected, low-income residential renters in Salt Lake City.
This budget amendment is separate from previous Council-approved City ERAP allocations: ERAP 1 Initial Award
($6,067,033), ERAP 1 Additional Allocation ($3,000,000), ERAP 1 Additional Allocation ($5,000,000), ERAP 2 Initial
Award ($4,800,559.40), and ERAP 2 Additional Allocation ($2,000,000).
Past ERAP 1 & 2 funds were disbursed in partnership with the State Department of Workforce Services through the unified
Utah Rent Relief portal. The Utah Rent Relief portal closed in March 2023 after ERAP funds at the State level were
exhausted and will not open to new applicants.
At the time Council last reviewed remaining ERAP 2 funds in March 2023, Council partially approved $2,000,000 for
rental assistance through the Utah Rent Relief portal and requested additional information regarding eligible uses for the
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
2
remaining funds and directed the administration to explore the potential for using these funds for direct client rental
assistance.
Treasury defines direct client rental assistance as: deposits, rent, utilities, rent arrears, utility arrears, and oth er housing
related costs (e.g. applications fees).
The administration is seeking direction from Council regarding the preferred process for disbursing these funds to a sole
source provider or through public competitive process that would receive applicati ons from multiple providers.
Note: All ERAP 2 funds must be obligated by September 30, 2025.
A-3: Liberty Park Basketball Court Utah Jazz
Donation CIP $100,000.00
Department: Public Lands-Trails & Natural Lands Prepared By: Makaylah Maponga
For questions, please include Makaylah Maponga, Kristin Riker and Gregg Evans
Public Lands is requesting a budget amendment to allocate a $100,000 donation from the Utah Jazz to the Liberty Park
Basketball Court project PRJ-230295. This project had significant funding constraints due to the failed condition of the
court. With this donation, Public Lands will be able to fully execute the project which will completely reconstruct the court
as well as install additional amenities to promote the court as a community gathering space.
The Liberty Basketball Court project was funded as a Constituent CIP project cost center 83 -22405 in FY2021-22 for
resurfacing. After initial evaluation of the court, it was determined that the cracks were too significant, and the court
needed complete reconstruction. Public Lands initially reached out to the Utah Jazz to partner on this project in the fall o f
2022. The Jazz followed up in Spring 2023 with interest in donating funds to the reconstruction in honor of their 50th
anniversary season. With this donation, Public Lands is able to cover the funding deficit and expand the scope to include
the addition of fencing and new seating areas. This is in line with the constituent's vision for the court as a host location for
an annual community tournament. This project is projected to be completed in Fall 2023. This project is projected to be
completed in Fall 2023. Public Lands will be recognizing the donation by including the Jazz Logo on the final court.
Public Lands has done due diligence and finds no reason to reject this donation proposal and specifically allocate the
funding to the Liberty Park Basketball Court project.
A-4: Scope Change for Miller Park Trail Access
Improvements & Historic Structures Preservation
CIP $0.00
Department: Public Lands-Trails & Natural Lands Prepared By: Kat Maus
For questions, please include Kristin Riker, Kat Maus and Gregg Evans
The Public Lands Department is requesting a scope change for the remaining $365,012.40 in the CIP cost center 83-18048
(PRJ-230184) (CC30004) to amend the project implementation list to accomplish proposed goals. This proposal to revise
the Miller Park capital project and associated funds do not close any informal or "social" trails that may exist. In FY 2017 -
18, a constituent submitted an application for funding to address the following goals at Miller Park: preserve the historic
structures, such as the WPA masonry walls, foot bridge, and stairways constructed during the Great Depression; and
improve accessibility of the trail system that navigates the park. To achieve these goals, the constituent proposed three
projects: restore a trail alignment (creekside) that was rerouted in 2014, install a bridge over Red Butte Creek, and stabilize
the WPA walls. Public Lands hired a consultant who obtained geotechnical and structural engineers, who determined that
the recommended projects in the original proposal would not fulfill the goals stated, and instead recommended projects
that would fulfill the stated goals. Public Lands is requesting a scope change for the remaining funds to remove the original
three projects proposed from the scope of work, and add the new projects recommended by the engineers. Public Lands
engaged extensively with community organizations and subject -matter experts to confirm the projects recommended in
the new scope, and confirm that the originally-proposed projects would not in fact fulfill the stated goals, including
Yalecrest Neighborhood Council, Salt Lake City Public Utilities, the City's Risk Management Attorney, a national trail -
building firm, American Trails, the State's Historic Preservation Officer, and the Mayor's Office ADA Coordinator and
Disability and Accessibility Commission. In addition, Public Lands conducted several periods of public engagement in
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
3
2021 and 2023 to determine the community's priorities for the new proposed projects. Please see the attached report for
the full synopsis and overview of the engagement and project recommendations.
While the budget is not expected to be able to complete all twelve projects, Public Lands is proposing starting from the
highest-priority recommended project, and working through the list (top-down) until the funding has been spent. The full
description of the prioritized list of recommended projects and justification for selection is included in the engagement
report. Anticipated projects, beginning with the highest priority, t o be completed include:
1. Repairing the historic crib walls to increase wall and trail stability
2. Stabilize exposed wall foundation with soil nails and cover foundation where feasible, and to prevent erosion with
adjacent properties
3. Reinforce walls with buttresses on the east side of the creek, and replace crib wall on creek side to reduce concentrated
drainage
4. Improve running and cross slopes for accessibility located near the entrance on 900 South and on the east side of the
creek, and other accessibility improvements as there are efficiencies with other projects
5. Improve cross slope near Bonneview Drive Entrance, and explore adding stairs and a handrail.
6. Reconstruct existing stairs to improve safety
7. Add curb cut and ramp from Bonneview Drive
Completing these projects would make nearly 75% of the park accessible to wheelchair access, far exceeding the ADA
requirements for natural areas, and would protect a majority of the historic walls for years into the future. Some pro jects
may be completed out of order if there are efficiencies with other projects.
A-5: Create a Public Lands Planning & Design
Division
GF ($543,144.00)
GF $543,144.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Kristin Riker
For questions, please include Kristin Riker and Gregg Evans
This cost-neutral budget amendment request will transfer the landscape architecture design and project management
functions from the Engineering Division to the Public Lands Department.
This request is three-fold:
1. Create a new Planning & Design Division within the Public Lands Department.
2. Transfer all four (4) full-time landscape architect positions and associated operating budget ($543,144) from the
Engineering Division (Public Services Department) to this new division within the Public Lands Department. The FTEs
include: one Senior Landscape Architect (Grade 34), two Landscape Architect IIIs (Grade 30), and one Landscape
Architect II (Grade 27).
3. Reclassify the Public Lands Department's Planning Manager position (Grade 33) as the Planning & Design Division
Director (Grade 34; merit, non-appointed). This position's appointment will be requested with the general budget request
in the following fiscal year (FY 24/25).
Past and Current Realities:
- In the past, the City's Public Lands Department and Engineering Division (Public Services Department) managed $1M
to $2M in parks, trails, and open space projects each year. They are now fortunate to be tasked with delivering nearly
$200M in new projects from various funding sources (i.e., Sales Tax Revenue Bond, GO Bond, CIP, and ot hers) over the
next 10 years.
- Currently, each of the City's 100+ parks, trails, and open space projects essentially has two project managers. Their
responsibilities overlap significantly. This requested change and new process would help rectify that.
Solutions:
- Our departments propose that the currently separate teams become one Planning & Design Division within the Public
Lands Department.
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
4
- The Public Lands Department would be responsible for all planning, prioritization, funding, public and st akeholder
engagement, design, consultant management, overall project management, and, ultimately, on-going maintenance of every
project.
- The Engineering Division of the Public Services Department would be responsible for the construction and contractor
management, and many of the most technical details of each project. Even this work will still be overseen by each project's
manager.
- These staffing changes will be combined with a new project delivery process (drafted by staff and leadership from bot h
departments) as well as even stronger, more effective coordination for each public lands project between the new Public
Lands Planning & Design Division and the Engineering Division.
A-6: Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract -
Senior Community Programs Manager
GF ($113,798.00)
GF $110,798.00
GF $3,000.00
IMS $3,000.00
Department: CAN Prepared By: Tammy Hunsaker / Kim Thomas
For questions, please include Tammy Hunsaker, Blake Thomas, Kim Thomas and Brent Beck
In March of 2018, the City and County entered into an interlocal agreement (ILA) that defines the responsibilities of the
respective entities for programming, operation, and maintenance of the Sorenson Unity Center. The facility is owned by
the City, and the City leads educational and community-based programming while the County leads recreational
programming. The City is responsible for utilities, security, and maintenance of the facility and t he County is responsible
for custodial services. Currently, all parties agree that it would be more efficient if the ILA is amended so that responsibi lity
for certain programming and custodial services be transferred from the County to the City. As such, t his is a revenue
neutral budget request that will rescope the Sorenson budget and facilitate an amendment to the ILA to modify terms
relating to child care programming and custodial responsibilities. If the budget rescope is approved, County and City staff
will finalize a draft amendment to the ILA and will coordinate an adoption process pursuant to state and city code.
Sorenson Janitorial and County Contract current budget $1,014,800, reduced by the FTE $901,002 – Note: this budget
will be used to pay both the County contract and for custodial services procured by Public Services. The split between the
two is currently unknown right now, but the total will not exceed this budget amount.
Senior Community Programs Manager FTE, grade E26: $113,798 fully loaded
A-7: Economic Development Project Manager
Position
GF $122,000.00
GF $3,000.00
IMS $3,000.00
Department: Economic Development Prepared By: Lorena Riffo-Jenson, Jolynn Walz
For questions, please include Lorena Riffo-Jenson, Jacob Maxwell, Jolynn Walz
Since the creation of the Department of Economic Development (DED), the Division of Business Development has seen a
significant increase in program administration. This increase comes from the transfer of existing programs (i.e., the
Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF) and Special Assessment Areas (SAAs)) and being charged with the creation of
new programs for the business community such as the Construction Mitigation Grant Pro gram and the Outdoor Dining
Grant Program.
Currently, DED manages the Special Assessment Area (SAA) in the Central Business Improvement District (Downtown
SAA) and is administering the creation of a second SAA in Sugarhouse. Phase 1 of the Sugarhouse SA A creation has
extended to almost two-years, and completion of the due diligence is expected to finalize in 2024. The second phase of the
Sugarhouse SAA will entail extensive administrative work required by state statute that governs the SAA process that
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
5
includes: the intent to designate resolution, a public hearing, the Board of Equalization Appointment, a second public
hearing, publishing a Request for Proposal (RFP) to appoint SAA contractor, contract award facilitation and ongoing
contract management.
In 2023, DED received a request from property owners in the Granary District to begin the due diligence investigatory
process to establish a third SAA. Salt Lake City Council has allocated funding for the consultant to conduct the due
diligence work for the Granary SAA. DED is charged with this initial phase that requires management of the consultant
(that provides the valuation numbers and tax scenarios) and due diligence reporting to the City Council.
In addition to the creation of two more SAAs, Sugarhouse and the Granary District, DED every three years is required to
manage the renewal of the Central Business Improvement District SAA (Downtown). The steps in renewal process are
similar to the process listed above to create an SAA (the intent to designate resolution, a public hearing, the Board of
Equalization Appointment, a second public hearing, publishing a Request for Proposal (RFP) to appoint SAA contractor,
contract award facilitation and ongoing contract management). Should additional areas be approved for assessment, and
the renewal of the contract for each SAA is every 3 to 5 years which is required by state statute; the demands of managing
the SAAs will require significant administration and full-time support.
In addition to the management of the Special Assessment Areas in the City, this position would support Salt Lake City’s
commercial corridors that host formal and informal business communities. The manager would work with the business
communities and corridors on outreach and engagement to create new districts while also providing ongoing support to
existing districts. Examples of these include the Midtown District, Granary District Alliance, River District Business
Alliance, and North Temple Community Improvement Group. To s upport these efforts, DED will partner with the RDA to
provide a community grants program that would make funds available to support emerging business districts and thus
increase their chance of success and long-term viability. This work would translate to more vibrant, active, and thriving
business districts/commercial corridors in Salt Lake City.
The impact of this position to further bolster Salt Lake City’s business and commercial corridors would benefit the City’s
residents and visitors while also contributing to the tax base. The Special Assessment Area is an important economic
development tool that can transform a neighborhood by bolstering business development, improving a commercial area’s
quality of life, and has proven to increase the commercial property values. As the City continues to grow, there will be
further opportunities and interest for various types of business district support. This will ultimately lead to more dynamic
neighborhoods and destinations for residents and visitors to enjoy.
A-8: SAA Funds to the Downtown Alliance Spec Assessment $664,293.70
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mary Beth Thompson
For questions, please include Mary Beth Thompson
Remaining cash balances in previous SAAs which are now being remitted back to the Downtown Alliance.
A-9: Know Your Neighbor Program Expeses GF $6,500.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: Sandee Moore / Tracy Patillo
For questions, please include Sandee Moore and Tracy Patillo
The Administration is requesting this budget amendment to recognize all expenses associated with the Know Your
Neighbor Program.
During the FY24 Budget Development and Budget Presentations, the Know Your Neighbor Program was presented to the
City Council with the total required expenses. Ho wever, the expenses were inadvertently not recognized on the FY24
presented Key Changes.
A-10: Love Your Block Program Expenses GF $55,750.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: Sandee Moore / Tracy Patillo
For questions, please include Sandee Moore and Tracy Patillo
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
6
The Administration is requesting this budget amendment to recognize all expenses associated with the Love Your Block
Program.
During the FY24 Budget Development and Budget Presentations, the Love Your Block Program was presented to the City
Council with the total required expenses. However, the expenses were inadvertently not recognized on the FY24 presented
Key Changes.
A-11: Proposed Ordinance Amending the FY 2023-
2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-
Represented Employees
NA No Budgetary Impact
Department: Human Resources Prepared By: David Salazar / Jonathan
Pappasideris
For question, please include David Salazar and Jonathan Pappasideris
The ordinance is attached to the transmittal. Further details on the reasons for the change are listed below.
- Revising Subsection IV(H) (“Snowfighter Pay”) of Section III (“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay
Allowances”) – Changes include insertion of the same pay amounts adopted for AFSCME-covered employees
eligible to receive Snowfighter Pay. (NOTE: In the original redlined copy of the Plan transmitted to City
Council, comments alerted city council the specific amounts included in these subsections would be matched and
added after the new rates negotiated and adopted in th e new AFSCME MOU were known.)
- Revising Subsection VI(A) (“Other Pay Allowances; Meal Allowance”) of Section III (“Work Hours,
Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) - Changes include insertion of the same pay amounts adopted for
AFSCME-covered employees eligible to receive Meal Allowance. (NOTE: In the original redlined copy of the Plan
transmitted to City Council, comments alerted city council the specific amounts included in these subsections
would be matched and added after the new rates negotiated and adopted in the new AFSCME MOU were known.)
- Revising Appendix A (“Salt Lake City Corporation General Employee Pay Plan (GEPP)”) - New rates
indicated correct rounding errors discovered in calculation of range minimums, midpoints, and maximums f or
salaried employees. Corrected rates match pay range information loaded for salaried employees in Workday
without fiscal impact.
- Revising Appendix B (“Appointed Employees by Department”) - Corrects pay levels shown for certain
job titles to match those included in the Plan originally transmitted to City Council. The latest copy of the
Appointed Pay Plan transmitted to city council intended only to show addition of the new Safety & Security
Director for Public Services, but inadvertently included incorrect pay level changes for Justice Court Judges and
Justice Court Administrator.
- Revising Appendix D (“Utah State Retirement Contributions FY 2022 -2023”) – Specific edits include
adjustments to employer contributions required for employees covered under the Tier 1 – Firefighter Retirement
System. Notice of these changes was not received from URS until after this Plan was originally transmitted to City
Council.
These changes will impact the Department of Public Services’ Snowfighter and the new Safety & Security Director’s pay
specifically and will also make changes to the Justice Court Judges salaries as well. The remainder of the changes will have
impacts generally throughout the City.
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
7
Section D: Housekeeping
D-1: Emergency Demolition Fund Reset Special Rev $65,472.00
Department: Fire Prepared By: Clint Rasmussen
For questions, please include Clint Rasmussen
This request is to reset the 'Emergency Demolition Fund' back to its orig inal budget of $200,000 The fund has been
working as intended and paid for the demolition of homes affected by fire on Major Street. The property owner has
reimbursed the city for the cost of demolition.
D-2: 300 N Pedestrian Bridge - Funding Pass-
through CIP $500,000.00
Department: Public Services-Engineering Prepared By: JP Goates / Josh Willie
For question, please include JP Goates, Josh Willie Jorge Chamorro
Engineering is ready to bill Union Pacific for their agreed upon contribution of $500,000 towards the 300 N pedestrian
bridge project. Under the terms of the agreement, this contribution will be paid to the City.
Since this contribution was accounted for as a funding source for the project, this budget amendment records the incoming
revenue from the Union Pacific's contribution and records the expense as the funds will be used as payment to the
contractor.
D-3: Withdrawn Prior to Transmittal
D-4: RDA Housing Funds Transfer to Miscellaneous
Grants Misc Grants $6,400,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mary Beth Thompson
For questions, please include Mary Beth Thompson
Funding was transferred to the RDA but is now being returned to Misc Grants to better track according to federal
guidelines.
D-5: General Obligation Series 2023 Bonds CIP $24,885,893.25
Department: Finance-Treasurer Prepared By: Gaby Ewell / Marina Scott
For questions, please include Gaby Ewell, Marina Scott and Samantha Kenney
In November 2022, voters authorized the issuance of up to $85 million in general obligation bonds to fund eight Parks,
Trails and Open Space projects. The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2023 were sold in August 2023 as the first issuance
of the authorization. This amendment creates the revenue budget for the receipt of bond proceeds and the expenditure
budget to pay for renovation of the park projects associated with the bonds.
There will be eleven project funds in Cost Center 10508 to which bond proceeds will be allocated.
• One allocation will be $9,000,0000 for the Glendale Regional Park (1200 West 1700 South) project.
• The second allocation will be $2,000,000 for Liberty Park Playground (600 East 900 South) project.
• The third allocation will be $850,000 for Allen Park (1900 South).
• The fourth allocation will be $5,000,000 for Folsom Trail Conpletion & Landscaping projects.
• The fifth will be $600,000 for the Fleet Block Park project.
• The sixth allocation will be $500,000 for the Fairmont Park (1040 East Sugarmont Drive ) project.
• The seventh allocation will be $1,050,000 for Reimagine Neighborhood Parks, Trail, or Open Spaces (various
locations) projects.
• The eighth allocation will be $600,000 for the Jordan River Corridor (various locations) project.
• There will be a unique Fund for the bond's Contingencies/Program Management that will be allocated $3,332,000.
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
8
• There will also be a unique Fund for Art Allowance that will be allocated $294,000.
• There will be a unique Fund for the bond's Salaries, Benefits and Operational costs for 3 FTE's for 3 years. This
allocation will receive $1,434,000 that is slated to be reimbursed to the general fund. These reimbursements will
be according to tracking of permitted expenses.
• Finally, there will an allocation for the bond's cost of issuance. This allocation will receive $225,893.25.
Section E: Grants Requiring No Staff Resources
E-1: TANF Capacity Building Grant-Financial
Capability
Misc Grants $1,229,681.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
For question, please include Amy Dorsey
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program is designed to help low-income families achieve self-
sufficiency. States receive block grants to design and operate programs that accomplish one of the purposes of the TANF
program. The award period for this award is from July 1,2023 to June 30,2026.
The Administration is requesting that the Council conduct a straw poll due to impending
reimbursement deadlines.
E-2: TANF Capacity Building Grant-Youth
Development
Misc Grants $1,391,672.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
For question, please include Amy Dorsey
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program is designed to help low-income families achieve self-
sufficiency. States receive block grants to design and operate programs that accomplish one of the purposes of the TANF
program. The award period for this award is from July 1,2023 to June 30,2026.
The Administration is requesting that the Council conduct a straw poll due to impending
reimbursement deadlines.
E-3: State Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation FY 24 Misc Grants $3,107,201.00
Department: CAN-Housing Stability Prepared By: Amy Dorsey / Michelle Hoon
For question, please include Amy Dorsey and Michelle Hoon
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $3,107,201 for the
purpose of deferring costs associated with having an eligible homeless shelter within the City. This is a formula grant the
City was not required to apply, but was awarded by the State.
This grant requires no match and would require three new positions in the Police Department, one new position in CAN
(that would be half funded by the grant) and one new position in the Justice Court.
E-4: Marathon Community Investment Fire
Department
Misc Grants $5,000.00
Department: Fire Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
For questions, please include Amy Dorsey, Clint Rasmussen
This grant will be used to pay for materials needed for the Fire Department's swift water rescue program. No FTE's are
associated with this grant.
E-5: Utah Department of Health & Human Services –
EMS Grant
Misc Grants $8,014.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
For questions, please include Amy Dorsey
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $8014 for the purpose
of reimbursements for expenditures related to the provision of Emergency Medical Services. No new FTEs.
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
9
Section F: Donations
Section G: Consent Agenda
Consent Agenda
G-1: Greater Salt Lake Area Clean Energy and Air
Roadmap
Misc Grants $1,000,000.00
Department: Sustainability Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $1,000,000 for the
purpose of developing a comprehensive, economy-wide climate mitigation plan or update an existing plan in collaboration
with air pollution control districts, large and small municipalitie s statewide and tribal governments that will support
actions to reduce greenhouse gases and harmful air pollutants and to conduct meaningful engagement with low income
and disadvantaged communities.
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agrees to pay for 100% of all approved budget period costs incurred up to
the $1,000,000 award.
1 New FTE: Four years of salary and fringe benefits for one FTE. The position would be responsible for facilitating the
sustained involvement of jurisdiction partners, managing consultants, assisting with community engagement, coordinating
stakeholder and public engagement activities and presentations, and tracking task completion and milestone achievement.
Public Hearing was held on July 11,2023
G-2: Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry
Fire and State Lands
Misc Grants $50,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
The Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands of the Utah Department of Natural Resources is giving Public Lands a
$50,000 grant for the purpose of removing navigational hazards, including downed trees, garbage, and other debris, from
the Jordan River from 2100 South to 2400 North. No match is required.
G-3: Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry
Fire and State Lands
Misc Grants $150,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
The Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands of the Utah Department of Natural Resources is giving Public Lands a
$150,000 grant for the purpose of removing navigational hazards, including downed trees, garbage, and other debris, from
the Jordan River from 2100 South to 2400 North. No match is required.
G-4: State of Utah Division of Outdoor Recreation Misc Grants $150,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
The Division of Outdoor Recreation is giving Public Lands a $150,000 grant for the purpose of removing navigational
hazards, including downed trees, garbage, and other debris, from the Jordan River from 2100 South to 2400 North. No
match is required.
G-5: Backman Community Open Space Misc Grants $200,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
Salt Lake City's (City) Department of Public Lands will improve the open space adjacent to Backman Elementary. The
design will likely include intentional landscaping and safety improvements, multiple nature playground amenities,
watchable wildlife areas, an outdoor gathering area and permaculture garden and/or similar amenities. This open space
area is covered with thick, invasive vegetation and remains virtually unused by the surrounding community. The current
conditions create safety concerns for families whose children use the existing trail and bridge to walk to school. An analysis
by the University of Utah of census block data shows that this natural area could provide children and their families greater
Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #2
Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount
10
access to nature than any other single natural open space in the city, making the site an unprecedented public asset for
hundreds of local children and families in the City's Rose Park neighborhood and users of the Jordan River Parkway by
improving a blighted section of the trail. 50% match is required.
Public hearing was held on May 16,2023.
G-6: Utah Department of Health & Human Services Misc Grants $8,014.00
Department: Fire Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
Utah Department of Health and Human Services is awarding the Salt Lake City Fire Department $8,014 for FY24. The
purpose of this grant is to award the annual EMS Per Capita grant funds. No match is required.
G-7: Utah Office for Victims of Crime-VOCA Misc Grants $92,846.00
Department: Police Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
Salt Lake City Prosecutor's Office was awarded $92,846 for a two-year grant to pay partial salary for a victim advocate.
This grant does not require any new positions as the victim advocate was partially paid for the last two years by a previous
VOCA award.
Public Hearing was held June 6, 2023.
The other portion of the Victim Advocate's salary will be used to satisfy the 25% match.
Section I: Council Added Items
Impact Fees - Summary Confidential
Data pulled 07/20/2023
Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area
Area Cost Center UnAllocated
Cash Notes:
Impact fee - Police 8484001 1,402,656$
Impact fee - Fire 8484002 273,684$ B
Impact fee - Parks 8484003 16,793,487$ C
Impact fee - Streets 8484005 6,304,485$ D
24,774,312$
Expiring Amounts: by Major Area, by Month
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 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Current Month
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 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202407 (Jul2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202408 (Aug2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202409 (Sep2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202410 (Oct2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202411 (Nov2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202412 (Dec2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202501 (Jan2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202502 (Feb2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202503 (Mar2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202504 (Apr2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202505 (May2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202506 (Jun2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202507 (Jul2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202508 (Aug2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202509 (Sep2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202510 (Oct2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202511 (Nov2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ 1,103,628$ 1,103,628$
202512 (Dec2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ 113,748$ 113,748$
202601 (Jan2026)2026Q3 -$ -$ -$ 3,960$ 3,960$
202602 (Feb2026)2026Q3 -$ -$ -$ 26,929$ 26,929$
202603 (Mar2026)2026Q3 -$ -$ -$ 95,407$ 95,407$
202604 (Apr2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ 1,065,383$ 1,065,383$
202605 (May2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ 95,762$ 95,762$
202606 (Jun2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ 53,972$ 53,972$
Total, Currently Expiring through Jun 2026 -$ -$ -$ 2,558,788$ 2,558,788$
FY
2
0
2
3
Calendar
Month
FY
2
0
2
4
FY
2
0
2
5
FY
2
0
2
6
Fiscal
Quarter
E = A + B + C + D
Police Fire Parks Streets
Total
Impact Fees Confidential
Data pulled 07/20/2023 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
IFFP Contract - Police 8423003 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$
Grand Total 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$
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 Training Center 8417015 (499,533)$ -$ (499,533)$ -$
Fire'sConsultant'sContract 8419202 3,079$ 3,021$ -$ 58.00
IFFP Contract - Fire 8423004 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$ B
IF Excess Capacity - Fire 8423006 2,200,000$ -$ 2,200,000$ -$
Grand Total 1,712,546$ 3,021$ 1,700,467$ 9,058.00
Parks Allocation
Budget Amended
Allocation
Encumbrances YTD Expenditures
Allocation
Remaining
Appropriation
Values
Description Cost Center
Sum of Parks Allocation
Budget Amended
Sum of Parks Allocation
Encumbrances
Sum of Parks Allocation YTD
Expenditures
Sum of Parks Allocation
Remaining Appropriation
Fisher Carriage House 8420130 261,187$ -$ 261,187$ -$
Emigration Open Space ACQ 8422423 700,000$ -$ 700,000$ -$
Waterpark Redevelopment Plan 8421402 16,959$ 1,705$ 15,254$ -$
JR Boat Ram 8420144 3,337$ -$ 3,337$ -$
RAC Parcel Acquisition 8423454 395,442$ -$ 395,442$ 0$
Park'sConsultant'sContract 8419204 2,638$ 2,596$ -$ 42$
Cwide Dog Lease Imp 8418002 23,262$ 23,000$ -$ 262$
Rosewood Dog Park 8417013 1,056$ -$ -$ 1,056$
Jordan R 3 Creeks Confluence 8417018 1,570$ -$ -$ 1,570$
9line park 8416005 16,495$ 855$ 13,968$ 1,672$
Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 2,946$ -$ -$ 2,946$
ImperialParkShadeAcct'g 8419103 6,398$ -$ -$ 6,398$
Rich Prk Comm Garden 8420138 12,431$ 4,328$ -$ 8,103$
FY IFFP Contract - Parks 8423005 9,000$ -$ -$ 9,000$
Redwood Meadows Park Dev 8417014 9,350$ -$ -$ 9,350$
9Line Orchard 8420136 156,827$ 132,168$ 6,874$ 17,785$
Trailhead Prop Acquisition 8421403 275,000$ -$ 253,170$ 21,830$
Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 1,042,694$ 240,179$ 764,614$ 37,902$
IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 56,109$ -$ 1,302$ 54,808$
Green loop 200 E Design 8422408 608,490$ 443,065$ 93,673$ 71,752$ C
FY20 Bridge to Backman 8420430 156,565$ 44,791$ 30,676$ 81,099$
Fisher House Exploration Ctr 8421401 555,030$ 52,760$ 402,270$ 100,000$
Cnty #1 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420424 254,159$ 133,125$ 13,640$ 107,393$
UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 122,281$ -$ 1,310$ 120,971$
Three Creeks West Bank NewPark 8422403 150,736$ -$ -$ 150,736$
Rose Park Neighborhood Center 8423403 160,819$ -$ 2,781$ 158,038$
Historic Renovation AllenParK 8422410 420,000$ 156,146$ 104,230$ 159,624$
RAC Playground with ShadeSails 8422415 179,323$ -$ 712$ 178,611$
Bridge to Backman 8418005 266,306$ 10,285$ 4,262$ 251,758$
900 S River Park Soccer Field 8423406 287,848$ -$ -$ 287,848$
Lighting NE Baseball Field 8423409 300,000$ -$ 678$ 299,322$
Open Space Prop Acq-Trails 8423453 300,000$ -$ -$ 300,000$
SLC Foothills Land Acquisition 8422413 319,139$ -$ -$ 319,139$
Parley's Trail Design & Constr 8417012 327,678$ -$ -$ 327,678$
Jordan Prk Event Grounds 8420134 428,074$ 5,593$ 23,690$ 398,791$
Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 446,825$ 18,467$ 14,885$ 413,472$
Open Space Prop Acq-City Parks 8423452 450,000$ -$ -$ 450,000$
Jordan Park Pedestrian Pathway 8422414 510,000$ 9,440$ 34,921$ 465,638$
Gateway Triangle Property Park 8423408 499,563$ -$ 106$ 499,457$
RAC Playground Phase II 8423405 521,564$ -$ -$ 521,564$
Mem. Tree Grove Design & Infra 8423407 867,962$ -$ 2,906$ 865,056$
Marmalade Plaza Project 8423451 1,000,000$ -$ 3,096$ 996,905$
SLCFoothillsTrailheadDevelpmnt 8422412 1,304,682$ 41,620$ 62,596$ 1,200,466$
GlendaleWtrprk MstrPln&Rehab 8422406 3,177,849$ 524,018$ 930,050$ 1,723,781$
Pioneer Park 8419150 3,149,123$ 69,208$ 94,451$ 2,985,464$
Glendale Regional Park Phase 1 8423450 4,350,000$ -$ -$ 4,350,000$
Grand Total 24,106,716$ 1,913,351$ 4,236,078$ 17,957,287$
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
Transportation Safety Improvem 8417007 1,292$ -$ 1,292$ -$
500/700 S Street Reconstructio 8412001 15,026$ 11,703$ 3,323$ -$
Trans Safety Improvements 8419007 13,473$ -$ 13,473$ -$
900 S Signal Improvements IF 8422615 70,000$ -$ 70,000$ -$
Corridor Transformations IF 8422608 25,398$ 25,398$ -$ -$
Trans Master Plan 8419006 13,000$ -$ 13,000$ -$
9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 63,955$ -$ 63,955$ -$
Local Link Construction IF 8422606 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ -$
Gladiola Street 8406001 16,109$ 12,925$ 940$ 2,244$
Transportatn Safety Imprvmt IF 8422620 44,400$ -$ 38,084$ 6,316$
Urban Trails FY22 IF 8422619 6,500$ -$ -$ 6,500$
Street'sConsultant'sContract 8419203 29,817$ 17,442$ -$ 12,374$
Complete Street Enhancements 8420120 35,392$ -$ 16,693$ 18,699$
500 to 700 S 8418016 22,744$ -$ -$ 22,744$ D
900 South 9Line RR Cross IF 8422604 28,000$ -$ -$ 28,000$
Transp Safety Improvements 8420110 58,780$ 17,300$ 11,746$ 29,734$
1700S Corridor Transfrmtn IF 8422622 35,300$ -$ -$ 35,300$
200S TransitCmpltStrtSuppl IF 8422602 37,422$ -$ -$ 37,422$
300 N Complete Street Recons I 8423606 40,000$ -$ -$ 40,000$
1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestr 8416004 42,833$ -$ -$ 42,833$
400 South Viaduct Trail IF 8422611 90,000$ -$ -$ 90,000$
Neighborhood Byways IF 8422614 104,500$ -$ -$ 104,500$
Transit Cap-Freq Trans Routes 8423608 110,000$ -$ -$ 110,000$
TransportationSafetyImprov IF 8421500 281,586$ 124,068$ 40,300$ 117,218$
Indiana Ave/900 S Rehab Design 8412002 124,593$ -$ -$ 124,593$
Bikeway Urban Trails 8418003 181,846$ -$ 542$ 181,303$
200 S Recon Trans Corridor IF 8423602 252,000$ -$ -$ 252,000$
Street Improve Reconstruc 20 8420125 780,182$ 46,269$ 393,884$ 340,029$
IF Complete Street Enhancement 8421502 625,000$ -$ -$ 625,000$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 836,736$ 55,846$ 45,972$ 734,918$
700 South Phase 7 IF 8423305 1,120,000$ -$ 166$ 1,119,834$
1300 East Reconstruction 8423625 3,111,335$ 1,192,649$ 224,557$ 1,694,129$
Grand Total 8,267,218$ 1,503,600$ 987,926$ 5,775,692$
Total 34,095,480$ 3,419,972$ 6,924,471$ 23,751,037$
E = A + B + C + D
TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE
8484002
24,774,312$
8484003
8484005
16,793,487$
6,304,485$
$273,684
UnAllocated
Budget
Amount
8484001
1,402,656$
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2023
(Amending the FY 2023-2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees)
An ordinance amending the FY 2023-2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-
Represented Employees.
PREAMBLE
The City Council, in Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 29B of 2023, approved the FY 2023-
2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees of Salt Lake City
Corporation. However, the City Council, in order to meet the operational needs of Salt Lake City
Corporation, wishes to amend the FY 2023-2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-
Represented Employees of Salt Lake City Corporation by:
i) revising Subsection II (“Employee Compensation for Fiscal Year
2023”) of Section II (“Employee Wages, Salaries & Benefits”) to
increase employee base pay and elected official salaries by an
additional half-percent;
ii) revising Subsection IV(B)(2) (“Wage Differentials & Additional
Pay; Standby Pay; Standby for Police Sergeants”) of Section III
(“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) to reduce the
amount of straight time compensation from two hours per twelve-
hour period to thirty (30) minutes per twelve-hour period;
iii) revising Subsection IV(H) (“Snowfighter Pay”) of Section III
(“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) to provide a
pay differential equal to fifteen percent of an eligible employee’s
regular weekly base pay;
iv) revising Subsection VI(A) (“Other Pay Allowances; Meal
Allowance”) of Section III (“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay
Allowances”) to increase the meal allowance amount from $10.00
to $15.00;
v) removing Subsection I(E) (“Holidays; Holiday Exceptions”) of
Section IV (“Holiday, Vacation & Leave Accrual”);
2
vi) revising Subsection III(B) (“Sick and Other Related Leave or
Personal Leave; Plan ‘B’”) of Section IV (“Holiday, Vacation &
Leave Accrual”) to provide that eligible employees shall receive
personal leave hours on November 1 of each calendar year and
clarify how such hours may be used and converted;
vii) revising Appendix A (“Salt Lake City Corporation General
Employee Pay Plan (GEPP)”) to reflect the correct pay rates and
rectify rounding error;
viii) revising Appendix B (“Appointed Employees by Department”) to
reflect changes to certain job titles and grades and to add the new
appointed position of “Safety & Security Director” in the Public
Services Department;
ix) revising Appendix C (“Elected Officials Salary Schedule”) to
reflect the correct annual salary amount;
x) revising Appendix D (“Utah State Retirement Contributions FY
2022-2023”) to reflect required changes; and
xi) making other technical and conforming changes.
Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this ordinance is to approve the attached
amended FY 2023-2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees of Salt
Lake City Corporation. Three copies of the attached amended FY 2023-2024 Annual
Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees of Salt Lake City Corporation shall be
maintained in the City Recorder’s Office for public inspection.
SECTION 2. EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION. Subsection II (“Employee
Compensation for Fiscal Year 2023”) of Section II (“Employee Wages, Salaries & Benefits”) is
hereby amended to increase employee base pay and elected official salaries by an additional half-
percent.
SECTION 3. STANDBY PAY FOR POLICE SERGEANTS. Subsection IV(B)(2)
(“Wage Differentials & Additional Pay; Standby Pay; Standby for Police Sergeants”) of Section
3
III (“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) is hereby amended to reduce the amount
of straight time compensation from two hours per twelve-hour period to thirty (30) minutes per
twelve-hour period.
SECTION 4. SNOWFIGHTER PAY. Subsection IV(H) (“Snowfighter Pay”) of Section
III (“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) is hereby amended to provide a pay
differential equal to fifteen percent of an eligible employee’s regular weekly base pay.
SECTION 5. MEAL ALLOWANCE. Subsection VI(A) (“Other Pay Allowances; Meal
Allowance”) of Section III (“Work Hours, Overtime & Other Pay Allowances”) is hereby
amended to increase the meal allowance amount from $10.00 to $15.00.
SECTION 6. HOLIDAY EXCEPTIONS. Subsection I(E) (“Holidays; Holiday
Exceptions”) of Section IV (“Holiday, Vacation & Leave Accrual”) is hereby removed.
SECTION 7. PLAN “B.” Subsection III(B) (“Sick and Other Related Leave or Personal
Leave; Plan ‘B’”) of Section IV (“Holiday, Vacation & Leave Accrual”) is hereby amended to
provide that eligible employees shall receive personal leave hours on November 1 of each
calendar year and clarify how such hours may be used and converted.
SECTION 8. GENERAL EMPLOYEE PAY PLAN. Appendix A (“Salt Lake City
Corporation General Employee Pay Plan (GEPP)”) is hereby amended to reflect the correct pay
rates and rectify rounding error.
SECTION 9. APPOINTED EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT. Appendix B
(“Appointed Employees by Department”) is hereby amended to reflect changes to certain job
titles and grades and to add the new appointed position of “Safety & Security Director” in the
Public Services Department.
4
SECTION 10. ELECTED OFFICIAL SALARY SCHEDULE. Appendix C (“Elected
Officials Salary Schedule”) is hereby amended to reflect the correct annual salary amount.
SECTION 11. UTAH STATE RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS. Appendix D (“Utah
State Retirement Contributions FY 2022-2023”) is hereby amended to reflect required changes.
SECTION 12. OTHER REVISIONS. The FY 2023-2024 Annual Compensation Plan
for Non-Represented Employees of Salt Lake City Corporation is hereby amended to reflect
other technical and conforming changes.
SECTION 13. APPLICATION. The attached amended FY 2023-2024 Annual
Compensation Plan for Non-Represented Employees of Salt Lake City Corporation shall not
apply to non-represented employees of Salt Lake City Corporation whose employment
terminated prior to the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 14. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective upon
adoption.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of _______________,
2023.
______________________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
CITY RECORDER
Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________________.
Mayor’s Action: _____Approved. _____Vetoed.
______________________________
MAYOR
5
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY RECORDER
(SEAL)
Bill No. _____ of 2023.
Published: ____________________.
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved as to Form
Date: _______________
By: ____________________
Jonathan Pappasideris
Division Chief
Senior City Attorney
August 29, 2023
Jonathan Pappasideris
ANNUAL COMPENSATON PLAN
FOR NON-REPRESENTED
EMPLOYEES
FY2023-2024
i
FY 2024 COMPENSATION PLAN FOR SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
Table of Contents
EFFECTIVE DATE ....................................................................................................................................... 1
EMPLOYEES COVERED BY THIS PLAN ................................................................................................ 1
AUTHORITY OF THE MAYOR ................................................................................................................. 1
APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS .................................................................................................................... 1
MODIFICATION, SUSPENSION, OR REVOCATION OF PROVISIONS ........................................... 1
SECTION I: DEFINITIONS ......................................................................................................................... 2
SUBSECTION I - DEFINITION OF TERMS ............................................................................................. 2
SECTION II: EMPLOYEE WAGES, SALARIES & BENEFITS ............................................................ 2
SUBSECTION I - COMPENSATION PROGRAM & SALARY SCHEDULES ....................................... 2
A. Determination ................................................................................................................................... 2
B. Salary Schedules ............................................................................................................................... 2
C. Other Compensation ......................................................................................................................... 3
SUBSECTION II - EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023 ..................................... 3
SUBSECTION III - EMPLOYEE INSURANCE ........................................................................................ 3
SUBSECTION IV - WORKERS’ COMPENSATION ................................................................................ 3
SUBSECTION V - SOCIAL SECURITY EXCEPTION FOR POLICE & FIRE ....................................... 4
SUBSECTION VI - RETIREMENT ............................................................................................................ 4
SECTION III: WORK HOURS, OVERTIME & OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES ................................. 4
SUBSECTION I – WORK HOURS ............................................................................................................. 4
SUBSECTION II- OVERTIME COMPENSATION ................................................................................... 4
SUBSECTION III - LONGEVITY PAY ..................................................................................................... 5
SUBSECTION IV - WAGE DIFFERENTIALS & ADDITIONAL PAY ................................................... 6
SUBSECTION V - EDUCATION AND TRAINING PAY ........................................................................ 9
SUBSECTION VI – OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES .................................................................................. 9
SUBSECTION VII - SEVERANCE BENEFIT ......................................................................................... 11
SECTION IV: HOLIDAY, VACATION & LEAVE ACCRUAL ............................................................ 13
SUBSECTION I – HOLIDAYS ................................................................................................................. 13
SUBSECTION II - VACATION LEAVE .................................................................................................. 14
SUBSECTION III - SICK AND OTHER RELATED LEAVE OR PERSONAL LEAVE ....................... 17
A. Plan “A ” ............................................................................................................................................ 17
1. Sick Leave .......................................................................................................................................... 17
ii
2. Hospitalization Leave ......................................................................................................................... 19
3. Dependent Leave ................................................................................................................................ 20
4. Career Incentive Leave, Plan “A” ........................................................................................................... 21
5. Retirement Benefit, Plan “A” ................................................................................................................. 21
B. Plan “B” .................................................................................................................................................. 21
SUBSECTION IV - PARENTAL LEAVE ................................................................................................ 24
SUBSECTION V - BEREAVEMENT LEAVE ......................................................................................... 25
SUBSECTION VI - MILITARY LEAVE .................................................................................................. 26
SUBSECTION VII - JURY LEAVE & COURT APPEARANCES .......................................................... 26
SUBSECTION VIII - INJURY LEAVE (SWORN POLICE AND FIRE EMPLOYEES ONLY)............ 27
SUBSECTION IX - ADDITIONAL LEAVES OF ABSENCE ................................................................. 28
SUBSECTION X - EMERGENCY LEAVE .............................................................................................. 28
APPENDIX A – GENERAL EMPLOYEE PAY PLAN (GEPP) ............................................................. 29
APPENDIX B – APPOINTED EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT ....................................................... 31
APPENDIX C – ELECTED OFFICIALS SALARY SCHEDULE .......................................................... 34
APPENDIX D- UTAH STATE RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS FY 2021-2022 ............................. 35
DISCLAIMER
City employment is subject to City ordinances, policies, practices and
procedures as well as state law, federal law, and constitutional limitations on
the City as a governmental entity. The policies, procedures, and practices of
the City and its departments and workgroups do not limit, affect, or alter any
legal or constitutional rights the City or its employees may have.
The City’s policies, procedures, and practices do not create any contractual
rights, either express or implied, or any other obligation or liability on the
City. The City also expressly reserves the right to amend or change its
policies, procedures, and practices at any time, with or without notice, and to
amend or change its ordinances, with the notice required by law.
1
FY 2024 COMPENSATION PLAN FOR NON-REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES
of SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
EFFECTIVE DATE
The provisions of this plan shall be effective commencing June 25, 2023, unless otherwise noted.
EMPLOYEES COVERED BY THIS PLAN
This plan applies to all full -time city employees. This plan does not apply to employees classified
as: seasonal, hourly, temporary, part-time or those covered by a memorandum of understanding.
AUTHORITY OF THE MAYOR
Employees covered by this compensation plan may be appointed, classified, and advanced under
rules and regulations promulgated by the mayor within budget limitations established by the city
council.
Furthermore, the mayor may authorize leave not specified in this compensation plan to provide
for operational flexibility, so long as the additional leave does not exceed the equivalent of eight
hours of leave per employee, per year. However, with the exception of a benefit created or
expanded pursuant to Section IV, Subsection X (“Emergency Leave”), the mayor may not
otherwise create a new benefit or expand an existing benefit for employees covered by this
compensation plan if doing so will result in a direct, measurable cost. A direct, measurable cost
includes a circumstance where the total cost of the new benefit or expansion of an existing benefit
exceeds appropriated funds. Further, city council input and approval is required if the creation of
a new benefit has policy implications or is already addressed in this compensation plan.
APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS
All provisions in this compensation plan are subject to the appropriation of funds by the city
council.
MODIFICATION, SUSPENSION, OR REVOCATION OF PROVISIONS
If a local emergency is declared, any provision in this compensation plan may be temporarily
modified, suspended, or revoked for the duration (or any portion thereof) of the period of local
emergency, if so authorized by the mayor and/or city council .
2
SECTION I: DEFINITIONS
SECTION II: EMPLOYEE WAGES, SALARIES & BENEFITS
SUBSECTION I - COMPENSATION PROGRAM & SALARY SCHEDULES
The city’s compensation system and program, in conjunction with this plan, is intended to
attract, motivate and retain qualified personnel necessary to effectively meet public service
demands.
A. Determination
1. The mayor shall develop policies and guidelines for the administration of the
pay plans.
2. To the degree that funds permit, employees shall be paid compensation that:
a. Is commensurate with the skills and abilities required of the position;
b. Achieves equal pay for equal work;
c. Attains comparability and is competitive with the compensation paid
by other public and/or private employers with whom the city compares
and/or competes for personnel recruitment and retention.
3. To the extent possible, market surveys shall be used to assess and evaluate the
city’s competitiveness with a cross section of organizations with whom the city
competes for personnel recruitment and retention. This may include one or more of
the following:
a. Compensation surveys, including actual pay and other cash
allowances paid to employees.
b. Benefits surveys, including paid leave, group insurance plans,
retirement, and other employer-provided and voluntary benefits.
c. Regular review of the city’s compensation plans and pay structures to
ensure salary ranges and regular pay practices provide for job growth and
encourage employee productivity.
B. Salary Schedules
1. All Employees covered under this plan (except for those designated as
“Elected Officials”) shall be paid base wages or salaries according to the General
Employee Pay Plan attached as Appendix “A.” Wages and salaries shall not be less
than the established range minimum or higher than the range maximum, unless
otherwise approved by the mayor or mayor’s designee.
3
2. Appointed Employees: The specific pay level assignments for Appointed
Employees are shown in Appendix “B.”
3. Elected Officials: Elected officials shall be paid annual compensation according
to schedule attached as Appendix "C."
C. Other Compensation
The mayor or the city council may distribute appropriated monies to city employees as
discretionary retention incentives or retirement contributions, or special lump sum
supplemental payments. Retention incentives or special lump sum payments are subject
to the mayor’s or city council’s approval.
SUBSECTION II - EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024
For employees covered under this plan, the city will increase each employee’s base pay by five
percent. Salaries for elected officials will, also, be increased by five percent.
The city’s living wage for regular, full-time employees is set and shall be no less than $15.11 per
hour.
SUBSECTION III - EMPLOYEE INSURANCE
The city will make available group medical, health and flex savings plans, dental, life, accidental
death & dismemberment, long-term disability insurance, voluntary benefits and an employee
assistance program (EAP) to all eligible employees and their eligible spouse, adult designee,
dependents and dependents of adult designee pursuant to city policy.
A. Employer-Paid Contributions. Effective July 1, 2023, the city’s contribution toward
the total premium for group medical will be 95% for the high -deductible Summit Star
Plan. For employees enrolled in the high-deductible Summit Star Plan, the city will also
contribute a one-time total of $750 into a qualified health savings account (HSA) or a
Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) for those enrolled for single coverage and
$1,500 for those enrolled for double or family coverage per plan year. Health savings
account or Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) contributions will be pro-rated for
any employee hired after July 1, 2023.
B. 501(c) (9) Post-Employment Health Reimbursement Account. The city will
contribute $24.30 per bi-weekly pay period into each employee’s Post Employment
Health Reimbursement Account. For any year in which there are 27 pay periods, no
such contribution will be made in the 27th pay period.
SUBSECTION IV - WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
The city will provide workers’ compensation coverage to employees as required by applicable
law.
4
SUBSECTION V - SOCIAL SECURITY EXCEPTION FOR POLICE & FIRE
All sworn employees in the Police and Fire departments covered under this plan are exempt from the
provisions of the federal Social Security System unless determined otherwise by the city or
required by applicable law.
SUBSECTION VI - RETIREMENT
A. Retirement Programs. The city hereby adopts the Utah State Retirement System for
providing retirement benefits to employees covered by the plan. The city may permit or
require the participation of employees in its retirement program(s) under terms and
conditions established by the mayor and consistent with applicable law. Such programs
may include:
1. The Utah State Public Employees (Contributory and Non-Contributory);
Public Safety Retirement Systems; or, the Utah Firefighters Retirement System; or,
2. Deferred compensation programs.
B. The 2023-2024 fiscal year retirement contribution rates for employees, including
elected officials, are shown in Appendix “D.”
SECTION III: WORK HOURS, OVERTIME & OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES
SUBSECTION I – WORK HOURS
A. The city’s standard work week begins Sunday at 12:00am and ends the following
Saturday at 11:59pm. Alternatives to the standard work week may be authorized and
adopted for specific work groups, such as:
1. The standard work schedule for combat Fire Battalion Chiefs, which
includes two consecutive 24-hour shifts immediately followed by 96 hours off.
SUBSECTION II- OVERTIME COMPENSATION
A. Overtime Compensation. The city will pay non-exempt employees overtime
compensation as required by the FLSA. The city will pay overtime hours at 1 ½ times
the employee’s regular hourly rate or, at the employee’s request and with their
department director’s approval, provide compensatory time off at a rate of 1½ hours for
each overtime hour in lieu of overtime compensation.
1. Employees may accrue compensatory time up to a maximum amount as
determined by their department director.
5
2. The city may elect at any time to pay an employee for any or all accrued
compensatory hours.
3. The city will includ e only actual hours worked and holiday leave hours when
calculating overtime.
4. When used, personal leave and compensatory time will not be included in
the calculation of overtime.
5. The city will pay out all accrued compensatory hours whenever an
employee’s status or position changes from FLSA non-exempt to exempt.
B. Labor Costs— Declared Emergency— Overtime Compensation for FLSA Exempt
Employees. The city may pay exempt employees overtime pay for any hours worked
over forty (40) hours in a workweek at a rate equivalent to their regular base hourly rate
of pay during periods of emergency. The city shall only make such payment when all of
the following conditions occur:
1. The mayor or the city council has issued a “Proclamation of Local Emergency”
or the city responds to an extraordinary emergency; and,
2. Exempt employees are required to work over forty (40) hours for one or more
workweek(s) during the emergency period: and,
3. The mayor and/or the city council approve the use of available funds to cover
the overtime payments.
The city shall distribute any overtime payments consistently with a pre-defined standard
that treats all exempt employees equitably. Hours worked under a declared or
extraordinary emergency must be paid hours and cannot be accrued as compensatory
time.
SUBSECTION III - LONGEVITY PAY
A. Eligibility. With the exception of elected officials, the city will pay a monthly
longevity benefit to full-time employees based on the most recent date an employee
began full -time employment as follows:
1. Employees who have completed six (6) consecutive years of employment with
the city will receive $50;
2. Employees who have completed ten (10) consecutive years of employment with
the city will receive $75;
3. Employees who have completed sixteen (16) full years of employment wit h the
city will receive $100; and,
6
4. Employees who have completed twenty (20) full years of employment with the
city will receive $125.
B. Pension Base Pay. Longevity pay will be included in base pay for purposes of
pension contributions.
C. Longevity While on an Unpaid Leave of Absence. Employees do not earn or receive
longevity payments while on an unpaid leave of absence. When an employee returns
from an approved unpaid leave of absence, longevity payments will resume.
SUBSECTION IV - WAGE DIFFERENTIALS & ADDITIONAL PAY
Eligible employees receive certain wage differentials as follows:
A. Call Back and Call Out Pay. Non-exempt employees will be paid Call Back or Call
Out pay based upon department director approval and the following guidelines:
1. Call Back Pay: Non-sworn, non-exempt employees who have been released
from normally scheduled work and standby periods, and who are directed by an
appropriate department head or designated representative to return to work prior to
their next scheduled normal duty shift, will be paid for a minimum of three (3)
hours straight-time pay and, in addition, will be guaranteed a minimum four (4)
hours work at straight-time pay.
2. Call Out Pay for Police Sergeants. Sergeants who have been released from their
scheduled work shifts and have been directed by an appropriate division head or
designated representative to perform work without at least 24 hours advance notice
or scheduling, shall be compensated as follows:
a. Sergeants who are directed to report to work shall receive a minimum of
four (4) hours compensation at one and one -half times their hourly wage
rate, or one and one-half times their hourly wage rate for actual hours
worked, whichever is greater.
b. Sergeants who are assigned to day shift, and who are directed to perform
work within eight (8) hours prior to the beginning of their regularly
scheduled shift shall receive a minimum of four (4) hours compensation at
one and one-half times their hourly wage rate, or one and one-half times
their hourly wage rate for actual hours worked, whichever is greater.
c. Sergeants who are assigned to afternoon or graveyard shifts, and who are
directed to perform work within eight (8) hours following the end of their
regularly scheduled shift shall receive a minimum of four (4) hours
compensation at one and one-half times their hourly wage rate, or one and
one-half times their hourly wage rate for actual
hours worked, whichever is greater.
7
B. Standby Pay : Non-exempt employees are eligible to receive Standby pay based
upon the following guidelines.
1. Standby for Non-Sworn Employees: Non-exempt, non-sworn employees
who have been released from normally scheduled work but have not been released
from standby status will be paid either two (2) hours of straight time pay for each 24
hour period of limited standby status; or two (2) hours straight time pay for each 12-
hour period of standby status if they are Department of Airports or Public Utilities
Department employees.
a. First Call to Work. An eligible employee who is directed to return to his
or her normal work site during an assigned Standby period by a department
head or designated representative without advanced notice or scheduling will
be paid a guaranteed minimum of four (4) hours, which may include any
combination of hours worked and/or non-worked straight-time pay.
b. Additional Calls to Work. An eligible employee will be paid an
additional guaranteed minimum of two (2) hours, which may include any
combination of hours worked and/or non-worked straight-time pay, for each
additional occasion he or she is called to work during the same twenty-four
(24) or twelve (12) hour standby period.
c. Exclusion for Snow Fighters. Any employee on standby as a member of
the Snow Fighter Corps shall not receive standby/on-call pay or shift
differential when on standby or called back to fight snow.
2. Standby for Police Sergeants: Police Sergeants directed by their division
commander or designee to keep themselves available for city service during
otherwise off-duty hours shall be compensated 30 minutes of straight time for each
12-hour period of standby status. This compensation shall be in addition to any
callout pay or pay for time worked the employee may receive during the standby
period.
C. Extra-Duty Shifts for Police Sergeants. "Extra-duty shifts" are defined as scheduled
or unscheduled hours worked other than the sergeant's normally scheduled work shifts.
"Extra-duty shifts" do not include extension or carry over of the sergeant's normally
scheduled work shift.
1. Any sergeant required by the city to work extra-duty shifts shall receive a
minimum of three (3) hours compensation at one and one -half times their regular
base hourly rate, or time worked paid at one and one-half times their regular hourly
base wage rate, whichever is greater.
D. Shift Allowance, not including Police Sergeants & Lieutenants. Only non- exempt
employees who perform afternoon/ swing or evening shift work are eligible to receive a
shift allowance.
8
1. The city will include all shift allowance when computing overtime. An
employee who receives Snow Fighter Corps differential pay is not eligible to also
receive shift allowance.
2. Day Shift: No allowance will be paid for work hours which are part of a regular
day shift.
3. Eligible Hours: For each non-day shift hour worked between the hours of 6:00
p.m. and 6:00 a.m., the city will pay an eligible non-exempt employee a differential
of $1.00 per hour.
E. Shift Differential for Police Sergeants & Lieutenants: The city will pay Police
sergeants & lieutenants shift differentials according to the shift actually worked. Actual
shift differential rates are determined as follows:
1. Day Shift: No differential pay for hours worked during day shift, which begins
at 0500 hours until 1159 hours.
2. Swing Shift: A differential of 2.5% in addition to the regular day rate shall be
paid for swing shift, which begins at 1200 hours until 1759 hours.
3. Graveyard Shift: A differential of 5.0% in addition to the regular day rate shall
be paid for graveyard shift, which begins at 1800 hours until 0459 hours.
F. K-9 Squad Allowance: Police sergeants assigned to the K-9 squad will be
compensated as follows:
1. Police sergeants shall be allowed ten (10) hours per month to care for the
police service dog. Such hours shall be counted as part of the Police sergeant's
regular work shift(s).
2. Police sergeants shall be provided ten (10) hours per month while off duty,
at the rate of one-and-one-half (1 ½) times their wage rate, to care for the police
service dog. No more than ten (10) hours per month shall be spent off duty to
care for the police service dog unless authorized by the Police Chief or designee.
G. Acting/Working out of Classification. A department head may elect to grant
additional compensation to an employee for work performed on a temporary basis,
whether in an acting capacity or otherwise, beyond the employee’s regular job
classification for any period lasting 20 or more working days. Unless approved by the
mayor or mayor’s designee, acting pay shall be limited to no more than 90 calendar days
from the start date and paid separately from regular earnings on each employee’s wage
statement. Compensation adjustments may be retroactive to the start date of the
temporary job assignmen t. Exceptions may be approved by the mayor or mayor’s
designee.
1. Acting pay shall be excluded when calculating any leave payouts, including
vacation, holiday, and personal leave.
9
H. Snowfighter Pay. The city will pay employees designated by the department head,
or designee, as members of the Snow Fighter Corps a pay differential equal to 15% of
an eligible employee’s regular weekly base pay for work related to snow removal. This
pay shall be separate from regular earnings on each employee’s wage statement.
SUBSECTION V - EDUCATION AND TRAINING PAY
A. Education Incentives. The mayor may adopt programs to promote employee
education and training, provided that all compensation incentives are authorized within
appropriate budget limitations established by the city council.
1. Police Sergeants, Lieutenants, and Captains are eligible for a $500 per year job-
related training allowance.
2. Fire Battalion/Division Chiefs are eligible for incentive pay following
completion of degree requirements at a fully accredited college or university and
submission of evidence of a diploma. The city will pay monthly allowances
according to the educational degree held, as follows:
Doctorate………….. $100.00
Masters………..…... $75.00
SUBSECTION VI – OTHER PAY ALLOWANCES
A. Meal Allowance. When approved by management, employees may receive meal
allowances in the amount of $15.00 when an employee works two or more hours
consecutive to their normally scheduled shift. Employees may also be eligible to
receive $15.00 for each additional four-hour consecutive period of work which is in
addition to the normally scheduled work shift.
1. Fire and police department employees shall be provided with adequate food
and drink to maintain safety and performance during emergencies or extraordinary
circumstances.
B. Business Expenses. City policy shall govern the authorization of employee
advancement or reimbursement for actual expenses reasonably incurred while
performing city business. Advance payment or reimbursement for expenses shall be
approved only when the amounts are documen ted and within the budget limitations
established by the city council.
C. Automobiles
1. The mayor may authorize, subject to the conditions provided in city policy, an
employee to utilize a city vehicle on a take-home basis and may require an
employee to reimburse the city for a portion of the take -home vehicle cost as
provided in city ordinance.
10
2. Employees who are authorized to use privately-owned automobiles for
official city business will be reimbursed for the operation expenses at the rate
specif ied in city policy.
3. The city will provide a car allowance to department directors, the mayor’s
chief of staff, the mayor’s chief administrative officer, up to three additional employees
in the mayor’s office, and the city council Executive Director at a rate not to exceed
$400 per month. A car allowance may be paid to specific appointed employees at a
rate not to exceed $400 per month as recommended by the mayor and approved by
the city council.
D. Uniform Allowance. The city will provide employees who are required to wear
uniforms in the performance of their duties a monthly uniform allowance as follows:
1. Non-sworn Police and Fire Department employees—$65.00
2. Watershed Management Division employees—$65.00
3. Fire: Battalion Chiefs will be provided with uniforms and other job -related
safety equipment, as needed. Employees may select uniforms and related
equipment from an approved list. The total allowance provided shall be $600 per
year, or the amount received by firefighter employees, whichever is greater.
Appointed employees shall be provided uniforms or uniform allowances to the
extent stated in Fire department policy.
a. Dangerous or contaminated safety equipment shall be cleaned,
repaired, or replaced by the Fire department.
4. Police: Police sergeants, lieutenants, and captains in uniform assignments,
as determined by their bureau commander, will be enrolled in the department’s
quartermaster system.
a. The quartermaster system will operate as follows:
i. Necessary uniform and equipment items, including patrol uniforms,
detective uniforms, duty gear, footwear, cold- weather gear, headwear,
etc. will be provided to Police sergeants, lieutenants, and captains by the
department’s quartermaster pursuant to department policy.
ii. A full inventory of items that the quartermaster will provide to Police
sergeants, lieutenants and captains within the quartermaster system and
the manner in which they will be distributed will be stated in department
policy.
iii. Police sergeants, lieutenants and captains in the quartermaster system
will be paid the sum of One Hundred Dollars ($100) each fiscal year for
the purpose of independently purchasing any incidental uniform item or
11
equipment not provided by the quartermaster system. Payment will be
made each year on the first day of the pay-period that includes August
15.
b. The city will provide for the cleaning of uniforms as described in Police
department policy.
c. Police sergeants, lieutenants, and captains in plainclothes assignments,
as determined by their bureau commander, are provided a clothing and
cleaning allowance totaling $39.00 per pay period. Sergeants, lieutenants,
and captains who are transferred back to a uniform assignment will return to
the quartermaster system upon transfer.
d. Uniforms or uniform allowances for appointed Police employees will be
provided to the extent stated in Police department policy.
E. Allowances for Certified Golf Teaching Professionals. The mayor may, within
budgeted appropriations and as business needs indicate, authorize golf lesson revenue
sharing between the city and employees recognized as Certified Golf Teaching
Professionals as defined in the Golf Division’s Golf Lesson Revenue Policy. Payment
to an employee for lesson revenue generated shall be reduced by: 1) a ten (10%) percent
administrative fee to be retained by the Golf division, and 2) the employee’s payroll tax
withholding requirements in accordance with applicable law.
F. Other Allowances. The mayor or the city council may, within budgeted
appropriations, authorize the payment of other allowances in extraordinary
circumstances (as determined by the mayor or the city council).
SUBSECTION VII - SEVERANCE BENEFIT
Subject to availability of funds, any current appointed employee who is not retained, not
terminated for cause and who is separated from city employment involuntarily shall receive
severance benefits based upon their respective appointment date.
A. Severance benefits shall be calculated using the employee’s salary rate in effect on
the employee’s date of termination. Receipt of severance benefits is contingent upon
execution of a release of all claims approved by the city attorney’s office.
1. Employees appointed on or after January 1, 1989 and before January 1, 2000
shall receive a severance benefit equal to one months’ base salary for each
continuous year of city employment in an appointed status before January 1, 2000.
Severance shall be calculat ed on a pro-rata basis for a total benefit of up to a
maximum of six m onths.
2. Current department heads, along with the mayor’s chief of staff and the
executive director of the city council office, appointed on or after January 1, 2000
shall receive a severance benefit equal to two month’s base salary after one full year
of continuous city employment in an appointed status; four months’ base salary
12
after two full years of continuous city employment in an appointed status; or, six
months’ base salary after three full years or more of continuous city employment in
an appointed status.
3. Current appointed employees who are not department heads, and who were
appointed on or after January 1, 2000 shall receive a severance benefit equal to one
week’s base salary for each year of continuous city employment in an appointed
status, calculated on a pro-rata basis, for a total benefit of up to a maximum of six
weeks.
B. Leave Payout: Appointed employees with leave hour account balances under Plan A
or Plan B shall, in addition to the severance benefit provided, receive a severance
benefit equal to the “retirement benefit” value provided under the leave plan of which
they are a participant (either Plan A or Plan B), if separation is involuntary and not for
cause.
C. Not Eligible for Benefit. An appointed employee is ineligible to be paid severance
benefits under the following circumstances:
1. An employee who, at the time of termination of employment, has been
convicted, indicted, charged or is under active criminal investigation concerning a
public offense involving a felony or moral turpitude. This provision shall not
restrict the award of full severance benefits should such employee subsequently be
found not guilty of such charge or if the charges are otherwise dismissed.
2. An employee who has been terminated or asked for a resignation by the
mayor or department director under bona fide charges of nonfeasance, misfeasance
or malfeasance in office.
3. An employee who fails to execute a Release of All Claims approved by the
city attorney’s office, where required as stipulated above.
4. An employee who is hired into another position in the city prior to their
separation date.
In the event an employee is hired into another position in the city after their
separation date and prior to the expiration of the period of time for which the
severance benefit was provided, the employee is required to reimburse the City (on
a pro-rata basis) for that portion of the severance benefit covering the period of time
between the date of rehire and the expiration of the period of time for which the
severance benefit was provided.
13
SECTION IV: HOLIDAY, VACATION & LEAVE ACCRUAL
Benefits-eligible employees shall receive pay for holidays, vacation and other leave as provided in
this section. Employees do not earn or receive holiday and vacation benefits while on unpaid
leave of absence. However, employees on an unpaid military leave of absence may be entitled to
the restoration of such leave benefits, as r equired by applicable law.
SUBSECTION I – HOLIDAYS
A. The following days are recognized and observed as holidays for covered employees.
Eligible employees will receive pay for non-worked holidays equal to their regular rate
of pay times the total number of hours which make a regularly scheduled shift. Except
as otherwise noted in this subsection, an employee may not bank a worked holiday.
1. New Year's Day, the first day of January.
2. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day (Human Rights Day), the third Monday of
January.
3. President's Day, the third Monday in February.
4. Memorial Day, the last Monday of May.
5. Juneteenth National Freedom Day, June 19
a. If June 19 is on a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday, the
holiday will be observed on the immediately preceding Monday. If June 19
is on a Saturday or Sunday, the holiday will be observed on the immediately
following Monday.
6. Independence Day, July 4.
7. Pioneer Day, July 24.
8. Labor Day, the first Monday in September.
9. Veteran's Day, November 11.
10. Thanksgiving Day, the fourth Thursday in November.
11. The Friday after Thanksgiving Day
12. Christmas Day, December 25.
13. One personal holiday per calendar year, taken upon request of an employee
and as approved by a supervisor.
14
B. When any holiday listed above falls on a Sunday, the following business day is
considered a holiday. When any holiday listed above falls on a Saturday, the preceding
business day is considered a holiday. In addition to the above, any day may be
designated as a holiday by proclamation of the mayor or the city council.
C. All holiday hours, including personal holidays, must be used in no less than regular
full day or shift increments.
1. A Fire battalion/division chief may be allowed to use a holiday in less than a
full shift increment only when converting from a “support” to “operations” work
schedule results in the creation of a half-shift.
D. No employee will receive more than the equivalent of one workday or a regular
scheduled shift as holiday pay for a single holiday. Employees must either work or be in
an authorized paid leave status a working day before and a working day after the
holiday to qualify for holiday pay.
1. An employee who is off work and in a paid status covered by short-term
disability or parental leave receives regular pay as a benefit and, therefore, is not
entitled to bank a holiday while off work.
E. Police Sergeant, Lieutenant, & Captain Holiday Hours Worked: When a day
designated as a holiday falls on a scheduled workday, a Police sergeant, lieutenant, or
captain may elect to take the day off work, subject to the approval of their supervisor, or
receive their regular wages for such days worked and designate an alternate day off
work to celebrate the holiday. For a Police sergeant whose assignment requires staffing
on either the graveyard shift prior to, or the day and afternoon shift on Thanksgiving
Day or Christmas Day, all hours worked will be compensated at a rate of one-and-one-
half (1 ½) times the employee’s regular base wage rate.
F. Police Sergeant, Lieutenant, & Captain Accrued Holiday Leave Payout: Police
sergeants, lieutenants, and captains who retire or separate from city employment for any
reason shall be compensated for any holiday time accrued and unused during the
preceding 12 months. Employees will not be compensated for any unused holiday time
accrued before the 12 months preceding the employee’s retirement or separation.
1. Any Police sergeant, lieutenant, or captain who is transferred or promoted to
a higher-level position within the department, including Deputy Chief, Assistant
Chief, or Police Chief, or to a position in another city department will be paid out at
their current base pay rate for any holiday time accrued and unused during the
preceding 12 months.
SUBSECTION II - VACATION LEAVE
The city will pay eligible employees their regular salaries during vacation periods earned and
taken in accordance with the following provisions. Except as provided for expressly in either city
policy or this plan, vacation leave hours are ineligible to be cashed out or used to exceed the total
15
number of hours for which an employee is regularly compensated during a work week or a pay
period.
Vacation hours may be used on the first day of the pay period following the period in which the
vacation hours are accrued.
A. Full-Time employees and appointed employees (except for those noted in
paragraphs B and C of this subsection) accrue vacation leave based upon years of city
service as follows:
Years of Hours of Vacation Accrued
City Service Per Bi-Weekly Pay Period
0 to end of year 3 3.73
4 to end of year 6 4.42
7 to end of year 9 4.81
10 to end of year 12 5.54
13 to end of year 15 6.15
16 to end of year 19 6.77
20 or more 7.69
B. Department directors, the mayor’s chief of staff, the mayor’s chief administrative
officer, up to two additional senior positions in the mayor’s office as specified by the
mayor, the executive director of the city council, and justice court judges will accrue
7.69 hours each bi-weekly pay period.
C. Fire battalion chiefs in the Operations division of the Fire department will accrue
vacation leave according to the following schedule:
Years of Accrued Hours of Vacation
City Service Per Pay Period
0 to end of year 3 5.54
4 to end of year 6 6.46
7 to end of year 9 7.38
10 to end of year 12 8.31
16
13 to end of year 14 9.23
15 to end of year 19 10.15
20 or more 11.54
D. For any plan year in which there are 27 pay periods, no vacation leave hours will be
awarded in the 27th pay period.
E. Years of city service are based on the most recent date the person became a full-
time salaried employee.
F. Full-time employees re-hired by the city are eligible to receive prior service credit
for previous full-time city employment and time worked with other public jurisdictions
without a break in service. Prior service credit is applicable for vacation accrual, personal
leave accrual, short-term disability benefits, layoff, and awarding of employee service
awards and service certificates only. Prior service credit does not apply to longevity
pay.
G. Full-time and appointed employees (except those listed in Paragraph B of this
subsection) may accumulate vacations, according to the length of their full-time years
of city Service, up to the following maximum limits:
Up to and including 9 years Up to 30 days/ 15 shifts/ 240 hours
After 9 years Up to 35 days/ 17.5 shifts/ 280 hours
After 14 years Up to 40 days/ 20 shifts/ 320 hours
For purposes of this subsection, "days" means "8-hour" days and “shifts” means
“24-hour” combat shifts.
H. Department directors and those included in Paragraph B of this subsection may
accumulate up to 320 hours of vacation without regard to their years of employment
with the city.
I. Any vacation accrued beyond the allowable maximums, including any Plan A sick
leave hours converted to vacation, will be deemed forfeited unless used before the end
of the pay period in which an employee’s designated longevity date occurs. However,
in the case of an employee’s return from an unpaid military leave of absence, leave
hours may be restored according to requirements under applicable law.
J. Vacation Payout at Termination: An employee separating from employment may not
exhaust more than 80 hours of any combination of accrued vacation, personal leave, or banked
(holiday or vacation) leave prior to their last day of employment. Employees shall be paid at
their base hourly rate for any unused accrued vacation leave time following termination
of employment, including retirement.
17
K. Vacation Allowance: As a recruiting incentive, the mayor or t he city council may
provide a one-time allowance of up to 120 hours of vacation leave.
SUBSECTION III - SICK AND OTHER RELATED LEAVE OR PERSONAL LEAVE
Benefits in this section are for the purpose of income replacement for employees during
absence from work due to illness, accident, or personal reasons. Some of these absences
may qualify under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA). Although the city
requires use of accrued paid leave prior to taking unpaid FMLA leave, employees will be
allowed to reserve up to 80 hours of non-lapsing leave as a contingency for future use by
submitting a written request to Human Resources. Employees are not eligible to earn or
receive leave benefits while on an unpaid leave of absence.
However, employees on an unpaid military leave of absence may be entitled to the
restoration of such leave benefits, as provided by applicable law.
Employees hired on or after November 16, 1997 receive personal leave benefits under Plan
B. All other employees receive personal leave benefits pursuant to the plan they participated
in as of November 15, 1998. Employees hired before November 16, 1997 shall receive
personal leave benefits under Plan B if they elected to do so during any city - established
election period occurring in 1998 or later.
A. Plan “A ”
1. Sick Leave
a. Sick leave is provided for full-time employees under Plan “A” as
insurance against loss of income when an employee is unable to perform
assigned duties because of illness or injury. The mayor may e stablish rules
governing the interfacing of sick leave and workers’ compensation benefits
and avoiding, to the extent allowable by law, duplicative payments.
b. Each full-time employee accrues sick leave at a rate of 4.62 hours per
pay period. For any plan year in which there are 27 pay periods, no sick
leave hours will be awarded in the 27th pay period. Authorized and unused
sick leave may be accumulated from year to year, subject to the limitations
of this plan.
1. Sick Leave Accrual for Fire Battalion Chiefs – Each covered
employee shall be entitled to 15 days of sick leave each calendar year,
except for members of the Operations division who shall be entitled to
7.5 shifts of sick leave each calendar year. The City shall credit a
covered employee’s sick leave account in a lump sum (either 15 days
or7.5 shifts) during the first month of each calendar year. Authorized
and unused sick leave may be accumulated from year to year subject to
the limitations of this plan.
c. Under this Plan “A,” Full-Time employees who have accumulated
18
240 hours of sick leave may choose to convert up to 64 hours of the sick
leave earned and unused during any given year to vacation. Any sick leave
used during the calendar year reduces the allowable conversion by an equal
amount.
1. Sick Leave Conversion for Fire Battalion Chiefs – Fire Battalion
Chiefs who have accumulated 15 shifts (for Operations employees), or
240 hours (for non-Operations employees) may choose to convert a
portion of the year sick leave grant from any given year to vacation, as
follows—
Number of Sick Leave Shifts
Used During Previous Calendar
Year (Operations Only)
Number of Sick Leave Shifts
Available for Conversion
(Operations Only)
No shifts used 5 shifts
One shift used 4 shifts
Two shifts used 3 shifts
Three shifts used 2 shifts
Four shifts used 1 shift
Five or more shifts used No shifts
Number of Sick Leave Shifts
Used During Previous Calendar
Year (Support Only)
Number of Sick Leave Shifts
Available for Conversion
(Support Only)
No days used 9 days
One day used 8 days
Two days used 7 days
Three days used 6 days
Four days used 5 days
Five or more days used 0 days
d. Conversion at the maximum allowable hours will be made unless the
employee elects otherwise. Any election by an employee for no conversion,
or to convert less than the maximum allowable sick leave hours to vacation
time, must be made by notifying the employee’s department timekeeper or
the city payroll administrator, in writing, not later than the second pay period
of the new calendar year (or the November vacation draw for Fire Battalion
Chiefs). Otherwise, the opportunity to waive conversion or elect conversion
other than the maximum allowable amount will be deemed waived for that
calendar year. In no event may sick leave days be converted from other than
the current year's sick leave allocation.
e. Any sick leave hours, properly converted to vacation benefits as
above described, must be taken before any other vacation hours to which the
employee is entitled; however, in no event is an employee, upon the
employee’s separation from employment, entitled to any pay or
compensation for any sick leave converted to vacation. An employee
19
forfeits any sick leave converted to vacation remaining unused at the date of
separation from employment.
f. Sick Leave Benefits Upon Layoff. Employees who are subject to
layoff because of lack of work or lack of funds will be paid at 100% of their
hourly base wage rate as of the date of termination for each accumulated
unused sick leave hour.
2. Hospitalization Leave
a. Hospitalization leave is provided for full-time employees under Plan
“A,” in addition to sick leave authorized hereunder, as insuran ce against loss
of income when an employee is unable to perform assigned duties because of
scheduled surgical procedures, urgent medical treatment, or hospital
inpatient admission.
b. Employees are entitled to 30 days of hospitalization leave each
calendar year. Hospitalization leave does not accumulate from year to year.
Employees may not convert hospitalization leave to vacation or any other
leave, nor may they convert hospitalization leave to any additional benefit at
time of retirement.
c. Employees who are unable to perform their duties during a shift due
to preparations (such as fasting, rest, or ingestion of medicine), for a
scheduled surgical procedure, may report the absence from the affected shift
as hospitalization leave, with the prior approval of their division head or
supervisor.
d. An employee who must receive urgent medical treatment at a
hospital, emergency room, or acute care facility, and who is regularly
scheduled for work or unable to perform their duties during a shift (or work
day) due to urgent medical treatment, may re port the absence from the
affected shift as hospitalization leave. Similarly, an employee who is absent
from work while on approved leave is also allowed to claim hospitalization
leave.
1. An employee who wishes to claim hospitalization leave is responsible
to report the receipt of urgent medical treatment to the employee’s
division head or supervisor as soon as practical.
2. For purposes of use of hospitalization leave, urgent medical
treatment includes at-home care directed by a physician immediately
after the urgent medical treatment and within the affected shift.
e. Employees who, because they are admitted as an inpatient to a
hospital for medical treatment, are unable to perform their duties, may report
the absence from duty while in the hospital as hospitalization leave.
20
f. Medical treatment consisting exclusively or primarily of post -injury
rehabilitation or therapy treatment, whether conducted in a hospital or other
medical facility, shall not be counted as hospitalization leave.
g. An employee requesting hospitalization leave under this section may
be required to provide verification of treatment or care from a competent
medical practitioner.
3. Dependent Leave
a. Under Plan “A,” dependent leave may be requested by a full-time
employee for the following reasons:
1. Becoming a parent through birth or adoption of a child.
2. Placement of a foster child in the employee’s home.
3. Due to the care of the employee’s child, spouse, spouse’s child, adult
designee, adult designee’s unmarried child under age 26, or parent with
a serious health condition.
b. Under Plan “A,” dependent leave may also be requested by a full-
time employee to care for an employee’s child, spouse, spouse’s child, adult
designee, an adult designee’s unmarried child under age 26, or a parent who
is ill or injured but who does not have a serious health condition.
c. The following provisions apply to the use of dependent leave by a
full- time employee:
1. Dependent leave may be granted with pay on a straight time basis.
2. If an employee has available unused sick leave, sick leave may be
used as dependent leave.
3. An employee is required to give notice of the need to take dependent
leave, including the expected duration of leave, to his or her supervisor
as soon as possible.
4. Upon request of a supervisor, an employee will be required to
provide a copy of a birth certificate or evidence of child placement for
adoption, or a letter from the attending physician in the event of
hospitalization, injury, or illness of a child, spouse, spouse’s child, adult
designee, adult designee’s child, or parent within five calendar days
following a return from leave.
5. An employee’s sick leave shall be reduced by the number of hours
21
taken by an employee as dependent leave.
4. Career Incentive Leave, Plan “A”
Full-Time employees, who have been in continuous full-time employment with the
city for more than 20 years, and who have accumulated to their credit 1500 or more
sick leave hours, may make a one-time election to convert up to 160 hours of sick
leave into 80 hours of paid Career Incentive Leave . Career Incentive Leave must
be taken prior to retirement. Sick leave hours converted to Career Incentive Leave
will not be eligible for a cash payout upon termination or retirement even though
the employee has unused Career Incentive Leave hours available. This leave can
be used for any reason. Requests for Career Incentive Leave must be submitted in
writing to the appropriate department director and be approved subject to the
department’s business needs (e.g., work schedules and workloads).
5. Retirement Benefit, Plan “A”
a. Employees who meet the eligibility requirements of the Utah State
Retirement System and who retire from the city will be paid at their base
hourly rate for 50% of their accumulated sick leave hours balance based on
the schedule below:
Retirement Month 50% sick leave will be:
January 1st – June 30th Contributed to 501(c)9 Health Reimbursement
Account Plan
(premium-only account) July 1st – December 31st Cash to retiree
B. Plan “B”
1. . Under Plan “B,” paid personal leave is provided for employees as insurance
against loss of income when an employee needs to be absent from work because of
illness or injury, to care for a dependent, or for any other emergency or personal
reason. Each eligible employee will receive personal leave on November 1st of each
calendar year. P e r s o n a l l e a v e h o u r s a r e i n e l i g i b l e t o b e
u s e d t o e x c e e d t h e t o t a l n u m b e r o f w o r k h o u r s f o r
w h i c h a n e m p l o y e e i s r e g u l a r l y c o m p e n s a t e d d u r i n g a
w o r k w e e k o r a p a y p e r i o d. Where the leave is not related to the
employee’s own illness or disability—or an event that qualifies under the FMLA—
a personal leave request is subject to supervisory approval based on the operational
requirements of the city and any policies regarding the use of such leave adopted by
the department in which the employee works. Accrued personal leave hours may be
used on the same day the hours are received.
2. Each full-time employee under Plan “B” is awarded personal leave hours based
on the following schedule:
22
Months of
Consecutive Hours of
City Service Personal Leave
Less than 6 40
Less than 24 60
24 or more 80
Employees hired during the plan year are provided paid personal leave on a pro-
rated basis.
3. Not later than October 15th of each calendar year, employees covered by Plan
“B” may elect, by notifying their department timekeeper or the city payroll
administrator in writing, to:
a. Convert any unused personal leave hours availab le as of October 31st
to a lump sum payment equal to the following: For each converted hour, the
employee will be paid 50 percent of the employee’s regular hourly base
wage rate (not including acting pay) in effect on the date of conversion. In
no event will total pay hereunder exceed 40 hours of pay (80 hours at 50%);
or
b. Carryover to the next calendar year up to 80 unused personal leave
hours; or
c. Convert a portion of unused personal leave hours, to a lump sum
payment as provided in subparagraph (3)(a), above, and carry over a portion
as provided in subparagraph (3)(b), above.
4. Maximum Accrual. A maximum of 80 hours of personal leave may be carried
over to the next plan year. Any personal leave hours unused at the end of the plan
year in excess of 80 will be converted to a lump sum payment as provided in
subparagraph 3(a) above.
5. Termination Benefits. An employee separating from employment may not exhaust
more than 80 hours of any combination of accrued vacation, personal leave, or banked
(holiday or vacation) leave prior to their last day of employment. At termination of
employment for any reason, accumulated unused personal leave hours, minus any
adjustment necessary after calculating the “prorated amount,” shall be paid to the
employee at 50 percent of the regular hourly base wage rate (not including acting
pay) on the date of termination for each unused hour. For purposes of this
paragraph, “prorated amount” shall mean the amount of personal leave credited at
the beginning of the plan year, multiplied by the ratio of the number of pay periods
worked in the plan year (rounded to the end of the pay period which includes the
separation date) to 26 pay periods. If the employee, at the time of separation, has
23
used personal leave in excess of the prorated amount, the value of the excess
amount shall be reimbursed to the city and may be deducted f rom the employee’s
paycheck.
6. Conditions on Use of Personal Leave include:
a. Minimum use of personal leave, with supervisory approval, must be
in no less than quarter-hour increments.
b. Except in unforeseen circumstances, such as emergencies or the
employee’s inability to work due to illness or accident or an unforeseen
FMLA-qualifying event, an employee must provide their supervisor with
prior notice to allow time for the supervisor to make arrangements necessary
to cover the employee’s work.
c. For leave due to unforeseen circumstances, the employee must give
their supervisor as much prior notice as possible.
d. Except as provided for expressly in either city policy or this plan,
personal leave hours are ineligible to be cashed out or used to exceed the
total number of hours for which an employee is regularly compensated
during a work week or a pay period.
7. Career Enhancement Leave, Plan “B”: A full-time employee covered under
this Plan “B” is eligible, after 15 years of full-time service with the city, to be
selected to receive up to two weeks of career enhancement leave. This one -time
leave benefit could be used for formal training, informal course of study, job-related
travel, internship, mentoring or other activity that could be of benefit to the city and
the employee’s career development. Selected employees will receive their full
regular salary during the leave. Request for this leave must be submitted in writing
to the appropriate department head, stating the purpose of the request and how the
leave is intended to benefit the city. The request must be approved by the
department head and by the Human Resources director (who will review the request
to ensure compliance with these guidelines).
8. Retirement/Layoff (RL) Benefit, Plan “B”
a. Full-Time employees currently covered under Plan “B” who were
hired before November 16, 1997, and who elected to be covered under Plan
“B,” shall have a retirement/layoff (RL) account equal to sixty percent of
their accumulated unused sick leave hours available on November 16,
1997, minus any hours withdrawn from that account since it was established.
b. Full-Time employees who were hired before November 16, 1997 and
who elected in 1998 to be covered under Plan “B,” shall have a
retirement/layoff (RL) account equal to fifty percent of their accumulated
unused sick leave hours available on November 14, 1998, minus any hours
withdrawn after the account is established.
24
c. Full-Time employees who were hired before November 16, 1997 and
who elected in 2007 or later during any period designated by the city to be
covered under Plan “B,” shall have a retirement /layoff (RL) account equal
to forty percent of their accumulated unused sick leave hours available on
the date that Plan B participation began, minus any hours withdrawn after
the account is established.
d. Payment of the RL Account.
1. All hours in an employee’s RL account shall be payable upon
retirement or as a result of layoff. In the case of layoff, 100% of R/L
hours shall be paid to the employee according to the employee’s base
hourly rate of pay on date of layoff. Any employee who quits, resigns, is
separated, or is terminated for cause is not eligible to receive payment
for RL account hours.
2. In cases of retirement, an eligible employee shall be paid at their base
hourly rate for 100% of their RL account balance based on the schedule
below:
Retirement Month 100% RL hours will be:
January 1st – June 30th Contributed to 501(c)9 Health Retirement
Account Plan
(premium-only account) July 1st – December 31st Cash to retiree
e. Hours may be withdrawn from the RL account to cover an
employee’s absence from work due to illness or injury, need to care for a
dependent, any emergency or to supplement Workers’ Compensation
benefits after all Personal Leave hours are exhausted. RL account hours,
when added to the employee’s workers’ compensation benefit, may not
exceed the employee’s regular net salary.
9. Short-Term Disability Insurance, Plan “B”: Protection against loss of income
when an employee is absent from work due to short -term disability shall be
provided to full-time employees covered under Plan “B” through short-term
disability insurance (SDI). There shall be no cost to the employee for SDI. SDI
shall be administered in accordance with the terms determined by the city.
SUBSECTION IV - PARENTAL LEAVE
A. Full-time employees who become parents through birth, adoption, or foster care
may take up to six consecutive weeks of paid parental leave to care for and bond with
the child. An employee may be allowed to take parental leave up to one year from the
date of a child’s birth or, in the case of adoption or foster care, the date a child is placed
in the employee’s home. Parental leave may be taken during a new employee’s
25
probationary period. The probationary period will be extended by an amount of time
equivalent to the parental leave taken.
B. Parental leave will run concurrently (during the same period of time) with FMLA
and SDI (if applicable). Parental leave is limited to six weeks per twelve-month period.
For employees approved for short-term disability, parental leave will make up the
difference between 100% pay and 66 2/3% pay (if applicable) for up to six weeks.
SUBSECTION V - BEREAVEMENT LEAVE
A. An employee who suffers the loss of an immediate family member including a(n):
current spouse, domestic partner, or adult designee; child, mother, father, brother, sister;
current father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law,
sister-in-law; grandparent; current step-grandfather, step-grandmother; grandchild, or
current step grandchild, stepchild, stepmoth er, stepfather, stepbrother or stepsister,
grandfather-in-law, grandmother-in-law; or, domestic partner’s or adult designee’s
relative as if the domestic partner or adult designee were the employee’s spouse is
eligible to be released from work for bereavement, including attendance at a funeral,
memorial service, or related event(s).
B. In the event of death of an immediate family member, the city will provide an
employee with up to five working days of paid leave for bereavement, including
attendance at a funeral, memorial service, or related event(s). The employee will be
permitted one additional day of bereavement leave if the employee attends a funeral,
memorial service or equivalent event that is held more than 150 miles from Salt Lake
City and the day following the memorial service or equivalent event is a regular
working shift.
C. In the event of death of a first-line extended relative of an employee, or of an
employee’s spouse, domestic partner, or adult designee’s relative as if the adult
designee were the employee’s spouse not covered in paragraph A above (such as an
uncle, aunt or cousin), the city will provide an employee with up to one work shift for
bereavement, including attendance at a funeral, memorial service, or related event(s).
The employee will be permitted one additional day of bereavement leave if the
employee attends a funeral, memorial service or equivalent event that is held more than
150 miles from S alt Lake City and the day following the memorial service or equivalent
event is a regular working shift.
D. In the event of death of a friend, an employee may be allowed to use vacation or
personal leave for time off to attend the funeral or memorial service, as approved by an
immediate supervisor.
E. In the event of death of any covered family member while an employee is on
vacation leave, an employee’s absence may be extended and authorized as bereavement
leave.
26
F. In the event of a miscarriage or stillbirth, the employee, employee’s spouse or
partner, or employee to be an adoptive parent, the city will provide an employee with
up to three working days of paid leave for bereavement.
SUBSECTION VI - MILITARY LEAVE
A. Leave of absence for employees who enter uniformed service. An employee who
enters the uniformed services of the United States, including the United States Army,
United States Navy, United States Marine Corps, United States Air Force,
commissioned Corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, United
States Coast Guard, or the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service, is entitled
to be absent from his or her duties and servic e from the city, without pay, as required by
applicable l law. Leave will be granted in accordance with the Uniformed Services
Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA).
B. Leave while on duty with the armed forces or Utah National Guard. An employee
who is or who becomes a member of the reserves of the federal armed forces, including
the United States Army, United States Navy, United States Marine Corps, United States
Air Force, and the United States Coast Guard, or an y unit of the Utah National Guard, is
allowed military leave for up to 15 working days per calendar year for time spent on
active or reserve duty. Military leave may be in addition to vacation leave and need not
be consecutive days of service. To be covered, an employee must provide
documentation demonstrating a duty requirement.
SUBSECTION VII - JURY LEAVE & COURT APPEARANCES
A. Jury Leave: An employee will be released from duty with full pay when, in
obedience to a subpoena or direction by proper authority, the employee is required to
either serve on a jury or appear as a witness for the United States, the state of Utah, or
other political subdivision.
1. Employees are entitled to retain statutory fees paid for service in a federal court,
state court, or city/county justice court.
2. On any day that an employee is required to report for service and is thereafter
excused from such service during his or her regular worki ng hours from the city, he
or she must forthwith return to and carry on his or her regular city employment.
Employees who fail to return to work after being excused from service for the day
are subject to discipline.
B. Court Appearances. A Police sergeant is eligible to receive compensation as a
witness subpoenaed by the city, the State of Utah, or the United States for a court or
administrative proceeding appearance as follows:
1. Appearances in court or administrative proceeding made while on-duty will be
compensated as normal hours worked.
27
2. In the event an appearance extends beyond the end of an employee's regularly
scheduled shift, time will be counted as normal work time for the purpose of
computing an employee's overtime compensation.
3. Employees are entitled to retain statutory witness fees paid for service in a
federal court, state court, or city/county justice court.
4. Appearances made while off-duty will be compensated as follows:
(a) The city will pay employees for two hours of preparation time plus
actual time spent in court or in an administrative hearing at one and one-half
times their regular hourly rate. Lunch periods granted are not considered
compensable time. Compensation for additional preparation time for any
subsequent appearance during the same day is allowed only when there is at
least two hours between the employee’s release time from a prior court or
administ rative proceeding and the start of the other.
(b) If the time spent in court or administrative proceeding extends into the
beginning of the employee's regularly scheduled work shift, time spent in
court or in administrative proceeding will be deemed ended at the time such
shift is scheduled to begin.
5. An employee is required to provide a copy of the subpoena, including the
beginning time and time released from the court or administrative hearing, with
initials of the prosecuting or another court representative within seven working days
following the appearance.
6. Any employee failing to appear in compliance with the terms of a formal notice
or subpoena may be subject to disciplinary action.
SUBSECTION VIII - INJURY LEAVE (SWORN POLICE AND FIRE EMPLOYEES ONLY)
The city has established rules governing the administration of an injury leave program for sworn
public safety personnel under the following qualifications and restrictions:
A. The disability must have resulted from an injury arising out of the discharge of
official duties or while exercising some form of necessary job-related activity as
determined by the city;
B. The employee must be unable to return to work due to the injury, as verified by a
medical provider acceptable to the city;
C. The leave benefit may not exceed the value of the employee's net sala ry during the
period of absence due to the injury, less all amounts paid or credited to the employee as
workers’ compensation, Social Security, long-term disability or retirement benefits, or
any form of governmental relief whatsoever;
D. The value of benefits provided to employees under this injury leave program may
28
not exceed the total of $5,000 per employee per injury, unless approved in writing by
the employee’s department head after receiving an acceptable treatment plan and
consulting with the city’s risk manager;
E. The city's risk manager is principally responsible for the review of injury leave
claims, except that appeals from the decision of the city’s risk manager may be
reviewed by the Human Resources director, who may make recommendations to the
mayor for final decisions;
F. If an employee is eligible for workers’ compensation as provided by law and is not
receiving injury leave pursuant to this provision, an employee may elect to use either
accumulated sick leave or hours from the RL account, if applicable, and authorized
vacation time to supplement workers’ compensation. The total value of leave hours or
hours from an RL account combined with a workers’ compensation benefit may not
exceed an employee's regular net salary.
SUBSECTION IX - ADDITIONAL LEAVES OF ABSENCE
Additional leaves of absence may be requested in writing and granted as identified in policy
to an employee at the discretion of a department director.
SUBSECTION X - EMERGENCY LEAVE
The city may provide additional paid leave to employees if: i) the mayor has declared a
local emergency; and ii) the mayor and/or city council authorize and approve the use of
available funds for such purposes during the period of local emergency.
Emergency leave may also be provided as a form of income replacement for part -time
(hourly) and/or seasonal employees whose work hours are either red uced or discontinued
temporarily, so long as there is an expectation they will return to work after the emergency
period is ended.
29
APPENDIX A - SALT LAKE CITY COR PORATION
GENERAL EMPLOYEE PAY PLAN (GEPP)
Effective June 25. 2023
GRADE MINIMUM CITY MARKET MAXIMUM
SEAX/HRLY $12.46 $70.00
10 $13.23 $17.28 $21.33
11 $13.87 $18.15 $22.42
12 $14.57 $19.21 $23.85
13 $15.31 $20.02 $24.72
14 $16.07 $20.94 $25.81
15 $16.86 $22.16 $27.45
16 $17.70 $23.45 $29.20
17 $18.60 $24.41 $30.21
18 $19.53 $25.94 $32.34
19 $20.50 $27.08 $33.66
20 $21.54 $28.24 $34.93
21 $21.72 $29.63 $37.54
22 $22.84 $31.15 $39.45
23 $23.97 $32.71 $41.44
24 $25.17 $34.33 $43.48
25 $26.42 $36.03 $45.64
26 $27.75 $37.85 $47.94
27 $29.12 $39.75 $50.38
28 $30.57 $41.76 $52.94
29 $32.12 $43.85 $55.58
30 $33.72 $46.04 $58.36
31 $35.41 $48.35 $61.29
32 $37.17 $50.75 $64.33
33 $39.04 $53.31 $67.57
34 $40.99 $55.97 $70.95
35 $43.03 $58.77 $74.50
36 $45.18 $61.71 $78.23
37 $47.45 $64.79 $82.12
38 $49.82 $68.03 $86.23
39 $52.32 $109.88
40 $54.93 $115.35
41 $57.68 $187.12
30
GRADE MINIMUM CITY MARKET MAXIMUM
SEAX/HRLY $25,924.08 $83,494.32
10 $27,518.40 $35,948.64 $44,357.04
11 $28,850.64 $37,739.52 $46,628.40
12 $30,313.92 $39,945.36 $49,598.64
13 $31,842.72 $41,627.04 $51,411.36
14 $33,415.20 $43,548.96 $53,682.72
15 $35,075.04 $46,082.40 $57,089.76
16 $36,822.24 $48,768.72 $60,737.04
17 $38,678.64 $50,756.16 $62,833.68
18 $40,622.40 $53,944.80 $67,267.20
19 $42,631.68 $56,325.36 $70,019.04
20 $44,793.84 $58,727.76 $72,661.68
21 $45,186.96 $61,632.48 $78,078.00
22 $47,502.00 $64,777.44 $82,052.88
23 $49,860.72 $68,031.60 $86,202.48
24 $52,350.48 $71,394.96 $90,439.44
25 $54,949.44 $74,954.88 $94,938.48
26 $57,723.12 $78,711.36 $99,721.44
27 $60,562.32 $82,686.24 $104,788.32
28 $63,576.24 $86,857.68 $110,117.28
29 $66,808.56 $91,203.84 $115,599.12
30 $70,128.24 $95,768.40 $121,386.72
31 $73,644.48 $100,573.20 $127,480.08
32 $77,313.60 $105,574.56 $133,813.68
33 $81,201.12 $110,881.68 $140,540.40
34 $85,263.36 $116,429.04 $147,572.88
35 $89,500.32 $122,216.64 $154,954.80
36 $93,977.52 $128,353.68 $162,708.00
37 $98,694.96 $134,752.80 $170,810.64
38 $103,630.80 $141,479.52 $179,350.08
39 $108,828.72 $228,555.60
40 $114,245.04 $239,934.24
41 $119,967.12 $389,210.64
Annual Rates
31
APPENDIX B – APPOINTED EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT
Effective June 25, 2023
911 BUREAU Job Title Grade
911 DISPATCH DIRECTOR 041X
911 COMMUNICATIONS DEPUTY DIRECTOR 032X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
AIRPORT
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF AIRPORTS 041X
CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, AIRPORT 040X
DIRECTOR AIRPORT DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 039X
DIRECTOR AIRPORT MAINTENANCE 039X
DIRECTOR FINANCE/ACCOUNTING AIRPORT 039X
DIRECTOR OF AIRPORT ADMINISTRATION/COMMERCIAL SERVICES 039X
DIRECTOR OF AIRPORT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 039X
DIRECTOR OF AIRPORT PLANNING & CAPITAL PROJECTS 039X
DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS - AIRPORT 039X
DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONAL READINESS & TRANSITION 039X
DIRECTOR COMMUNICATIONS & MARKETING 038X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY ATTORNEY 041X
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY 040X
CITY RECORDER 035X
CITY COUNCIL
COUNCIL MEMBER-ELECT N/A*
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL OFFICE 041X
COUNCIL LEGAL DIRECTOR 039X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR - CITY COUNCIL 039X
ASSOCIATE DEPUTY DIRECTOR COUNCIL 037X
LEGISLATIVE & POLICY MANAGER 037X
SENIOR ADVISOR CITY COUNCIL 037X
SENIOR PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 033X
COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL 031X
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST III 031X
COMMUNITY FACILITATOR 031X
OPERATIONS MANAGER & MENTOR – CITY COUNCIL 031X
PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 031X
POLICY ANALYST/PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 028X
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST II 028X
CONSTITUENT LIAISON/POLICY ANALYST 027X
CONSTITUENT LIAISON 026X
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST I 026X
ASSISTANT TO THE COUNCIL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 025X
COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT/AGENDA 024X
COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 021X
COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 041X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 037X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY SERVICES 037X
32
DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (ENGINEER) 037X
PLANNING DIRECTOR 037X
BUILDING OFFICIAL 035X
DIRECTOR OF HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 035X
DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (PLANNER) 035X
YOUTH & FAMILY DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 041X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 037X
ARTS DIVISION DIRECTOR 033X
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT DIVISION DIRECTOR 033X
FINANCE
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 041X
CITY TREASURER 039X
DEPUTY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 039X
CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER 036X
FIRE
FIRE CHIEF 041X
DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF 037X
ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF 035X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
HUMAN RESOURCES
CHIEF HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICER 041X
DEPUTY CHIEF HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICER 037X
CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARD INVESTIGATOR 035X
TRANSITION CHIEF OF STAFF 041X*
TRANSITION COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR 039X*
TRANSITION EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X*
INFORMATION MGT SERVICES
CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 041X
CHIEF INNOVATIONS OFFICER 039X
DEPUTY CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 039X
JUSTICE COURTS
JUSTICE COURT JUDGE 038X
JUSTICE COURT ADMINISTRATOR 037X
MAYOR
CHIEF OF STAFF 041X
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 041X
COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR 039X
DEPUTY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 039X
DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF 039X
SENIOR ADVISOR 039X
COMMUNICATIONS DEPUTY DIRECTOR 030X
POLICY ADVISOR 029X
REP COMMISSION POLICY ADVISOR 029X
COMMUNITY LIAISON 026X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
OFFICE MANAGER - MAYOR'S OFFICE 024X
COMMUNITY OUTREACH - EQUITY & SPECIAL PROJECTS
COORDINATOR 024X
33
COMMUNICATION AND CONTENT MANAGER - MAYOR'S OFFICE 021X
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 019X
CONSUMER PROTECTION ANALYST 016X
POLICE
CHIEF OF POLICE 041X
ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE 039X
DEPUTY CHIEF POLICE 037X
ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR - COMMUNICATIONS 037X
ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR - INTERNAL AFFAIRS 037X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
PUBLIC LANDS
PUBLIC LANDS DIRECTOR 041X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR, PUBLIC LANDS 037X
GOLF DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
PARKS DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
URBAN FORESTRY DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
PUBLIC SERVICES
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES 041X
CITY ENGINEER 039X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS 038X
SAFETY & SECURITY DIRECTOR 037X
FACILITIES DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
FLEET DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
STREETS DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
COMPLIANCE DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
PUBLIC UTILITIES
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC UTILITIES 041X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC UTILITIES 039X
FINANCE ADMINISTRATOR PUBLIC UTILITIES 039X
CHIEF ENGINEER - PUBLIC UTILITIES 037X
WATER QUALITY & TREATMENT ADMINSTRATOR 037X
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 026X
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
DIRECTOR, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 041X
DEPUTY DIRECTOR, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 037X
SUSTAINABILITY
SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTOR 041X
SUSTAINABILITY DEPUTY DIRECTOR 037X
WASTE & RECYCLING DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X
Except for a change in job title or reassignment to a lower pay level, no appointed position on this pay
plan may be added, removed or modified without approval of the City Council.
* Compensation for transitional positions, including city council member -elect, is set as provided under Chapter 2.03.030 of the
Salt Lake City Code. Benefits for transitional employees are equivalent to those provided to full-time employees. Except for
leave time, benefits for city council members-elect are also equivalent to those provided to full-time employees.
34
APPENDIX C – ELECTED OFFICIALS SALARY SCHEDULE
Annual Salaries
Effective June 25, 2023
Mayor $168,067
Council Members $42,017
Except for leave time, benefits for the mayor and city council members are equivalent to those provided to
full-time employees.
35
APPENDIX D- UTAH STATE RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS FY 2023-2024
Tier 1 Defined Benefit System
System Employee
Contribution Employer Contribution Total
Public Employees Contributory System 6.0% 13.96% 19.96%
Public Employees Noncontributory System 0 17.97% 17.97%
Public Safety Noncontributory System 0 46.71% 46.71%
Firefighters Retirement System 0 23.05% 23.05%
Tier 1 Post Retired
System
Post Retired Employment
After 6/30/10 – NO 401(k)
Amortization of UAAL*
Post Retired Employment Before
7/1/2010
Optional 401(k)
Public Employees Noncontributory System 6.11%
11.86%
Public Safety Noncontributory System 24.20% 22.51%
Firefighters Retirement System 0% n/a
Tier 2 Defined Benefit Hybrid System
Employee
Contribution
Employer
Contribution 401(k) Total
Public Employees Noncontributory System 0% 16.01% 0.18% 16.19%
Public Safety Noncontributory System
(for entry and two year pay steps only) 2.59% (city paid) 38.28% 6.00% 46.87%
Public Safety Noncontributory System
(for pay steps year four or more) 2.59% (city paid) 38.28% 0% 40.87%
Firefighters Retirement System 2.59% (city paid) 14.08% 0% 16.67%
Tier 2 Defined Contribution Only
Employee
Contribution
Employer
Contribution 401(k) Total
Public Employees Noncontributory System 0% 6.19% 10.00% 16.19%
Public Safety Noncontributory System
(for entry and two year pay steps only) 0% 24.28% 22.27% 46.55%
Public Safety Noncontributory System
(for pay steps year four or more) 0% 24.28% 14.00% 38.28%
Firefighters Retirement System 0% 0.08% 14.00% 14.08%
36
Executive Non-Legislative
Position Employer Contribution
Public Employees Noncontributory System
Department Heads, Mayor,
Mayor’s Chief of Staff, Chief
Administrative Officer, Up to Two
Additional Senior Executives in the
Mayor’s Office, Executive Director
for City Council
Normal contribution into Utah Retirement
System (URS)with 3% into 401(k)
– OR –
If Tier 1 and exempt from system or Tier II and
exempt from vesting, 401k contribution equal to
the applicable URS system contribution plus 3%
Public Safety Noncontributory System Department Head Same as above
Firefighters Retirement System Department Head Same as above
Council Members Elected with prior service in the Utah Retirement System
(Tier 1 Defined
Benefit)
System Employee
Contribution Employer Contribution Total
Public Employees Noncontributory System 0 17.97% 17.97%
If exempt… 0 10% base salary to 401(k) 10%
Council Members Elected After July 1, 2011 with no prior service in the Utah Retirement
System (may exempt from vesting)
Tier 2 Defined Contribution
Only
Employer 401K Total
6.19% 10% 16.19%
Tier 2 Defined Benefit Hybrid
System
Employer 401K Total
16.01% 0.18% 16.19%
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P.O. BOX 145474
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474
WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM
TEL 801-535-7704
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
______________________________ Date Received: 8/28/2023
Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff
Date Sent to Council: 8/28/2023
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 8/28/2023
Darin Mano, Chair
FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff
Office of the Mayor
SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Arts Council Board
STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson
April.Patterson@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Arts Council Board
Committee
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the
recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Caitlin Tursic member of the
Arts Council Board.
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P.O. BOX 145474
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474
WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM
TEL 801-535-7704
August 28, 2023
Salt Lake City Council
451 S State Street Room 304
PO Box 145476
Salt Lake City, UT 84114
Dear Council Member Mano,
Listed below is my recommendation for the membership appointment for: Arts Council
Board.
Caitlin Tursic to be appointed for a three year term starting from date of City Council
advice and consent.
I respectfully ask for your consideration and support for this appointment.
Respectfully,
Erin Mendenhall, Mayor
cc: file
Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description
9/13/2023 9:23 Carrie Luker Westpointe Green Space Could you please stop the land grab in Westpointe. It's quite a bad spot for apartments-making a bad traffic
situation and it takes away one of the last horse/cattle properties in the city. It's beautiful and peaceful to
drive through there, but actually the mosquitoes are bad for humans too. Also the last public ATV trails are
there. Could we get individuals and families on a path to home ownership to start creating generational
wealth instead of eternally throwing money away on rent? Too many apartments here and they're more than
a monthly mortgage anyway. Please stop it. Let's keep our last green space asset.
9/13/2023 16:09 Katrina Larsen Please continue to protect Salt Lake wetlands To whom it may concern, I am taking time to write and beg you to consider the wetlands and its inhabitants
in decisions that you make regarding development of areas near or in the wetlands of the Great Salt Lake.
These wetlands are critical to not only the wildlife, but also human life in the area long term. Thank you for
your rejection of the blanket redistricting of this area that would have opened the door for massive
warehouse developments that would have been catastrophic to the wetlands and the lake. I hope you will
continue to act with courage in the future. 🙂 Thank you for your time. Have a good day! Katrina Larsen
9/13/2023 16:12 Janiece Pompa Inland port Hi – This is a plea that the Salt Lake City Council leave the zoning of the inland port area as it currently is,
rather than recommending that the zoning be changed to M1, which would enable it to be a warehouse
district. As I’m sure you know, Deeda Seed has pointed out that the 17,000 acres that are already zoned for
warehouses in Salt Lake comprise 23% of the city, and is contributing to the air quality problems we already
have. It has been reported that people living in Northpoint are having to endure construction dust, noise,
traffic problems, etc. that are a result of the construction that is now going on 24 hours per day and 7 days
per week for the warehouse development that has already been allowed. That has to be very disruptive and
undoubtedly is negatively affecting their quality of life. Let’s give them, and the rest of Salt Lake, a break.
Untrammeled industrial and population growth is ruining our way of life. Do we really have to say yes to
every money-making proposal that comes down the pike and fattens the wallets of developers, trucking
companies and other industries? Thanks for your consideration of our point of view – that this will NOT be a
good thing for us in the long run. Janiece L. Pompa, Ph.D. Adjunct Professor Emeritus Dept. of Educational
Psychology University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 84112
9/13/2023 16:13 Heather Wilkins The Thriving in Place:The Thriving in Place: I don't believe the Salt Lake City council or Mayor understands what thriving means. We
as residents have to work harder then most to pay taxes, eat and make sure if we have a morgage, or car
payments, that those budgets get met every month. Domnion energy 20%+ increase Water 20% increase
Property taxes 30%+ increase Local gas prices 40% increase Food coats 25%+ When you pay more to live, you
survive. Crime increase 150%+ Prostitution 25%+ Drugs kneedles% 100+ When do we thrive? Hold criminals
accountable for their crimes. How about giving us a tax break Mayor Mendenhall. I believe we need new
leadership, Rocky Anderson looks great right now now!!
9/13/2023 16:14 Anna Jackson Rezoning of Northpoint Area To Whom it May Concern, Please do not rezone to allow another warehouse district in the Northpoint area. It
is important to reduce, not add to, the pollution going into neighborhoods and the ecological destruction on
the South shore of Great Salt Lake. Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, Anna
9/13/2023 16:16 Christine Jackson SLC Northpoint Warehouse District Please do not put more Warehouse
9/13/2023 16:17 Tay Haines Opposing another warehouse district Please preserve our natural ecosystem particularly the Great Salt Lake. Thank you! Tay Haines
Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description
9/13/2023 16:18 Katie Pappas Northpoint Dear Council Members, Just want to follow up with you on the Northpoint Small Area Plan discussion of 9/5.
Thank you all for listening to and considering additional public comment on whether to approve the Plan as
currently written. Three major changes have occurred since development in the area was green-lighted by
the Anderson administration: 1. The Great Salt Lake is now in crisis. Every effort must be made to restore the
health of the lake and the important ecosystem that surrounds it. The lake's support of migratory bird
populations gives it international importance. Living here makes us the stewards of its preservation. Projects
that divert water from or contaminate the lake are not acceptable. 2. We are in a housing crisis and can't
keep up with current or projected needs of the area's population. The last thing we should be doing is
rezoning residential areas to industrial and tearing down existing housing. 3. The Utah Inland Port was
created by the Utah Legislature in 2018 and has resulted in accelerated warehouse and industrial
development in the NWQ that will likely exceed the local need for distribution facilities. Related to this, UIPA
has approved or is considering at least five inland port projects in the Great Salt Lake watershed. The impact
of these, on the lake and the environment, should be considered as a whole. Up-zoning on a case-by-case
basis is a big improvement over blanket M-1 zoning of the area. It allows the city and residents to consider
the details and impacts of developments in the area and will allow for annexation and preservation to move
forward. Personally, I would like to see the area remain as is with no further industrial development. The
warehouses currently being built are having a devastating impact on the people who have called the area
home for years. The city should immediately address those problems and ensure a livable situation for the
duration of the current construction. Please consider delaying approval of this plan until changes are made
that provide a pathway to Great Salt Lake shoreline preservation, appropriate annexation and zoning, and
accommodation for current and future residential use. Thanks for your consideration of this. Best regards,
Katie Pappas Salt Lake City
9/14/2023 11:11 Arezoo Sharp Missing Crossing Guard Good morning I am writing to voice concerns about the intersection at 1300 S and 1900 E and that this
intersection is without a crossing Guard at this moment in time. I have 2 boys attending Bonneville
Elementary located just up the street from this intersection and they along with many other children walk to
and from school daily. Myself, my husband and many other parents in our community have become
extremely aware of the situation and are very concerned about the many children that cross this intersection
daily without supervision. I understand there is a job posting for a crossing guard at this intersection,
however this issue needs to be covered by some temporary measures until the position is filled. I have
reached out to public safety to see if an officer can cover this intersection and I understand they are working
on it, but things are happening quick enough. As you may already know a young girl from Bonneville
elementary school was hit by a car last year and unfortunately passed away as a result. This incident as you
can imagine was a big hit on our community, we can’t have another incident like it happen again. My 10 year
old son came home from school 2 days ago telling me the crossing guard was gone and let me know he
looked all around, made good eye contact with the driver, held his handout and made sure his 6 year old
brother was close as they crossed this intersection. If my 10 year old is making a big deal of this it means it
really is a big deal. Children should always be aware and careful but as he spoke me to me the other day I
could sense the concern and worry in his voice. I would appreciate anything you can do to help this situation
and provide a temporary fix to the problem until the permanent fix is here. Thank you AZY SHARP
Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description
9/14/2023 16:36 Roberta Wheeler Rose Park Lane Annexation and Rezone Please reconsider this rezoning. The traffic in the area is bad already. To add another 1800 people coming and
going every day to the congestion is dangerous. The only outlet is on to a barely two lane road and a stop
sign. When the soccer fields are full, the traffic is really congested. More people will only make it worse. I
cannot see any place to make a second exit for this site. A fire in the area would be disasterus because fire
units would not be able to access the area. The logistics for the ingress and egress precludes this site from
adding additional people and traffic without MAJOR road upgrades which would take a number of years to
complete. Even with the upgrades to the roads, there is only one way out and in. There is not another place
to put a road. I really feel this is not a good option for the community due to the traffic problems of the area.
Roberta Wheeler 1427 N. Bloomfield Place Salt Lake City Ut
9/14/2023 16:38 Linda Korb the open streets project.During open streets, can we ride our ebikes to the downtown area? We love the open streets project. Thank
you Linda
9/14/2023 17:07 Micheal Olsa Homeless Hello, I'm so tired of the homelessness near by my neiborhood, I've been living here for about 2 years and it's
only gotten worse and worse. I have picked up so many needles and I'm so scared to walk my two pit bulls.
you'd think I have two pit bulls that should keep me safe but it hasn't because they are toms of homeless
doing drugs and drinking and everything around here. this is ridiculous and needs to be fixed.
9/15/2023 13:48 Manuel l. Gonzales regarding public Restrooms and Phones Att: Salt Lake City Utah USA City Council the DWFS has only allowed the use of the rest room's no out side
lines for phone calls when they see fit, Operation's are being told what too do by the subject involved in long
use of individuls sitting for long piroids of time on the toilets 1/2 -1 hours.
9/15/2023 16:29 Sharon Glanville Inland Port Hello, I’m a concerned citizen who is deeply concerned over the Inland Port. We won’t be able to breathe in
this valley or across the Wasatch Front. Our children, and their children deserve more. I’m not in favor.
Perhaps if you required every truck an to be electric. Make it a requirement and they will still come. Make a
breathable City and community. I wish all of you would have thought better for the health of you, your
family, and community over your profits. Thank you.9/15/2023 16:41 Kim Child Noise Complaint The Unity Block Party is taking place and she is upset about the noise. She lives in the Metro Condos, right
next to where the event is taking place. She states that this is making her home unlivable and drastically
affecting her husband who has brain cancer. She wants to know if the City noise ordinances can be changed
to make it so these concerts cannot be so loud.
9/15/2023 16:49 Hank Cobb E-bikes vs. Motorcycles Chris: In the evolution of e-bikes heading towards motorcycles, I think there needs to be some specifications
and appropriate training and licensing, keeping simple.... based on speed and equipment. Below are
proposed list of classes: 1. E-bikes (pedals/no pedals) <20mph - essentially a bicycle, so bicycle rules. 2. E-
bikes (exceed 20mph) used on streets as motorcycle -license, motorcycle endorsement, 16+ age -proper
lights, brake light, license plate., insurance. Simple thoughts to keep everyone safe. thanks, hank
9/19/2023 19:48 Christopher Foster Requiring vets at rodeos I live in the Marmalade. I would to mention that I strongly agree with the proposal to require vets at rodeos.
This seems like basic decency (and common sense). Thank you.
*llr -
l**+rt,*t
ttt
tt*
)
7
,t
I
\i--r ,F7\{
iL
o
\
\o
L/d
..s
s^{o sb
\
/
t
/
T
I
*ttt*ttt
**
J*
.lti
*it
*t
*
*
ttt
The animals used in rodeos are exempt
from animal cruelty laws in Utah under
Utah code 76-9-30l B.
lf you have to make an exemption in
animals cruelty laws for rodeos to exist,
you must recognize that rodeos are
inherently cruel.
CALF ROPING
"l keep 3O head of cattle around for practice, at $2OO a head.
You can cripple three or four in an afternoon. So it gets to be
a pretty expensive hobby." - T.K. Hardy, a calf roper and
veterinarian
"Calves whose necks are twisted and jerked in the calf
roping event would invariably sustain injuries to the
underlying tissue. lf the calf didn't have hair covering the
neck, we would likely see bruising of the skin also. The calf
weighs 22O lo 28O pounds. The rope around the neck stops
the head, but the weight of the calfs body keeps moving,
stretching the muscles and tissues in the neck. lt would be
like a 22O to 28O pound man hanging himself." -Dr. Peggy
Larson -former bareback bronco rider and large animal
veterinarian
"The Rodeo folks send their animals to the packing
houses where I have seen cattle so extensively
bruised that the only areas in which skin is
attached [to the body] was the head, neck, legs and
belly. I have seen animals with six to eight ribs
broken from the spine and at times puncturing the
lungs." -Veterinarian and USDA meat inspector C.C.
Haber
WILD COW MILKING
Similar to humans, cows need to be pregnant
and give birth for milk production and release to
occur.
Cows will have their calves taken away, and
forced into the stadium to be milked against
their will for entertainment and laughs.
A mother cow being violently choked by a rope
while being mocked and laughed at by
cowboys.
Contestants will pull the mother cows tails
as hard as they can to hold them in place
and milk them. An animal's tail is an
extension of the spine, and is extremely
sensitive.
o
lLto
o
G,
IJJ
Il-
FFou
oo
UJa3o
J
Iz
Foz
-
o
UJ
E,
f
o
=Photos: Draper Days Rodeo 7nl2O23
HOSE i RUBBEI SI
'j
tt*
.\ ..
:*
:-: .*t o **.
-qE-: -
Estimated s of small
Bu$ioesses/Artisti
$erved
Estimated funding
Amount Given to Each
Committee Scores
weighted (x3) +
Admin Score
Eof
Committe
e soofes Redmed Score
TUNDING OPTIOiI ,
Score'lAdmin
TOTAI.
(excluding
Busin€ss Name t Small Eusines$/Artist
Cornmunity 6rant
llcation l{ame '}
cGA-O0063359
cGA-OO063462
cGA-OO06l 19 I
cGA-OO061408
cGA-OO06ll29
cGA-OO06344 I
cGA,0006l2S7
cGA-()0063540
cGA-OO063503
cGA-O0063502
cGA-00063340
cGA-OOO84218
cGA-00084237
cGA-OO063478
cGA-OOO63487
cGASO63460
cGA-O0063377
cGA-00063529
CGA-OOO63528
CGA{OO63403
CGA-OOO63544
CGA{O063519
cGA-00063492
CGA{OO63549
CGA-@O63277
CGA{OO60853
cGA-OOO84t65
CGA-OOO63530
CGA{OO63531
cGA-OOO84234
CGA-@O63261
cGA-00063517
90
40
60tr
t:
2C)
5 to 1L]
t7
23
62
26
I
150
20
43
250
77
230
50 to 75
70
10
65
l6
55
t94
to0
94
76
36
N/A
17
N/A
Neigaborworks S3lt La(e
lJ:ar .ilr, (Ent€f
-l:aa Atir Alliance
SLiazo a.r rine: i (:enier
,:iri \l:troent€rpr 5€ Lo;,1 FLrr,c
. AACC C l-"r fl t:bi€ For-.r'|].rtio'l
J,rrove:y Grtew,ry L1 ldrer'5 Mr..:€Lrl-
Utah Cultural alliance Foundation
lnternational Rescue Committee
GK Folks Foundation
Spy Hop Productions
University of Utah - Bridging the Gap
Torrey House Pr€ss
Utah Pride Center
Shango Music and Dance DBA Samb€ Fogo
Utah Museum of Contemporary Art
Beloved community/Banded Black
Salt Lake ActinB Company
Utah Muslim Civic League
Utah Presents
JAYHAWKS Program
1520 Arts
Downtown Alliance
create Reel Change
Venturecapital.org
Brazilian Arts Center
Brolly Arts
Visual Art lnstitute
Utah Brewers Guild
Utah Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
Mundi Project
Kostopulos Dr€am Foundation/Camp K
Wasatch Theatre Company of Salt Lake
County
Community Building Seruices
The Other Side Academy
Ballet west
So to $r2,ooo
1800
Sgso to 52,ooo
$2o to 93oo
9o to Sro,o00
S25o to S1o,ooo
S8,ooo to S45,5oo
47o,5
33E2
$42s to S5,ooo
lo77
$1,ooo to 91s,ooo
S2oo to Ss,ooo
5flX)
S5oo to S2,ooo
So to $2,569
S15o to Ssooo
$3oo to Slo,ooo
So to Sz,ooo
1143
$soo to Slo,ooo
255
50(}0
S2oo to S6,000
S90 to Ss,ooo
S5oo to SToo
93oo to S5,ooo
S2oo to S&ooo
So to S6,000
N/A
5065
N/A
S2s to Ssoo
1088
$2o,ooo to S4o,oooo
S1,soo to S2,ooo
S loo,ooo
s 72,sOO
5 IOO,OOO
5 10o,ooo
s roo,0o0
S loo,ooo
s 1OO,0O0
$ loo,ooo
I 10o,ooo
S loo,ooo
$ loo,ooo
$ loo,ooo
S roo,ooo
S roo,ooo
s 75,0OO
S 1oo,oo0
S loo,ooo
$ loo,ooo
$ 1oo,oo0
s 7s,0o0
S so,ooo
S 1s,ooo
$ loo,ooo
$ loo,ooo
I loo,ooo
S so,ooo
S 7o,ooo
S loo,ooo
S loo,ooo
$ loo,ooo
$ 75,ooo
S loo,ooo
161
154
151
150
147
146
146
t6
149
143
141
139
7r7
137
137
136
136
133
113
t3l
130
130
128
L27
127
L26
L25
L22
12.1
120
116
119
120
113
tt2
82
508
487
476
{74
465
:16l
461
tl60
460
454
it45
441
416
415
412
432
411
423
42)
418
4r.0
40E
406
tt06
406
il{)1
194
la7
180
J73
,72
,69
,68
360
t58
261
84.67
81.17
79.11
79.00
77.50
77.r7
76.81
76.67
76.67
75.67
74.17
73.50
72.67
72.50
72.OO
72.00
7L.41
70.50
70.50
69.67
68.31
68.OO
67.67
67.67
67.67
66.83
65.67
64.50
63.33
62.17
62.00
61.50
25
25
2l
z4
)4
25
2l
22
25
25
22
24
2S
24
2t
24
2t
24
24
25
20
18
22
2E
2S
23
19
2t
t1
13
24
12
8
2t
22
15
s
I
5
5
:
5
5
s
$
s
s
s
$
s
s
$
s
$
$
)
$
s
s
$
$
$
I
s
$
s
s
s
s
s
s
$
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
. E4,_F7
s8,q!-6
79,)r3
.79,qqo
l!,59
7.7+61.
41,87
500,o00
cGA-00062683
cGA-00062730
cGA-00063495
cGA-00063218
15@
55
3
25
S so,ooo
S e7,o84
$ too,ooo
$ ss,ooo
61.13
@.00
59.67
43.50
Reouest {Sl
Admin
AVEAAGE
'orks Salt Lake $ I 00.000.00 .00
NONPROFIT SUBRECIPIENT APPLICANT
2022-2024
REQUESTED
FUNDING
2022-2024 CRC
RECOMMENDATION
#
I
7o Based on
NeighborWorks has two target projects for which the funds would be used. The first would be to offer a grant for lnternational Market vendors to cover their
fees associated with the market. The second project would be a storefront lease assistance grant to help remove barriers for small businesses to maintain a
brick-and-mortar location.
Type of Organization: 501c3
Target Population Served: Small Businesses
Estimated # of Target Population Served: 90
Estimated Funding Amount Given to Each of Target Population: $0 to S12,000
Utah Film Center's resource center for filmmakers and cinematic artists, called the Artist Foundry, currently offers co-working space, editing bays, private editing
suites, and workshops in documentary editing and screenwriting. Funding from Salt Lake City Corporation would provide up to 40 SlC-based filmmakers with
scholarships to attend the business of filmmaking workshops and the Artist Foundry and its resources.
Type of Organization: 501c3
Target Population Served: Artists
Estimated # of Target Population Served: 40
Estimated Funding Amount Given to Each of Target Population: Sf ,SOO
Programming will support a wide range of art forms and target various creative industries, ensuring platforms and opportunities for hundreds of local artists.
Support for artists will include access to resources for their professional development, commissions for art works, subsidized rehearsal and performance space,
and frequent opportunities to connect their work with the public.
Type of Organization: 501c3
Target Population Served: Artists
Estimated f of Target Population Served: 84
Estimated Funding Amount Given to Each of Target Population: SSSO to SZ,OOO
2
J
4
Utah Film Center (634621 $72.500.00
xlr 0.00 $79Utah Arts Alliance (63191)
Suazo Business Center (63408)$ r 00.000.00 $79.000.00
With the funds provided by this SLC Community Grant, the Suazo Center will be able to directly provide 550,000 to its clients in the form of loan repayments,
scholarships for services provided, waivers for mentoring expenses, and additional capital expenditure reimbursements the businesses may have acquired.
Type of Organization: 501c3
Target Population Served: Small Businesses
Estimated fr of Target Population Served: 600
Estimated Funding Amount Given to Each of Target Population: S20 to 5300
lltah Nlicroenterprise Loan Fund (63329)$77.S00.005
UMLF would create a grant program for our Salt Lake City small business owners alongside focused one-on-one business advising and financial review. With 80%
of the grant award, we would like to grant our 15-20 business owners who fall within SLC boundaries 20% oftheir original loan amount with a max of S10k per
individual business.
Type of Ortanization: 501c3
Tartet Population Served: Small Businesses
Estimated f otTattet Population Served: 15
Estimated Funding Amount Glven to Each of Target Population:50 to S10,000
UAACC will 1) provide 525,000 grant funds to four Salt Lake City businesses who participate in our "Shoking the Money lree" programming, 2) The
"Everydoy Entreprcneu Prcgrcm" is ptovided through The Mill at Salt Lake Community ColleSe and we would have facilitators for these classes to be held in our
space in downtown Salt Lake City. Tuition is S500 for each participant. The UAACC Charitable Foundation absorbs that cost. Each cohort caps at 10 participants.
Half of them will come from Salt Lake, 3) Additionally, each participant will receive S25O to get a bank account started for their busine5s.
1 Discovery Gateway Children's Museum (63287)$ 100.(n)0.00 $,1.3.,187.00
Discovery Gateway seeks to hire multiple community artists to showcase the rich and diverse population in Utah to create new murals for the museum. Through
our many special events throughout the year, we also hire several guest performers and artists. Just this past year during our World Connection Day we had 5
separate groups of artists and performers for this one event. ln addition to the community artists and performers that DGCM supports, we also have our full-
time Art lnstructor that teaches kids in the Art Studio of the museum.
Type of Organization: 501c3
Target Populatlon Served: Small Businesses/Artists
Estimated i orTa.gel Populatlon Sewed: 5 to 10
Estimated Funding Amount Given to Each of Target Populatlon: 58,000to S45,500
rNote: lunding oplion technically should be
$76,833 when Jbllowing _lbrmula, but $ afiouhl is
lowered to the remainder offunds lefl to hit
$500k mar
UAACC Charitable Foundation (6J441)$ 100.000.00 $77.t67.00
$ 100,000.00
Type of Ortanization: 501c3
Targ€t Fopulation Served: Small Businesses
Estimated * of Target Population Served: 20
€stimated Funding Amount civen to Each ofTarget Population: S250 to S10,000