The URL can be used to link to this page

10/03/2023 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WORK SESSION October 3, 2023 Tuesday 2:00 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 7:00 pm Formal Meeting Room 326 (See separate agenda) Welcome and public meeting rules In accordance with State Statute and City Ordinance, the meeting may be held electronically. After 5:00 p.m., please enter the City & County Building through the main east entrance. The Work Session is a discussion among Council Members and select presenters. The public is welcome to listen. Items scheduled on the Work Session or Formal Meeting may be moved and / or discussed during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance or availability of speakers. The Website addresses listed on the agenda may not be available after the Council votes on the item. Not all agenda items will have a webpage for additional information read associated agenda paperwork. Generated: 13:39:32 Note: Dates not identified in the project timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. Item start times and durations are approximate and are subject to change. Work Session Items 1.Informational: Updates from the Administration ~ 2:00 p.m. 15 min. The Council will receive information from the Administration on major items or projects in progress. Topics may relate to major events or emergencies (if needed), services and resources related to people experiencing homelessness, active public engagement efforts, and projects or staffing updates from City Departments, or other items as appropriate. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Recurring Briefing Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a 2.Informational: Equity Update ~ 2:15 p.m. 20 min. The Council will hold a discussion about various initiatives led by the City's Office of Equity and Inclusion. These initiatives include, but are not limited to, improving racial equity and justice in policing. Discussion may also include updates on the City's other work to achieve equitable service delivery, decision-making, and community engagement through the Citywide Equity Plan, increased ADA resources, language access, and other topics addressed in the ongoing work of the Human Rights Commission and the Racial Equity in Policing Commission. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Recurring Briefing Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a 3.Ordinance: Rezone at 2157 South Lincoln Street ~ 2:35 p.m. 20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning of the property located at 2157 South Lincoln Street from RB (Residential/Business District) to CSHBD2 (Sugar House Business District). This proposal would facilitate the redevelopment of this, and the adjacent parcels into a multi-family residential project. The property is currently occupied by a Victorian home used as an office building. Under the proposal, the home would be preserved and used as part of the project. Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics. The project is within Council District 7. Petitioner: Mark Isaac, representing the property owners. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, October 17, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, November 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 14, 2023 4.Ordinance: Rezone and Master Plan Amendment at 116 East Edith Avenue ~ 2:55 p.m. 20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning of properties located at 116 East Edith Avenue from R-1/5,000 (Single Family Residential District) to CC (Corridor Commercial District). This proposal would also amend the Central Community Future Land Use Map from Low-Density Residential to Community Commercial. The proposed amendments would allow for further commercial and multi- family development of the site and would make the property consistent with the adjacent property that shares the same owner. 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: Ian Kaplan of ADDVirtue, representing the property owners. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, October 17, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, November 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 14, 2023 5.Ordinance: Text Amendment Related to Maximum Height in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District ~ 3:15 p.m. 15 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend Section 21A.28.020 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to maximum height in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District. The proposed amendment would allow bulk material storage structures up to 150 feet in height to be built west of 5600 West, between 100 feet and 1000 feet south of Interstate 80. Petitioner: The Salt Lake Garfield and Western Railway Company FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 7, 2023 6.Ordinance: Budget Amendment No.2 for Fiscal Year 2023-24 Follow-up ~ 3:30 p.m. 30 min. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about Budget Amendment No.2 for the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and modifications. The proposed amendment includes $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 and Tuesday, October 3, 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 7.Informational: UDOT Interstate 15 Study Follow-up: Potential Widening and Interchange Improvements ~ 4:00 p.m. 20 min. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing from the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) about an environmental study on the Interstate 15 corridor between 400 South in Salt Lake City and the US-89 interchange in Farmington. The study aims to provide solutions to improve safety and mobility for all users, meet future demand, and replace aging infrastructure while better connecting communities. The study examines issues and needs, proposes potential solutions, evaluates their environmental impacts, and ultimately recommends a preferred option. For more information visit https://i15eis.udot.utah.gov/. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 3, 2023 and October 3, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a 8.Tentative Break ~ 4:20 p.m. 20 min. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - n/a Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a 9.Ordinance: Affordable Housing Incentives Follow-up ~ 4:40 p.m. 45 min. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about an ordinance that would amend various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code establishing a chapter for zoning incentives and adding affordable housing incentives. The proposed amendments would incentivize and reduce barriers for affordable housing. The incentives would include administrative design review and additional building height in various zoning districts, planned development requirement modifications, removal of the density requirements in the RMF zoning districts, and additional dwelling types in various zoning districts. Other sections of Title 21A – Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition. The changes would apply Citywide. The City Council may consider modifications to other related sections of the code as part of this proposal. For more information visit https://tinyurl.com/AffordableHousingIncentives. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, September 19, 2023 and Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD 10.Ordinance: The Anti-Gentrification and -Displacement Plan, Thriving in Place Follow-up ~ 5:25 p.m. 45 min. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about 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 and Tuesday, October 3, 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 11.Ordinance: North Temple Boulevard General Plan Amendment to Not Relocate Madsen Park Written Briefing - The Council will receive a written briefing about an ordinance that would amend the North Temple Boulevard Plan to remove a recommendation to relocate Madsen Park. The proposed amendment would add language to keep Madsen Park at its current location and would also reimagine and improve the park. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, October 17, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, November 7, 2023 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 14, 2023 12.Board Appointment: Cultural Core Finance Committee – Kathryn Carlisle-Kesling ~ 6:10 p.m. 5 min The Council will interview Kathryn Carlisle-Kesling prior to considering appointment to the Cultural Core Finance Committee for a term ending October 3, 2027. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 13.Board Appointment: Utah Performing Arts Center Agency – Helen Langan ~ 6:15 p.m. 5 min The Council will interview Helen Langan prior to considering appointment to the Utah Performing Arts Center Agency Board for a term ending October 3, 2027. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 14.Board Appointment: Transportation Advisory Board – Josh Stewart ~ 6:20 p.m. 5 min The Council will interview Josh Stewart prior to considering appointment to the Transportation Advisory Board for a term ending September 28, 2026. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Standing Items 15.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair Report of Chair and Vice Chair. 16.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director - - Report of the Executive Director, including a review of Council information items and announcements. The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to City Council business, including but not limited to scheduling items. 17.Tentative Closed Session - - The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session. A closed meeting described under Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including, but not limited to: a. discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; b. strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; c. strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; d. strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; e. strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; f. discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and g. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 5:00 p.m. on Friday, September 29, 2023, the undersigned, duly appointed City Recorder, does hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1) posted on the Utah Public Notice Website created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701, and (2) a copy of the foregoing provided to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others who have indicated interest. CINDY LOU TRISHMAN SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda, including but not limited to adoption, rejection, amendment, addition of conditions and variations of options discussed. The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. Administrative Updates October 3, 2023 www.slc.gov/feedback/ Regularly updated with highlighted ways to engage with the City. Community Engagement Highlights Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canBallpark NEXT / RDA Ballparknext.com Planning slc.gov/planning Thriving in PlacePlanning •Transmitted Projects •Reorganization of Local Historic District Chapter •Landscape Chapter Update •Planning Commission •Adaptive Reuse Ordinance – Sep.27th •Ballpark Station Area Zoning Map – Oct. 11 •Subdivision Code Updates – Oct. 11 •Community Benefit Requirements – Oct. 11 Transportation •Capitol Hill Traffic Calming •Working with community to improve project Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canBallpark NEXT / RDA Ballparknext.com Planning slc.gov/planning Thriving in PlacePublic Lands •Glendale Regional Park Playground •Pickleball •Making the Emerald Ribbon •Dinner Party! October 18, 5-7pm •Allen Park •Phase 2 is active •City Creek Water Treatment Upgrade •November 1 kick off Public Utilities Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canBallpark NEXT / RDA Ballparknext.com Planning slc.gov/planning Thriving in PlaceMayor’s Office Location Date Time Ellerbeck Bed & Breakfast Oct. 6 10am-12pm Urban Sailor Coffee, Sugar House Oct. 6 8am-10am Emigration Café Oct. 9 1pm-3pm Day-Riverside Library Oct. 11 3pm-5pm Homeless Resource Fair Oct. 13 9:30am-12:30pm Glendale/Mountain View CLC Oct. 27 3pm-5pm October Community Office Hours Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canOctober Events These events are a collection of City sponsored, ACE, and publicly permitted events. Event Date Event Location Renter Resource Night 10/4 Marmalade Library IRC's Spice Kitchen Incubator Discover Food Festival 10/7 200 E. Between Library and City Hall Resource Fair 10/13 Pioneer Park Homeless Resource Center Utilization •Sept 25th-29th HRCs:99.1% Rapid Intervention/ EIM •No EIM Plans this week •55 HEART-tracked camps •RIT locations: o VOA Outreach Engagement: 3 o RIT Site Rehabilitations: 7 (+17) Resource Fair •Friday 10/13 @ Pioneer Park •My Hometown Chili Dog BBQ Homelessness Update Additional System Information: Salt Lake Valley Coalition to End Homelessness (SLVCEH) endutahhomelessness.org/ salt-lake-valley Utah Office of Homeless Services (OHS) jobs.utah.gov/homelessness/ index.html LANGUAGE ACCESS UPDATE Salt Lake City Corporation’s policy is to provide timely, meaningful language access to services or programs to members of the public who have a limited ability to speak, understand, read, or write English. 28 Language Liaisons 24 workshop sessions 11/24 Completed Mayors Staff SLC Justice Courts 911 Dispatch Waste & Recycling Public Lands Transportation SLC Airport Public Services Sustainability Economic Development Arts Council 8 more scheduled through October 2023 Future efforts The language access coordinator will continue to explore best practices for serving people who do not speak English and how to incorporate plain language and cultural competency in city staff training. 2 Training content includes: ü The legal basis (Law and Policy) for providing language assistance. ü The Language Access Plan and Protocols ü Best practices for working with Limited English Proficient persons and deaf persons ü Best practices for collaborating with an interpreter ü Requesting translation and interpretation services ü Documentation of language assistance requests (tracking of services) Xris Macias: Language Access Coordinator xris.macias@slcgov.com Eradicate Hate Global Summit - Pittsburgh, PA Utah delegation in participating in conference & working groups Overall Experience Utah delegation with holocaust survivor, Inge Auerbacher Utah delegation with representatives from Guiding Rage Into Power (GRIP) Takeaways/Action Items Racial Equity in Policing Commission (REP) -Working closely with SLCPD to develop a toolkit and assessment for dealing with reports of hate incidents Human Rights Commission (HRC) -Collaboration with REP on community dialogue sessions to gauge experiences of hate in Salt Lake City Community Partners Against Hate -Involvement in planning a local or regional summit to gauge more Utah communities in these efforts Disability Community Forum This forum is held by the Accessibility and Disability Commission for people with disabilities to share questions, priorities, and concerns about accessibility and inclusion in the city. The event is an opportunity for residents and visitors to let city officials know what is working and where there is room for improvement. The Commission will also provide an update on their goals and priorities. This event is in partnership with the SLC Public Library. • What: Disability Community Forum • When: Thursday, October 26 th from 3:00 to 4:30 PM • Where: Marmalade Library (280 W 500 N, SLC, UT 84103) • Who: People with disabilities and their families or support systems • Why: The discussions at the forum will help shape the Commission’s 2024 goals and priorities. 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:October 3, 2023 RE: Zoning Map Amendment at 2157 South Lincoln Street PLNPCM2023-00239 The Council will be briefed about a proposal to amend the zoning map for the approximately 0.7-acre parcel at 2157 South Lincoln Street in City Council District Seven from its current RB (Residential/Business District) zoning designation to C-SHBD2 (Sugar House Business District). In addition to the subject parcel, the petitioner owns parcels at 2131 South Lincoln Street and 2134, 2140, 2156, and 2160 South 1000 East which are currently zoned CSHBD2. Under the petitioner’s proposal, a 60- foot tall (maximum CSHBD2 building height) 238-unit market rate apartment complex would be constructed on the six parcels. The proposed unit mix would be 79 studios (33%), 90 1-bedroom (38%), and 69 (29%) 2-bedroom units with 240 onsite parking spaces. A Victorian home currently used as an office building is on the subject property and the petitioner proposes to retain it for use as amenity space for residents of the proposed apartment complex. It should be noted that the home is not in a local historic district and has no protection from demolition. In its recommendation to the City Council the Planning Commission included a condition that the petitioner enter into a development agreement with the City to ensure that the home is preserved. As shown in the map below, area zoning is primarily CSHBD2, with some RMF-35 (Moderate-Density Multi-family Residential) on the subject block and blocks to the east and west. Blocks to the south are a mix of FB-SE (Form-Based Special Purpose Edge) on properties fronting 2100 South, CSHBD2 for properties fronting McClelland Street, and R-1/5,000 (single-family residential) between. The S-Line streetcar and bike and pedestrian greenway is approximately ½ block to the south of the subject parcel and shown in green. Item Schedule: Briefing: October 3, 2023 Set Date: October 17, 2023 Public Hearing: November 7, 2023 Potential Action: November 14, 2023 Page | 2 Area zoning map with the subject parcel outlined in blue and the project area outlined in red. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed zoning map amendment during its July 26, 2023 meeting and held a public hearing at which three people, including a representative from the Sugar House Community Council spoke. The commenters were supportive of the proposed zoning map amendment, but expressed concerns about parking, landscaping, and sidewalk width. Commissioners discussed sidewalk width and whether to recommend a condition requiring minimum 10- foot-wide sidewalks as called for in the Sugar House Circulation and Streetscape Amenities Plan. It is worth noting some Commissioners felt the additional width was beneficial for the area, while others expressed concerns with loss of park strips and trees. The Commission voted 5-2 to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council. As part of its recommendation, the Commission included the above-mentioned condition to preserve the Victorian home, and a second condition to extend the width of sidewalks abutting the subject parcels to include the park strip area. Page | 3 Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed zoning map amendments, determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to ask the applicant if they would be amenable to including affordable units in the proposed development. 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? 2. The Council may wish to ask the Administration how the recently transmitted Affordable Housing Incentives proposal may impact this petition or development potential on the property if the petitioner will consider affordable units. 3. If supportive of the zoning map amendment, the Council may wish to discuss whether to require a development agreement that preserves the Victorian home. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Council is only being asked to consider rezoning the property. A formal site plan has been submitted to the City, but it is not within the scope of the Council’s authority to review the plans. (It is worth noting that the Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the petitioner’s design review application at the same meeting it voted to forward a positive recommendation to the Council on the zoning map amendment.) Because zoning of a property can outlast the life of a building, any rezoning application should be considered on the merits of changing the zoning of that property, not simply based on a potential project. KEY CONSIDERATIONS Planning staff identified four key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 6-8 of the Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the staff report. Consideration 1 – Is the C-SHBD appropriate in the proposed location? Planning staff noted the Sugar House Master Plan future land use map designates the subject property as “Business District Mixed-Use Neighborhood Scale.” This is consistent with the future land use map’s designation for all other parcels on the block. It is Planning’s opinion that the requested change from RB to CSHBD2 zoning designation is reasonable and appropriate for the location. Consideration 2 – Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning As shown in the map above, area zoning is predominantly CSHBD2 on the subject block and blocks to the east and west. FB-SE, R-1/5,000, and CSHBD2 are to the south. Nearby land uses are a mix of commercial and residential. Smith’s grocery store is immediately to the west across Lincoln Street, low- and moderate- density residential, and a tire shop are to the north. A small office building, duplexes and high-density housing is to the northeast. Single-family residential is across Elm Avenue to the south. Consideration 3 – City Adopted Master Plans Planning found that the proposal is consistent with the CSHBD zoning district purpose statement which says: “The purpose of the CSHBD Sugar House Business District is to promote a walkable community with a transit oriented, mixed-use town center that can support a 24-hour population. The CSHBD provides residential, commercial and office use opportunities, with incentives for high density residential land uses in a manner compatible with the existing form and function of the Sugar House Master Plan and the Sugar House Business District.” Planning staff further found that the proposal meets various principles and initiatives found in the Sugar Page | 4 House Master Plan (2005), Plan Salt Lake (2015), and the SLC Urban Design Element (1990). Consideration 4 – Preservation of the Victorian Mansion The petitioner proposes preserving the Victorian home on the subject property. As mentioned above, the home is not in a historic district and has no protection from demolition. Planning staff noted the home would provide an anchor for the project, and act as a buffer between the proposed development and single- family residential to the south across Elm Avenue. Planning staff and the Planning Commission recommended including a development agreement to preserve the home if the Council is supportive of the proposed zoning map amendment. The petitioner provided the following concept rendering illustrating how the Victorian home could be incorporated into the proposed development. Image courtesy of petitioner ZONING COMPARISON The following table compares building height and setback requirements for the current RB and proposed CSHBD2 zoning districts. RB (Current)CSHBD2 (Proposed) Maximum Building Height 30 feet 60 feet for residential use. 30 feet for nonresidential use. Front Setback 20% of lot depth, but need not exceed 25 feet. No minimum yard required. Maximum setback is 15 feet. Side Setback Corner side yard: 10 feet.Corner side yard: no minimum yard required. Maximum setback is 15 feet. Interior side yard: None required. Page | 5 Interior side yard: 6 feet; provided, that on interior lots one yard must be at least ten feet. Rear Setback 25% of lot depth, but the yard need not exceed 30 feet. None required. Analysis of Factors Attachment D (pages 67-68) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines zoning map amendment standards that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. The standards and findings are summarized below. Please see the Planning Commission staff report for additional information. Factor Finding Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the city as stated through its various adopted planning documents. Complies Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies The extent to which a proposed map amendment will affect adjacent properties Complies 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 concerns with the proposal, but stated additional review and permits would be required if the property is developed. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • April 14, 2023-Petition for zoning map amendment received by Planning Division. • May 15, 2023-Petition assigned to Lex Traughber, Senior Planner. o Notice mailed to the Sugar House Community Council and Sugar House Chamber of Commerce. • June 7, 2023-Petitioner presented their proposal to the Sugar House Community Council, with Planning staff in attendance. Page | 6 • June 26, 2023-Early notification mailed to property owners and tenants located within 300 feet of the subject property boundaries. • July 12, 2023-Property posted with signs for the July 26, 2023 Planning Commission hearing. • July 13, 2023-Public hearing notice mailed to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject property. Planning Commission agenda emailed to Planning listserv. Project posted to City Planning and State websites. • July 26, 2023-Planning Commission public hearing. The Planning Commission voted to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed zoning map amendment. • July 31, 2023-Draft ordinance sent to the City Attorney’s Office for review. • August 3, 2023-Planning received signed ordinance from the Attorney’s Office. • September 8, 2023-Transmittal received in City Council Office. CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING // OCTOBER 3, 2023 10TH & ELM APARTMENTSZONING MAP AMENDMEMT PLNPCM2023-00239 Mark Isaac, representing the property owner, is requesting a zoning map amendment to rezone the property located at approxima tely 2157 S. Lincoln Street as follows: • Existing zoning -RB (Residential/Business District) • Proposed zoning –C-SHBD2 (Sugar House Business District) The City Council has decision making authority for Zoning Map Amendment requests. The property owner intends to construct an apartment complex (approximately 238 units) if the map amendment is approved. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission forwarded a recommendation for approval with two conditions: 1.Petitioner shall enter into a development agreement to guarantee the preservation of the existing Victorian mansion currently located on the 2157 S.Lincoln Street parcel;and 2.Petitioner shall increase the width of the sidewalk to extend it to the curb abutting the parcels that are the subject of Petitioner’s design review application (Petition No.PLNPCM2023-00092). PROJECT REQUEST Salt Lake City // Planning Division Salt Lake City // Planning Division Salt Lake City // Planning Division Height:Varies slightly by façade but does not exceed 60’ anywhere (See plans) Number of Residential Units:238 units Ground Floor Uses: Entrance lobby/leasing, office space, residential units, garage entry and loading, pool in the interior courtyard. Upper Floor Uses: Residential units & residential amenities (Fitness, lounge areas) Exterior Materials: Glass, board form concrete, various fiber cement lap siding, aluminum storefront, glass & metal railings, vinyl windows Parking: 196 stalls Review Process & Standards: Zoning Map Amendment (21A.50) Salt Lake City // Planning Division Salt Lake City // Planning Division South Elevation along Elm Avenue QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS Salt Lake City // Planning Division Lex Traughber // Senior Planner Lex.traughber@slcgov.com ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: 09/08/2023 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date sent to Council: 09/08/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: September 6, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods _ SUBJECT: Petition PLNPCM2023-00239 2157 S. Lincoln Street Zoning Map Amendment STAFF CONTACT: Lex Traughber, Senior Planner (801) 535-6184 or lex.traughber@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council amend the zoning map as recommended by the Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Mark Isaac, representing the property owner, proposes to amend the zoning map to change the zoning for the 0.7 acre parcel located at approximately 2157 S. Lincoln Street from RB (Residential Business District) to C-SHBD2 (Sugar House Business District) in its entirety. The parcel is currently occupied by a Victorian mansion used as an office building, and the applicant intends to retain the mansion as part of the proposal. This zoning map amendment change will facilitate construction of a new multi-family residential development on a portion of the parcel. The zoning map amendment is consistent with the future land use designation for the property as outlined in the Sugar House Master Plan. 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 rachel otto (Sep 8, 2023 09:11 MDT) The Planning Commission reviewed the request at a public hearing on July 26, 2023. The commission determined the request met the standards for a zoning map amendment. The commission voted to forward a positive recommendation to City Council to amend the zoning map from RB to C-SHBD2, with the following two conditions: 1. Petitioner shall enter into a development agreement to guarantee the preservation of the existing Victorian mansion currently located on the 2157 S. Lincoln Street parcel; and 2. Petitioner shall increase the width of the sidewalk to extend it to the curb abutting the parcels that are the subject of Petitioner’s design review application (Petition No. PLNPCM2023- 00092). To clarify these conditions, Planning Staff recommended the first condition because the mansion is not in a local historic district nor is it an individually listed site, and therefore demolition is not regulated and it could potentially be torn down. Retention of the mansion has always been something that was presented to the community by the developer as an amenity of the overall project and the development agreement would ensure retention. The second condition was added by the Planning Commission based on public comment at the public hearing. Section 21A.26.060(N) of the zoning ordinance addressed sidewalk width and calls for 10’ sidewalks in the C-SHBD zones. This section of code goes on to say that modifications to this requirement may be approved by the planning director if in compliance with the adopted "Sugar House Circulation and Streetscape Amenities Plan" or its successor. The Sugar House Master Plan (Business District Design Guideline Handbook – page 20) refers to 8’ sidewalks in high traffic areas and 6’ sidewalks in low traffic areas. In addition, the Sugar House Business District Circulation and Amenities plan looks at sidewalk widths along 2100 South, Highland Drive/1100 East & McClelland/1100 East. The associated McClelland map shows the corridor that is close to this project site and calls for 5-8’ sidewalks. The applicant proposed a mix of sidewalk widths of 5-7’ depending on location. Given the residential nature of this and surrounding development, Planning Staff, after consulting with the Planning Director, supported the applicant’s proposal of 5-7’ wide sidewalks as being appropriate when considered with the tree lined parkway between the curb and the sidewalk. The Planning Commission disagreed with this assertion and stipulated a condition that the sidewalk extend to the back of the curb to effectively increase the sidewalk width. PUBLIC PROCESS: ● Early Notification – Notification of the proposal was sent to all property owners and tenants located within 300 feet of the subject parcels on June 26, 2023. In addition, the Sugar House Community Council and the Sugar House Chamber of Commerce were also provided notification on May 15, 2023. ● Sugar House Community Council – The applicant presented and discussed the proposal to rezone the property at the Sugar House Community Council meeting on June 7, 2023. Planning Staff was in attendance. ● Planning Commission Meeting – On July 26, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the proposed zoning map amendment. The Planning Commission voted to forward a positive recommendation regarding the proposal on to the City Council for decision. PLANNING AND HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION RECORDS: a) PC Agenda of July 26, 2023 (Click Here) b) PC Minutes of July 26, 2023 (Click Here) c) PC Staff Report of July 26, 2023 (Click Here) d) PC Hearing of July 26, 2023 (Click Here) EXHIBITS: 1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING 3. ORIGINAL PETITION 4. MAILING LIST 5. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT (RECEIVED AFTER STAFF REPORT PUBLICATION) SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2023 (Amending the zoning of the property located at 2157 S. Lincoln Street from RB Residential/Business District to CSHBD2 Sugar House Business District) An ordinance amending the zoning map pertaining to the property located at 2157 S. Lincoln Street from RB Residential/Business District to CSHBD2 Sugar House Business District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00239. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a public hearing on July 26, 2023 on a petition submitted by Mark Isaac, representing the property owner, 1000 E SUGARHOUSE APARTMENTS, LLC (“Petitioner”), to rezone the property located at 2157 S. Lincoln Street (Parcel number 16-20-136-006) (the “Property”) from RB Residential/Business District to CSHBD2 Sugar House Business District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00239; 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 application with the conditions provided in Section 2 below; and WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the city council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be and hereby is amended to reflect that the Property identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto shall be and hereby is rezoned from RB Residential/Business District to CSHBD2 Sugar House Business District. SECTION 2. Conditions. The proposed zoning map amendment is conditioned upon the Petitioner entering into a development agreement with Salt Lake City that requires the Property’s owner and its successors to use and develop the Property as follows: 1. Petitioner shall enter into a development agreement to guarantee the preservation of the existing Victorian mansion currently located on the 2157 S. Lincoln Street parcel; and 2. Petitioner shall increase the width of the sidewalk to extend it to the curb abutting the parcels that are the subject of Petitioner’s design review application (Petition No. PLNPCM2023- 00092); and SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. The Salt Lake City Recorder is instructed to not publish this ordinance until the conditions set forth in Section 2 are satisfied as certified by the Salt Lake City Planning Director or his designee. SECTION 4. Time. If the conditions set forth in Section 2 have not been met within one year after adoption, this ordinance shall become null and void. The City Council may, for good cause shown, extend the time period for satisfying the above conditions by resolution. 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 2157 S Lincoln Street with DA APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date: August 3, 2023 By: Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney EXHIBIT “A” Legal Description for the Property to be Rezoned: Address: 2157 S. Lincoln Street Tax ID No. 16-20-136-006 GENEVA PLACE 1115LOTS 1 TO 8 INCL BLK 3 GENEVA PLACE 5476- 1134 5476-1137 5851-0751,0753 5882-2969 5993-0733 6090-0374 7412- 2833 8414-8416 8526-2230 08526-2239 Contains 30,492 sq feet or 0.7 acres more or less. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING 3. ORIGINAL PETITION 4. MAILING LIST 5. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT (RECEIVED AFTER STAFF REPORT PUBLICATION) 1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY PROJECT CHRONOLOGY 2157 S. Lincoln Street Zoning Map Amendment Petition PLNPCM2023-00239 April 14, 2023 Petitions received by the City. May 15, 2023 Petition assigned to Lex Traughber. May 15, 2023 The Sugar House Community Council & the Sugar House Chamber of Commerce were emailed notification of the proposal. June 7, 2023 The applicant formally presented the proposal to the Sugar House Community Council at their regularly scheduled monthly meeting. Planning Staff was in attendance. June 26, 2023 Early notification mailed to property owners and tenants located within 300 feet of the subject property boundaries. July 12, 2023 Property posted with signs for the July 26, 2023 Planning Commission hearing. July 13, 2023 Notice of the Planning Commission’s July 26, 2023 Public Hearing mailed to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject property. Listserve notification of Planning Commission agenda emailed. Agenda posted on the Planning Division and State websites. July 26, 2023 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The Planning Commission voted to forward a positive recommendation regarding the request on to the City Council for a decision. July 31, 2023 Sent a draft ordinance to the City Attorney’s Office for review reflecting the Planning Commission’s recommendation regarding the zoning map amendment. Requested review of the draft ordinance. August 3, 2023 Received ordinance from the City Attorney’s Office. August 25, 2023 Transmittal submitted to CAN. 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2023-00239 – 2157 S. Lincoln Street Zoning Map Amendment – Mark Isaac, representing the property owner, proposes to amendment the zoning map to change the zoning for the 0.7 acre parcel noted above from RB (Residential Business District) to C-SHBD2 (Sugar House Business District) in its entirety. The parcel is currently occupied by a Victorian mansion used as an office building. This zoning map amendment change will facilitate the redevelopment of this parcel into a multi-family residential project. The subject property is located in Council District 7 represented by Sarah Young. As part of their study, the City Council is holding two advertised public hearings to receive comments regarding the petition. During these hearings, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider adopting the ordinance on the same night of the second public hearing. The hearing will be held electronically: DATE: Date #1 and Date #2 TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: **This meeting will not have a physical location. **This will be an electronic meeting pursuant to the Salt Lake City Emergency Proclamation. If you are interested in participating in the Public Hearing, please visit our website at https://www.slc.gov/council/ to learn how you can share your comments during the meeting. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801)535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Lex Traughber at (801) 535-6184 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail at lex.traughber@slcgov.com People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance in order to participate in this hearing. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. 3. ORIGINAL PETITION 360 W 300 S, Suite 102 Salt Lake City, UT 84101 385-273-3888 dwelldesignstudio.com Rezoning Amendment Our Statement: We are requesting a zoning amendment of the parcel located on the corner of Lincoln and Elm, currently zoned RB to CSHBD2. Granting this request will allow us to achieve and promote a more walkable and integrated community, with higher density compatible with the envisioned master plan for the Sugar House Business District that currently neighbors this parcel on multiple sides. Our Purpose: “A dance of old and new”, a guiding principle of our design is to establish the harmony between old and new. The Victorian mansion that currently resides on this parcel is a part of Sugarhouse’s rich history, and our approach is to respect what is old and what is new. The intent is for the Victorian to be an enjoyable amenity space for the tenants of the multifamily development planned for the parcels neighboring the mansion. By granting this amendment it will allow us too also better incorporate the new build into the Victorian with the reduction of setback requirements associated to the CSHBD2. The Mansion is currently used by a small investment firm, and the architectural beauty of the building is underappreciated due to the privacy of its use. By including the mansion in the residential development zone, it will enable the use of an underutilized architectural gem. Reasons Why: 1. Not granting this amendment will leave this parcel isolated to the rest of the zoning in the area, which in turn works against promoting the walkable, more transit-oriented district that Sugar House Master plan is working hard to achieve. 2. The design intent is to integrate the Victorian mansion into the new build. By not granting this amendment, the separation requirements between the two zones would be detrimental to the project by not enabling a more direct connection between the 2 structures. 3. Additionally, by including the Victorian Mansion in the development, a piece of Sugarhouse’s historical architectural fabric will be permanently protected. Request amending the Zoning Map: The request will amend the existing Zoning Map. The parcel to be amended is 16-20-136-006-000 (see attached zoning map for reference). 360 W 300 S, Suite 102 Salt Lake City, UT 84101 385-273-3888 dwelldesignstudio.com 4. MAILING LIST OWN_FULL_NAME OWN_ADDR OWN_CITY OWN_STA OWN_ZIP NUPETCO ASSOCIATES, LLCET AL 2001 S WINDSOR ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105 SUTTONS WESTERN WHOLESALEFLOORING, INC 823 S MAIN ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SUGARHOUSE DISTRIBUTING INC 7997 S HUNTERS MEADOW CIR COTTONWOOD HTS UT 84093 LANDMARK 973 E 2100 S LLC PO BOX 980580 PARK CITY UT 84098 NEILSON, DANIEL L &STACEY M; JT 2092 S 1000 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105 SMITH'S FOOD KING PROPERTIESINC 1014 VINE ST 7TH FLOOR CINCINNATI OH 45202 INGRAM BARTON HOLDINGS, LLC 733 N MAIN ST SPANISH FORK UT 84660 FLEEGE, JAMES 922 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 WAAGEN, ANGELA M &KIM C; JT 924 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 TREMBLAY SIMES FAM TRET AL 8769 S WILLOW GREEN DR SANDY UT 84093 SAPPINGTON, DANIELLESAPPINGTON, JONAS 968 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 SMITH, ABRAHAM &COLTON, KIMBERLY; JT 2186 S LINCOLN ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 HART, ROBERT J 2190 S LINCOLN ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 SUGARMONT PLACE DEVELOPMENTLLC 733 N MAIN ST SPANISH FORK UT 84660 SORENSON, BLAIR W &MARGENE; TRS PO BOX 526136 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84152 1000 E SUGARHOUSE APARTMENTS,LLC 2157 S LINCOLN ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 1000 E SUGARHOUSE APARTMENTS,LLC 2156 S 1000 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 1000 E SUGARHOUSE APARTMENTS,LLC 2160 S 1000 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 AGHDAS SIMIN TOOMEY LIV TRTOOMEY, AGHDAS S; TR 635 N DEARBORN ST CHICAGO IL 60654 974 EAST 2100 SOUTH, LLC 1075 E 2100 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 RYANS ON ELM, LLC 948 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 STEVENSON, AARON N &CAITLIN B; JT 956 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 BRADY, CONNOR; JTHANKS, CANDACE; JT 960 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 JOHNSON, KRISTI M &GIBSON, MARSHA; JT 2187 S LINCOLN ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 CARLISLE, JOHN W &DREES, BETH E; JT 2195 S LINCOLN ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 LASKOWSKI, STEPHEN E; JTCATE, SHELBY; JT 2197 S LINCOLN ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 ROSA M CASTRO TRCASTRO, ROSA M; TR 2192 S 1000 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 WHEELER, DAVID S; JTWHEELER, MICHELLE M; JT 2196 S 1000 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 Property Owner 968 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 Property Owner 974 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 Property Owner 11724 S SUN TEA WY SOUTH JORDAN UT 84009 Property Owner 1525 E REDONDO AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105 HARVARD PLUMB LLC 1468 E HARVARD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105 MCCLELLAND STREET ASSOCIATESLC 1165 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 U S BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION;TR ET AL 428 W RIVERSIDE AVE SPOKANE WA 99201 MILES, GARETT &HALEY; JT 42843 CHAMPNEY CT BROADLANDS VA 20148 ZHAO, ZHONGLIANG &TANG, WEI; JT 8156 S MAIO DR SANDY UT 84093 RUELAS, AURELIO 1015 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 ROCKWOOD INVESTMENTASSOCIATES, LC 5882 S HOLLADAY BLVD HOLLADAY UT 84121 MCCLELLAND STREETASSOCIATES LC 1165 E WILMINGTON AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 SREIT SUGAR FLATS SLC, LLC 2340 COLLINS AVE MIAMI FL 33139 DILLON, JAMIL 1002 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 HERTZEL, JONDAVID F 1010 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 REIMHERR, PATRICK M 1014 E ELM AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 HAO NGOC EVANS TREVANS, HAO N; TR 887 E THIRD AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103 GOOD, FOREST R 2187 S 1000 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 MURDOCK, VALERIE 2193 S 1000 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 MARK E PITTMAN REV TRPITTMAN, MARK E; TR 2195 S 1000 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 DIXON PLACE LLC 2170 S MCCLELLAND ST #100 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 Current Occupant 935 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 955 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 959 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 967 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 973 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 975 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 922 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 910 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 916 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 932 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 940 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2185 S 900 E Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 960 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2131 S LINCOLN ST Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2134 S 1000 E Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2140 S 1000 E Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 944 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 974 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1001 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1020 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2124 S MCCLELLAND ST Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1003 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1007 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2141 S 1000 E Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1010 E 2100 S Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2150 S MCCLELLAND ST Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 1024 E ELM AVE Salt Lake City UT 84106 Current Occupant 2170 S MCCLELLAND ST Salt Lake City UT 84106 Lex Traughber 451 S. State Street, Room 406, PO BOX 145480 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114-548 5. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT (RECEIVED AFTER STAFF REPORT PUBLICATION) From: John Stefanic To: Planning Public Comments Subject: (EXTERNAL) 10th and Elm Date: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 11:02:59 AM Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. This is a public comment for the 10th and Elm project. I live on the end of Lincoln St, approximately one block south of the 10th and Elm project. The intersection at Lincoln and Elm is dangerous because of the reduced sight lines and street parking that surrounds all sides of the blocks. This is a popular place for patrons of Smith’s to park and it is temporary home to a lot of RVs and campervans. I have witnessed two accidents here and my wife’s car was hit by a speeding car down Elm that could not see her pulling out of Lincoln. The plans for the 10th and Elm project have the buildings extending as far up to the sidewalks as possible, and the sightlines for cars are already terrible in this neighborhood. By extending the sidewalk width, sightlines for vehicles will be improved and pedestrians will have more space to walk (it’s pretty challenging to pass someone with a dog or a stroller as it is now). Developers get whatever they want in this neighborhood— please start setting some precedents that promote the safety and character of our neighborhood. This is another project with no street activation that is going to gobble up another full city block. Please consider something beyond an investment bank’s bottom line. We’re sick of ground floor parking garages and boring facades winning out over the needs of the residents of Sugar House. John Stefanic Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. From: Judi Short To: Traughber, Lex Subject: (EXTERNAL) Fwd: 10th and Elm Date: Thursday, August 3, 2023 2:13:22 PM Here is another comment on Tenth and Elm Judi Short, First-Vice Chair and Land Use Chair Sugar House Community Council 801,864.7387 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Dayna McKee <dmckee3313@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 1:47 PM Subject: 10th and Elm To: Judi Short <judi.short@gmail.com> Hi Judi, Trying to play catch up again here. I agree with you that the updated zoning ordinance for 10' sidewalks should be adhered to. Additionally, I agree that the landscaping plan is critical to continue to mitigate the effects of climate change and air pollution in our community, particularly with such a high influx on people coming into the neighborhood through all of the high density development that has been and will continue to occur. I would also argue that all future development projects should be making provisions for solar power, water wise landscaping and building materials, etc. We should be building for the future and these developments need to be incorporating best practices for environmentally sustainable housing. Lastly, my initial comments included questions about affordable housing options for this project. I would like to know more about how they intend to address housing disparities in our community with this project. Thank you for your time on this matter. Dayna McKee RE: Comments & Concerns Regarding 10th & Elm Proposed Project Dear Salt Lake City Planning Commission and City Council, We strongly oppose this proposed project and ask that the City Council reject the move to rezone the existing zoning of RB for 2157 S. Lincoln Street. At minimum, we ask that the City Council grants more time for the public to gather their opinions and submit to the Council before making a final decision as our seat (District 7) has been empty and recently filled so this will allow for adequate time for all opinions to be heard. Please consider the following: -There are already 4 additional major apartments being finished within a ½ mile of this location -Sugar Alley – Lowe Development -900 E./Sugarmont Project -Alta Terra (Former 24 Hour Fitness) -Former Art Studio Building @ 700 East/Simpson Ave. -With the 4 already being built and then the Former Snelgrove Ice Cream property beginning to start construction soon, in addition to other proposed projects in the area at the old Midas Muffler site and the Wells Fargo Bank site, there is already enough apartments being built to support growth in the area. -This area is already highly trafficked and increasing the amount of apartments in Sugarhouse will only continue to steer it away from its small quaint charm that it’s always offered and is one of the best neighborhoods in Salt Lake City for this aspect. -This area does not have the infrastructure for these additional cars with the proposed changes happening to 21st South resulting in a more pedestrian focused infrastructure and less lanes for cars. -This area is becoming more walker focused and adding around 240+ cars with this proposed apartment will only cause the traffic in the 21st South corridor to become even more challenging. -Additionally, how will the street parking be able to support these additional cars? No matter how many spaces are offered on site, there will always be residents and guests who will park on the street and Elm & surrounding streets (McClelland & 1000 East) are already completely full with street parking as it is. -There is no diversity of offerings for single families - only apartments are being put into Sugarhouse. -There needs to be offerings such as townhomes and single-family homes to help first time home buyers be able to buy equity. -The community aspect is very important to us personally, as we are a young family looking to connect with people in our community and continued apartment building prevents community equity and long-term residents. -We understand the developer plans on keeping the Victorian house on site as part of the project, but the end result will be a beautiful, historic home being overshadowed by an ill-fitting, massive apartment complex which is unfortunately more of the same for this area. Regards, Connor & Candace Brady 960 East Elm Avenue Homeowners 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:October 3, 2023 RE: 116 East Edith Avenue Zoning Map and Master Plan Amendments PLNPCM2022-01160/01161 The Council will be briefed about a proposal to amend the zoning map for property at 116 East Edith Avenue (approximately 1200 South) in City Council District Five from its current R-1/5,000 (Single Family Residential) zoning designation to CC (Corridor Commercial). In addition, the proposal calls for amending the Central Community Master Plan future land use map from the current “Low-Density Residential” designation to “Community Commercial.” Current R-1/5,000 and CC zoning allow buildings up to 28 feet and 30 feet respectively. (An additional 15 feet of height (45 feet total) can be approved in the CC zoning district through the design review process.) The 0.12-acre parcel is used as parking for the adjacent parcel at 1207 South State Street where a magazine and smoke shop is located. The property reportedly has also been used as U-Haul storage. Both parcels are under the same ownership. Planning staff referenced a 1950 Sanborn map that indicates a single-family residence was located at 116 East Edith Avenue. There is no record of a building permit since 1979, so Planning estimates the home was demolished sometime between 1950 and 1979. Planning staff believes the current commercial use has existed since at least 1979. Edith Avenue properties between the subject property and 200 East are zoned R-1/5,000 and properties fronting State Street and 1300 South are zoned CC as shown in the zoning map below. Amending the zoning map and master plan future land use map would allow the current use to be a conforming use, and potentially combine 1207 South State Street and 116 East Edith Avenue into one Item Schedule: Briefing: October 3, 2023 Set Date: October 17, 2023 Public Hearing: November 7, 2023 Potential Action: November 14, 2023 Page | 2 parcel, giving potential to redevelop the site. It is worth noting that to date no concept plans have been submitted to the City. Area zoning map with the subject property outlined in blue. As outlined in Key Consideration 1 below, Planning staff’s opinion was that the proposed zoning map and master plan amendments are consistent with adopted City plans and recommended the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the City Council. However, at its May 24, 2023 meeting the Commission voted unanimously to forward negative recommendations to the Council on both the zoning map and future land use map amendments. Commissioners felt expanding auto centric use into a residential neighborhood is inconsistent with Plan Salt Lake. Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed zoning and future land use map amendments, determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to discuss whether aligning the zoning with current use of the property, and redevelopment potential outweighs impacts to the adjacent single-family neighborhood. 2. The Corridor Commercial zone is designed to be adjacent and compatible with residential neighborhoods, however, the Council may wish to consider whether another zone could be considered to resolve the non-conforming use, open opportunities for future plans, and be supportive of the residential neighborhood. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Council is only being asked to consider rezoning the property and amending the future land use map. No formal site plan has been submitted to the City, nor is it within the scope of the Council’s role to review such plans. Because zoning of a property can outlast the life of a building, any rezoning application should Page | 3 be considered on the merits of changing the zoning of that property, not simply based on a potential project. KEY CONSIDERATIONS Planning staff identified two key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 5-8 of the Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the staff report. Consideration 1 – Relevant Adopted Master Plan Documents Central Community Master Plan (2005) The subject property is within the Central Community Master Plan area, and the future land use map designates the property as low density residential. The adjacent property at 1207 South State Street is designated Corridor Commercial. Planning staff pointed to a section of the master plan that addresses “preventing zoning changes for commercial land use encroachment into residential neighborhoods.” Commercial land use encroachment occurs when new businesses are established on formerly residential properties and when existing neighborhood businesses appropriate contiguous residential properties. Both types of expanding commercial development often cause the demolition of residential structures for commercial land use. This has a severe impact on the character, livability, and stability of the existing residential neighborhood. Planning noted that demolition of an existing building would be discouraged but reiterated that the building on the subject property was demolished prior to 1980. Use of the property is believed to have been commercial since then, and Planning staff stated the proposal would allow commercial use on the property without demolishing a building. It would also allow continued use of the site which is already impacting the community as a commercial use. Planning staff included the following from the master plan: The location of neighborhood businesses within residential areas shortens travel times and makes it possible to walk, cycle, or take the bus rather than using the automobile, thus benefiting the community through improved air quality and reduced congestion on the City’s streets. and …non-conforming land uses, such as a commercial business on residentially zoned property, can serve the local community. In some cases, these businesses may be 20 to 50 years old and have provided convenient service to the neighborhood. These types of businesses also add character and opportunities for social exchanges in the neighborhood. Plan Salt Lake (2015) Planning staff felt the proposal aligns with the Neighborhoods, and Growth guiding principles. They outlined that the proposal supports the Neighborhoods principle because it does not change the expectation of commercial use for the property, and provides neighborhood services and amenities. Regarding support of the Growth guiding principle, Planning referenced that the proposal includes a mix of land uses in the neighborhood, includes potential to redevelop the property, and any new development would be in an area with existing infrastructure. As noted above, the Planning Commission felt the proposal is inconsistent with Plan Salt Lake and forwarded a negative recommendation to the City Council. Page | 4 Consideration 2 – Comparison of R-1/5,000 and Corridor Commercial Zones Planning staff found the current R-1/5,000 single-family zoning is appropriate for residential uses along Edith Avenue, and the proposed Corridor Commercial zone is congruent with existing properties on State Street north and south of the subject property. R-1/5,000 zoning limits development on the 116 East Edith Avenue property to a single-family dwelling, while CC zoning would allow for more intense uses such as a bar/tavern/brewpub, veterinary office, convenience store/gas station, check cashing payday loan business, medical clinic, multi-family dwelling, and mixed-use development, among others. (For a more comprehensive list of permitted and conditional uses, please see Attachment D (pages 18-20) of the Planning Commission staff report.) Planning also noted the current use of 116 East Edith Avenue as off-site U-Haul parking was created through City processes, and is considered a legal, non-conforming use. Corridor Commercial zoning would allow this as a permitted use. If rezoned to CC zoning the subject parcel would not conform to lot width standards for the zone. However, if the parcel and adjacent parcel at 1207 South State Street were combined the larger lot would conform to lot width standards. Rezoning the subject parcel to Corridor Commercial would allow more intense uses than the existing R- 1/5,000 zoning. If the property is redeveloped or the current building at 1207 South State Street were to be expanded under the proposed zoning, greater height would be allowed and there would be fewer setbacks. However, a landscaped buffer would be required on the east property line adjacent to the single-family residential. ZONING COMPARISON The following table compares current and proposed zoning districts. R-1/5,000 (current)CC (proposed) Maximum Building Height 28 feet to the ridge of the roof or the average height of other principal buildings on the block face. 20 feet to the top of a flat roof 30 feet (An additional 15 feet of building height can be approved through the design review process.) Front and Corner Side Yard Setback Average of block face or 20 feet. Corner side yard: 10 feet 15 feet Interior Side Yard Setback 4 feet on one side, 10 feet on the other. None required Rear Setback 25% of lot depth or 20 feet, whichever is less. 10 feet Upper-Level Step Back None None Minimum Lot Width 50 feet 75 feet Minimum Lot Size Single-family detached: 5,000 square feet 10,000 square feet Open Space 60% (40% maximum building coverage) None other than required yard areas. Analysis of Factors Attachment E (pages 21-24) 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 Page | 5 Commission staff report for additional information. Factor Planning’s 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. Proposal is consistent with Plan Salt Lake and the Central Community Master Plan and is accordance with their goals, standards, and policies. Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies The extent to which a proposed map amendment will affect adjacent properties The proposed CC zone will impose different development regulations that the R-1/5,000 district but as the property has been historically utilized as a commercial use the impacts would be negligible. Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. Does not conflict with any overlays that affect the property. 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 redeveloped. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • February 10, 2023 – Petition submitted. • March 7, 2023 – o Petition assigned to staff. o Early notification sent to Central City Community Council and residents and property owners living within 300 feet of the project site. o Beginning of 45-day comment period. • April 21, 2023 - The 45-day public comment period for recognized organizations ended. • May 10, 2023 – Planning Commission public hearing notice sign posted on the property. • May 12, 2023 - Public hearing notice mailed to residents and property owners within 300 feet of the project site. Newspaper notice published. • May 24, 2023 - Planning Commission public hearing and negative recommendation. • June 23, 2023-Draft ordinance requested from Attorney’s Office. Page | 6 • July 7, 2023-Planning received draft ordinance from the Attorney’s Office. • August 8, 2023-Transmittal received in City Council Office. CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING// October 3rd, 2023 116 E EDITHMASTER PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT PLNPCM2022-01160 & -01161 Salt Lake City // Planning Division •Nazar Enterprises desires to amend the Master Plan Future Land Use Map and zone to match the current commercial use of the property. 1.Master Plan Amendment:Amend the Central Community Future Land Use Map (PLNPCM2022-01161)from Low Density Residential to Community Commercial. 2.Zoning Amendment:Amend the Zoning Map (PLNPCM2022- 01160)from R-1-5000 (Single Family Residential)to CC Corridor Commercial. •State Street is a major corridor road with large scale commercial on either side, and 1300 S is a major collector, with the “Lincoln Plaza” strip mall directly south. •Subject property size is .12 acres or 5,200 square feet. •Property has a history of being a commercial accessory parking lot to the property located at 1207 S State. •A landscaping buffer is required between the commercial property abutting residential in accordance with 21A.48. No development proposal at this time. The applicant has indicated possible residential/commercial mixed-use, but plans are not known at this time. Several community members came to the Planning Commission meeting.They discussed concerns about access on Edith Ave. PROJECT REQUEST R-1/5000 CC Building Height 28’ for pitched roofs 20’ for flat roofs 30’ permitted up to 45’ if granted through design review Front Setback Average of block face 15’ Side Setback Corner Side Setback 4’ and 10’ 4’ None required Rear Setback 25% of lot depth or 20’, whichever is less 10’ Lot Minimums 5,000 square feet 10,000 square feet Lot Width 50’75’ Building Coverage 40%Requirements of 21a.48. Salt Lake City // Planning Division ZONING DISTRICT COMPARISON 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 PLNPCM2022-01160 & PLNPCM2022-01161 116 E Edith Ave. - R-1-5000 to CC Zoning Map & Master Plan Amendment STAFF CONTACT: Grant Amann, Associate Planner grant.amann@slcgov.com, 801-535-6171 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Deny the ordinance amending the zoning map for the property at 116 E Edith Ave as recommended by Planning Commission BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The applicant is requesting to amend the zoning map and the Central Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map for the property located at 116 E Edith Ave which is approximately 5,100 square feet in size. The proposal involves two requests: (1) to amend the Central Community Future Land Use Map from Low Density Residential (5-10 dwelling units per acre) to Community Commercial and (2) to amend the zoning map designation from R-1/5000 (Single Family Residential) to CC (Corridor Commercial) zoning district. The property has acted as ancillary parking for the commercial business located at 1207 S State Street for several decades. The rezone to CC would make the property consistent with the adjacent property that shares the same owner. Lisa Shaffer (Aug 8, 2023 16:34 MDT)08/08/2023 08/08/2023 The applicant is requesting the rezone as they are considering alternative options for the business on the property. PUBLIC PROCESS: •Notice of the project and request for comments was sent to the Central City Community Council on March 7th, 2023. •Also on March 7th, 2023, early notification of the project was mailed to property owners/residents within 300 feet of the proposal informing them of the proposal, where to get more information, and who to contact for questions and comments. o No letters or emails were received in opposition to the proposal. •The Planning Commission public hearing was held on May 24th, 2023. Several neighbors spoke during the public hearing in opposition to the proposal, citing concerns about the site regarding safety, and an increase of intensity of use. •The Planning Commission motion recommended denial for the reason that it is inconsistent with Plan Salt Lake. •The Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward a negative recommendation to the City Council for the proposal as requested by the applicant. Planning Commission (PC) Records a)PC Agenda of May 26, 2021 (Click to Access) b)PC Minutes of May 26, 2021 (Click to Access) c)Planning Commission Staff Report of May 26, 2021 (Click to Access Report) EXHIBITS: 1.Project Chronology 2.Notice of City Council Hearing 3.Original Petition 4.Mailing List 5.Ordinance 1.PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Petition: PROJECT CHRONOLOGY PLNPCM2022-01160/PLNPCM2022-01161 – 116 E. Edith Ave. Zoning Map and Master Plan Amendment February 10, 2023 Petition for the amendments were received by the Salt Lake City March 7, 2023 March 7, 2023 April 21, 2023 May 10, 2023 May 12, 2023 May 24, 2023 Planning Division. Petition PLNPCM2022-01160, -01161 assigned to Grant Amann, Associate Planner, for staff analysis and processing. Early notification announcement of the project to Central City Community Council, and 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. Beginning of 45-day input and comment period. End of 45-day Recognized Community Organization notice period. Public hearing notice sign with project information and notice of the Planning Commission public hearing physically posted on the property. Planning Commission public hearing notices mailed to residents and property owners within 300 feet. Newspaper notice published. Public hearing notice signs posted on the site. Planning Commission holds a public hearing and makes a negative recommendation to deny the proposed Zoning Map Amendment. 2.NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petitions PLNPCM2022-01160 and PLNPCM2022- 01161- A request by Ian Kaplan of ADDVirtue, representing the owner of the properties, to rezone the parcels located at approximately 116 E Edith from R-1/5,000 (Single Family Residential) to CC (Corridor Commercial). The site currently is a vacant lot but serves as ancillary parking to the existing commercial use located at 1207 S State Street. Although the applicant has no current intentions of redeveloping the site, the proposed CC zone would allow for further commercial and multi-family development of the site that is not currently allowed under its current designation. The properties are located in Council District 5, represented by Darin Mano. As part of their study, the City Council is holding two advertised public hearings to receive comments regarding the petition. During these hearings, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider adopting the ordinance on the same night of the second public hearing. The hearing will be held electronically: DATE: TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Room 315, 451 South State Street 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 Grant Amann at 801-535-6171 or via e-mail at grant.amann@slcgov.com. The application details can be accessed at https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/, by selecting the “planning” tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2022-01160 and PLNPCM2022-01161. The City and County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance in order to participate in this hearing. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. 3.PETITION Zoning Amendment  Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance  Amend the Zoning Map OFFICE USE ONLY Received By: Date Received: Project #: Name or Section/s of Zoning Amendment: PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION Address of Subject Property (or Area): Name of Applicant: Phone: Address of Applicant: E-mail of Applicant:Cell/Fax: Applicant’s Interest in Subject Property:  Owner  Contractor  Architect  Other: Name of Property Owner (if different from applicant): E-mail of Property Owner:Phone: Please note that additional information may be required by the project planner to ensure adequate information is provided for staff analysis. All information required for staff analysis will be copied and made public, including professional architectural or engineering drawings, for the purposes of public review by any interested party. AVAILABLE CONSULTATION If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this application, please contact Salt Lake City Planning Counter at zoning@slcgov.com prior to submitting the application. REQUIRED FEE Map Amendment: $1,142 filing fee, plus $121 per acre (excess of one acre), plus additional public notice fee. Text Amendment: $1,142 filing fee, plus additional public notice fee. Public noticing fees will be assessed after the application is submitted. SIGNATURE If applicable, a notarized statement of consent authorizing applicant to act as an agent will be required. Signature of Owner or Agent: Date: SA L T L A K E C I T Y P L A N N I N G UPDATED 6/28/22 Ian Kaplan ian@addvirtue.com miqbalsial48@gmail.com 10.29.2022 4 4 1207 S State Street 9897 S 2700 E 4 4 Ikbal Sial 116 E Edith Avenue DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E4684B4-F37F-4FE4-8E62-B882F173E21C Updated 9/14/22 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. 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. 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 i s the subject of this application. APPLICANT SIGNATURE Name of Applicant: Application Type: Mailing Address: Email: Phone: Signature: Date: FEE TITLE OWNER SIGNATURE Legal Description of Subject Property: Name of Owner: Mailing Address Street Address: Signature: Date: Ian Kaplan Zoning & Masterplan Amendment ian@addvirtue.com 10.29.2022 9897 S 2700 E, Sandy, UT 84092 9897 S 2700 E, Sandy, UT 84092 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E4684B4-F37F-4FE4-8E62-B882F173E21C St a f f R e v i e w SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1.Project Description (please electronically attach additional sheets. See Section 21A.50 for the Amendments ordinance.) A statement declaring the purpose for the amendment. A description of the proposed use of the property being rezoned. List the reasons why the present zoning may not be appropriate for the area. Is the request amending the Zoning Map? If so, please list the parcel numbers to be changed. Is the request amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance? If so, please include language and the reference to the Zoning Ordinance to be changed. WHERE TO FILE THE COMPLETE APPLICATION Apply online through the Citizen Access Portal. There is a step-by-step guide to learn how to submit online. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED ______ I acknowledge that Salt Lake City requires the items above to be submitted before my application can be processed. I understand that Planning will not accept my application unless all of the following items are included in the submittal package. UPDATED 6/28/22 4 4 4 4 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E4684B4-F37F-4FE4-8E62-B882F173E21C Advocacy | Design | Development RE: Application for Zoning Amendment Supplemental Information Prepared By: Date: Ian Kaplan (Owner Representative) October 31st, 2022 ADDvirtue LLC Ian@ADDvirtue.com Owner Information: Iqbal Sial Nazar Enterprises miqbalsial48@gmail.com Project Addresses Parcel Number: Site Area: 116 E Edith Ave 357-047 .12 Acres Existing Zone: R-1-5000 (Single Family Residential) Proposed Zone: CC (Corridor Commercial) Master Plan: Central Community Subject Property: Advocacy | Design | Development Purpose For Amendment: The property located at 1207 S State Street is composed of two contiguous parcels each with separate zoning designations. The smaller of the two parcels, zoned R-1-5000, is a vacant lot and has historically been accessory to the commercial use of the State Street parcel. Due to the adjacency of a commercial structure on two of its four property lines and it’s proximity to State Street, the vacant residential parcel has a low likelihood of being used for new residential construction in the future. The land would be better utilized as Corridor Commercial space that can serve the adjacent neighborhood. Proposed Use: Corridor Commercial Present Zoning Conflicts: 1. The location of the residential parcel with its adjacency to two commercially zoned properties and its historic use as accessory to a commercial property presents a low likelihood of being utilized as single family residential. Central Community Master Plan Findings: The future land use is designated as R-1-5000 on PG.2 of the Central Community Master plan (CCMP). The Community Commercial zone is intended to provide the close integration of moderately sized commercial areas with adjacent residential neighborhoods (See PG. 10, CCMP). Additionally, the community input received during the Master Planning phase of this neighborhood notes that residents do not want commercial activities in low density neighborhoods and prefer to keep them in areas already plagued with noise, trash and traffic (See PG 9, CCMP). Due to the adjacency of existing Commercially zoned property on State street, a Zoning Amendment of this parcel would keep in line with the intent of the CC zone, as established in the CCMP, in maintaining larger scale community commercial in zones along arterial roadways. Furthermore, by amending the zoning of the vacant residential lot, any future commercial business development on the property would be required to meet the buffer requirements as established in 21.A.48.080 of the Salt Lake City Municipal Code, which would increase privacy and protection of the adjacent residential neighborhood. Advocacy | Design | Development Plan Salt Lake Findings: The zoning amendment of this residential property adjacent to larger scale commercial property would positively contribute to the goals set forth in Plan Salt Lake by contributing to the following: ● Locating new development in areas with existing infrastructure and amenities, such as transit and transportation corridors. ● Promoting infill and redevelopment of underutilized land. 4. MAILING LIST OWN_FULL_NAME OWN_ADDR Own _unit OWN_CITY OWN_ STATE OWN_ZIP 1700 INVESTMENTS, LLC 1207 S MAIN ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 1200 STATE PROPERTY LLC 1418 E MICHIGAN AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105 BING KONG TONG, INC PO BOX 735 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84110 GARY L PETERSON; KATHRYN A PETERSON (JT) 1220 S STATE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 LANDEN PROPERTIES, LLC 13 E WANDERWOOD WY SANDY UT 84092 BING KONG TONG, INC PO BOX 735 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84110 RESCUE MISSION OF SALT LAKE INC PO BOX 1431 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84110 AXIS T PROPERTIES, LLC 351 W 400 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101 MARGARET H CLAYTON 116 E KELSEY AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 RACHEL E SANDERS 122 E KELSEY AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 PETER GOODWIN 126 E KELSEY AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 LAURA KRAMER; MATTHEW PETTIT (JT) 132 E KELSEY AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 JUDITH M BEESLEY TRUST 04/20/1989 169 N STATE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84103 KATHERINE J YOUNG 6908 S HOLLOW MILL DR COTTONWOOD HTS UT 84121 CONSUELO R HARRIS; TERESA M HARRIS; BRENNA HARRIS (JT) 146 E KELSEY AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 AXIS T PROPERTIES LLC 351 W 400 S SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101 SERGIO GOMEZ 115 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 TIA P MARTINEZ 119 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 NICOLE A JOHNSTON; RYAN K JOHNSTON (JT) 125 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 DAVID SHEARER; STACEY SHEARER (JT) 131 E EDITH AVE # SOUTH SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 CONRAD NAGEL 135 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 LANCE B SAUNDERS 983 N POINSETTIA DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116 BRIAN J FIEDLER; JESSICA ROESTENBURG (JT) 145 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 JESSICA M REECE 149 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 DREW HANSEN 120 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 DAVID A SALTSMAN 142 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SALT LAKE COUNTY PO BOX 144575 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114 ADEQUATE INVESTMENTS, LLC 40 S SAMARA ST VINEYARD UT 84059 LYNN LOSELI KATOA 156 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 AUTONOMY INC 6036 S LINDEN ST HOLLADAY UT 84121 AUTONOMY INC 6036 S LINDEN ST HOLLADAY UT 84121 ADEQUATE INVESTMENTS, LLC 40 S SAMARA ST VINEYARD UT 84059 DOE MAYERS TRUST 09/27/2019 1057 E BELLE MEADOWS WY SALT LAKE CITY UT 84121 TERRY GORSETH; STACY GORSETH (JT) 136 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 PAUL H WHITE; JEANNENE WHITE (JT) 152 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SALT LAKE COUNTY PO BOX 144575 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114 WILLISTON SLOULIN FIELD PAD LLC; UFPRP LLC 5670 WILSHIRE BLVD #1250 LOS ANGELES CA 90036 FIRST UTAH BANK 3826 S 2300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109 RICK ROSS 126 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 JEFFREY KATZ 130 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 NAZAR, ENTERPRISES, LLC 1207 S STATE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 NAZAR ENTERPRISES, LLC 1207 S STATE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 Current Occupant 1190 S STATE ST Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 1200 S STATE ST Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 1216 S STATE ST Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 85 E 1300 S Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 1212 S STATE ST Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 1165 S STATE ST Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 1169 S STATE ST Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 136 E KELSEY AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 140 E KELSEY AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 1185 S STATE ST Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 131 E EDITH AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 139 E EDITH AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 144 E EDITH AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 146 E EDITH AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 120 E EDITH AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 142 E EDITH AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 146 E EDITH AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 156 E EDITH AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 1297 S STATE ST Salt Lake City UT 84111 Current Occupant 145 E 1300 S Salt Lake City UT 84115 Current Occupant 115 E 1300 S Salt Lake City UT 84115 Current Occupant 116 E EDITH AVE Salt Lake City UT 84111 5. ORDINANCE SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2023 (Amending the zoning of property located at 116 East Edith Avenue from R-1/5,000 Single- Family Residential District to CC Corridor Commercial District, and amending the Central Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map) An ordinance pertaining to property located at 116 East Edith Avenue (the “Property”) as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto, amending the zoning map from R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District to CC Corridor Commercial District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022- 01160 and amending the Central Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map with respect to the Property to change the future land use designation from Low Density Residential to Community Commercial pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01161. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a public hearing on May 24, 2023 on an application submitted by Ian Kaplan of ADDvirtue, LLC (“Applicant”) to rezone the Property from R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District to CC Corridor Commercial District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01160 and to amend the Central Community Master Plan Future Land Use Map with respect to the Property to change the future land use designation from Low Density Residential to Community Commercial pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2022-01161; and WHEREAS, at its May 24, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) deny said application; and WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending the Zoning Map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be and hereby is amended to reflect that the Property identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto shall be and hereby is rezoned from R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District to CC Corridor Commercial District. SECTION 2. Amending the Central Community Master Plan. The Future Land Use Map of the Central Community Master Plan shall be and hereby is amended to change the future land use designation of the Property identified in Exhibit “A” attached hereto from Low Density Residential to Community Commercial. SECTION 3. 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. 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 116 E Edith Ave APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney June 23, 2023 EXHIBIT “A” Affects property located at: 116 East Edith Avenue Tax ID No. 16-07-357-047-0000 LOT 14, BLOCK 1, WALKER PLACE PLAT A. ALSO BEG SW COR OF SD LOT 14, BLOCK 1, WALKER PLACE PLAT A; N 89^56'40" E 42.36 FT; S 0^01'52" W 9.54 FT; N 89^50'11" W 42.36 FT; N 0^01'52"E 9.38 FT TO BEG. 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:October 3, 2023 RE: Text Amendment Related to Maximum Height in the M-1 District PLNPCM2023-00282 The Council will be briefed about a proposal initiated by the Salt Lake Garfield and Western Railway Company to amend the zoning ordinance related to maximum height in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District. The proposal would allow bulk material storage structures associated with a railroad freight terminal up to 150 feet high to be constructed west of 5600 West, and within the area between 100 feet and 1,000 feet south of Interstate 80, in the Utah Inland Port jurisdiction. The proposal includes some exceptions: •At the request of Salt Lake City International Airport staff, structures located between 5600 West and John Glenn Road shall not exceed an elevation of 4,378.8 Mean Sea Level (MSL). •To help mitigate potential visual impact, structures taller than 85 feet are limited to 100 feet in diameter. Groups of these structures may be permitted if the combined width including space between structures is less than 200 feet. These structures or groups of structures are to be separated by a distance equal to or greater than two times the height. This is illustrated in the diagram below provided by the City Planning Division. Item Schedule: Briefing: October 3, 2023 Set Date: October 3, 2023 Public Hearing: October 17, 2023 Potential Action: November 7, 2023 Page | 2 Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division The current maximum structure height in the M-1 district is 65 feet, with some exceptions. •West of the Salt Lake City International Airport and north of Interstate 80, buildings may exceed 65 feet (through design review) but may not exceed 85 feet. •Cranes, lifts, and other similar offloading structures related to railroad freight terminal operations are allowed up to 85 feet, subject to Airport Flight Path Protection (AFPP) Overlay District and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements. •Emission free distillation column structures necessary for manufacturing are permitted up to 120 feet. Planning staff recommended the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed text amendment. The Commission reviewed the proposal at its August 9, 2023 meeting and held a public hearing at which one person from a nearby business spoke expressing concerns with potential fugitive dust from bulk material structures. The proposed height of structures adjacent to 5600 West was also a concern. The petitioner responded saying they have dust containment equipment at their facilities throughout the country to prevent environmental impact and product loss. The petitioner further expressed a willingness to work with the commenter to help mitigate concerns with potential location of the bulk materials structures. Commissioners discussed buffer requirements from the freeway ramps and felt the distance bulk material structures would be from the freeway, and how much higher the freeway and ramps are, would mitigate visual impact concerns expressed during the public hearing. Commissioners voted 7-0 (with one Commissioner recused) to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council with a recommended modification to include language that the area between 5600 West and John Glenn Road be measured from the lower of the airport runway elevation and the site elevation. The ordinance includes language specifying maximum elevation of structures in this area. Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed text amendment, determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. With the support of the Council Chair and Vice chair, staff worked with the Recorder’s Office to get the public hearing scheduled for October 17. POLICY QUESTION Page | 3 1. The Council may wish to discuss impacts the proposed text amendment may have and whether requirements in the ordinance will sufficiently mitigate them. KEY CONSIDERATIONS Planning staff identified three key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 4-7 of the Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the staff report. Consideration 1 - Compatibility with City Goals, Policies, and General Plans Planning staff found the proposed text amendment supports principles found in Plan Salt Lake and the Northwest Quadrant Master Plan which encourage industrial development in the city with a caution that growth should be focused on major transportation corridors and directed away from natural areas. The proposal is limited to the area immediately south of Interstate 80 which is already developed and outside of the natural and buffer areas. Consideration 2 – Impact Analysis Traffic Impact The proposed text amendment would allow additional height for some structures located west of 5600 West, and within an area between 100 feet and 1000 feet south of Interstate 80. Planning staff found that this is consistent with the Northwest Quadrant Master Plan which encourages “industrial and manufacturing uses adjacent to I-80 and around the intermodal rail facility.” Planning supports the location exception approach to minimize impacts of large truck traffic by keeping them close to the interstate. Visual Impact As noted and illustrated above, requirements for the size and spacing grouping of structures are intended to reduce their visual impact to the area. Without these requirements it would be possible to construct a “wall” of 150-foot-tall structures. Planning staff is supportive of the proposed location limitations, and requirements to reduce visual impacts on the area. Consideration 3-Use Analysis M-1 zoning allows a broad range of uses such as chemical manufacturing, hotels/motels, food processing, warehouses, and laboratories, among others. Because of this, the proposed height exception would apply to a specific type of structure that meets the petitioner’s request and is consistent with planning goals. The proposed text amendment is intentionally narrow in its focus on “bulk material storage structures associated with a railroad freight terminal” to avoid unforeseen impacts that might arise if used in other industrial uses and at a larger scale. Railroad freight terminals are a conditional use in the M-1 zoning district. As such, new bulk material storage structures at these terminals would require Planning Commission approval. Concerns about negative impacts can be addressed with appropriate conditions. The proposed locations are also within the Inland Port Overlay District, and new conditional uses within this area are required to provide mitigation plans that address traffic, stormwater and sewer impacts, water use, estimated energy consumption, and an emergency response plan. Coal, crude oil, and other similar products are required to be stored in enclosed buildings away from sensitive lands, residential districts, and the state prison. These requirements would apply to bulk storage Page | 4 facilities affected by the proposed amendment. In addition, a new bulk storage facility that is anticipated to become a source of air pollution must comply with air pollution control standards in City Code. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT STANDARDS Planning staff reviewed the proposed text amendment against the following criteria City Code says the City Council should consider. Please see Attachment B (pages 10-11) of the Planning Commission staff report for additional information. Factor Finding Whether a proposed text amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the City as stated through its various adopted planning documents. Complies Whether a proposed text amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies A proposed text amendment is consistent with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. Complies The extent to which a proposed text amendment implements the best current, professional practices of urban planning and design. Complies PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • April 25, 2023-Petition submitted to Planning Division, and assigned to Andy Hulka, Principal Planner. • May 16, 2023- o Notice emailed to Poplar Grove Community Council. o Early notification mailed to property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the affected area. • May 22, 2023-Petition posted to the Planning Division’s online open house webpage (public comment period ended June 30, 2023). • July 28, 2023- o Planning Commission agenda posted to City and State websites. o Public hearing notice mailed to property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the affected area. • August 9, 2023-Planning Commission meeting and public hearing. The Planning Commission voted 7-0, with one abstaining, to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council. • August 20, 2023-Draft ordinance sent to Attorney’s Office. • September 14, 2023-Planning received signed ordinance from the Attorney’s Office. • September 20, 2023-Transmittal received in City Council Office. City Council Briefing // October 3, 2023 M-1 MAXIMUM HEIGHT TEXT AMENDMENT PLNPCM2023-00282 •This petition would allow bulk material storage structures up to 150' in height to be built west of 5600 West and between 100' and 1000' south of I-80. •On August 9, 2023, the Planning Commission voted to send a positive recommendation to the City Council. •Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the changes to the zoning ordinance related to maximum height in the M-1 District, as recommended by the Planning Commission. SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION Salt Lake City // Planning Division LOCATION & SPACING Andy Hulka // Inland Port Principal Planner andy.hulka@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: September 19, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: PLNPCM2023-00282, Text Amendment Related to Maximum Height in the M-1 District STAFF CONTACT: Andy Hulka, Inland Port Principal Planner andy.hulka@slcgov.com or 801-535-6608 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the changes to the zoning ordinance related to maximum height in the M-1 District, as recommended by the Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Salt Lake Garfield and Western Railway Company has initiated a petition to amend the zoning ordinance related to maximum height in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District. The proposed amendment would allow bulk material storage structures up to 150' in height to be built west of 5600 West and between 100' and 1000' south of I-80. The proposed changes will affect section 21A.28.020 "M-1 Light Manufacturing District" of the zoning ordinance. The current maximum height allowed in the district is 65’, with several exceptions for different types of structures or buildings in certain locations: •Emission free distillation column structures necessary for manufacture processing purposes are permitted up to 120’. Lisa Shaffer (Sep 20, 2023 09:43 MDT)09/20/2023 09/20/2023 • Buildings located west of the Airport and north of I-80 are permitted up to 85’, subject to design review. • Railroad offloading structures are allowed up to a maximum of 85’. After several discussions with the applicant, the language of the proposed amendment was drafted to allow bulk material storage structures associated with a railroad freight terminal up to 150’ in height if they are located west of 5600 W. and between 100’ and 1000’ south of I-80. Airport staff has also requested that the height of structures located between 5600 W. and John Glenn Rd. not exceed the elevation of 4,378.8 mean sea level (MSL). In order to mitigate the potential visual impact of the structures, size and spacing standards have been included to limit the diameter of the structures to 100’ and to require spacing between structures equal to or greater than double the structure height. The Planning Commission considered the request at an August 9, 2023 public hearing and voted to send a positive recommendation to the City Council with a condition that “the section between 5600 West and John Glenn Road be measured from the lower of the runway elevation and the site elevation.” The language of the amendment has been updated to reflect the intent of the Commission’s condition, while also incorporating the Airport staff’s recommended language. PUBLIC PROCESS: Community Council Notice: A notice of application was sent to the Poplar Grove Community Council on May 16, 2023, per City Code Chapter 2.60 with a link to the online open house webpage. The recognized organizations were given 45 days to respond with any concerns or to request staff to meet with them and discuss the proposed zoning amendment. The 45-day public engagement period ended on June 30, 2023. Public Open House: An online open house was held from May 16, 2023, to June 30, 2023. Staff received no public input for this petition during the public engagement period. Planning Commission Meeting: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 9, 2023. The Planning Commission provided a positive recommendation to the City Council on the proposed amendment with a condition that “the section between 5600 West and John Glenn Road be measured from the lower of the runway elevation and the site elevation.” Planning Commission (PC) Records a) Planning Commission Agenda of August 9, 2023 (Public Hearing) b) Planning Commission Minutes of August 9, 2023 (Public Hearing) c) Planning Commission Staff Report of April 26, 2023 EXHIBITS: 1) Project Chronology 2) Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3) Original Petition 1 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 1 No. _____ of 2023 2 3 (Amending the text of Section 21A.28.020 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to maximum 4 height in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District) 5 6 An ordinance amending the text of Section 21A.28.020 of the Salt Lake City Code 7 pertaining to maximum height in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District pursuant to Petition No. 8 PLNPCM2023-00282. 9 WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a 10 public hearing on August 9, 2023 to consider a petition initiated by the Salt Lake Garfield and 11 Western Railway Company (Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00282) to amend Section 21A.28.020 12 (Zoning: Manufacturing Districts: M-1 Light Manufacturing District) of the Salt Lake City Code 13 to allow bulk material storage structures up to 150’ in height to be built west of 5600 West and 14 between 100’ and 1000’ south of I-80; and 15 WHEREAS, at its August 9, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of 16 transmitting a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said 17 petition; and 18 WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter, the City Council has determined that 19 adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. 20 NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 21 SECTION 1. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.28.020.F. That 22 Subsection 21A.28.020.F of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Manufacturing Districts: M-1 23 Light Manufacturing District: Maximum Height) shall be, and hereby is amended as follows: 24 F. Maximum Height: 25 1. Distillation Column Structures; Development In AFPP Overlay District: No 26 building shall exceed sixty five feet (65') except that emission free distillation column 27 2 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT structures, necessary for manufacture processing purposes, shall be permitted up to the 28 most restrictive Federal Aviation Administration imposed minimal approach surface 29 elevations, or one hundred twenty feet (120') maximum, whichever is less. Said approach 30 surface elevation will be determined by the Salt Lake City Department of Airports at the 31 proposed locations of the distillation column structure. Any proposed development in the 32 Airport Flight Path Protection (AFPP) Overlay District, as outlined in section 21A.34.040 33 of this title, will require approval of the Department of Airports prior to issuance of a 34 building permit. All proposed development within the AFPP Overlay District which 35 exceeds fifty feet (50') may also require site specific approval from the Federal Aviation 36 Administration. 37 2. Location Exception exceptions: In the M-1 Zoning Districts located west of 38 the Salt Lake City International Airport and north of Interstate 80 (I-80), buildings may 39 exceed sixty five feet (65') in height subject to the design review standards and 40 procedures of chapter 21A.59 of this title. In no case shall any building exceed eighty 41 five feet (85'). 42 a. West of the Salt Lake City International Airport and north of 43 Interstate 80 (I-80): Buildings may exceed sixty-five feet (65') in height 44 subject to the design review standards and procedures of chapter 21A.59 45 of this title. In no case shall any building exceed eighty-five feet (85'). 46 b. West of 5600 West Street and between 100' and 1,000' south of the 47 Interstate 80 (I-80) right of way: Bulk material storage structures 48 associated with a railroad freight terminal may be allowed up to one 49 hundred fifty feet (150’) in height. When the structure is located between 50 5600 West Street and John Glenn Road, the height of the structure shall 51 not exceed 4,378.8 Mean Sea Level (MSL). 52 (1) Size and spacing: Structures exceeding 85’ in height are 53 limited to 100’ in diameter. A group of such structures may be 54 permitted if the combined width, including the space in between 55 the structures, does not exceed 200’. Such structures or groups of 56 structures shall be separated by a distance equal to or greater than 2 57 times its height. 58 59 3 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 60 61 3. Railroad Offloading Structures: Cranes, lifts, and other similar offloading 62 structures related to the operation of a railroad freight terminal are allowed up to eighty 63 five feet (85’) in height and are also subject to the Airport Flight Path Protection (AFPP) 64 Overlay District and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements. 65 SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its 66 first publication. 67 68 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ___ day of ____________, 2023. 69 ______________________________ 70 CHAIRPERSON 71 ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: 72 73 ______________________________ 74 CITY RECORDER 75 76 Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. 77 78 79 Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. 80 81 ______________________________ 82 MAYOR 83 ______________________________ 84 CITY RECORDER 85 4 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 86 87 (SEAL) 88 89 Bill No. ________ of 2023. 90 Published: ______________. 91 Ordinance amending maximum height in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District (legislative) 92 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2023 (Amending the text of Section 21A.28.020 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to maximum height in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District) An ordinance amending the text of Section 21A.28.020 of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to maximum height in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00282. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a public hearing on August 9, 2023 to consider a petition initiated by the Salt Lake Garfield and Western Railway Company (Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00282) to amend Section 21A.28.020 (Zoning: Manufacturing Districts: M-1 Light Manufacturing District) of the Salt Lake City Code to allow bulk material storage structures up to 150’ in height to be built west of 5600 West and between 100’ and 1000’ south of I-80; and WHEREAS, at its August 9, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of transmitting a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said petition; and WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter, the City Council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subection 21A.28.020.F. That Subsection 21A.28.020.F of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Manufacturing Districts: M-1 Light Manufacturing District: Maximum Height) shall be, and hereby is amended as follows: F. Maximum Height: 1. Distillation Column Structures; Development In AFPP Overlay District: No building shall exceed sixty five feet (65') except that emission free distillation column 2 structures, necessary for manufacture processing purposes, shall be permitted up to the most restrictive Federal Aviation Administration imposed minimal approach surface elevations, or one hundred twenty feet (120') maximum, whichever is less. Said approach surface elevation will be determined by the Salt Lake City Department of Airports at the proposed locations of the distillation column structure. Any proposed development in the Airport Flight Path Protection (AFPP) Overlay District, as outlined in section 21A.34.040 of this title, will require approval of the Department of Airports prior to issuance of a building permit. All proposed development within the AFPP Overlay District which exceeds fifty feet (50') may also require site specific approval from the Federal Aviation Administration. 2. Location exceptions: a. West of the Salt Lake City International Airport and north of Interstate 80 (I-80): Buildings may exceed sixty-five feet (65') in height subject to the design review standards and procedures of chapter 21A.59 of this title. In no case shall any building exceed eighty-five feet (85'). b. West of 5600 West Street and between 100' and 1,000' south of the Interstate 80 (I-80) right of way: Bulk material storage structures associated with a railroad freight terminal may be allowed up to one hundred fifty feet (150’) in height. When the structure is located between 5600 West Street and John Glenn Road, the height of the structure shall not exceed 4,378.8 Mean Sea Level (MSL). (1) Size and spacing: Structures exceeding 85’ in height are limited to 100’ in diameter. A group of such structures may be permitted if the combined width, including the space in between the structures, does not exceed 200’. Such structures or groups of structures shall be separated by a distance equal to or greater than 2 times its height. 3 3. Railroad Offloading Structures: Cranes, lifts, and other similar offloading structures related to the operation of a railroad freight terminal are allowed up to eighty five feet (85’) in height and are also subject to the Airport Flight Path Protection (AFPP) Overlay District and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements. 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 4 (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2023. Published: ______________. Ordinance amending maximum height in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District (final) APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:___________________________ By: ____________________________ Katherine D. Pasker, Senior City Attorney September 14, 2023 1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Project Chronology Petition: PLNPCM2023-00282 April 25, 2023 April 25, 2023 May 16, 2023 May 16, 2023 May 22, 2023 July 28, 2023 August 9, 2023 September 14, 2023 Application accepted. Petition assigned to Andy Hulka, Inland Port Principal Planner. Notice emailed to the Poplar Grove Community Council. Property owners and tenants within 300’ of the affected area were mailed an early notification of the proposal. Petition posted to the Planning Division’s Online Open House webpage (Public comment period ended June 30, 2023). Planning Commission agenda posted on City and State websites. Public hearing notice mailed. Planning Commission meeting and public hearing. The Commission voted 7-0, with one abstaining, to send a positive recommendation to the City Council with one modification. Signed ordinance received from City Attorney’s Office. 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2023-00282 – The Salt Lake Garfield and Western Railway Company has initiated a petition to amend the zoning ordinance related to maximum height in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District. The proposed amendment would allow bulk material storage structures up to 150' in height to be built west of 5600 West and between 100' and 1000' south of I-80. The proposed changes will affect section 21A.28.020 "M-1 Light Manufacturing District" of the zoning ordinance. (Staff Contact: Andy Hulka at 801-535-6608 or andy.hulka@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: 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 Andy Hulka at 801-535-6608 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, or via e-mail at andy.hulka@slcgov.com. The application details can be accessed at https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/, by selecting the “Planning” tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2023-00282. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com, (801)535-7600, or relay service 711. 3. ORIGINAL PETITION Zoning Amendment  Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance  Amend the Zoning Map OFFICE USE ONLY Received By: Date Received: Project #: Name or Section/s of Zoning Amendment: PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION Address of Subject Property (or Area): Name of Applicant: Phone: Address of Applicant: E-mail of Applicant:Cell/Fax: Applicant’s Interest in Subject Property:  Owner  Contractor  Architect  Other: Name of Property Owner (if different from applicant): E-mail of Property Owner:Phone: Please note that additional information may be required by the project planner to ensure adequate information is provided for staff analysis. All information required for staff analysis will be copied and made public, including professional architectural or engineering drawings, for the purposes of public review by any interested party. AVAILABLE CONSULTATION If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this application, please contact Salt Lake City Planning Counter at zoning@slcgov.com prior to submitting the application. REQUIRED FEE Map Amendment: $1,142 filing fee, plus $121 per acre (excess of one acre), plus additional public notice fee. Text Amendment: $1,142 filing fee, plus additional public notice fee. Public noticing fees will be assessed after the application is submitted. SIGNATURE If applicable, a notarized statement of consent authorizing applicant to act as an agent will be required. Signature of Owner or Agent: Date: SA L T L A K E C I T Y P L A N N I N G UPDATED 6/28/22 Salt Lake, Garfield and Western Railway Company 801-322-3429 danmccay@gmail.com 801-560-0400 4 6400 W 100 S, Salt Lake City, UT 84104 1200 W North Temple St, Salt Lake City, UT 84116 4 /s Don Itzkoff 4/13/2023 Updated 9/14/22 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. 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. 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 i s the subject of this application. APPLICANT SIGNATURE Name of Applicant: Application Type: Mailing Address: Email: Phone: Signature: Date: FEE TITLE OWNER SIGNATURE Legal Description of Subject Property: Name of Owner: Mailing Address Street Address: Signature: Date: Salt Lake, Garfield and Western Railway Company 801-322-3429 4/13/2023 St a f f R e v i e w SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1.Project Description (please electronically attach additional sheets. See Section 21A.50 for the Amendments ordinance.) A statement declaring the purpose for the amendment. A description of the proposed use of the property being rezoned. List the reasons why the present zoning may not be appropriate for the area. Is the request amending the Zoning Map? If so, please list the parcel numbers to be changed. Is the request amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance? If so, please include language and the reference to the Zoning Ordinance to be changed. WHERE TO FILE THE COMPLETE APPLICATION Apply online through the Citizen Access Portal. There is a step-by-step guide to learn how to submit online. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED ______ I acknowledge that Salt Lake City requires the items above to be submitted before my application can be processed. I understand that Planning will not accept my application unless all of the following items are included in the submittal package. UPDATED 6/28/22 DM ZONING APPLICATION MEMORANDUM To: Salt Lake City, Planning Staff From: Daniel McCay, Representative of Salt Lake, Garfield, and Western Railway Company RE: Textual Zoning Amendment Application Date: 4/17/2023 Statement Declaring the Purpose for the Amendment The purpose of the amendment is to facilitate the construction of a mixed-use project consisting of rail operations to the west and Cement distribution to the east. Statement of Proposed Use of the Property The plan is to construct a cement distribution terminal for bulk cement products. The bulk cement (dry powder) product would be shipped into the facility via rail, unloaded into vertical storage tanks and then loaded onto local delivery trucks for distribution in the Salt Lake City and surrounding areas. The necessity for the terminal stems from meeting customer demand. Having product available and in the location it is ultimately being transported to is key to obtaining contracts to secure sales and to serve clients during the construction season. The distribution terminal consists of the following; rail spurs to be able to move the rail cars (typically unit trains which reduce the trip generation) onto an unloading area, an unloading pit for unloading the rail cars, a bucket elevator that carries the product upward to enable loading into the top of vertical storage tanks, vertical storage tanks consisting of bolted steel construction, a terminal scale house building to house the employees and controls for the facility, a compressed air building for housing the compressors that support the facility, and related product moving equipment such as conveyors, augers and air slides. The client strives to reduce energy consumption by reducing the conveyance devices to the minimum needed to complete the transfer of the product. The height of the elevator that brings product upward to then be sent into the vertical storage tanks is dictated by the clients desire to use less energy consuming conveyance devices that rely on gravity more so than power. Product is conveyed from the elevator via a device called an air slide where-in gravity flow is aided by low pressure air injected to move the product along. The heights and sizes of the vertical storage tanks are driven by several factors such as; being able to load tanker trailers via gravity (in lieu of powered equipment) and having capacity to hold enough product to make the unit trains viable. The cement product is loaded and unloaded in a contained environment. Rainfall even moisture in the air is detrimental to the product when in transit and storage. Unloading, conveyance and loading measures are all within contained devices (conveyors, etc), unloading apparatus is directly connected to rail cars (rail cars are enclosed hopper cars), the trucks being loaded are contained trailers (not open tops). At the many facilities that the client owns air quality permits are obtained and, in some cases not required as dust mitigation is handled by not having the product exposed to the environment when loading and unloading. The cement products are generally used by local ready-mix plants, precast concrete manufacturers and for mixing of concrete for larger projects (road construction, large cast in place projects) directly at the site of the project being constructed (not within this facility). GCC has made a commitment to environmentally responsible construction products and internal operations. Much of that initiative can be found on their website at Sustainability - GCC Thank you for your help and time on the review of our proposed project. Reasons the Proposed Amendment is Appropriate 1. Project is located in a heavy industrial area 2. Project is located next to and will be served by rail 3. Cement distribution via rail will meet an important need in the industrial growth of the area and minimize traffic Language for proposed Change See Exhibit A EXHIBIT A 21A.28.020: M-1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING DISTRICT: A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the M-1 Light Manufacturing District is to provide an environment for light industrial uses that produce no appreciable impact on adjacent properties, that desire a clean attractive industrial setting, and that protects nearby sensitive lands and waterways. This zone is appropriate in locations that are supported by the applicable Master Plan policies adopted by the City. This district is intended to provide areas in the City that generate employment opportunities and to promote economic development. The uses include other types of land uses that support and provide service to manufacturing and industrial uses. Safe, convenient and inviting connections that provide access to businesses from public sidewalks, bike paths and streets are necessary and to be provided in an equal way. Certain land uses are prohibited in order to preserve land for manufacturing uses and to promote the importance of nearby environmentally sensitive lands. B. Uses: Uses in the M-1 Light Manufacturing District as specified in section 21A.33.040, "Table Of Permitted And Conditional Uses For Manufacturing Districts", of this title are permitted subject to the general provisions set forth in section 21A.28.010 of this chapter. C. Minimum Lot Size: 1. Minimum Lot Area: Ten thousand (10,000) square feet. 2. Minimum Lot Width: Eighty feet (80'). 3. Existing Lots: Lots legally existing as of April 12, 1995, shall be considered legal conforming lots. D. Minimum Yard Requirements: 1. Front Yard: Fifteen feet (15'). 2. Corner Side Yard: Fifteen feet (15'). 3. Interior Side Yard: None required. 4. Rear Yard: None required. 5. Accessory Uses, Buildings And Structures In Yards: Accessory uses, buildings and structures may be located in a required yard area subject to section 21A.36.020, table 21A.36.020B of this title. 6. Additional Setback When Adjacent To AG-2 And AG-5 Districts: When adjacent to a lot in the AG- 2 or AG-5 Zoning District, buildings or portions of buildings, shall be set back one foot (1') beyond the required landscape buffer as required in section 21A.48.080 of this title for every one foot (1') of building height above thirty feet (30'). E. Landscape Yard Requirements: 1. Front And Corner Side Yards: All required front and corner side yards shall be maintained as landscape yards in conformance with the requirements of chapter 21A.48 of this title. 2. Buffer Yards: All lots abutting a lot in a residential district shall conform to the buffer yard requirements of chapter 21A.48 of this title. 3. Northwest Quadrant Overlay District: Properties located within the Northwest Quadrant Overlay District are subject to special landscape requirements as outlined in subsection 21A.34.140B2 of this title. F. Maximum Height: 1. Distillation Column Structures; Development In AFPP Overlay District: No building shall exceed sixty five feet (65') except that emission free distillation column structures, necessary for manufacture processing purposes, shall be permitted up to the most restrictive Federal Aviation Administration imposed minimal approach surface elevations, or one hundred twenty feet (120') maximum, whichever is less. Said approach surface elevation will be determined by the Salt Lake City Department of Airports at the proposed locations of the distillation column structure. Any proposed development in the Airport Flight Path Protection (AFPP) Overlay District, as outlined in section 21A.34.040 of this title, will require approval of the Department of Airports prior to issuance of a building permit. All proposed development within the AFPP Overlay District which exceeds fifty feet (50') may also require site specific approval from the Federal Aviation Administration. 2. Location Exception: In the M-1 Zoning Districts located west of the Salt Lake City International Airport and north of Interstate 80 (I-80), buildings may exceed sixty-five feet (65') in height subject to the design review standards and procedures of chapter 21A.59 of this title. In no case shall any building exceed eighty five feet (85'). 3. Location Exception: In the M-1 Zoning Districts located west of the Salt Lake City International Airport and not less than 1000 feet south of Interstate 80 (I-80), buildings may exceed eighty-five feet (85') in height subject to the design review standards and procedures of chapter 21A.59 of this title. In no case shall any building exceed one hundred fifty feet (150'). 4. Railroad Offloading Structures: Cranes, lifts, and other similar offloading structures related to the operation of a railroad freight terminal are allowed up to eighty five feet (85') in height and are also subject to the Airport Flight Path Protection (AFPP) Overlay District and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements. (Ord. 14-19, 2019: Ord. 3-18, 2018) Items B1-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 tinyurl.com/SLCFY24 TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke and Sylvia Richards Budget Analysts DATE:October 3, 2023 RE: Budget Amendment Number Two FY2024 MOTION 1 – CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING I move that the Council close the public hearing and refer the budget amendment and two grants to a future date for action. MOTION 2 – CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING I move that the Council continue the public hearing to a future date. MOTION 3 – CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPT ITEMS I move that the Council close the public hearing, refer the two grant items to a future consent agenda, and 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. 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) A-2: U.S. Treasury Emergency Rent Assistance Program Funding ($2,339,009 to Misc. Grants Fund) A-3: Liberty Park Basketball Court Donation from Utah Jazz ($100,000 to CIP Fund) A-4: Rescope Miller Park Trail ADA Access Improvements and Historic Structure Preservation (Budget Neutral in the CIP Fund) A-5: Create a Public Lands Planning & Design Division (Transfer $543,144 and Four FTEs from the Engineering Division) A-6: New FTE Senior Community Programs Manager (Budget Neutral – Shifting $113,798 from County Contract for Sorenson Center Services to New Position) A-7: New FTE Economic Development Project Manager to Facilitate Special Assessment Areas (SAAs) ($128,000 from General Fund Balance) A-8: Central Business Improvement Area Assessment Funds to the Downtown Alliance ($664,294 from Special Assessment Fund) A-9: Know Your Neighbor Program Expenses ($6,500 from General Fund Balance) A-10: Love Your Block Program Expenses ($55,750 from General Fund Balance) A-11: Proposed Ordinance Amending the FY 2023- 2024 Annual Compensation Plan for Non- Represented Employees (Budget Neutral) D-1: Emergency Demolition Fund Reset ($65,472 from Special Revenue Fund) D-2: 300 North Pedestrian Bridge - Funding Passthrough ($500,000 from Union Pacific to the CIP Fund) D-4: RDA Housing Funds Transfer to Miscellaneous Grants ($6,476,014 to Misc. Grants) D-5: General Obligation Series 2023 Parks, Trails, & Open Space Bonds ($24,885,893 from the First Bond Issuance to the CIP Fund) D-6: RV Enforcement Team Budget to Non-departmental for Transfer to IMS and Fleet ($45,800 from Non-departmental) E-1: TANF Capacity Building Grant-Financial Capability ($1,229,681 from Misc. Grants) E-2: TANF Capacity Building Grant-Youth Development ($1,391,672 from Misc. Grants) E-3: State Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation FY 24 ($3,107,201 to the Misc. Grants Fund) G-1: Greater Salt Lake Area Clean Energy and Air Roadmap Grant ($1 million from Misc. Grants) G-2: Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry Fire and State Lands ($50,000 from Misc. Grants) G-3: Utah Department of Natural Resources/Forestry Fire and State Lands ($150,000 from Misc. Grants) G-4: State of Utah Division of Outdoor Recreation ($150,000 from Misc. Grants) G-5: Backman Community Open Space ($200,000 from Misc. Grants) G-6: Utah Office for Victims of Crime-VOCA Misc Grants ($92,846 from Misc. Grants) G-7: YouthCity Summer Food Service Program - Utah State Board of Education ($11,000 from Misc. Grants) I-1: Placeholder - Additional Funding for Sanctioned Camping ($1 Million from General Fund Balance) MOTION 4 – CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND NOT ADOPT I move that the Council close the public hearing and proceed to the next agenda item. 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: October 3, 2023 RE: Budget Amendment Number 2 of Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 NEW INFORMATION At the first briefing on September 19, the Council discussed the chart tracking new potential ongoing costs to the General Fund, updated Fund Balance projections (the City’s rainy-day fund / savings account), and item G-1: Greater Salt Lake Area Clean Energy and Air Roadmap Coordinator Position which is a four-year EPA grant. The Council also took straw polls indicating support for the following time sensitive items: - D-5: General Obligation Series 2023 Parks, Trails, & Open Space Bonds ($24,885,893 from the First Bond Issuance to the CIP Fund) - E-1: TANF Capacity Building Grant-Financial Capability ($1,229,681 from Misc. Grants) - E-2: TANF Capacity Building Grant-Youth Development ($1,391,672 from Misc. Grants) - I-1: Placeholder - Additional Funding for Sanctioned Camping ($1 Million) o The Council discussed potentially using General Fund Balance as the funding source for this item. In a future budget opening, the Council could consider backfilling General Fund Balance from a deeply affordable housing City grant provided to a development that is no longer expected to proceed. The Council is scheduled to continue discussing the remaining items in Budget Amendment #2 at the second briefing on October 3.  Information below was provided to the Council at earlier briefings  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 Project Timeline: Set Date: September 19, 2023 1st Briefing: September 19, 2023 2nd Briefing: October 3, 2023 Public Hearing: October 3, 2023 Potential Action: October 17, 2023 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 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 Parks, Trails, & Open Space 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: _______________ 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% Draft EIS Release Update Today’s Topics •I-15 EIS Process •Draft EIS Release •Public Comment •Questions / Discussion Quality of Life Other Improvements Aging Infrastructure Travel Time Safety Shoulders Sharp Curves Interchange Needs Limited Connections Study Purpose and Need Improve Safety •Improve the safety and operations of the I-15 mainline, I-15 interchanges, bicyclist and pedestrian crossings, and connected roadway network. Better Connect Communities •Be consistent with planned land use, growth objectives, and transportation plans. •Support the planned FrontRunner Double Track projects and enhance access and connectivity to FrontRunner, regional transit and trails, and across I-15. Strengthen the Economy •Replace aging infrastructure on I-15. •Enhance the economy by reducing travel delay on I-15. Improve Mobility for All Users •Improve mobility and operations on the I-15 mainline, I-15 interchanges, connected roadway network, transit connections, and bicyclist and pedestrian facilities to help accommodate projected travel demand in 2050. I-15 Mainline Alternatives I-15 Mainline Alternatives - Travel Times Proposed Walking and Biking Improvements Interchange Options Local Area Working Groups •Area residents •Business owners •Limited income •People of color •Elderly (over the age of 64) •Persons living with disabilities •Youth •Linguistically isolated Alternatives Open Houses Efforts to Reduce Barriers •Free transportation to open houses •Free food at open houses •Kid’s Corner at open houses •English/Spanish collateral materials •Spanish interpreters at open houses •Map commenting tool in English/Spanish •Targeted social media ads •Meetings in accessible buildings central to study area Alternatives Screening Process Alternatives Screening Process Draft EIS Release DEIS Public Meetings & Comment Period October 16 Online Open House October 17 Open House & Hearing State Fair Park, Bonneville Building October 18 Open House & Hearing South Davis Rec Center Public Comments Improve Safety - Does the preferred alternative address safety in areas/ways you care about? - Are there safety issues you don’t see addressed in the alternative? Better Connect Communities - Does the preferred alternative better connect you to the places that matter to you? Strengthen the Economy - Does the preferred alternative strengthen the economy in ways that matter to you? Improve Mobility for All Users - Does the preferred alternative improve walking and biking connections in your area? - Were there improvements/connections you hoped to see that you didn’t? Study Team Contact Information Draft EIS Release Draft EIS Release Update COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Nick Tarbet, Policy Analyst DATE: October 3, 2023 RE:Zoning Amendments: Affordable Housing Incentives PLNPCM2019-00658 PROJECT TIMELINE: Briefing 1: Sept 19, 2023 Briefing 2: Oct 3, 2023 Set Date: Oct 3, 2023 Public Hearing: Oct 17, 2023 Potential Action: TBD Visit the Council’s Website for more information on various topics relating to affordable housing, including this proposal tinyurl.com/SLCHousingProposals NEW INFORMATION During the September 19 work session, the Council held a briefing on the Affordable Housing Incentives zoning amendment petition. Based on that discussion, several questions were raised, and Council staff is working with the Administration to get responses to those questions. A follow up briefing will be held on October 3 in conjunction with a briefing on the Thriving In Place (TIP) plan. The TIP plan identifies the Affordable Housing Incentives as a priority for implementation and notes funding for new staff will be needed, in the future. As part of the discussion on Affordable Housing Incentives, the Council may wish to consider discussing some of the policy questions outlined below. 1. Drafting Administrative Policies and Procedures •During the work session briefing Planning staff mentioned it would take some time to get guidelines and procedures in place to administer the program. Planning staff clarified that the policy will be set by the ordinance and that their work will create the administrative procedures that outline the process administrative staff will follow to move an application through the process. •The thriving place plan lists an action step with a timeline of June 2024 to “adopt the affordable housing incentives. The Council may wish to ask what that action relates to. Page | 2 2. Design Guidelines •Some questions were raised about how buildings constructed according to the Affordable Housing Incentives would be compatible with neighborhoods and existing development. The draft ordinance notes that base zoning standards apply unless they are specifically modified by this section. However, if there are conflicts with design standards, the more restrictive regulation applies and takes precedence. There are design standards that apply to rowhouses, sideways rowhouses, cottages as well as for the new housing types in single- and two-family zoning districts. 21A.52.H, 1-3 – Development regulations. According to the draft ordinance, the “development regulations are intended to provide supplemental regulations and modify standards of the base zoning district for the purpose of making the Affordable Housing Incentives more feasible and compatible with existing development.” (21A.52.H – Development regulations) 3. Staffing Adjustments •Administrative staff said they will be able to initially absorb the anticipated workload that creating and administering this program will require. However, they anticipate they will likely come to the Council in future budgets to request additional staff once the program is up and running. 4. Potential Program Participation Fee •At this time Administration has not proposed to include a fee for the program that will help cover the costs of administering it. However, they noted it is likely a fee can be justified. o Does the Council wish to put in a place holder in the ordinance that anticipates the Administration will return to the Council with a request to put a fee in the City Code? •This action would preserve the city’s option, but would not dictate that a fee would ever be put in place. 5. Good Landlord Requirements •Council staff is working with Attorney’s and Planning staff to find out if requirements outlined in the good landlord program can be included as a requirement as part of participation in the Affordable Housing Incentives program. As written, the good landlord program requirements would not apply. 6. Impact Fee Waiver •Council staff is working with the Attorney’s Office to find out if impact fees would be waived for affordable units that are constructed are part of this program. •With additional information, the Council may want to weigh the pros and cons of expanding the impact fee waiver to this category of housing. Page | 3 7. Licensing Requirements for Apartments with Three or Fewer Units Staff is working with Attorney’s and Planning staff to confirm whether apartment complexes with three or fewer units are handled differently in State Code than other apartment configurations. There were amendments to the code in 2023 that may have changed a previous preemption. 8. Enforcing fines and Compliance with Code. •Questions have been raised about how the City enforces issues related to infill construction, particularly in neighborhoods when space is limited, and property owners may inadvertently encroach upon or cause damage to abutting properties. • Fines are levied for certain Building Code construction violations. The City primarily uses the fine system to bring the properties into compliance, and often settles with the property owner for a much lower amount than the total of fines accrued. The fine is currently $25 per day. Some questions have been raised about the effectiveness of the fine amount. Staff understands that the Administration is contemplating advancing a recommended increase to the fine. The Council may wish to request that the ordinance change be provided for consideration as soon as possible so that it can be updated as this housing ordinance is implemented. • The practice of settling with property owners for less than the amount owed once a property comes into compliance may be a policy approach that could be reviewed with the Administration. It is not clear whether the current approach is an effective deterrent to avoid future violations or whether it serves to have the property come into compliance more quickly. In some cases, abutting property owners perceive that the fine and practice of reducing the fine results in “a minor cost of doing business” to the property owner. •Council staff is working with the Attorney’s Office to get additional information on the overall question of what can be done if a developer encroaches on or damages an abutting property. To date, it is staff’s understanding that encroachment on to or damage of an abutting property would have a very limited response from the City. It would likely be a civil matter between property owners, thus creating a legal expense for the property owner whose property has been damaged or encroached upon. In many areas of the City, it may be cost prohibitive for a property owner whose property is damaged by abutting construction to seek a legal remedy through the court system. •Based upon constituent complaints, Council Member Wharton was recently contacted by Representative Jennifer Dailey-Provost, who offered the assistance of the State in looking for opportunities to address what appears to be a gap in the City’s ability to effectively limit or enforce upon encroachment or damage on abutting property. The first step is to clarify whether the City has existing authority to adopt ordinances that would be helpful, or whether State Legislative action would be needed. •The Council may wish to clarify with the City Attorney whether enough is known at this time to determine whether there is an opportunity to add language to this ordinance to address the issue of damage or encroachment on abutting properties, or whether it is helpful to include basic language in the ordinance that serves as a placeholder for future action on that topic, or whether it is necessary to take additional time to identify the best approach to address this issue. Page | 4 9. Administering and Enforcement Administering and enforcement of the Affordable Housing Incentives program was discussed. Planning staff outlined the key provisions related to the enforcement plan: 21A.52.D, E and F •Reporting and Auditing o Property owners must submit an annual report to the Director of CAN by April 30 of each year, demonstrating compliance with the ordinance o That report includes: 1. Property location, tax ID and legal description 2. Property owner name, mailing and email addresses, 3. Information on the dwelling units and tenants receiving incentives includes: a. total number of dwelling units b. number of bedrooms for each unit c. rental rate of each unit d. identify dwelling units that comply with level of affordability identified in the approval process and statement that units are in compliance e. identify change in occupancy to the units, include number of people residing in each unit and change in tenant (Personal data is not required) f. confirm verification for all tenants was performed on annual basis g. identify differences in rent between agreed upon rental rate and actual rent received h. identify instances where an affordable unit was no longer rented at the agreed upon level of affordability, length of time it was not in compliance and remedy taken to address noncompliance o The CAN director has 30 days to review the application and provide written notice to property owners whether they are in compliance or not. o In situations of noncompliance, a property owner has 30 days to come into compliance. If they are unable to do so, the City will begin assessing the fine. •Enforcement o Violations of the restrictive covenant will be investigated and prosecuted 1. A lien may be placed on the property 2. A business license may be revoked The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether they are confident that these enforcement mechanisms will be effective. For example, if a fine is issued is it one-time, or ongoing until the situation is addressed? Is there any situation in which a property owner could build using the proposed ordinance, pay a fine for non-compliance and lose their business license, but still have received the benefit of developing more housing on the property than would have been allowed under the base zoning? Is there any complication that the State limitation on the degree or manner in which enforcement action can be taken on properties with fewer than three units may impact this? City enforcement is a property is suspended from the program or has their business license revoked? Page | 5 •Eligibility o Property owner must enter into a legally binding restrictive covenant which must be filed with the Salt Lake County Recorder o Notice of sale shall be provided to the City and the City shall have right of first refusal to any sale of the property. o Affordable units shall be both income and rent/housing payment restricted o Affordable units must be comparable to the market rate units within the development. 10. Delayed Adopt for Portions of the Affordable Housing Incentives Amendment Some have asked about the possibility of dividing the Affordable Housing Incentives into separate pieces for adoption. The suggestion was that the first piece would be to adopt the RMF/mixed use/institutional zoning initiatives. Then the second would be to adopt changes to the single-family zoning districts. 11. Institutional Zone Amendments There were some questions about what incentives apply to the Institutional zoning district. According to the draft ordinance, housing would be allowed on institutional zoned land. These would include row houses, sideways row houses, cottage developments Additionally, the Institutional zoning district will follow the affordability requirements as outlined in table 21 A.52.050.G (see page 7 below) Affordable rental or homeownership units shall meet a minimum of at least one of the affordability criteria identified. Any fractional number of units required shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. 1. 20% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI; 2. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 60% AMI; 3. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an average income at or below 60% AMI and these units shall not be occupied by those with an income greater than 80% AMI; 4. 5% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 30% AMI; 5. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI when the affordable units have two or more bedrooms; 6. 5% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 60% AMI when the affordable units have two or more bedrooms; or 5% of the units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI when the affordable units have three or more bedrooms. The following information was provided for the September 19 briefing. It is provided again for background purposes. ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will receive a briefing about an ordinance that would amend various sections of the City zoning ordinance by establishing Affordable Housing Incentives (AHI). The proposed amendments would allow the following if requirements for affordable units are met in order to streamline and encourage more units to be built in the City at an affordable rate. See more details on each of these changes starting at the end of page 2, and chart on page 3 to see the level/quantity of affordability required for each: Page | 6 • Permit administrative design review and additional building height between 1-3 stories, depending on the zone, in various zoning districts that permit multifamily housing. • Remove the Planned Development requirement for specific modifications and for development in the CS (Community Shopping) zoning districts. • Permit an additional story in the TSA Transition zoning districts and two stories in the TSA Core zoning districts. • Allow additional housing types in the CG (General Commercial), CC (Community Commercial), and CB (Community Business) zoning districts. • Allow housing on Institutional zoned land. • Remove the density requirements in the RMF (Residential Multi Family) zoning districts. • On properties currently zoned for single- or two-family homes: o Allow townhomes and housing structures that contain up to 4-unit buildings, o a second detached dwelling when an existing dwelling is maintained; o cottage developments; o Allow twin and two-family homes in these zoning districts where they are not currently allowed. The proposal was initially envisioned as an overlay. However, since the incentives are different for various zoning districts, the proposal was changed to a specific section of the zoning ordinance, 21A.52 Zoning Incentives. The Affordable Housing Incentives is proposed to be the first section of this new chapter of the zoning ordinance. The Planning Commission held public hearings and forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council. Additionally, the Planning Commission added a condition that if adopted by the City Council, the incentives plan should be analyzed 24 months after approval, to include a report of the cost and benefits of the changes. Staff note on public notice/engagement: Because of the City-wide breadth and potential impact of this topic, along with the context of the City-wide anti-gentrification study, the Council authorized the mailing of a postcard City-wide, to all residents and property owners, with direction to go to the Council’s main website on the affordable housing topic, that includes information on these issues and others, at tinyurl.com/SLCHousingProposals POLICY QUESTIONS •Reporting and Enforcement Related Questions o Reporting Requirements – annual reporting and auditing will be a key component of the plan to ensure property owners and builders who use the incentives keep the units at affordable levels. ▪Will the proposed fine structure be enough to ensure compliance by property owners? ▪The Council could consider requiring a biannual report on the affordability compliance of the program. o Option for the City to contract with another entity to administer the program ▪Would the third party be responsible for enforcement? ▪What type of entity might be interested in administering the program? o Will properties that are part of the program be required to get a business license and participate in the Good Landlord Program? o Is there a plan in place to link up the affordable housing with income-restricted individuals, or would the City service as a central resource to connect individuals with housing? •Staffing/Guidelines Questions Page | 7 o The Planning Commission staff report noted additional staff will be needed to administer the program. The Council may wish to ask the Administration when and how they will propose funding this additional staffing, how many FTEs would be needed, and the anticipated timeline to onboard and train those FTEs? o Because this ordinance would go into effect prior to the next budget amendment, is existing staff sufficient to accept any applications that may come in prior to the next budget and ensure compliance with design and affordability objectives? o Is there a possibility this ordinance will go into effect before design guidelines are developed/approved? Would funding be needed to develop those design guidelines? Will the development of the design guidelines be an administrative process, or will they be approved by the Planning Commission? o Does the Administration plan to promote this program to the general public to notify them of the program and potential benefits? o How long might it take for the City to get the necessary affordability and design review structures in place? •Thriving in Place Plan Objectives and Community feedback o The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration whether there are alternative ways to achieve the goals of this proposal (see page 5). o Given the significant community feedback received to date, the Council may wish to discuss concerns that have been noted by some neighborhoods about the potential for these incentives to result in the demolition of existing housing stock, including existing naturally occurring affordable housing. o The purpose statement of the affordable housing incentives notes design is key to the success of the proposal: Housing constructed using the incentives is intended to be compatible in form with the neighborhood and provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play. Does the Council wish to ask the administration to discuss how design guidelines will be able to help implement this vision? o Based on concerns expressed by some residents, the Council may wish to discuss the benefit of additional housing units with the potential for additional traffic in areas where transit is not readily available. o Based on recent discussion about the lack of family-sized housing with much of the new construction in the city, the Council may wish to discuss if this incentive program has ways to provide more family- sized affordable housing. SUMMARY OF INCENTIVES Pages 3-6 of the Planning Commission staff report outline key changes of the proposed amendment. The list below, from Attachment B Summary of Incentives, is a high-level summary of the key changes, based on the type of zoning district. •Multi-family and Mixed-Use Zoning Districts o Permit additional height, between 1-3 stories (approximately 10’ per story), depending on the zone in various zoning districts that currently permit multifamily housing. •Residential Multifamily Zoning Districts o Remove the density requirements in the RMF zoning districts, o No additional height permitted. o Only 25% of the units could be 500 square feet or smaller. Page | 8 o Add development and design standards for rowhouses, sideways rowhouses, cottages, and other building forms. •Single- and Two-family Zoning Districts o Allow additional building types in single- and two-family zoning districts, provided 1-2 of the units would be affordable. o Allow townhouses in groups of up to four, 3–4-unit buildings, and cottage developments on parcels that are currently zoned for single- or two-family homes. o Twin and two-family homes would be permitted in the zoning districts where they are not currently allowed. o Add development and design standards for these dwellings. •Other Incentives o Waive the Planned Development process for some proposals o Allow single-family and single-family attached housing on Institutional zoned land. Future zoning amendments may be considered to allow multifamily housing. o Allow additional housing types in the CG (General Commercial), CC (Community Commercial), and CB (Community Business) zoning districts to encourage the redevelopment of underutilized commercial land. These districts currently permit multifamily housing, but not single-family dwellings, including single-family attached units, or cottages. •Affordability requirements - Planning staff worked with developers to come up with a model that would provide sufficient return on development to incentivize the development of affordable units in various projects. Table 21A.52.050.G of the ordinance outlines the recommendation based on that analysis. Attachment G of the Planning Commission staff report includes a summary of the proforma and scenario analyses. See the table on the next page. Table 21A.52.050.G Incentive Type Types Incentives Type A. Applicable to the single- and two-family zoning districts: FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, R-1/12,000, R-1/7,000, R-1/5,000, R-2, SR-1, SR-1A, and SR-3. Dwelling units shall meet the requirements for an affordable rental or homeownership unit affordable to those with incomes at or below 80% AMI. New construction: At least 50% of the provided dwelling units shall be affordable. Existing building maintained: A minimum of one of the dwelling units shall be affordable provided the existing building is maintained as required in 21A.52.050.H.1.c. Type B. Applicable to residential multifamily zoning districts: RMF- 30, RMF-35, RMF-45, and RMF-75 An affordable rental unit shall meet a minimum of at least one of the following affordability criteria: 1. 40% of units shall be affordable to those with incomes at or below 60% AMI; 2. 20% of units shall be affordable to those with incomes at or below 50% AMI; or 3. 40% of units shall be affordable to those with incomes averaging no more than 60% AMI Page | 9 and these units shall not be occupied by those with an income greater than 80% AMI. For sale owner occupied units: An affordable homeownership unit shall provide a minimum of 50% of units affordable to those with incomes at or below 80% AMI Type C. Applicable to zoning districts not otherwise specified. Affordable rental or homeownership units shall meet a minimum of at least one of the affordability criteria identified. Any fractional number of units required shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. 7. 20% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI; 8. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 60% AMI; 9. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an average income at or below 60% AMI and these units shall not be occupied by those with an income greater than 80% AMI; 10. 5% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 30% AMI; 11. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI when the affordable units have two or more bedrooms; 12. 5% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 60% AMI when the affordable units have two or more bedrooms; or 13. 5% of the units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI when the affordable units have three or more bedrooms. COMMUNITY OUTREACH Pages 2-3 of the transmittal summarize outreach efforts Planning conducted to get feedback from the community on the proposed change. Outreach efforts included: online surveys, developer discussion, recognized community organization outreach, and open houses, both in person and online. The Historic Landmark Commission and Planning Commission both reviewed the proposed changes. The Planning Commission held public hearings in May 2022 and March 2023. Additionally, in the fall and winter of 2022/2023 the Mayor convened a focus group that included 15-20 members of the community, including neighborhood leaders, developers, policy advisors, and housing advocates. The group reviewed and discussed topics with the most community concerns over four meetings in the fall and winter of 2022. Based on the focus group’s recommendations, changes were made to the final draft. Their recommended changes to the proposal are detailed in the Planning staff’s report and highlighted on pages 7-9 of Attachment A – Updated Affordable Housing Incentives March 2023 to this memo. Page | 10 As noted above, the Council also authorized a City-wide postcard to notify residents and property owners about this proposal as well as the City-wide anti-gentrification plan. KEY ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL The Affordable Housing Incentives amendments are intended to encourage the development, construction, and preservation of housing in the city through a variety of methods, including allowing for additional height, reducing parking requirements, allowing additional housing types, and providing planning process waivers or modifications. Purpose The purpose statement of the Affordable Housing Incentives section reads as follows: To encourage the development of affordable housing. The provisions within this section facilitate the construction of affordable housing by allowing more inclusive development than would otherwise be permitted in the base zoning districts. Housing constructed using the incentives is intended to be compatible in form with the neighborhood and provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play. There are two primary goals of the Affordable Housing Incentives: 1. Help public and private dollars that go into building affordable housing create more housing units. 2. Create additional opportunities for property owners to provide new, affordable housing units. (April 26, 2023, Planning Commission Staff Report, Page 2) Affordable Housing Definition The draft ordinance provides the following definition for affordable housing: Shall be both income and, as applicable, rent restricted. The affordable units shall be made available only to individuals and households that are qualifying occupants at or below the applicable percentage of the area median income for the Salt Lake City Utah, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) Metro FMR Area the “SLC Area Median Income” or “AMI”, as periodically determined by HUD and adjusted for household size) and published by the Utah Housing Corporation, or its successor. Affordable housing units must accommodate (30% of gross income for housing costs, including utilities) at least one of the following categories: a.Extremely Low-Income Affordable Units: Housing units accommodating up to 30% AMI; b.Very Low-Income Affordable Units: Housing units accommodating up to greater than 30% and up to 50% AMI; or c.Low-Income Affordable Units: Housing units accommodating greater than 50% and up to 80% AMI Preservation of Existing Housing The Affordable Housing Incentives adds provisions to encourage preservation of existing housing. This includes allowing a second, detached dwelling on a property when the existing dwelling is maintained. Key Concepts Discussed with the Planning Commission Pages 2-3 of the transmittal letter outline the key considerations of the draft amendments discussed with the Planning Commission. A short summary is provided below. See pages 7-14 for full analysis. 1.Implementation of city goals and policies identified in adopted plans a. Planning staff found the proposed amendments are consistent with principles and polices of Plan Salt Lake and Growing SLC Page | 11 2.Affordability level and percentage of units a. See chart on page 3 above. 3.Neighborhood Impacts The focus group discussed several mitigation options based on comments from the Planning Commission and the public and came to a consensus on the following recommendations: •The removal of the proximity to transit and adjacency to arterial roads requirement for additional housing types in the single- and two-family zoning districts. •Emphasis on the preservation of existing housing •Additional design standards for new housing types in single- and two-family zoning districts 4.Administration and Enforcement a. Administrative staff anticipates additional staff will be needed to administer the program based on the number of projects that use the affordable housing incentive program. b. Language is included in the draft ordinance that would enable the City to contract with a third party for administration on the incentives. c. Language on reporting, compliance, and enforcement are included in the ordinance. The properties using the AHI would be required to submit an annual report, and a restrictive covenant would be placed on the property. 5.Infrastructure impacts a. If a water, sewer, or storm drain line does not have adequate capacity for new housing units, a developer is required to increase the capacity. This is handled during the building permit process. b. Planning staff also worked with Public Utilities to determine the impact this proposal may have on water supply and demand in the city. Public Utilities provided scenarios for different types of potential development that would result from the proposed changes. i. Average usage for single-family residential dwellings is between 12,000-15,000 gallons per month. 1. Much of this is for outdoor watering and in the winter water usage is approximately 6,500-7,000 gallons per month. ii. A sampling of high-rise and wood frame construction with a total of about 725 units averaged water usage of approximately 2,000 gallons per month, per unit. iii. Two fourplexes and a cottage court (10 units) averaged approximately 3,000 gallons per month, per unit. ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL 08/08/2023________________________ Lisa Shaffer (Aug 8, 2023 16:33 MDT) Date Received: _________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _0_8_/0_8_/_2_0_2 3_________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: August 7, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: Affordable Housing Incentives STAFF CONTACT: Sara Javoronok, AICP Senior Planner sara.javoronok@slcgov.com, 801-535-7625 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: The City Council amend the text of the zoning ordinance as recommended by the Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: None. However, implementation of the amendments may require additional staff and resources. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Former Mayor Jackie Biskupski initiated the text amendment in 2019. The Affordable Housing Incentives (AHI) are proposed for the city’s zoning code to incentivize and reduce barriers for affordable housing. The proposed amendments include the following if requirements for affordable units are met: • Permit administrative design review and additional building height between 1-3 stories, depending on the zone, in various zoning districts that permit multifamily housing. • Remove the Planned Development requirement for specific modifications and for development in the CS zoning districts. • Permit an additional story in the TSA Transition zoning districts and two stories in the TSA Core zoning districts. 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 • Allow additional housing types in the CG (General Commercial), CC (Community Commercial), and CB (Community Business) zoning districts. • Allow housing on Institutional zoned land. • Remove the density requirements in the RMF zoning districts. • Allow townhouses, 3-4 unit buildings, a second detached dwelling when an existing dwelling is maintained, and cottage developments on properties that are currently zoned for single- or two-family homes. Permit twin and two-family homes in these zoning districts where they are not currently allowed. The project was initiated in 2019 to address increasing concerns regarding housing affordability and to implement Growing SLC. Initial outreach on the proposal included an online survey in late 2019/early 2020. From the initial survey results, staff developed a draft framework for the AHI that serves as the basis for the current proposal. Staff requested additional feedback from the community in a survey on the draft framework. Based on this feedback, developed draft the initial AHI text amendments. Staff presented these initial draft amendments to the community in the spring of 2022 and to the Planning Commission and public at a hearing in May 2022. Following the hearing, staff worked with developers and a focus group convened by the Office of the Mayor to address and revise the draft based on the issues raised. The revisions also incorporate changes from the now adopted RMF-30 and pending Downtown Building Heights text amendments. Staff presented a revised draft to the Planning Commission for discussion on March 22, 2023 and March 29, 2023. The Historic Landmark Commission held a work session on April 6, 2023. The Planning Commission held a public hearing and made a recommendation to the City Council on April 26, 2023. The Planning Commission added a condition that the incentives be analyzed 24 months after approval with a full report of the costs and benefits of the implementation to the Planning Commission. 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 application was initiated: Online Surveys and Comment Form: • December-January 2020 – Planning staff posted an initial survey seeking feedback on housing issues. Over 2,100 people responded. • July 2020 – Planning staff presented a draft proposal in a Story Map and sought feedback on the proposal. Nearly 300 people responded. • February 2022 – Planning staff posted the draft amendments and sought feedback through a comment form. Approximately 130 people responded. • March 2023 – Planning staff posted an updated draft of the proposed amendments and sought feedback through the comment form. Two people responded for a total of approximately 175 since February 2022. Developer Discussions: Planning staff met with several affordable housing developers in 2019 to discuss issues and obstacles to building affordable housing in the community and how zoning may be able to address them. Developers generally indicated that by right processes were best, there should be parking reductions especially for lowest incomes, density limits made development difficult in the RMF districts, additional height was needed in many zoning districts, and there was a preference for form-based zoning districts. Staff requested feedback from developers on the draft proposal and generally heard that the incentives would allow them to construct more units and that the incentives in the single-family zoning districts may encourage smaller developers to construct units. Recognized Community Organization Notice and Meetings: • June 25, 2020 – The 45-day required notice for recognized community organizations was sent citywide. o July 20, 2020 – Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Sugar House Land Use and Zoning meeting (Zoom). o August 6, 2020 – Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Ball Park Community Council meeting (Zoom). • March 3, 2022 – The 45-day required notice for recognized community organizations was sent citywide. o March 16, 2022 – Planning staff discussed the proposal at the East Bench Community Council meeting (Zoom). Members expressed concerns with loss of views, view easements, and wanted to be notified of potential projects in the neighborhood. o March 21, 2022 - Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Sugar House Land Use Committee meeting (Zoom). Members expressed concerns with additional housing types proposed, especially in the Highland Park neighborhood, lack of parking, lack of utility capacity, loss of neighborhood character, increase in rental housing, and desire for the proposal to be implemented as a smaller, pilot program. o April 7, 2022 – Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Ball Park Community Council meeting (Zoom). Community members want to see more owner-occupied housing in the neighborhood, expressed concerns with additional height in the FB districts, have concerns with existing parking requirements in the FB zones, and have general parking and safety concerns. o April 13, 2022 – Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Jordan Meadows/Westpointe Community Council meeting (Zoom). Community members asked questions about parking and how the increased number of students and increased park usage would be addressed. o April 14, 2022 – Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Yalecrest Community Council meeting (Zoom). Community members asked questions about historic districts and how the proposal would affect them, required parking, accessory dwelling units, rental units, and neighborhood character. o May 4, 2022 – Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Greater Avenues Community Council meeting (Zoom). Community member questions included affordability levels, the Planning Commission meeting and how to submit comments if not able to attend, and the monitoring of the deed restricted properties. o March 16, 2023 – Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Salt Lake City Community Network meeting (Zoom). Open Houses and Virtual Events: • July 9, 2020 – Facebook Live Q&A – Planning staff hosted an AMA/Q&A discussion on Facebook. It reached 4,365 people with 1,423 3-second video views and 52 comments. • February 16, 2022 – Facebook Live Q&A – Planning staff hosted an AMA/Q&A discussion on Facebook. It reached 772 people with 401 3-second video views and 71 reactions, shares, and comments. • April 5, 2022 – Virtual Office Hours (Zoom) – Planning staff hosted an open Zoom meeting to answer questions. There were no attendees. • April 5, 2022 – Open House (Sugar House Fire Station #3) – Planning staff hosted an open house to provide information and answer questions on the proposal. Seven people attended. • April 12, 2022 – Open House (Unity Center) – Planning staff hosted an open house to provide information and answer questions on the proposal. Three people attended. • April 14, 2022 – Virtual Office Hours (Zoom) – Planning staff hosted an open Zoom meeting to answer questions. No one attended. • April 19, 2022 – Open House (Riverside Park) – Planning staff hosted an open house to provide information and answer questions on the proposal. No one attended. • April 21, 2022 – Open House (Lindsey Gardens Park) – Planning staff hosted an open house to provide information and answer questions on the proposal. One person attended. The Glendale and Sugar House Community Councils submitted letters. Community Notification: The City Council office sent a flyer to commercial and residential addresses in the city and owners that live outside of Salt Lake City. It identified housing initiatives in the city and highlighted this proposal. A total of 99,832 were sent. Focus Group: The Office of the Mayor convened a focus group that included 15-20 members. It was comprised of neighborhood leaders, developers, policy advisors, and housing advocates. The group reviewed and discussed topics with the most community concerns over four meetings in the fall and winter of 2022. They made several recommended changes to proposal detailed in the planning staff’s report. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) PC Agenda of May 11, 2022 (Click to Access) b) PC Minutes of May 11, 2022 (Click to Access) c) Planning Commission Staff Report of May 11, 2022 (Click to Access Report) d) PC Agenda of March 22, 2023 (Click to Access) e) PC Minutes of March 22, 2023 (Click to Access) f) Planning Commission Memo of March 22, 2023 (Click to Access Memo) g) PC Agenda of March 29, 2023 (Click to Access) h) PC Minutes of March 29, 2023 (Click to Access) i) PC Agenda of April 26, 2023 (Click to Access) j) PC Minutes of April 26, 2023 (Click to Access) k) Planning Commission Staff Report of April 26, 2023 (Click to Access Report) Attachment E EXHIBITS: 1) Ordinance: Final and Legislative Versions 2) Project Chronology 3) Notice of City Council Public Hearing 4) Petition Initiation Request 5) Additional Department Comments 6) Public Comment Received after the Planning Commission Staff Report was Published 1. ORDINANCE SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2023 (An ordinance amending various sections of the Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code establishing a chapter for zoning incentives and adding affordable housing incentives) An ordinance amending various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00658 pertaining to zoning incentives and affordable housing incentives. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held public hearings on May 11, 2022 and April 26, 2023 to consider a petition submitted by former Salt Lake City Mayor, Jackie Biskupski (Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00658) to amend various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code adding zoning incentives and affordable housing incentives; and WHEREAS, at its April 26, 2023, meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of transmitting a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said petition; and WHEREAS, the City Council requests a report on costs and benefits of implementation of the affordable housing incentives 24 months following adoption; and WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the City Council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.20.040. That Section 21A.20.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Enforcement: Civil Fines) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 1 A. If the violations are not corrected by the citation deadline, civil fines shall accrue at twenty five dollars ($25.00) a day per violation for those properties legally used for purposes that are solely residential uses, and one hundred dollars ($100.00) a day per violation for those properties used for purposes that are not residential uses. B. Affordable housing incentives per 21A.52.050: If the violation(s) are not corrected by the citation deadline, civil fines shall accrue at the rate set in the Consolidated Fee Schedule per day per violation. If the violation(s) include renting an affordable rental unit in excess of the approved rental rate then an additional monthly fine shall accrue that is the difference between the market rate of the unit and the approved rental rate that is agreed to by the applicant at the time of approval for a project using the incentives. SECTION 2. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.24.050.A. That Subsection 21A.24.050.A of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: R-1/12,000 Single-family Residential District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: A.Purpose Statement: The purpose of the R-1/12,000 Single-Family Residential District is to provide for single-family residential dwellings and affordable housing incentives developments with up to four units on lots twelve thousand (12,000) square feet in size or larger. This district is appropriate in areas of the City as identified in the applicable community Master Plan. Uses are intended to be compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. The standards for the district are intended to provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play, promote sustainable and compatible development patterns and to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood. SECTION 3. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.24.060.A. That Subsection 21A.24.060.A of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: R-1/7,000 Single-family Residential District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: A.Purpose Statement: The purpose of the R-1/7,000 Single-Family Residential District is to provide for single-family residential dwellings and affordable housing incentives developments with up to four units on lots not less than seven thousand (7,000) square feet in size. This district is appropriate in areas of the City as identified in the applicable community Master Plan. Uses are intended to be compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. The standards for the district are intended to provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play, promote sustainable and compatible development patterns and to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood. SECTION 4. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.24.070.A. That Subsection 21A.24.070.A of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: R-1/5,000 Single-family Residential District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 2 A.Purpose Statement: The purpose of the R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District is to provide for single-family residential dwellings and affordable housing incentives developments with up to four units on lots not less than five thousand (5,000) square feet in size. This district is appropriate in areas of the City as identified in the applicable community Master Plan. Uses are intended to be compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. The standards for the district are intended to provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play, promote sustainable and compatible development patterns and to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood. SECTION 5. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.24.110.A. That Subsection 21A.24.110.A of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: R-2 Single- and Two-family Residential District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: A.Purpose Statement: The purpose of the R-2 Single- and Two- Family Residential District is to preserve the character of existing neighborhoods which exhibit a mix of predominantly single- and two-family dwellings. Uses are intended to be compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. The standards for the district are intended to provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play and to promote sustainable and compatible development patterns. SECTION 6. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.24.170.F. That Subsection 21A.24.170.F of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: R-MU Residential/Mixed Use District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: F.Maximum Building Height: The maximum building height shall not exceed seventy five feet (75'), except that nonresidential buildings and uses shall be limited by subsections F1 and F2 of this section. 1. 2. Maximum height for nonresidential buildings: Forty five feet (45'). Maximum floor area coverage of nonresidential uses in mixed use buildings of residential and nonresidential uses: Three (3) floors. SECTION 7. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.26.078.E.2. That Subsection 21A.26.078.E.2 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: TSA Transit Station Area District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows (Table 21A.26.078.E.2 and all notes thereto shall remain and are not amended herein): 2.Building Height: The minimum and maximum building heights are found in table 21A.26.078.E.2, "Building Height Regulations", of this subsection E.2. The minimum 3 building height applies to all structures that are adjacent to a public or private street. The building shall meet the minimum building height for at least fifty percent (50%) of the width of the street facing building wall. SECTION 8. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Table 21A.27.040.C. That Table 21A.27.040.C of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Form Based Districts: FB-SC and FB-SE Form Based Special Purpose Corridor District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: TABLE 21A.27.040.Cꢀ FB-SC BUILDING FORM STANDARDSꢀ Permitted Building Forms Multi-Family And Storefront ꢀ H ꢀ Maximum building height ꢀMaximum building height in the FB-SC is 60 ft. Limitation on commercial uses Commercial or nonresidential uses are limited to the first 3 stories and a height of 45 ft. This limitation does not apply to hotel/motel uses, which are limited to the maximum height of 75 ft. F Front and corner Greenway Minimum of 5 ft. Maximum of 15 ft. side yard setback Neighborhood Minimum of 15 ft. Maximum of 25 ft. Avenue Boulevard Minimum of 5 ft. Maximum of 10 ft. Minimum of 15 ft. Maximum of 25 ft. B Required built-to Minimum of 50% of any street facing facade shall be built to the minimum setback line. At least 10% of any street facing facade shall be built to the maximum setback line. S Interior side yard When adjacent to a residential district, a minimum setback of 25% of the lot width, up to 25 ft., is required. Any portion of the building taller than 30 ft. must be stepped back 2 ft. from the required building setback line for every 1 ft. of height over 30 ft. When adjacent to other zoning districts, no minimum setback is required. See illustration below. R Rear yard When adjacent to a residential district, a minimum setback of 25% of the lot width, up to 25 ft., is required. Any portion of the building taller than 30 ft. must be stepped back 2 ft. from the required building setback line for every 1 ft. of height over 30 ft. When adjacent to other zoning districts, no minimum setback is required. See illustration below. L Minimum lot size 4,000 sq. ft.; not to be used to calculate density. 4 W Minimum lot width 50 ft. DU Dwelling units per building form No minimum or maximum. Bf Number of building forms per lot 1 building form permitted for every 4,000 sq. ft. of lot area provided all building forms have frontage on a street. SECTION 9. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.020. That Section 21A.33.020 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Residential Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Residential Districts, in alphabetical order with other use categories in the table, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 5 Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District FR-1/ FR-2/ FR-3/R-1/R-1/R-1/ SR- SR- SR- R- RMF- RMF- RMF- RMF- RB R-R-R- RO 43,560 21,780 12,000 12,000 7,000 5,000 1 2 3 2 30 35 45 75 MU- MU- MU 35 P 45 PAffordable Housing P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Incentives Development 6 SECTION 10. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That Section 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts, in alphabetical order with other use categories in the table, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 7 Use Permitted and Conditional Uses by District CN P CB P CS1 P CC P CSHBD1 CG P SNB PAffordable Housing P Incentives Development 8 SECTION 11. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.035. That Section 21A.33.035 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Transit Station Area Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Transit Station Area Districts, in alphabetical order with other use categories in the table, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 9 Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District TSA-UN TSA-MUEC Core Transition Core Transition TSA-UC Transition TSA-SP Core TransitionCore Affordable Housing Incentives Development P P P P P P P P 10 SECTION 12. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That Section 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts, in alphabetical order with other use categories in the table, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District D-1 P D-2 P D-3 P D-4 PAffordable Housing Incentives Development SECTION 13. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.060. That Section 21A.33.060 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses in the Gateway District) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for the Gateway District, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: Use G-MU Affordable Housing Incentives Development P SECTION 14. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.070. That Section 21A.33.070 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Special Purpose Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Special Purpose Districts, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 11 Use Permitted and Conditional Uses by District RP BP FP AG AG-2 AG-5 AG-20 OS NOS PL PL-2A I UI MH EI MU Affordable Housing P Incentives Development 12 SECTION 15. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.080. That Section 21A.33.080 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Form Based Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Form Based Districts, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: [Note to codifier: use this table if FBUN3 is adopted as of the date of this ordinance pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00277. If it is not adopted, then this table is void.] Use Permitted Uses By District FB-UN1 P FB-UN2 FB-UN3 P FB-SC FB-SE PAffordable Housing Incentives Development P P [Note to codifier: use this table if FBUN3 is not adopted as of the date of this ordinance pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00277. If it is adopted this table is void and the prior table should be codified.] Use Permitted Uses By District FB-UN1 P FB-UN2 P FB-SC P FB-SE PAffordable Housing Incentives Development SECTION 16. Creating a new Chapter 21A.52 of Salt Lake City Code 21A. Chapter 21A of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning Incentives) shall be and hereby is amended to include a new Chapter 21A.52 Zoning Incentives and shall read as follows: 21A.52.010 PURPOSE: The purpose of this chapter is to establish zoning incentives to support achieving adopted goals within the City’s adopted plans and policy documents. 21A.52.020 APPLICABILITY: This chapter applies as indicated within each subsection. 21A.52.030 RELATIONSHIP TO BASE ZONING DISTRICTS AND OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS: 13 Unless otherwise indicated in this chapter, all base zoning district or overlay zoning district standards and requirements take precedence except as indicated in this section. 21A.52.040 APPROVAL PROCESS: Any process required by this title shall apply to this chapter unless specifically exempt or modified within this chapter. A. B. C. The Planned Development process in 21A.55 may be modified as indicated within this chapter. The Design Review process in 21A.59 may be modified as indicated within this chapter. Developments authorized by this chapter are exempt from 21A.10.020.B.1. 21A.52.050 AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES: A.Purpose: The Affordable Housing Incentives encourage the development of affordable housing. The provisions within this section facilitate the construction of affordable housing by allowing more inclusive development than would otherwise be permitted in the base zoning districts. Housing constructed using the incentives is intended to be compatible in form with the neighborhood and provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play. B.Applicability: The provisions in this section provide optional incentives to development projects that include affordable housing units. Unless specifically stated below, all other applicable provisions in the base zoning district or overlay districts shall apply. C. D. Uses: Additional housing types are allowed in zones subject to compliance with this section. Reporting and Auditing: Property owners who use the incentives of this chapter are required to provide a report that demonstrates compliance with this section and any additional approvals associated with the use of incentives. The report shall be submitted annually by April 30th and shall be reflective of the financial status at the end of the previous calendar year. The report shall be submitted to the Director of Community and Neighborhoods or successor. 1. Annual Report and Auditing: Each property owner shall submit a report that demonstrates compliance with this chapter. a. If applicable, the property owner shall submit a copy of the annual report(s) provided to Utah Housing Corporation, Olene Walker Housing Loan Fund, Housing Authority of Salt Lake City, Housing Connect, or similar funding source as determined by the Department of Community and Neighborhoods, or successors, confirming compliance with affordable housing conditions, including tenant income and rent rates. b. If an annual report is not submitted as required in 21A.52.050.D.1.a above, the property owner shall provide a report that includes, but is not limited to the following: (1) The property location, tax ID number, and legal description. (2) Property owner name, mailing address, and email address. (3) Information on the dwelling units and tenants of the property receiving the incentives that includes: 14 (A) The total number of dwelling units (B) The number of bedrooms of each dwelling unit (C) The rental rate of each dwelling unit (D)Identify the dwelling units that comply with the level of affordability identified in the approval to use the incentives and a statement that the dwelling units are in compliance with the approval requirements. (E) Identify any change in occupancy to the units that are required to be affordable under this section, including a change in the number of people residing in each unit and any change in tenant. Personal data is not required to be submitted. (F) Confirm that income verification for all tenants was performed on an annual basis. (G)Identify any differences in rent between the agreed upon rental rate in the approval to use the incentives and the actual rent received for the identified affordable dwelling units. (H)Identify any instance where an affordable dwelling unit was no longer rented at the agreed upon level of affordability, the length of time the dwelling unit was not in compliance with the agreed upon level of affordability, and any remedy that was taken to address the noncompliance. 2. Review of Annual Report: The Director of Community and Neighborhoods shall review the report to determine if the report is complete. 3. Within 30 days of receipt of a complete report, the Director of Community and Neighborhoods shall provide the property owner with written notice that: a. Identifies whether the property is in compliance. b. Identify any deficiency in the information provided by the owner. c. Assesses any penalty that is due as a result of an identified noncompliance. 4. After receipt of the notice from the Director of Community and Neighborhoods that indicates noncompliance, the property owner shall: a. Cure the identified noncompliance within 30 days of such notice and concurrently submit an updated report of then-current operations of the property that demonstrates compliance; or (1) Property owners can request an extension in writing prior to the expiration of the 30-day cure period identified above. The request shall include an explanation of the efforts to correct the non-compliance and the reason the extension is needed. The Director of Community and Neighborhoods will review and determine if the timeframe and extension are appropriate and whether or not fines shall be stayed during any approved extension. Upon expiration of the extension granted by the Director the property owner shall submit an updated report of then-current operations of the property that demonstrates compliance. b. Pay any fine or fee that is assessed pursuant to 21A.20.040 due to any noncompliance within 14 days of achieving compliance. Any fine or fee shall 15 be assessed from the first identified date that the property is not in compliance. 5. The city may contract with another entity for review of the requirements in this section. 6. Violations of this Chapter shall be investigated and prosecuted pursuant to 21A.20, except as set forth below in 21A.52.050.E. E.Enforcement: Violations of this Chapter, or the restrictive covenant on the property as set forth in 21A.52.050.F.1, shall be investigated and prosecuted pursuant to 21A.20. The city shall have the additional remedies for violations as set forth below. 1. Lien on Property. If the property owner fails to make payment of the outstanding fines, then after 90 days or when fines reach $5,000, the division will issue a statement of outstanding fines. If the property owner fails to make payment within 14 days, then the division may certify the fines set forth in the statement to the Salt Lake County Treasurer. After entry by the Salt Lake County Treasurer, the amount entered shall have the force and effect of a valid judgment of the district court, is a lien on the property, and shall be collected by the treasurer of the county in which the property is located at the time of the payment of general taxes. Upon payment of the amount set forth in the statement, the judgment is satisfied, the lien is released from the property, and receipt shall be acknowledged upon the general tax receipt issued by the treasurer. 2. Revocation of Business License. Upon a determination of the division that the property is in violation of this Chapter the city may suspend or revoke the business license associated with the property. Any suspension or revocation of a license shall not be imposed until a hearing is first held before the Director of Community and Neighborhoods or his/her successor. The licensee shall be given at least 14 days’ notice of the time and place of the hearing, together with the nature of the charges against the licensee. The licensee may appear in person or through an officer, agent or attorney, to introduce evidence on the licensee’s behalf, and to confront and cross-examine witnesses. The Director of Community and Neighborhoods shall make a decision based upon the evidence introduced at the hearing and issue a written decision. The licensee may appeal to an appeals hearing officer and thereafter to district court pursuant to 21A.16. If the license is revoked or suspended it shall thereafter be unlawful for any person to engage in or use, or permit to be used any property for any business with respect to which the license has been suspended or revoked until a license shall be granted upon appeal or due to the property’s compliance with this Chapter. No person whose license has been revoked, and no person associated or connected with such person in the conduct of such business, shall be granted a license for the same purpose for a period of six months after the revocation has occurred. The Director may, for good cause, waive the prohibition against persons formerly associated or connected with an individual who has had a license revoked. F.Eligibility Standards: Developments shall meet the criteria below to be eligible for the authorized incentives: 16 1.Restrictive Covenant Required: a.Any owner who uses the incentives of this chapter shall enter into a legally binding restrictive covenant, the form of which shall be approved by the city attorney. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of a building using the incentives, the restrictive covenant shall be filed with the Salt Lake County Recorder. The agreement shall provide for the following, without limitation: acknowledge the use of the incentives, the nature of the approval and any conditions thereof, the affordability requirements, the terms of compliance with all applicable regulations, shall guarantee compliance for a term of 30 years, and the potential enforcement actions for any violation of the agreement. The agreement shall be recorded on the property with the Salt Lake County Recorder, guarantees that the affordability criteria will be met for at least 30 years, and is transferrable to any future owner. b.For an affordable homeownership unit, a notice of sale shall be provided to the city and the city shall have a right of first refusal to any sale of the property in accordance with a future sales price that is capped to comply with section 21A.52.050.F.2.b.2 below. 2.The affordable units shall be both income and rent/housing payment restricted. a.Income Restriction - The affordable units shall be made available only to Eligible Households that are qualifying occupants with an annual income at or below the SLC Area Median Income (“AMI”) as applicable for the given affordable unit for Salt Lake City Utah, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) Metro FMR Area (as periodically determined by the HUD and adjusted for household size). b.Rent/Housing Payment Restriction (1)For an affordable rental unit, the monthly rent, including all required housing costs per unit, such as utilities and other charges uniformly assessed to all apartment units other than charges for optional services, shall be set forth in a written lease and shall not exceed, for the term of the lease, the maximum monthly gross rental rate published annually by the Utah Housing Corporation for affordable units located in Salt Lake City for the percentage AMI as applicable for the given affordable unit type. (2)For an affordable homeownership unit, the annualized housing payment, including mortgage principal and interest, private mortgage insurance, property taxes, condominium and/or homeowner's association fees, insurance, and parking, shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the maximum monthly income permissible for the AMI as applicable for the given affordable 17 unit, assuming a household size equal to the number of bedrooms in the unit plus one person. 3. 4. Comparable units: Affordable units shall be comparable to market rate units in the development including entrance location, dispersion throughout the building or site, number of bedrooms (unless otherwise permitted), access to all amenities available to the market rate units in the development, or as set forth in the terms of the restrictive covenant. This section does not apply to units in single- and two-family zoning districts. The property owner shall be ineligible for affordable housing incentives pursuant to this Chapter if the property owner or its principals, partners, or agents are under enforcement for any violation of title 11, 18, 20, or 21. G.Incentives: Developments are eligible for the incentives identified in this section. Table 21A.52.050.G establishes the affordability requirements based on the zoning district of the property. Sections 1 through 4 establish the modifications allowed within each zoning district in order to be eligible for the affordability incentives. To use the incentives, developments shall comply with the criteria applicable to the base zoning districts. Table 21A.52.050.G Incentive Types Types Incentive Type A. Applicable to the single- and Dwelling units shall meet the requirements for an two-family zoning districts: FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, R-1/12,000, R-1/7,000, R-1/5,000, R-2, SR-1, SR-1A, and SR-3. affordable rental or homeownership unit affordable to those with incomes at or below 80% AMI. New construction: At least 50% of the provided dwelling units shall be affordable. Existing building maintained: A minimum of one of the dwelling units shall be affordable provided the existing building is maintained as required in 21A.52.050.H.1.c. Type B. Applicable to residential multifamily zoning districts: RMF- 30, RMF-35, RMF-45, and RMF-75 An affordable rental unit shall meet a minimum of at least one of the following affordability criteria: 1. 40% of units shall be affordable to those with incomes at or below 60% AMI; 2. 20% of units shall be affordable to those with incomes at or below 50% AMI; or 3. 40% of units shall be affordable to those with incomes averaging no more than 60% AMI and these units shall not be occupied by those with an income greater than 80% AMI. For sale owner occupied units: An affordable homeownership unit shall provide a minimum of 50% of units affordable to those with incomes at or below 80% AMI. 18 Type C. Applicable to zoning districts not otherwise specified. Affordable rental or homeownership units shall meet a minimum of at least one of the affordability criteria identified. Any fractional number of units required shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. 1. 20% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI; 2. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 60% AMI; 3. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an average income at or below 60% AMI and these units shall not be occupied by those with an income greater than 80% AMI; 4. 5% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 30% AMI; 5. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI when the affordable units have two or more bedrooms; 6. 5% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 60% AMI when the affordable units have two or more bedrooms; or 7. 5% of the units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI when the affordable units have three or more bedrooms. 1. Single- and Two-Family Zoning Districts: The following housing types: twin home and two-family, three-family dwellings, four-family dwellings, row houses, sideways row houses, and cottage developments are authorized in the FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, R-1/12,000, R-1/7,000, R-1/5,000, R-2, SR-1, SR-1A, and SR-3 zoning districts provided the affordability requirements in for Type A in Table 21A.52.050.G are met. 2. RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45 and RMF-75 zoning districts: The qualifying provisions for density found in the minimum lot area and lot width tables for the RMF-35, RMF-45, and RMF-75 zoning districts do not apply and in the RMF-30 zoning district, the minimum lot size per dwelling unit does not apply, provided the affordability requirements for Type B in Table 21A.52.050.G are met. 3. Incentives in the CB Community Business, CC Corridor Commercial, CG General Commercial, and I Institutional Zoning Districts: a.The following housing types: row houses, sideways row houses, and cottage developments are authorized in zoning districts provided the affordability requirements in subsection b. are complied with; 19 b.To be eligible for the incentives listed in this section, a development shall meet the affordability requirements for Type C in Table 21A.52.050.G. 4. The following incentives are authorized in zoning districts provided the affordability requirements for Type C in Table 21A.52.050.G are complied with: a.Administrative design review provided the noticing requirements of 21A.10.020.B and the standards in 21A.59 are met. Early engagement notice requirements to recognized organizations are not applicable. Additional building height as indicated in the following sections:b. (1) Residential districts: Permitted Maximum Height with IncentiveZoning District RMU-35 RMU-45 RB 45’ with administrative Design Review, regardless of abutting use or zone. 55’ with administrative Design Review, regardless of abutting use or zone. May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building. Density limitations listed in the land use table do not apply. RMU RO May build three additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building. (2)Commercial Districts: Zoning District SNB Permitted Maximum Height with Incentive May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building. CB CN CC CG May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building. May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building. 45’ with administrative Design Review; additional landscaping may be met by meeting requirements in 21A.52.050.H.3.c.5. May build two additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. May build three additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review for properties in the mapped area in Figure 21A.26.070.G. CSHBD1 CSHBD2 105’ and two additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. 60’ with administrative Design Review and one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. 20 TSA- Transition May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative review. TSA-Core May build two additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative review. (3)Form-based districts: [Note to codifier: use this table if FBUN3 is adopted as of the date of this ordinance pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00277. If it is not adopted, then this table is void.] Zoning District Permitted Maximum Height with Incentive FB-UN3 125’ and three additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. FB-UN2 FB-SC FB-SE May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. FB-UN1 May build up to three stories and 30’ in height. [Note to codifier: use this table if FBUN3 is not adopted as of the date of this ordinance pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00277. If it is adopted this table is void and the prior table should be codified.] Zoning District Permitted Maximum Height with Incentive FB-UN2 May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. FB-SC FB-SE May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. FB-UN1 May build up to three stories and 30’ in height. (4)Downtown districts: Zoning District D-1 Permitted Maximum Height with Incentive Administrative Design Review is permitted when a Design Review process is required. D-2 D-3 Two additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. Three additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. 21 D-4 Three additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the stories permitted with administrative Design Review. 375’ and administrative Design Review in mapped area in 21A.30.045.E.2.b. (5)Other districts: Zoning District GMU Permitted Maximum Height with Incentive Two additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. MU 60’ with residential units and administrative Design Review. c.Administrative Design Review is permitted for the following: (6)Buildings in the CSHBD1 and CSHBD2 zoning district that exceed 20,000 square feet in size. (7)Buildings in the CB zoning district that exceed 7,500 gross square feet of floor area for a first-floor footprint or in excess of 15,000 gross square feet floor area. 5. Planned Developments: A Planned Development is not required when the purpose of the planned development is due to the following reasons cited below, subject to approval by other city departments. If a development proposes any modification that is not listed below, planned development approval is required. To be eligible for the incentives in this section, a development shall meet the affordability requirements for the applicable zoning district in Table 21A.52.040. a.Multiple Buildings on a Single Parcel: More than one principal building may be located on a single parcel and are allowed without having public street frontage. This allowance supersedes the restrictions of 21A.36.010.B; b. c. d. Principal buildings with frontage on a paved public alley; Principal buildings with frontage on a private street; Development located in the Community Shopping (CS) “Planned Development Review” in 21A.26.040.C. H.Development Regulations: The following development regulations are intended to provide supplemental regulations and modify standards of the base zoning district for the purpose of making the affordable housing incentives more feasible and compatible with existing development. Base zoning standards apply unless specifically modified by this section and are in addition to modifications authorized in subsection 21A.52.050.G. If there are conflicts with design standards, the more restrictive regulation shall apply and take precedence. These standards are not allowed to be modified through the planned development process. 1. Modifications in the FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, R-1/12,000, R-1/7,000, R-1/5,000, R-2, SR-1, SR-1A, and SR-3 zoning districts: a.Parking: Unless there is a lesser parking requirement in 21A.44, only one off-street parking space per unit is required. One detached garage 22 or covered parking space, no greater than 250 sq. ft. per unit, may be provided for each unit and these structure(s) may exceed the yard and building coverage requirements for accessory structures. When covered parking is provided, the 250 sq. ft. per unit of covered parking may be combined into a single structure for each required parking stall provided. b. c. Yards: Minimum required yards shall apply to the perimeter of the development and not to the individual principal buildings within the development. Density: (1)Lots approved through a planned development prior to the effective date of this chapter are required to go through a major modification of the planned development to use the incentives. Lots may contain up to four units. Existing lots may be divided such that each unit is on its own lot. The new lots are exempt from minimum lot area, lot width, and lot frontage requirements. (2) (3) (4) An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) is considered one unit and counts toward the number of units permitted. Arrangement of dwellings: (A)New dwelling units may be arranged in any manner within a building, as a second detached dwelling, as attached units, or a cottage development with three or more detached dwellings, within the buildings that are part of the cottage development. (B)When an existing building is maintained, new units may be added internal to the existing structure, as an addition, or as a second detached dwelling. Any addition must comply with the standards of the base zoning district; however, the addition may contain additional units. 50% of the exterior walls of the existing dwelling, including the front elevation, shall remain as exterior walls. (C)The units shall comply with this section, applicable requirements of the base zoning district, and any applicable overlay district. 2. Within the RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45 and RMF-75 zoning districts the following provisions shall apply: a.Unit Mix: No more than 25% of the units in the development shall be less than 500 square feet to promote a mix of unit sizes. Parking: Unless there is a lesser parking requirement in 21A.44, only one off-street parking space per unit is required in multifamily developments with less than 10 units. b. 23 c.Yards: The minimum required yards shall apply to the perimeter of the development and not to the individual principal buildings within the development. d.Lot width: Minimum lot width requirements do not apply. 3. In addition to applicable requirements in 1. and 2. above, the following provisions apply to the specific building types listed: a.Row house and Sideways row house (1) Perimeter yard requirements: (A) Front yards: The front yard and corner side yard of the base zoning district apply. (B) Side yards: A minimum of 10 feet on one side of the building and 6 feet on the other interior side yard unless a greater yard is required by the base zoning district (C) Rear yard: The rear yard of the base zoning district applies. (2) Number of Units: To qualify for incentives in the FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, R-1/12,000, R-1/7,000, R-1/5,000, R-2, SR-1, and SR- 1A zoning districts there is a minimum of three and a maximum of four residential dwelling units per building. (3) Building length facing street: (A) The building length shall not exceed 60 feet or the average of the block face, whichever is less, in FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, R -1/12,000, R-1/7,000, R-1/5,000, R- 2, SR-1, and SR-1A districts; (B) The building length shall not exceed 100 feet in the RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45 and RMF-75 districts; and (C) The building length shall not exceed 175 feet in other zoning districts. (4) Building entry facing street: At least one operable building entrance on the ground floor is required for each unit facing the primary street facing façade. All units adjacent to a public street shall have the primary entrance on the street facing façade of the building with an unenclosed entry porch, canopy, or awning feature. The entry feature may encroach in the front yard setback, but the encroachment shall not be closer than 5 feet from the front property line. (5) Building materials: 50% of any street facing facade shall be clad in durable materials. Durable materials include stone, brick, masonry, textured or patterned concrete, and fiber cement board. Other materials may be used for the remainder of the facade adjacent to a street. Other materials proposed to satisfy the durable requirement may be approved at the discretion of the Planning Director if it is found that the 24 proposed material is durable and is appropriate for the structure. (6) Parking requirement and location: Unless there is a lesser parking requirement in 21A.44, only one off-street parking space per unit is required. All provided parking shall be located to the side of the street facing building façade, behind a principal structure that has frontage on a street, or within the principal structure subject to any other applicable provision. (7) Garage doors facing street: Garage doors are prohibited on the façade of the building that is parallel to, or located along, a public street. (8) Personal outdoor space: Each unit shall have a minimum outdoor space of 60 square feet where the minimum measurement of any side cannot be less than 6 feet. (9) Glass: The surface area of the façade of each floor facing a street must contain a minimum of 15% glass. (10) Blank wall: The maximum length of any blank wall uninterrupted by windows, doors, or architectural detailing at the ground floor level along any street facing façade is 15’. (11) Screening of mechanical equipment: All mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view and sited to minimize their visibility and impact. Examples of siting include on the roof, enclosed or otherwise integrated into the architectural design of the building, or in a rear or side yard area subject to yard location restrictions found in section 21A.36.020, table 21A.36.020B, “Obstructions In Required Yards” of this title. Illustration for 21A.52.050.E.3.a.1 Required Setbacks for Public Street Facing Row House Illustration for 21A.52.050.E.3.b.1 Required Setbacks for Sideways Row House 25 b.Cottage Development (1) Perimeter yard requirements: (A) Front yards: The front yard and corner side yard of the base zoning district apply. (B) Side yards: A minimum of 10 feet on one side of the property line and 6 feet on the other interior side yard, unless a greater yard is required by the base zoning district. (C) Rear yard: The rear yard of the base zoning district applies. (2) Setbacks Between Individual Cottages: All cottages shall have a minimum setback of eight feet from another cottage. (3) Area: No cottage shall have more than 850 square feet of gross floor area, excluding basement area. There is no minimum square foot requirement. (4) Building Entrance: All building entrances shall face a public street or a common open space. (5) Building materials: 50% of any street facing facade shall be clad in durable materials. Durable materials include stone, brick, masonry, textured or patterned concrete, and fiber cement board. Other materials may be used for the remainder of the facade adjacent to a street. Other materials proposed to satisfy the durable requirement may be approved at the discretion of the Planning Director if it is found that the 26 proposed material is durable and is appropriate for the structure. (6) (7) Open Space: A minimum of 250 square feet of common, open space is required per cottage. At least 50% of the open space shall be in a courtyard or other common, usable open space. The development shall include landscaping, walkways or other amenities intended to serve the residents of the development. Personal Outdoor Space: In addition to the open space requirement in this section, a minimum of 120 square feet of private open space is required per cottage. The open space shall provide a private yard area for each cottage and will be separated with a fence, hedge, or other visual separation to distinguish the private space. (8)Parking: Unless there is a lesser parking requirement in 21A.44, one off-street parking space per unit is required. All provided parking shall be located to the side of a street facing building façade, behind a principal structure that has frontage on a street, or within the principal structure subject to any other applicable provision. c. In addition to applicable requirements in 21A.52.050.H above, the following provisions apply to all other buildings containing more than two residential units. If the base zone has a greater design standard requirement, that standard applies. (1)Perimeter yard requirements: (A) Front yards: The front yard and corner side yard setback of the base zoning district apply. (B) Side yards: For housing types not otherwise allowed in the zoning district, a minimum of 10 feet on each side property line, unless a greater setback is required for single-family homes. (C) Rear yards: The rear yard of the base zoning district applies. (2)Building entrances: The ground floor shall have a primary entrance on the street facing façade of the building with an unenclosed entry porch, canopy, or awning feature. Stairs to second floor units are not permitted on street facing elevations. Glass: The surface area of the façade of each floor facing a street must contain a minimum of 15% glass. Building materials: 50% of any street facing facade shall be clad in durable materials. Durable materials include stone, brick, masonry, textured or patterned concrete, and fiber cement board. Other materials may be used for the remainder of the facade adjacent to a street. Other materials proposed to satisfy the durable requirement may be approved at the discretion of the Planning Director if it is found that the (3) (4) 27 proposed material is durable and is appropriate for the structure. (5)Open space: Open space area may include landscaped yards, patios, dining areas, and other similar outdoor living spaces. All required open space areas shall be accessible to all residents or users of the building. (A) Single- and two-family zoning districts: 120 sq. ft. of open space with a minimum width of 6 ft. shall be provided for each building with a dwelling. (B) All other zoning districts: A minimum of 10% of the land area within the development shall be open space, up to 5,000 square feet. Open space may include courtyards, rooftop and terrace gardens and other similar types of open space amenities. All required open space areas shall be accessible to all residents or users of the building. d. Single- and Two-family Dwellings: No additional design standards except as identified in 21A.24. e. Unit Limits: For overall development sites with more than 125 units, no more than 50% of units shall be designated as affordable units. f. Lots without public street frontage may be created to accommodate developments without planned development approval subject to the following standards: (1)Required yards shall be applied to the overall development site not individual lots within the development. The front and corner yards of the perimeter shall be maintained as landscaped yards; (2) (3) (4) Lot coverage shall be calculated for the overall development not individual lots within the development; and Required off street parking stalls for a unit within the development are permitted on any lot within the development. The subdivision shall be finalized with a final plat and the final plat shall document that the new lot(s) has adequate access to a public street by way of easements or a shared driveway or private street; and (5)An entity, such as a homeowner association, must be established for the operation and maintenance of any common infrastructure. Documentation establishing that entity must be recorded with the final plat. SECTION 17. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.55.010.C.1. That Subsection 21A.55.010.C.1 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Planned Developments: Purpose Statements) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 28 1. Affordable housing that meets the requirements of 21A.52.050. SECTION 18. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.60.020. That Section 21A.60.020 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: List of Terms: List of Defined Terms) shall be and hereby is amended to add the following terms in the list of defined terms to be inserted into that list in alphabetical order: Affordable Housing Affordable Housing Incentives Development Dwelling, Three-family Dwelling, Four-family Dwelling, Row House Dwelling, Sideways Row House Dwelling, Cottage Development SECTION 19. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.62.040. That Section 21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Definitions: Definitions of Terms), shall be and hereby is amended as follows: a. Adding the definition of “AFFORDABLE HOUSING.” That the definition of “AFFORDABLE HOUSING” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Affordable housing shall be both income and, as applicable, rent-restricted. The affordable units shall be made available only to individuals and households that are qualifying occupants at or below the applicable percentage of the area median income for the Salt Lake City Utah, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) Metro FMR Area the “SLC Area Median Income” or “AMI”, as periodically determined by HUD and adjusted for household size) and published by the Utah Housing Corporation, or its successor. Affordable (30% of gross income for housing costs, including utilities) housing units must accommodate at least one of the following categories: a. Extremely Low-Income Affordable Units: Housing units accommodating up to 30% AMI; b. Very Low-Income Affordable Units: Housing units accommodating up to greater than 30% and up to 50% AMI; or c. Low-Income Affordable Units: Housing units accommodating greater than 50% and up to 80% AMI. 29 b. Adding the definition of “AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES DEVELOPMENT.” That the definition of “AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES DEVELOPMENT” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES DEVELOPMENT: A housing development that meets the criteria in 21A.52.050. c. Adding the definition of “DWELLING, THREE-FAMILY.” That the definition of “DWELLING, THREE-FAMILY” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: DWELLING, THREE-FAMILY: A detached building containing three dwelling units. d. Adding the definition of “DWELLING, FOUR-FAMILY.” That the definition of “DWELLING, FOUR-FAMILY” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: DWELLING, FOUR-FAMILY: A detached building containing four dwelling units. e. Adding the definition of “DWELLING, ROW HOUSE.” That the definition of “DWELLING, ROW HOUSE” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: DWELLING, ROW HOUSE: A series of attached single-family dwellings that share at least one common wall with an adjacent dwelling unit and where the entry of each unit faces a public street. Units may be stacked vertically and/or attached horizontally. Each attached unit may be on its own lot. f. Adding the definition of “DWELLING, SIDEWAYS ROW HOUSE.” That the definition of “DWELLING, SIDEWAYS ROW HOUSE” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: DWELLING, SIDEWAYS ROW HOUSE: A series of attached single-family dwellings that share at least one common wall with an adjacent dwelling unit and where the entry of each 30 unit faces a side yard as opposed to the front yard. Units may be stacked vertically and/or attached horizontally. Each attached unit may be on its own lot. g. Adding the definition of “DWELLING, COTTAGE DEVELOPMENT.” That the definition of “DWELLING, COTTAGE DEVELOPMENT” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: DWELLING, COTTAGE DEVELOPMENT: A cottage development is a unified development that contains a minimum of two and a maximum of eight detached dwelling units with each unit appearing to be a small single-family dwelling with a common green or open space. Dwellings may be located on separate lots or grouped on one lot. SECTION 20. That the “ZONING FEES” section of the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule shall be, and hereby is, amended, in pertinent part, to add the fees set forth in the attached Exhibit A, and that a copy of the amended Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule shall be published on the official Salt Lake City website. SECTION 21. 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: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER 31 Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office (SEAL) July 7, 2023 Date:___________________________Bill No. ________ of 2023. Published: ______________.By: ________ Katherine D. Pasker, Senior City Attorney Ordinance creating zoning incentives and affordable housing incentives 32 EXHIBIT A Service Fee Additional Information Section Affordable Housing Incentives Fines Noncompliance violation $100/affordable Plus rental difference unit/day 21A.20.040.B 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2023 (An ordinance amending various sections of the Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code establishing a chapter for zoning incentives and adding affordable housing incentives) An ordinance amending various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00658 pertaining to zoning incentives and affordable housing incentives. 9 10 11 12 13 WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held public hearings on May 11, 2022 and April 26, 2023 to consider a petition submitted by former Salt Lake City Mayor, Jackie Biskupski (Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00658) to amend various 14 sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code adding zoning incentives and affordable housing 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 incentives; and WHEREAS, at its April 26, 2023, meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of transmitting a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said petition; and WHEREAS, the City Council requests a report on costs and benefits of implementation of the affordable housing incentives 24 months following adoption; 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. 23 NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 24 25 26 SECTION 1. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.20.040. That Section 21A.20.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Enforcement: Civil Fines) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 1 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 A. If the violations are not corrected by the citation deadline, civil fines shall accrue at twenty five dollars ($25.00) a day per violation for those properties legally used for purposes that are solely residential uses, and one hundred dollars ($100.00) a day per violation for those properties used for purposes that are not residential uses. B. Affordable housing incentives per 21A.52.050: If the violation(s) are not corrected by the citation deadline, civil fines shall accrue at the rate set in the Consolidated Fee Schedule per day per violation. If the violation(s) include renting an affordable rental unit in excess of the approved rental rate then an additional monthly fine shall accrue that is the difference between the market rate of the unit and the approved rental rate that is agreed to by the applicant at the time of approval for a project using the incentives. SECTION 2. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.24.050.A. That Subsection 21A.24.050.A of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: R-1/12,000 Single-family Residential District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 A.Purpose Statement: The purpose of the R-1/12,000 Single-Family Residential District is to provide for conventional single-family residential dwellings and affordable housing incentives developments with up to four units on residential neighborhoods with lots twelve thousand (12,000) square feet in size or larger. This district is appropriate in areas of the City as identified in the applicable community Master Plan. Uses are intended to be compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. The standards for the district are intended to provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play, promote sustainable and compatible development patterns and to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood. SECTION 3. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.24.060.A. That 52 53 Subsection 21A.24.060.A of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: R-1/7,000 Single-family Residential District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 A.Purpose Statement: The purpose of the R-1/7,000 Single-Family Residential District is to provide for conventional single-family residential dwellings and affordable housing incentives developments with up to four units on residential neighborhoods with lots not less than seven thousand (7,000) square feet in size. This district is appropriate in areas of the City as identified in the applicable community Master Plan. Uses are intended to be compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. The standards for the district are intended to provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play, promote sustainable and compatible development patterns and to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood. 2 64 65 66 SECTION 4. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.24.070.A. That Subsection 21A.24.070.A of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: R-1/5,000 Single-family Residential District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 A.Purpose Statement: The purpose of the R-1/5,000 Single-Family Residential District is to provide for conventional single-family residential dwellings and affordable housing incentives developments with up to four units on residential neighborhoods with lots not less than five thousand (5,000) square feet in size. This district is appropriate in areas of the City as identified in the applicable community Master Plan. Uses are intended to be compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. The standards for the district are intended to provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play, promote sustainable and compatible development patterns and to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood. SECTION 5. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.24.110.A. That 78 79 Subsection 21A.24.110.A of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: R-2 Single- and Two-family Residential District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 A.Purpose Statement: The purpose of the R-2 Single- and Two- Family Residential District is to preserve and protect for single-family dwellings the character of existing neighborhoods which exhibit a mix of predominantly single- and two-family dwellings by controlling the concentration of two-family dwelling units. Uses are intended to be compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. The standards for the district are intended to provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play and to promote sustainable and compatible development patterns. SECTION 6. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.24.170.F. That 89 Subsection 21A.24.170.F of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: R-MU 90 Residential/Mixed Use District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 F.Maximum Building Height: The maximum building height shall not exceed seventy five feet (75'), except that nonresidential buildings and uses shall be limited by subsections F1 and F2 of this section. Buildings taller than seventy five feet (75'), up to a maximum of one hundred twenty five feet (125'), may be authorized through the design review process (chapter 21A.59 of this title) and provided, that the proposed height is located within the one hundred twenty five foot (125') height zone indicated in the map located in subsection F3 of this section. 1. 2. Maximum height for nonresidential buildings: Forty five feet (45'). Maximum floor area coverage of nonresidential uses in mixed use buildings of residential and nonresidential uses: Three (3) floors. 3 101 102 103 3.One hundred twenty five foot (125') height zone map for the R-MU District: 104 105 FIGURE 21A.24.170.F.3 106 107 SECTION 7. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.26.078.E.2. That Subsection 21A.26.078.E.2 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: TSA Transit Station Area District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows (Table 21A.26.078.E.2 and all notes thereto shall remain and are not amended herein): 108 109 110 4 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 2.Building Height: The minimum and maximum building heights are found in table 21A.26.078.E.2, "Building Height Regulations", of this subsection E.2. The following exceptions apply: a. The minimum building height applies to all structures that are adjacent to a public or private street. The building shall meet the minimum building height for at least fifty percent (50%) of the width of the street facing building wall. b. Projects that achieve a development score that qualifies for administrative review are eligible for an increase in height. The increase shall be limited to one story of habitable space. The height of the additional story shall be equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building. This is in addition to the height authorized elsewhere in this title. SECTION 8. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Table 21A.27.040.C. That Table 124 125 21A.27.040.C of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Form Based Districts: FB-SC and FB-SE Form Based Special Purpose Corridor District) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 126 127 TABLE 21A.27.040.Cꢀ FB-SC BUILDING FORM STANDARDSꢀ Permitted Building Forms Multi-Family And Storefront ꢀ H ꢀ Maximum building height ꢀMaximum building height in the FB-SC is 60 ft. An additional 15 ft. in height (for a total height of 75 ft.) may be permitted for residential uses if a minimum of 10% of the units areꢀ affordable housing. ꢀ Limitation on commercial uses F Front and corner Greenway Commercial or nonresidential uses are limited to the first 3 stories and a height of 45 ft. This limitation does not apply to hotel/motel uses, which are limited to the maximum height of 75 ft. Minimum of 5 ft. Maximum of 15 ft. side yard setback Neighborhood Minimum of 15 ft. Maximum of 25 ft. Avenue Boulevard Minimum of 5 ft. Maximum of 10 ft. Minimum of 15 ft. Maximum of 25 ft. B Required built-to Minimum of 50% of any street facing facade shall be built to the minimum setback line. At least 10% of any street facing facade shall be built to the maximum setback line. S Interior side yard When adjacent to a residential district, a minimum setback of 25% of the lot width, up to 25 ft., is required. Any portion of the building taller than 30 ft. must be stepped back 2 ft. from the required building setback line for every 1 ft. of height over 30 ft. When adjacent to other zoning districts, no 5 minimum setback is required. See illustration below. R Rear yard When adjacent to a residential district, a minimum setback of 25% of the lot width, up to 25 ft., is required. Any portion of the building taller than 30 ft. must be stepped back 2 ft. from the required building setback line for every 1 ft. of height over 30 ft. When adjacent to other zoning districts, no minimum setback is required. See illustration below. L Minimum lot size W Minimum lot width 4,000 sq. ft.; not to be used to calculate density. 50 ft. DU Dwelling units per building form No minimum or maximum. Bf Number of building forms per lot 1 building form permitted for every 4,000 sq. ft. of lot area provided all building forms have frontage on a street. 128 129 130 131 SECTION 9. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.020. That Section 21A.33.020 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Residential Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Residential Districts, in alphabetical order with other use categories in the table, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 132 133 134 135 136 6 Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District FR-1/ FR-2/ FR-3/ 43,560 21,780 12,000 12,000 7,000 5,000 R-1/R-1/R-1/ SR- SR- SR- R- RMF- RMF- RMF- RMF- RB R-R-R-RO P 1 2 3 2 30 35 45 75 MU- MU- MU 35 P 45 PAffordable Housing Incentives Development P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 137 7 138 139 140 SECTION 10. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.030. That Section 21A.33.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Commercial Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use 141 category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional 142 143 Uses for Commercial Districts, in alphabetical order with other use categories in the table, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 8 Use Permitted and Conditional Uses by District CN P CB P CS1 CC P CSHBD1 CG P SNB PAffordable Housing P P Incentives Development 145 9 146 147 148 149 150 151 SECTION 11. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.035. That Section 21A.33.035 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Transit Station Area Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Transit Station Area Districts, in alphabetical order with other use categories in the table, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 152 10 Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District TSA-UN TSA-MUEC Core Transition Core Transition TSA-UC Transition TSA-SP Core TransitionCore Affordable Housing Incentives Development P P P P P P P P 153 11 154 155 156 157 158 159 SECTION 12. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.050. That Section 21A.33.050 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts, in alphabetical order with other use categories in the table, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: Use Permitted And Conditional Uses By District D-1 P D-2 P D-3 P D-4 PAffordable Housing Incentives Development 160 161 SECTION 13. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.060. That Section 21A.33.060 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses in the Gateway District) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for the Gateway District, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 162 163 164 165 Use G-MU Affordable Housing Incentives Development P 166 167 168 169 170 171 SECTION 14. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.070. That Section 21A.33.070 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Special Purpose Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Special Purpose Districts, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 12 172 Use Permitted and Conditional Uses by District RP BP FP AG AG-2 AG-5 AG-20 OS NOS PL PL-2A I UI MH EI MU Affordable Housing P Incentives Development 173 13 174 175 176 177 178 SECTION 15. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.33.080. That Section 21A.33.080 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Land Use Tables: Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Form Based Districts) shall be and hereby is amended only to add the use category “Affordable Housing Incentives Development” in the Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Form Based Districts, which use category shall read and appear in that table as follows: 179 180 [Note to codifier: use this table if FBUN3 is adopted as of the date of this ordinance pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00277. If it is not adopted, then this table is void.] Use Permitted Uses By District FB-UN1 P FB-UN2 FB-UN3 P FB-SC FB-SE PAffordable Housing Incentives Development P P 181 182 183 184 [Note to codifier: use this table if FBUN3 is not adopted as of the date of this ordinance pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00277. If it is adopted this table is void and the prior table should be codified.] Use Permitted Uses By District FB-UN1 P FB-UN2 P FB-SC P FB-SE PAffordable Housing Incentives Development 185 186 187 188 SECTION 16. Creating a new Chapter 21A.52 of Salt Lake City Code 21A. Chapter 21A of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning Incentives) shall be and hereby is amended to include a new Chapter 21A.52 Zoning Incentives and shall read as follows: 189 21A.52.010 PURPOSE: 190 191 The purpose of this chapter is to establish zoning incentives to support achieving adopted goals within the City’s adopted plans and policy documents. 192 193 21A.52.020 APPLICABILITY: This chapter applies as indicated within each subsection. 194 195 21A.52.030 RELATIONSHIP TO BASE ZONING DISTRICTS AND OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS: 14 196 197 Unless otherwise indicated in this chapter, all base zoning district or overlay zoning district standards and requirements take precedence except as indicated in this section. 198 21A.52.040 APPROVAL PROCESS: 199 200 Any process required by this title shall apply to this chapter unless specifically exempt or modified within this chapter. 201 202 203 204 205 A. B. C. The Planned Development process in 21A.55 may be modified as indicated within this chapter. The Design Review process in 21A.59 may be modified as indicated within this chapter. Developments authorized by this chapter are exempt from 21A.10.020.B.1. 206 21A.52.050 AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES: 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 A.Purpose: The Affordable Housing Incentives encourage the development of affordable housing. The provisions within this section facilitate the construction of affordable housing by allowing more inclusive development than would otherwise be permitted in the base zoning districts. Housing constructed using the incentives is intended to be compatible in form with the neighborhood and provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play. Applicability: The provisions in this section provide optional incentives to development projects that include affordable housing units. Unless specifically stated below, all other applicable provisions in the base zoning district or overlay districts shall apply. B. C. D. Uses: Additional housing types are allowed in zones subject to compliance with this section. Reporting and Auditing: Property owners who use the incentives of this chapter are required to provide a report that demonstrates compliance with this section and any additional approvals associated with the use of incentives. The report shall be submitted annually by April 30th and shall be reflective of the financial status at the end of the previous calendar year. The report shall be submitted to the Director of Community and Neighborhoods or successor. 1. Annual Report and Auditing: Each property owner shall submit a report that demonstrates compliance with this chapter. a. If applicable, the property owner shall submit a copy of the annual report(s) provided to Utah Housing Corporation, Olene Walker Housing Loan Fund, Housing Authority of Salt Lake City, Housing Connect, or similar funding source as determined by the Department of Community and Neighborhoods, or successors, confirming compliance with affordable housing conditions, including tenant income and rent rates. b. If an annual report is not submitted as required in 21A.52.050.D.1.a above, the property owner shall provide a report that includes, but is not limited to the following: (1) The property location, tax ID number, and legal description. (2) Property owner name, mailing address, and email address. (3) Information on the dwelling units and tenants of the property receiving the incentives that includes: 15 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 (A) The total number of dwelling units (B) The number of bedrooms of each dwelling unit (C) The rental rate of each dwelling unit (D)Identify the dwelling units that comply with the level of affordability identified in the approval to use the incentives and a statement that the dwelling units are in compliance with the approval requirements. (E) Identify any change in occupancy to the units that are required to be affordable under this section, including a change in the number of people residing in each unit and any change in tenant. Personal data is not required to be submitted. (F) Confirm that income verification for all tenants was performed on an annual basis. (G)Identify any differences in rent between the agreed upon rental rate in the approval to use the incentives and the actual rent received for the identified affordable dwelling units. (H)Identify any instance where an affordable dwelling unit was no longer rented at the agreed upon level of affordability, the length of time the dwelling unit was not in compliance with the agreed upon level of affordability, and any remedy that was taken to address the noncompliance. 2. Review of Annual Report: The Director of Community and Neighborhoods shall review the report to determine if the report is complete. 3. Within 30 days of receipt of a complete report, the Director of Community and Neighborhoods shall provide the property owner with written notice that: a. Identifies whether the property is in compliance. b. Identify any deficiency in the information provided by the owner. c. Assesses any penalty that is due as a result of an identified noncompliance. 4. After receipt of the notice from the Director of Community and Neighborhoods that indicates noncompliance, the property owner shall: a. Cure the identified noncompliance within 30 days of such notice and concurrently submit an updated report of then-current operations of the property that demonstrates compliance; or (1) Property owners can request an extension in writing prior to the expiration of the 30-day cure period identified above. The request shall include an explanation of the efforts to correct the non-compliance and the reason the extension is needed. The Director of Community and Neighborhoods will review and determine if the timeframe and extension are appropriate and whether or not fines shall be stayed during any approved extension. Upon expiration of the extension granted by the Director the property owner shall submit an updated report of then-current operations of the property that demonstrates compliance. b. Pay any fine or fee that is assessed pursuant to 21A.20.040 due to any noncompliance within 14 days of achieving compliance. Any fine or fee shall 16 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 be assessed from the first identified date that the property is not in compliance. 5. The city may contract with another entity for review of the requirements in this section. 6. Violations of this Chapter shall be investigated and prosecuted pursuant to 21A.20, except as set forth below in 21A.52.050.E. E.Enforcement: Violations of this Chapter, or the restrictive covenant on the property as set forth in 21A.52.050.F.1, shall be investigated and prosecuted pursuant to 21A.20. The city shall have the additional remedies for violations as set forth below. 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 1. Lien on Property. If the property owner fails to make payment of the outstanding fines, then after 90 days or when fines reach $5,000, the division will issue a statement of outstanding fines. If the property owner fails to make payment within 14 days, then the division may certify the fines set forth in the statement to the Salt Lake County Treasurer. After entry by the Salt Lake County Treasurer, the amount entered shall have the force and effect of a valid judgment of the district court, is a lien on the property, and shall be collected by the treasurer of the county in which the property is located at the time of the payment of general taxes. Upon payment of the amount set forth in the statement, the judgment is satisfied, the lien is released from the property, and receipt shall be acknowledged upon the general tax receipt issued by the treasurer. 2. Revocation of Business License. Upon a determination of the division that the property is in violation of this Chapter the city may suspend or revoke the business license associated with the property. Any suspension or revocation of a license shall not be imposed until a hearing is first held before the Director of Community and Neighborhoods or his/her successor. The licensee shall be given at least 14 days’ notice of the time and place of the hearing, together with the nature of the charges against the licensee. The licensee may appear in person or through an officer, agent or attorney, to introduce evidence on the licensee’s behalf, and to confront and cross-examine witnesses. The Director of Community and Neighborhoods shall make a decision based upon the evidence introduced at the hearing and issue a written decision. The licensee may appeal to an appeals hearing officer and thereafter to district court pursuant to 21A.16. If the license is revoked or suspended it shall thereafter be unlawful for any person to engage in or use, or permit to be used any property for any business with respect to which the license has been suspended or revoked until a license shall be granted upon appeal or due to the property’s compliance with this Chapter. No person whose license has been revoked, and no person associated or connected with such person in the conduct of such business, shall be granted a license for the same purpose for a period of six months after the revocation has occurred. The Director may, for good cause, waive the prohibition against persons formerly associated or connected with an individual who has had a license revoked. 328 329 F.Eligibility Standards: Developments shall meet the criteria below to be eligible for the authorized incentives: 17 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 1.Restrictive Covenant Required: a.Any owner who uses the incentives of this chapter shall enter into a legally binding restrictive covenant, the form of which shall be approved by the city attorney. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of a building using the incentives, the restrictive covenant shall be filed with the Salt Lake County Recorder. The agreement shall provide for the following, without limitation: acknowledge the use of the incentives, the nature of the approval and any conditions thereof, the affordability requirements, the terms of compliance with all applicable regulations, shall guarantee compliance for a term of 30 years, and the potential enforcement actions for any violation of the agreement. The agreement shall be recorded on the property with the Salt Lake County Recorder, guarantees that the affordability criteria will be met for at least 30 years, and is transferrable to any future owner. b.For an affordable homeownership unit, a notice of sale shall be provided to the city and the city shall have a right of first refusal to any sale of the property in accordance with a future sales price that is capped to comply with section 21A.52.050.F.2.b.2 below. 2.The affordable units shall be both income and rent/housing payment restricted. a. b. Income Restriction - The affordable units shall be made available only to Eligible Households that are qualifying occupants with an annual income at or below the SLC Area Median Income (“AMI”) as applicable for the given affordable unit for Salt Lake City Utah, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) Metro FMR Area (as periodically determined by the HUD and adjusted for household size). Rent/Housing Payment Restriction (1)For an affordable rental unit, the monthly rent, including all required housing costs per unit, such as utilities and other charges uniformly assessed to all apartment units other than charges for optional services, shall be set forth in a written lease and shall not exceed, for the term of the lease, the maximum monthly gross rental rate published annually by the Utah Housing Corporation for affordable units located in Salt Lake City for the percentage AMI as applicable for the given affordable unit type. (2)For an affordable homeownership unit, the annualized housing payment, including mortgage principal and interest, private mortgage insurance, property taxes, condominium and/or homeowner's association fees, insurance, and parking, shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the maximum monthly income permissible for the AMI as applicable for the given affordable 18 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 unit, assuming a household size equal to the number of bedrooms in the unit plus one person. 3. 4. Comparable units: Affordable units shall be comparable to market rate units in the development including entrance location, dispersion throughout the building or site, number of bedrooms (unless otherwise permitted), access to all amenities available to the market rate units in the development, or as set forth in the terms of the restrictive covenant. This section does not apply to units in single- and two-family zoning districts. The property owner shall be ineligible for affordable housing incentives pursuant to this Chapter if the property owner or its principals, partners, or agents are under enforcement for any violation of title 11, 18, 20, or 21. 387 388 389 390 391 392 G.Incentives: Developments are eligible for the incentives identified in this section. Table 21A.52.050.G establishes the affordability requirements based on the zoning district of the property. Sections 1 through 4 establish the modifications allowed within each zoning district in order to be eligible for the affordability incentives. To use the incentives, developments shall comply with the criteria applicable to the base zoning districts. 393 Table 21A.52.050.G Incentive Types Types Incentive Type A. Applicable to the single- and Dwelling units shall meet the requirements for an two-family zoning districts: FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, R-1/12,000, R-1/7,000, R-1/5,000, R-2, SR-1, SR-1A, and SR-3. affordable rental or homeownership unit affordable to those with incomes at or below 80% AMI. New construction: At least 50% of the provided dwelling units shall be affordable. Existing building maintained: A minimum of one of the dwelling units shall be affordable provided the existing building is maintained as required in 21A.52.050.H.1.c. Type B. Applicable to residential multifamily zoning districts: RMF- 30, RMF-35, RMF-45, and RMF-75 An affordable rental unit shall meet a minimum of at least one of the following affordability criteria: 1. 40% of units shall be affordable to those with incomes at or below 60% AMI; 2. 20% of units shall be affordable to those with incomes at or below 50% AMI; or 3. 40% of units shall be affordable to those with incomes averaging no more than 60% AMI and these units shall not be occupied by those with an income greater than 80% AMI. For sale owner occupied units: An affordable homeownership unit shall provide a minimum of 50% of units affordable to those with incomes at or below 80% AMI. 19 Type C. Applicable to zoning districts not otherwise specified. Affordable rental or homeownership units shall meet a minimum of at least one of the affordability criteria identified. Any fractional number of units required shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. 1. 20% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI; 2. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 60% AMI; 3. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an average income at or below 60% AMI and these units shall not be occupied by those with an income greater than 80% AMI; 4. 5% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 30% AMI; 5. 10% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI when the affordable units have two or more bedrooms; 6. 5% of units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 60% AMI when the affordable units have two or more bedrooms; or 7. 5% of the units are restricted as affordable to those with an income at or below 80% AMI when the affordable units have three or more bedrooms. 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 1. Single- and Two-Family Zoning Districts: The following housing types: twin home and two-family, three-family dwellings, four-family dwellings, row houses, sideways row houses, and cottage developments are authorized in the FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, R-1/12,000, R-1/7,000, R-1/5,000, R-2, SR-1, SR-1A, and SR-3 zoning districts provided the affordability requirements in for Type A in Table 21A.52.050.G are met. 401 402 403 404 405 406 2. RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45 and RMF-75 zoning districts: The qualifying provisions for density found in the minimum lot area and lot width tables for the RMF-35, RMF-45, and RMF-75 zoning districts do not apply and in the RMF-30 zoning district, the minimum lot size per dwelling unit does not apply, provided the affordability requirements for Type B in Table 21A.52.050.G are met. 407 408 409 410 411 3. Incentives in the CB Community Business, CC Corridor Commercial, CG General Commercial, and I Institutional Zoning Districts: a.The following housing types: row houses, sideways row houses, and cottage developments are authorized in zoning districts provided the affordability requirements in subsection b. are complied with; 20 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 b.To be eligible for the incentives listed in this section, a development shall meet the affordability requirements for Type C in Table 21A.52.050.G. 4. The following incentives are authorized in zoning districts provided the affordability requirements for Type C in Table 21A.52.050.G are complied with: a.Administrative design review provided the noticing requirements of 21A.10.020.B and the standards in 21A.59 are met. Early engagement notice requirements to recognized organizations are not applicable. Additional building height as indicated in the following sections:b. (1) Residential districts: Permitted Maximum Height with IncentiveZoning District RMU-35 RMU-45 RB 45’ with administrative Design Review, regardless of abutting use or zone. 55’ with administrative Design Review, regardless of abutting use or zone. May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building. Density limitations listed in the land use table do not apply. RMU RO May build three additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building. 423 424 425 (2)Commercial Districts: Zoning District SNB Permitted Maximum Height with Incentive May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building. CB CN CC CG May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building. May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building. 45’ with administrative Design Review; additional landscaping may be met by meeting requirements in 21A.52.050.H.3.c.5. May build two additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. May build three additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review for properties in the mapped area in Figure 21A.26.070.G. CSHBD1 CSHBD2 105’ and two additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. 60’ with administrative Design Review and one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. 21 TSA- Transition TSA-Core May build one additional story equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative review. May build two additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative review. 426 427 428 429 430 (3)Form-based districts: [Note to codifier: use this table if FBUN3 is adopted as of the date of this ordinance pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00277. If it is not adopted, then this table is void.] Zoning District Permitted Maximum Height with Incentive FB-UN3 125’ and three additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. FB-UN2 FB-SC FB-SE May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. FB-UN1 May build up to three stories and 30’ in height. 431 432 433 434 435 [Note to codifier: use this table if FBUN3 is not adopted as of the date of this ordinance pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00277. If it is adopted this table is void and the prior table should be codified.] Zoning District Permitted Maximum Height with Incentive FB-UN2 May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. FB-SC FB-SE May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. May build one additional story equal to the average height of the other stories in the building. FB-UN1 May build up to three stories and 30’ in height. 436 437 438 439 (4)Downtown districts: Zoning District D-1 Permitted Maximum Height with Incentive Administrative Design Review is permitted when a Design Review process is required. D-2 D-3 Two additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. Three additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. 22 D-4 Three additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the stories permitted with administrative Design Review. 375’ and administrative Design Review in mapped area in 21A.30.045.E.2.b. 440 441 442 (5)Other districts: Zoning District GMU Permitted Maximum Height with Incentive Two additional stories equal to or less than the average height of the other stories in the building with administrative Design Review. MU 60’ with residential units and administrative Design Review. 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 c.Administrative Design Review is permitted for the following: (6)Buildings in the CSHBD1 and CSHBD2 zoning district that exceed 20,000 square feet in size. (7)Buildings in the CB zoning district that exceed 7,500 gross square feet of floor area for a first-floor footprint or in excess of 15,000 gross square feet floor area. 5. Planned Developments: A Planned Development is not required when the purpose of the planned development is due to the following reasons cited below, subject to approval by other city departments. If a development proposes any modification that is not listed below, planned development approval is required. To be eligible for the incentives in this section, a development shall meet the affordability requirements for the applicable zoning district in Table 21A.52.040. a.Multiple Buildings on a Single Parcel: More than one principal building may be located on a single parcel and are allowed without having public street frontage. This allowance supersedes the restrictions of 21A.36.010.B; Principal buildings with frontage on a paved public alley; Principal buildings with frontage on a private street; Development located in the Community Shopping (CS) “Planned Development Review” in 21A.26.040.C. b. c. d. H.Development Regulations: The following development regulations are intended to provide supplemental regulations and modify standards of the base zoning district for the purpose of making the affordable housing incentives more feasible and compatible with existing development. Base zoning standards apply unless specifically modified by this section and are in addition to modifications authorized in subsection 21A.52.050.G. If there are conflicts with design standards, the more restrictive regulation shall apply and take precedence. These standards are not allowed to be modified through the planned development process. 1. Modifications in the FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, R-1/12,000, R-1/7,000, R-1/5,000, R-2, SR-1, SR-1A, and SR-3 zoning districts: a.Parking: Unless there is a lesser parking requirement in 21A.44, only one off-street parking space per unit is required. One detached garage 23 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 or covered parking space, no greater than 250 sq. ft. per unit, may be provided for each unit and these structure(s) may exceed the yard and building coverage requirements for accessory structures. When covered parking is provided, the 250 sq. ft. per unit of covered parking may be combined into a single structure for each required parking stall provided. Yards: Minimum required yards shall apply to the perimeter of the development and not to the individual principal buildings within the development. b. c.Density: (1)Lots approved through a planned development prior to the effective date of this chapter are required to go through a major modification of the planned development to use the incentives. Lots may contain up to four units. Existing lots may be divided such that each unit is on its own lot. The new lots are exempt from minimum lot area, lot width, and lot frontage requirements. (2) (3) (4) An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) is considered one unit and counts toward the number of units permitted. Arrangement of dwellings: (A)New dwelling units may be arranged in any manner within a building, as a second detached dwelling, as attached units, or a cottage development with three or more detached dwellings, within the buildings that are part of the cottage development. (B)When an existing building is maintained, new units may be added internal to the existing structure, as an addition, or as a second detached dwelling. Any addition must comply with the standards of the base zoning district; however, the addition may contain additional units. 50% of the exterior walls of the existing dwelling, including the front elevation, shall remain as exterior walls. (C)The units shall comply with this section, applicable requirements of the base zoning district, and any applicable overlay district. 2. Within the RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45 and RMF-75 zoning districts the following provisions shall apply: a.Unit Mix: No more than 25% of the units in the development shall be less than 500 square feet to promote a mix of unit sizes. Parking: Unless there is a lesser parking requirement in 21A.44, only one off-street parking space per unit is required in multifamily developments with less than 10 units. b. 24 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 c.Yards: The minimum required yards shall apply to the perimeter of the development and not to the individual principal buildings within the development. d.Lot width: Minimum lot width requirements do not apply. 3. In addition to applicable requirements in 1. and 2. above, the following provisions apply to the specific building types listed: a.Row house and Sideways row house (1) Perimeter yard requirements: (A) Front yards: The front yard and corner side yard of the base zoning district apply. (B) Side yards: A minimum of 10 feet on one side of the building and 6 feet on the other interior side yard unless a greater yard is required by the base zoning district (C) Rear yard: The rear yard of the base zoning district applies. (2) Number of Units: To qualify for incentives in the FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, R-1/12,000, R-1/7,000, R-1/5,000, R-2, SR-1, and SR- 1A zoning districts there is a minimum of three and a maximum of four residential dwelling units per building. (3) Building length facing street: (A) The building length shall not exceed 60 feet or the average of the block face, whichever is less, in FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, R -1/12,000, R-1/7,000, R-1/5,000, R- 2, SR-1, and SR-1A districts; (B) The building length shall not exceed 100 feet in the RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45 and RMF-75 districts; and (C) The building length shall not exceed 175 feet in other zoning districts. (4) Building entry facing street: At least one operable building entrance on the ground floor is required for each unit facing the primary street facing façade. All units adjacent to a public street shall have the primary entrance on the street facing façade of the building with an unenclosed entry porch, canopy, or awning feature. The entry feature may encroach in the front yard setback, but the encroachment shall not be closer than 5 feet from the front property line. (5) Building materials: 50% of any street facing facade shall be clad in durable materials. Durable materials include stone, brick, masonry, textured or patterned concrete, and fiber cement board. Other materials may be used for the remainder of the facade adjacent to a street. Other materials proposed to satisfy the durable requirement may be approved at the discretion of the Planning Director if it is found that the 25 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 proposed material is durable and is appropriate for the structure. (6) Parking requirement and location: Unless there is a lesser parking requirement in 21A.44, only one off-street parking space per unit is required. All provided parking shall be located to the side of the street facing building façade, behind a principal structure that has frontage on a street, or within the principal structure subject to any other applicable provision. (7) Garage doors facing street: Garage doors are prohibited on the façade of the building that is parallel to, or located along, a public street. (8) Personal outdoor space: Each unit shall have a minimum outdoor space of 60 square feet where the minimum measurement of any side cannot be less than 6 feet. (9) Glass: The surface area of the façade of each floor facing a street must contain a minimum of 15% glass. (10) Blank wall: The maximum length of any blank wall uninterrupted by windows, doors, or architectural detailing at the ground floor level along any street facing façade is 15’. (11) Screening of mechanical equipment: All mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view and sited to minimize their visibility and impact. Examples of siting include on the roof, enclosed or otherwise integrated into the architectural design of the building, or in a rear or side yard area subject to yard location restrictions found in section 21A.36.020, table 21A.36.020B, “Obstructions In Required Yards” of this title. Illustration for 21A.52.050.E.3.a.1 Required Setbacks for Public Street Facing Row House 598 599 Illustration for 21A.52.050.E.3.b.1 Required Setbacks for Sideways Row House 26 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 b.Cottage Development (1) Perimeter yard requirements: (A) Front yards: The front yard and corner side yard of the base zoning district apply. (B) Side yards: A minimum of 10 feet on one side of the property line and 6 feet on the other interior side yard, unless a greater yard is required by the base zoning district. (C) Rear yard: The rear yard of the base zoning district applies. (2) Setbacks Between Individual Cottages: All cottages shall have a minimum setback of eight feet from another cottage. (3) Area: No cottage shall have more than 850 square feet of gross floor area, excluding basement area. There is no minimum square foot requirement. (4) Building Entrance: All building entrances shall face a public street or a common open space. (5) Building materials: 50% of any street facing facade shall be clad in durable materials. Durable materials include stone, brick, masonry, textured or patterned concrete, and fiber cement board. Other materials may be used for the remainder of the facade adjacent to a street. Other materials proposed to satisfy the durable requirement may be approved at the discretion of the Planning Director if it is found that the 27 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 proposed material is durable and is appropriate for the structure. (6) (7) Open Space: A minimum of 250 square feet of common, open space is required per cottage. At least 50% of the open space shall be in a courtyard or other common, usable open space. The development shall include landscaping, walkways or other amenities intended to serve the residents of the development. Personal Outdoor Space: In addition to the open space requirement in this section, a minimum of 120 square feet of private open space is required per cottage. The open space shall provide a private yard area for each cottage and will be separated with a fence, hedge, or other visual separation to distinguish the private space. Parking: Unless there is a lesser parking requirement in 21A.44, one off-street parking space per unit is required. All provided parking shall be located to the side of a street facing building façade, behind a principal structure that has frontage on a street, or within the principal structure subject to any other applicable provision. (8) c. In addition to applicable requirements in 21A.52.050.H above, the following provisions apply to all other buildings containing more than two residential units. If the base zone has a greater design standard requirement, that standard applies. (1)Perimeter yard requirements: (A) Front yards: The front yard and corner side yard setback of the base zoning district apply. (B) Side yards: For housing types not otherwise allowed in the zoning district, a minimum of 10 feet on each side property line, unless a greater setback is required for single-family homes. (C) Rear yards: The rear yard of the base zoning district applies. Building entrances: The ground floor shall have a primary entrance on the street facing façade of the building with an unenclosed entry porch, canopy, or awning feature. Stairs to second floor units are not permitted on street facing elevations. Glass: The surface area of the façade of each floor facing a street must contain a minimum of 15% glass. Building materials: 50% of any street facing facade shall be clad in durable materials. Durable materials include stone, brick, masonry, textured or patterned concrete, and fiber cement board. Other materials may be used for the remainder of the facade adjacent to a street. Other materials proposed to satisfy the durable requirement may be approved at the discretion of the Planning Director if it is found that the (2) (3) (4) 28 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 proposed material is durable and is appropriate for the structure. Open space: Open space area may include landscaped yards, patios, dining areas, and other similar outdoor living spaces. All required open space areas shall be accessible to all residents or users of the building. (A) Single- and two-family zoning districts: 120 sq. ft. of open space with a minimum width of 6 ft. shall be provided for each building with a dwelling. (B) All other zoning districts: A minimum of 10% of the land area within the development shall be open space, up to 5,000 square feet. Open space may include courtyards, rooftop and terrace gardens and other similar types of open space amenities. All required open space areas shall be accessible to all residents or users of the building. (5) d. Single- and Two-family Dwellings: No additional design standards except as identified in 21A.24. e. Unit Limits: For overall development sites with more than 125 units, no more than 50% of units shall be designated as affordable units. f. Lots without public street frontage may be created to accommodate developments without planned development approval subject to the following standards: (1)Required yards shall be applied to the overall development site not individual lots within the development. The front and corner yards of the perimeter shall be maintained as landscaped yards; Lot coverage shall be calculated for the overall development not individual lots within the development; and Required off street parking stalls for a unit within the development are permitted on any lot within the development. The subdivision shall be finalized with a final plat and the final plat shall document that the new lot(s) has adequate access to a public street by way of easements or a shared driveway or private street; and (2) (3) (4) (5)An entity, such as a homeowner association, must be established for the operation and maintenance of any common infrastructure. Documentation establishing that entity must be recorded with the final plat. SECTION 17. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.55.010.C.1. That Subsection 21A.55.010.C.1 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Planned Developments: Purpose Statements) shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 711 712 29 713 714 715 716 717 1.At least twenty percent (20%) of the housing must be for those with incomes that are at or below eighty percent (80%) of the area median income. Affordable housing that meets the requirements of 21A.52.050. SECTION 18. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.60.020. That Section 718 21A.60.020 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: List of Terms: List of Defined Terms) shall be and 719 720 hereby is amended to add the following terms in the list of defined terms to be inserted into that list in alphabetical order: 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 Affordable Housing Affordable Housing Incentives Development Dwelling, Three-family Dwelling, Four-family Dwelling, Row House Dwelling, Sideways Row House Dwelling, Cottage Development 729 730 731 732 733 734 SECTION 19. Amending the Text of Salt Lake City Code Section 21A.62.040. That Section 21A.62.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Definitions: Definitions of Terms), shall be and hereby is amended as follows: a. Adding the definition of “AFFORDABLE HOUSING.” That the definition of “AFFORDABLE HOUSING” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Affordable housing shall be both income and, as applicable, rent-restricted. The affordable units shall be made available only to individuals and households that are qualifying occupants at or below the applicable percentage of the area median income for the Salt Lake City Utah, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) Metro FMR Area the “SLC Area Median Income” or “AMI”, as periodically determined by HUD and adjusted for household size) and published by the Utah Housing Corporation, or its successor. Affordable (30% of gross income for housing costs, including utilities) housing units must accommodate at least one of the following categories: a. Extremely Low-Income Affordable Units: Housing units accommodating up to 30% AMI; b. Very Low-Income Affordable Units: Housing units accommodating up to greater than 30% and up to 50% AMI; or 30 747 748 749 750 c. Low-Income Affordable Units: Housing units accommodating greater than 50% and up to 80% AMI. b. Adding the definition of “AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES DEVELOPMENT.” That the definition of “AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES DEVELOPMENT” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES DEVELOPMENT: A housing development that meets the criteria in 21A.52.050. c. Adding the definition of “DWELLING, THREE-FAMILY.” That the definition of “DWELLING, THREE-FAMILY” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: 758 759 760 DWELLING, THREE-FAMILY: A detached building containing three dwelling units. 761 762 763 764 d. Adding the definition of “DWELLING, FOUR-FAMILY.” That the definition of “DWELLING, FOUR-FAMILY” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: DWELLING, FOUR-FAMILY: A detached building containing four dwelling units. 765 766 767 e. Adding the definition of “DWELLING, ROW HOUSE.” That the definition of “DWELLING, ROW HOUSE” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: 768 769 770 771 DWELLING, ROW HOUSE: A series of attached single-family dwellings that share at least one common wall with an adjacent dwelling unit and where the entry of each unit faces a public street. Units may be stacked vertically and/or attached horizontally. Each attached unit may be on its own lot. 772 773 774 f. Adding the definition of “DWELLING, SIDEWAYS ROW HOUSE.” That the definition of “DWELLING, SIDEWAYS ROW HOUSE” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: 31 775 776 777 778 DWELLING, SIDEWAYS ROW HOUSE: A series of attached single-family dwellings that share at least one common wall with an adjacent dwelling unit and where the entry of each unit faces a side yard as opposed to the front yard. Units may be stacked vertically and/or attached horizontally. Each attached unit may be on its own lot. 779 780 781 g. Adding the definition of “DWELLING, COTTAGE DEVELOPMENT.” That the definition of “DWELLING, COTTAGE DEVELOPMENT” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order and read as follows: 782 783 784 785 DWELLING, COTTAGE DEVELOPMENT: A cottage development is a unified development that contains a minimum of two and a maximum of eight detached dwelling units with each unit appearing to be a small single-family dwelling with a common green or open space. Dwellings may be located on separate lots or grouped on one lot. 786 787 SECTION 20. That the “ZONING FEES” section of the Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule shall be, and hereby is, amended, in pertinent part, to add the fees set forth in the attached Exhibit A, and that a copy of the amended Salt Lake City Consolidated Fee Schedule shall be published on the official Salt Lake City website. 788 789 790 791 792 SECTION 21. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of ______________, 2023. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER 801 802 803 804 32 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office (SEAL) Date:___________________________ Bill No. ________ of 2023. Published: ______________.By: ____________________________ Katherine D. Pasker, Senior City Attorney822823Ordinance creating zoning incentives and affordable housing incentives 33 824 EXHIBIT A 825 826 Service Fee Additional Information Section Affordable Housing Incentives Fines Noncompliance violation $100/affordable Plus rental difference unit/day 21A.20.040.B 827 34 2. CHRONOLOGY ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Petition: PLNPCM2019-00658 July 15, 2019 Petition initiated by Mayor Jackie Biskupski Petition assigned to Sara JavoronokJuly 15, 2019 December 3, 2019 First survey posted. Notice emailed to listserv and posted on social media accounts. June 25, 2020 June 26, 2020 Notice mailed to all Community Councils. StoryMap with framework for proposal and survey posted. Notice emailed to listservs and posted on city social media accounts. July 9, 2020 Planning staff held an AMA/Q&A discussion on Facebook Live. July 20, 2020 Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Sugar House Land Use and Zoning meeting. August 6, 2020 Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Ball Park Community Council meeting. January 28, 2022 February 16, 2022 March 3, 2022 Project website updated and Project Update notice emailed to listservs. Planning staff held a second AMA/Q&A on Facebook Live. Second notice mailed to all Community Councils. Planning staff met with seven Community Councils in March and April 2022. March 16, 2022 March 21, 2022 April 2022 Planning staff discussed the proposal at the East Bench Community Council meeting. Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Sugar House Land Use Committee meeting. Flyer mailed to 99,832 commercial and residential addresses in Salt Lake City and owners outside of the city. April 5, 2022 April 5, 2022 Open House held at Sugar House Fire Station #3. Planning staff hosted Virtual Office Hours on an open Zoom meeting to answer questions. April 7, 2022 Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Ball Park Community Council meeting. April 12, 2022 April 13, 2022 Open House held at the Unity Center Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Jordan Meadows/Westpointe Community Council meeting. April 14, 2022 April 14, 2022 Planning staff hosted Virtual Office Hours on an open Zoom meeting to answer questions. Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Yalecrest Community Council meeting. April 19, 2022 April 21, 2022 April 29, 2022 Open House held at Riverside Park Open House held at Lindsey Gardens Park Planning Commission agenda posted to the website and notice emailed to listserv. May 4, 2022 Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Greater Avenues Community Council meeting May 6, 2022 Staff report posted to Planning’s website May 11, 2022 October 25, 2022 March 16, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting and Public Hearing. The item was tabled. First of four Focus Group Meetings Planning staff discussed the proposal at the Salt Lake City Community Network meeting. March 22, 2023 March 29, 2023 April 6, 2023 Planning Commission Briefing Planning Commission Work Session Historic Landmark Commission Work Session April 14, 2023 Planning Commission agenda posted to the website and notice emailed to the listserv. April 21, 2023 April 26, 2023 Staff report posted to Planning’s website Planning Commission forwards a positive recommendation to the City Council 3. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2019-00658 – A petition initiated by former Mayor Jackie Biskupski to amend the Salt Lake City Zoning Code to add a new chapter with Affordable Housing Incentives. The proposed amendments are to incentivize and reduce barriers for affordable housing. The incentives include administrative Design Review and additional building height in various zoning districts, Planned Development requirement modifications, removal of the density requirements in the RMF zoning districts, and additional dwelling types in various zoning districts. The proposed amendments involve multiple chapters of the Zoning Ordinance. Related provisions of Title 21A Zoning amended as part of this petition. The changes would apply Citywide. The City Council may consider modifications to other related sections of the code as part of this proposal. DATE: Date #1 and Date #2 TIME: 7:00 p.m. All persons interested and present will be given an opportunity to be heard in this matter. his meeting will be held via electronic means, while potentially also providing for an in person opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. If you are interested in participating during the Public Hearing portion of the meeting, please visit the website www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings/ or call 801-535-7654 to obtain connection information. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801)535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Sara Javoronok at 801-535-7625 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail sara.javoronok@slcgov.com. The application details can be accessed at https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/, by selecting the “planning” tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2019-00658 or on the project page at https://www.slc.gov/planning/2023/03/08/affordable-housing/. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance in order to participate in this hearing. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535- 7600, or relay service 711. 4. PETITION INITIATION REQUEST 5. ADDITIONAL DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Kristeen Beitel, Public Utilities When weighing increased densification as an incentive for affordable housing, it is important for applicants to consider the potential increase in construction costs resulting from required offsite utility improvements. Densification may place greater demands on water, sewer, and storm drain systems, which could exceed the capacity of the existing infrastructure. Property owners and developers may be required to upgrade the offsite public utilities to ensure sufficient capacity for the new developments. 6. PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED AFTER PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT POSTED From:Clark, Aubrey To:Turner Bitton; Planning Public Comments Subject: Date: RE: (EXTERNAL) Supportive Comments for Affordable Housing Incentives Public Hearing Wednesday, April 26, 2023 5:58:07 PM Attachments:image001.png Turner, Thank you for submitting your comments. I have forwarded it to the Planning Commission, and it will be shared during the public hearing. Thanks, Aubrey Clark | (She/Her/Hers) Administrative Assistant PLANNING DIVISION | SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION Direct: (801) 535-7759 or Mobile: (385) 415-4701 Email: Aubrey.Clark@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: Turner Bitton Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 5:52 PM To: Planning Public Comments <planning.comments@slcgov.com> Subject: (EXTERNAL) Supportive Comments for Affordable Housing Incentives Public Hearing Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. Hello, I had planned to attend tonight’s planning commission digitally but learned that there is no longer a digital attendance option and I’m at Disneyland so I can’t make it. I wanted to make sure that our support for the Affordable Housing Incentives was formally submitted. In addition to our formal support, I would like to submit this statement for the record: “SLC Neighbors for More Neighbors supports the Affordable Housing Incentives, however based on estimates in the current proposal, we are concerned that projects in single-family neighborhoods will not be financially viability. If the city is serious about promoting the construction of more housing in high- opportunity single-family neighborhoods, some of the current conditions that make those projects financially unfeasible should be removed. The Scenarios in Attachment G show that there is virtually no economic incentive for market rate developers to pursue the AHI’s. However, it has the potential to add more affordable units on SELECT projects that are already pursuing LIHTC’s Especially in multi-family districts, density bonuses need to take into account building code requirements, for example that the maximum number of stories that can be built with a wood-frame structure is five. If the density bonus provided forces builders to use a steel-frame construction technique, the economic benefits of an extra floor of apartments does not overcome the extra cost of using expensive construction materials. In addition, to make the incentives more functional, the incentives should be changed to: 1) Allow lots to be split and to allow for the sale of separate units. 2) Eliminate ALL parking requirements for projects that meet the threshold for the incentives. This would make many projects more affordable, especially in higher density zones. 3) In multi-family districts near rail transit, the incentives in terms of FAR (floor area ratio) and height limits should be much stronger to (a) make more projects financially viable and (b) locate more residents and businesses near rail. Overall, the incentives should be increased to find a broader mix of incentives that produce positive results for market rate developers considering adding affordable units to projects.” Thanks, Turner C. Bitton (he/him) Executive Director SLC Neighbors for More Neighbors www.slcneighbors.org Item B5 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 Budget and Policy Analyst DATE:October 3, 2023 RE: ORDINANCE: THE ANTI-GENTRIFICATION AND -DISPLACEMENT PLAN, THRIVING IN PLACE MOTION 1 – CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING I move that the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a later date. MOTION 2 – CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING I move that the Council continue the public hearing on a future date. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 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: Allison Rowland Budget & Policy Analyst DATE:October 3, 2023 RE: ORDINANCE: THE ANTI-GENTRIFICATION AND -DISPLACEMENT PLAN, THRIVING IN PLACE ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will continue to discuss whether the City’s anti-gentrification and anti-displacement plan, known as Thriving in Place, is ready for adoption. The aim of the plan was to identify policy measures that can help current residents remain in Salt Lake City during this period of rapid growth and change. (For additional information, see the September 12 staff report, attached.) In response to Council Member concerns and questions after the first briefing, staff summarized information in the plan, including the proposed resources and timing of each of the Strategic Priorities. This summary is found in section C below. Some of the proposed deadlines listed in the plan may need to be updated, and the Department Community and Neighborhoods has indicated that it is open to Council suggestions about the timing of specific items. Goal of the briefing: Continue to review and provide feedback on the draft of the City’s gentrification and displacement plan, known as Thriving in Place, in preparation for a public hearing and potential adoption. ADDITIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION A.The Role of Strategic Priorities. Twenty-two Strategic Priorities were defined and divided into “near- term” and longer-run actions (pages 31 to 81 of the transmittal). These would change existing City Item Schedule: Briefing 1: September 12, 2023 Briefing 2: October 3 Set Date: September 19, 2023 Public Hearing: October 3 Potential Action: October 17 Page | 2 programs, policies, and practices, or create new ones, to meet needs identified in the plan’s research and engagement. In addition, new structures are proposed for collaborations with governments outside the City, as well as community groups and non-profits. The Priorities are listed in the chart in section C, below. B.Proposed Funding for Strategic Priorities. In general terms, the plan notes that some existing resources can be repurposed to serve the plan’s goals, but significantly more investment ultimately would be needed for full implementation (see page 83 of the transmittal). As always, precise amounts would be determined through the budget process. The ordinance proposed to adopt the Thriving in Place plan notes that, like other City plans, “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.” The Council may wish to further specify that the language of the plan is aspirational, and not a promise of spending on any particular policy or program area, either now or in the future. Emphasizing this concept may be more important for this plan than traditional plans, since the need is so great in this area, and the expectations are high in the community. Other organizations have traditionally filled part of this need, and it is important that they continue their funding and involvement and not perceive that the City will be able to address these issues with general fund dollars. The plan communicates the importance of these partnerships clearly, but an emphasis in the funding sections that sources other than the general fund will be required to carry out this plan may still be helpful. ➢Policy Question: Would the Council like to add language to the plan that clarifies that the City will emphasize the identification of new funding resources to fulfill the Strategic Priorities? This could be added to the text describing “Strategic Priority 4A - Develop New Funding and Leverage Existing Resources” on pages 55 and 56 of the plan, as well as Attachment A, which describes the Two-Year Action Plan, and includes some estimates of resources needed. It could also appear in the adopting ordinance or the motion sheet. C.Summary of Resources and Timing Identified in the Plan. For the second briefing on Thriving in Place, Council staff summarized key information on the plan’s order-of-magnitude funding estimates, as well as the proposed timing for some major milestones in each of the Strategic Priorities in a new chart, below. Based on the information in this chart, staff also provided some new potential policy questions for the Council. Also, please note the following related to the information on this chart: 1. All of the Strategic Priorities would require time from existing staff for planning and implementation. Additional City staff needed for specific Strategic Priorities is highlighted in yellow in the chart below. 2. The September 12 staff report contains additional policy questions, which are reproduced below. Strategic Priorities with specific policy questions in that staff report are indicated with *. Other policy questions can be found in the Policy Question section of both this and that staff report. 3. In some cases, there are inconsistencies in the Plan between the discussions of individual Strategic Priorities and the Two-Year Action Plan Overview (page 83 of transmittal). Strategic Priority Resources Timing Page | 3 1A. Develop a Tenant Relocation Assistance Program* New funding: less than $200,000. - Two-year pilot period using existing federal pass-through funds. - Staffing for program administration by a community partner. - Funds for relocation assistance. The Council added $180,000 for Tenant Relocation Assistance Program in the FY24 Budget (from Funding Our Future). Launch by Dec 2023 The Administration may elect to update this timeline 1B. Adopt a Displaced Tenants Preference Policy No additional.Design and adopt by March 2024 1C. Improve and Expand Tenant Resources and Services* New funding: $1 million to $5 million. - Tenant assistance and services. - Includes legal services and landlord training enhancements. July 2024 1D. Create a Tenant Resource Center and Navigation Service New funding: less than $200,000. - Two-year pilot to develop website, program information, and marketing materials and to fund a community-based staff position as the navigator. - Alternatively, use an existing City staff position in a community-accessible location and repurpose existing resources. The Council added $92,000 for Tenant Resource Center and Navigation Service in the FY24 Budget (50% from Funding Our Future; 50% from general fund). Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority 1E. Help Tenants Become Owners* New funding: over $5 million. -“Funding to invest in more shared-equity housing models will be needed plus staff time to work with partners and oversee program activities.” - Program activities would include coordinating investments, property development, outreach, and management of shared equity units. Identify shared equity priorities by 2024 1F. Grow People’s Incomes “Will need to be determined on a program-by-program basis for new initiatives.” Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority 2A. Develop and Adopt a Community Benefit Policy Potential consultant support. New funding: less than $200,000. - Reprioritization of the Planning Division’s work plan and/or funding for consultant support (for the in-lieu fee analysis) and/or new staff. - Ongoing funding for policy implementation, including enforcement and ongoing program management. Develop and adopt new policy by December 2024, including needed code updates. 2B. Acquire and Rehabilitate Consultant support. New funding: over $5 million. Ongoing Page | 4 Unsubsidized Housing* - Acquisition, rehabilitation, and preservation of older units through RDA’s current annual NOFA process. - Develop a small landlord incentive program through CAN with financing or grants to rehabilitate unsubsidized units in return for an affordability deed restriction on units. 2C. Invest in Community Land Trusts* New funding: less than $200,000. Does not include purchase of any new properties. Adopt policy by December 2023 Clarify whether this timeline needs to be adjusted 2D. Address Short-Term Rentals’ Impacts Consultant support. Council funded two new enforcement officers in FY24 Budget. Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority 3A. Adopt the Affordable Housing Incentives Funding for new staff and implementation. - Annual monitoring and enforcement of deed-restricted units. Adopt policy by June 2024 Clarify whether this relates to the adoption of the housing affordability incentives ordinance, or whether there is a policy that will be advanced after the adoption of the plan 3B. Make Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) Easier and Less Expensive to Build* New funding: less than $1 million. - Consider designating a City ADU Liaison position. - Explore the potential for creating a staffed ADU Resource Center. - Does not include any construction subsidies. Ongoing 3C. Facilitate Creation of More Diverse Housing Choices. “Addressed in existing efforts; new efforts may require additional funding and/or staff support.” Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority 3D. Utilize Publicly Owned Property* Consultant support New funding: less than $200,000. - Building a database of City-owned and other public agency properties that could be prioritized for affordable housing. - Defining the desired development program for priority properties and developing partnerships for implementation. Initial priorities defined by June 2024 3E. Prioritize Long-Term Affordability, Integrated Services, and Transit Access New efforts may require additional funding and staff.Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority 4A. Develop New Funding Sources and Develop additional funding to support investments and staffing through: Prioritize options by December 2023 Page | 5 Leverage Existing Resources* - Reprioritization of existing resources (budget, staffing, work plans) - Work with partners to leverage each other’s resources. Implementation 2024-25 4B. Define Displacement Indicators and Develop Data Systems Consultant support New funding: less than $200,000 - Initial data systems and dashboard development. - Staffing for updating and reporting. Launch initial reporting by March 2024 4C. Strengthen the City’s Capacity to Enforce Deed-Restricted Housing Commitments Possible consultant support. Possible additional staff. - Training for staff across multiple divisions. - Data and management systems. - Enforcement. Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority Clarify whether the adoption of the affordable housing incentives ordinance would make this a near- term priority 5A. Form City Implementation Team. No additional.Form team by June 2023 5B. Work with Partners to Form a Regional Anti-Displacement Coalition. No additional.First meeting in fourth quarter of 2023 5C. Launch an Ongoing Community Partnership to Coordinate Action. New funding: less than $200,000. - Smaller community-defined project initiatives that can leverage other resources. Launch partnership by December 2023 6A. Tenant Rights and Affordable Housing at the State Level Possibly, additional funding or staffing.Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority NEW POLICY QUESTIONS (since September 12 staff report) 1.All of the Strategic Priorities would require time from existing staff for planning and implementation. Would the Council like to ask how existing staff responsibilities would be shifted or covered when taking on additional duties, and whether any of the new programs would necessitate making current work a lower priority? 2. In the Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) budget, the Council agreed to fund a Tenant Resource Center and Navigation Service (Strategic Priority 1D, $92,000) and a Tenant Relocation Assistance Program (Strategic Priority 1A, $180,000) to allow work on these two Council priorities to be undertaken before adoption of the plan. Page | 6 ➢The Council may wish to request updates from the Administration on the actions taken or planned with the funds allocated in FY24 on these priorities. ➢The Tenant Resource Center and Navigation Service item is listed in the plan as not being one of the 22 proposed Two-Year Action Priorities. In recognition of the limits of staff capacity, would the Council like to suggest which of the proposed Two-Year Action Priorities it considers less urgent than these services for renters? Would the Council like to request more information on the extent to which other organizations are currently assisting people in need? 3.The Council may wish to request updates from the Administration on other Priorities which may already be in process. For example, public engagement has already begun on the proposed changes to City code to establish a Community Benefit Policy (Strategic Priority 2A). These amendments would involve: - Title 18.64.050 Residential Demolition Provisions will be amended to include provisions to ensure the replacement of housing units that have a similar rent and unit size if housing is demolished. - Title 18.97 Mitigation of Residential Housing Loss will be deleted and replaced with the community benefit policy in Title 19 General Plans and Title 21A.50 Amendments. 4.More broadly, would the Council like to request that some of the proposed deadlines listed in Thriving in Place be updated before formal Council consideration of the plan to reflect the time that has elapsed since the Council’s last discussion of the plan in January 2023? POLICY QUESTIONS FROM THE SEPTEMBER 12 STAFF REPORT 1. The Council may wish to request stand-alone briefings, or simply more information, on several of the proposals included in the Thriving in Place plan, for example: ➢Improvements and expansion of the Landlord Tenant Initiative (also known as the Good Landlord Program), Near-Term Priority 1C. ➢The proposed development of a new Community Benefit Policy, Near-Term Priority 2A. ➢Increasing investment in the Housing Development Loan Program (HDLP) toward acquiring non-subsidized housing for rehabilitation and placing deed restrictions on it, and/or financing small-landlord incentives for rehabilitation, Near-Term Priority 2B. ➢The potential relationships and key differences between CAN’s Community Land Trust and RDA’s Westside Community Initiative, Near-Term Priority 2C. ➢If the Affordable Housing Incentives are adopted, how these incentives might interact with the proposed Community Benefit Policy, Near-Term Priority 3A. ➢The proposed Thriving in Place Indicators (on Page 73 of the transmittal) which would be tracked to assess displacement and other elements of the City’s housing policy, Near-Term Priority 4B. ➢Some or all of the Strategic Priorities not included among the Near-Term Priority Actions. Page | 7 2. Would Council Members like to discuss what Thriving in Place refers to as “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” (page 43 of the transmittal)? 3. The Thriving in Place plan suggests several potential sources of new funds for the programs and policies recommended (Near-Term Priority 4A). Does the Council wish to discuss any or all of these possibilities? 4.General Policy Questions on Near-Term Action Priorities ➢Work is already underway on many of the Near-Term Action Priorities. The Council may wish to inquire about the status of some of them. ➢Most of the Priorities listed below would rely on “Time from existing staff.” The Council may wish to ask how existing staff responsibilities would be shifted or covered when taking on additional duties. POLICY QUESTIONS SPECIFIC TO SOME OF THE NEAR-TERM ACTION PRIORITIES (from the chart in the September 12 staff report) 1A. Develop a Tenant Relocation Assistance Program. ➢The Council may wish to ask about the amount and source of the “existing federal pass-through funds” that are mentioned as funding for the first two years of this program. ➢The transmittal reports that some community organizations have questioned the long-term viability of the tenant relocation assistance program. Would the Council like to request additional information on this question? 1C. Improve and Expand Tenant Resources and Services. ➢Do Council Members have feedback from constituents related to resources and support that could improve the Landlord Tenant Initiative? 1E. Help Tenants Become Owners. ➢The RDA is identified as the lead for this Priority. The Council may wish to request additional information on the advantages and disadvantages of this arrangement, whether there are plans to shift responsibility for CAN’s Community Land Trust to RDA, and whether the RDA has the expertise needed to run a direct-service program. ➢This is one of the costliest Priorities in the plan, already begun through the Perpetual Housing Initiative. Would the Council like to request more information on future plans? Perhaps the Council also would like to request that more specific plans for funding be included in the proposed Shared Equity Housing Priorities? ➢The Council could ask whether the proposed date for this priority is at the beginning or end of 2024. Page | 8 2B. Acquire and Rehabilitate Unsubsidized Housing. ➢This is one of the costliest Priorities in the plan. Would the Council like to request more specific plans for funding? ➢The timing on this is listed as “ongoing.” Would the Council like to ask when the RDA anticipates beginning and completing the proposed steps for new aspects of this Priority? ➢Would the option of setting aside additional resources for rehabilitation be part of RDA Board Housing Priorities for FY2025? ➢This Priority also suggests the City “Keep some funds aside to support being nimble in response to unforeseen opportunities” (page 53 of the transmittal). Would the Council like to request the Administration provide more detail on this proposal, particularly how the amount to be set aside would be determined? 2C. Invest in Community Land Trusts. ➢The Council may wish to request additional information on what the plan refers to as a “Community Land Trust legislative policy.” ➢The Priority acknowledges that there are some similarities between CAN’s Community Land Trusts and the RDA’s emerging Westside Community Initiative. Would the Council like to suggest that this Priority be revised after fuller discussions with the RDA on the WCI? 3B. Make Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) Easier and Less Expensive to Build. ➢The lead for this item is the Planning Division, working with the following partners: RDA, Housing Stability Division, Building Services Division, Public Utilities Department and Fire Department. Would the Council like to encourage the ADU taskforce to prioritize work on ADUs in the RDA’s 9 Line Project Area, since it could serve as a pilot for testing several broader concepts related to ADUs? ➢The Council may wish to confirm whether moving this ahead could be accommodated with existing staff, or whether additional resources would be needed. 3D. Utilize Publicly Owned Property. ➢The Council may wish to ask about the status of the Salt Lake County public property map produced by the Putting Assets to Work Program at the Sorenson Impact Center, which was provided to the City some time ago. Has it been finalized? ➢Would the Council like to ask whether the Administration identified any properties that were not already under consideration? Has it begun exploring possibilities with the County for any of its properties within City boundaries that potentially could be suitable for this purpose? 4A. Develop New Funding Sources and Leverage Existing Resources. Options the Department would consider and evaluate include: Page | 9 - state, federal, and philanthropic resources; - 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; - an affordable housing bond measure; and/or - a proposed in-lieu fee paid by developers as part of a Community Benefit Policy’s implementation (see Section D). ➢Policy Question: Council Members may wish to discuss the potential for each of the funding options proposed above. 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 ➢Policy Question: Would the Council like to add language to the plan that clarifies that the City will emphasize the identification of new funding resources to fulfill the Strategic Priorities? This could be added to the text describing “Strategic Priority 4A - Develop New Funding and Leverage Existing Resources” on pages 55 and 56 of the plan, as well as Attachment A, which describes the Two-Year Action Plan, and includes some estimates of resources needed. It could also appear in the adopting ordinance or the motion sheet. Strategic Priority Resources Timing 1A. Develop a Tenant Relocation Assistance Program* New funding: less than $200,000. - Two-year pilot period using existing federal pass-through funds. - Staffing for program administration by a community partner. - Funds for relocation assistance. The Council added $180,000 for Tenant Relocation Assistance Program in the FY24 Budget (from Funding Our Future). Launch by Dec 2023 The Administration may elect to update this timeline 1B. Adopt a Displaced Tenants Preference Policy No additional.Design and adopt by March 2024 1C. Improve and Expand Tenant Resources and Services* New funding: $1 million to $5 million. - Tenant assistance and services. - Includes legal services and landlord training enhancements. July 2024 1D. Create a Tenant Resource Center and Navigation Service New funding: less than $200,000. - Two-year pilot to develop website, program information, and marketing materials and to fund a community-based staff position as the navigator. - Alternatively, use an existing City staff position in a community-accessible location and repurpose existing resources. The Council added $92,000 for Tenant Resource Center and Navigation Service in the FY24 Budget (50% from Funding Our Future; 50% from general fund). Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority 1E. Help Tenants Become Owners* New funding: over $5 million. -“Funding to invest in more shared-equity housing models will be needed plus staff time to work with partners and oversee program activities.” - Program activities would include coordinating investments, property development, outreach, and management of shared equity units. Identify shared equity priorities by 2024 Page | 2 1F. Grow People’s Incomes “Will need to be determined on a program-by-program basis for new initiatives.” Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority 2A. Develop and Adopt a Community Benefit Policy Potential consultant support. New funding: less than $200,000. - Reprioritization of the Planning Division’s work plan and/or funding for consultant support (for the in-lieu fee analysis) and/or new staff. - Ongoing funding for policy implementation, including enforcement and ongoing program management. Develop and adopt new policy by December 2024, including needed code updates. 2B. Acquire and Rehabilitate Unsubsidized Housing* Consultant support. New funding: over $5 million. - Acquisition, rehabilitation, and preservation of older units through RDA’s current annual NOFA process. - Develop a small landlord incentive program through CAN with financing or grants to rehabilitate unsubsidized units in return for an affordability deed restriction on units. Ongoing 2C. Invest in Community Land Trusts* New funding: less than $200,000. Does not include purchase of any new properties. Adopt policy by December 2023 Clarify whether this timeline needs to be adjusted 2D. Address Short-Term Rentals’ Impacts Consultant support. Council funded two new enforcement officers in FY24 Budget. Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority 3A. Adopt the Affordable Housing Incentives Funding for new staff and implementation. - Annual monitoring and enforcement of deed-restricted units. Adopt policy by June 2024 Clarify whether this relates to the adoption of the housing affordability incentives ordinance, or whether there is a policy that will be advanced after the adoption of the plan 3B. Make Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) Easier and Less Expensive to Build* New funding: less than $1 million. - Consider designating a City ADU Liaison position. - Explore the potential for creating a staffed ADU Resource Center. - Does not include any construction subsidies. Ongoing 3C. Facilitate Creation of More Diverse Housing Choices. “Addressed in existing efforts; new efforts may require additional funding and/or staff support.” Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority Page | 3 3D. Utilize Publicly Owned Property* Consultant support New funding: less than $200,000. - Building a database of City-owned and other public agency properties that could be prioritized for affordable housing. - Defining the desired development program for priority properties and developing partnerships for implementation. Initial priorities defined by June 2024 3E. Prioritize Long-Term Affordability, Integrated Services, and Transit Access New efforts may require additional funding and staff.Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority 4A. Develop New Funding Sources and Leverage Existing Resources* Develop additional funding to support investments and staffing through: - Reprioritization of existing resources (budget, staffing, work plans) - Work with partners to leverage each other’s resources. Prioritize options by December 2023 Implementation 2024-25 4B. Define Displacement Indicators and Develop Data Systems Consultant support New funding: less than $200,000 - Initial data systems and dashboard development. - Staffing for updating and reporting. Launch initial reporting by March 2024 4C. Strengthen the City’s Capacity to Enforce Deed-Restricted Housing Commitments Possible consultant support. Possible additional staff. - Training for staff across multiple divisions. - Data and management systems. - Enforcement. Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority Clarify whether the adoption of the affordable housing incentives ordinance would make this a near- term priority 5A. Form City Implementation Team. No additional.Form team by June 2023 5B. Work with Partners to Form a Regional Anti-Displacement Coalition. No additional.First meeting in fourth quarter of 2023 5C. Launch an Ongoing Community Partnership to Coordinate Action. New funding: less than $200,000. - Smaller community-defined project initiatives that can leverage other resources. Launch partnership by December 2023 6A. Tenant Rights and Affordable Housing at the State Level Possibly, additional funding or staffing.Not a Near-Term Action (2-year) Priority Page | 4 NEW POLICY QUESTIONS (since September 12 staff report) 1.All of the Strategic Priorities would require time from existing staff for planning and implementation. Would the Council like to ask how existing staff responsibilities would be shifted or covered when taking on additional duties, and whether any of the new programs would necessitate making current work a lower priority? 2. In the Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) budget, the Council agreed to fund a Tenant Resource Center and Navigation Service (Strategic Priority 1D, $92,000) and a Tenant Relocation Assistance Program (Strategic Priority 1A, $180,000) to allow work on these two Council priorities to be undertaken before adoption of the plan. ➢The Council may wish to request updates from the Administration on the actions taken or planned with the funds allocated in FY24 on these priorities. ➢The Tenant Resource Center and Navigation Service item is listed in the plan as not being one of the 22 proposed Two-Year Action Priorities. In recognition of the limits of staff capacity, would the Council like to suggest which of the proposed Two-Year Action Priorities it considers less urgent than these services for renters? Would the Council like to request more information on the extent to which other organizations are currently assisting people in need? 3.The Council may wish to request updates from the Administration on other Priorities which may already be in process. For example, public engagement has already begun on the proposed changes to City code to establish a Community Benefit Policy (Strategic Priority 2A). These amendments would involve: - Title 18.64.050 Residential Demolition Provisions will be amended to include provisions to ensure the replacement of housing units that have a similar rent and unit size if housing is demolished. - Title 18.97 Mitigation of Residential Housing Loss will be deleted and replaced with the community benefit policy in Title 19 General Plans and Title 21A.50 Amendments. 4.More broadly, would the Council like to request that some of the proposed deadlines listed in Thriving in Place be updated before formal Council consideration of the plan to reflect the time that has elapsed since the Council’s last discussion of the plan in January 2023? POLICY QUESTIONS FROM THE SEPTEMBER 12 STAFF REPORT 1. The Council may wish to request stand-alone briefings, or simply more information, on several of the proposals included in the Thriving in Place plan, for example: ➢Improvements and expansion of the Landlord Tenant Initiative (also known as the Good Landlord Program), Near-Term Priority 1C. ➢The proposed development of a new Community Benefit Policy, Near-Term Priority 2A. ➢Increasing investment in the Housing Development Loan Program (HDLP) toward acquiring non-subsidized housing for rehabilitation and placing deed restrictions on it, and/or financing small-landlord incentives for rehabilitation, Near-Term Priority 2B. Page | 5 ➢The potential relationships and key differences between CAN’s Community Land Trust and RDA’s Westside Community Initiative, Near-Term Priority 2C. ➢If the Affordable Housing Incentives are adopted, how these incentives might interact with the proposed Community Benefit Policy, Near-Term Priority 3A. ➢The proposed Thriving in Place Indicators (on Page 73 of the transmittal) which would be tracked to assess displacement and other elements of the City’s housing policy, Near-Term Priority 4B. ➢Some or all of the Strategic Priorities not included among the Near-Term Priority Actions. 2. Would Council Members like to discuss what Thriving in Place refers to as “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” (page 43 of the transmittal)? 3. The Thriving in Place plan suggests several potential sources of new funds for the programs and policies recommended (Near-Term Priority 4A). Does the Council wish to discuss any or all of these possibilities? 4.General Policy Questions on Near-Term Action Priorities ➢Work is already underway on many of the Near-Term Action Priorities. The Council may wish to inquire about the status of some of them. ➢Most of the Priorities listed below would rely on “Time from existing staff.” The Council may wish to ask how existing staff responsibilities would be shifted or covered when taking on additional duties. POLICY QUESTIONS SPECIFIC TO SOME OF THE NEAR-TERM ACTION PRIORITIES (from the chart in the September 12 staff report) 1A. Develop a Tenant Relocation Assistance Program. ➢The Council may wish to ask about the amount and source of the “existing federal pass-through funds” that are mentioned as funding for the first two years of this program. ➢The transmittal reports that some community organizations have questioned the long-term viability of the tenant relocation assistance program. Would the Council like to request additional information on this question? 1C. Improve and Expand Tenant Resources and Services. ➢Do Council Members have feedback from constituents related to resources and support that could improve the Landlord Tenant Initiative? 1E. Help Tenants Become Owners. Page | 6 ➢The RDA is identified as the lead for this Priority. The Council may wish to request additional information on the advantages and disadvantages of this arrangement, whether there are plans to shift responsibility for CAN’s Community Land Trust to RDA, and whether the RDA has the expertise needed to run a direct-service program. ➢This is one of the costliest Priorities in the plan, already begun through the Perpetual Housing Initiative. Would the Council like to request more information on future plans? Perhaps the Council also would like to request that more specific plans for funding be included in the proposed Shared Equity Housing Priorities? ➢The Council could ask whether the proposed date for this priority is at the beginning or end of 2024. 2B. Acquire and Rehabilitate Unsubsidized Housing. ➢This is one of the costliest Priorities in the plan. Would the Council like to request more specific plans for funding? ➢The timing on this is listed as “ongoing.” Would the Council like to ask when the RDA anticipates beginning and completing the proposed steps for new aspects of this Priority? ➢Would the option of setting aside additional resources for rehabilitation be part of RDA Board Housing Priorities for FY2025? ➢This Priority also suggests the City “Keep some funds aside to support being nimble in response to unforeseen opportunities” (page 53 of the transmittal). Would the Council like to request the Administration provide more detail on this proposal, particularly how the amount to be set aside would be determined? 2C. Invest in Community Land Trusts. ➢The Council may wish to request additional information on what the plan refers to as a “Community Land Trust legislative policy.” ➢The Priority acknowledges that there are some similarities between CAN’s Community Land Trusts and the RDA’s emerging Westside Community Initiative. Would the Council like to suggest that this Priority be revised after fuller discussions with the RDA on the WCI? 3B. Make Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) Easier and Less Expensive to Build. ➢The lead for this item is the Planning Division, working with the following partners: RDA, Housing Stability Division, Building Services Division, Public Utilities Department and Fire Department. Would the Council like to encourage the ADU taskforce to prioritize work on ADUs in the RDA’s 9 Line Project Area, since it could serve as a pilot for testing several broader concepts related to ADUs? ➢The Council may wish to confirm whether moving this ahead could be accommodated with existing staff, or whether additional resources would be needed. 3D. Utilize Publicly Owned Property. Page | 7 ➢The Council may wish to ask about the status of the Salt Lake County public property map produced by the Putting Assets to Work Program at the Sorenson Impact Center, which was provided to the City some time ago. Has it been finalized? ➢Would the Council like to ask whether the Administration identified any properties that were not already under consideration? Has it begun exploring possibilities with the County for any of its properties within City boundaries that potentially could be suitable for this purpose? 4A. Develop New Funding Sources and Leverage Existing Resources. Options the Department would consider and evaluate include: - state, federal, and philanthropic resources; - 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; - an affordable housing bond measure; and/or - a proposed in-lieu fee paid by developers as part of a Community Benefit Policy’s implementation (see Section D). ➢Policy Question: Council Members may wish to discuss the potential for each of the funding options proposed above. 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 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: _________________ ________________________ Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date sent to Council: _________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: September 6, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods ________________________ SUBJECT: North Temple Boulevard General Plan Amendment (PLNPCM2023-00327) STAFF CONTACT: Seth Rios, Associate Planner, 801-535-7758 or seth.rios@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: The City Council follows the Planning Commission’s recommendation and approves the requested General Plan amendment. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Mayor Erin Mendenhall, in coordination with the Salt Lake City Department of Public Lands, initiated a request to amend the North Temple Boulevard Plan as it pertains to the recommendation to move Madsen Park. The proposal will add language to keep Madsen Park at its current location and to reimagine and improve the park. More information can be found in the Planning Commission Staff Report. Proposed General Plan Amendment The proposed amendment will remove the recommendation to move Madsen Park. The new language will replace strategy 3-D on page 62 of the North Temple Boulevard Plan with the following language: rachel otto (Sep 8, 2023 09:13 MDT)09/08/2023 09/08/2023 PUBLIC PROCESS: Community Council Notice: A notice of application was sent to the Poplar Grove and Fairpark Community Councils on June 5, 2023, per City Code Chapter 2.60 with a link to the online open house webpage. The recognized organizations were given 45 days to respond with any concerns or to request staff to meet with them and discuss the proposed zoning amendment. No meeting was requested by either of the community councils. The 45-day public engagement period ended on July 20, 2023. Public Open House: An online open house was held from February 17, 2023, to July 20, 2023. Staff received no comments from the public. Planning Commission Meeting: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 9, 2023. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward a recommendation of approval. Planning Commission (PC) Records a)PC Agenda of August 9, 2023 (Click to Access) b)PC Minutes of August 9, 2023 (Click to Access) c)Planning Commission Staff Report of August 9, 2023 (Click to Access Report) EXHIBITS: 1)Project Chronology 2)Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3)Petition Initiation SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2023 (Amending the North Temple Boulevard Plan) An ordinance amending the North Temple Boulevard Plan to remove a recommendation to relocate Madsen Park. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a public hearing on August 9, 2023, on a petition submitted by Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall in coordination with the Salt Lake City Department of Public Lands to remove the recommendation to relocate Madsen Park from the North Temple Boulevard Plan pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00327; and WHEREAS, at its August 9th, 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 North Temple Boulevard Plan. That the North Temple Boulevard Plan shall be and hereby is amended to amend Strategy 3-D on page 62 of the plan to read as shown in Exhibit “A”. The adoption of this plan amendment serves to identify the goals and objectives that are the subject of the amendment, 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 amending the North Temple Boulevard Plan - Madsen Park APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney August 16, 2023 EXHIBIT “A” 1. CHRONOLOGY Project Chronology Petition: PLNPCM2023-00327 April 25, 2023 Mayor Mendenhall, in coordination with the Public Lands Department, initiated the petition for amendments to the North Temple Boulevard Plan. June 8, 2023 Petition assigned to Seth Rios, Associate Planner June 5, 2023 Poplar Grove and Fairpark Community Councils were sent the 45-day required notice. No meeting was requested from either organization. June 5, 2023 Property owners and residents within 300 feet of the development were provided early notification of the proposal. June 5- July 20, 2023 Information about the general plan amendment was posted to the Planning Division’s Online Open House webpage. July 28, 2023 Planning Commission public hearing notices were posted on City and State websites and Planning Division listserv. July 31, 2023 Public hearing notice sign posted on the property. August 3, 2023 Staff report posted online and sent to the Planning Commission. August 9, 2023 Planning Commission held a public hearing and forwarded a unanimous positive recommendation to City Council. August 16, 2023 Draft ordinance forwarded to the Attorney’s Office for review. August 16, 2023 Final ordinance received from the Attorney’s Office August 17, 2023 Transmitted 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2023-00327– Mayor Erin Mendenhall, in coordination with the Salt Lake City Department of Public Lands, initiated a request to amend the North Temple Boulevard Plan as it pertains to the recommendation to move Madsen Park. The proposal will add language to keep Madsen Park at its current location and to reimagine and improve the park. (Staff contact: Seth Rios at 801-535-7758 or seth.rios@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 p.m. PLACE: Electronic and in-person options. 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah ** This meeting will be held via electronic means, while also providing for an in-person opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, including WebEx connection information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Seth Rios at 801-535-7758 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail at seth.rios@slcgov.com. The application details can be accessed at https://citizenportal.slcgov.com, by selecting the “Planning” tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2023-00327. The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. 3. ORIGINAL PETITION 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: 8/21/2023 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 8/21/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 8/21/2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Culture Core Finance Committee STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Culture Core Finance Committee RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Kathryn Carlisle-Kesling member of the Culture Core Finance Committee. 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 21, 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: Culture Core Finance Committee. Kathryn Carlisle-Kesling to be appointed for a four 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 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: 9/15/2023 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 9/15/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 9/15/2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Utah Performing Arts Center Agency STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Utah Performing Arts Center Agency RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Helen Langan member of the Utah Performing Arts Center Agency. 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 September 15, 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: Utah Performing Arts Center Agency. Helen Langan to be appointed for a four 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 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: 9/15/2023 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 9/15/2023 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 9/15/2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Transportation Advisory Board STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Transportation Advisory Board RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Josh Stewart member of the Transportation Advisory Board. ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 September 15, 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 Transportation Advisory Board. Josh Stewart to be appointed for a three year term starting from date of City Council advice and consent and ending on September 28, 2026. I respectfully ask for your consideration and support for this appointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall, Mayor cc: file SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION SWORN STATEMENT SUPPORTING CLOSURE OF MEETING I, ____________ , acted as the presiding member of the _______________________________in which met on _________ Appropriate notice was given of the Council's meeting as required by §52-4-202. A quorum of the Council was present at the meeting and voted by at least a two-thirds vote, as detailed in the minutes of the open meeting, to close a portion of the meeting to discuss the following: §52-4-205(l)(a) discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; §52 -4-205(1 )(b) strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; §52-4-205(l )(c) strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; §52-4-205( l )(d) strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; §52-4-205(l )(e) strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: ((A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) if the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; §52-4-205(1)(f) discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and §52-4-205(1)(g) investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A Closed Meeting may also be held for Attorney-Client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code §78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. Other, described as follows: ____________________________________________________________ The content of the closed portion of the Council meeting was restricted to a discussion of the matter(s) for which the meeting was closed. With regard to the closed meeting, the following was publicly announced and recorded, and entered on the minutes of the open meeting at which the closed meeting was approved: (a)the reason or reasons for holding the closed meeting; (b)the location where the closed meeting will be held; and (c)the vote of each member of the public body either for or against the motion to hold the closed meeting. The recording and any minutes of the closed meeting will include: (a)the date, time, and place of the meeting; (b)the names of members Present and Absent; and (c)the names of all others present except where such disclosure would infringe on the confidentiality necessary to fulfill the original purpose of closing the meeting. Pursuant to §52-4-206(6),a sworn statement is required to close a meeting under §52-4-205(1)(a) or (f), but a record by tape recording or detailed minutes is not required; and Pursuant to §52-4-206(1), a record by tape recording and/or detailed written minutes is required for a meeting closed under §52-4-205(1)(b),(c),(d),(e),and (g): A record was not made. A record was made by: : Tape recording Detailed written minutes I hereby swear or affin11 under penalty of perjury that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Presiding Member Date of Signature Salt Lake City CouncilDarin Mano October 3, 2023 4 4 4 4 Darin Mano (Oct 10, 2023 14:58 MDT)10/10/2023 Closed Session - Sworn Statement Final Audit Report 2023-10-10 Created:2023-10-04 By:Michelle Barney (michelle.barney@slcgov.com) Status:Signed Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAVJ2xWsUdXPqNSUcV1IKFMOfaEQCw0ah6 "Closed Session - Sworn Statement" History Document created by Michelle Barney (michelle.barney@slcgov.com) 2023-10-04 - 0:30:19 AM GMT Document emailed to Darin Mano (darin.mano@slcgov.com) for signature 2023-10-04 - 0:32:28 AM GMT Email viewed by Darin Mano (darin.mano@slcgov.com) 2023-10-04 - 4:35:32 AM GMT Email viewed by Darin Mano (darin.mano@slcgov.com) 2023-10-10 - 1:30:26 AM GMT Document e-signed by Darin Mano (darin.mano@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2023-10-10 - 8:58:32 PM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed. 2023-10-10 - 8:58:32 PM GMT