The URL can be used to link to this page

03/05/2024 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WORK SESSION March 5, 2024 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 tinyurl.com/SLCCouncilMeetings. Council Work Room 451 South State Street, Room 326 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 SLCCouncil.com 7:00 pm Formal Meeting Room 315 (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: 16:12:22 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.Ordinance: Landscaping and Buffers Chapter Text Amendment Follow-up ~ 2:15 p.m. 30 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 pertaining to Landscaping and Buffers chapter amendments. The proposed amendments would seek to reduce water consumption, enhance the urban forest, and improve air quality and green infrastructure city-wide. The proposal would also seek to clarify, simplify, and reorganize the landscaping and buffer chapter to be more user-friendly. The City Council may consider modifications to other related sections of the code as part of this proposal. For more information visit tinyurl.com/SLCLandscapingAndBuffers. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, December 5, 2023; Tuesday, December 12, 2023; Tuesday, February 6, 2024; Tuesday, February 20, 2024; and Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, December 12, 2023 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 3.Fiscal Year 2024-25 Funding Allocations for One-year Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant & Other Federal Grants ~ 2:45 p.m. 55 min. The Council will receive a briefing about the resident advisory board's and the Mayor's funding recommendations and an appropriations resolution that would authorize grant funding to selected applicants and adopt the One-Year Annual Action Plan for Fiscal Year 2024-25. The plan includes Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding, HOME Investment Partnership Program funding, Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funding, and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) funding. The resolution would also approve an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This year, the Council will also consider funding recommendations for one-time federal pandemic- related grants for tenant-based rental assistance authorized by the American Rescue Plan Act and CDBG coronavirus response CARES Act funds. For more information visit www.tinyurl.com/annualhudgrants. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD 4.Resolution: University of Utah Baseball Stadium Public Benefits Analysis Follow-up ~ 3:40 p.m. 20 min. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about a resolution that would authorize a 99-year below-market ground lease to the University of Utah of 1.175 acres of City-owned property at approximately 1735 Sunnyside Avenue. This lease would facilitate the expansion of the University’s baseball field to meet the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) requirements for a competition field, but also result in the removal of one existing City-owned softball field and one multi-purpose field located at Sunnyside Park. In exchange for this lease, the University would commit $4.2 million to the City for improvements and new amenities at Sunnyside Park, as well as, possibly, other public benefits. The types of improvements and amenities would be determined through a community engagement process. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, February 6, 2024 and Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, February 6, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 5.Tentative Break ~ 4:00 p.m. 20 min. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - n/a Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a 6.Ordinance: Budget Amendment No.4 for Fiscal Year 2023- 24 Follow-up ~ 4:20 p.m. 20 min. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about Budget Amendment No.4 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 over $1.8 million for police officer overtime related to the Clean Neighborhoods Program, three new full-time mechanics in the Fleet Division, $230,000 to expand a City air quality incentives program, and a new software tool to identify non-compliant short-term rentals among other items. There is a separate ordinance to create a Division of Planning and Design in the Public Lands Department related to an item in the budget amendment. For more information visit tinyurl.com/SLCFY24. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, February 13, 2024; Tuesday, February 20, 2024; and Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, February 6, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 7.Advice and Consent: Salt Lake City Chief Administrative Officer – Jill Love ~ 4:40 p.m. 10 min. The Council will interview Jill Love prior to considering her appointment as the Salt Lake City Chief Administrative Officer. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 8.Board Appointment: Appeals Hearing Officer – Clayton Preece ~ 4:50 p.m. 5 min The Council will interview Clayton Preece prior to considering appointment as an Appeals Hearing Officer for a term ending March 5, 2029. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 9.Board Appointment: Appeals Hearing Officer – Aaron McKnight ~ 4:55 p.m. 5 min The Council will interview Aaron McKnight prior to considering appointment as an Appeals Hearing Officer for a term ending March 5, 2029. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 10.Board Appointment: Airport Board – Craig Smith ~ 5:00 p.m. 5 min The Council will interview Craig Smith prior to considering appointment to the Airport Board for a term ending March 5, 2028. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 11.Board Appointment: Business Advisory Board – Brittany Dew ~ 5:05 p.m. 5 min The Council will interview Brittany Dew prior to considering appointment to the Business Advisory Board for a term ending December 25, 2028. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 12.Resolution: Public Comment Policy ~ 5:10 p.m. 20 min. The Council will have a discussion to consider amendments to the public comment policy, rules, and procedures to preserve the Council's ability to conduct the public business. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 5, 2024 Standing Items 13.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair Report of Chair and Vice Chair. 14.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. 15.Tentative Closed Session - - The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session. A closed meeting described under Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including, but not limited to: a. discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; b. strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; c. strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; d. strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; e. strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; f. discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and g. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 1:00 p.m. on Monday, March 4, 2024, 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 March 5, 2024 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 •Adaptive Reuse Ordinance •Planning Commission recommends adoption •2100 South Station Area Plan and Zoning Amendments (D5) •Next community engagement scheduled for March 7th Arts Council •West Side Iconic Art Project (D1/2) •Public engagement report has been finalized and is in review Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canBallpark NEXT / RDA Ballparknext.com Planning slc.gov/planning Thriving in PlaceTransportation •Capitol Hill Traffic Calming (D3) •Second phase planning underway •1000 West Corridor Plan (D1/2) •Construction Documents nearly complete •600/700 North Reconstruction (D1) •40% Concept Design roll out •Public Open House Thursday March 28 – Backman elementary 5:30 -7 Public Lands •Riverside Park (D1) •Grand opening – March 28 4 -5:30pm Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canBallpark NEXT / RDA Ballparknext.comThriving in PlaceLove Your Block State Legislative Funding Requests Public Safety & Emergency Shelter Services •$25 M- Low Barrier Shelter Development •$33.9 M- Low Barrier Shelter Operations (3yrs) •$27.3 M- Non-Congregate Shelter Ops. (3yrs) •$28.8 M- Winter Response/ Stabilization (3yrs) •$10 M- Ongoing Homeless System funding •$2.5 M- Ongoing Shelter Cities Mitigation Funds •Total: $127.5M 2024 State Legislative Funding •$64.5 (including $15M private match) Initial Objectives: •Fund current shelter services •Shelter beds available through summer Homelessness Update Shelters: 801-990 -9999 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 Item C3 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: Jennifer Bruno Deputy Director DATE:March 5, 2024 RE: ORDINANCE: LANDSCAPING AMENDMENTS MOTION 1 – ADOPT PROPOSED ORDINANCE I move that the Council adopt the ordinance amending various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to the Landscaping and Buffers chapter, as res. OR MOTION 2 – ADOPT PROPOSED ORDINANCE WITH CHANGES RELATING TO ENFORCEMENT I move that the Council adopt the ordinance amending various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to the Landscaping and Buffers chapter, with the understanding that enforcement on provisions relating to artificial turf installed prior to the effective date of this ordinance will be delayed for 18 months to give residents an opportunity to come into compliance. I further move that the Administration and Council Staff make efforts to communicate the clarifications to the code as well as pending enforcement to any constituent that has installed artificial turf. OR MOTION 3 – NOT ADOPT PROPOSED ORDINANCE I move that the Council not adopt the proposed ordinance. COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Jennifer Bruno, Deputy Director DATE: March 5, 2024 RE:Landscaping and Buffers Chapter Text Amendment PROJECT TIMELINE: Briefing 1: Dec 5, 2023 Set Date: Dec 12, 2023 Public Hearing: Jan 9, 2024 Potential Action: TBD New Information – March 5 Discussion As of the printing of this staff report, the Administration has not identified a preferable way to handle enforcement for constituents who may have installed artificial turf based on perceived inconsistent information about whether it is currently legal or may become legal at some point in the future. Some options discussed during the Feb 20 Council Work session meeting: •Grandfather constituents who have installed artificial turf by X date. Community And Neighborhoods Staff noted that this has caused significant work/confusion in the past as there is not always a way to guarantee by which date someone had installed the turf. In some cases competing information from neighbors was provided. •Establish a time window where constituents could certify with the City that they had installed artificial turf, and receive confirmation from the City. CAN staff noted that when the City used this approach for the unit legalization process several years ago, this still created administrative difficulties with constituents who insisted they did not know about the window. CAN staff indicated that they would not recommend using this approach again. •Establish an income-qualified loan/grant program to help individuals come into compliance. Note: this would require the Council to authorize additional budget, and staff would have to work with the Administration to determine whether/where it makes sense to administer a program like this. •Give a period of 12/18/24 months for people to come into compliance with the new requirements. As of last week, CAN staff indicated this may be the preferable option. The following information was provided for the February 20 discussion. It’s provided again for reference. New Information - February 20 Discussion Page | 2 The Council held a discussion on February 6 and took straw polls regarding several potential edits and/or clarifications to the ordinance. Planning staff has included those edits/clarifications in the attached memo and revised ordinance: •Clarifying that landscaping requirements for properties with multiple park strips will be calculated cumulatively rather than separately. Planning has suggested the following language: “Park strip standards shall be applied cumulatively along the adjacent street frontage. Lots with park strips on 2 or more street frontages shall be calculated separately for each street frontage.” •Keep “promote water conservation” in the purpose statement: “The purpose of this chapter is to promote water conservation, preserve and expand Salt Lake City’s urban tree canopy, improve air quality, and reduce urban heat islands and stormwater runoff.” •Vehicle overhang in parking lot perimeter landscaping. Planning staff has provided the following response: A question was raised whether the proposed chapter and existing zoning code allows for vehicle overhang into a required parking lot perimeter landscaping area. The Division of Transportation parking standards allow for an approximately 2’ vehicle overhang allowance, dependent on the angle of the park stall. The proposed Landscaping & Buffers chapter will allow for this vehicle overhang to extend into the required parking lot perimeter landscaping. Unresolved Issue – enforcement on artificial turf - Some Council Members have been contacted by constituents who were referred by Public Utilities to a rebate program run by the Central Utah Water Conservancy District (CWUWCD) which reimburses residents who remove their grass turf on the basis of how much grass turf is removed. As a part of this program, a resident would take a class run by CWUWCD. While the program strongly discourages artificial turf, it doesn’t expressly prohibit it. So some residents who participated in this program installed artificial turf as a part of removing their grass turf. o In order to address the issue regarding messaging, one Council Member have suggested that the ordinance simply grandfather any artificial turf installed by January 1, 2024 (or some other date). o Another Council Member has suggested the ordinance could outline a “grace period” to give those who installed artificial term a period of time to comply with the new ordinance. o Public Utilities indicated support for the concept of an enforcement date. Community and Neighborhoods Staff raised concerns about equitably enforcing based on a date. o The Council may wish to discuss further with the Administratoin. -The Council may wish to discuss this issue and straw poll a preferred approach to enforcement on artificial turf. - Note: Council Staff is inquiring with City staff to get an estimate of how many properties may have installed artificial turf in their required landscaping area, to get a better idea of the scope of the issue. The following was provided for the February 6 Discussion, and is provided again for reference: The Council held a discussion on December 5 and 12, 2023, and identified several areas to discuss further and potentially adjust. Planning Staff has provided a memo and revised ordinance (see attached) responding to the various areas identified. The Council may wish to discuss and straw poll any of these items: ➢Parking Lot Landscaping – there are five elements relating to Parking Lot landscaping that the Administration has evaluated based on the Council’s discussion, and has come back with recommendations: Page | 3 -Applicability – The Council discussed whether the requirements should apply to parking lots as small as 10 stalls (initial proposal). Upon review and analysis included in their memo, the Administration is recommending the requirements apply to parking lots of 15 stalls or more (which is the current code). -Perimeter Landscaping – The Council’s discussion included a concern that the proposal’s requirement of 10’ of perimeter landscaping could be too much. Current perimeter landscaping is 7’. After discussion with the City’s Urban Forester, the Administration is recommending 8’ of required perimeter landscaping, to achieve the policy goals of tree health and urban heat island effect. See analysis in the Administration’s memo. Look at the nose of the car and seeing if external spots could have a 2 foot overhang -Clarification of Double-Loading Row and Row End Landscaping – The Administration has recommended the following language to clarify this language, as there was some confusion in the previous discussion, page 88, line 2642 of the ordinance: “2. Location: Interior landscape areas shall be provided in the following locations: a. At each end of a parking row containing 6 stalls or more, where not abutting required perimeter landscaping. b. Parallel to parking lot stalls, at a rate of 1 interior landscape area for every 6 parking spaces, or landscape areas may be provided along the interior length of double-loaded parking rows.” -Accessibility – The Council’s discussion included concerns about the proposed changes and pedestrian experience/walkability. The Administration believes that the overall increase in walking distance would be minimal, and notes that a walkway is required in lots with 25 or more stalls. As such, the Administration is not recommending changes. -Reduce required Minimum Interior Landscaping – the Council requested a change in the minimum required size of the interior landscaping to be similar in size to a parking stall. The original proposal required interior landscaping be at least 10’ wide. The Urban forester recommended that a landscaping area be between 8’ and 9’. The Administration has provided proposed language changes, page 88, line 2651 of the ordinance: “Size: Interior landscape areas shall have a minimum width equal to the width of average parking stall within the parking lot, as measured from the inside of the curbing, and shall have a minimum length equal to the length of the abutting parking spaces. Where interior landscape areas do not abut parking spaces, a minimum length of 10’ is required.” ➢Natural Turf – See page 4 of the Administration’s memo which covers additional information regarding the reasoning for allowing natural turf. Staff note: Staff is aware of some suggestions from Public Utilities about the definition of turf in the code, and is inquiring with the Administration if these adjustments are included in the proposal. The Administration is not recommending changes. ➢Public Information prohibiting artificial turf – The memo (page 5) indicates that public outreach is ongoing and staff will be updating a project webpage on this topic. ➢Reduction in Tree Canopy that qualifies as vegetation coverage – Based on the Council conversation, the Administration is recommending that qualifying tree canopy coverage be limited to newly planted tree canopy at the time of planting (or existing canopy). The Administration has provided proposed language changes, page 84, line 2603 of the ordinance Page | 4 “The total area of an existing tree canopy, or a tree canopy at the time of planting, may be included in the vegetation coverage calculations of the required landscaping location the tree is within.” ➢Rock Mulch Limits – Based on the Council conversation, the Administration has modified this language to clarify that a maximum of 20% of rock mulch be allowed in the required landscaping area. The Administration has provided proposed language changes, page 92, line 2759 of the ordinance “ f. Rock used as a mulch material is limited to 20% of an area where landscaping is required by this chapter.” ➢Park Strip Vegetation Height Allowance – This item was raised by the Planning Director to allow for some native plant species and addressing the sight distance triangle. The Administration has provided proposed language changes – pg 81, line 2433: A. All landscaping shall: 1. Maintain a clearance from grade level to 7 feet above the sidewalk, or 10 feet above a street; 2. Not create a hedge or visual barrier between the sidewalk and street; 3. Not create obstructions within the sight distance triangle, as defined and illustrated in Chapter 21A.62 of this title; The following information was provided for the Council’s previous work session. It is provided again for reference. ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Administration’s proposed ordinance rewrites and re-organizes the Landscaping and Buffers Chapter, consistent with previous Council discussions relating to various sustainability goals for Salt Lake City, and consistent with the strategies outlined in the City’s Urban Forest Action Plan. The Administration’s transmittal notes that the ordinance is intended to “better support the City’s adopted policies related to reducing water use, enhancement of the urban forest, reduction in the urban heat island, improve air quality…”. It also notes that re-organizing this section of the code to improve clarity and readability for both the public and administration. The proposed changes also include feedback from several City departments, as well as changes recommended from the Planning Commission. On April 26, 2023 the Planning Commission voted 10 to 1 to recommend a positive recommendation to the Council with two modifications (see Key Elements #2 and Policy Question #1 on page 3). Goal of the Briefing: Review proposed changes to Landscaping and Buffers chapter, provide feedback and schedule public hearing to receive public comment. KEY ELEMENTS 1.Proposed Changes – The Administration’s transmittal notes the following proposed changes/additions, organized by policy goal: a. Improve water conservation by: i. Requiring a landscaping or irrigation professional letter of compliance with irrigation and landscaping standards. ii. Requiring a WaterSense automatic irrigation controller. iii. Prohibiting water waste. iv. Creating standards for irrigation systems to be designed and maintained to maximize water efficiency. Page | 5 b. Supporting the Urban Forest/trees by: i. Allowing tree canopy to count toward vegetation coverage standards and requiring the largest tree appropriate to the landscape location in most zoning districts. ii. Ensuring tree health by requiring Urban Forestry review of alterations to street trees and root zone protection. iii. Improving tree survival rates by requiring a permanent irrigation system for street trees when a landscape plan is required (new construction, or a commercial property where the landscaping is being updated by 50% or more, or a commercial addition that increases the floor area by 50% or more). iv. Requiring trees in the Northwest Quadrant. c. Reduce the urban heat island by: i. Creating parking lot landscaping standards directed at reducing the urban heat island effect. ii. Establishing rock mulch limitations. iii. Allowing tree canopy to count toward landscape coverage and requiring street trees where new construction is proposed. d. Reduce stormwater runoff by: i. Allowing stormwater curb cuts. ii. Requireing bioretention for parking lots with 50 or more stalls in the Parking Chapter (21A.44) e. Simplify and clarify through: i. Requiring separate plans for planting, grading, and irrigation. ii. Addressing artificial turf, by removing it as permitted, based on the Planning Commission recommendation (See Planning Commission changes below and policy question #1 on Page 3). iii. Consolidating buffer sizes. iv. Updating the Freeway Landscape buffer better comply with goals and intent of chapter. v. Creating tables and graphics where possible. vi. Removing duplicate or wordy standards that were difficult to implement. vii. Quantifying, where possible, minimum landscaping standards. 2.Planning Commission Changes – The Planning Commission voted 10-1 to forward a positive recommendation to the Council with the following changes: c. Prohibiting artificial turf. The Administration’s transmittal notes that the proposed draft before the Council includes “a statement that artificial turf is prohibited anywhere landscaping is regulated by the chapter. Where landscaping is not regulated in this chapter, artificial turf would be allowed (such as the rear yard), as it is today in unregulated landscaping areas. The commission’s recommendation was based on a discussion centered around artificial turfs impact on stormwater runoff and possible harmful chemicals contained in the manufacturing process.” See Policy Question #1 on Page 3. d.Define “Landscape or Irrigation specialist”. During the Planning Commission hearing, some commented that the general language originally proposed about a “landscape or irrigation professional” was too broad. The current draft now requires review and signature by a landscape architect (licensed with the State of Utah), or a US-EPA WaterSense Labeled Certified Professional. Page | 6 5.Elements not changing - The Administration’s transmittal notes that several current standards in the zoning code will remain: a. Regulated landscaping locations (Park Strips, Yard areas, Buffers, Parking Lots). b. 33% vegetation standard. c. 20% hard surfacing limitations. d. Landscaping and irrigation designed depending on watering needs. e. Drip and spray irrigation on separate valves. f. Park Strip less than 36” in width are exempt from some landscaping standards. g. Landscaping buffer tree and shrub quantities. – h. Mulching depth and permeability standards. i. And encroachment standards in the park strip or public right of way. j. Maintaining the City’s resident’s eligibility for “rip your strip” rebate programs through the CUWCD (Central Utah Water Conservancy District) and Utah Department of Natural Resources. POLICY QUESTIONS 1.Planning Commission recommendations relating to turf – o The draft presented to the Planning Commission on April 26th, permitted artificial turf in front and corner yard landscaping locations as an impervious surface, which is limited to a maximum of 20% of the required landscaping. It was prohibited in other locations. Additionally, artificial turf would have had to meet certain material standards such as individual grass blade length and quantity as well as infill material type. o As noted above, the Planning Commission was concerned with this aspect of the proposal, particularly the impact of turf on stormwater runoff and harmful chemicals used in the turf manufacturing process. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommended to prohibit turf in required landscaping areas. Where landscaping is not regulated by this chapter, such as the rear yard, turf would be permitted. o Recently, some cities, including Boston and several in California have prohibited artificial turf. They have cited Poly-fluoroalkyl Substances or P-FAS, as well as bisphenol A (BPA) in the rubber crumb underlayer as a main public health reason to prohibit artificial turf. o According to the Environmental Protection Agency, PFAS chemicals are a known carcinogen which can interfere with hormones, reproduction, immunity and cause developmental delays in children. The EPA has not officially listed BPA on their concerned substance list but they are continuing to monitor research. o Turf manufacturers have been working to improve the production of artificial turf to reduce/remove chemicals, and each year of development shows improvement on this front. o Previous Council discussions asked for the Administration to evaluate artificial turf as an option for required landscaping areas. Does the Council wish to discuss this further with the Administration, including reviewing the language originally proposed to the Planning Commission? Page | 7 2.Enforcement – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if they have a recommendation for how to handle enforcement/grandfathering of the changing standards, particularly as it relates to turf? Currently staff understands that the Administration has paused enforcement on turf in landscaping areas, while this ordinance is working its way through the process. CHRONOLOGY •September 6, 2022 – Initial feedback from City Council in work session •February 8, 2023 – Text amendment formally initiated •February 10, 2023 – Notice emailed to recognized organizations and changes posted to Planning Division Open House webpage •March 20, 2023 – Proposed changes presented to Sugar House Community Council •April 26, 2023 – Planning Commission discussion and positive recommendation forwarded •May 8, 2023 – Ordinance forwarded to Attorney’s office for review •June 15, 2023 – Ordinance corrections forwarded to Attorney’s office •August 29, 2023 – Corrected ordinance returned to Attorney’s office for final review •September 26, 2023 – Final ordinance received from Attorney’s Office •September 28, 2023 – Transmittal sent to Council Office SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 406 WWW.SLC.GOV PO BOX 145480 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5480 TEL 801-535-7757 FAX 801-535-6174 PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS MEMORANDUM To: City Council Members From: Nannette Larsen, Senior Planner Date: January 12th, 2023 Re: Landscaping & Buffers Chapter During the briefing held on December 12, 2023, the City Council provided guidance and direction for changes to the 21A.48 Landscaping & Buffers Chapter draft. The following memorandum is a response to the comments and requested changes: 1. Parking Lot Landscaping Applicability: The Council discussed concerns with the proposed minimum number of stalls before parking lot landscaping standards would apply. Specifically, that the proposed threshold for when parking lot landscaping applies may limit infill development or redevelopment potential of smaller properties. In the initial proposal presented to Council, parking lot landscaping would apply to parking lots with 10 or more parking stalls. Currently, parking lot landscaping is required for parking lots with 15 or more parking stalls. Parking lot landscaping requirements include interior and perimeter landscaping. A minimum of 5% of the square footage of the parking lot is required for interior parking lot landscaping. Interior landscaping areas must be provided on parking row ends, and every 6 parking spaces or between double-loading parking rows. Perimeter parking lot landscaping is required where a parking lot is located within a required yard area or within 20’ of a property line. The recommended width of the perimeter parking lot landscaping is 8’. Analysis: For the Council’s consideration, analysis of the percentage of parking lot landscaping that would be required for a parking lot with 10 stalls (initial proposal), 15 stalls (current code requirement) and 25 stalls, is provided below. The following calculations are based on the assumption that the average parking lot size is approximately 350 square feet per parking stall. Parking Lot Parking Lot Square Footage Minimum Interior Landscaping 5% Perimeter Landscaping 8’ Total Landscaping as a % of a Parking Lot 10 Stalls 3,500 175 Sq Ft 944 Sq Ft 31% 15 Stalls 5,250 262 Sq Ft 1,144 Sq Ft 26%  Page 2 (Current requirement & recommendation) 25 Stalls 8,750 437 Sq Ft 1,488 Sq Ft 22% It is recommended that the threshold for when parking lot landscaping applies is maintained at 15 stalls, the current ordinance requirement. A parking lot with 15 stalls would require approximately 26% landscaping with a typical design. This total landscaping area of 28% is similar to vegetation coverage standards, of 1/3rd, in required yard areas. Recommendation: maintain the parking lot landscaping threshold at 15 stalls Status: direction needed. Perimeter Landscaping: The majority of parking lot landscaping falls within the perimeter landscaping, encompassing all of the required parking lot landscaping except generally the 5% interior landscaping area. The perimeter parking lot landscaping acts as both a tool that reduces the urban heat island as well as a form of a land use buffer from adjoining properties. Currently the parking lot perimeter landscaping width is required at 7’, this was increased to a minimum of 10’ in the initial proposal presented to council. The purpose of the initial proposal of 10’ was to promote tree health and longevity, it was also increased to match landscape buffer widths required elsewhere in the chapter. While there is some concern about the amount of required perimeter parking lot landscaping, it is still recommended that there is an increase in perimeter landscaping width to improve tree health in these areas. After follow-up conversations with the Urban Forester, 8’ in width is sufficient to support tree health and reduce tree mortality rates. It is recommended that the perimeter parking lot landscaping be a minimum of 8’ to assuage concerns regarding infill and redevelopment properties while still sufficiently addressing and mitigating the effects of a parking lot located within 20’ of a property line and reducing the urban heat island effect. Parking Lot Parking Lot Square Footage Perimeter Landscaping 8’ Perimeter Landscaping 10’ Perimeter Landscaping (8’) as a % of Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping (10’) as a % of Parking Lot 10 Stalls 3,500 944 Sq Ft 1,180 Sq Ft 33%38% 15 Stalls 5,250 1,152 Sq Ft 1,440 Sq Ft 21%32% 25 Stalls 8,750 1,488 Sq Ft 1,860 Sq Ft 17%26% The proposed landscaping chapter’s perimeter and interior parking lot landscaping averages based on parking lot size are indicated in the above table. It is shown in this table that as parking lot square footages increases, the percentage of landscaping decreases. This is due to  Page 3 most of the landscaping being located along the perimeter of the parking lot. While the overall landscaping to hard surface ratio decreases as the size of the parking lot increases, it is expected that the provision requiring a biodetention in parking lots with 50 or more stalls landscaping ratios will be similar to smaller square footage parking lots. This is because these biodetention areas will generally need to be larger, than the interior and perimeter parking lot landscaping minimums, to adequately detain stormwater in these larger parking lots. Recommendation: require perimeter parking lot landscaping to be 8’ wide Status: direction needed Clarification of Double-Loading Row and Row End Landscaping: The language in the most recent draft chapter was updated to clarify where interior parking lot landscaping is required. The type of interior landscaping locations provided are required to ensure dispersion of interior landscaping areas. The minimum 5% interior landscaping is stated to ensure sufficient interior parking lot landscaping is provided to meet the purpose and goals of the chapter. Status: changes made to the legislative version, pg. 88, line 2642. “2. Location: Interior landscape areas shall be provided in the following locations: a. At each end of a parking row containing 6 stalls or more, where not abutting required perimeter landscaping. b. Parallel to parking lot stalls, at a rate of 1 interior landscape area for every 6 parking spaces, or landscape areas may be provided along the interior length of double-loaded parking rows.” Accessibility: During the briefing there was a concern raised regarding the accessibility of parking lot and how the proposed parking lot landscaping standards would affect how pedestrians experience the increase in walking distance. In addition to the 5% interior landscaping, it would also require 5’ perimeter landscaping and a 3’ walkway where a parking lot abuts the principal building. The interior parking lot landscaping area would affect the distance between parking stalls and access to the building. However, a 5% of interior landscaping area and a 5’ perimeter landscaping area between the parking lot and the building, the increase in walking distance would be overall minimal. In addition to the proposed changes to the Landscaping & Buffer chapter, are proposed modifications to the Off-Street Parking chapter (21A.44). Pedestrian walkways are proposed to be required where there are 25 or more stalls. One walkway, which is separate from drive aisles, is required for every 20 stalls provided. While the proposed parking lot landscaping will increase the distance from the surface parking lot to the building, the experience of the pedestrian will improve as there will be a separation between the pedestrian and vehicles, and there will be a reduction in the urban heat island. Recommendation: no modification to proposed chapter Status: direction needed Reduce Required Minimum Interior Landscaping Size: The Council requested a change in the minimum required size of the interior parking lot landscaping areas to be similar to a standard parking stall. This modification would ease in the implementation of the ordinance and  Page 4 encourage compliance. The original proposal required that interior parking lot landscaping areas be at least 10’ wide and equal to the length of the adjoining stalls. The Council recommended that the interior landscaping minimum width be reduced to the average parking stall width. The average stall width is dependent on the angle of the parking stall. Generally, standard parking stall widths are between 8’ and 9’. The current interior landscaping minimum width is 5’, it is recommended that this width is increased as this isn’t sufficient space for tree health or a tree full canopy. The Urban Forester confirmed an interior parking lot landscaping area between 8’ and 9’ would be sufficient to promote the health and longevity of the tree. The draft Landscaping & Buffers chapter has been modified and now requires a minimum interior landscaping width equal average parking stall in the parking lot. Status: changes made to the legislative version, pg. 88, line 2651. “Size: Interior landscape areas shall have a minimum width equal to the width of average parking stall within the parking lot, as measured from the inside of the curbing, and shall have a minimum length equal to the length of the abutting parking spaces. Where interior landscape areas do not abut parking spaces, a minimum length of 10’ is required.” 2. Why Allow Turf in Required Landscaping Areas: The proposed Landscaping & Buffers chapter addresses high water consuming grass species which are commonly seen in single-family residential areas. These cool season grasses (like Kentucky Blue) are defined as turf in the proposed chapter. Turf is defined as: “Grasses planted as a ground cover that may be mowed and maintained to be used as a lawn area of landscaping. Does not include decorative grasses, grasses that are adaptive or native to the local environment or grasses that do not generally require supplemental water, or inorganic substitutes commonly referred to as artificial turf.” This definition of turf does not include all ground cover grass seed. The grass species which qualify as turf, those species which are non- adaptive and non-native to northern Utah climates, generally cool season grasses, are those grass species proposed to be limited in all zoning districts. Turf limitations are to reduce water consumption, qualify for waterwise rebates, and assist in changing landscape expectations in the City. It is typical to see 100% turf coverage in residential districts as the preferred landscape material. While limiting turf in residential districts will still allow turf grasses that require more watering in the summer months to maintain a green lawn in 1/3 of the landscaping locations, it will cut high water consuming cool season grasses by over half, with a 2/3 reduction. It’s important to remember that while many single- and two- family residential districts have landscaped rear yard areas, available for recreational activities, other residential districts do not always have this rear yard landscaping areas. An example of this is the RMF districts. In the RMF districts there are rear yard setbacks required but the rear yard is generally occupied by needed parking or storage areas to accommodate the increase in density. By allowing some turf in required yard areas it allows for multi-family residential districts to still provide a recreational or lounging space for residents in required landscaping areas, a landscaping use that is typical in residential neighborhoods. Turf is proposed to be prohibited in manufacturing districts as it’s rare for uses in manufacturing districts to utilize turf areas. All other zoning districts not included in the residential or manufacturing districts allow turf but only in active recreational areas. These  Page 5 prohibitions and limitations also facilitate a reduction in water consumption while still allowing outdoor activity use, if these areas are dedicated to activities where turf is a typical playing surface. Turf limitations in these areas are needed to retain waterwise rebate eligibility for City residents. Turf in park strips throughout Salt Lake City is proposed to be prohibited. Recommendation: changes are not recommended Status: direction needed 3.Public Information About Prohibiting Artificial Turf: The concern was raised by Council regarding the public’s response to prohibiting artificial turf in required landscaping locations. Public outreach is ongoing and staff will be updating the Landscaping & Buffers project webpage with information that is accessible to the public with accessible information on why it is recommended that artificial turf is prohibited as a landscaping material. Status: outreach is ongoing 4. Reduction in Tree Canopy that Qualifies as Vegetation Coverage: During the December briefing the Council was informed that the rewrite of the chapter includes the provision where a tree’s canopy at maturity could count towards 100% of the vegetation coverage in required landscaping locations. At maturity, a small tree generally has a 300 square foot canopy, this would allow for a tree canopy to count toward 100% of the vegetation, resulting in the tree being the only living landscape material in these locations – the council expressed concern with this. It's recommended that the qualifying tree canopy coverage is limited to the newly planted tree canopy at the time of planting or existing tree canopy. That way, it is the size of the canopy, not the age or degree of maturity that would be counted. This would potentially still allow for existing mature trees to account for all the required vegetation, however, staff believes this still accomplishes the goals of the landscaping chapter and is in line with the goals of the urban forest action plan related to prioritizing trees. New trees would be calculated by their existing canopy, not their canopy at maturity, so it’s likely that in the case of new trees, more than just a tree would be required to meet the vegetation requirements. Allowing existing tree canopies Image 1: park strip trees with no vegetation ground cover  Page 6 to qualify as vegetation coverage minimums would still incentivize trees in required landscaping locations, while still requiring sufficient organic material that benefits the appearance of neighborhoods, maintains soil health, and ensures sufficient evapotranspiration thereby assisting in the reduction of the urban heat island. Recommendation: limit qualifying tree canopy coverage to exiting canopies or canopies at the time of planting Status: changes made to legislative version, pg. 84, line 2603. “The total area of an existing tree canopy, or a tree canopy at the time of planting, may be included in the vegetation coverage calculations of the required landscaping location the tree is within.” 5. Rock Mulch Limits a Percentage of a Landscaping Area: During the Council’s discussion the method of measuring and limiting rock mulch was raised as a possible issue where mulch beds are limited in size. It was recommended by Council that rock mulch is limited as a percentage of the landscaping area rather than a percentage of the mulch used. The purpose of limiting rock mulch is to better address the effect rock mulch has on the urban heat island effect and soil quality. These goals can still be met when rock mulch is regulated as a maximum percentage of landscaping area. The original proposed draft recommended that no more than 50% of the mulch used on the site may be rock mulch. This has been modified at the request of Council, to a maximum of 20% of rock mulch in the landscape area. The maximum rock mulch ratio was determined as rock mulch heat index and heat retention is similar to that of hard surfacing. However, rock mulch doesn’t have the same stormwater runoff rate that hard surfaces have. This proposed maximum 20% rock mulch is also consistent with what was previously required – a maximum 50% of the mulch in the landscaping area. Landscaping areas must have no less than 33% of vegetation and has a maximum of 20% hard surfacing. The remaining landscaping area, 47%, could be mulched. Half of this allowed mulched areas would equate to approximately 20% of the required landscaping area. Status: changes made to legislative version, pg. 92, line 2759 “ f. Rock used as a mulch material is limited to 20% of an area where landscaping is required by this chapter.” 6. Increase Park Strip Vegetation Height Allowance: The Planning Director brought up an issue that was raised over the summer about allowed vegetation height in the park strip. There was concern that some native plant species would be excluded from the park strip due to vegetation height restrictions. Allowed vegetation height in the park strip was previously proposed to remain at a maximum of 22”. The newly updated language to address this issue states that there cannot be a visual barrier between the sidewalk and the street – to ensure continued visibility between these spaces. The modifications also address view obstructions within the sight distance triangle.  Page 7 Status: changes made to legislative version, pg. 81, line 2433 A. All landscaping shall: 1. Maintain a clearance from grade level to 7 feet above the sidewalk, or 10 feet above a street; 2. Not create a hedge or visual barrier between the sidewalk and street; 3. Not create obstructions within the sight distance triangle, as defined and illustrated in Chapter 21A.62 of this title; The full revised draft of the Landscaping & Buffers Chapter is attached for reference. Text Amendment // City Council Briefing LANDSCAPING & BUFFERSCHAPTER 48 FOLLOW-UP PLNPCM2023-00098 POTENTIAL DRAFT MODIFICATIONS Salt Lake City // Planning Division PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING. Applicability Threshold Perimeter Landscaping Parking Lot Parking Lot Square Footage Minimum Interior Landscaping 5% Perimeter Landscaping 8’ Total Landscaping as a % of a Parking Lot 10 Stalls 3,500 175 Sq Ft 944 Sq Ft 31% 15 Stalls 5,250 262 Sq Ft 1,144 Sq Ft 26% 25 Stalls 8,750 437 Sq Ft 1,488 Sq Ft 22% •Clarification of Double Loading Parking Row and Row End Landscaping. •Reduce Required Minimum Interior Landscaping Size. •Parking Lot Accessibility. Salt Lake City // Planning Division PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING. Salt Lake City // Planning Division WHY ALLOW TURF IN REQUIRED LANDSCAPING AREAS? Will Still Reduce Water Consuming Turf By 2/3. Allows For Multi-family Recreational Or Lounging Space. Prohibited In Districts Where Turf Is Not Utilized. Continued Rebate Eligibility. Salt Lake City // Planning Division PRIORITIZING TREES WHILE ENSURING SUFFICIENT VEGETATION Existing Tree Canopy May Count Toward Required Vegetation Coverage. PARK STRIP VEGETATION HEIGHT. ROCK MULCH LIMITATIONS. Limited To 20% Of A Required Landscaping Area. Cannot Create A Hedge Or Visual Barrier. “TURF:Grasses planted as a ground cover that may be mowed and maintained to be used as a lawn area of landscaping.Does not include grasses that are listed in the Salt Lake City Plant List &Hydrozone Schedule.Inorganic substitutes,commonly referred to as artificial turf,are prohibited in required landscaping areas.” UPDATE TURF DEFINITION. *ADDITIONAL MODIFICATION* Salt Lake City // Planning Division Applicability Threshold: Direction Needed Recommendation: Maintain existing 15 stall threshold. Perimeter Landscaping: Direction Needed Recommendation: Require minimum 8’ wide. Clarification of Interior Parking Lot Landscaping: Changes Made Recommendation: Clarified. Parking Lot Accessibility: Direction Needed Recommendation: No modifications. Reduce Minimum Interior Landscape Size: Changes Made Recommendation: Minimum width of average stall. Why Allow Turf in Required Landscaping Areas: Direction Needed Recommendation: No modification. Existing Tree Canopy as Vegetation Coverage: Changes Made Recommendation: Limit qualifying tree canopy coverage to existing canopies or canopies at the time of planting. Rock Mulch Limited Per Landscaping Area: Changes Made Recommendation: Limit rock mulch to 20% of a required landscaping area. Increase Park Strip Vegetation Height Allowance: Changes Made Recommendation: Cannot create a hedge or visual barrier. Salt Lake City // Planning Division 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2024 (Amending the zoning text of various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to Landscaping and Buffers chapter amendments) An ordinance amending the text of various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to Landscaping and Buffers Chapter amendments pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00098. WHEREAS, on April 26, 2023, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a public hearing on a petition submitted by Salt Lake City Mayor, Erin Mendenhall--at the request of the Salt Lake City Council--to amend the zoning code pertaining to the Landscaping and Buffer Chapter (Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00098); and WHEREAS, at its April 26, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council on said petition; WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the city council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests; and WHEREAS, enforcement of the prohibition against artificial turf, which turf was installed prior to the effective date of this ordinance, will be delayed for 18 months to give residents an opportunity to come into compliance and Administration and Council staff will make efforts to communicate pending enforcement to any constituent that has installed artificial turf. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.24.010.P.12. That Subsection 21A.24.010.P.12 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: General Provisions: Special Foothills Regulations), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 37 F. Special Purpose Districts: Standard (Code Section) District RP BP FP AG AG-2 AG-5 AG-20 PL PL-2 I UI OS NOS MH EI MU Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 40-70 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) X Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G) 38 Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) X Ground floor residential entrances (21A.37.050.L) Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1) Street trees (21A.37.050.P.2) Soil Volume (21A.37.050.P.3) Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.4) Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.5) Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) 25 (1) An appropriate plan for mitigation of any construction activities shall be prepared, and (2) Absent any State or Federal regulations, a plan for creating no adverse impact should the line be abandoned shall be prepared. Utility, building or structure (private). Utility, transmission wire, line, pipe or pole (private). b. Conditional Use Standards: In addition to demonstrating conformance with the conditional use standards contained in Chapter 21A.54 of this title, each applicant for a conditional use within the Northwest Quadrant Natural Area must demonstrate conformance with the following standards: (1) The development will not detrimentally affect or destroy natural features such as ponds, streams, wetlands, and forested areas, nor impair their natural functions, but will preserve and incorporate such features into the development’s site; (2) The location of natural features and the site’s topography have been considered in the designing and siting of all physical improvements; (3) Adequate assurances have been received that the clearing of the site topsoil, trees, and other natural features will not occur before the commencement of building operations; only those areas approved for the placement of physical improvements may be cleared; (4) The development will not reduce the natural retention storage capacity of any watercourse, nor increase the magnitude and volume of flooding at other locations; and that in addition, the development will not increase stream velocities; (5) The soil and subsoil conditions are suitable for excavation and site preparation, and the drainage is designed to prevent erosion and environmentally deleterious surface runoff; (6) The proposed development activity will not endanger health and safety, including danger from the obstruction or diversion of flood flow; (7) The proposed development activity will not destroy valuable habitat for aquatic or other flora and fauna, adversely affect water quality or groundwater resources, increase stormwater runoff velocity so that water levels from flooding increased, or adversely impact any other natural stream, floodplain, or wetland functions, and is otherwise consistent with the intent of this title; (8) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems are adequate to prevent disease, contamination and unsanitary conditions; and (9) The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding for the proposed use. 3. Landscaping: Landscaping is not required for uses and improvements within the Natural Area, except: 39 Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) 4 Building Regulation Building Type Single- Family Dwelling Two- Family Dwelling Multi- Family Residential Row House1 Sideways Row House1 Cottage Development1 Tiny House1 Non Residential Building Building Regulation Building Type Single- Family Dwelling Two- Family Dwelling Multi- Family Residential Row House1 Sideways Row House1 Cottage Development1 Tiny House1 Non Residential Building H Height 30’ Pitched Roof- 23’ Flat Roof-16’ 16’ 30’ F Front yard setback 20’ or the average of the block face C Corner side yard setback 10’ S Interior side yard setback 4’ on one side 10’ on the other 10’ 4’ 6’ on one side 10’ on the other 4’ 10’ R Rear yard Minimum of 20% lot depth, need not exceed 25’ 10’ Minimum of 20% lot depth, need not exceed 25’ 40 G. Form Based Districts: Standard (Code Section) District FB-UN1 FB-UN2 FB-MU11 FB-SC FB-SE Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) 75 753 75 75 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.3) 70 70 70 70 70 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.4) 70 70 70 70 70 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 601 601 601 601 601 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 15 15 15 15 15 Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) 75 75 75 75 75 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 15 30 30 30 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) 200 200 200 200 200 Upper floor step back (feet) (21A.37.050.G.4) X X X X Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X X X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X X X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K.1) X X X2 Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) X X X Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) X X X X X Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1) 40 40 40 Street trees (21A.37.050.P.2) X X X X X 19 C. Permitted Uses: The uses specified as permitted uses in the table of permitted and conditional uses set forth in Part III of this title for the underlying district shall be permitted uses and no other. D. Conditional Uses: The uses specified as conditional uses in the table of permitted and conditional uses set forth in Part III of this title for the underlying district shall be conditional uses. In addition to the conditional uses permitted in the underlying district, the following uses shall be allowed as conditional uses in the T Transitional Overlay District: 1. Light manufacturing and industrial assembly uses; 2. Warehouse and wholesale uses in which goods and materials are stored in completely enclosed buildings; 3. Offices; 4. Furniture and appliance repair shops; 5. Commercial photography studios and photofinishing laboratories; 6. Retail goods establishments; 7. Retail services establishments; 8. Medical and dental offices and clinics; and 9. Medical laboratories. E. Minimum Lot Area: The minimum lot area for any conditional use shall be 10,000 square feet. F. Minimum Lot Width: The minimum lot width for any conditional use shall be 60’. G. Maximum Building Height: The maximum building height for conditional uses shall be 35’. H. Site Design Criteria: The land use compatibility of a proposed conditional use shall be assessed, through the application of the following criteria in addition to the standards for conditional uses set forth in Chapter 21A.54, “Conditional Uses”, of this title. 1. The proposed principal building shall be located not less than 20’ from any residential dwelling; 2. Interior side yards for lots abutting residential uses shall not be less than 12’; 3. Interior side yards for lots abutting another nonresidential use shall not be less than eight feet; 4. Front and corner side yards shall be provided consistent with the underlying zoning district; 5. Rear yards shall not be less than 25’; 6. Signs should be limited to one flat nonilluminated identification sign not more than six square feet per 50’ of lot frontage. I. Application: The application for a conditional use in the transitional overlay district shall include information in sufficient detail so that the planning commission may judge the compatibility of the conditional use with the existing residential conditions and the 41 Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.3) X X X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.4) X X X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.5) Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) X X X Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) X X X Notes: 1. This may be reduced to twenty percent (20%) if the ground floor is within one of the following building types: urban house, two-family, cottage, and row house. 2. Except where specifically authorized by the zone. 3. For buildings with street facing building facades over 100' in length: a. A minimum length of 30% of the ground floor street facing façade shall consist of non-residential active uses allowed by Subsection 21A.37.050.A.1. b. An additional minimum length of 45% of the ground floor street facing façade shall consist of any active uses allowed by Subsection 21A.37.050.A.1. c. This footnote does not apply to the rowhouse building form. SECTION 24. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.40.120.E.1. That Subsection 21A.40.120.E.1 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Accessory Uses, Buildings and Structures: Regulation of Fences, Walls and Hedges: Height Restrictions and Gates), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: E. Height Restrictions and Gates: 1. Fences, walls, and hedges shall comply with the following regulations based on the following zoning districts: a. Nonresidential Zoning Districts: (1) Notwithstanding Subsection 21A.40.120.1.b.(l), in the M-2 and EI zoning districts fences, walls, or hedges may be up to six (6) feet in height if located between the front property line and the front yard setback line. (2) If there is no minimum front yard setback in the underlying zoning district, a fence, wall, or hedge of a maximum six (6) feet in height may be placed no closer than ten (10) feet from the property line. 42 (3) Outdoor storage, when permitted in the zoning district, shall be located behind the primary facade of the principal structure and shall be screened with a solid wall or fence and shall comply with the requirements in Section 5.60.120. (4) All refuse disposal and recycling dumpsters, except those located in the M-2, LO and EI districts shall be screened on all sides by a solid wood fence, masonry wall or an equivalent opaque material to a height of not less than 6 feet but not more than 8 feet. SECTION 25. Amending the Text of Subsections 21A.44.060.A.2 and 3. That Subsections 21A.44.060.A.2 and 3 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Off Street Parking, Mobility and Loading: Parking Location and Design: Generally), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 2. Biodetention in Parking Lot Interior and Perimeter Landscaping Areas: Retention of the 80th percentile storm is required for all impervious surface parking lots with 50 or more parking spaces. Where this is not feasible, as defined in the SLCDPUs Standard Practices Manual, an approved Stormwater Best Management Practices (Stormwater BMPs) is required. All proposed Stormwater BMPs are subject to Public Utilities Division review, approval, and inspection. 3. Parking Location and Setbacks: All parking shall comply with the parking restrictions within yards pursuant to Table 21A.44.060-A, “Parking Location and Setback Requirements”. Parking lots with 15 or more stalls and within 20’ of a lot line that are in a required yard area or abutting a building are subject to Section 21A.48.070 Parking Lot Landscaping. 43 [Codifier: No changes to Table 21A.44.060-A to be made.] SECTION 26. Amending the Text of Subsections 21A.44.060.A.11 through 14. That Subsections 21A.44.060.A.11 through 14 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Off Street Parking, Mobility and Loading: Parking Location and Design: Generally), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 11. Landscaping and Screening: All parking areas and facilities shall comply with the landscaping and screening standards in Chapter 21A.48 and Section 21A.40.120 of this title. 12. Lighting: Where a parking area or parking lot is illuminated, the light source shall be shielded so that the light source is not directly visible from any abutting property or abutting private or public street. 13. Signs: All signs in parking areas or related to parking facilities shall comply with Chapter 21A.46, “Signs”, and applicable provisions of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). 14. Pedestrian Walkways: The following standards shall apply to surface parking lots with 25 or more parking spaces: a. Pedestrian walkway(s) shall be at least five feet (5’) in width, and located in an area that is not a driving aisle leading from the farthest row of parking spaces to the primary entrance of the principal building. b. Vehicles shall not overhang the pedestrian walkway(s). c. Where the walkway(s) crosses a drive aisle, pedestrian walkway(s) shall be identified by a change in color, material, surface texture, from surrounding driving surfaces, but such identification cannot be curbing of the walkway. d. One (1) pedestrian walkway meeting these standards shall be provided for every 50 parking spaces provided on site or part thereof, after the first 20 parking spaces. SECTION 27. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.44.070.B. That Subsection 21A.44.070.B of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Off Street Parking, Mobility and Loading: Off Street Loading Areas: Location and Design of Loading Areas), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: B. Location and Design of Loading Areas: 31 Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) Residential character in RB District (21A.37.050.N) X B. Commercial Districts: Standard (Code Section) District SNB CN CB CS CC CSHBD CG1 TSA Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) 80 802 80 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) 60/25 70/20 60/25 Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.3) 80 70 90 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.4) 60 60 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 40 40 40 40 60 60 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 25 Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 0 Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 40 Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) X X X X X 40 40 40 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 15 15 15 20 15 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet)(21A.37.050.F) 200 200 200 Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G.2 and 21A.37.050.G.3) 15 X Façade height for required stepback (21A.37.050.G.2) 30 Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X X X X X X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X X X X X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) X X X X X X 44 1. All required loading berths shall be located on the same development site as the use(s) served. 2. No loading berth shall be located within thirty feet (30’) of the nearest point of intersection of any two (2) streets. 3. No loading berth shall be located in a required front yard. 4. Each required loading berth shall be located and designed to: a. Allow all required vehicle maneuvering and backing movements on-site; b. Minimize conflicts with pedestrian, bicycle, and traffic movement or encroachments into any pedestrian walkway, bicycle lane, public right-of-way, and fire lane; and c. Avoid the need to back into a public street while leaving the site to the maximum extent practicable, as determined by the planning director and the transportation director. 5. Landscaping and screening of all loading berths shall be provided to comply with the requirements of Subsection 21A.40.120, “Regulation of Fences, Walls, and Hedges”. 6. Where a loading berth is illuminated, the light source shall be shielded so that the light source is not directly visible from any abutting property or abutting private or public street. 7. All signs in loading areas shall comply with Chapter 21A.46, “Signs”, and applicable provisions of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 8. All required loading berths shall comply with the surfacing standards of the Off Street Parking Standards Manual. SECTION 28. Amending the Text of Chapter 21A.48. That Chapter 21A.48 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Landscaping and Buffers), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.48: LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERS SECTION: 21A.48.010: Purpose and Intent 21A.48.020: Applicability 21A.48.030: Authority 21A.48.040: Responsibility & Maintenance 21A.48.050: Landscape Plan 21A.48.060: Landscape Requirements 21A.48.070: Parking Lot Landscaping 21A.48.080: General Standards 21A.48.090: Private Lands Tree Preservation 21A.48.100: Appeal 12 (1) Colonnades; (2) Staircases; (3) Balconies: All balconies must be located at the third story or above. (4) Building overhangs and associated cantilever: These coverings may be between 9 and 14’ above the level of the sidewalk. They shall provide a minimum depth of coverage of six feet and project no closer to the curb than three feet. (5) Skybridge: A single skybridge is permitted. All skybridges must be located at the third, fourth, or fifth stories. (6) Other architectural element(s) not listed above that offers refuge from weather and/or provide publicly accessible usable space. Illustration of Regulation 21A.30.010.F Midblock Walkways 1 The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. G. Sidewalks: For all downtown districts, sidewalks must be a clear walking path that is a minimum of 10’ wide. Outdoor dining shall be permitted within the sidewalk if it complies with the minimum width of a clear path as defined in the outdoor dining design guidelines. H. Landscaping and Buffers: All uses in the downtown districts shall comply with the provisions governing landscaping and buffers in Chapter 21A.48 of this title. Where a park strip does not exist, street trees are only required when the sidewalk width of at least 10’ can be maintained, in which required street trees shall be planted in tree wells with tree grates. 45 21A.48.010: PURPOSE & INTENT: The purpose of this chapter is to promote water conservation, preserve and expand Salt Lake City’s urban tree canopy, improve air quality, and reduce urban heat islands and stormwater runoff. These regulations are intended to encourage low impact development principals into overall landscape design in a way that is attractive, and to mitigate impacts through buffering between dissimilar zoning districts. 21A.48.020: APPLICABILITY: A. The provisions of this chapter apply to all properties within the city. B. Any modification of required landscaping shall come into greater compliance with this chapter. 21A.48.030: AUTHORITY: A. The requirements of this chapter may be modified by the zoning administrator, on a case- by-case basis where innovative landscaping design that furthers the purpose and intent of this chapter is implemented, or in response to input from: 1. Police Department; 2. Public Utilities; or 3. Urban Forestry. 21A.48.040: RESPONSIBILITY & MAINTENANCE: A. All landscaping shall: 1. Maintain a clearance from grade level to 7 feet above the sidewalk, or 10 feet above a street; 2. Not create a hedge or visual barrier between the sidewalk and street; 3. Not create obstructions within a sight distance triangle, as defined and illustrated in Chapter 21A.62 of this title; 4. Be maintained in live condition to present a reasonably healthy appearance; and 5. Be kept free of refuse, debris, and noxious weeds. B. Landscape Yards. The owner of the property shall be responsible for the correct installation, maintenance, repair, or replacement of all landscaping, and obtain permits as required by the provisions of this chapter. C. Park Strips. 26 a. Any areas disturbed by construction activity that will be left undeveloped shall be revegetated with native plants as listed in the “Salt Lake City Northwest Quadrant Plant List”. b. Noxious weed species as identified by the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (or its successor) in the State of Utah Noxious Weed List (or its successor) shall be removed from landscaped areas and areas disturbed by construction activity. Noxious weeds shall be controlled for a period of two years and methods of control shall be identified on the landscape plan. SECTION 22. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.37.050.P. That Subsection 21A.37.050.P of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Design Standards: Design Standards Defined: Streetscape Standards), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: P. Streetscape Standards: These standards are required for landscaping that is within the public right of way. This is defined as the space between the private property line and the back of the curb. All properties must comply with the park strip landscaping regulations in Chapter 21A.48. Where there is a conflict between the requirements in Chapter 21A.48 and the requirements of this Subsection, the requirements in this Subsection shall apply. 1. Tree Canopy Coverage: No tree canopy shall cover less than the specified percentage according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. The defined percentage represents the canopy coverage at maturity. At installation, a minimum of 20% of all trees shall have a minimum caliper of 3”. Where tree canopy coverage percentage is indicated in Table 21A.37.060, tree canopy coverage shall not count towards the minimum coverage requirements for park strip vegetation. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.1 Tree Canopy Coverage 46 1. The owner of the property abutting the park strip shall be responsible for the correct installation, maintenance, repair, or replacement of all landscaping and obtain permits as required by the provisions of this chapter. 2. Exclusions: Any street tree planting or maintenance pursuant to Subsections 21A.48.040.D.1 and 21A.48.040.D.2. D. Street Trees. 1. Salt Lake City’s expectation is to preserve street trees . Planting, cutting, removing, pruning, and any other maintenance of street trees is subject to approval by the Salt Lake City Urban Forestry Division as described in Section 2.26.210 of this code. 2. It is the abutting property owner’s responsibility to: a. Contact the Salt Lake City Urban Forestry Division to request maintenance on a street tree and obtain required approval for any changes made to a street tree. b. Provide sufficient irrigation to a street tree located in the abutting park strip. 3. Root Zone Protection: The root zone of all street trees shall be protected when impacted by any construction work on the abutting property or within the right-of- way when a street tree is present. 4. Irrigation. a. When a Landscaping Plan is required, as described in Section 21A.48.050, street trees shall be irrigated with a permanent automatic irrigation system. b. Street tree irrigation systems are the responsibility of the abutting property owner to install and maintain. It shall provide water adequately and efficiently to each street tree, as determined by the Salt Lake City Urban Forestry Division. E. Irrigation Systems: 1. Shall be maintained in good operating condition to eliminate water waste or run-off into the public right-of-way. 2. Shall be appropriate for the designated plant material and achieves the highest water efficiency. 3. All irrigation systems, including drip irrigation shall be equipped with a pressure regulator, filter, flush-end assembly, and backflow preventer. 4. Each valve shall irrigate landscaping with similar site, slope, soil conditions, and similar watering needs. 5. Turf and planting beds shall be irrigated on separate irrigation valves; and, 6. Drip emitters and sprinklers shall be placed on separate irrigation valves. 7. Irrigation systems are required to use an irrigation controller that can automatically adjust the frequency and duration of irrigation in response to changing weather conditions and have a US-EPA WaterSense label. 8. Any fountain, pond, and other similar water feature supplied through the culinary water system shall have a recirculating system. 47 9. Backflow preventer assemblies shall be designed and installed and maintained according to the standards as outlined in the “Salt Lake City Landscape BMPs For Water Resource Efficiency and Protection” or the documents’ successor. 21A.48.050: LANDSCAPE PLAN: A. Landscape Plan Required: A landscape plan shall be required for the following: 1. New construction of a primary structure. 2. Any addition, expansion or intensification of a property that increases the floor area by 50% or more, increases the number of parking stalls required by 50% or more, or modifies any required landscaping by 50% or more. Single- and two- family uses are exempt from this provision. 3. When required elsewhere in this title. B. Modifications to an Approved Landscape Plan: Any change to an approved landscape plan requires the approval of the zoning administrator, except for changes from one plant species to another plant species that have similar watering needs and meet all other standards within this chapter. C. Unauthorized Modifications: Landscape improvements made to a lot that are not authorized and not in conformance with a required and approved landscape plan shall be a violation of this title, and subject to the fines and penalties established in Chapter 21A.20. D. Contents of a Complete Landscape Plan: A complete landscape plan shall include at least the following information unless specifically waived by the zoning administrator. All plans shall be drawn at the same scale: 1. Planting Plan: a. Property lines, easements, and street names. b. Location and dimensions of existing and proposed structures, parking lots, drive aisles, and fencing. c. Location of existing and proposed sidewalks, bicycle paths, ground signs, refuse disposal, freestanding electrical equipment, and all other structures. d. The location of existing buildings, structures, and trees on adjacent property within 20 feet of the site. e. The location, size, and common names of all existing trees. f. Sight distance triangles at curb cuts or corners, as defined and illustrated in Chapter 21A.62. g. Root Zone Protection Plan required when construction work will occur near a street tree or other protected tree and is subject to approval from the Urban Forestry Division. h. Minimum tree soil standards set by the Salt Lake City Urban Forestry Division. i. The location, quantity, size at maturity, and name (botanical and common) of proposed plants and trees. j. Summary table that specifies the following for each landscaping location separately: 48 (1) Area and percentage of each required landscape location. (2) Area and percentage of each landscape location covered in turf grasses, impervious surfaces. (3) Area and percentage of each landscape location covered in adapted or native plant species and adapted or native trees at maturity. k. A signature by a Landscape Architect licensed with the State of Utah, or an US- EPA WaterSense certified professional verifying planting plan compliance with the standards of this chapter. 2. Grading Plan: a. Property lines, street names, existing and proposed structures, turf areas, and paved areas. b. Existing and proposed grading of the site indicating contours at 2-foot intervals. c. Any proposed berming shall be indicated using 1-foot contour intervals. d. Delineate and label areas with a grade greater than 25% (4 feet Horizonal: 1 foot Vertical). 3. Irrigation Plan: a. Layout of the irrigation system and a legend summarizing the type and size of all components of the system. b. Delineate and label each hydrozone in accordance with the Salt Lake City Plant List and Hydrozone Schedule. c. Location and coverage of individual sprinkler heads. d. Use of a water efficient irrigation system. e. Type of US-EPA WaterSense automatic controller. f. A signature by a Landscape Architect licensed with the State of Utah, or an US- EPA WaterSense certified professional verifying irrigation plan compliance with the standards of this chapter. g. Separate plans from the irrigation plan are required for: (1) Backflow Prevention Plan. (2) Water Feature Recirculating Plan, if applicable. E. Specific Landscape Regulations: Various zoning districts in this title have specific landscaping regulations in addition to the requirements found in this chapter. Refer to the respective zoning district for specific landscaping regulations. Landscape plans for properties subject to zoning district specific landscape regulations shall be in compliance with all applicable landscape and district specific requirements. F. Compliance Certification: A letter of compliance shall be prepared and submitted to the city upon completion of the landscape plan installation and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or commencement of the use of the property. Compliance certification shall be signed by a landscape architect licensed with the State of Utah, or an 49 US-EPA WaterSense certified professional verifying that all landscape plan elements have been installed in compliance with the approved landscape plan. G. Planting Season Installation: The landscape plan installation may be delayed until the next optimal planting season. A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) may be issued and subsequent TCO fees waived between October 15 and the following April 1 where it is not favorable to install landscaping. The landscape plan shall be installed, and a letter of compliance submitted within 30 days following April 1. Temporary Certificate of Occupancy fees pursuant to Section 18.32.035 of this code shall be reinstated where no letter of compliance is submitted by the end of the 30-day period. 21A.48.060: LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: A. Landscape Locations: 1. Applicability: The following graphics illustrate required landscape locations that are regulated by the standards identified in this chapter. 2. Landscape Yards: All required front and corner side yards shall be maintained as landscaped yards, unless otherwise exempted in this title. 3. Landscape Buffers: Landscape buffers and freeway buffers may be located within a required side or rear yard. 4. Coverage and Quantity calculations: a. Vegetation coverage is measured at plant maturity. b. The total area of an existing tree canopy, or a tree canopy at the time of planting, may be included in the vegetation coverage calculations of the required landscaping location the tree is within. c. Fractional landscaping quantities shall be measured to the nearest whole number. d. Streets, drives and sidewalks necessary for reasonable access may be excluded from impervious surface calculations. e. Park strip standards shall be applied cumulatively along the adjacent street frontage. Lots with park strips on 2 or more street frontages shall be calculated separately for each street frontage. 5. Conflicting Standards: a. Where there are conflicting standards in this chapter, the more restrictive requirements shall apply. b. Where the standards in this chapter conflict with specific district regulations, the specific district regulations shall prevail. 2 12. Landscaping and Revegetation: a. Installation of all required landscaping shall begin no later than one month after a certificate of occupancy; except that if the certificate of occupancy is issued between October 15 and the following April 1, installation of the landscaping shall begin no later than April 30. Landscaping shall be substantially completed within nine (9) months after a certificate of occupancy is issued. Landscaping shall conform to the requirements of Chapter 21A.48 of this title, and shall also conform to the following requirements: (1) Front Yards and Side Yards: Front yards, corner side yards and interior side yards shall be completely landscaped except for driveways, walkways and patios/decks. (2) Disturbed Areas: All other areas disturbed during construction shall be either landscaped or revegetated to a natural state. (3) Undevelopable Areas: Lawns or gardens are prohibited in the undevelopable areas. Native and drought tolerant plant species established in undevelopable areas may be enhanced by irrigation and supplemental planting as approved by the zoning administrator, provided the zoning administrator finds that such supplemental planting is in keeping with the natural conditions. b. Special Landscape Regulations in the FR-1/43,560 and FR-2/21,780 Districts: In addition to the regulations in Chapter 21A.48 “Landscaping and Buffers” the following special landscape regulations apply: (1) Landscape Plan: In addition to the landscape plan submittal requirements listed in Section 21A.48.050, landscape plans shall also include: (a) Delineation between the proposed revegetation of disturbed site areas. (b) As a condition of site plan approval, a plan for erosion. (c) An irrigation plan designed to provide sufficient water for at least the first two years of growth to establish revegetation of natural areas. (2) Tree Preservation and Replacement: Existing trees over 2 inches in caliper that are removed from the site to accommodate development shall be replaced. Whenever microclimate conditions make it practical, the proportion of replacement tree species shall be the same as the trees removed. (3) Slope Revegetation: All slopes graded or otherwise disturbed shall be restored/replanted. Restored vegetation shall consist of native or adapted grasses, herbaceous perennials, or woody trees and shrubs as appropriate for slope and microclimate conditions. SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.24.020.I. That Subsection 21A.24.020.I of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: FR-1/43,560 Foothills Estate Residential District: Landscape Plan), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 5 L Minimum lot size2 2,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit 1,500 sq. ft. per dwelling unit 5,000 sq. ft. per building DU Maximum Dwelling Units per Form 1 2 8 6 8 per development 1 n/a BC Maximum Building Coverage 50% LY Required Landscaped Yards The front and corner side yards shall be maintained as landscape yards. LB Landscape Buffers per Chapter 21A.48 X X X G Attached Garages Garage doors accessed from the front or corner side yard shall be no wider than 50% of the front facade of the structure and set back at least 5’ from the street facing building facade and at least 20’ from the property line. Interior side loaded garages are permitted. DS Design Standards All new buildings are subject to applicable design standards in Chapter 21A.37 of this title. 0 32 Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) X Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) X Primary entrance design SNB District (21A.37.050.O) X Tree canopy coverage (%)(21A.37.050.P.1) 40 Street trees (21A.37.050.P.2) X Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.3) X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.4) X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.5) X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent buildings (21A.37.050.Q) Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) X Notes: 1. These standards only apply to the portion of the CG district within the boundaries of north of 900 S, south of 200 S, west 300 W and east of I-15. 2. Maximum width of the entrance shall be 35’ if the additional 20% is used for an entrance to a parking structure. 50 B. Park Strip Standards: Park Strips Street Trees Minimum of 1 street tree planted on center between back of street curb and the sidewalk. Additional street trees shall be provided at the following rate per each frontage length: 1 small tree per 20 feet, or 1 medium tree per 30 feet, or 1 large tree per 40 feet. The largest tree that is appropriate to the park strip size shall be used. 1, 2 Vegetation Minimum 33% coverage. Turf Prohibited Impervious Surfaces The combination of all paving materials shall not exceed 20% of the total park strip area. 1. Street trees shall be an appropriate species chosen from the Urban Forestry Street Tree List based on park strip size, shall have sufficient separation from public utilities, and shall be approved by the Urban Forestry Division. 2. Park strips with a width of 36” or less are exempt from this provision. C. Landscape Yard Standards 1. Residential Districts (all districts included in Chapter 21A.24): 51 Landscape Yards Vegetation Minimum 33% coverage. Turf Maximum 33% 1 (Landscape yard areas less than 250 sq. ft. are exempt) Impervious Surfaces Maximum 20% 1. Turf limitations established in 21A.48.080.B shall apply. 2. Manufacturing Districts (all districts included in Chapter 21A.28): Landscape Yards Vegetation Minimum 33% coverage. Turf Prohibited. Impervious Surfaces Maximum 20% up to a maximum of 1,200 sq. ft. 3. All Other Districts Not Included in Chapters 21A.24 and 21A.28: Landscape Yards Vegetation Minimum 33% coverage (may be decreased if specified within specific district regulations). Turf Only permitted in active recreation areas. 1 Impervious Surfaces Maximum 20% (may be increased if specified within specific district regulations). 1. Turf limitations established in Subsection 21A.48.080.B shall apply. D. Landscape Buffer Standards: District When Abutting 1 Required Landscape / Freeway Buffer Widths All districts (except Single- and Two- Family, Foothill, Special Development Pattern, SNB, FB-UN1, and those districts listed below that require a greater buffer width) Single- and Two- Family, Foothill, & Special Development 10’ All districts Freeway 2 20’ All other non-residential districts (except SNB, FB- UN1, and those districts listed below that require a greater buffer width) RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45, & RMF- 75 10’ 52 M-1 Any district that allows residential uses, AG districts, & OS 15’ M-2 Any district that allows residential uses 50’ AG districts & OS 30’ BP & RP All residential districts (in Chapter 21A.24) 30’ EI All districts 30’ MH All districts 20’ 1. Or when required elsewhere by this title. 2. The zoning administrator may approve a reduced freeway buffer if there’s an existing sound wall or required off-street parking cannot be met. If such a reduction is necessary, the buffer may not be less than 10’ in width. Landscape Buffer Standards 1 tree for every 30 linear feet of landscape buffer. 1 shrub every 3 feet, with a mature height of no less than 4’, along the entire length of the buffer. A 6-foot solid fence along the length of the required landscape buffer unless modified by the zoning administrator to better meet the fence height provisions in Section 21A.40.120. Turf is limited to active recreation areas. Freeway Landscape Buffer Standards (buffer standards for those properties abutting a freeway) 1 tree for every 15 linear feet of required freeway landscape buffer. Trees shall be staggered along the length of the buffer. 100% coverage required, may include adapted or native grasses, wildflower, and shrubs. Turf is prohibited. 21A.48.070: PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING: A. Applicability: 1. Hard surfaced parking lots with 15 or more parking spaces shall provide landscaping in accordance with the provisions of this section. The following graphic depicts landscape location required and corresponding standards identified in this chapter. 2. Parking lots with less than 15 parking spaces are exempt from parking lot landscaping but shall provide the required landscape yards and landscape buffers. B. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping: 1. Minimum Area: A minimum of 5% of the parking lot shall be interior parking lot landscaping in the locations identified below and dispersed throughout the parking 53 lot. Landscaping areas located along the perimeter of a parking lot shall not be included toward satisfying this requirement. 2. Location: Interior landscape areas shall be provided in the following locations: a. At each end of a parking row containing 6 stalls or more, where not abutting required perimeter landscaping. b. Parallel to parking lot stalls, at a rate of 1 interior landscape area for every 6 parking spaces, or along the interior length of double-loaded parking rows. 3. Size: Interior landscape areas shall have a minimum width equal to the width of average parking stall within the parking lot, as measured from the inside of the curbing, and shall have a minimum length equal to the length of the abutting parking spaces. Where interior landscape areas do not abut parking spaces, a minimum length of 10’ is required. 4. Planting Requirements: Interior Landscape Areas Shade trees A minimum of 1 tree is required per interior landscape area. Additional trees are required at a rate of 1 tree for every additional 140 square feet in each required interior landscape area. Shrubs A minimum of 2 shrubs are required per interior landscape area. Additional shrubs are required at a rate of 2 shrubs for every additional 140 square feet in each landscape area. Adapted or native ornamental grasses or wildflowers with a minimum height of 3’ may be used as an alternative. Ground cover / Mulch Landscape area outside of shrub masses shall be established in ground cover or mulched consistent with the standards of this chapter. Turf is prohibited. 10 b. Fencing shall consist of wrought iron or other similar material (chainlink is prohibited); and c. Fencing shall be open so as not to create a visual barrier, and shall be limited to a maximum of 4 feet in height, with the exception of a fence located within a sight distance on any corner lot as noted in Section 21A.40.120 of this title. The approval of a building permit shall be delegated to the building official with the input of the planning director, to determine if the fencing materials, location, and height are compatible with adjacent properties in a given setting. D. Outdoor Sales, Display and Storage: “Sales and display (outdoor)” and “storage and display (outdoor)”, as defined in Chapter 21A.62 of this title, are allowed where specifically authorized in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title. These uses shall conform to the following: 1. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not encroach into areas of required parking for periods longer than 30 days; 2. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not be located in any required yard area within the lot when the required yard abuts a residential zoning district; 3. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not include the use of banners, pennants or strings of pennants; 4. Outdoor storage shall be allowed only where specifically authorized in the applicable district regulation and shall be required to be fully screened with opaque fencing not to exceed eight feet in height; and 5. Outdoor sales and display and outdoor storage shall also be permitted when part of an authorized temporary use as established in Chapter 21A.42 of this title. E. Restrictions on Parking Lots and Structures: An excessive amount of at or above ground parking lots and structures can negatively impact the urban design objectives of the Downtown zoning districts. To control such impacts, the following regulations apply to surface parking and above grade structures: 1. Parking shall be located behind principal buildings or incorporated into the principal building provided the parking is wrapped on street facing facades with a use allowed in the zone other than parking. 2. A parking lot shall not consist of more than two double-loaded parking aisles (bays) adjacent to each other. The length of a parking lot shall not exceed 10 stalls. Parking for government facilities necessary for public health and safety are exempt from this provision. Illustration of Regulation 21A.010.E.2 Surface Parking Lots 13 I. Additional Standards: All uses in the downtown districts shall comply with the standards set in Part IV, Regulations of General Applicability, of this title, including the applicable standards in the following chapters: 1. 21A.36 General Provisions 2. 21A.37 Design Standards 3. 21A.38 Nonconforming Uses and Noncomplying Structures 4. 21A.40 Accessory Uses, Buildings, and Structures 5. 21A.42 Temporary Uses 6. 21A.44 Off Street Parking, Mobility, and Loading 7. 21A.46 Signs 8. 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers 9. Any other applicable chapter of this title that may include applicable provisions. SECTION 15. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.30.020.C. That Subsection 21A.30.020.C of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Downtown Districts: D-1 Central Business District), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: C. D-1 District General Regulations: The regulations established in this section apply to the D-1 District as a whole. 1. Yard Requirements: No minimum yards are required. A maximum yard of eight feet is allowed. a. If provided, the yard must include one of the following elements: i. Seating at a ratio of at least one bench for every 500 square feet of yard space; or ii. Landscaping that includes an increase of at least 25% in the total number of trees required to be planted on the site; or iii. Awning or a similar form of weather protection that covers at least five feet in width and length from all street-facing building entrances. b. Exceptions to this requirement may be authorized through the design review process, subject to the requirements of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. c. The planning director, in consultation with the transportation director, may modify this requirement to accommodate a wider sidewalk if the adjacent public sidewalk is less than 15’ wide and the resulting modification to the setback results in a more efficient public sidewalk. The planning director may waive this requirement for any addition, expansions, or intensification, which increases the floor area or parking requirement by less than 50% if the planning director finds the following: 54 5. Modifications to Interior Parking Lot Landscaping: The zoning administrator may waive interior landscape area requirements if a solar energy system is integrated into 55 the roof structure of a carport, or if the parking lot perimeter landscaping width is increased to 15’ and with an equal number of trees, as required in the interior, and perimeter parking lot landscaping, are provided. C. Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping: 1. Applicability: Landscaping along the perimeter of the parking lot shall be provided when the parking lot is located: a. Within a required yard (where permitted in Sections 21A.44.060 or 21A.36.020) b. Within 20 feet of a lot line; or c. Abutting a principal building. 2. Where both landscape buffers and perimeter parking lot landscaping are required, the more restrictive shall apply. 3. Where a surface parking lot is adjacent to another surface parking lot, on the same or separate parcels or lots, the perimeter parking lot landscaping provision may be waived by the zoning administrator if the required number trees are located elsewhere within the development. 4. Size: a. In a required yard or within 20 feet of a property line: 8 feet in width, as measured from the back of the parking lot curb and extending into any parking space overhang area. b. Abutting a building on the same property: A minimum 5-foot-wide required landscaping and 3-foot walkway shall be required to buffer buildings from parking spaces. 5. Planting Requirements: Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping: Shade Tress 1 tree per 300 square feet of perimeter parking lot area. Trees may be clustered or spaced throughout the landscaping areas. Perimeter landscaping abutting a building does not need to be included in the square footage calculation.1 Shrubs 1 shrub per 3 feet, on center, along 100 percent of the yard length. Shrubs with mature height not more than 3 feet Ground cover / Mulch Required landscaping outside of shrub masses shall be established in ground cover or mulched consistent with the standards of this chapter. Turf is prohibited. Parking Lot Fences/Walls: Fences or walls along parking lot perimeters may be required to satisfy landscape buffer requirements outlined in Section 21A.48.060 of this chapter. 1. Required perimeter trees species shall be chosen from the Urban Forestry Street Tree List and shall be approved by the Salt Lake City Urban Forestry Division. 56 D. Curbing: Concrete curbing shall be installed at the perimeter of internal landscape areas and perimeter parking where parking lots vehicular access aisles or stalls directly abuts required landscaping. Biodetention areas are exempt from curbing requirements, however a vehicle stop is required when biodetention areas directly abut parking stalls. E. Biodetention in Parking Lot Interior and Perimeter Landscaping Areas: Retention of the 80th percentile storm is required for all impervious surface parking lots with 50 or more parking spaces. Where this is not feasible, as defined in the SLCDPUs Standard Practices Manual, an approved Stormwater Best Management Practices (Stormwater BMPs) is required. All proposed Stormwater BMPs are subject to Public Utilities Division review, approval, and inspection. F. Stormwater BMP Approval Required: A SLC Approved Stormwater Best Management Practice (Stormwater BMP) for all hard surfaced parking lots is required prior to discharge to the public storm drain and gutter, as required in Subsection 21A.44.060.A.2: 1. All Stormwater BMPs are subject to Public Utilities Division review, approval, and inspection. 2. Plantings within BMPs are to be drought tolerant, salt tolerant, winter hardy, and able to be submerged. 21A.48.080. GENERAL STANDARDS 57 All required landscape plans shall be prepared based on the following standards. All landscape improvements in the required landscape locations, as described in Sections 21A.48.060 and 21A.48.070 shall meet the regulations described in this section. A. Installation: All landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the current planting procedures established by the American Association of Nurserymen. The installation of all plants required by this chapter may be delayed until the next optimal planting season, as determined by the zoning administrator. 1. At the time of planting: a. Deciduous Trees: All deciduous trees shall have a minimum trunk size of 1.5 inches in caliper. b. Evergreen Trees: All evergreen trees shall have a minimum size of 5 feet in height. c. Shrubs: All shrubs shall have a minimum height or spread of 10 inches depending on the plant’s natural growth habit, unless otherwise specified. Plants in 2-gallon containers will generally comply with this standard. B. General Landscaping Standards: 1. Drought Tolerant or Native Species: 100% of required shrubs, perennial plants, and groundcover used on a site shall be drought tolerant, adapted or native species. The city has compiled a list titled “Salt Lake City Plant List & Hydrozone Schedule”, established and maintained by Public Utilities, shall be used to satisfy this requirement. Other plants that are not on the list but are considered drought tolerant, adapted or native and require similar watering needs may also be used. 2. Turf: Turf is not permitted: a. In the park strip. b. In parking lot perimeter and interior landscaping areas. c. In areas that are less than 8 feet in any dimension at the narrowest point. d. In areas with a slope greater than 25% (4 feet horizontal: 1 foot vertical). e. In required landscape buffer areas. 3. Mulch: Mulch shall be: a. At least 3 inches in depth, b. Used in areas that are not covered with landscaping. c. Permeable to air and water. d. Permanent fiber barriers, plastic sheeting, or other impervious barriers are prohibited as an underlayment. e. Crushed rubber is prohibited. f. Rock used as a mulch material is limited to 20% of an area where landscaping is required by this chapter. 18 4. Limits on Turf: To minimize the impact on the natural landscape and promote the intent of this district, the area of turf grasses shall not exceed 33% of the area to be landscaped and shall not encroach into undevelopable areas. 5. Slope Revegetation: All slopes graded or otherwise disturbed shall be restored/replanted. Restored vegetation shall consist of native or adapted grasses, herbaceous perennials, or woody trees and shrubs as appropriate for slope, soil and microclimate conditions. SECTION 18. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.32.130.I. That Subsection 21A.32.130.I of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Special Purpose Districts: MU Mixed Use District: Landscape Buffers), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: I. Landscape Buffers: Where a nonresidential or mixed use lot abuts a residential or vacant lot within the MU Mixed Use District or any Residential District, a 10’ landscape buffer shall be provided subject to the improvement requirements of Chapter 21A.48 of this title. SECTION 19. Amending the Text of Section 21A.34.030. That Section 21A.34.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: T Transitional Overlay District), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.34.030: T TRANSITIONAL OVERLAY DISTRICT: A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the T Transitional Overlay District is to allow for the redevelopment of certain older residential areas for limited commercial and light industrial uses. This district is intended to provide a higher level of control over such activity to ensure that the use and enjoyment of existing residential properties is not substantially diminished by future nonresidential redevelopment. The intent of this district shall be achieved by designating certain nonresidential uses as conditional uses within the overlay district and requiring future redevelopment to comply with established standards for compatibility and buffering as set forth in this section. B. District Locational Criteria: Residential areas covered by the T Transitional Overlay District are characterized by: 1. A land use designation in the city’s General Plan identifying reuse or redevelopment for nonresidential uses; 2. The presence of external influences, such as proximity to expressways, railroad tracks and incompatible uses, which impact the long term viability of residential use; and 3. Deteriorating housing stock. 20 adopted mixed use development policies and for the planning commission to assess the impacts to the existing neighborhood. The following specific information shall also be provided in the application: 1. The amount of employee, customer or other business related traffic (i.e., delivery and pick up) expected to be generated by the proposed use; 2. Traffic impact analysis determining the anticipated effect on contiguous streets and necessary improvements to the street network required to maintain an acceptable level of service for the neighborhood; 3. The location and design of vehicular access to the proposed use, the amount of off street parking facilities, and the location, arrangement and dimensions of loading and unloading facilities; 4. Hours of operation of the business; 5. The amount of noise, noxious odors, fumes or vibration anticipated from the proposed use; 6. Schematic elevations of all building facades indicating building materials, entries, loading docks, signage and building height; 7. Schematic landscape plan. J. Standards: In evaluating the suitability of a proposed conditional use, the planning commission shall consider the following standards: 1. In addition to all the requirements, standards and criteria established for the transitional overlay district, each conditional use must satisfy the requirements of Chapter 21A.54, “Conditional Uses”, of this title. 2. The applicant has the burden of establishing to the planning commission that the proposed conditional use meets the purposes of the transitional overlay district. SECTION 20. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.34.040.FF. That Subsection 21A.34.040.FF of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: AFPP Airport Flight Path Protection Overlay District: Airport Parking Lot Landscaping), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: FF. Airport Parking Lot Landscaping: All parking lots located within the airport landscaping overlay district shall comply with the following guidelines: 1. General Landscaping Performance Standards: Landscaping plans for parking lots shall be developed to reflect a balance between the responsibility of ensuring the safety and security of persons and property with the objective of creating aesthetically pleasing, environmentally sensitive landscapes. Landscaping should address city goals related to reduction of urban heat islands, visual buffering of parking lots, impacts of noise, water conservation, as well as minimization of dust, runoff and sedimentation. Landscaping shall consist of a variety of landscape materials, which may include trees, ground cover, shrubs, perennials, managed water features, and 58 4. Artificial turf is prohibited in any location where landscaping is regulated by this chapter. 5. Berming is prohibited in parking lot and park strip landscaping unless required in specific district regulations. C. Specific Park Strip Standards: In addition to General Landscape Standards these provisions shall apply to park strips. 1. Street Trees: a. Substitutions. The Urban Forester may approve a substitute of the required street tree provision for a cash in lieu payment if the number of required trees cannot be met due to conflicts related to public utilities or right-of-way regulations. A cash in lieu payment, in the amount of cost to purchase and plant the required number of street trees, shall be contributed to the city’s Tree Fund; b. Tree Grates: If new street trees are proposed in a location where the area surrounding the tree will have an impervious surface, tree wells with grates shall be provided with adequate dimensions and sufficient soil volume to accommodate the proposed tree species, subject to review by the Urban Forestry Division. c. Tree Root Protection: Rock or gravel shall maintain a 2-foot separation from the trunk of a street tree. 2. Vegetation with Thorned, Spined, or Other Sharp Rigid Parts: Vegetation with thorns, spines, or other sharp, rigid parts hazardous to pedestrians and bicyclists, and difficult to walk across are prohibited within 3 feet of a curb, sidewalk, walkway, or driveway. 3. Storm Drain Protection: a. Rock or gravel shall be set at or below top back of curb or abutting sidewalk grade. b. Rock or gravel shall have 1 inch or greater diameter. Grades abutting public streets exceeding 4%, as indicated by Public Utilities Division’s “4% Grade Streets Map”, shall have rock or gravel 3 inch or greater diameter. 4. Pathways: Impervious surface pathways provided between the curb and sidewalk, are permitted subject to the following: a. Shall not be more than 5 feet in width and shall be located to provide the most direct route from curb to sidewalk. b. A maximum of 1 pathway per 20 linear feet of park strip is permitted. c. The pathway area shall be included in impervious surface percentage calculation. 59 5. Stormwater Curb Controls: Integration of LID (Low Impact Development) practices are encouraged in park strip areas. Stormwater curb cuts are permitted to allow stormwater to enter the landscaped area subject to the following provisions: a. The design and construction of the stormwater curb cut shall comply with the SLCDPU Standards Practices Manual. b. All stormwater curb controls are subject to Public Utilities Division review and approval. 6. Encroachments in the Right-of-Way: Structural encroachments are only permitted when specifically approved by city divisions and applicable decision-making bodies (or their designee) and may require an encroachment permit . a. All encroachments are subject to the following standards, unless specifically allowed elsewhere in this title: (1) Any raised structure shall be setback from the curb a minimum of 24 inches, (2) There are no other practical locations for the structure on the private property, and (3) The proposed structures will serve the general public and are part of general public need, or the proposed structures are necessary for the functional use of the property. b. Bus Stops and Bike Share Stations: Concrete pads for bus stop benches and/or shelters and bike share stations may be permitted with zoning administrator approval. Impervious surface limitations may be modified upon review. c. Outdoor Dining: Park strip materials and structural standards may be modified by the Zoning Administrator when outdoor dining is approved pursuant to Section 21A.40.065 of this title. d. Bike Paths: Bike paths that are separated from the travel lanes with cars are permitted in any existing park strip. Any space between the bike path and the sidewalk and/or curb of the travel lanes are subject to the requirements of this section. 21A.48.090: PRIVATE LANDS TREE PRESERVATION: A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of these tree preservation provisions is to recognize and protect the valuable asset embodied in the trees that exist on private lands within the city and ensure that the existing trees of Salt Lake City continue to provide benefit to its citizens. Essential to effective tree preservation is the understanding of tree growth requirements having to do with space, water, and soil quality needs, among other qualities. Good, early planning, site design, and construction management practices are key to allowing trees to prosper. Preconstruction planning and mitigation of potential impacts that development may have on trees is necessary and one of the purposes of this section. Numerous community and personal benefits arise from the presence of trees in urbanized areas - both on residential and nonresidential lands - and it is the intent of this section through the preservation of the trees to: 6 SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Section 21A.26.010. That Section 21A.26.010 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: General Provisions), shall be and hereby is amended as follows: a. That Subsection 21A.26.010.C.1 shall be amended to read as follows: C. Impact Controls and General Restrictions in the Commercial Districts: 1. Refuse Control: Temporary storage of refuse materials shall be limited to that produced on the premises. Refuse containers must be covered and shall be stored within completely enclosed buildings or screened in conformance with the requirements of Section 21A.40.120 of this title. For buildings existing as of April 12, 1995, this screening provision shall be required if the floor area or parking requirements are increased by twenty five percent (25%) or more by an expansion to the building or change in the type of land use. b. That Subsection 21A.26.010.H shall be amended to read as follows: H. Landscaping and Buffering: The landscaping and buffering requirements for the commercial districts shall be as specified in Chapter 21A.48 of this title. SECTION 6. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.26.020.G. That Subsection 21A.26.020.G of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: CN Neighborhood Commercial District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: G. Landscape Yard Requirements: Front and corner side yards shall be maintained as landscape yards, conforming to the requirements of Chapter 21A.48. Subject to site plan review approval, part or all of the landscape yard may be a patio or plaza. SECTION 7. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.26.025.G. That Subsection 21A.26.025.G of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: SNB Small Neighborhood Business District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 60 1. Enhance the quality of life in the city and protect public health and safety; 2. Preserve and enhance the visual and aesthetic qualities of the city; 3. Enhance public and private property for greater enjoyment and usability due to the shade, cooling, and the aesthetic beauty afforded by trees; 4. Protect and improve the real estate values of the city; 5. Preserve and enhance air and water quality; 6. Reduce noise, glare, dust, and heat, and moderate climate, including urban heat island effect; 7. Increase slope stability, and control erosion and sediment runoff into streams and waterways; 8. Protect the natural habitat and ecosystems of the city; 9. Conserve energy by reducing heating and cooling costs; and 10. Preserve the function of mature trees to absorb greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide. B. Applicability: 1. General: The standards in this section shall apply to new development in the city unless exempted in accordance with Subsection C, “Exemptions”, of this section. The standards in this section shall apply at the time of a development application for “development” as defined in the zoning ordinance. 2. Other Regulations: Title 2, Chapter 2.26 of this code, the Salt Lake City urban forestry ordinance, addressing the protection of trees located on public property owned by the city and in rights of way, shall remain in effect. 3. Specimen Trees: The city forester shall maintain a list of trees or tree types that are deemed to be specimen trees subject to Subsection E, “Standards”, of this section. C. Exemptions: The following specimen tree removal activities may be exempt from the standards of this section upon confirmation and approval by the city forester: 1. The removal of dead, damaged, or naturally fallen trees, or in cases of community emergency; 2. When in conjunction with the construction of a single- or two- family residence not part of a proposed new subdivision; 3. The removal of trees on an existing legal lot when not associated with new development; 4. The removal of trees in such a condition that they pose a threat to structures or natural features on the site, on adjoining properties, or in the public right of way; 5. The removal of diseased trees posing a threat to adjacent trees; 6. The selective and limited removal of trees necessary to obtain clear visibility at driveways or intersections; 7. The removal of trees associated with development at the Salt Lake City International Airport only as necessary to provide safe operations; 8. The removal of trees when requested by the city forester for the purposes of conflict with utilities or streets; and 27 2. Street Trees: All new development must provide street trees in accordance with the requirements in Chapter 21A.48. Where specified in Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter, for every new development, there shall be one street tree planted for every 30’ of street frontage. 3. Soil Volume: In order to promote street tree health and longevity, each tree shall have an adequate volume of soil. The soil volume surrounding a tree shall be 750ft 3 to 1,000ft3 per tree, provided that this area is exclusive of the soils volume calculation for adjacent trees. The soil volume may be reduced if under ground utilities are present within the soil volume and the soil volume cannot be extended horizontally due to other obstructions or barriers. 4. Minimize Curb Cuts: As an effort to emphasize the public realm and encourage the safety of pedestrians, places where cars intersect the street shall be minimized. More specifically, curb cuts are encouraged to be concentrated at midblock and alley locations. The sidewalk material shall continue at ground level of the curb cuts. 1 No tree canopy coverage shall cover less than the specified percentage according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.3 Soil Volume 1 The soil volume surrounding a tree shall be 750ft3 to 1,000ft3 per tree, provided that this area is exclusive of the soils volume calculation for adjacent trees. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.4 Minimize Curb Cuts 61 9. The removal of trees deemed appropriate by the city forester, based on tree species, site conditions, or other variables. D. Standards: 1. Preservation of Specimen Trees: Specimen trees shall be preserved to the maximum extent practicable as determined by the city forester, in consultation with the zoning administrator, unless exempted pursuant to Subsection C, “Exemptions”, of this section. a. In determining if preservation is impracticable, the city shall consider the following criteria, including, but not limited to: (1) Whether an alternative location or configuration of the development including elements such as parking or structures on the site would be feasible to accomplish tree preservation, without negatively impacting adjacent properties, (2) Whether preservation of the specimen tree would render all permitted development on the property infeasible, or (3) If development of the property will provide significant community benefits that outweigh tree preservation. b. The zoning administrator may modify any dimensional standard, such as setbacks and height limits, by up to 20% if such modification will result in preservation of a specimen tree. 2. Cutting, Removal, or Damage Prohibited: Specimen trees, required to be preserved, shall not be cut, removed, pushed over, killed, or otherwise damaged. 3. Paving, Fill, Excavation, or Soil Compaction Prohibited: The tree protection zone of any protected specimen tree shall not be subjected to paving, filling, excavation, or soil compaction. 4. Mitigation: Where the city determines it is not practicable to preserve a specimen tree on the development site, the following mitigation provisions shall apply. a. Replacement Tree Required: 2 caliper inches of replacement trees shall be provided for each dbh of specimen tree removed (for example, if a 24 inch dbh specimen tree is removed, it must be replaced with at least 24 trees of a minimum 2 inch caliper or 8 trees with a 6 inch caliper). Each replacement tree shall be a minimum of 2 inches in caliper, and shall either be replanted prior to certificate of occupancy or within a conditional time frame as approved by the city forester. Consult the “Salt Lake City Plant List and Hydrozone Schedule” for recommendations on tree selection. Replacement trees shall be planted on the lot or site where the specimen tree was removed except where the city forester, in consultation with the zoning administrator, finds the following: 62 (1) The site does not provide for adequate landscape surface area to accommodate the total number of replacement trees; or (2) That due to unique soil types, topography, or unusual characteristics of the site, the likelihood of successful tree growth is diminished. In such cases, the applicant shall mitigate for the loss of the specimen tree in the form of payment to the city’s tree fund as provided below. b. Cash in Lieu Payment/Tree Fund Contribution: Applicants who are permitted to remove a specimen tree but not plant a replacement tree on site shall make a cash in lieu payment, in the amount of the cost to purchase and plant the required number of replacement trees, into the city’s tree fund. E. Specimen Tree Protection During Construction: 1. Owner’s Responsibility: During construction, the owner of the property shall be responsible for the ongoing health of specimen trees located on the site. This includes basic tree maintenance and watering throughout the term of construction. The owner shall also ensure the erection of barriers necessary to protect any specimen tree from damage during and after construction. 2. Tree Protection Zone Fencing: Tree protection fencing shall be erected to protect all preserved trees from excavation, fill, compaction, or other impacts that would threaten tree health. Specimen trees shall be fenced in accordance with this subsection before any grading, excavating, or other land disturbing activity begins on a construction site. No construction, grading, equipment or material storage, or any other activity shall be allowed within the tree protection zone, as delineated by the required tree protection fencing, except in accordance with the standards in Subsection F.3, “Encroachments Into Tree Protection Zones and Root Zones”, of this section. Fencing shall be maintained until the land disturbance activities are complete, and shall not be removed or altered without first obtaining written consent from the city forester. The tree protection fencing shall be clearly shown on the required development applications such as a site plan, building permit, or grading permit application. a. Location: Fencing shall extend at least 1 foot in distance from the edge of the drip line of a specimen tree or group of specimen trees or as directed by the city forester to best protect a specimen tree’s critical root zone and still allow construction access. b. Type of Fencing: The developer shall erect a chainlink fence, a minimum of 4 feet in height, secured to metal posts driven into the ground. Such fencing shall be secured to withstand construction activity and weather on the site and shall be maintained in a functional condition for the duration of work on the property. This is not considered permanent fencing subject to Section 21A.40.120, “Regulation of Fences, Walls and Hedges”, of this title. c. Timing: All required tree protection measures shall be installed, inspected and approved by the city forester prior to the commencement of any land disturbing activities. 14 i. The architecture of the addition is compatible with the architecture of the original structure or the surrounding architecture, or ii. The addition reduces the extent of the noncompliance of the existing building. d. Regardless of the setback provided, doors shall be setback a minimum distance to allow the door to operate without swinging into a right of way or midblock walkway. e. Interior Side Yards: No minimum interior side yard is required. f. Rear Yard: No minimum rear yard is required. SECTION 16. Amending the Text of Section 21A.32.030. That Section 21A.32.030 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Special Purpose Districts: BP Business Park District), shall be and hereby is amended as follows: a. That Subsection 21A.32.030.E shall be amended to read as follows: E. Minimum Open Space Area: The minimum open space area for any use shall not be less than fifteen percent (15%) of the lot area. 1. At least thirty three percent (33%) of the required open space area shall be covered with vegetation. 2. All landscaped open space areas shall conform with the water efficient landscaping standards found in Chapter 21A.48 of this title. b. That Subsection 21A.32.030.I shall be amended to read as follows: I. Other District Regulations: In addition to the foregoing regulations, all uses shall comply with the following requirements: 1. Enclosed Operations: All principal uses shall take place within entirely enclosed buildings. 2. Outdoor Storage: Accessory outdoor storage shall be screened with a solid fence and approved through the site plan review process. 3. Nuisance Impacts: Uses and processes shall be limited to those that do not create a nuisance to the use and enjoyment of adjacent property due to odor, dust, smoke, gases, vapors, noise, light, vibration, refuse matter or water carried waste. The use of explosive or radioactive materials, or any other hazardous materials, shall conform to all applicable State or Federal regulations. 63 4. Encroachments Into Tree Protection Zones and Root Zones: Encroachments into a tree protection zone or within the critical root zones of trees protected in accordance with this subsection shall occur only in rare instances, and only upon obtaining written authorization from the city forester. If such encroachment is anticipated, tree preservation measures including, but not limited to, the following may be required: a. Tree Crown and/or Root Pruning: The pruning, or cutting, of specimen tree branches or roots shall only be done under the supervision of an ISA certified arborist, and only upon approval of the city forester. b. Soil Compaction Impact Mitigation: Where compaction might occur due to planned, temporary traffic through or materials placed within the protection zone, the area shall first be mulched with a minimum 4 inch layer of woodchips or a 6 inch layer of pine straw. Plywood sheet or metal plate coverage of the impacted area may be accepted by the city forester when high moisture conditions warrant. Equipment or materials storage shall not be allowed within the tree protection zone. c. Grade Change Impact Mitigation: In the event proposed site development requires soil elevation changes tree protection measures designed to mitigate harm to the tree(s) shall be coordinated with the city forester and the zoning administrator. d. Construction Debris/Effluent Strictly Prohibited: In no instance shall any debris or effluent, associated with the construction process, including equipment or vehicle washing, concrete mixing, pouring, or rinsing processes, be permitted to drain onto lands within tree protection zones, as delineated by the chainlink tree protection fencing. F. Enforcement: These tree preservation provisions shall be subject to the zoning and development enforcement codes as adopted by the city. 21A.48.100: APPEAL: Any person adversely affected by a final decision of the zoning administrator on a landscaping or buffer requirement may appeal to the appeals hearing officer in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 21A.16 of this title. SECTION 29. Amending the Text of 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. Amending the definition of “GROUND COVER.” That the definition of “GROUND COVER” shall be amended to read as follows: 33 C. Manufacturing Districts: Standard (Code Section) District M-1 M-2 Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G) Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) 64 GROUND COVER: Any perennial plant material species that generally does not exceed 12 inches in height, stabilizes soils and protects against erosion, and covers 100% of the ground all year. b. Amending the definition of “LANDSCAPE AREA.” That the definition of “LANDSCAPE AREA” shall be amended to read as follows: LANDSCAPE AREA: That portion of a lot devoted exclusively to landscaping, except streets, drives and sidewalks may be located within such an area to provide reasonable access. c. Amending the definition of “LANDSCAPING.” That the definition of “LANDSCAPING” shall be amended to read as follows: LANDSCAPING: The improvement of a lot, parcel or tract of land with vegetation such as ornamental grass, shrubs and trees. Landscaping may include pedestrian walks, flowerbeds, ornamental objects such as fountains, statuary, and other similar natural and artificial objects designed and arranged to produce an aesthetically pleasing effect. d. Amending the definition of “MULCH.” That the definition of “MULCH” shall be amended to read as follows: MULCH: Any material such as rock, bark, compost, wood chips or other materials left loose and applied to the soil, for the purposes of suppressing weeds, moderating soil temperature, and preventing soil erosion. e. Amending the definition of “PARK STRIP LANDSCAPING.” That the definition of “PARK STRIP LANDSCAPING” shall be amended to read as follows: PARK STRIP LANDSCAPING: The improvement of property within the street right-of-way situated between the back of curb and the sidewalk or, if there is no sidewalk, the back of curb and the right-of-way line, through the addition of plants and other organic and inorganic materials harmoniously combined to produce an effect appropriate for adjacent uses and compatible with the neighborhood. 65 f. Amending the definition of “PARKING LOT.” That the definition of “PARKING LOT” shall be amended to read as follows: PARKING LOT: An area on the surface of the land used for the parking and circulation of more than four (4) automobiles. g. Amending the definition of “TURF.” That the definition of “TURF” shall be amended to read as follows: TURF: Grasses planted as a ground cover that may be mowed and maintained to be used as a lawn area of landscaping. Does not include grasses that are listed in the Salt Lake City Plant List & Hydrozone Schedule. Inorganic substitutes commonly referred to as artificial turf are prohibited in required landscaping areas. h. Adding the definition of “ARTIFICIAL TURF.” That the definition of “ARTIFICIAL TURF” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: ARTIFICIAL TURF: A synthetically derived, grass substitute that simulates the appearance of natural live grass. i. Adding the definition of “CALIPER.” That the definition of “CALIPER” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: CALIPER: The dimension of the diameter of a tree trunk measured at a distance of 6 inches from the soil line. j. Adding the definition of “DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (dbh).” That the definition of “DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (dbh)” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (dbh): The dimension of the diameter of a tree trunk measured at a distance of 4 feet 6 inches from the ground. 21 rock features. Drought tolerant, native, or adapted vegetation, which reflects the natural vegetation and geography of the region, shall be used to create an aesthetically appealing landscape. 2. Reduction of Urban Heat Islands: The following standards are intended to help mitigate the contribution to the urban heat island effect from large parking areas. Parking lot owners or operators may use a combination of any of the following methods to reduce urban heat: a. The total airport parking supply shall consist of a combination of surface and structured parking lots. Structured parking shall offset the area of surface parking that is otherwise required, thereby reducing the area that contributes to urban heat. b. Landscaping within large land use areas may be evaluated in terms of a comprehensive planned development program to consider the total landscaping within the entire development area. Landscaping may be shifted from the interior of parking lots to other areas within the developed area. c. Landscaping, which includes trees, shrubs, ground cover and perennials, shall be dispersed throughout parking lots to provide shade while ensuring trees are not planted at a spacing or density that will encourage wildlife use or create an aviation hazard. d. Shade for pedestrians shall be provided in parking lots through the use of pedestrian shelters integrated with landscaping. e. Interior landscaped areas shall be provided in parking lots to reduce heat, provide a visual buffer and reduce runoff. f. No specific ratio of trees and shrubs to landscaped area is required. 3. Visual Buffering: Landscaped buffers, not less than 10’ in width, shall be provided, where feasible, between parking lots and primary entrance and exit roads. Visual screening shall be provided within landscape buffers to enhance aesthetics and reduce visibility of parked vehicles. Visual screening may consist of a combination of shrubs, trees or other methods. 4. Water Conservation: To promote water conservation, landscape concepts shall incorporate features that use trees, shrubs, ornamental grasses, ground cover, and perennials that are drought tolerant, native, or adapted species that can withstand dry conditions once established. The plant list developed by the city, titled “Water Conserving Plants for Salt Lake City”, shall be used as the primary reference in determining drought tolerance of plants. All irrigation systems shall be designed for efficient use of potable water. Traditional turf areas are prohibited. 5. Temporary Parking Lots: Parking lots that are intended to be in use for three years or less are exempt from parking lot landscaping requirements. Such parking lots may exist to phase the construction of other facilities and shall be removed once the facilities are completed. Temporary lots that are within the area of an approved comprehensive plan may remain in use for the duration approved in the plan. However, temporary parking lots shall still comply with applicable development standards for parking lots as outlined in Chapter 21A.44 of this title. Parking lots that remain in use by the public beyond three years shall be brought into compliance with these standards within 12 months. 66 k. Adding the definition of “IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.” That the definition of “IMPERVIOUS SURFACE” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: Any material that substantially reduces or prevents the infiltration of stormwater directly into the ground, including: asphalt, concrete, pavers, and brick. l. Adding the definition of “LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID).” That the definition of “LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID)” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID): Systems or practices that use or mimic natural processes that result in the infiltration, evapotranspiration, and/or use of stormwater to protect water quality and aquatic habitat. m. Adding the definition of “SHADE TREE.” That the definition of “SHADE TREE” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: SHADE TREE: Any tree that has a mature minimum tree canopy of 30 feet and a mature height that is 40 feet or greater. n. Adding the definition of “SPECIMEN TREE.” That the definition of “SPECIMEN TREE” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: SPECIMEN TREE: A structurally sound and healthy tree or grouping of trees, having an individual or combined dbh measuring greater than 10 inches; whose future vitality can be reasonably expected and maintained with proper protection and regularly scheduled care; and whose absence from the landscape would significantly alter the site’s appearance, environmental benefit, character or history. o. Adding the definition of “STORMWATER CURB CUT.” That the definition of “STORMWATER CURB CUT” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 67 STORMWATER CURB CUT: Openings created in the curb to allow storm water from an adjacent impervious surface to flow into a depressed planting area. p. Adding the definition of “TREE PROTECTION FENCING.” That the definition of “TREE PROTECTION FENCING” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: TREE PROTECTION FENCING: The fencing required to be installed, and maintained during construction activities, to delineate required tree protection zones. q. Adding the definition of “TREE PROTECTION ZONE.” That the definition of “TREE PROTECTION ZONE” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: TREE PROTECTION ZONE: The area of a development site that includes the area located within the drip line of specimen trees and also includes the area that supports tree health requirements and interactions as determined by the city forester. r. Deleting definitions. That the following definitions are hereby deleted from the definitions of terms: BMP BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE (BMP) (Applies Only To Chapter 21A.48 Of This Title) ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION PROJECT ET OR ETo ETAF EVAPOTRANSPIRATION (ET) RATE EVERGREEN LANDSCAPE BMPs MANUAL 68 OVERSPRAY PERENNIAL TIER 2 WATER TARGET TREASURED LANDSCAPE WATER BUDGET SECTION 30. Repealing the Text of Subsection 21A.62.050.D. That Subsection 21A.62.050.D of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Definitions: Illustrations of Selected Definitions: Landscape Area), shall be repealed in its entirety as follows: D. Reserved. SECTION 31. 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 ______________, 2024. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. 28 5. Overhead Cover: Overhead covers are required at building entrances to provide weather protection to pedestrians and may encroach into a required yard as indicated in this section or into a public right of way with an approved encroachment agreement with the city. These coverings are required to be between 9 and 14’ above the level of the sidewalk. They shall also provide coverage with a minimum depth of 6’ and project no closer to the curb than 3’. 1 Curb cuts are encouraged to be concentrated at midblock and alley locations. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.5 Overhead Cover 1 The shade structure shall occur between 9 and 14’ above the level of the sidewalk. The shade shall provide a minimum coverage of 6’ in width. 69 ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2024. Published: ______________. Ordinance Amending Landscaping Regulations (legislative)v2 APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:___________________________ By: ____________________________ Katherine D. Pasker, Senior City Attorney March 5, 2024 7 G. Landscape Yard Requirements: Front and corner side yards shall be maintained as landscape yards. Subject to site plan review approval, part or the entire landscape yard may be a patio or plaza. SECTION 8. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.26.040.F. That Subsection 21A.26.040.F of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: CS Community Shopping District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: F. Landscape Yard Requirements: A landscape yard of fifteen feet (15’) shall be required on all front and corner side yards, conforming to the requirements of Chapter 21A.48. SECTION 9. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.26.050.E. That Subsection 21A.26.050.E of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: CC Corridor Commercial District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: F. Landscape Yard Requirements: A landscape yard of fifteen feet (15’) shall be required on all front and corner side yards, conforming to the requirements of Chapter 21A.48. SECTION 10. Amending the Text of Section 21A.26.060. That Section 21A.26.060 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: CSHBD Sugar House Business District (CSHBD1 and CSHBD2)), shall be and hereby is amended as follows: a. That Subsection 21A.26.060.J shall be amended to read as follows: J. Park Strip Materials: Properties within this zoning district may utilize alternative park strip landscaping materials. Alternative materials are subject to planning director approval based on its compliance with the adopted “Circulation and Streetscape Amenities Plan” or its successor. b. That Subsection 21A.26.060.K shall be amended to read as follows: K. Street Trees: Street trees are required and subject to the regulations in Chapter 21A.48. If a park strip does not exist, street trees are required when the sidewalk width of at least 10’ can be maintained, to which required street trees shall be planted in tree wells with tree grates with sufficient soil volume as determined by the Urban Forestry Division. 8 SECTION 11. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.26.070.E. That Subsection 21A.26.070.E of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: CG General Commercial District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: E. Landscape Yard Requirements: A landscape yard of five feet shall be required on all front or corner side yards, conforming to the requirements of Chapter 21A.48 of this title. SECTION 12. Amending the Text of Section 21A.28.010. That Section 21A.28.010 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Manufacturing Districts: General Provisions), shall be and hereby is amended as follows: a. That Subsection 21A.28.010.B.1 shall be amended to read as follows: B. Impact Controls and General Restrictions in the Manufacturing Districts: 1. Refuse Control: Refuse containers must be covered and shall be stored within completely enclosed buildings or screened in conformance with the requirements of Section 21A.40.120 of this title. b. That Subsection 21A.28.010.G shall be amended to read as follows: G. Landscaping and Buffering: All uses in the manufacturing districts shall comply with the provisions governing landscaping and buffering in Chapter 21A.48 of this title. SECTION 13. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.28.030.E. That Subsection 21A.28.030.E of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Manufacturing Districts: M-2 Heavy Manufacturing District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: E. Landscape Yard Requirements: The first twenty five feet (25’) of all required front yards and the first fifteen feet (15’) of all required corner side yards shall be maintained as landscape yards in conformance with the requirements of Chapter 21A.48 of this title. 34 Ground floor residential entrances (21A.37.050.L) Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) D. Downtown Districts: Standard (Code Section) District D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4 Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) 90 80 80 80 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) 80/10 70/20 70/20 70/20 Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) 70 80 701 70 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) 50 50 701 50 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 60 60 60 60 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 50 50 50 50 Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 0 0 0 0 Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 50 50 50 50 Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) 40 40 60 60 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 20 20 20 20 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) 150 200 150 150 Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G.1) X X X X Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X X X X 9 SECTION 14. Amending the Text of Section 21A.30.010. That Section 21A.30.010 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Downtown Districts: General Provisions), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.30.010: GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. Statement of Intent: The downtown districts are intended to provide use, bulk, urban design and other controls and regulations appropriate to the commercial core of the city and adjacent areas in order to enhance employment opportunities; to encourage the efficient use of land; to enhance property values; to improve the design quality of downtown areas; to create a unique downtown center which fosters the arts, entertainment, financial, office, retail and governmental activities; to provide safety and security; encourage permitted residential uses within the downtown area; and to help implement adopted plans. B. Permitted Uses: The uses specified as permitted uses in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title are permitted; provided, that they comply with all requirements of this chapter, the general standards set forth in Part IV of this title, and all other applicable requirements of this title. 1. Conditional Uses: The uses specified as conditional uses in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title, may be allowed in the downtown districts provided they are approved pursuant to the standards and procedures for conditional uses set forth in Chapter 21A.54 of this title, and comply with all other applicable requirements. C. Impact Controls and General Restrictions in the Downtown Districts: 1. Refuse Control: Refuse containers must be covered and shall be stored within completely enclosed buildings or screened in conformance with the requirements of Section 21A.40.120 of this title. For buildings existing as of April 12, 1995, this screening provision shall be required if the floor area or parking requirements are increased by twenty five percent (25%) or more by an expansion to the building or change in the type of land use. 2. Lighting: On site lighting, including parking lot lighting and illuminated signs, shall be located, directed or designed in such a manner so as not to create glare on adjacent properties. 3. Fencing for Vacant Lots in the D-1 Central Business District and D-4 Downtown Secondary Central Business District: Fencing shall be required on those lots becoming vacant, where no replacement use is proposed, in conformance with the following: a. Fencing, pursuant to Section 21A.40.120 of this title, is required to secure vacant lots in the downtown area; 15 4. Property Zoned Business Park: When a property zoned Business Park abuts, or is across the street from, an AG-2 or AG-5 Zoning District the following standards shall apply: a. Buildings shall be prohibited within one hundred feet (100’) of the adjacent property line; b. Parking lots shall be prohibited within fifty feet (50’) of the adjacent property line; and c. The portion of the lot located between the adjacent property line and the parking lot or building shall be improved in the form of a landscaped buffer with a minimum 5 foot berm and shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 21A.48 of this title. SECTION 17. Amending the Text of Section 21A.32.040. That Section 21A.32.040 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Special Purpose Districts: FP Foothills Protection District), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.32.040: FP FOOTHILLS PROTECTION DISTRICT: A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the FP Foothills Protection District is to protect the foothill areas from intensive development in order to protect the scenic value of these areas, wildlife habitats and to minimize flooding and erosion. This district is appropriate in areas where supported by applicable master plans. B. Uses: Uses in the FP Foothills Protection District as specified in Section 21A.33.070, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Special Purpose Districts”, of this title, are permitted subject to the general provisions set forth in Section 21A.32.010 of this chapter and this section. C. Special Foothills Regulations: The regulations contained in Subsection 21A.24.010.P of this title, shall apply to the FP Foothills Protection District. D. Minimum Lot Area and Lot Width: Any use, except trailheads, in the FP Foothills Protection District shall comply with the following lot area and width requirements: 1. Minimum lot area: Sixteen (16) acres. 2. Minimum lot width: One hundred forty feet (140’). E. Maximum Building Height: See Subsection 21A.24.010.P of this title for special foothills regulations governing building height. 16 F. Minimum Yard Requirements: No principal or accessory building shall be located within twenty feet (20’) of the front or corner side lot line nor shall any principal or accessory building be located within 75’ of any side or rear lot line. Accessory structures (other than accessory buildings) shall conform to Section 21A.36.020, Table 21A.36.020.B of this title. G. Maximum Disturbed Area: The disturbed site area shall not exceed two acres. For the purposes of this district, “disturbed areas” shall be defined as areas of grading and removal of existing vegetation for principal and accessory buildings and areas to be hard surfaced. H. Slope Restrictions: To protect the visual and environmental quality of foothill areas, no building shall be constructed on any portion of the site that exceeds a thirty percent (30%) slope for lots in subdivisions granted preliminary approval by the planning commission after November 4, 1994. I. Fence Restrictions: Fences and walls shall only be constructed after first obtaining a building permit subject to the standards of this subsection. 1. Site Plan Submittal: As a part of the site plan review process, a fencing plan shall be submitted which shall show: a. Any specific subdivision approval conditions regarding fencing; b. Material specifications and illustrations necessary to determine compliance with specific subdivision approval limitations and the standards of this section. 2. Field Fencing of Designated Undevelopable Areas: Fencing on areas identified as undevelopable areas or transitional areas on any subdivision granted preliminary approval by the planning commission after November 4, 1994, or any lot previously platted which identifies undevelopable areas or transitional areas shall be limited to the following standards unless subdivision approval granted prior to November 4, 1994, included specific fencing requirements which are more restrictive. The more restrictive requirement shall apply. a. A low visibility see through fence shall consist of flat black colored steel “T” posts and not more than four strands of nonbarbed steel wire, strung at even vertical spacing on the “T” post, and erected to a height of not more than 42” above the natural ground surface. b. When fencing lot boundary lines, vegetation or native brush shall not be cleared so as to create a visible demarcation from off site. c. The existing surface of the ground shall not be changed by grading activities when erecting boundary fences. d. Fence materials and designs must not create a hazard for big game wildlife species. 17 e. No field fencing shall be erected in conflict with pedestrian easements dedicated to Salt Lake City. 3. Buildable Area Fencing: Fencing on any portions of a lot identified as buildable area or required side yard on any subdivision granted preliminary approval by the planning commission after November 4, 1994, or any lot previously platted which identifies undevelopable areas or transitional areas shall be limited to the following standards unless subdivision approval granted prior to November 4, 1994, includes specific fencing requirements which are more restrictive. The more restrictive requirement shall apply. a. An open, see through fence shall be constructed of tubular steel, wrought iron or similar materials, finished with a flat black, nonreflective finish constructed to a height of six feet or less; or b. A sight obscuring or privacy type fence shall be of earth tone colors, or similar materials to the primary dwelling, and located in a way to screen private outdoor living spaces from off site view. 4. Front or Corner Side Yard Fencing: Walls and fences located within the front or corner side yards or along dedicated roads shall not exceed a maximum of 42” in height. J. Special Landscape Regulations: In addition to the regulations in Chapter 21A.48 “Landscaping and Buffers” the following special landscape regulations apply: 1. Landscape Plan: In addition to the landscape plan submittal requirements listed in Section 21A.48.050, landscape plans shall also include: a. Delineation between proposed revegetation of disturbed areas of the site, and road/driveway areas. The landscape plan shall extend 100 feet beyond the disturbed site area and 25 feet beyond the limits of grading for roads/driveways, but need not include any portions of the site designated as undevelopable unless these areas are disturbed. b. As a condition of site plan approval, a plan for erosion protection. c. An irrigation plan designed to provide sufficient water for at least the first 2 years of growth to establish revegetation of natural areas. 2. Maximum Disturbed Area: The maximum disturbed area shall not exceed 10% of the total site area. 3. Tree Preservation and Replacement: Existing trees over 2 inches in caliper that are removed from the site to accommodate development shall be replaced. Whenever microclimate conditions make it practical, the proportion of replacement tree species shall be the same as the trees removed. 22 6. Operational and Maintenance Lots: Parking lots that are not available to the public for parking and are used to store vehicles, operational materials, or maintenance equipment are exempt from landscaping requirements. The portions of permanent storage lots that are adjacent to public areas shall be landscaped using acceptable landscaping principles contained herein to screen the storage area from public view. 7. Plan Approval: All landscape plans shall be coordinated with the city’s development review team (DRT) and planning division, for review and comment on compliance with city ordinances and these performance standards. The planning director and director of airports shall jointly approve final landscaping plans for any airport parking lot. SECTION 21. Amending the Text of Section 21A.34.140. That Section 21A.34.140 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: Northwest Quadrant Overlay District), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 21A.34.140: NORTHWEST QUADRANT OVERLAY DISTRICT: A. Northwest Quadrant Overlay District: 1. Purpose: The purpose of the Northwest Quadrant Overlay District is to protect sensitive lands and wildlife habitat; allow for the continuation of agricultural uses; and allow for the development of lands in appropriate areas that contribute to the future economic growth of the city and will not negatively impact sensitive lands, habitats, and waterways in the area north of I-80 and west of the Salt Lake International Airport. Sites within this area may be subject to difficult environmental and site conditions. The overlay defines three subareas: the Development Area, the Eco-Industrial Buffer Area, and the Natural Area. 2. Public Improvements and Dedications: The undeveloped land in the Northwest Quadrant requires public improvements to ensure the long term development potential and success of the area. All development subject to a site development or building permit, shall be required to provide public improvements required by city departments as outlined in their master plans. 3. State and Federal Permits Required: A site development and/or building permit shall not be granted unless the applicant has first obtained any necessary State and/or Federal wetlands and/or stream alteration permits. 4. Precedence: For areas where the LC Lowland Conservancy Overlay District is mapped within the Northwest Quadrant Development Area and/or the Northwest Quadrant Eco-Industrial Buffer Area, the LC Lowland Conservancy Overlay District shall take precedence. B. Northwest Quadrant Development Area: The purpose of this area of the Northwest Quadrant Overlay District is to allow for new development to occur in a way that allows for the growth of light industrial uses in the city while minimizing impacts to wildlife and the surrounding sensitive Great Salt Lake shore lands. This area is identified on the zoning map. 23 1. General Requirements: a. Minimum Yard Requirements: (1) Front Yard: 20’. (2) Corner Side Yard: 20’. (3) Interior Side Yard: None required. (4) Rear Yard: None required. b. Lighting: All lighting on the property, including lighting on the buildings, parking areas, and for signs shall be shielded to direct light down and away from the edges of the property to eliminate glare or light into adjacent properties and have cutoffs to prevent upward lighting. Uplighting and event searchlights are prohibited. c. Roof Color: Light reflective roofing material with a minimum solar reflective index (SRI) of 82 shall be used for all roofs. 2. Landscaping Requirements: The purpose of the special landscaping for the Northwest Quadrant Development Area is to provide appropriate native landscaping that can survive in the unique conditions of the area, prevent noxious weeds, and to provide landscaping that will not negatively impact the adjacent sensitive lands and birds areas. a. All landscaping shall consist only of native plants as identified in the “Salt Lake City Northwest Quadrant Plant List” on file with the city’s planning division. b. Any areas disturbed by construction activity that will be left undeveloped shall be landscaped with plantings at an appropriate density to achieve complete cover within two years. c. Noxious weed species as identified by the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (or its successor) in the State of Utah Noxious Weed List (or its successor) shall be removed from landscaped areas and areas disturbed by construction activity. Noxious weeds shall be controlled for a period of two years and methods of control shall be identified on the landscape plan. d. Required trees, including street trees, shall be chosen from the “Northwest Quadrant Plant List”. Noxious trees, as identified by the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (or its successor) in the State of Utah Noxious Weed List (or its successor) are prohibited. e. Any shrub required by Chapter 21A.48 of this title shall be selected from the “Salt Lake City Northwest Quadrant Plan List” have a mature height of at least three feet (3’). f. All other requirements in Chapter 21A.48 of this title apply. This section shall take precedence in the case of a conflict with Chapter 21A.48 of this title. C. Northwest Quadrant Eco-Industrial Buffer Area: The purpose of this area of the Northwest Quadrant Overlay District is to provide an adequate buffer between the Natural Area, the adjacent Inland Sea Shore and the development of light industrial uses. 24 Requirements in this area are meant to provide an area of transition from the natural environment to the built environment that will limit impacts to wildlife and sensitive areas. This area is identified on the zoning map. 1. In addition to the requirements listed in Subsection B of this section, properties located within the Northwest Quadrant Eco- Industrial Buffer Area are subject to the following requirements: a. Glass Requirements: For buildings with more than 10% glass on any building elevation, a minimum of 90% of all glass shall be treated with applied films, coatings, tints, exterior screens, netting, fritting, frosted glass or other means to reduce the number of birds that may collide with the glazing. Any treatment must create a grid pattern that is equal to or smaller than two inches wide by four inches tall. b. Fencing: When adjacent to the Northwest Quadrant Natural Area or the western city boundary, a see through fence that is at least 50% open with a minimum height of six feet shall be erected along the property line to protect the Natural Area from development impacts and trespass. D. Northwest Quadrant Natural Area: The purpose of this area of the Northwest Quadrant Overlay District is to protect sensitive lands and wildlife near the Great Salt Lake shorelands, to allow for the continuation of existing uses, and to limit new uses and new development in this area. This area is identified on the zoning map. 1. Permitted Uses and Improvements: Within the Natural Area, permitted developments and improvements to land are limited to the following: Accessory use (associated with an allowed principal use). Agricultural use. Living quarters for caretaker or security guard. Maintenance to existing infrastructure. Natural open space. Necessary infrastructure to support an allowed use. Utility, building or structure (public). Utility, transmission wire, line, pipe or pole (public). Wildlife and game preserves. 2. Conditional Uses and Standards: a. Uses and Improvements: The following uses and improvements are subject to conditional use standards contained in Chapter 21A.54 of this title: Hunting club, (when allowed by the underlying zoning). Underground utility transmission infrastructure (private), subject to the following: 29 SECTION 23. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.37.060. That Subsection 21A.37.060 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Design Standards: Design Standards Required in Each Zoning District), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: This section identifies each design standard and to which zoning districts the standard applies. If a box is checked (X), that standard is required. If a box is blank, it is not required. If a specific dimension or detail of a design standard differs among zoning districts or differs from the definition, it will be indicated within the box. In cases where a dimension in this table conflicts with a dimension in the definition, the dimensions listed in the table shall take precedence. The cover shall project no closer than 3’ to the curb. 3 I. Landscape Plan: A landscape plan conforming to the requirements of Section 21A.48.050 and Subsection 21A.24.010.P of this title shall be required. SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.24.030. That Subsection 21A.24.030.I of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: FR-1/21,780 Foothills Residential District: Landscape Plan), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: I. Landscape Plan: A landscape plan conforming to the requirements of Section 21A.48.050 and Subsection 21A.24.010.P of this title shall be required. SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.24.120.G. That Subsection 21A.24.120.G of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District: RMF-30 Building Type Zoning Standards), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 30 TABLE 21A.37.060 A. Residential Districts: Standard (Code Section) District RMF-30 RMF-35 RMF-45 RMF-75 RB R-MU-35 R-MU-45 R-MU RO Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) 75 75 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050B.3) 80 80 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.4) Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 60 60 40 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) 75 75 X Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 15 15 Street facing facade: maximum length(feet) (21A.37.050.F) Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G.2 and 21A.37.050.G.3) 10 Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X X X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K.1) X X X Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) 35 Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) X X X X Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) X2 X2 Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1) 40 40 40 40 Street trees (21A.37.050.P.2) X X X X Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.3) X X X X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.4) X X X X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.5) X X X X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) X X X Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) X X X X Notes: 1. In the D-3 zoning district this percentage applies to all sides of the building, not just the front or street facing facade. 2. Parking structures shall be located behind principal buildings. This requirement may be modified so that structures may be located at least 15’ from front and corner side lot lines if a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the ground floor adjacent to a sidewalk is used for retail goods/service establishments, office and/or restaurant space to encourage pedestrian activity. The facades of the ground floor shall be designed to be compatible and consistent with the associated retail or office portion of the building and other retail uses in the area. E. Gateway Districts: Standard (Code Section) District G-MU Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) 80 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) 70/20 Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) 70 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) 50 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 60 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 50 Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 0 11 3. Parking lots, garages or parking structures, proposed as the only principal use on a property that has frontage on a public street and that would result in a building demolition are prohibited in the Downtown zoning districts. 4. No special restrictions shall apply to belowground parking facilities. F. Midblock Walkways: As part of the city’s plan for the downtown area, it is intended that midblock walkways be provided to increase pedestrian connectivity and overall livability downtown through the creation of an intricate pedestrian network. The city has adopted the Downtown Plan that includes a midblock walkway map and establishes a need for such walkways as the Downtown grows. Because the districts within the downtown area allow building heights that exceed those of other districts in the city, the requirement for a midblock walkway is considered to be necessary to alleviate pedestrian impacts on the public sidewalks by dispersing future use of the public sidewalks. All buildings constructed after the effective date hereof within the Downtown zoning districts shall conform to this officially adopted plan for midblock walkways, in addition to the following standards: 1. Any new development shall provide a midblock walkway if a midblock walkway on the subject property has been identified in a master plan that has been adopted by the city. 2. The following standards apply to the midblock walkway: a. The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. b. The midblock walkway may be incorporated into the building provided it is open to the public. A sign shall be posted indicating that the public may use the walkway. c. Building encroachments into the midblock walkway are permitted if they include one or more of the following elements: 36 Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 50 Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) 40 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) 150 Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G.1) X Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X1 Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X1 Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) X Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) X2 Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1) 40 Street trees (21A.37.050.P.2) X Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.3) X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.4) X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.5) X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) X Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) X Notes: 1. Sidewalks and street lamps installed in the public right-of- way shall be of the type specified in the sidewalk/street lighting policy document adopted by the city. 2. Parking structures shall be located behind principal buildings. This requirement may be modified so that structures may be located at least 15’ from front and corner side lot lines if a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the ground floor adjacent to a sidewalk is used for retail goods/service establishments, office and/or restaurant space to encourage pedestrian activity. The facades of the ground floor shall be designed to be compatible and consistent with the associated retail or office portion of the building and other retail uses in the area. 1 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE 2 No. _____ of 2024 3 4 (Amending the zoning text of various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code 5 pertaining to Landscaping and Buffers chapter amendments) 6 7 An ordinance amending the text of various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City 8 Code pertaining to Landscaping and Buffers Chapter amendments pursuant to Petition No. 9 PLNPCM2023-00098. 10 WHEREAS, on April 26, 2023, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning 11 Commission”) held a public hearing on a petition submitted by Salt Lake City Mayor, Erin 12 Mendenhall--at the request of the Salt Lake City Council--to amend the zoning code pertaining 13 to the Landscaping and Buffer Chapter (Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00098); and 14 WHEREAS, at its April 26, 2023 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of 15 forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council on said petition; 16 WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the city council has determined that 17 adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests; and 18 WHEREAS, enforcement of the prohibition against artificial turf, which turf was 19 installed prior to the effective date of this ordinance, will be delayed for 18 months to give 20 residents an opportunity to come into compliance and Administration and Council staff will 21 make efforts to communicate pending enforcement to any constituent that has installed artificial 22 turf. 23 NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 24 25 SECTION 1. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.24.010.P.12. That Subsection 26 21A.24.010.P.12 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: General Provisions: 27 Special Foothills Regulations), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 18 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 521 b. As a condition of site plan approval, a plan for erosion protection. 522 c. An irrigation plan designed to provide sufficient water for at least the first 2 years 523 of growth to establish revegetation of natural areas. 524 525 526 2. Maximum Disturbed Area: The maximum disturbed area shall not exceed 10% of the 527 total site area. 528 3. Tree Preservation and Replacement: Existing trees over 2 inches in caliper that are 529 removed from the site to accommodate development shall be replaced. Whenever 530 microclimate conditions make it practical, the proportion of replacement tree species 531 shall be the same as the trees removed. 532 4. Limits on Turf: To minimize the impact on the natural landscape and promote the 533 intent of this district, the area of turf grasses shall not exceed 33% of the area to be 534 landscaped and shall not encroach into undevelopable areas. 535 5. Slope Revegetation: All slopes graded or otherwise disturbed shall be 536 restored/replanted. Restored vegetation shall consist of native or adapted grasses, 537 herbaceous perennials, or woody trees and shrubs as appropriate for slope, soil and 538 microclimate conditions. 539 540 SECTION 18. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.32.130.I. That Subsection 541 21A.32.130.I of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Special Purpose Districts: MU Mixed Use 542 District: Landscape Buffers), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 543 I. Landscape Buffers: Where a nonresidential or mixed use lot abuts a residential or vacant 544 lot within the MU Mixed Use District or any Residential District, a ten foot (10’) 545 landscape buffer shall be provided subject to the improvement requirements of subsection 546 Chapter 21A.48.080D of this title. 547 548 SECTION 19. Amending the Text of Section 21A.34.030. That Section 21A.34.030 of 549 the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: T Transitional Overlay District), shall be and 550 hereby is amended to read as follows: 551 552 21A.34.030: T TRANSITIONAL OVERLAY DISTRICT: 553 554 A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the T Transitional Overlay District is to allow for the 555 redevelopment of certain older residential areas for limited commercial and light 556 industrial uses. This district is intended to provide a higher level of control over such 557 activity to ensure that the use and enjoyment of existing residential properties is not 558 substantially diminished by future nonresidential redevelopment. The intent of this 559 district shall be achieved by designating certain nonresidential uses as conditional uses 19 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 560 within the overlay district and requiring future redevelopment to comply with established 561 standards for compatibility and buffering as set forth in this section. 562 B. District Locational Criteria: Residential areas covered by the T Transitional Overlay 563 District are characterized by: 564 1. A land use designation in the Ccity’s General Plan identifying reuse or redevelopment 565 for nonresidential uses; 566 2. The presence of external influences, such as proximity to expressways, railroad tracks 567 and incompatible uses, which impact the long term viability of residential use; and 568 3. Deteriorating housing stock. 569 570 C. Permitted Uses: The uses specified as permitted uses in the table of permitted and 571 conditional uses set forth in pPart III of this title for the underlying district shall be 572 permitted uses and no other. 573 D. Conditional Uses: The uses specified as conditional uses in the table of permitted and 574 conditional uses set forth in pPart III of this title for the underlying district shall be 575 conditional uses. In addition to the conditional uses permitted in the underlying district, 576 the following uses shall be allowed as conditional uses in the T tTransitional oOverlay 577 dDistrict: 578 1. Light manufacturing and industrial assembly uses; 579 2. Warehouse and wholesale uses in which goods and materials are stored in completely 580 enclosed buildings; 581 3. Offices; 582 4. Furniture and appliance repair shops; 583 5. Commercial photography studios and photofinishing laboratories; 584 6. Retail goods establishments; 585 7. Retail services establishments; 586 8. Medical and dental offices and clinics; and 587 9. Medical laboratories. 588 589 E. Minimum Lot Area: The minimum lot area for any conditional use shall be ten thousand 590 (10,000) square feet. 591 F. Minimum Lot Width: The minimum lot width for any conditional use shall be sixty feet 592 (60’). 593 G. Maximum Building Height: The maximum building height for conditional uses shall be 594 thirty five feet (35’). 595 H. Site Design Criteria: The land use compatibility of a proposed conditional use shall be 596 assessed, through the application of the following criteria in addition to the standards for 597 conditional uses set forth in cChapter 21A.54, “Conditional Uses”, of this title. 598 1. The proposed principal building shall be located not less than twenty feet (20’) from 599 any residential dwelling; 2 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 28 12. Landscaping Aand Revegetation: 29 a. Installation of all required landscaping shall begin no later than one month after a 30 certificate of occupancy; except that if the certificate of occupancy is issued 31 between October 15 and the following April 1, installation of the landscaping 32 shall begin no later than April 30. Landscaping shall be substantially completed 33 within nine (9) months after a certificate of occupancy is issued. Landscaping 34 shall conform to the requirements of cChapter 21A.48 of this title, and shall also 35 conform to the following requirements: 36 a.(1) Front Yards Aand Side Yards: Front yards, corner side yards and interior 37 side yards shall be completely landscaped except for driveways, walkways 38 and patios/decks. 39 b.(2) Disturbed Areas: All other areas disturbed during construction shall be 40 either landscaped or revegetated to a natural state. 41 c.(3) Undevelopable Areas: Lawns or gardens are prohibited in the 42 undevelopable areas. Native and drought tolerant plant species established in 43 undevelopable areas may be enhanced by irrigation and supplemental planting 44 as approved by the Zzoning Aadministrator, provided the Zzoning 45 Aadministrator finds that such supplemental planting is in keeping with the 46 natural conditions. 47 b. Special Landscape Regulations in the FR-1/43,560 and FR-2/21,780 Districts: In 48 addition to the regulations in Chapter 21A.48 “Landscaping and Buffers” the 49 following special landscape regulations apply: 50 51 (1) Landscape Plan: In addition to the landscape plan submittal requirements 52 listed in Section 21A.48.050, landscape plans shall also include: 53 54 (a) Delineation between the proposed revegetation of disturbed site areas. 55 (b) As a condition of site plan approval, a plan for erosion. 56 (c)An irrigation plan designed to provide sufficient water for at least the first 57 two years of growth to establish revegetation of natural areas. 58 59 (2) Tree Preservation and Replacement: Existing trees over 2 inches in caliper 60 that are removed from the site to accommodate development shall be replaced. 61 Whenever microclimate conditions make it practical, the proportion of 62 replacement tree species shall be the same as the trees removed. 63 (3) Slope Revegetation: All slopes graded or otherwise disturbed shall be 64 restored/replanted. Restored vegetation shall consist of native or adapted 65 grasses, herbaceous perennials, or woody trees and shrubs as appropriate for 66 slope and microclimate conditions. 67 68 SECTION 2. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.24.020.I. That Subsection 69 21A.24.020.I of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: FR-1/43,560 Foothills 70 Estate Residential District: Landscape Plan), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 20 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 600 2. Interior side yards for lots abutting residential uses shall not be less than twelve feet 601 (12’); 602 3. Interior side yards for lots abutting another nonresidential use shall not be less than 603 eight feet (8’); 604 4. Front and corner side yards shall be provided consistent with the underlying zoning 605 district; 606 5. Rear yards shall not be less than twenty five feet (25’); 607 6. Signs should be limited to one flat nonilluminated identification sign not more than 608 six (6) square feet per fifty feet (50’) of lot frontage. 609 610 I. Buffer Requirements: All conditional uses shall conform to the buffer requirements 611 established in subsection 21A.48.100E of this title. 612 JI. Application: The application for a conditional use in the transitional overlay district shall 613 include information in sufficient detail so that the planning commission may judge the 614 compatibility of the conditional use with the existing residential conditions and the 615 adopted mixed use development policies and for the planning commission to assess the 616 impacts to the existing neighborhood. The following specific information shall also be 617 provided in the application: 618 619 1. The amount of employee, customer or other business related traffic (i.e., delivery and 620 pick up) expected to be generated by the proposed use; 621 2. Traffic impact analysis determining the anticipated effect on contiguous streets and 622 necessary improvements to the street network required to maintain an acceptable 623 level of service for the neighborhood; 624 3. The location and design of vehicular access to the proposed use, the amount of off 625 street parking facilities, and the location, arrangement and dimensions of loading and 626 unloading facilities; 627 4. Hours of operation of the business; 628 5. The amount of noise, noxious odors, fumes or vibration anticipated from the proposed 629 use; 630 6. Schematic elevations of all building facades indicating building materials, entries, 631 loading docks, signage and building height; 632 7. Schematic landscape plan. 633 634 KJ.Standards: In evaluating the suitability of a proposed conditional use, the planning 635 commission shall consider the following standards: 636 1. In addition to all the requirements, standards and criteria established for the 637 transitional overlay district, each conditional use must satisfy the requirements of 638 cChapter 21A.54, “Conditional Uses”, of this title. 639 2. The applicant has the burden of establishing to the planning commission that the 640 proposed conditional use meets the purposes of the transitional overlay district. 641 642 SECTION 20. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.34.040.FF. That Subsection 643 21A.34.040.FF of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: AFPP Airport Flight Path 21 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 644 Protection Overlay District: Airport Parking Lot Landscaping), shall be and hereby is amended 645 to read as follows: 646 FF.Airport Parking Lot Landscaping: All parking lots located within the airport 647 landscaping overlay district shall comply with the following guidelines: 648 649 1. General Landscaping Performance Standards: Landscaping plans for parking lots 650 shall be developed to reflect a balance between the responsibility of ensuring the 651 safety and security of persons and property with the objective of creating aesthetically 652 pleasing, environmentally sensitive landscapes. Landscaping should address city 653 goals related to reduction of urban heat islands, visual buffering of parking lots, 654 impacts of noise, water conservation, as well as minimization of dust, runoff and 655 sedimentation. Landscaping shall consist of a variety of landscape materials, which 656 may include trees, turf, ground cover, shrubs, perennials, managed water features, and 657 rock features. Drought tolerant, native, or adapted or resistant vegetation, which 658 reflects the natural vegetation and geography of the region, should shall be used to 659 create an aesthetically appealing landscape. 660 2. Reduction Oof Urban Heat Islands: The following standards are intended to help 661 mitigate the contribution to the urban heat island effect from large parking areas. 662 Parking lot owners or operators may use a combination of any of the following 663 methods to reduce urban heat: 664 665 a. The total airport parking supply shall consist of a combination of surface and 666 structured parking lots. Structured parking shall offset the area of surface parking 667 that is otherwise required, thereby reducing the area that contributes to urban heat. 668 b. Landscaping within large land use areas may be evaluated in terms of a 669 comprehensive planned development program to consider the total landscaping 670 within the entire development area. Landscaping may be shifted from the interior 671 of parking lots to other areas within the developed area. 672 c. Landscaping, which includes trees, shrubs, ground cover and perennials, shall be 673 dispersed throughout parking lots to provide shade while ensuring trees are not 674 planted at a spacing or density that will encourage wildlife use or create an 675 aviation hazard. 676 d. Shade for pedestrians shall be provided in parking lots through the use of 677 pedestrian shelters integrated with landscaping. 678 e. Interior landscaped areas shall be provided in parking lots to reduce heat, provide 679 a visual buffer and reduce runoff. 680 f. No specific ratio of trees and shrubs to landscaped area is required. 681 682 3. Visual Buffering: Landscaped buffers, not less than ten feet (10’) in width, shall be 683 provided, where feasible, between parking lots and primary entrance and exit roads. 684 Visual screening shall be provided within landscape buffers to enhance aesthetics and 685 reduce visibility of parked vehicles. Visual screening may consist of a combination of 686 earth berms, shrubs, trees or other methods. 22 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 687 4. Water Conservation: To promote water conservation, landscape concepts shall 688 incorporate features that use trees, shrubs, ornamental grasses, ground cover, and 689 perennials that are drought tolerant, native, or adapted or resistant species that can 690 withstand dry conditions once established. The plant list developed by the city, titled 691 “Water Conserving Plants Ffor Salt Lake City”, shall be used as the primary reference 692 in determining drought tolerance of plants. All irrigation systems shall be designed 693 for efficient use of potable water. Traditional Tturf areas is are prohibited should be 694 minimized in favor of alternative landscape practices to reduce the use of water. 695 5. Temporary Parking Lots: Parking lots that are intended to be in use for three (3) years 696 or less are exempt from parking lot landscaping requirements. Such parking lots may 697 exist to phase the construction of other facilities and shall be removed once the 698 facilities are completed. Temporary lots that are within the area of an approved 699 comprehensive plan may remain in use for the duration approved in the plan. 700 However, temporary parking lots shall still comply with applicable development 701 standards for parking lots as outlined in cChapter 21A.44 of this title. Parking lots 702 that remain in use by the public beyond three (3) years shall be brought into 703 compliance with these standards within twelve (12) months. 704 6. Operational Aand Maintenance Lots: Parking lots that are not available to the public 705 for parking and are used to store vehicles, operational materials, or maintenance 706 equipment are exempt from landscaping requirements. The portions of permanent 707 storage lots that are adjacent to public areas shall be landscaped using acceptable 708 landscaping principles contained herein to screen the storage area from public view. 709 7. Plan Approval: All landscape plans shall be coordinated with the city’s development 710 review team (DRT) and planning division, for review and comment on compliance 711 with city ordinances and these performance standards. The planning director and 712 director of airports shall jointly approve final landscaping plans for any airport 713 parking lot. 714 715 SECTION 21. Amending the Text of Section 21A.34.140. That Section 21A.34.140 of 716 the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: Northwest Quadrant Overlay District), shall 717 be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 718 21A.34.140: NORTHWEST QUADRANT OVERLAY DISTRICT: 719 A. Northwest Quadrant Overlay District: 720 1. Purpose: The purpose of the Northwest Quadrant Overlay District is to protect 721 sensitive lands and wildlife habitat; allow for the continuation of agricultural uses; 722 and allow for the development of lands in appropriate areas that contribute to the 723 future economic growth of the Ccity and will not negatively impact sensitive lands, 724 habitats, and waterways in the area north of I-80 and west of the Salt Lake 725 International Airport. Sites within this area may be subject to difficult environmental 726 and site conditions. The overlay defines three (3) subareas: the Development Area, 727 the Eco-Industrial Buffer Area, and the Natural Area. 23 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 728 2. Public Improvements Aand Dedications: The undeveloped land in the Northwest 729 Quadrant requires public improvements to ensure the long term development 730 potential and success of the area. All development subject to a site development or 731 building permit, shall be required to provide public improvements required by Ccity 732 departments as outlined in their Mmaster Pplans. 733 3. State Aand Federal Permits Required: A site development and/or building permit 734 shall not be granted unless the applicant has first obtained any necessary State and/or 735 Federal wetlands and/or stream alteration permits. 736 4. Precedence: For areas where the LC Lowland Conservancy Overlay District is 737 mapped within the Northwest Quadrant Development Area and/or the Northwest 738 Quadrant Eco-Industrial Buffer Area, the LC Lowland Conservancy Overlay District 739 shall take precedence. 740 741 B. Northwest Quadrant Development Area: The purpose of this area of the Northwest 742 Quadrant Overlay District is to allow for new development to occur in a way that allows 743 for the growth of light industrial uses in the Ccity while minimizing impacts to wildlife 744 and the surrounding sensitive Great Salt Lake shore lands. This area is identified on the 745 zoning map. 746 747 1. General Requirements: 748 749 a. Minimum Yard Requirements: 750 751 (1) Front Yard: Twenty feet (20’). 752 (2) Corner Side Yard: Twenty feet (20’). 753 (3) Interior Side Yard: None required. 754 (4) Rear Yard: None required. 755 756 b. Lighting: All lighting on the property, including lighting on the buildings, parking 757 areas, and for signs shall be shielded to direct light down and away from the edges 758 of the property to eliminate glare or light into adjacent properties and have cutoffs 759 to prevent upward lighting. Uplighting and event searchlights are prohibited. 760 c. Roof Color: Light reflective roofing material with a minimum solar reflective 761 index (SRI) of 82 shall be used for all roofs. 762 763 2. Landscaping Requirements: The purpose of the special landscaping for the Northwest 764 Quadrant Development Area is to provide appropriate native landscaping that can 765 survive in the unique conditions of the area, prevent noxious weeds, and to provide 766 landscaping that will not negatively impact the adjacent sensitive lands and birds 767 areas. 768 769 a. All landscaping shall consist only of native plants as identified in the “Salt Lake 770 City Northwest Quadrant Plant List” on file with the Ccity’s Pplanning Ddivision. 771 b. Any areas disturbed by construction activity that will be left undeveloped shall be 772 landscaped with plantings at an appropriate density to achieve complete cover 773 within two (2) years. 24 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 774 c. Noxious weed species as identified by the Utah Department of Agriculture and 775 Food (or its successor) in the State of Utah Noxious Weed List (or its successor) 776 shall be removed from landscaped areas and areas disturbed by construction 777 activity. Noxious weeds shall be controlled for a period of two (2) years and 778 methods of control shall be identified on the landscape plan. 779 d. Required Ttrees, including street trees, shall be chosen from the “Northwest 780 Quadrant Plant List” are not required for any landscaping as required elsewhere in 781 this title. Noxious trees, as identified by the Utah Department of Agriculture and 782 Food (or its successor) in the State of Utah Noxious Weed List (or its successor) 783 are prohibited. 784 e. Any shrub and tree plantings required by cChapter 21A.48 of this title shall be 785 selected from the “Salt Lake City Northwest Quadrant Plan List” and substituted 786 with allowed shrubs or with allowed plants that have a mature height of at least 787 three feet (3’). as identified in the “Salt Lake City Northwest Quadrant Plant 788 List”. 789 f. All other requirements in cChapter 21A.48 of this title apply. This section shall 790 take precedence in the case of a conflict with cChapter 21A.48 of this title. 791 792 C. Northwest Quadrant Eco-Industrial Buffer Area: The purpose of this area of the 793 Northwest Quadrant Overlay District is to provide an adequate buffer between the 794 Natural Area, the adjacent Inland Sea Shore and the development of light industrial uses. 795 Requirements in this area are meant to provide an area of transition from the natural 796 environment to the built environment that will limit impacts to wildlife and sensitive 797 areas. This area is identified on the zoning map. 798 799 1. In addition to the requirements listed in sSubsection B of this section, properties 800 located within the Northwest Quadrant Eco- Industrial Buffer Area are subject to the 801 following requirements: 802 803 a. Glass Requirements: For buildings with more than ten percent (10%) glass on any 804 building elevation, a minimum of ninety percent (90%) of all glass shall be treated 805 with applied films, coatings, tints, exterior screens, netting, fritting, frosted glass 806 or other means to reduce the number of birds that may collide with the glazing. 807 Any treatment must create a grid pattern that is equal to or smaller than 2 two 808 inches wide by 4 four inches tall. 809 b. Fencing: When adjacent to the Northwest Quadrant Natural Area or the western 810 Ccity boundary, a see through fence that is at least fifty percent (50%) open with a 811 minimum height of six feet (6’) shall be erected along the property line to protect 812 the Natural Area from development impacts and trespass. 813 814 D. Northwest Quadrant Natural Area: The purpose of this area of the Northwest Quadrant 815 Overlay District is to protect sensitive lands and wildlife near the Great Salt Lake 816 shorelands, to allow for the continuation of existing uses, and to limit new uses and new 817 development in this area. This area is identified on the zoning map. 818 25 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 819 1. Permitted Uses Aand Improvements: Within the Natural Area, permitted 820 developments and improvements to land are limited to the following: 821 822 Accessory use (associated with an allowed principal use). 823 Agricultural use. 824 Living quarters for caretaker or security guard. 825 Maintenance to existing infrastructure. 826 Natural open space. 827 Necessary infrastructure to support an allowed use. 828 Utility, building or structure (public). 829 Utility, transmission wire, line, pipe or pole (public). 830 Wildlife and game preserves. 831 832 2. Conditional Uses Aand Standards: 833 834 a. Uses Aand Improvements: The following uses and improvements are subject to 835 conditional use standards contained in cChapter 21A.54 of this title: 836 837 Hunting club, (when allowed by the underlying zoning). 838 839 Underground utility transmission infrastructure (private), subject to the following: 840 841 (1) An appropriate plan for mitigation of any construction activities shall be 842 prepared, and 843 (2) Absent any State or Federal regulations, a plan for creating no adverse impact 844 should the line be abandoned shall be prepared. 845 846 Utility, building or structure (private). 847 848 Utility, transmission wire, line, pipe or pole (private). 849 850 b. Conditional Use Standards: In addition to demonstrating conformance with the 851 conditional use standards contained in cChapter 21A.54 of this title, each 852 applicant for a conditional use within the Northwest Quadrant Natural Area must 853 demonstrate conformance with the following standards: 854 855 (1) The development will not detrimentally affect or destroy natural features such 856 as ponds, streams, wetlands, and forested areas, nor impair their natural 857 functions, but will preserve and incorporate such features into the 858 development’s site; 859 (2) The location of natural features and the site’s topography have been 860 considered in the designing and siting of all physical improvements; 861 (3) Adequate assurances have been received that the clearing of the site topsoil, 862 trees, and other natural features will not occur before the commencement of 863 building operations; only those areas approved for the placement of physical 864 improvements may be cleared; 26 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 865 (4) The development will not reduce the natural retention storage capacity of any 866 watercourse, nor increase the magnitude and volume of flooding at other 867 locations; and that in addition, the development will not increase stream 868 velocities; 869 (5) The soil and subsoil conditions are suitable for excavation and site 870 preparation, and the drainage is designed to prevent erosion and 871 environmentally deleterious surface runoff; 872 (6) The proposed development activity will not endanger health and safety, 873 including danger from the obstruction or diversion of flood flow; 874 (7) The proposed development activity will not destroy valuable habitat for 875 aquatic or other flora and fauna, adversely affect water quality or groundwater 876 resources, increase stormwater runoff velocity so that water levels from 877 flooding increased, or adversely impact any other natural stream, floodplain, 878 or wetland functions, and is otherwise consistent with the intent of this title; 879 (8) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems are adequate to prevent 880 disease, contamination and unsanitary conditions; and 881 (9) The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding for the 882 proposed use. 883 884 3. Landscaping: Landscaping is not required for uses and improvements within the 885 Natural Area, except: 886 887 a. Any areas disturbed by construction activity that will be left undeveloped shall be 888 revegetated with native plants as listed in the “Salt Lake City Northwest Quadrant 889 Plant List”. 890 b. Noxious weed species as identified by the Utah Department of Agriculture and 891 Food (or its successor) in the State of Utah Noxious Weed List (or its successor) 892 shall be removed from landscaped areas and areas disturbed by construction 893 activity. Noxious weeds shall be controlled for a period of two (2) years and 894 methods of control shall be identified on the landscape plan. 895 896 SECTION 22. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.37.050.P. That Subsection 897 21A.37.050.P of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Design Standards: Design Standards Defined: 898 Streetscape Standards), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 899 P. Streetscape Standards: These standards are required for landscaping that is within the 900 public right of way. This is defined as the space between the private property line and the 901 back of the curb. All properties must comply with the park strip landscaping regulations 902 in Chapter 21A.48. Where there is a conflict between the requirements in Chapter 21A.48 903 and the requirements of this Subsection, the requirements in this Subsection shall apply. 904 905 1. Tree Canopy Coverage: No tree canopy shall cover less than the specified percentage 906 according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. The defined 907 percentage represents the canopy coverage at maturity. At installation, a minimum of 10 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 226 1995, this screening provision shall be required if the floor area or parking 227 requirements are increased by twenty five percent (25%) or more by an expansion to 228 the building or change in the type of land use. 229 2. Lighting: On site lighting, including parking lot lighting and illuminated signs, shall 230 be located, directed or designed in such a manner so as not to create glare on adjacent 231 properties. 232 3. Fencing for Vacant Lots in the D-1 Central Business District and D-4 Downtown 233 Secondary Central Business District: Fencing shall be required on those lots 234 becoming vacant, where no replacement use is proposed, in conformance with the 235 following: 236 237 a. Fencing, pursuant to Section 21A.40.120 of this title, is required to secure vacant 238 lots in the downtown area; 239 b. Fencing shall consist of wrought iron or other similar material (chainlink is 240 prohibited); and 241 c. Fencing shall be open so as not to create a visual barrier, and shall be limited to a 242 maximum of 4 feet in height, with the exception of a fence located within a sight 243 distance on any corner lot as noted in Section 21A.40.120 of this title. 244 245 The approval of a building permit shall be delegated to the building official with the 246 input of the planning director, to determine if the fencing materials, location, and 247 height are compatible with adjacent properties in a given setting. 248 249 D. Outdoor Sales, Display and Storage: “Sales and display (outdoor)” and “storage and 250 display (outdoor)”, as defined in Chapter 21A.62 of this title, are allowed where 251 specifically authorized in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses 252 for Downtown Districts”, of this title. These uses shall conform to the following: 253 254 1. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not encroach into areas of required 255 parking for periods longer than 30 days; 256 2. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not be located in any required yard 257 area within the lot when the required yard abuts a residential zoning district; 258 3. The outdoor sales or display of merchandise shall not include the use of banners, 259 pennants or strings of pennants; 260 4. Outdoor storage shall be allowed only where specifically authorized in the applicable 261 district regulation and shall be required to be fully screened with opaque fencing not 262 to exceed eight feet in height; and 263 5. Outdoor sales and display and outdoor storage shall also be permitted when part of an 264 authorized temporary use as established in Chapter 21A.42 of this title. 265 266 E. Restrictions on Parking Lots and Structures: An excessive amount of at or above ground 267 parking lots and structures can negatively impact the urban design objectives of the 268 Downtown Zzoning Ddistricts. To control such impacts, the following regulations apply 269 to surface parking and above grade structures: 270 27 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 908 20% of all trees shall have a minimum caliper of 3”. Where tree canopy coverage 909 percentage is indicated in Table 21A.37.060, tree canopy coverage shall not count 910 towards the minimum coverage requirements for park strip vegetation. 911 912 2. Minimum Vegetation Standards: The percentage of vegetation shall be no less than 913 the specified amount according to Chapter 21A.48. The vegetation shall be planted in 914 the public right of way. 915 Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.1 Tree Canopy Coverage 1 No tree canopy coverage shall cover less than the specified percentage according to Section 21A.37.060, Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.2 Minimum Vegetation Standards (References the measurements in Table D, Downtown Districts) [Illustration to be deleted] 28 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 916 917 23. Street Trees: All new development must provide street trees in accordance with the 918 requirements in Street trees are required and subject to the regulations in Section 919 Chapter 21A.48.080. Where specified in Table 21A.37.060 of this chapter, In addition 920 to those standards, for every new development, there shall be one street tree planted 921 for every 30’ of street frontage. 922 34. Soil Volume: In order to promote street tree health and longevity, each tree shall have 923 an adequate volume of soil. The soil volume surrounding a tree shall be 750ft3 to 924 1,000ft3 per tree, provided that this area is exclusive of the soils volume calculation 925 for adjacent trees. The soil volume may be reduced if under ground utilities are 926 present within the soil volume and the soil volume cannot be extended horizontally 927 due to other obstructions or barriers. 928 929 930 45. Minimize Curb Cuts: As an effort to emphasize the public realm and encourage the 931 safety of pedestrians, places where cars intersect the street shall be minimized. More 932 specifically, curb cuts are encouraged to be concentrated at midblock and alley 933 locations. The sidewalk material shall continue at ground level of the curb cuts. 934 1 The percentage of vegetation shall be no less than the specified percentage according to Chapter 21A.48. 2 Vegetation shall be planted in the public right of way. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.34 Soil Volume 1 The soil volume surrounding a tree shall be 750ft3 to 1,000ft3 per tree, provided that this area is exclusive of the soils volume calculation for adjacent trees. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.45 Minimize Curb Cuts 29 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 935 936 56. Overhead Cover: Overhead covers are required at building entrances to provide 937 weather protection to pedestrians and may encroach into a required yard as indicated 938 in this section or into a public right of way with an approved encroachment agreement 939 with the Ccity. These coverings are required to be between 9 and 14’ above the level 940 of the sidewalk. They shall also provide coverage with a minimum depth of 6’ and 941 project no closer to the curb than 3’. 942 1 Curb cuts are encouraged to be concentrated at midblock and alley locations. Illustration of Regulation 21A.37.050.P.56 Overhead Cover 1 The shade structure shall occur between 9 and 14’ above the level of the sidewalk. The shade shall provide a minimum coverage of 6’ in width. 3 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 71 I. Landscape Plan: A landscape plan conforming to the requirements of chapter Section 72 21A.48.050 and Subsection 21A.24.010.P of this title shall be required. 73 74 SECTION 3. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.24.030. That Subsection 75 21A.24.030.I of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: FR-1/21,780 Foothills 76 Residential District: Landscape Plan), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 77 I. Landscape Plan: A landscape plan conforming to the requirements of chapter Section 78 21A.48.050 and Subsection 21A.24.010.P of this title shall be required. 79 80 81 SECTION 4. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.24.120.G. That Subsection 82 21A.24.120.G of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Residential Districts: RMF-30 Low Density 83 Multi-Family Residential District: RMF-30 Building Type Zoning Standards), shall be and 84 hereby is amended to read as follows: 30 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 943 944 7. Streetscape Landscaping: All vegetation used along the streetscape must comply with 945 the landscape requirements set forth in Chapter 21A.48. 946 947 SECTION 23. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.37.060. That Subsection 948 21A.37.060 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Design Standards: Design Standards Required 949 in Each Zoning District), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 950 This section identifies each design standard and to which zoning districts the standard applies. If 951 a box is checked (X), that standard is required. If a box is blank, it is not required. If a specific 952 dimension or detail of a design standard differs among zoning districts or differs from the 953 definition, it will be indicated within the box. In cases where a dimension in this table conflicts 954 with a dimension in the definition, the dimensions listed in the table shall take precedence. 955 956 957 958 959 960 The cover shall project no closer than 3’ to the curb. 31 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 961 TABLE 21A.37.060 962 A. Residential Districts: 963 District Standard (Code Section) RMF-30 RMF-35 RMF-45 RMF-75 RB R-MU-35 R-MU-45 R-MU RO Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1)75 75 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050B.3) 80 80 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.4) Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1)60 60 40 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D)75 75 X Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 15 15 Street facing facade: maximum length(feet) (21A.37.050.F) Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G.2 and 21A.37.050.G.3) 10 Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I)X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J)X X X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K.1)X X X Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) 32 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) Residential character in RB District (21A.37.050.N) X 964 965 B. Commercial Districts: 966 District Standard (Code Section)SNB CN CB CS CC CSHBD CG1 TSA Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1)80 802 80 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2)60/25 70/20 60/25 Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.3)80 70 90 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.4)60 60 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1)40 40 40 40 60 60 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2)25 Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1)0 Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2)40 Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D)X X X X X 40 40 40 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E)15 15 15 15 20 15 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet)(21A.37.050.F)200 200 200 Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G.2 and 21A.37.050.G.3) 15 X Façade height for required stepback (21A.37.050.G.2)30 Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H)X X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I)X X X X X X X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J)X X X X X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K)X X X X X X 33 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) X Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M)X Primary entrance design SNB District (21A.37.050.O)X Tree canopy coverage (%)(21A.37.050.P.1)40 Minimum vegetation standards (%) (21A.37.050.P.2)X Street trees (21A.37.050.P.32)X Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.43)X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.54)X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.65)X Streetscape landscaping (21A.37.050.P.7)X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent buildings (21A.37.050.Q) Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R)X 967 Notes: 968 1. These standards only apply to the portion of the CG district within the boundaries of north of 900 S, south of 200 S, west 300 W and east of I-15. 969 2. Maximum width of the entrance shall be 35’ if the additional 20% is used for an entrance to a parking structure. 970 34 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 971 C. Manufacturing Districts: 972 DistrictStandard (Code Section)M-1 M-2 Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G) Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) 35 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Ground floor residential entrances (21A.37.050.L) Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) 973 974 D. Downtown Districts: DistrictStandard (Code Section)D-1 D-2 D-3 D-4 Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) 90 80 80 80 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) 80/10 70/20 70/20 70/20 Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) 70 80 701 70 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) 50 50 701 50 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 60 60 60 60 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 50 50 50 50 Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 0 0 0 0 Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 50 50 50 50 Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) 40 40 60 60 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 20 20 20 20 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) 150 200 150 150 Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G.1) X X X X Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X X X X 11 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 271 1. Parking shall be located behind principal buildings or incorporated into the principal 272 building provided the parking is wrapped on street facing facades with a use allowed 273 in the zone other than parking. 274 2. A parking lot shall not consist of more than two double-loaded parking aisles (bays) 275 adjacent to each other. The length of a parking lot shall not exceed 10 stalls. Parking 276 for government facilities necessary for public health and safety are exempt from this 277 provision. 278 Illustration of Regulation 21A.010.E.2 Surface Parking Lots 279 280 3. Parking lots, garages or parking structures, proposed as the only principal use on a 281 property that has frontage on a public street and that would result in a building 282 demolition are prohibited in the Downtown zoning districts. 283 4. No special restrictions shall apply to belowground parking facilities. 284 285 F. Midblock Walkways: As part of the city’s plan for the downtown area, it is intended that 286 midblock walkways be provided to increase pedestrian connectivity and overall livability 287 downtown through the creation of an intricate pedestrian network. The city has adopted 288 the Downtown Plan that includes a midblock walkway map and establishes a need for 289 such walkways as the Downtown grows. Because the districts within the downtown area 290 allow building heights that exceed those of other districts in the city, the requirement for 291 a midblock walkway is considered to be necessary to alleviate pedestrian impacts on the 292 public sidewalks by dispersing future use of the public sidewalks. All buildings 293 constructed after the effective date hereof within the Downtown zoning districts shall 294 conform to this officially adopted plan for midblock walkways, in addition to the 295 following standards: 296 36 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) X X X X Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) X2 X2 Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1) 40 40 40 40 Minimum vegetation standards (21A.37.050.P.2) X X X X Street trees (21A.37.050.P.32) X X X X Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.43) X X X X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.54) X X X X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.65) X X X X Streetscape landscaping (21A.37.050.P.7) X X X X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) X X X Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) X X X X 975 Notes: 976 1. In the D-3 zoning district this percentage applies to all sides of the building, not just the front or street facing facade. 977 2. Parking structures shall be located behind principal buildings. This requirement may be modified so that structures may 978 be located at least 15’ from front and corner side lot lines if a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the ground 979 floor adjacent to a sidewalk is used for retail goods/service establishments, office and/or restaurant space to encourage 980 pedestrian activity. The facades of the ground floor shall be designed to be compatible and consistent with the 981 associated retail or office portion of the building and other retail uses in the area. 982 983 E. Gateway Districts: DistrictStandard (Code Section) G-MU Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1)80 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) 70/20 Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) 70 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) 50 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1)60 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2)50 37 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 0 Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) 50 Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D)40 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) 150 Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G.1)X Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H)X1 Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I)X1 Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K)X Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) X2 Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1)40 Minimum vegetation standards (21A.37.050.P.2) X Street trees (21A.37.050.P.32)X Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.43)X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.54)X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.65)X Streetscape landscaping (21A.37.050.P.7)X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) X Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R)X 984 Notes: 985 1. Sidewalks and street lamps installed in the public right-of- way shall be of the type specified in the sidewalk/street 986 lighting policy document adopted by the city. 987 2. Parking structures shall be located behind principal buildings. This requirement may be modified so that structures may 988 be located at least 15’ from front and corner side lot lines if a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the ground 989 floor adjacent to a sidewalk is used for retail goods/service establishments, office and/or restaurant space to encourage 38 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 990 pedestrian activity. The facades of the ground floor shall be designed to be compatible and consistent with the 991 associated retail or office portion of the building and other retail uses in the area. 39 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 992 993 F. Special Purpose Districts: DistrictStandard (Code Section)RP BP FP AG AG-2 AG-5 AG-20 PL PL-2 I UI OS NOS MH EI MU Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1) Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.1) Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.2) Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) 40-70 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D) X Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) Upper floor stepback (feet) (21A.37.050.G) 4 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Building TypeBuilding Regulation Single- Family Dwelling Two- Family Dwelling Multi- Family Residential Row House1 Sideways Row House1 Cottage Development1 Tiny House1 Non Residential Building 85 Building TypeBuilding Regulation Single- Family Dwelling Two- Family Dwelling Multi- Family Residential Row House1 Sideways Row House1 Cottage Development1 Tiny House1 Non Residential Building H Height 30’Pitched Roof- 23’ Flat Roof-16’ 16’30’ F Front yard setback 20’ or the average of the block face C Corner side yard setback 10’ S Interior side yard setback 4’ on one side 10’ on the other 10’4’6’ on one side 10’ on the other 4’10’ R Rear yard Minimum of 20% lot depth, need not exceed 25’10’Minimum of 20% lot depth, need not exceed 25’ 40 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H) X X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I) X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K) X Ground floor residential entrances (21A.37.050.L) Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1) Minimum vegetation standards (21A.37.050.P.2) Street trees (21A.37.050.P.32) Soil Volume (21A.37.050.P.43) Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.54) Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.65) Streetscape landscaping (21A.37.050.P.7) 41 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R) 994 42 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 995 G. Form Based Districts: DistrictStandard (Code Section) FB-UN1 FB-UN2 FB-MU11 FB-SC FB-SE Ground floor use (%) (21A.37.050.A.1)75 753 75 75 Ground floor use + visual interest (%) (21A.37.050.A.2) Building materials: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.B.3) 70 70 70 70 70 Building materials: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.B.4) 70 70 70 70 70 Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1)601 601 601 601 601 Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2)15 15 15 15 15 Reflective Glass: ground floor (%) (21A.37.050.C.1) Reflective Glass: upper floors (%) (21A.37.050.C.2) Building entrances (feet) (21A.37.050.D)75 75 75 75 75 Blank wall: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.E) 15 15 30 30 30 Street facing facade: maximum length (feet) (21A.37.050.F) 200 200 200 200 200 Upper floor step back (feet) (21A.37.050.G.4) X X X X Lighting: exterior (21A.37.050.H)X X X X X Lighting: parking lot (21A.37.050.I)X X X Screening of mechanical equipment (21A.37.050.J) X X X Screening of service areas (21A.37.050.K.1) X X X2 Ground floor residential entrances for dwellings with individual unit entries (21A.37.050.L) X X X Parking garages or structures (21A.37.050.M) X X X X X Tree canopy coverage (%) (21A.37.050.P.1) 40 40 40 43 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Minimum vegetation standards (21A.37.050.P.2) X X X Street trees (21A.37.050.P.32)X X X X X Soil volume (21A.37.050.P.43)X X X Minimize curb cuts (21A.37.050.P.54)X X X Overhead cover (21A.37.050.P.65) Streetscape landscaping (21A.37.050.P.7)X X X Height transitions: angular plane for adjacent zone districts (21A.37.050.Q) X X X Horizontal articulation (21A.37.050.R)X X X 996 Notes: 997 1. This may be reduced to twenty percent (20%) if the ground floor is within one of the 998 following building types: urban house, two-family, cottage, and row house. 999 2. Except where specifically authorized by the zone. 1000 3. For buildings with street facing building facades over 100' in length: 1001 a. A minimum length of 30% of the ground floor street facing façade shall consist of 1002 non-residential active uses allowed by Subsection 21A.37.050.A.1. 1003 b. An additional minimum length of 45% of the ground floor street facing façade shall 1004 consist of any active uses allowed by Subsection 21A.37.050.A.1. 1005 c. This footnote does not apply to the rowhouse building form. 1006 1007 1008 SECTION 24. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.40.120.E.1. That Subsection 1009 21A.40.120.E.1 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Accessory Uses, Buildings and Structures: 1010 Regulation of Fences, Walls and Hedges: Height Restrictions and Gates), shall be and hereby is 1011 amended to read as follows: 1012 E. Height Restrictions and Gates: 1013 1014 1. Fences, walls, and hedges shall comply with the following regulations based on the 1015 following zoning districts: 1016 1017 a. Nonresidential Zoning Districts: 1018 1019 (1) Notwithstanding Subsection 21A.40.120.1.b.(l), in the M-2 and EI zoning 1020 districts fences, walls, or hedges may be up to six (6) feet in height if located 1021 between the front property line and the front yard setback line. 44 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1022 (2) If there is no minimum front yard setback in the underlying zoning district, a 1023 fence, wall, or hedge of a maximum six (6) feet in height may be placed no 1024 closer than ten (10) feet from the property line. 1025 (3) Outdoor storage, when permitted in the zoning district, shall be located behind 1026 the primary facade of the principal structure and shall be screened with a solid 1027 wall or fence and shall comply with the requirements in Section 5.60.120. 1028 1029 (4) All refuse disposal and recycling dumpsters, except those located in the M-2, 1030 LO and EI districts shall be screened on all sides by a solid wood fence, 1031 masonry wall or an equivalent opaque material to a height of not less than 6 1032 feet but not more than 8 feet. 1033 1034 SECTION 25. Amending the Text of Subsections 21A.44.060.A.2 and 3. That 1035 Subsections 21A.44.060.A.2 and 3 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Off Street Parking, 1036 Mobility and Loading: Parking Location and Design: Generally), shall be and hereby is amended 1037 to read as follows: 1038 2. Biodetention and Landscape Islands in General and Neighborhood Center 1039 Contexts Parking Lot Interior and Perimeter Landscaping Areas: Retention of 1040 the 80th percentile storm is required for all impervious surface parking lots with 1041 50 or more parking spaces. Where this is not feasible, as defined in the 1042 SLCDPUs Standard Practices Manual, an approved Stormwater Best 1043 Management Practices (Stormwater BMPs) is required. All proposed 1044 Stormwater BMPs are subject to Public Utilities Division review, approval, and 1045 inspection. For parking lots with one hundred (100) or more parking spaces in 1046 the General Context and Neighborhood Center Context areas, parking lot 1047 islands or biodetention areas shall be provided on the interior of the parking lot 12 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 297 1. Any new development shall provide a midblock walkway if a midblock walkway on 298 the subject property has been identified in a master plan that has been adopted by the 299 city. 300 2. The following standards apply to the midblock walkway: 301 a. The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 302 6’ wide unobstructed path. 303 b. The midblock walkway may be incorporated into the building provided it is open 304 to the public. A sign shall be posted indicating that the public may use the 305 walkway. 306 c. Building encroachments into the midblock walkway are permitted if they include 307 one or more of the following elements: 308 309 (1) Colonnades; 310 (2) Staircases; 311 (3) Balconies: All balconies must be located at the third story or above. 312 (4) Building overhangs and associated cantilever: - These coverings may be 313 between 9 and 14’ above the level of the sidewalk. They shall provide a 314 minimum depth of coverage of six feet and project no closer to the curb than 315 three feet. 316 (5) Skybridge: A single skybridge is permitted. All skybridges must be located at 317 the third, fourth, or fifth stories. 318 (6) Other architectural element(s) not listed above that offers refuge from weather 319 and/or provide publicly accessible usable space. 320 Illustration of Regulation 21A.30.010.F Midblock Walkways 1 The midblock walkway must be a minimum of 15’ wide and include a minimum 6’ wide unobstructed path. 321 45 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1048 to help direct traffic flow and to provide landscaped areas within such lots. 1049 3. Parking Location and Setbacks: All parking shall comply with the parking restrictions 1050 within yards pursuant to Table 21A.44.060-A, “Parking Location and Setback 1051 Requirements”. Parking lots with 15 or more stalls and within 20’ of a lot line that are 1052 in a required yard area or abutting a building are subject to Section 21A.48.070 1053 Parking Lot Landscaping. 1054 [Codifier: No changes to Table 21A.44.060-A to be made.] 1055 1056 1057 SECTION 26. Amending the Text of Subsections 21A.44.060.A.11 through 14. That 1058 Subsections 21A.44.060.A.11 through 14 of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Off Street Parking, 1059 Mobility and Loading: Parking Location and Design: Generally), shall be and hereby is amended 1060 to read as follows: 1061 1062 11. Landscaping and Screening: All parking areas and facilities shall comply with 1063 the landscaping and screening standards in Chapter 21A.48 and Section 1064 21A.40.120, “Landscaping and Buffers” of this title. 1065 12. Lighting: Where a parking area or parking lot is illuminated, the light source shall be 1066 shielded so that the light source is not directly visible from any abutting property or 1067 abutting private or public street. 1068 13. Signs: All signs in parking areas or related to parking facilities shall comply with 1069 Chapter 21A.46, “Signs”, and applicable provisions of the Manual on Uniform 1070 Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). 1071 14. Pedestrian Walkways: The following standards shall apply to 1072 1073 a. Ssurface parking lots with between twenty-five (25) and one hundred (100) or 1074 more parking spaces shall provide a pedestrian walkway or sidewalk through the 1075 parking lot to the primary entrance of the principal building. Pedestrian walkways 1076 shall be identified by a change in color, material, surface texture, or grade 1077 elevation from surrounding driving surfaces. 1078 b. Parking lots with more than one hundred (100) parking spaces shall provide: 1079 1080 a.(1) One (1) or more grade-separated Ppedestrian walkway(s) shall be at least 1081 five feet (5’) in width, and located in an area that is not a driving aisle surface, 1082 leading from the farthest row of parking spaces to the primary entrance of the 1083 principal building. 1084 b.(2) Vehicles shall not overhang the pedestrian walkway(s). 1085 c.(3) Where the walkway(s) crosses a drive aisle, pedestrian walkway(s) shall be 1086 identified by a change in color, material, surface texture, or grade elevation 1087 from surrounding driving surfaces, but such identification cannot be curbing of 1088 the walkway. 1089 d.(4) One (1) pedestrian walkway meeting these standards shall be provided for 46 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1090 every ach 50 one hundred (100) parking spaces provided on site or part 1091 thereof, after the first 20 one hundred (100) parking spaces. 1092 1093 1094 SECTION 27. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.44.070.B. That Subsection 1095 21A.44.070.B of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Off Street Parking, Mobility and Loading: Off 1096 Street Loading Areas: Location and Design of Loading Areas), shall be and hereby is amended to 1097 read as follows: 1098 B. Location and Design of Loading Areas: 1099 1100 1. All required loading berths shall be located on the same development site as the 1101 use(s) served. 1102 2. No loading berth shall be located within thirty feet (30’) of the nearest point of 1103 intersection of any two (2) streets. 1104 3. No loading berth shall be located in a required front yard. 1105 4. Each required loading berth shall be located and designed to: 1106 1107 a. Allow all required vehicle maneuvering and backing movements on-site; 1108 b. Minimize conflicts with pedestrian, bicycle, and traffic movement or 1109 encroachments into any pedestrian walkway, bicycle lane, public right-of-way, 1110 and fire lane; and 1111 c. Avoid the need to back into a public street while leaving the site to the maximum 1112 extent practicable, as determined by the planning director and the transportation 1113 director. 1114 1115 5. Landscaping and screening of all loading berths shall be provided to comply with the 1116 requirements of Chapter 21A.48 Subsection 21A.40.120, “Regulation of Fences, 1117 Walls, and Hedges Landscaping and Buffers”. 1118 6. Where a loading berth is illuminated, the light source shall be shielded so that the 1119 light source is not directly visible from any abutting property or abutting private or 1120 public street. 1121 7. All signs in loading areas shall comply with Chapter 21A.46, “Signs”, and applicable 1122 provisions of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 1123 8. All required loading berths shall comply with the surfacing standards of the Off Street 1124 Parking Standards Manual. 1125 1126 SECTION 28. Amending the Text of Chapter 21A.48. That Chapter 21A.48 of the Salt 1127 Lake City Code (Zoning: Landscaping and Buffers), shall be and hereby is amended to read as 1128 follows: 47 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1129 21A.48: LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERS 1130 1131 SECTION: 1132 21A.48.010: Purpose Statement and Intent 1133 21A.48.020: Enforcement Of Landscape Requirements Applicability 1134 21A.48.030: Landscape Plan Authority 1135 21A.48.040: Selection, Installation And Maintenance Of Plant Materials Responsibility 1136 & Maintenance 1137 21A.48.050: Design Standards And Guidelines Landscape Plan 1138 21A.48.055: Water Efficient Landscaping 1139 21A.48.060: Park Strip Landscaping Landscape Requirements 1140 21A.48.070: Parking Lot Or Vehicle Sales Or Lease Lots Landscaping Parking Lot 1141 Landscaping 1142 21A.48.080: Landscape Buffers General Standards 1143 21A.48.090: Landscape Yards Private Lands Tree Preservation 1144 21A.48.100: Special Landscape Regulations Appeal 1145 21A.48.110: Freeway Scenic Landscape Setback 1146 21A.48.120: Screening Of Refuse Disposal Dumpsters 1147 21A.48.130: Innovative Landscaping 1148 21A.48.135: Private Lands Tree Preservation 1149 21A.48.140: Changes To Approved Landscape Plans 1150 21A.48.150: Automobile Sales Establishments 1151 21A.48.160: Appeal 1152 21A.48.170: Landscaping Provided As A Condition Of Building Permit Issuance 1153 21A.48.010: PURPOSE STATEMENT: 1154 The landscaping and buffering requirements specified in this chapter are intended to foster 1155 aesthetically pleasing development which will protect and preserve the appearance, character, 1156 health, safety and welfare of the community. These regulations are intended to increase the 1157 compatibility of adjacent uses and, in doing so, minimize the harmful impacts of noise, dust 1158 and other debris, motor vehicle headlight glare or other artificial light intrusions, and other 1159 objectionable activities or impacts conducted or created by an adjoining or nearby use, 1160 thereby fostering compatibility among different land uses. These regulations are also 1161 intended to preserve, enhance and expand the urban forest and promote the prudent use of 1162 water and energy resources. 1163 21A.48.020: ENFORCEMENT OF LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: 1164 Wherever the submission and approval of a landscape plan is required by this title, such 1165 landscape plan shall be an integral part of any application for a building permit and 1166 occupancy permit. No permit shall be issued without city approval of a landscape plan as 1167 required herein. The requirements of this chapter may be modified by the zoning 1168 administrator, on a case by case basis, in response to input from the city police department 1169 regarding the effects of required landscaping on crime prevention. 1170 21A.48.030: LANDSCAPE PLAN: 48 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1171 A. Landscape Plan Required: A landscape plan shall be required whenever landscaping or 1172 alteration of landscaping is required by this title. Such landscape plan shall be drawn in 1173 conformance with the requirements specified in this chapter. Landscape plans must be 1174 approved by the zoning administrator prior to the issuance of a building permit. 1175 Landscape plans for planned developments or conditional uses, or other uses requiring 1176 site plan review approval shall be reviewed and approved by the development review 1177 team. The construction of detached single- family residences and two-family residences 1178 shall be exempt from this landscape plan requirement, except for dwellings in the FP, FR- 1179 1 and FR-2 districts, which shall conform to the requirements of this chapter. 1180 B. Content Of Landscape Plan: All landscape plans submitted for approval shall contain the 1181 following information, unless specifically waived by the zoning administrator: 1182 1183 1. The location and dimensions of all existing and proposed structures, property lines, 1184 easements, parking lots and drives, roadways and rights of way, sidewalks, bicycle 1185 paths, ground signs, refuse disposal and recycling areas, bicycle parking areas, fences, 1186 freestanding electrical equipment, tot lots and other recreational facilities, and other 1187 freestanding structural features as determined necessary by the zoning administrator; 1188 2. The location, quantity, size and name, both botanical and common names, of all 1189 proposed plants; 1190 3. The location, size and common names, of all existing plants including trees and other 1191 plants in the parkway, and indicating plants to be retained and removed; 1192 4. The location of existing buildings, structures and plants on adjacent property within 1193 twenty feet (20’) of the site, as determined necessary by the zoning administrator; 1194 5. Existing and proposed grading of the site indicating contours at two foot (2’) 1195 intervals. Proposed berming shall be indicated using one foot (1’) contour intervals; 1196 6. Elevations of all fences and retaining walls proposed for location on the site; 1197 7. Elevations, cross sections and other details as determined necessary by the zoning 1198 administrator; 1199 8. Water efficient irrigation system (separate plan required); 1200 9. Summary data indicating the area of the site in the following classifications: 1201 1202 a. Total area and percentage of the site in landscape area, 1203 b. Total area and percentage of the site in turf grasses, and 1204 c. Total area and percentage of the site in drought tolerant plant species. 1205 21A.48.040: SELECTION, INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PLANT 1206 MATERIALS: 1207 A. Selection: Plants used in conformance with the provisions of this chapter shall be of good 1208 quality, and capable of withstanding the extremes of individual site microclimates. Size 1209 and density of plants both at the time of planting and at maturity, are additional criteria 1210 which shall be considered by the zoning administrator when approving plants. The use of 1211 drought tolerant plants is preferred when appropriate to site conditions. 1212 B. Installation: All landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the current planting 1213 procedures established by the American Association of Nurserymen. The installation of 49 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1214 all plants required by this chapter may be delayed until the next optimal planting season, 1215 as determined by the zoning administrator. 1216 C. Maintenance: 1217 1218 1. Responsibility: The owner of the premises shall be responsible for the maintenance, 1219 repair and replacement of all landscaping materials and barriers, including refuse 1220 disposal areas, as may be required by the provisions of this chapter. 1221 2. Landscaping Materials: All landscaping materials shall be maintained in good 1222 condition so as to present a healthy, neat and orderly appearance, and plants not in 1223 this condition shall be replaced when necessary and shall be kept free of refuse and 1224 debris. 1225 3. Fences, Walls And Hedges: Fences, walls and hedges shall be maintained in good 1226 repair. 1227 4. Irrigation Systems: Irrigation systems shall be maintained in good operating condition 1228 to promote the conservation of water. 1229 21A.48.050: DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: 1230 Landscape plans shall be prepared based on the following design standards and guidelines. 1231 Design standards are numerically measurable design requirements that can be definitively 1232 evaluated for compliance. Design guidelines are not precisely measurable, but compliance 1233 can be determined through the evaluation process of landscape plan review. The evaluation 1234 and approval of landscape plans shall be based on compliance with both the design standards 1235 and guidelines. 1236 1237 A. Design Standards At Time Of Planting: 1238 1239 1. Deciduous Trees: All deciduous trees shall have a minimum trunk size of two inches 1240 (2”) in caliper, unless otherwise specified. 1241 2. Evergreen Trees: All evergreen trees shall have a minimum size of five feet (5’) in 1242 height, unless otherwise specified. 1243 3. Ornamental Trees: All ornamental trees shall have a minimum trunk size of one and 1244 one-half inches (11/2”) in caliper, unless otherwise specified. 1245 4. Shrubs: All shrubs shall have a minimum height or spread of eighteen inches (18”) 1246 depending on the plant’s natural growth habit, unless otherwise specified. Plants in 1247 five (5) gallon containers will generally comply with this standard. 1248 5. Drought Tolerant Species: Site conditions in Salt Lake City are generally arid, and the 1249 selection of plant species suited to dry conditions is appropriate. To promote water 1250 conservation, not less than eighty percent (80%) of the trees and eighty percent (80%) 1251 of the shrubs used on a site shall be drought tolerant species that can withstand dry 1252 conditions once established. The city has compiled a list titled “Water Conserving 1253 Plants For Salt Lake City”, that may be locally available. 1254 6. Existing Street Trees: The removal of trees within the street right of way is prohibited 1255 without the approval of the zoning administrator in consultation with the urban 1256 forester. 1257 1258 B. Design Guidelines: 5 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT L Minimum lot size2 2,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit 1,500 sq. ft. per dwelling unit 5,000 sq. ft. per building DU Maximum Dwelling Units per Form 1 2 8 6 8 per development 1 n/a BC Maximum Building Coverage 50% LY Required Landscaped Yards The front and corner side yards shall be maintained as landscape yards. LB Landscape Buffers per subsectionChapter 21A.48.080 C of this title. X X X G Attached Garages Garage doors accessed from the front or corner side yard shall be no wider than 50% of the front facade of the structure and set back at least 5’ from the street facing building facade and at least 20’ from the property line. Interior side loaded garages are permitted. DS Design Standards All new buildings are subject to applicable design standards in cChapter 21A.37 of this title. 50 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1259 1260 1. Scale And Nature Of Landscaping Material: The scale and nature of landscaping 1261 materials shall be appropriate to the size of the structures. Large scale buildings, for 1262 example, should generally be complemented by larger scale plants. 1263 2. Selection Of Plants: Plants shall be selected for form, texture, color, pattern of growth 1264 and adaptability to local conditions. 1265 3. Evergreens: Evergreens should be incorporated into the landscape treatment of a site, 1266 particularly in those areas where screening and buffer is required. 1267 4. Softening Of Walls And Fences: Plants shall be placed intermittently against long 1268 expanses of building walls, fences, and other barriers to create a softening effect. 1269 5. Planting Beds: Planting beds may be mulched with bark chips, decorative stone, or 1270 similar materials. Mulch shall not be used as a substitute for plants. 1271 6. Detention/Retention Basins And Ponds: Detention/retention basins and ponds shall be 1272 landscaped. Such landscaping may include shade and ornamental trees, evergreens, 1273 shrubbery, hedges, turf, ground cover and/or other plant materials. 1274 7. Water Conservation: Landscape design pursuant to the requirements of this chapter 1275 must recognize the climatic limitations of the Salt Lake City area and the need for 1276 water conservation. While irrigation systems are required for certain landscape areas, 1277 and may be desirable for other applications, all irrigation systems shall be designed 1278 for efficient use of water. 1279 8. Turf Grasses: Turf grasses should be used in areas with less than a fifty percent (50%) 1280 slope to prevent the runoff of irrigation water. 1281 9. Energy Conservation: Plant placement shall be designed to reduce the energy 1282 consumption needs of the development. 1283 1284 a. Deciduous trees should be placed on the south and west sides of buildings to 1285 provide shade from the summer sun. 1286 b. Evergreens and other plant materials should be concentrated on the north side of 1287 buildings to dissipate the effect of winter winds. 1288 1289 10. Preservation Of Existing Plants: Existing plants should be incorporated into the 1290 landscape treatment of a site as required herein or as required by the site plan review 1291 process found in chapter 21A.58 of this title. Trees in the public right of way shall not 1292 be removed without the approval of the zoning administrator and urban forester. 1293 11. Berming: Earthen berms and existing topographic features should be, whenever 1294 determined practical by the zoning administrator, incorporated into the landscape 1295 treatment of a site, particularly when combined with plant material to facilitate 1296 screening. 1297 21A.48.055: WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPING: 1298 A. Applicability: 1299 1300 1. New Development: All new development as specified below requiring approval by the 1301 city shall comply with the provisions of this section. 1302 1303 a. Residential: 51 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1304 1305 (1) Large subdivisions with ten (10) or more lots which also have a common 1306 landscaped area (applies to common area only); 1307 (2) Multi-family residential, three (3) units or more; 1308 (3) Planned unit developments that include residential units; 1309 (4) Single-family and two-family homes on lots that have a landscaped area 1310 greater than one-half (1/2) acre; 1311 (5) Common areas of condominium and/or planned developments; and 1312 (6) Mixed use developments including residential elements. 1313 1314 b. Nonresidential: 1315 1316 (1) Industrial; 1317 (2) Commercial; 1318 (3) Institutional (including public facilities); and 1319 (4) Mixed use developments including industrial, commercial, or institutional 1320 elements. 1321 1322 2. Existing Development: The regulations in this section shall apply to all existing 1323 nonresidential, mixed use and multi-family residential development projects that 1324 increase the square footage of the footprint of the building or the parking requirement 1325 by twenty five percent (25%) or more. 1326 3. Exemptions: The following developments and uses are exempt from the provisions of 1327 this section unless otherwise specified: 1328 1329 a. New single- and two-family homes on lots one-half (1/2) acre or less of 1330 landscaped area; 1331 b. Treasured landscapes; 1332 c. Plant collections as part of botanical gardens and arboretums open to the public; 1333 d. Community gardens and portions of private gardens dedicated to edible plants; 1334 e. Cemeteries; 1335 f. Parks, athletic fields and playgrounds; 1336 g. Ecological restoration projects that do not require a permanent irrigation system; 1337 and 1338 h. Similar uses and activities as determined by the zoning administrator in 1339 consultation with the public utilities department or designee. 1340 1341 B. Submittal Requirements: In addition to the submittal requirements set forth in section 1342 21A.48.030, “Landscape Plan”, of this chapter the applicant shall complete any 1343 additional submittal requirements identified in the “Salt Lake City Landscape BMPs For 1344 Water Resource Efficiency And Protection”. The landscape submittal packet shall be 1345 prepared by a licensed landscaped architect, licensed civil engineer, licensed architect, 1346 certified irrigation professional, or other landscape professional appropriately licensed or 1347 recognized by the state of Utah or Salt Lake City. It shall contain the submittal 1348 information listed in the “Salt Lake City Landscape BMPs For Water Resource 52 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1349 Efficiency And Protection” unless specifically waived in writing by the zoning 1350 administrator in consultation with the public utilities department director. 1351 C. Review Procedures: The following review procedures shall be followed for all 1352 landscaping plans and irrigation systems subject to this section: 1353 1. Landscaping plans shall be submitted concurrently with a development application. 1354 2. Backflow prevention plans shall be reviewed by the public utilities department. 1355 D. Standards: All developments subject to this section shall comply with the following 1356 standards: 1357 1. Required Plants: All landscapes in developments subject to this section shall use 1358 plants identified in the “Salt Lake City Plant List And Hydrozone Schedule” or plants 1359 identified as being water wise or low water plants in other guides approved by the 1360 public utilities department as listed in the “Salt Lake City Landscape BMPs For 1361 Water Resource Efficiency And Protection”. 1362 2. Plant Substitutions: Landscaping shall be installed consistent with the approved 1363 planting plans, but plant substitutions may be made provided that the substituted 1364 plants are from the same hydrozone and of similar plant type (grass for grass, tree for 1365 tree, etc.) as the plant originally specified in the approved landscape plan. 1366 3. Hydrozones: All landscape plans shall identify and indicate each plant, and all plants 1367 shall be grouped into appropriate hydrozones as listed in the “Salt Lake City Plant 1368 List And Hydrozone Schedule” and as described in the “Salt Lake City Landscape 1369 BMPs For Water Resource Efficiency And Protection”. Mixing plants from different 1370 hydrozones and with different water demands is strongly discouraged. Landscape 1371 areas with a mix of plants from different hydrozones shall be designated on landscape 1372 submittals as being of the hydrozone of the highest water demand plant within that 1373 irrigation zone. 1374 4. Water Budget: All developments with a total landscaped area greater than one-half 1375 (1/2) acre must install an irrigation meter at the expense of the applicant and shall be 1376 assigned a tier 2 water target by the public utilities department. 1377 5. Small Landscaped Areas: To prevent overspray and water waste, landscaped areas 1378 eight feet (8’) or smaller in any perimeter dimension, including, but not limited to, 1379 park strips, parking lot islands, and landscaped areas separated by walkways from 1380 other landscaped areas, shall only be irrigated with a system designed to prevent 1381 overspray. 1382 6. Soil Amendment/Preparation: Where appropriate, the use of organic soil amendments 1383 or additives, such as aged compost, are encouraged. See the “Salt Lake City 1384 Landscape BMPs For Water Resource Efficiency And Protection” for more 1385 information. 1386 7. Mulch: Where mulch is required or allowed in a landscape plan by this section, it 1387 shall be installed and maintained at a minimum depth of three inches to four inches 1388 (3” - 4”). Fiber barriers and plastic sheeting that are not porous to air and water are 1389 prohibited. 1390 8. Preservation Of Existing Specimen Trees: All specimen trees located within a 1391 landscape plan area shall be protected as provided in section 21A.48.135, “Private 1392 Lands Tree Preservation”, of this chapter. 53 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1393 9. Water Features: Unless it is a natural water body or stream, recirculating systems 1394 shall be used for all water features such as fountains, ponds, reflecting pools, and 1395 other similar water features. 1396 10. Irrigation Systems: Irrigation systems shall be designed, installed, and maintained to 1397 work efficiently, as defined in the “Salt Lake City Landscape BMPs For Water 1398 Resource Efficiency And Protection”. 1399 11. Backflow Prevention: Backflow prevention assemblies shall be designed and installed 1400 according to the standards as outlined in the “Salt Lake City Landscape BMPs For 1401 Water Resource Efficiency And Protection”. 1402 21A.48.060: PARK STRIP LANDSCAPING: 1403 A. Intent: The intent of these requirements is to maintain the appearance of park strips, and 1404 expand landscape design flexibility while not unreasonably inhibiting access for repair 1405 and maintenance of public utilities, encourage water conservation through the use of 1406 water conserving plants and generally to improve environmental conditions along the 1407 city’s streets. It is also the intent to protect the users of park strips by prohibiting the use 1408 of materials that may cause harm or injury to pedestrians or vehicles, and to provide for 1409 safe and convenient visual and physical access across park strips to and from vehicles 1410 that may park at the curb. 1411 B. Applicability: The requirements of this section shall apply to all “park strips”, as defined 1412 in section 21A.62.040 of this title, except as otherwise noted. 1413 1414 1. Properties With Curbs And Gutters: These standards apply to all properties in the 1415 city, including vacant lots that have street curb and/or gutter. Owners of property on 1416 streets that do not have curb and gutter are not required to maintain formal 1417 landscaping within the public right of way. 1418 2. Improvement Districts: These requirements shall not apply to official improvement 1419 districts where exceptions to park strip standards are approved pursuant to subsection 1420 E of this section. 1421 3. Discretionary Authority: The zoning administrator may modify the standards of this 1422 section to better achieve its intent and address site specific conditions such as, among 1423 other things, steep grades between the curb and sidewalk or the presence of canals or 1424 drainage channels. 1425 1426 C. General Landscape Requirements: 1427 1428 1. Property Owner Responsibility: All park strips shall be landscaped by the abutting 1429 property owner, in conformance with the provisions of this section. For permits 1430 involving new construction of a principal building, the contractor shall be responsible 1431 for landscaping the park strips as part of the building permit. In general, this 1432 landscaping will involve improving the ground surface of the park strip with plant 1433 material, or hard surface treatments where permitted. Park strip trees shall also be 1434 provided as required herein. 1435 2. Maintenance: All park strip landscaping shall be maintained in a safe and well kept 1436 condition by the abutting property owner. Trash, other debris, and noxious weeds 1437 shall not be allowed to collect or grow in these areas. 13 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 322 G. Sidewalks: For all downtown districts, sidewalks must be a clear walking path that is a 323 minimum of 10’ wide. Outdoor dining shall be permitted within the sidewalk if it 324 complies with the minimum width of a clear path as defined in the outdoor dining design 325 guidelines. 326 327 H. Landscaping and Buffers: All uses in the downtown districts shall comply with the 328 provisions governing landscaping and buffers in Chapter 21A.48 of this title. Where a 329 park strip does not exist, street trees are only required when the sidewalk width of at least 330 10’ can be maintained, in which required street trees shall be planted in tree wells with 331 tree grates. 332 333 IH.Additional Standards: All uses in the downtown districts shall comply with the standards 334 set in Part IV, Regulations of General Applicability, of this title, including the applicable 335 standards in the following chapters: 336 337 1. 21A.36 General Provisions 338 2. 21A.37 Design Standards 339 3. 21A.38 Nonconforming Uses and Noncomplying Structures 340 4. 21A.40 Accessory Uses, Buildings, and Structures 341 5. 21A.42 Temporary Uses 342 6. 21A.44 Off Street Parking, Mobility, and Loading 343 7. 21A.46 Signs 344 8. 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers 345 9. Any other applicable chapter of this title that may include applicable provisions. 346 347 348 SECTION 15. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.30.020.C. That Subsection 349 21A.30.020.C of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Downtown Districts: D-1 Central Business 350 District), shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 351 C. D-1 District General Regulations: The regulations established in this section apply to the 352 D-1 District as a whole. 353 354 1. Yard Requirements: No minimum yards are required. A maximum yard of eight feet 355 is allowed. 356 a. If provided, the yard must include one of the following elements: 357 358 i. Seating at a ratio of at least one bench for every 500 square feet of yard space; 359 or 360 ii. Landscaping that includes an increase of at least 25% in the total number of 361 trees required to be planted on the site; or 54 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1438 3. Watering: Sufficient water shall be provided for vegetative ground cover, annuals, 1439 perennials, shrubs and trees to keep them in a healthy condition. 1440 4. Definition Of An “Operable Irrigation System”: For purposes of this section, 1441 “operable irrigation system” shall mean a fixed underground irrigation system 1442 connected to the adjacent property’s water supply, but does not include a movable 1443 hose, sprinkler or other portable watering system. 1444 1445 D. Park Strip Trees: 1446 1447 1. Spacing And Size: Park strip trees, when required, shall be provided at the equivalent 1448 of at least one tree for each thirty feet (30’) of street frontage and may be clustered or 1449 spaced linearly as deemed appropriate by the city forester. Tree size shall be a 1450 minimum of two inch (2”) caliper (measured at a point 6 inches above the soil line) at 1451 time of planting. 1452 2. Tree Grates: If new trees are proposed in a park strip in which the area surrounding 1453 the tree will have an impervious surface, the property owner responsible for 1454 installation shall ensure that tree wells with grates are provided which have 1455 dimensions adequate to accommodate the recommended tree species. All new 1456 installation of tree grates shall be accompanied by an operable irrigation system to 1457 ensure adequate water to the tree, and structural soil shall be installed according to 1458 Salt Lake City engineering standards. 1459 3. Permit And Planting: No tree shall be planted in a park strip without first obtaining a 1460 permit from the urban forestry division of the Salt Lake City public services 1461 department (section 2.26.210 of this code). Tree species and location shall be 1462 approved by the city forester. 1463 4. Tree Maintenance: Planting and maintenance of trees shall be done in conformance 1464 with the Salt Lake City urban forestry standards and specifications which are 1465 available and shall be administered and enforced through the urban forestry office. 1466 No work (pruning, removal, etc.) shall be performed on street trees without first 1467 obtaining a permit from the urban forestry office. 1468 1469 E. Park Strip Ground Surface Treatment: The intent of this section is to provide a palette of 1470 allowed plant, organic and/or natural materials that allow for creative landscaping, 1471 maintain a healthy street tree canopy, and create an attractive pedestrian environment 1472 while encouraging actual, not merely perceptual, water conservation. In many instances, 1473 a water wise turf grass/sod remains the most effective park strip plant material. 1474 1475 1. Plant Coverage: Live plant materials, not to exceed twenty two inches (22”) in height, 1476 are allowed. Plants with heights up to thirty six inches (36”) tall may be allowed as 1477 specimen or accent plants when not located within sight distance areas. These plants 1478 may not be planted in a manner that would create a visual barrier between the street 1479 and the sidewalk. 1480 At least thirty three percent (33%) or more of the park strip surface must be covered 1481 with turf, perennial or low growing shrub vegetation within three (3) years of planting 1482 or when planting has reached maturity, whichever comes first. For lots with two (2) 1483 or more street frontages, this standard shall be applied separately to each adjacent 55 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1484 park strip on each street frontage. In new park strips, or when replacing landscaping 1485 in existing park strips, it is recommended that water conserving plants constitute at 1486 least eighty percent (80%) of all plants used. 1487 Plants which have thorns, spines, or other sharp, rigid parts are hazardous to 1488 pedestrians and bicyclists, and are difficult to walk across and are generally 1489 prohibited except that limited use of thorn bearing flowers, such as roses, may be 1490 acceptable subject to the approval of the zoning administrator. 1491 2. Erosion: It shall be the property owner’s responsibility to ensure that erosion does not 1492 deposit soil or other material on sidewalks or in the street. Where annual or perennial 1493 plants are planted in the park strip, an organic much is required on the park strip 1494 during the dormant season to prevent erosion. 1495 3. Organic Mulch: Materials such as bark, shredded plant material, and compost, may be 1496 used as water conserving mulch for plants and may also be used as the only material 1497 in portions of a park strip. 1498 4. Gravel, Rocks, And Boulders: Because rock, gravel and other hard surface materials 1499 as a ground cover retain and emit heat during the summer months when water is 1500 scarce, they may not be used within a thirty six inch (36”) radius (72 inch diameter) 1501 of any street tree, unless an operable irrigation system is provided. Otherwise, gravel, 1502 rocks, and boulders, may be used on portions of the park strip. Organic mulch or 1503 gravel, as approved by the city forester, shall be used near existing street trees. Rocks 1504 are limited to twenty inches (20”) in height. Boulders as an accent material are 1505 limited to thirty six inches (36”) in height, and may not be arranged in a manner that 1506 creates a continuous visual obstruction. 1507 Any rock raised above the curb height shall be set back from the curb by at least 1508 twenty four inches (24”). 1509 Large diameter rocks (over 6 inches) or boulders shall be kept a minimum of twenty 1510 four inches (24”) away from street trees. 1511 Any material placed beneath gravel, rocks or boulders designed to block weed growth 1512 must be of a porous nature, allowing water to percolate to plant root systems. 1513 5. Paving Materials: Paving materials, limited to poured concrete, concrete pavers, brick 1514 pavers, or natural stone pavers, may be used in portions of a park strip subject to the 1515 following limitations: 1516 1517 a. Paving Materials Near Existing Street Trees: Poured concrete shall not be placed 1518 in any park strip with existing street trees unless the park strip is being improved 1519 as part of an improvement district or pedestrian traffic counts warrant (as 1520 determined by Salt Lake City transportation and engineering divisions) and tree 1521 grates and an operable irrigation system is being installed, except as otherwise 1522 noted. Organic mulch or gravel, as approved by the city forester, shall be used 1523 near existing street trees. Poured concrete or rocks/gravel may not be used in any 1524 park strip unless an operable irrigation system is provided to the street trees. 1525 b. Twenty Four Inch Wide Park Strips: Except as specified in subsection E5a of this 1526 section, any allowed paving material listed in this section may be used in a park 1527 strip that is twenty four inches (24”) or less in width. If poured concrete is used, it 1528 shall be finished with a stamped pattern resembling brick or natural stone or 56 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1529 scored with another decorative pattern to distinguish it from the adjacent 1530 sidewalk. 1531 c. Less Than Thirty Six Inch Wide Park Strips: In park strips that are less than thirty 1532 six inches (36”) in width, brick pavers, concrete pavers, or natural stone pavers 1533 may be used. Poured concrete shall not be used except for carriageways as 1534 outlined in subsection E6 of this section. The use of plants in combination with 1535 paving materials is encouraged. 1536 d. Park Strips Thirty Six Inches Wide Or Greater: In park strips thirty six inches 1537 (36”) in width or greater, the combination of all paving materials, gravel, rocks, 1538 and boulders shall not exceed sixty seven percent (67%) of the total park strip 1539 surface area. Poured concrete shall not be used except for carriageways as 1540 outlined in subsection E6 of this section. 1541 6. Carriageways: In order to provide for safe and convenient access across park strips to 1542 and from vehicles that may park at the curb, carriageways (walkways between the 1543 curb and sidewalk) through planted area are encouraged. The material of 1544 carriageways may be poured concrete, concrete pavers, brick pavers, or flat, natural 1545 stone paving materials such as flagstone or a combination of these materials. If 1546 poured concrete is used, the carriageway shall be not more than four feet (4’) in width 1547 and shall be located so as to provide the most direct route from the curb to the 1548 sidewalk. The area of carriageways shall be included in calculating the percentage of 1549 inorganic material in the park strip. 1550 7. Retaining Walls, Fences And Other Similar Structural Encroachments: Retaining 1551 walls, fences, steps, raised planter boxes and other similar structural encroachments in 1552 park strips are only permitted when specifically approved by the engineering 1553 department pursuant to adopted standards and/or recognized engineering principles, 1554 and by: 1555 1556 a. The historic landmark commission if the proposed structure is located with the H 1557 historic preservation overlay district; 1558 b. The planning commission if the proposed structure is part of a development 1559 proposal that requires planning commission approval; 1560 c. The planning director or the planning director’s designee if the proposed structure 1561 is not within an H historic preservation overlay district and not part of a 1562 development proposal that requires planning commission approval; or 1563 d. The city council if the proposed structure is part of an adopted improvement 1564 district. 1565 1566 Structural encroachments in park strips are generally limited because they may block 1567 access from the street to the sidewalks and create obstructions to, and increase the 1568 cost of performing maintenance of public improvements and utilities within the park 1569 strip. Structural encroachments are not permitted unless the relevant decision making 1570 entities identified in this section find that: 1571 1572 a. The proposed structures will serve the general public and are part of general 1573 public need, or 57 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1574 b. The proposed structures are necessary for the functional use of the adjacent 1575 property (such as a mailbox near the curb, steps or a retaining wall on a sloping 1576 site, fence behind the sidewalk, etc.), and 1577 c. There are no other practical locations for the structure on the adjacent private 1578 property. 1579 1580 Any raised structure or retaining wall shall be set back from the curb by at least 1581 twenty four inches (24”). 1582 This subsection E7 does not apply to outdoor dining that is subject to section 1583 21A.40.065 of this title or ground mounted utility boxes governed by section 1584 21A.40.160 of this title. 1585 1586 8. Plants And Objects Within Sight Distance Areas: Because of safety and visibility 1587 issues related to both pedestrians and automobile drivers, tall objects are not allowed 1588 in sight distance triangle areas. Except for street trees, or mailboxes, no plant, 1589 boulder, monument, structure or other object which is over twenty two inches (22”) in 1590 height shall be planted or located within sight distance areas. 1591 9. Turf And Gravel On Steep Park Strips: Turf and gravel are not permitted in park 1592 strips with a slope greater than three to one (3:1) (3 feet horizontal distance to 1 foot 1593 vertical distance). Turf is difficult to mow on steep slopes and gravel will migrate 1594 down the slope and collect in the gutter. Larger rocks (a diameter greater than 6 1595 inches) or boulders used on steep park strips shall be buried in the ground to a depth 1596 equal to at least one-third (1/3) of the rock or boulder’s average dimension in order to 1597 anchor them into the slope. 1598 10. Exceptions To Park Strip Standards: Exceptions to the park strip policies established 1599 herein shall be limited to the following: 1600 1601 a. Improvement District: Variations from these standards may be approved as part of 1602 improvement districts. Areas where alternative park strip materials could be 1603 considered include identifiable nonresidential areas. The improvement district 1604 concept is not intended to respond to one or two (2) properties but an identifiable 1605 district. The improvement district concept is not generally applicable to 1606 residential areas where a predominant design theme consisting of vegetation has 1607 been established. 1608 b. Nonconforming Provision: All vegetation located in park strips prior to November 1609 5, 1992, may be maintained subject to city transportation division approval for 1610 sight distance and public way safety requirements. 1611 c. Bus Stop Benches And Shelters, And Bike Share Stations: Concrete pads for bus 1612 stop benches and/or shelters and bike share stations are permitted with zoning 1613 administrator approval and subject to all permitting requirements. Concrete used 1614 for this purpose shall not be included in calculating the percentage of inorganic 1615 material in the park strip. 1616 d. Outdoor Dining: Park strip materials may be modified by the zoning administrator 1617 when outdoor dining is approved pursuant to section 21A.40.065 of this title. 1618 21A.48.070: PARKING LOT OR VEHICLE SALES OR LEASE LOTS LANDSCAPING: 58 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1619 A. Applicability: All hard surfaced parking lots or hard surfaced vehicle sales or lease lots, 1620 for passenger cars and light trucks, with fifteen (15) or more parking spaces shall provide 1621 landscaping in accordance with the provisions of this section. Smaller parking lots shall 1622 not be required to provide landscaping other than yard area landscaping and landscaped 1623 buffer requirements as specified in other sections of this title. 1624 B. Interior Parking Lot And Vehicle Sales Or Lease Lots Landscaping: 1625 1626 1. Area Required: Not less than five percent (5%) of the interior of a parking lot or 1627 vehicle sales or lease lots shall be devoted to landscaping. Landscaping areas located 1628 along the perimeter of a parking lot or vehicle sales or lease lots beyond the curb or 1629 edge of pavement of the lot shall not be included toward satisfying this requirement. 1630 2. Landscaped Areas: The landscaped areas defined in subsection B1 of this section 1631 shall be improved in conformance with the following: 1632 1633 a. Dispersion: Interior parking lot or vehicle sales or lease lots landscaping areas 1634 shall be dispersed throughout the parking lot or vehicle sales or lease lots. 1635 b. Minimum Size: Interior parking lot or vehicle sales or lease lots landscaping areas 1636 shall be a minimum of one hundred twenty (120) square feet in area and shall be a 1637 minimum of five feet (5’) in width, as measured from back of curb to back of 1638 curb. 1639 c. Landscape Material: The plants used to improve the landscape areas defined 1640 above shall conform to the following: 1641 1642 (1) Type: The primary plant materials used in parking lots or vehicle sales or 1643 lease lots shall be shade tree species in conformance with applicable 1644 provisions of subsections 21A.48.050A and B of this chapter. Ornamental 1645 trees, shrubbery, hedges, and other plants may be used to supplement the 1646 shade tree plantings, but shall not be the sole contribution to such landscaping; 1647 (2) Quantity: One shade tree shall be provided for every one hundred twenty 1648 (120) square feet of landscaping area; 1649 (3) Ground Cover: A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of every interior parking 1650 lot or vehicle sales or lease lots landscaping area shall be planted with an 1651 approved ground cover in the appropriate density to achieve complete cover 1652 within two (2) years, as determined by the zoning administrator. 1653 1654 3. Exceptions: In the CG, M-1, M-2 and EI districts, hard surfaced areas used as 1655 operational yard areas for trucks, trailers and other incidental vehicles, other than 1656 passenger automobiles and light trucks, and which are not parking lots for employees, 1657 clients, and customers, are exempt from the parking lot interior landscaping 1658 standards. 1659 1660 C. Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping: 1661 1662 1. Applicability: Where a parking lot is located within a required yard, or within twenty 1663 feet (20’) of a lot line, perimeter landscaping shall be required along the 1664 corresponding edge of the parking lot in conformance with the provisions in table 59 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1665 21A.48.070G of this section. Perimeter landscaping for vehicle sales or lease lots 1666 shall include rear and interior side yard landscaping only. Front and corner side yard 1667 landscaping for vehicle sales or lease lots shall be provided as specified in each 1668 zoning district. Where both landscape buffers and parking lot landscaping is required, 1669 the more restrictive requirement shall apply. 1670 2. Landscape Area: Where perimeter landscaping is required, it shall be provided within 1671 landscape areas at least seven feet (7’) in width, as measured from the back of the 1672 parking lot curb and extending any parking space overhang area. 1673 3. Required Improvements: Within the landscape area required above, landscape 1674 improvements shall be required as established in table 21A.48.070G of this section. 1675 D. Parking Lot Fencing: Fences along parking lot perimeters may be required through the 1676 site plan review process pursuant to the provisions of chapter 21A.58 of this title or when 1677 required by the zoning administrator to satisfy buffer requirements outlined in section 1678 21A.48.080 of this chapter. 1679 E. Parking Lot Curb Controls: Six inch (6”) poured concrete curb controls shall be 1680 constructed around all required landscaping on the perimeter and within parking lots. 1681 F. Discretionary Authority: The zoning administrator may modify requirements of this 1682 section to better achieve the intent of this section and address site specific conditions. 1683 These modifications shall be limited to the location of required plants and shall not 1684 permit a reduction in the required total number of plants. 1685 G. Landscape Improvements Table: 1686 1687 TABLE 21A.48.070G 1688 REQUIRED PERIMETER PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS 1689 General Intent: The landscape requirements identified in this table provide for the 1690 enhancement of parking lots by recognizing two (2) distinct conditions. The first is where 1691 parking lots are located within front and corner side yards, and a uniform scheme of 1692 landscaping is required to protect the aesthetics along public streets. The second condition is 1693 where parking lots are located within rear and interior side yards, and minimum requirements 1694 for beautification of both residential and nonresidential uses are the city’s goal. The intent is 1695 to require a higher level of landscaping for residential uses (principally multi-family uses) 1696 than for nonresidential uses. The improvements established in this table are required only for 1697 parking lots with fifteen (15) or more spaces and where the lot is located within a required 1698 yard or within twenty feet (20’) of a lot line. The reduction of impacts between dissimilar 1699 uses is addressed by section 21A.48.080 of this chapter. Where both parking lot landscaping 1700 and landscape buffers are required, the more restrictive shall apply. Required Landscaping Front And Corner Side Yards Required Landscaping Front And Corner Side Yards Shade trees 1 tree per 50 feet of yard length, measured to the nearest whole number (in addition to required parkway trees) 6 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 87 88 SECTION 5. Amending the Text of Section 21A.26.010. That Section 21A.26.010 of 89 the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: General Provisions), shall be and hereby 90 is amended as follows: 91 a. That Subsection 21A.26.010.C.1 shall be amended to read as follows: 92 93 C. Impact Controls Aand General Restrictions Iin Tthe Commercial Districts: 94 95 1. Refuse Control: Temporary storage of refuse materials shall be limited to that 96 produced on the premises. Refuse containers must be covered and shall be stored 97 within completely enclosed buildings or screened in conformance with the 98 requirements of chapter Section 21A.40.1208 of this title. For buildings existing as of 99 April 12, 1995, this screening provision shall be required if the floor area or parking 100 requirements are increased by twenty five percent (25%) or more by an expansion to 101 the building or change in the type of land use. 102 103 b. That Subsection 21A.26.010.H shall be amended to read as follows: 104 105 H. Landscaping Aand Buffering: The landscaping and buffering requirements for the 106 Ccommercial Ddistricts shall be as specified in cChapter 21A.48 , including 107 section 21A.48.110, of this title. 108 109 SECTION 6. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.26.020.G. That Subsection 110 21A.26.020.G of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: CN Neighborhood 111 Commercial District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is amended to read as 112 follows: 113 G. Landscape Yard Requirements: Front and corner side yards shall be maintained as 114 landscape yards, conforming to the requirements of Chapter 21A.48. Subject to site plan 115 review approval, part or all of the landscape yard may be a patio or plaza, conforming to 116 the requirements of Chaptersection 21A.48.090 of this title. 117 118 SECTION 7. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.26.025.G. That Subsection 119 21A.26.025.G of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: SNB Small 60 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Shrubs 1 shrub per 3 feet, on center along 100 percent of the yard length. Shrubs with mature height not more than 3 feet unless a lower shrub height is specifically required in this chapter for front yard areas Ground cover Landscape area outside of shrub masses shall be established in turf or other ground cover Rear And Interior Side YardsRequired Landscaping Residential Use (Including Institutional Residential Uses) Nonresidential Use Shade trees 1 tree per 30 feet of yard length, measured to the nearest whole number 1 tree per 50 feet of yard length, measured to the nearest whole number Shrubs 1 shrub per 3 feet, on center along 100 percent of the yard length. Shrubs shall have a mature height not less than 3 feet 1 shrub per 3 feet, on center along 50 percent of the yard length. Shrubs shall have a mature height of not less than 3 feet Ground cover Landscape area outside of shrub masses shall be established as per section 21A.48.090 of this chapter Landscape area outside of shrub masses shall be established as per section 21A.48.090 of this chapter 1701 H. Landscaping Performance Standards For Airport District (A): Parking lot landscaping in 1702 Airport District shall comply with the specifications set forth in subsections 1703 21A.34.040EE and FF of this title. 1704 21A.48.080: LANDSCAPE BUFFERS: 1705 A. Applicability: The regulations of this section shall establish the dimensions and 1706 improvement requirements of landscape buffers as required for transitions between 1707 dissimilar uses. 1708 B. General Restrictions: Landscape buffers shall be reserved for planting and fencing as 1709 required within this section. No parking, driveways, sidewalks, accessory buildings or 1710 other impervious surfaces shall be permitted, unless specifically authorized through the 61 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1711 site plan review process. Landscape buffers may be located within required yards or 1712 required landscape yards as established in the applicable district regulations. Where both 1713 landscape buffers and parking lot landscaping is required the more restrictive shall apply. 1714 C. Size Of Landscape Buffers: The minimum size of landscape buffers for various situations 1715 is set forth below: 1716 1717 1. RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45, RMF-75, R-MU-35, R-MU-45, R-MU, RO, MU, PL, 1718 PL-2 And OS Districts: Lots in the RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45, RMF-75, R-MU-35, 1719 R-MU-45, R-MU, RO, MU, PL, PL-2 or OS Districts which abut a lot in a single- 1720 family or two-family residential district, shall provide a ten foot (10’) wide landscape 1721 buffer. 1722 2. RB And FB-UN1 Districts: A landscape buffer is not required for lots in an RB or 1723 FB-UN1 District which abut a lot in a residential district. 1724 3. CN, CB, CC And CSHBD Districts: Lots in the CN, CB, CC or CSHBD Districts 1725 which abut a lot in a residential district shall provide a seven foot (7’) landscape 1726 buffer. 1727 4. CS And CG Districts: Lots in the CS or CG Districts which abut a lot in a residential 1728 district shall provide a fifteen foot (15’) landscape buffer. 1729 5. M-1 District: Lots in the M-1 District which abut a lot in a residential, AG-2 1730 Agriculture, or AG-5 Agriculture District shall provide a fifteen foot (15’) landscape 1731 buffer. 1732 6. M-2 District: Lots in the M-2 District which abut a lot in a residential district shall 1733 provide a fifty foot (50’) landscape buffer. 1734 7. RP And BP Districts: Lots in the RP or BP Districts which abut a lot in a residential 1735 district shall provide a thirty foot (30’) landscape buffer. 1736 8. I Institutional District: Lots in the I Institutional District which abut a lot in a 1737 residential district shall provide a landscape buffer fifteen feet (15’) in width or equal 1738 to the average height of the facade of the principal building facing the buffer, 1739 whichever is greater. 1740 9. UI Urban Institutional District: Lots in the UI Urban Institutional District which abut 1741 a lot in a single-family or two-family residential district shall provide a fifteen foot 1742 (15’) landscape buffer. 1743 10. MH Mobile Home District: A landscape buffer of twenty feet (20’) in width shall be 1744 provided around the perimeter of each mobile home park. 1745 11. EI Extractive Industries And LO Landfill Overlay Districts: A landscape buffer of 1746 thirty feet (30’) shall be provided around the perimeter of each use. 1747 12. TSA District: Lots in the TSA District which abut a lot in an OS, R-1, R-2, SR, 1748 RMF-30, RMF-35 or RMF-45 District shall provide a ten foot (10’) landscape buffer. 1749 13. All Other Non-Residential Districts: Where not otherwise specified by this 1750 subsection, lots in a non-residential district which abut a lot in an R-1, R-2, SR, RMF- 1751 30, RMF-35 or RMF-45 District shall provide a seven foot (7’) landscape buffer. The 1752 provided landscape buffer shall be improved to the same standards required for lots in 1753 the CN Zone. 1754 1755 D. Improvement Of Landscape Buffers: Required planting and fencing shall be installed in 1756 conformance with the following provisions: 62 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1757 1758 1. RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45, RMF-75, R-MU-35, R-MU-45, R-MU, RO, MU, PL, 1759 PL-2 And OS Districts: In the RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45, RMF-75, R-MU-35, R- 1760 MU-45, R-MU, RO, MU, PL, PL-2 and OS Districts, the following improvements 1761 shall be provided: 1762 1763 a. Shade trees shall be planted at the rate of one tree for every thirty (30) linear feet 1764 of landscape buffer. 1765 b. A continuous evergreen or deciduous shrub hedge shall be planted along the 1766 entire length of landscape buffer. This shrub hedge shall have a mature height of 1767 not less than four feet (4’). 1768 c. A fence not exceeding six feet (6’) in height may be combined with the shrub 1769 hedge, subject to the approval of the Zoning Administrator. 1770 d. Landscape yards shall be maintained per section 21A.48.090 of this chapter. 1771 1772 2. CN, CB, CC And CSHBD Districts: In the CN, CB, CC, and CSHBD Districts, the 1773 following improvements shall be provided: 1774 1775 a. Shade trees shall be planted at the rate of one tree for every thirty (30) linear feet 1776 of landscape buffer; 1777 b. Shrubs, having a mature height of not less than four feet (4’), shall be planted 1778 along the entire length of the landscape buffer; 1779 c. Landscape yards shall be maintained per section 21A.48.090 of this chapter; and 1780 d. A solid fence between four feet (4’) and six feet (6’) in height shall be erected 1781 along the property line unless waived by the Zoning Administrator. 1782 1783 3. CS, CG, TSA, M-1, I, UI, MH, RP And BP Districts: In the CS, CG, TSA, M-1, I, UI, 1784 MH, RP and BP Districts, the following improvements shall be provided: 1785 1786 a. Shade trees shall be planted at the rate of one tree per twenty five (25) linear feet 1787 along the entire length of the landscape yard. Shade trees may be clustered subject 1788 to the site plan review approval. Evergreen trees may be substituted for a portion 1789 of the shade trees; 1790 b. Shrub masses, at least two (2) rows deep and with shrubs alternately spaced, shall 1791 be provided along the entire length of the landscape yard. Shrubs shall reach a 1792 mature height of not less than four feet (4’); 1793 c. Landscape yards shall be maintained per section 21A.48.090 of this chapter; and 1794 d. A solid fence six feet (6’) in height shall be located on the property line along the 1795 required landscape buffer unless waived by the Zoning Administrator. 1796 1797 4. M-2 District: In the M-2 District, the following improvements shall be provided: 1798 1799 a. Shade trees shall be planted at a rate of one tree for every twenty feet (20’) of 1800 length of the landscape buffer. Shade trees may be grouped or clustered, subject 1801 to site plan review approval. Evergreen trees may be used as substitutes for some 1802 of the shade trees. 14 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 362 iii. Awning or a similar form of weather protection that covers at least five feet in 363 width and length from all street-facing building entrances. 364 b. Exceptions to this requirement may be authorized through the design review 365 process, subject to the requirements of Chapter 21A.59 of this title. 366 c. The planning director, in consultation with the transportation director, may 367 modify this requirement to accommodate a wider sidewalk if the adjacent public 368 sidewalk is less than 15’ wide and the resulting modification to the setback results 369 in a more efficient public sidewalk. The planning director may waive this 370 requirement for any addition, expansions, or intensification, which increases the 371 floor area or parking requirement by less than 50% if the planning director finds 372 the following: 373 374 i. The architecture of the addition is compatible with the architecture of the 375 original structure or the surrounding architecture, or 376 ii. The addition reduces the extent of the noncompliance of the existing building. 377 378 d. Regardless of the setback provided, doors shall be setback a minimum distance to 379 allow the door to operate without swinging into a right of way or midblock 380 walkway. 381 e. Interior Side Yards: No minimum interior side yard is required. 382 f. Rear Yard: No minimum rear yard is required. 383 384 4. Landscape Requirements For Demolition Sites: Vacant lots, resulting from 385 demolition activities where no replacement use is proposed, shall conform to chapter 386 21A.48 of this title, special landscape requirements applicable to the D-1 Central 387 Business District. 388 389 SECTION 16. Amending the Text of Section 21A.32.030. That Section 21A.32.030 of 390 the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Special Purpose Districts: BP Business Park District), shall be 391 and hereby is amended as follows: 392 a. That Subsection 21A.32.030.E shall be amended to read as follows: 393 394 E. Minimum Open Space Area: The minimum open space area for any use shall not be less 395 than fifteen percent (15%) of the lot area. 396 397 1. At least thirty three percent (33%) of the required open space area shall be covered 398 with vegetation. 399 2. All landscaped open space areas shall conform with the water efficient landscaping 400 standards found in section Chapter 21A.48.055 of this title. 401 402 63 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1803 b. Shrub masses, at least two (2) rows deep and with shrubs alternately spaced, shall 1804 be provided along seventy five percent (75%) of the length of the landscape yard. 1805 Shrubs shall reach a mature height of not less than four feet (4’). 1806 c. Landscape yards shall be maintained per section 21A.48.090 of this chapter. 1807 1808 5. EI And LO Districts: Each use in the EI and LO Districts must submit a landscape 1809 plan to the Zoning Administrator indicating how the proposed landscaping will 1810 mitigate noise, dust or other impacts on surrounding and nearby uses. 1811 21A.48.090: LANDSCAPE YARDS: 1812 Landscape yards are yards devoted exclusively to landscaping except, however, that 1813 driveways and sidewalks needed to serve the use and buildings on the lot may be located 1814 within a required landscape yard. As used in this chapter, the term “landscaping” shall be 1815 defined as set forth in section 21A.62.040, “Definitions Of Terms”, of this title. No specific 1816 improvements are required within landscape yards, except that all landscape areas shall be 1817 maintained with at least one-third (1/3) of the yard(s) area covered by vegetation, which may 1818 include trees, shrubs, grasses, annual or perennial plants and vegetable plants. Mulches such 1819 as organic mulch, gravel, rocks and boulders shall be a minimum depth of three inches to 1820 four inches (3” - 4”), dependent on the material used, to control weeds and erosion in 1821 unplanted areas and between plants, and that these aforementioned items at all times cover 1822 any installed weed block barriers that cover the ground surface. 1823 1824 A. Bond Requirement: All developers and/or contractors shall be required to post a bond 1825 with the City for the total amount of the landscaping contract for all multi-family 1826 dwellings and commercial development. 1827 21A.48.100: SPECIAL LANDSCAPE REGULATIONS: 1828 In addition to the foregoing requirements, special landscape regulations shall apply to certain 1829 zoning districts. These regulations are established below: 1830 1831 A. FP Foothills Protection District: 1832 1833 1. Landscape Plan Required: A landscape plan, conforming to sections 21A.48.030 and 1834 21A.48.050 of this chapter, shall be required for all uses within this district. This plan 1835 shall delineate the proposed revegetation of disturbed areas of the site, and 1836 road/driveway areas. The landscape plan shall extend one hundred feet (100’) beyond 1837 the disturbed site area and twenty five feet (25’) beyond the limits of grading for 1838 roads/driveways, but need not include any portions of the site designated as 1839 undevelopable unless these areas are disturbed. 1840 2. Maximum Disturbed Area: The maximum disturbed area shall not exceed ten percent 1841 (10%) of the total site area. 1842 3. Tree Preservation And Replacement: Existing trees over two inches (2”) in caliper 1843 that are removed from the site to accommodate development shall be replaced. 1844 Whenever microclimate conditions make it practical, the proportion of replacement 1845 tree species shall be the same as the trees removed. 64 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1846 4. Limits On Turf: To help promote the intent of this district by minimizing the impact 1847 on the natural landscape, the area of turf grasses shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) 1848 of the area to be landscaped and shall not encroach into undevelopable areas. 1849 5. Slope Revegetation: All slopes graded or otherwise disturbed shall be 1850 restored/replanted. Restored vegetation shall consist of native or adapted grasses, 1851 herbaceous perennials, or woody trees and shrubs as appropriate for slope, soil and 1852 microclimate conditions. 1853 6. Irrigation: Irrigation shall be installed to provide needed water for at least the first two 1854 (2) years of growth to establish revegetation of natural areas. Irrigation for areas of 1855 turf and ornamental landscaping shall be provided at the discretion of the property 1856 owner, however, all systems shall be subject to the review and approval of the Zoning 1857 Administrator. 1858 7. Erosion Protection: As a condition of site plan approval, a plan for erosion protection 1859 shall be submitted with the landscape plan. 1860 1861 B. FR-1 And FR-2 Foothills Residence Districts: 1862 1863 1. Landscape Plan Required: A landscape plan, conforming to sections 21A.48.030 and 1864 21A.48.050 of this chapter, shall be required for all uses within this district. This plan 1865 shall delineate the proposed revegetation of disturbed site areas. 1866 2. Tree Preservation And Replacement: Existing trees over two inches (2”) in caliper 1867 that are removed from the site to accommodate development shall be replaced. 1868 Whenever microclimate conditions make it practical, the proportion of replacement 1869 tree species shall be the same as the trees removed. 1870 3. Slope Revegetation: All slopes graded or otherwise disturbed shall be 1871 restored/replanted. Restored vegetation shall consist of native or adapted grasses, 1872 herbaceous perennials, or woody trees and shrubs as appropriate for slope and 1873 microclimate conditions. 1874 4. Irrigation: Irrigation shall be installed to provide needed water for at least the first two 1875 (2) years of growth to establish revegetation of natural areas. Irrigation for areas of 1876 turf and ornamental landscaping shall be provided at the discretion of the property 1877 owner, however, all systems shall be subject to city review and approval. 1878 5. Erosion Protection: As a condition of site plan approval, a plan for erosion protection 1879 shall be submitted with the landscape plan. 1880 1881 C. CC Commercial District: 1882 1883 1. Special Front Yard Landscaping: Special front yard landscaping shall be required in 1884 conformance with the following: 1885 1886 a. The first fifteen feet (15’) of lot depth shall be devoted to landscaping. Driveways 1887 and sidewalks may be located within this area to serve the building and use on the 1888 lot; 1889 b. Shrubs limited to a height of not more than three feet (3’) shall be provided at the 1890 rate of one shrub for every two feet (2’) of lot width. A mix of shrub species is 1891 recommended, and at least forty percent (40%) of the shrubs must be evergreen; 65 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1892 c. Trees shall be provided at the rate of one tree for every twenty five feet (25’) of 1893 lot width, rounded to the nearest whole number. Evergreen trees or shade trees 1894 may be substituted with ornamental trees, subject to the review and approval of 1895 the development review team; and 1896 d. Areas not planted with shrubs or trees shall be maintained in turf or as vegetative 1897 ground cover. A drought tolerant ground cover is recommended. 1898 1899 2. Irrigation: Permanent irrigation shall be installed and used as needed to maintain plant 1900 material in a healthy state. 1901 3. Maintenance: Landscaping shall be installed and maintained in substantial 1902 conformance with the approved landscape plan. Landscaping shall be kept free of 1903 weeds and litter. 1904 1905 D. D-1 Central Business District And D-4 Downtown Secondary Central Business District: 1906 1907 1. Right Of Way Landscaping: The principal area of focus for landscaping in the D-1 1908 and D-4 districts shall be along sidewalks and parkways. Landscaping on private 1909 property shall be subject to the regulations below and in the D-1 and D-4 districts. 1910 1911 a. Location: Landscape areas shall be located a minimum of two feet (2’) from back 1912 of the street curb and shall be located in conformance with the adopted 1913 beautification plan for an approved beautification district. If the beautification 1914 plan does not address the site in question, the location of landscape areas shall be 1915 determined through the site plan review process. 1916 b. Trees: Shade trees shall be planted as specified through the site plan review 1917 process. 1918 c. Shrubs/Ground Cover: The ground surface of the landscape area may be suitable 1919 for the planting of shrubs, ground cover or flowers depending on use and 1920 pedestrian patterns. Tree grates or other improvements may be required to 1921 facilitate pedestrian circulation along the street. The ground surface shall be 1922 determined by the beautification plan, or in the absence of specific direction from 1923 the plan, the site plan review process. 1924 1925 2. Landscaping For Vacant Lots: Special landscaping shall be required on those lots 1926 becoming vacant, where no replacement use is proposed, in conformance with the 1927 following: 1928 1929 a. Landscape Yard Requirement: A landscape yard of fifteen feet (15’) shall be 1930 required as measured from any point along all property lines. Fencing, pursuant to 1931 section 21A.40.120 of this title, can be used as an element of the overall 1932 landscaping plan, however, shall not be used in lieu of the landscaping 1933 requirements of this section. The purpose of any fencing on downtown lots is for 1934 aesthetic value only, and shall consist of wrought iron or other similar material 1935 (no chainlink). Fencing shall be open so as not to create a visual barrier, and shall 1936 be limited to a maximum of four feet (4’) in height, with the exception of a fence 1937 located on any corner lot as noted in subsection 21A.40.120E of this title. The 66 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1938 approval of a final landscape plan, that includes a fencing element, shall be 1939 delegated to the building official with the input of the planning director, to 1940 determine if the fencing materials, location, and height are compatible with 1941 adjacent properties in a given setting. 1942 b. Trees: Shade trees shall be provided at the rate of one tree per thirty feet (30’) of 1943 yard length, rounded up to the nearest whole number. 1944 c. Shrubs: Shrubs shall be provided at the rate of one plant for every three feet (3’) 1945 of yard length, evenly spaced, limited to a height of not more than three feet (3’). 1946 All plants shall be drought tolerant; consult the Salt Lake City water wise plant 1947 list for suggestions. At least forty percent (40%) of the plants must be evergreen. 1948 d. Ground Cover: Areas not planted with shrubs and trees shall be maintained in 1949 drought tolerant vegetative ground cover. 1950 e. Irrigation: Permanent irrigation shall be installed and used as needed to maintain 1951 plant materials in a healthy state. 1952 f. Maintenance: Landscaping shall be installed and maintained in conformance with 1953 the approved landscape plan. Landscaping shall be kept free of weeds and litter. 1954 E. Transitional Overlay District: All conditional uses in the transitional overlay district shall 1955 conform to the following landscape/buffer requirements. Permitted uses shall be exempt 1956 from these requirements. 1957 1958 1. Landscaped Front And Corner Side Yard: All front and corner side yards shall be 1959 maintained as landscape yards. The improvement of such landscape yards shall be 1960 consistent with the character of the residential neighborhood. 1961 2. Landscaped Interior Side Yard: Where the interior side yard abuts a residential use, a 1962 landscape yard eight feet (8’) in width shall be provided. This landscape yard shall be 1963 improved as set forth below: 1964 1965 a. A six foot (6’) high solid fence or wall shall be constructed from the front yard 1966 setback line to the rear lot line. The outside edge of this fence or wall shall be 1967 located no less than seven feet (7’) from the side lot line. The requirement for a 1968 fence or wall may be waived by the zoning administrator if the building elevation 1969 facing the residential property is of a design not requiring screening by a fence or 1970 wall; 1971 b. Deciduous shade trees shall be planted within the landscape yard. One tree per 1972 thirty (30) linear feet of landscape yard shall be required, although the spacing of 1973 trees may be arranged in an informal manner; 1974 c. A continuous row of shrubs (deciduous or evergreen) shall be planted along the 1975 entire length of the landscape yard. The size of the shrubs shall not be less than 1976 four feet (4’) in height at the time of maturity. The spacing of shrubs shall not be 1977 greater than five feet (5’) on center. Shrubs must be set back from the side lot line 1978 at least four feet (4’) on center; and 1979 d. Landscape yards shall be maintained per section 21A.48.090 of this chapter. 1980 1981 3. Landscaped Rear Yard: Where the rear yard abuts a residential use, a solid fence or 1982 wall shall be constructed along the entire length of the rear lot line. The requirement 67 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1983 for a fence or wall may be waived if conditions on the lot, including landscape 1984 screening within the rear yard, eliminate the need for a fence or wall. 1985 21A.48.110: FREEWAY SCENIC LANDSCAPE SETBACK: 1986 A. Purpose Statement: Freeway scenic landscape setbacks shall be established along all 1987 federal interstate highways to enhance the visual appearance of Salt Lake City, reduce 1988 visual distractions to motorists and promote the general health, safety and welfare of Salt 1989 Lake City. 1990 B. Applicability: Freeway scenic landscape setbacks shall be required for all lots abutting an 1991 interstate highway that are subdivided after April 12, 1995, for construction of a principal 1992 building, or for a twenty five percent (25%) floor area increase of a principal building, or 1993 for any new use of a previously undeveloped site or twenty five percent (25%) expansion 1994 of an existing use on a developed site, in all zones except single- family, R-2 single- and 1995 two-family residential districts. 1996 C. Scenic Landscape Location: Freeway scenic landscape setbacks shall be located directly 1997 adjacent to an interstate highway right of way line. For applicable properties adjacent to 1998 an interstate highway, a scenic landscape setback shall be provided along the full length 1999 of its frontage along such interstate highway. 2000 D. Size Of Scenic Landscape Setback: For lots platted after April 12, 1995, scenic landscape 2001 setbacks shall be twenty feet (20’) in width. For lots existing as of April 12, 1995, the 2002 width of the scenic setback may be reduced, upon approval of the zoning administrator, if 2003 such reduction is necessary to achieve the required off street parking. The width of the 2004 scenic landscape setback shall not be less than ten feet (10’). 2005 E. Planting Of Scenic Landscape Setback: All scenic landscape setbacks shall be planted to 2006 achieve a significant vegetative screen. To accomplish this, the following planting shall 2007 be required within a scenic landscape setback. 2008 2009 1. Shade Trees: One shade tree shall be planted for each three hundred (300) square feet 2010 of setback area. 2011 2. Evergreen Trees: Evergreen trees may be substituted for one hundred percent (100%) 2012 of the shade trees required in subsection E1 of this section, where microclimate 2013 conditions support the use of evergreen trees, subject to the approval of the zoning 2014 administrator. 2015 3. Ornamental Trees: Ornamental trees, having a mature canopy size less than thirty feet 2016 (30’), may be substituted for up to thirty percent (30%) of the shade trees required in 2017 subsection E1 of this section. 2018 4. Large Shrubs: Large shrubs may be substituted for up to ten percent (10%) of the 2019 shade trees required in subsection E1 of this section. Three (3) large shrubs shall be 2020 planted for each shade tree substitution. 2021 5. Ground Cover: To promote water conservation and the visual character of the native 2022 landscape, scenic landscape setbacks shall use native grasses, wildflowers and shrubs 2023 for the establishment of ground cover. In areas with greater exposure to sun and 2024 drought conditions, herbaceous perennials and shrubs will be used to create a native 2025 ground cover. 2026 68 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2027 F. Drought Tolerant Material: All of the plant material used shall be drought tolerant species 2028 conforming to the current list maintained by the zoning administrator, or as otherwise 2029 approved. 2030 G. Irrigation: A permanent water efficient irrigation system shall be installed within each 2031 scenic landscape setback. 2032 H. Waiver Of Requirements: Some or all of the requirements of this section may be waived 2033 by the zoning administrator if conformance with such will not benefit the visual 2034 appearance of the city or the general public welfare. Specifically, the zoning 2035 administrator may waive the requirement where property abuts interstate highway bridges 2036 and underpasses and where the change of grade/elevation would not allow for views of 2037 the scenic landscape setback. 2038 21A.48.120: SCREENING OF REFUSE DISPOSAL DUMPSTERS: 2039 All refuse disposal dumpsters, except those located in the CG, M-2, LO and EI districts shall 2040 be screened on all sides by a solid wood fence, masonry wall or an equivalent opaque 2041 material to a height of not less than six feet (6’) but not more than eight feet (8’). This 2042 requirement shall not apply to recycling containers and devices. 2043 21A.48.130: INNOVATIVE LANDSCAPING: 2044 Innovative landscaping design is encouraged and shall be considered as a positive attribute in 2045 connection with any request for a variation from the requirements of this chapter. 2046 21A.48.135: PRIVATE LANDS TREE PRESERVATION: 2047 A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of these tree preservation provisions is to recognize and 2048 protect the valuable asset embodied in the trees that exist on private lands within the city 2049 and ensure that the existing trees of Salt Lake City continue to provide benefit to its 2050 citizens. Essential to effective tree preservation is the understanding of tree growth 2051 requirements having to do with space, water, and soil quality needs, among other 2052 qualities. Good, early planning, site design, and construction management practices are 2053 key to allowing trees to prosper. Preconstruction planning and mitigation of potential 2054 impacts that development may have on trees is necessary and one of the purposes of this 2055 section. Numerous community and personal benefits arise from the presence of trees in 2056 urbanized areas - both on residential and nonresidential lands - and it is the intent of this 2057 section through the preservation of the trees to: 2058 2059 1. Enhance the quality of life in the city and protect public health and safety; 2060 2. Preserve and enhance the visual and aesthetic qualities of the city; 2061 3. Enhance public and private property for greater enjoyment and usability due to the 2062 shade, cooling, and the aesthetic beauty afforded by trees; 2063 4. Protect and improve the real estate values of the city; 2064 5. Preserve and enhance air and water quality; 2065 6. Reduce noise, glare, dust, and heat, and moderate climate, including urban heat island 2066 effect; 2067 7. Increase slope stability, and control erosion and sediment runoff into streams and 2068 waterways; 69 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2069 8. Protect the natural habitat and ecosystems of the city; 2070 9. Conserve energy by reducing heating and cooling costs; and 2071 10. Preserve the function of mature trees to absorb greenhouse gases such as carbon 2072 dioxide. 2073 2074 B. Applicability: 2075 2076 1. General: The standards in this section shall apply to new development in the city 2077 unless exempted in accordance with subsection C, “Exemptions”, of this section. The 2078 standards in this section shall apply at the time of a development application for 2079 “development” as defined in the zoning ordinance. 2080 2. Other Regulations: Title 2, chapter 2.26 of this code, the Salt Lake City urban forestry 2081 ordinance, addressing the protection of trees located on public property owned by the 2082 city and in rights of way, shall remain in effect. 2083 3. Specimen Trees: The city forester shall maintain a list of trees or tree types that are 2084 deemed to be specimen trees subject to subsection E, “Standards”, of this section. 2085 2086 C. Exemptions: The following specimen tree removal activities may be exempt from the 2087 standards of this section upon confirmation and approval by the city forester: 2088 2089 1. The removal of dead, damaged, or naturally fallen trees, or in cases of community 2090 emergency; 2091 2. When in conjunction with the construction of a single- or two- family residence not 2092 part of a proposed new subdivision; 2093 3. The removal of trees on an existing legal lot when not associated with new 2094 development; 2095 4. The removal of trees in such a condition that they pose a threat to structures or natural 2096 features on the site, on adjoining properties, or in the public right of way; 2097 5. The removal of diseased trees posing a threat to adjacent trees; 2098 6. The selective and limited removal of trees necessary to obtain clear visibility at 2099 driveways or intersections; 2100 7. The removal of trees associated with development at the Salt Lake City International 2101 Airport only as necessary to provide safe operations; 2102 8. The removal of trees when requested by the city forester for the purposes of conflict 2103 with utilities or streets; and 2104 9. The removal of trees deemed appropriate by the city forester, based on tree species, 2105 site conditions, or other variables. 2106 D. Definitions: For purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall have the following 2107 meanings: 2108 CALIPER: The dimension of the diameter of a tree trunk measured at a distance of 2109 six inches (6”) from the soil line. 2110 dbh: Diameter at breast height. 2111 DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT: The dimension of the diameter of a tree trunk 2112 measured at a distance of four feet six inches (4’6”) from the ground. 7 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 120 Neighborhood Business District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is 121 amended to read as follows: 122 G. Landscape Yard Requirements: Front and corner side yards shall be maintained as 123 landscape yards. Subject to site plan review approval, part or the entire landscape yard 124 may be a patio or plaza, conforming to the requirements of section 21A.48.090 of this 125 title. 126 127 SECTION 8. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.26.040.F. That Subsection 128 21A.26.040.F of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: CS Community 129 Shopping District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is amended to read as 130 follows: 131 F. Landscape Yard Requirements: A landscape yard of fifteen feet (15’) shall be required on 132 all front and corner side yards, conforming to the requirements of Chaptersection 133 21A.48.090 of this title. 134 135 SECTION 9. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.26.050.E. That Subsection 136 21A.26.050.E of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: CC Corridor 137 Commercial District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is amended to read as 138 follows: 139 F. Landscape Yard Requirements: A landscape yard of fifteen feet (15’) shall be required on 140 all front and corner side yards, conforming to the requirements of Chaptersection 141 21A.48.090 and subsection 21A.48.100C of this title. 142 143 144 SECTION 10. Amending the Text of Section 21A.26.060. That Section 21A.26.060 of 145 the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: CSHBD Sugar House Business District 146 (CSHBD1 and CSHBD2)), shall be and hereby is amended as follows: 147 a. That Subsection 21A.26.060.J shall be amended to read as follows: 148 149 J. Park Strip Materials: Propertiesy within this zoning district may utilize alternative park 150 strip landscaping materials. Alternative materials are subject to planning director 151 approval based on its compliance with the adopted shall be considered part of 152 an improvement district subject to the provisions of Section 21A.48.060, and as such, 70 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2113 MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE: No feasible or practical alternative exists, 2114 as determined by the city forester, and all possible efforts to comply with the 2115 standards or regulations and minimize potential harmful or adverse impacts have been 2116 undertaken by the applicant. Economic considerations may be taken into account but 2117 shall not be the overriding factor in determining “maximum extent practicable”. 2118 SPECIMEN TREE: A structurally sound and healthy tree or grouping of trees, having 2119 an individual or combined dbh measuring greater than ten inches (10”); whose future 2120 vitality can be reasonably expected and maintained with proper protection and 2121 regularly scheduled care; and whose absence from the landscape would significantly 2122 alter the site’s appearance, environmental benefit, character or history. 2123 TREE PROTECTION FENCING: The fencing required to be installed, and 2124 maintained during construction activities, to delineate required tree protection zones. 2125 TREE PROTECTION ZONE: The area of a development site that includes the area 2126 located within the drip line of specimen trees and also includes the area that supports 2127 tree health requirements and interactions as determined by the city forester. 2128 E. Standards: 2129 1. Preservation Of Specimen Trees: Specimen trees shall be preserved to the maximum 2130 extent practicable as determined by the city forester, in consultation with the zoning 2131 administrator, unless exempted pursuant to subsection C, “Exemptions”, of this 2132 section. 2133 2134 a. In determining if preservation is impracticable, the city shall consider the 2135 following criteria, including, but not limited to: 2136 2137 (1) Whether an alternative location or configuration of the development including 2138 elements such as parking or structures on the site would be feasible to 2139 accomplish tree preservation, without negatively impacting adjacent 2140 properties, 2141 (2) Whether preservation of the specimen tree would render all permitted 2142 development on the property infeasible, or 2143 (3) If development of the property will provide significant community benefits 2144 that outweigh tree preservation. 2145 2146 b. The zoning administrator may modify any dimensional standard, such as setbacks 2147 and height limits, by up to twenty percent (20%) if such modification will result 2148 in preservation of a specimen tree. 2149 2150 2. Cutting, Removal, Or Damage Prohibited: Specimen trees, required to be preserved, 2151 shall not be cut, removed, pushed over, killed, or otherwise damaged. 2152 3. Paving, Fill, Excavation, Or Soil Compaction Prohibited: The tree protection zone of 2153 any protected specimen tree shall not be subjected to paving, filling, excavation, or 2154 soil compaction. 2155 4. Mitigation: Where the city determines it is not practicable to preserve a specimen tree 2156 on the development site, the following mitigation provisions shall apply. 71 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2157 2158 a. Replacement Tree Required: Two (2) caliper inches of replacement trees shall be 2159 provided for each dbh of specimen tree removed (for example, if a 24 inch dbh 2160 specimen tree is removed, it must be replaced with at least 24 trees of a minimum 2161 2 inch caliper or 8 trees with a 6 inch caliper). Each replacement tree shall be a 2162 minimum of two inches (2”) in caliper, and shall either be replanted prior to 2163 certificate of occupancy or within a conditional time frame as approved by the 2164 city forester. Consult the “Salt Lake City Plant List And Hydrozone Schedule” for 2165 recommendations on tree selection. 2166 Replacement trees shall be planted on the lot or site where the specimen tree was 2167 removed except where the city forester, in consultation with the zoning 2168 administrator, finds the following: 2169 2170 (1) The site does not provide for adequate landscape surface area to 2171 accommodate the total number of replacement trees; or 2172 (2) That due to unique soil types, topography, or unusual characteristics of the 2173 site, the likelihood of successful tree growth is diminished. 2174 In such cases, the applicant shall mitigate for the loss of the specimen tree in 2175 the form of payment to the city’s tree fund as provided below. 2176 2177 b. Cash In Lieu Payment/Tree Fund Contribution: Applicants who are permitted to 2178 remove a specimen tree but not plant a replacement tree on site shall make a cash 2179 in lieu payment, in the amount of the cost to purchase and plant the required 2180 number of replacement trees, into the city’s tree fund. 2181 F. Specimen Tree Protection During Construction: 2182 1. Owner’s Responsibility: During construction, the owner of the property shall be 2183 responsible for the ongoing health of specimen trees located on the site. This includes 2184 basic tree maintenance and watering throughout the term of construction. The owner 2185 shall also ensure the erection of barriers necessary to protect any specimen tree from 2186 damage during and after construction. 2187 2. Tree Protection Zone Fencing: Tree protection fencing shall be erected to protect all 2188 preserved trees from excavation, fill, compaction, or other impacts that would 2189 threaten tree health. Specimen trees shall be fenced in accordance with this subsection 2190 before any grading, excavating, or other land disturbing activity begins on a 2191 construction site. No construction, grading, equipment or material storage, or any 2192 other activity shall be allowed within the tree protection zone, as delineated by the 2193 required tree protection fencing, except in accordance with the standards in 2194 subsection F3, “Encroachments Into Tree Protection Zones And Root Zones”, of this 2195 section. Fencing shall be maintained until the land disturbance activities are complete, 2196 and shall not be removed or altered without first obtaining written consent from the 2197 city forester. 2198 The tree protection fencing shall be clearly shown on the required development 2199 applications such as a site plan, building permit, or grading permit application. 15 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 403 b. That Subsection 21A.32.030.I shall be amended to read as follows: 404 405 I. Other District Regulations: In addition to the foregoing regulations, all uses shall comply 406 with the following requirements: 407 408 1. Enclosed Operations: All principal uses shall take place within entirely enclosed 409 buildings. 410 2. Outdoor Storage: Accessory outdoor storage shall be screened with a solid fence and 411 approved through the site plan review process. 412 3. Nuisance Impacts: Uses and processes shall be limited to those that do not create a 413 nuisance to the use and enjoyment of adjacent property due to odor, dust, smoke, 414 gases, vapors, noise, light, vibration, refuse matter or water carried waste. The use of 415 explosive or radioactive materials, or any other hazardous materials, shall conform to 416 all applicable State or Federal regulations. 417 4. Property Zoned Business Park: When a property zoned Business Park abuts, or is 418 across the street from, an AG-2 or AG-5 Zoning District the following standards shall 419 apply: 420 421 a. Buildings shall be prohibited within one hundred feet (100’) of the adjacent 422 property line; 423 b. Parking lots shall be prohibited within fifty feet (50’) of the adjacent property 424 line; and 425 c. The portion of the lot located between the adjacent property line and the parking 426 lot or building shall be improved in the form of a landscaped buffer with a 427 minimum five foot (5-’)foot berm and shall comply with the provisions of 428 subsection Chapter 21A.48.080D3 of this title. 429 430 SECTION 17. Amending the Text of Section 21A.32.040. That Section 21A.32.040 of 431 the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Special Purpose Districts: FP Foothills Protection District), 432 shall be and hereby is amended to read as follows: 433 21A.32.040: FP FOOTHILLS PROTECTION DISTRICT: 434 435 A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of the FP Foothills Protection District is to protect the 436 foothill areas from intensive development in order to protect the scenic value of these 437 areas, wildlife habitats and to minimize flooding and erosion. This district is appropriate 438 in areas where supported by applicable master plans. 439 440 B. Uses: Uses in the FP Foothills Protection District as specified in sSection 21A.33.070, 441 “Table Oof Permitted Aand Conditional Uses Ffor Special Purpose Districts”, of this 442 title, are permitted subject to the general provisions set forth in sSection 21A.32.010 of 443 this chapter and this section. 72 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2200 a. Location: Fencing shall extend at least one foot (1’) in distance from the edge of 2201 the drip line of a specimen tree or group of specimen trees or as directed by the 2202 city forester to best protect a specimen tree’s critical root zone and still allow 2203 construction access. 2204 b. Type Of Fencing: The developer shall erect a chainlink fence, a minimum of four 2205 feet (4’) in height, secured to metal posts driven into the ground. Such fencing 2206 shall be secured to withstand construction activity and weather on the site and 2207 shall be maintained in a functional condition for the duration of work on the 2208 property. This is not considered permanent fencing subject to section 21A.40.120, 2209 “Regulation Of Fences, Walls And Hedges”, of this title. 2210 c. Timing: All required tree protection measures shall be installed, inspected and 2211 approved by the city forester prior to the commencement of any land disturbing 2212 activities. 2213 2214 3. Encroachments Into Tree Protection Zones And Root Zones: Encroachments into a 2215 tree protection zone or within the critical root zones of trees protected in accordance 2216 with this subsection shall occur only in rare instances, and only upon obtaining 2217 written authorization from the city forester. If such encroachment is anticipated, tree 2218 preservation measures including, but not limited to, the following may be required: 2219 2220 a. Tree Crown And/Or Root Pruning: The pruning, or cutting, of specimen tree 2221 branches or roots shall only be done under the supervision of an ISA certified 2222 arborist, and only upon approval of the city forester. 2223 b. Soil Compaction Impact Mitigation: Where compaction might occur due to 2224 planned, temporary traffic through or materials placed within the protection zone, 2225 the area shall first be mulched with a minimum four inch (4”) layer of woodchips 2226 or a six inch (6”) layer of pine straw. Plywood sheet or metal plate coverage of 2227 the impacted area may be accepted by the city forester when high moisture 2228 conditions warrant. Equipment or materials storage shall not be allowed within 2229 the tree protection zone. 2230 c. Grade Change Impact Mitigation: In the event proposed site development requires 2231 soil elevation changes tree protection measures designed to mitigate harm to the 2232 tree(s) shall be coordinated with the city forester and the zoning administrator. 2233 d. Construction Debris/Effluent Strictly Prohibited: In no instance shall any debris or 2234 effluent, associated with the construction process, including equipment or vehicle 2235 washing, concrete mixing, pouring, or rinsing processes, be permitted to drain 2236 onto lands within tree protection zones, as delineated by the chainlink tree 2237 protection fencing. 2238 2239 G. Enforcement: These tree preservation provisions shall be subject to the zoning and 2240 development enforcement codes as adopted by the city. 2241 21A.48.140: CHANGES TO APPROVED LANDSCAPE PLANS: 2242 Any change or deviation to an approved landscape plan shall require the approval of the 2243 zoning administrator. Changes which do not conform to this chapter shall be subject to the 2244 procedures for a variance as established in chapter 21A.18 of this title. Landscape 73 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2245 improvements made to a lot that are not in conformance with an approved landscape plan 2246 shall be a violation of this title, and subject to the fines and penalties established herein. 2247 21A.48.150: AUTOMOBILE SALES ESTABLISHMENTS: 2248 In the absence of more restrictive regulations of the applicable zoning district, automobile 2249 sales and lease establishments shall be required to provide a five foot (5’) landscape front and 2250 corner side yard. 2251 21A.48.160: APPEAL: 2252 Any person adversely affected by a final decision of the zoning administrator on a 2253 landscaping or buffer requirement may appeal to the appeals hearing officer in accordance 2254 with the provisions of chapter 21A.16 of this title. 2255 21A.48.170: LANDSCAPING PROVIDED AS A CONDITION OF BUILDING 2256 PERMIT ISSUANCE: 2257 The landscaping required by this chapter shall be provided as a condition of building permit 2258 issuance for any addition, expansion or intensification of a property that increases the floor 2259 area and/or parking requirement by fifty percent (50%) or more. The zoning administrator 2260 may waive the landscaping requirement if an existing building is located in an area of the lot 2261 that is required to be landscaped and compliance with the landscaping requirements of this 2262 chapter necessitates removing all or a portion of an existing building. 2263 2264 21A.48.010: PURPOSE & INTENT: 2265 The purpose of this chapter is to promote water conservation, preserve and expand Salt Lake 2266 City’s urban tree canopy, improve air quality, and reduce urban heat islands and stormwater 2267 runoff. 2268 These regulations are intended to encourage low impact development principals into overall 2269 landscape design in a way that is attractive, and to mitigate impacts through buffering 2270 between dissimilar zoning districts. 2271 21A.48.020: APPLICABILITY: 2272 A. The provisions of this chapter apply to all properties within the city. 2273 B. Any modification of required landscaping shall come into greater compliance with this 2274 chapter. 2275 21A.48.030: AUTHORITY: 2276 A. The requirements of this chapter may be modified by the zoning administrator, on a case- 2277 by-case basis where innovative landscaping design that furthers the purpose and intent of 2278 this chapter is implemented, or in response to input from: 74 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2279 2280 1. Police Department; 2281 2. Public Utilities; or 2282 3. Urban Forestry. 2283 2284 21A.48.040: RESPONSIBILITY & MAINTENANCE: 2285 A. All landscaping shall: 2286 2287 1. Maintain a clearance from grade level to 7 feet above the sidewalk, or 10 feet above a 2288 street; 2289 2. Not create a hedge or visual barrier between the sidewalk and street; 2290 3. Not create obstructions within a sight distance triangle, as defined and illustrated in 2291 Chapter 21A.62 of this title; 2292 4. Be maintained in live condition to present a reasonably healthy appearance; and 2293 5. Be kept free of refuse, debris, and noxious weeds. 2294 2295 B. Landscape Yards. 2296 2297 The owner of the property shall be responsible for the correct installation, maintenance, 2298 repair, or replacement of all landscaping, and obtain permits as required by the provisions 2299 of this chapter. 2300 2301 C. Park Strips. 2302 2303 1. The owner of the property abutting the park strip shall be responsible for the correct 2304 installation, maintenance, repair, or replacement of all landscaping and obtain permits 2305 as required by the provisions of this chapter. 2306 2. Exclusions: Any street tree planting or maintenance pursuant to Subsections 2307 21A.48.040.D.1 and 21A.48.040.D.2. 2308 2309 D. Street Trees. 2310 2311 1. Salt Lake City’s expectation is to preserve street trees. Planting, cutting, removing, 2312 pruning, and any other maintenance of street trees is subject to approval by the Salt 2313 Lake City Urban Forestry Division as described in Section 2.26.210 of this code. 2314 2. It is the abutting property owner’s responsibility to: 2315 2316 a. Contact the Salt Lake City Urban Forestry Division to request maintenance on a 2317 street tree and obtain required approval for any changes made to a street tree. 2318 b. Provide sufficient irrigation to a street tree located in the abutting park strip. 2319 2320 3. Root Zone Protection: The root zone of all street trees shall be protected when 2321 impacted by any construction work on the abutting property or within the right-of- 2322 way when a street tree is present. 2323 4. Irrigation. 75 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2324 2325 a. When a Landscaping Plan is required, as described in Section 21A.48.050, street 2326 trees shall be irrigated with a permanent automatic irrigation system. 2327 b. Street tree irrigation systems are the responsibility of the abutting property owner 2328 to install and maintain. It shall provide water adequately and efficiently to each 2329 street tree, as determined by the Salt Lake City Urban Forestry Division. 2330 2331 E. Irrigation Systems: 2332 2333 1. Shall be maintained in good operating condition to eliminate water waste or run-off 2334 into the public right-of-way. 2335 2. Shall be appropriate for the designated plant material and achieves the highest water 2336 efficiency. 2337 3. All irrigation systems, including drip irrigation shall be equipped with a pressure 2338 regulator, filter, flush-end assembly, and backflow preventer. 2339 4. Each valve shall irrigate landscaping with similar site, slope, soil conditions, and 2340 similar watering needs. 2341 5. Turf and planting beds shall be irrigated on separate irrigation valves; and, 2342 6. Drip emitters and sprinklers shall be placed on separate irrigation valves. 2343 7. Irrigation systems are required to use an irrigation controller that can automatically 2344 adjust the frequency and duration of irrigation in response to changing weather 2345 conditions and have a US-EPA WaterSense label. 2346 8. Any fountain, pond, and other similar water feature supplied through the culinary 2347 water system shall have a recirculating system. 2348 9. Backflow preventer assemblies shall be designed and installed and maintained 2349 according to the standards as outlined in the “Salt Lake City Landscape BMPs For 2350 Water Resource Efficiency and Protection” or the documents’ successor. 2351 21A.48.050: LANDSCAPE PLAN: 2352 A. Landscape Plan Required: A landscape plan shall be required for the following: 2353 2354 1. New construction of a primary structure. 2355 2. Any addition, expansion or intensification of a property that increases the floor area 2356 by 50% or more, increases the number of parking stalls required by 50% or more, or 2357 modifies any required landscaping by 50% or more. Single- and two- family uses are 2358 exempt from this provision. 2359 3. When required elsewhere in this title. 2360 2361 B. Modifications to an Approved Landscape Plan: Any change to an approved landscape 2362 plan requires the approval of the zoning administrator, except for changes from one plant 2363 species to another plant species that have similar watering needs and meet all other 2364 standards within this chapter. 2365 C. Unauthorized Modifications: Landscape improvements made to a lot that are not 2366 authorized and not in conformance with a required and approved landscape plan shall be 2367 a violation of this title, and subject to the fines and penalties established in Chapter 2368 21A.20. 76 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2369 D. Contents of a Complete Landscape Plan: A complete landscape plan shall include at least 2370 the following information unless specifically waived by the zoning administrator. All 2371 plans shall be drawn at the same scale: 2372 2373 1. Planting Plan: 2374 2375 a. Property lines, easements, and street names. 2376 b. Location and dimensions of existing and proposed structures, parking lots, drive 2377 aisles, and fencing. 2378 c. Location of existing and proposed sidewalks, bicycle paths, ground signs, refuse 2379 disposal, freestanding electrical equipment, and all other structures. 2380 d. The location of existing buildings, structures, and trees on adjacent property 2381 within 20 feet of the site. 2382 e. The location, size, and common names of all existing trees. 2383 f. Sight distance triangles at curb cuts or corners, as defined and illustrated in 2384 Chapter 21A.62. 2385 g. Root Zone Protection Plan required when construction work will occur near a 2386 street tree or other protected tree and is subject to approval from the Urban 2387 Forestry Division. 2388 h. Minimum tree soil standards set by the Salt Lake City Urban Forestry Division. 2389 i. The location, quantity, size at maturity, and name (botanical and common) of 2390 proposed plants and trees. 2391 j. Summary table that specifies the following for each landscaping location 2392 separately: 2393 (1) Area and percentage of each required landscape location. 2394 (2) Area and percentage of each landscape location covered in turf grasses, 2395 impervious surfaces. 2396 (3) Area and percentage of each landscape location covered in adapted or native 2397 plant species and adapted or native trees at maturity. 2398 2399 k. A signature by a Landscape Architect licensed with the State of Utah, or an US- 2400 EPA WaterSense certified professional verifying planting plan compliance with 2401 the standards of this chapter. 2402 2403 2. Grading Plan: 2404 2405 a. Property lines, street names, existing and proposed structures, turf areas, and 2406 paved areas. 2407 b. Existing and proposed grading of the site indicating contours at 2-foot intervals. 2408 c. Any proposed berming shall be indicated using 1-foot contour intervals. 2409 d. Delineate and label areas with a grade greater than 25% (4 feet Horizonal: 1 foot 2410 Vertical). 2411 2412 3. Irrigation Plan: 2413 77 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2414 a. Layout of the irrigation system and a legend summarizing the type and size of all 2415 components of the system. 2416 b. Delineate and label each hydrozone in accordance with the Salt Lake City Plant 2417 List and Hydrozone Schedule. 2418 c. Location and coverage of individual sprinkler heads. 2419 d. Use of a water efficient irrigation system. 2420 e. Type of US-EPA WaterSense automatic controller. 2421 f. A signature by a Landscape Architect licensed with the State of Utah, or an US- 2422 EPA WaterSense certified professional verifying irrigation plan compliance with 2423 the standards of this chapter. 2424 g. Separate plans from the irrigation plan are required for: 2425 2426 (1) Backflow Prevention Plan. 2427 (2) Water Feature Recirculating Plan, if applicable. 2428 2429 E. Specific Landscape Regulations: Various zoning districts in this title have specific 2430 landscaping regulations in addition to the requirements found in this chapter. Refer to the 2431 respective zoning district for specific landscaping regulations. Landscape plans for 2432 properties subject to zoning district specific landscape regulations shall be in compliance 2433 with all applicable landscape and district specific requirements. 2434 F. Compliance Certification: A letter of compliance shall be prepared and submitted to the 2435 city upon completion of the landscape plan installation and prior to the issuance of a 2436 certificate of occupancy, or commencement of the use of the property. Compliance 2437 certification shall be signed by a landscape architect licensed with the State of Utah, or an 2438 US-EPA WaterSense certified professional verifying that all landscape plan elements 2439 have been installed in compliance with the approved landscape plan. 2440 G. Planting Season Installation: The landscape plan installation may be delayed until the 2441 next optimal planting season. A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) may be 2442 issued and subsequent TCO fees waived between October 15 and the following April 1 2443 where it is not favorable to install landscaping. The landscape plan shall be installed, and 2444 a letter of compliance submitted within 30 days following April 1. Temporary Certificate 2445 of Occupancy fees pursuant to Section 18.32.035 of this code shall be reinstated where no 2446 letter of compliance is submitted by the end of the 30-day period. 2447 21A.48.060: LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: 2448 A. Landscape Locations: 2449 2450 1. Applicability: The following graphics illustrate required landscape locations that are 2451 regulated by the standards identified in this chapter. 2452 2. Landscape Yards: All required front and corner side yards shall be maintained as 2453 landscaped yards, unless otherwise exempted in this title. 2454 3. Landscape Buffers: Landscape buffers and freeway buffers may be located within a 2455 required side or rear yard. 2456 4. Coverage and Quantity calculations: 2457 2458 a. Vegetation coverage is measured at plant maturity. 78 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2459 b. The total area of an existing tree canopy, or a tree canopy at the time of planting, 2460 may be included in the vegetation coverage calculations of the required 2461 landscaping location the tree is within. 2462 c. Fractional landscaping quantities shall be measured to the nearest whole number. 2463 d. Streets, drives and sidewalks necessary for reasonable access may be excluded 2464 from impervious surface calculations. 2465 e. Park strip standards shall be applied cumulatively along the adjacent street 2466 frontage. Lots with park strips on 2 or more street frontages shall be calculated 2467 separately for each street frontage. 2468 2469 5. Conflicting Standards: 2470 2471 a. Where there are conflicting standards in this chapter, the more restrictive 2472 requirements shall apply. 2473 b. Where the standards in this chapter conflict with specific district regulations, the 2474 specific district regulations shall prevail. 2475 2476 2477 B. Park Strip Standards: Park Strips 79 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Street Trees Minimum of 1 street tree planted on center between back of street curb and the sidewalk. Additional street trees shall be provided at the following rate per each frontage length: 1 small tree per 20 feet, or 1 medium tree per 30 feet, or 1 large tree per 40 feet. The largest tree that is appropriate to the park strip size shall be used. 1, 2 Vegetation Minimum 33% coverage. Turf Prohibited Impervious Surfaces The combination of all paving materials shall not exceed 20% of the total park strip area. 1. Street trees shall be an appropriate species chosen from the Urban Forestry Street Tree List based on park strip size, shall have sufficient separation from public utilities, and shall be approved by the Urban Forestry Division. 2. Park strips with a width of 36” or less are exempt from this provision. 2478 C. Landscape Yard Standards 2479 1. Residential Districts (all districts included in Chapter 21A.24): Landscape Yards Vegetation Minimum 33% coverage. Turf Maximum 33% 1 (Landscape yard areas less than 250 sq. ft. are exempt) Impervious Surfaces Maximum 20% 1. Turf limitations established in 21A.48.080.B shall apply. 2480 2. Manufacturing Districts (all districts included in Chapter 21A.28): Landscape Yards Vegetation Minimum 33% coverage. Turf Prohibited. Impervious Surfaces Maximum 20% up to a maximum of 1,200 sq. ft. 2481 3. All Other Districts Not Included in Chapters 21A.24 and 21A.28: Landscape Yards Vegetation Minimum 33% coverage (may be decreased if specified within specific district regulations). Turf Only permitted in active recreation areas. 1 Impervious Surfaces Maximum 20% (may be increased if specified within specific district regulations). 1. Turf limitations established in Subsection 21A.48.080.B shall apply. 2482 2483 D. Landscape Buffer Standards: 8 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 153 alternative materials may be utilized for park strips. Alternative material is subject to 154 planning director approval based on its compliance with the adopted “Circulation and 155 Streetscape Amenities Plan” or its successor. 156 b. That Subsection 21A.26.060.K shall be amended to read as follows: 157 158 K. Street Trees: Street trees are required and subject to the regulations in ChapterSection 159 21A.48.060. If a park strip does not exist, street trees are required when the sidewalk 160 width of at least 10’ can be maintained, to which required street trees shall be planted in 161 tree wells with tree grates with sufficient soil volume as determined by the Urban 162 Forestry Division. 163 164 SECTION 11. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.26.070.E. That Subsection 165 21A.26.070.E of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Commercial Districts: CG General 166 Commercial District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is amended to read as 167 follows: 168 E. Landscape Yard Requirements: A landscape yard of five feet shall be required on all 169 front or corner side yards, conforming to the requirements of Section Chapter 21A.48.090 170 of this title. 171 172 SECTION 12. Amending the Text of Section 21A.28.010. That Section 21A.28.010 of 173 the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Manufacturing Districts: General Provisions), shall be and 174 hereby is amended as follows: 175 a. That Subsection 21A.28.010.B.1 shall be amended to read as follows: 176 177 B. Impact Controls Aand General Restrictions Iin Tthe Manufacturing Districts: 178 179 1. Refuse Control: Refuse containers must be covered and shall be stored within 180 completely enclosed buildings or screened in conformance with the requirements of 181 Section chapter 21A.4840.120 of this title. 182 b. That Subsection 21A.28.010.G shall be amended to read as follows: 183 184 G. Landscaping Aand Buffering: All uses in the manufacturing districts shall comply with 185 the provisions governing landscaping and buffering in cChapter 21A.48 of this title, 186 including section 21A.48.110 of this title. 187 188 80 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT District When Abutting 1 Required Landscape / Freeway Buffer Widths All districts (except Single- and Two- Family, Foothill, Special Development Pattern, SNB, FB-UN1, and those districts listed below that require a greater buffer width) Single- and Two- Family, Foothill, & Special Development 10’ All districts Freeway 2 20’ All other non-residential districts (except SNB, FB- UN1, and those districts listed below that require a greater buffer width) RMF-30, RMF-35, RMF-45, & RMF- 75 10’ M-1 Any district that allows residential uses, AG districts, & OS 15’ Any district that allows residential uses 50’ M-2 AG districts & OS 30’ BP & RP All residential districts (in Chapter 21A.24)30’ EI All districts 30’ MH All districts 20’ 1. Or when required elsewhere by this title. 2. The zoning administrator may approve a reduced freeway buffer if there’s an existing sound wall or required off-street parking cannot be met. If such a reduction is necessary, the buffer may not be less than 10’ in width. Landscape Buffer Standards 1 tree for every 30 linear feet of landscape buffer. 1 shrub every 3 feet, with a mature height of no less than 4’, along the entire length of the buffer. A 6-foot solid fence along the length of the required landscape buffer unless modified by the zoning administrator to better meet the fence height provisions in Section 21A.40.120. Turf is limited to active recreation areas. Freeway Landscape Buffer Standards (buffer standards for those properties abutting a freeway) 1 tree for every 15 linear feet of required freeway landscape buffer. Trees shall be staggered along the length of the buffer. 16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 444 445 C. Special Foothills Regulations: The regulations contained in sSubsection 21A.24.010.P of 446 this title, shall apply to the FP Foothills Protection District. 447 448 D. Minimum Lot Area Aand Lot Width: Any use, except trailheads, in the FP Foothills 449 Protection District shall comply with the following lot area and width requirements: 450 1. Minimum lot area: Sixteen (16) acres. 451 2. Minimum lot width: One hundred forty feet (140’). 452 453 E. Maximum Building Height: See sSubsection 21A.24.010.P of this title for special 454 foothills regulations governing building height. 455 F. Minimum Yard Requirements: No principal or accessory building shall be located within 456 twenty feet (20’) of the front or corner side lot line nor shall any principal or accessory 457 building be located within seventy five feet (75’) of any side or rear lot line. Accessory 458 structures (other than accessory buildings) shall conform to sSection 21A.36.020, 459 tTable 21A.36.020.B of this title. 460 G. Maximum Disturbed Area: The disturbed site area shall not exceed two (2) acres. For the 461 purposes of this district, “disturbed areas” shall be defined as areas of grading and 462 removal of existing vegetation for principal and accessory buildings and areas to be hard 463 surfaced. 464 H. Slope Restrictions: To protect the visual and environmental quality of foothill areas, no 465 building shall be constructed on any portion of the site that exceeds a thirty percent 466 (30%) slope for lots in subdivisions granted preliminary approval by the Pplanning 467 Ccommission after November 4, 1994. 468 I. Fence Restrictions: Fences and walls shall only be constructed after first obtaining a 469 building permit subject to the standards of this subsection. 470 1. Site Plan Submittal: As a part of the site plan review process, a fencing plan shall be 471 submitted which shall show: 472 a. Any specific subdivision approval conditions regarding fencing; 473 b. Material specifications and illustrations necessary to determine compliance with 474 specific subdivision approval limitations and the standards of this section. 475 2. Field Fencing Oof Designated Undevelopable Areas: Fencing on areas identified as 476 undevelopable areas or transitional areas on any subdivision granted preliminary 477 approval by the Pplanning Ccommission after November 4, 1994, or any lot 478 previously platted which identifies undevelopable areas or transitional areas shall be 479 limited to the following standards unless subdivision approval granted prior to 480 November 4, 1994, included specific fencing requirements which are more restrictive. 481 The more restrictive requirement shall apply. 81 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 100% coverage required, may include adapted or native grasses, wildflower, and shrubs. Turf is prohibited. 2484 21A.48.070: PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING: 2485 A. Applicability: 2486 2487 1. Hard surfaced parking lots with 15 or more parking spaces shall provide landscaping 2488 in accordance with the provisions of this section. The following graphic depicts 2489 landscape location required and corresponding standards identified in this chapter. 2490 2. Parking lots with less than 15 parking spaces are exempt from parking lot landscaping 2491 but shall provide the required landscape yards and landscape buffers. 2492 2493 B. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping: 2494 2495 1. Minimum Area: A minimum of 5% of the parking lot shall be interior parking lot 2496 landscaping in the locations identified below and dispersed throughout the parking 2497 lot. Landscaping areas located along the perimeter of a parking lot shall not be 2498 included toward satisfying this requirement. 2499 2. Location: Interior landscape areas shall be provided in the following locations: 2500 2501 a. At each end of a parking row containing 6 stalls or more, where not abutting 2502 required perimeter landscaping. 2503 b. Parallel to parking lot stalls, at a rate of 1 interior landscape area for every 6 2504 parking spaces, or along the interior length of double-loaded parking rows. 2505 2506 3. Size: Interior landscape areas shall have a minimum width equal to the width of 2507 average parking stall within the parking lot, as measured from the inside of the 2508 curbing, and shall have a minimum length equal to the length of the abutting parking 2509 spaces. Where interior landscape areas do not abut parking spaces, a minimum length 2510 of 10’ is required. 2511 2512 4. Planting Requirements: 2513 Interior Landscape Areas Shade trees A minimum of 1 tree is required per interior landscape area. Additional trees are required at a rate of 1 tree for every additional 140 square feet in each required interior landscape area. Shrubs A minimum of 2 shrubs are required per interior landscape area. Additional shrubs are required at a rate of 2 shrubs for every additional 140 square feet in each landscape area. Adapted or native ornamental grasses or wildflowers with a minimum height of 3’ may be used as an alternative. 82 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Ground cover / Mulch Landscape area outside of shrub masses shall be established in ground cover or mulched consistent with the standards of this chapter. Turf is prohibited. 2514 2515 2516 83 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2517 2518 2519 5. Modifications to Interior Parking Lot Landscaping: The zoning administrator may 2520 waive interior landscape area requirements if a solar energy system is integrated into 2521 the roof structure of a carport, or if the parking lot perimeter landscaping width is 2522 increased to 15’ and with an equal number of trees, as required in the interior, and 2523 perimeter parking lot landscaping, are provided. 2524 C. Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping: 2525 2526 1. Applicability: Landscaping along the perimeter of the parking lot shall be provided 2527 when the parking lot is located: 2528 2529 a. Within a required yard (where permitted in Sections 21A.44.060 or 21A.36.020) 2530 b. Within 20 feet of a lot line; or 2531 c. Abutting a principal building. 2532 2533 2. Where both landscape buffers and perimeter parking lot landscaping are required, the 2534 more restrictive shall apply. 2535 3. Where a surface parking lot is adjacent to another surface parking lot, on the same or 2536 separate parcels or lots, the perimeter parking lot landscaping provision may be 2537 waived by the zoning administrator if the required number trees are located elsewhere 2538 within the development. 2539 4. Size: 2540 84 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2541 a. In a required yard or within 20 feet of a property line: 8 feet in width, as measured 2542 from the back of the parking lot curb and extending into any parking space 2543 overhang area. 2544 b. Abutting a building on the same property: A minimum 5-foot-wide required 2545 landscaping and 3-foot walkway shall be required to buffer buildings from 2546 parking spaces. 2547 2548 5. Planting Requirements: Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping: Shade Tress 1 tree per 300 square feet of perimeter parking lot area. Trees may be clustered or spaced throughout the landscaping areas. Perimeter landscaping abutting a building does not need to be included in the square footage calculation.1 Shrubs 1 shrub per 3 feet, on center, along 100 percent of the yard length. Shrubs with mature height not more than 3 feet Ground cover / Mulch Required landscaping outside of shrub masses shall be established in ground cover or mulched consistent with the standards of this chapter. Turf is prohibited. Parking Lot Fences/Walls: Fences or walls along parking lot perimeters may be required to satisfy landscape buffer requirements outlined in Section 21A.48.060 of this chapter. 1. Required perimeter trees species shall be chosen from the Urban Forestry Street Tree List and shall be approved by the Salt Lake City Urban Forestry Division. 2549 2550 2551 2552 85 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2553 2554 D. Curbing: Concrete curbing shall be installed at the perimeter of internal landscape areas 2555 and perimeter parking where parking lots vehicular access aisles or stalls directly abuts 2556 required landscaping. Biodetention areas are exempt from curbing requirements, however 2557 a vehicle stop is required when biodetention areas directly abut parking stalls. 2558 E. Biodetention in Parking Lot Interior and Perimeter Landscaping Areas: Retention of the 2559 80th percentile storm is required for all impervious surface parking lots with 50 or more 2560 parking spaces. Where this is not feasible, as defined in the SLCDPUs Standard Practices 2561 Manual, an approved Stormwater Best Management Practices (Stormwater BMPs) is 2562 required. All proposed Stormwater BMPs are subject to Public Utilities Division review, 2563 approval, and inspection. 2564 F. Stormwater BMP Approval Required: A SLC Approved Stormwater Best Management 2565 Practice (Stormwater BMP) for all hard surfaced parking lots is required prior to 2566 discharge to the public storm drain and gutter, as required in Subsection 21A.44.060.A.2: 2567 2568 1. All Stormwater BMPs are subject to Public Utilities Division review, approval, and 2569 inspection. 2570 2. Plantings within BMPs are to be drought tolerant, salt tolerant, winter hardy, and able 2571 to be submerged. 2572 21A.48.080. GENERAL STANDARDS 2573 All required landscape plans shall be prepared based on the following standards. All 2574 landscape improvements in the required landscape locations, as described in Sections 2575 21A.48.060 and 21A.48.070 shall meet the regulations described in this section. 86 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2576 2577 A. Installation: All landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the current planting 2578 procedures established by the American Association of Nurserymen. The installation of 2579 all plants required by this chapter may be delayed until the next optimal planting season, 2580 as determined by the zoning administrator. 2581 2582 1. At the time of planting: 2583 2584 a. Deciduous Trees: All deciduous trees shall have a minimum trunk size of 1.5 2585 inches in caliper. 2586 b. Evergreen Trees: All evergreen trees shall have a minimum size of 5 feet in 2587 height. 2588 c. Shrubs: All shrubs shall have a minimum height or spread of 10 inches depending 2589 on the plant’s natural growth habit, unless otherwise specified. Plants in 2-gallon 2590 containers will generally comply with this standard. 2591 2592 B. General Landscaping Standards: 2593 2594 1. Drought Tolerant or Native Species: 100% of required shrubs, perennial plants, and 2595 groundcover used on a site shall be drought tolerant, adapted or native species. The 2596 city has compiled a list titled “Salt Lake City Plant List & Hydrozone Schedule”, 2597 established and maintained by Public Utilities, shall be used to satisfy this 2598 requirement. Other plants that are not on the list but are considered drought tolerant, 2599 adapted or native and require similar watering needs may also be used. 2600 2. Turf: Turf is not permitted: 2601 2602 a. In the park strip. 2603 b. In parking lot perimeter and interior landscaping areas. 2604 c. In areas that are less than 8 feet in any dimension at the narrowest point. 2605 d. In areas with a slope greater than 25% (4 feet horizontal: 1 foot vertical). 2606 e. In required landscape buffer areas. 2607 2608 3. Mulch: Mulch shall be: 2609 2610 a. At least 3 inches in depth, 2611 b. Used in areas that are not covered with landscaping. 2612 c. Permeable to air and water. 2613 d. Permanent fiber barriers, plastic sheeting, or other impervious barriers are 2614 prohibited as an underlayment. 2615 e. Crushed rubber is prohibited. 2616 f. Rock used as a mulch material is limited to 20% of an area where landscaping is 2617 required by this chapter. 2618 2619 4. Artificial turf is prohibited in any location where landscaping is regulated by this 2620 chapter. 87 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2621 5. Berming is prohibited in parking lot and park strip landscaping unless required in 2622 specific district regulations. 2623 2624 C. Specific Park Strip Standards: In addition to General Landscape Standards these 2625 provisions shall apply to park strips. 2626 2627 1. Street Trees: 2628 2629 a. Substitutions. The Urban Forester may approve a substitute of the required street 2630 tree provision for a cash in lieu payment if the number of required trees cannot be 2631 met due to conflicts related to public utilities or right-of-way regulations. A cash 2632 in lieu payment, in the amount of cost to purchase and plant the required number 2633 of street trees, shall be contributed to the city’s Tree Fund; 2634 2635 b. Tree Grates: If new street trees are proposed in a location where the area 2636 surrounding the tree will have an impervious surface, tree wells with grates shall 2637 be provided with adequate dimensions and sufficient soil volume to accommodate 2638 the proposed tree species, subject to review by the Urban Forestry Division. 2639 2640 c. Tree Root Protection: Rock or gravel shall maintain a 2-foot separation from the 2641 trunk of a street tree. 2642 2643 2. Vegetation with Thorned, Spined, or Other Sharp Rigid Parts: Vegetation with thorns, 2644 spines, or other sharp, rigid parts hazardous to pedestrians and bicyclists, and difficult 2645 to walk across are prohibited within 3 feet of a curb, sidewalk, walkway, or driveway. 2646 2647 3. Storm Drain Protection: 2648 2649 a. Rock or gravel shall be set at or below top back of curb or abutting sidewalk 2650 grade. 2651 b. Rock or gravel shall have 1 inch or greater diameter. Grades abutting public 2652 streets exceeding 4%, as indicated by Public Utilities Division’s “4% Grade 2653 Streets Map”, shall have rock or gravel 3 inch or greater diameter. 2654 2655 4. Pathways: Impervious surface pathways provided between the curb and sidewalk, are 2656 permitted subject to the following: 2657 2658 a. Shall not be more than 5 feet in width and shall be located to provide the most 2659 direct route from curb to sidewalk. 2660 b. A maximum of 1 pathway per 20 linear feet of park strip is permitted. 2661 c. The pathway area shall be included in impervious surface percentage calculation. 2662 2663 5. Stormwater Curb Controls: Integration of LID (Low Impact Development) practices 2664 are encouraged in park strip areas. Stormwater curb cuts are permitted to allow 2665 stormwater to enter the landscaped area subject to the following provisions: 2666 88 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2667 a. The design and construction of the stormwater curb cut shall comply with the 2668 SLCDPU Standards Practices Manual. 2669 b. All stormwater curb controls are subject to Public Utilities Division review and 2670 approval. 2671 2672 6. Encroachments in the Right-of-Way: Structural encroachments are only permitted 2673 when specifically approved by city divisions and applicable decision-making bodies 2674 (or their designee) and may require an encroachment permit. 2675 2676 a. All encroachments are subject to the following standards, unless specifically 2677 allowed elsewhere in this title: 2678 2679 (1) Any raised structure shall be setback from the curb a minimum of 24 inches, 2680 (2) There are no other practical locations for the structure on the private property, 2681 and 2682 (3) The proposed structures will serve the general public and are part of general 2683 public need, or the proposed structures are necessary for the functional use of 2684 the property. 2685 2686 b. Bus Stops and Bike Share Stations: Concrete pads for bus stop benches and/or 2687 shelters and bike share stations may be permitted with zoning administrator 2688 approval. Impervious surface limitations may be modified upon review. 2689 c. Outdoor Dining: Park strip materials and structural standards may be modified by 2690 the Zoning Administrator when outdoor dining is approved pursuant to 2691 Section 21A.40.065 of this title. 2692 d. Bike Paths: Bike paths that are separated from the travel lanes with cars are 2693 permitted in any existing park strip. Any space between the bike path and the 2694 sidewalk and/or curb of the travel lanes are subject to the requirements of this 2695 section. 2696 21A.48.090: PRIVATE LANDS TREE PRESERVATION: 2697 A. Purpose Statement: The purpose of these tree preservation provisions is to recognize and 2698 protect the valuable asset embodied in the trees that exist on private lands within the city 2699 and ensure that the existing trees of Salt Lake City continue to provide benefit to its 2700 citizens. Essential to effective tree preservation is the understanding of tree growth 2701 requirements having to do with space, water, and soil quality needs, among other 2702 qualities. Good, early planning, site design, and construction management practices are 2703 key to allowing trees to prosper. Preconstruction planning and mitigation of potential 2704 impacts that development may have on trees is necessary and one of the purposes of this 2705 section. Numerous community and personal benefits arise from the presence of trees in 2706 urbanized areas - both on residential and nonresidential lands - and it is the intent of this 2707 section through the preservation of the trees to: 2708 2709 1. Enhance the quality of life in the city and protect public health and safety; 2710 2. Preserve and enhance the visual and aesthetic qualities of the city; 89 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2711 3. Enhance public and private property for greater enjoyment and usability due to the 2712 shade, cooling, and the aesthetic beauty afforded by trees; 2713 4. Protect and improve the real estate values of the city; 2714 5. Preserve and enhance air and water quality; 2715 6. Reduce noise, glare, dust, and heat, and moderate climate, including urban heat island 2716 effect; 2717 7. Increase slope stability, and control erosion and sediment runoff into streams and 2718 waterways; 2719 8. Protect the natural habitat and ecosystems of the city; 2720 9. Conserve energy by reducing heating and cooling costs; and 2721 10. Preserve the function of mature trees to absorb greenhouse gases such as carbon 2722 dioxide. 2723 2724 B. Applicability: 2725 2726 1. General: The standards in this section shall apply to new development in the city 2727 unless exempted in accordance with Subsection C, “Exemptions”, of this section. The 2728 standards in this section shall apply at the time of a development application for 2729 “development” as defined in the zoning ordinance. 2730 2. Other Regulations: Title 2, Chapter 2.26 of this code, the Salt Lake City urban 2731 forestry ordinance, addressing the protection of trees located on public property 2732 owned by the city and in rights of way, shall remain in effect. 2733 3. Specimen Trees: The city forester shall maintain a list of trees or tree types that are 2734 deemed to be specimen trees subject to Subsection E, “Standards”, of this section. 2735 2736 C. Exemptions: The following specimen tree removal activities may be exempt from the 2737 standards of this section upon confirmation and approval by the city forester: 2738 2739 1. The removal of dead, damaged, or naturally fallen trees, or in cases of community 2740 emergency; 2741 2. When in conjunction with the construction of a single- or two- family residence not 2742 part of a proposed new subdivision; 2743 3. The removal of trees on an existing legal lot when not associated with new 2744 development; 2745 4. The removal of trees in such a condition that they pose a threat to structures or natural 2746 features on the site, on adjoining properties, or in the public right of way; 2747 5. The removal of diseased trees posing a threat to adjacent trees; 2748 6. The selective and limited removal of trees necessary to obtain clear visibility at 2749 driveways or intersections; 2750 7. The removal of trees associated with development at the Salt Lake City International 2751 Airport only as necessary to provide safe operations; 2752 8. The removal of trees when requested by the city forester for the purposes of conflict 2753 with utilities or streets; and 2754 9. The removal of trees deemed appropriate by the city forester, based on tree species, 2755 site conditions, or other variables. 2756 9 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 189 SECTION 13. Amending the Text of Subsection 21A.28.030.E. That Subsection 190 21A.28.030.E of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Manufacturing Districts: M-2 Heavy 191 Manufacturing District: Landscape Yard Requirements), shall be and hereby is amended to read 192 as follows: 193 E. Landscape Yard Requirements: The first twenty five feet (25’) of all required front yards 194 and the first fifteen feet (15’) of all required corner side yards shall be maintained as 195 landscape yards in conformance with the requirements of cChapter 21A.48 of this title, 196 including section 21A.48.110 of this title. 197 198 SECTION 14. Amending the Text of Section 21A.30.010. That Section 21A.30.010 of 199 the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Downtown Districts: General Provisions), shall be and hereby 200 is amended to read as follows: 201 21A.30.010: GENERAL PROVISIONS: 202 A. Statement of Intent: The downtown districts are intended to provide use, bulk, urban 203 design and other controls and regulations appropriate to the commercial core of the city 204 and adjacent areas in order to enhance employment opportunities; to encourage the 205 efficient use of land; to enhance property values; to improve the design quality of 206 downtown areas; to create a unique downtown center which fosters the arts, 207 entertainment, financial, office, retail and governmental activities; to provide safety and 208 security; encourage permitted residential uses within the downtown area; and to help 209 implement adopted plans. 210 B. Permitted Uses: The uses specified as permitted uses in Section 21A.33.050, “Table of 211 Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title are permitted; 212 provided, that they comply with all requirements of this chapter, the general standards set 213 forth in Part IV of this title, and all other applicable requirements of this title. 214 215 1. Conditional Uses: The uses specified as conditional uses in Section 21A.33.050, 216 “Table of Permitted and Conditional Uses for Downtown Districts”, of this title, may 217 be allowed in the downtown districts provided they are approved pursuant to the 218 standards and procedures for conditional uses set forth in Chapter 21A.54 of this title, 219 and comply with all other applicable requirements. 220 221 C. Impact Controls and General Restrictions in the Downtown Districts: 222 223 1. Refuse Control: Refuse containers must be covered and shall be stored within 224 completely enclosed buildings or screened in conformance with the requirements of 225 Section 21A.40.120chapter 21A.48 of this title. For buildings existing as of April 12, 17 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 482 a. A low visibility see through fence shall consist of flat black colored steel “T” 483 posts and not more than four (4) strands of nonbarbed steel wire, strung at even 484 vertical spacing on the “T” post, and erected to a height of not more than forty 485 two inches (42”) above the natural ground surface. 486 b. When fencing lot boundary lines, vegetation or native brush shall not be cleared 487 so as to create a visible demarcation from off site. 488 c. The existing surface of the ground shall not be changed by grading activities 489 when erecting boundary fences. 490 d. Fence materials and designs must not create a hazard for big game wildlife 491 species. 492 e. No field fencing shall be erected in conflict with pedestrian easements dedicated 493 to Salt Lake City. 494 3. Buildable Area Fencing: Fencing on any portions of a lot identified as buildable area 495 or required side yard on any subdivision granted preliminary approval by the 496 Pplanning Ccommission after November 4, 1994, or any lot previously platted which 497 identifies undevelopable areas or transitional areas shall be limited to the following 498 standards unless subdivision approval granted prior to November 4, 1994, includes 499 specific fencing requirements which are more restrictive. The more restrictive 500 requirement shall apply. 501 a. An open, see through fence shall be constructed of tubular steel, wrought iron or 502 similar materials, finished with a flat black, nonreflective finish constructed to a 503 height of six feet (6’) or less; or 504 b. A sight obscuring or privacy type fence shall be of earth tone colors, or similar 505 materials to the primary dwelling, and located in a way to screen private outdoor 506 living spaces from off site view. 507 4. Front Oor Corner Side Yard Fencing: Walls and fences located within the front or 508 corner side yards or along dedicated roads shall not exceed a maximum of forty two 509 inches (42”) in height. 510 J. Special Landscape Regulations: In addition to the regulations in Chapter 21A.48 511 “Landscaping and Buffers” the following special landscape regulations apply: 512 513 1. Landscape Plan: In addition to the landscape plan submittal requirements listed in 514 Section 21A.48.050, landscape plans shall also include: 515 516 a. Delineation between proposed revegetation of disturbed areas of the site, and 517 road/driveway areas. The landscape plan shall extend 100 feet beyond the 518 disturbed site area and 25 feet beyond the limits of grading for roads/driveways, 519 but need not include any portions of the site designated as undevelopable unless 520 these areas are disturbed. 90 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2757 D. Standards: 2758 1. Preservation of Specimen Trees: Specimen trees shall be preserved to the maximum 2759 extent practicable as determined by the city forester, in consultation with the zoning 2760 administrator, unless exempted pursuant to Subsection C, “Exemptions”, of this 2761 section. 2762 2763 a. In determining if preservation is impracticable, the city shall consider the 2764 following criteria, including, but not limited to: 2765 2766 (1) Whether an alternative location or configuration of the development including 2767 elements such as parking or structures on the site would be feasible to 2768 accomplish tree preservation, without negatively impacting adjacent 2769 properties, 2770 (2) Whether preservation of the specimen tree would render all permitted 2771 development on the property infeasible, or 2772 (3) If development of the property will provide significant community benefits 2773 that outweigh tree preservation. 2774 2775 b. The zoning administrator may modify any dimensional standard, such as setbacks 2776 and height limits, by up to 20% if such modification will result in preservation of 2777 a specimen tree. 2778 2779 2. Cutting, Removal, or Damage Prohibited: Specimen trees, required to be preserved, 2780 shall not be cut, removed, pushed over, killed, or otherwise damaged. 2781 3. Paving, Fill, Excavation, or Soil Compaction Prohibited: The tree protection zone of 2782 any protected specimen tree shall not be subjected to paving, filling, excavation, or 2783 soil compaction. 2784 4. Mitigation: Where the city determines it is not practicable to preserve a specimen tree 2785 on the development site, the following mitigation provisions shall apply. 2786 2787 a. Replacement Tree Required: 2 caliper inches of replacement trees shall be 2788 provided for each dbh of specimen tree removed (for example, if a 24 inch dbh 2789 specimen tree is removed, it must be replaced with at least 24 trees of a minimum 2790 2 inch caliper or 8 trees with a 6 inch caliper). Each replacement tree shall be a 2791 minimum of 2 inches in caliper, and shall either be replanted prior to certificate of 2792 occupancy or within a conditional time frame as approved by the city forester. 2793 Consult the “Salt Lake City Plant List and Hydrozone Schedule” for 2794 recommendations on tree selection. 2795 Replacement trees shall be planted on the lot or site where the specimen tree was 2796 removed except where the city forester, in consultation with the zoning 2797 administrator, finds the following: 2798 2799 (1) The site does not provide for adequate landscape surface area to accommodate 2800 the total number of replacement trees; or 91 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2801 (2) That due to unique soil types, topography, or unusual characteristics of the 2802 site, the likelihood of successful tree growth is diminished. 2803 In such cases, the applicant shall mitigate for the loss of the specimen tree in 2804 the form of payment to the city’s tree fund as provided below. 2805 2806 b. Cash in Lieu Payment/Tree Fund Contribution: Applicants who are permitted to 2807 remove a specimen tree but not plant a replacement tree on site shall make a cash 2808 in lieu payment, in the amount of the cost to purchase and plant the required 2809 number of replacement trees, into the city’s tree fund. 2810 E. Specimen Tree Protection During Construction: 2811 2812 1. Owner’s Responsibility: During construction, the owner of the property shall be 2813 responsible for the ongoing health of specimen trees located on the site. This includes 2814 basic tree maintenance and watering throughout the term of construction. The owner 2815 shall also ensure the erection of barriers necessary to protect any specimen tree from 2816 damage during and after construction. 2817 2. Tree Protection Zone Fencing: Tree protection fencing shall be erected to protect all 2818 preserved trees from excavation, fill, compaction, or other impacts that would 2819 threaten tree health. Specimen trees shall be fenced in accordance with this subsection 2820 before any grading, excavating, or other land disturbing activity begins on a 2821 construction site. No construction, grading, equipment or material storage, or any 2822 other activity shall be allowed within the tree protection zone, as delineated by the 2823 required tree protection fencing, except in accordance with the standards in 2824 Subsection F.3, “Encroachments Into Tree Protection Zones and Root Zones”, of this 2825 section. Fencing shall be maintained until the land disturbance activities are complete, 2826 and shall not be removed or altered without first obtaining written consent from the 2827 city forester. 2828 The tree protection fencing shall be clearly shown on the required development 2829 applications such as a site plan, building permit, or grading permit application. 2830 a. Location: Fencing shall extend at least 1 foot in distance from the edge of the drip 2831 line of a specimen tree or group of specimen trees or as directed by the city 2832 forester to best protect a specimen tree’s critical root zone and still allow 2833 construction access. 2834 b. Type of Fencing: The developer shall erect a chainlink fence, a minimum of 4 feet 2835 in height, secured to metal posts driven into the ground. Such fencing shall be 2836 secured to withstand construction activity and weather on the site and shall be 2837 maintained in a functional condition for the duration of work on the property. This 2838 is not considered permanent fencing subject to Section 21A.40.120, “Regulation 2839 of Fences, Walls and Hedges”, of this title. 2840 c. Timing: All required tree protection measures shall be installed, inspected and 2841 approved by the city forester prior to the commencement of any land disturbing 2842 activities. 2843 2844 4. Encroachments Into Tree Protection Zones and Root Zones: Encroachments into a 2845 tree protection zone or within the critical root zones of trees protected in accordance 92 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2846 with this subsection shall occur only in rare instances, and only upon obtaining 2847 written authorization from the city forester. If such encroachment is anticipated, tree 2848 preservation measures including, but not limited to, the following may be required: 2849 2850 a. Tree Crown and/or Root Pruning: The pruning, or cutting, of specimen tree 2851 branches or roots shall only be done under the supervision of an ISA certified 2852 arborist, and only upon approval of the city forester. 2853 b. Soil Compaction Impact Mitigation: Where compaction might occur due to 2854 planned, temporary traffic through or materials placed within the protection zone, 2855 the area shall first be mulched with a minimum 4 inch layer of woodchips or a 6 2856 inch layer of pine straw. Plywood sheet or metal plate coverage of the impacted 2857 area may be accepted by the city forester when high moisture conditions warrant. 2858 Equipment or materials storage shall not be allowed within the tree protection 2859 zone. 2860 c. Grade Change Impact Mitigation: In the event proposed site development requires 2861 soil elevation changes tree protection measures designed to mitigate harm to the 2862 tree(s) shall be coordinated with the city forester and the zoning administrator. 2863 d. Construction Debris/Effluent Strictly Prohibited: In no instance shall any debris or 2864 effluent, associated with the construction process, including equipment or vehicle 2865 washing, concrete mixing, pouring, or rinsing processes, be permitted to drain 2866 onto lands within tree protection zones, as delineated by the chainlink tree 2867 protection fencing. 2868 2869 F. Enforcement: These tree preservation provisions shall be subject to the zoning and 2870 development enforcement codes as adopted by the city. 2871 2872 21A.48.100: APPEAL: 2873 Any person adversely affected by a final decision of the zoning administrator on a 2874 landscaping or buffer requirement may appeal to the appeals hearing officer in accordance 2875 with the provisions of Chapter 21A.16 of this title. 2876 2877 SECTION 29. Amending the Text of Section 21A.62.040. That Section 21A.62.040 of 2878 the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Definitions: Definitions of Terms), shall be and hereby is 2879 amended as follows: 2880 a. Amending the definition of “GROUND COVER.” That the definition of “GROUND 2881 COVER” shall be amended to read as follows: 2882 GROUND COVER: Any perennial evergreen plant material species that generally does not 2883 exceed twelve inches (12 inches”) in height, stabilizes soils and protects against erosion, and 2884 covers one hundred percent (100%) of the ground all year. 93 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2885 2886 2887 b. Amending the definition of “LANDSCAPE AREA.” That the definition of “LANDSCAPE 2888 AREA” shall be amended to read as follows: 2889 LANDSCAPE AREA: That portion of a lot devoted exclusively to required landscaping, 2890 except that streets, drives and sidewalks may be located within such an area to provide 2891 reasonable access. 2892 2893 2894 c. Amending the definition of “LANDSCAPING.” That the definition of “LANDSCAPING” 2895 shall be amended to read as follows: 2896 LANDSCAPING: The improvement of a lot, parcel or tract of land with vegetation such as 2897 ornamental grass, shrubs and trees. Landscaping may include pedestrian walks, flowerbeds, 2898 ornamental objects such as fountains, statuary, and other similar natural and artificial objects 2899 designed and arranged to produce an aesthetically pleasing effect. 2900 2901 2902 d. Amending the definition of “MULCH.” That the definition of “MULCH” shall be amended 2903 to read as follows: 2904 MULCH: Any material such as rock, bark, compost, wood chips or other materials left loose 2905 and applied to the soil, for the purposes of suppressing weeds, moderating soil temperature, 2906 and preventing soil erosion. 2907 2908 2909 e. Amending the definition of “PARK STRIP LANDSCAPING.” That the definition of “PARK 2910 STRIP LANDSCAPING” shall be amended to read as follows: 2911 PARK STRIP LANDSCAPING: The improvement of property within the street right-of-way 2912 situated between the back of curb and the sidewalk or, if there is no sidewalk, the back of 2913 curb and the right-of-way line, through the addition of plants and other organic and inorganic 2914 materials harmoniously combined to produce an effect appropriate for adjacent uses and 2915 compatible with the neighborhood. Park strip landscaping includes trees and may also 2916 include a combination of lawn, other perennial ground cover, flowering annuals and 2917 perennials, specimen shrubs, and inorganic material. 2918 2919 2920 f. Amending the definition of “PARKING LOT.” That the definition of “PARKING LOT” 2921 shall be amended to read as follows: 94 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2922 PARKING LOT: An area on the surface of the land used for the parking and circulation of 2923 more than four (4) automobiles. Areas designated for the display of new and used 2924 vehicles for sale are not included in this definition. 2925 2926 2927 g. Amending the definition of “TURF.” That the definition of “TURF” shall be amended to 2928 read as follows: 2929 TURF: Grasses planted as a ground cover that may be mowed and maintained to be used as a 2930 lawn area of landscaping. Does not include decorative grasses, that are listed in the Salt Lake 2931 City Plant List & Hydrozone Schedule. grasses that are native to the local environment or 2932 grasses that do not generally require supplemental water, or Iinorganic substitutes commonly 2933 referred to as artificial turf are prohibited in required landscaping areas. 2934 2935 h. Adding the definition of “ARTIFICIAL TURF.” That the definition of “ARTIFICIAL 2936 TURF” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as 2937 follows: 2938 ARTIFICIAL TURF: A synthetically derived, grass substitute that simulates the appearance 2939 of natural live grass. 2940 2941 2942 i. Adding the definition of “CALIPER.” That the definition of “CALIPER” be added and 2943 inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 2944 CALIPER: The dimension of the diameter of a tree trunk measured at a distance of 6 inches 2945 from the soil line. 2946 2947 2948 j. Adding the definition of “DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (dbh).” That the definition of 2949 “DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (dbh)” be added and inserted into the list of definitions 2950 in alphabetical order to read as follows: 2951 DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (dbh): The dimension of the diameter of a tree trunk 2952 measured at a distance of 4 feet 6 inches from the ground. 2953 2954 95 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2955 k. Adding the definition of “IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.” That the definition of 2956 “IMPERVIOUS SURFACE” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical 2957 order to read as follows: 2958 IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: Any material that substantially reduces or prevents the 2959 infiltration of stormwater directly into the ground, including: asphalt, concrete, pavers, and 2960 brick. 2961 2962 2963 l. Adding the definition of “LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID).” That the definition of 2964 “LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID)” be added and inserted into the list of definitions 2965 in alphabetical order to read as follows: 2966 LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID): Systems or practices that use or mimic natural 2967 processes that result in the infiltration, evapotranspiration, and/or use of stormwater to 2968 protect water quality and aquatic habitat. 2969 2970 2971 m. Adding the definition of “SHADE TREE.” That the definition of “SHADE TREE” be added 2972 and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 2973 SHADE TREE: Any tree that has a mature minimum tree canopy of 30 feet and a mature 2974 height that is 40 feet or greater. 2975 2976 2977 n. Adding the definition of “SPECIMEN TREE.” That the definition of “SPECIMEN TREE” 2978 be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order to read as follows: 2979 SPECIMEN TREE: A structurally sound and healthy tree or grouping of trees, having an 2980 individual or combined dbh measuring greater than 10 inches; whose future vitality can be 2981 reasonably expected and maintained with proper protection and regularly scheduled care; and 2982 whose absence from the landscape would significantly alter the site’s appearance, 2983 environmental benefit, character or history. 2984 2985 2986 o. Adding the definition of “STORMWATER CURB CUT.” That the definition of 2987 “STORMWATER CURB CUT” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in 2988 alphabetical order to read as follows: 96 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2989 STORMWATER CURB CUT: Openings created in the curb to allow storm water from an 2990 adjacent impervious surface to flow into a depressed planting area. 2991 2992 2993 p. Adding the definition of “TREE PROTECTION FENCING.” That the definition of “TREE 2994 PROTECTION FENCING” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical 2995 order to read as follows: 2996 TREE PROTECTION FENCING: The fencing required to be installed, and maintained 2997 during construction activities, to delineate required tree protection zones. 2998 2999 3000 q. Adding the definition of “TREE PROTECTION ZONE.” That the definition of “TREE 3001 PROTECTION ZONE” be added and inserted into the list of definitions in alphabetical order 3002 to read as follows: 3003 TREE PROTECTION ZONE: The area of a development site that includes the area located 3004 within the drip line of specimen trees and also includes the area that supports tree health 3005 requirements and interactions as determined by the city forester. 3006 3007 3008 r. Deleting definitions. That the following definitions are hereby deleted from the definitions 3009 of terms: 3010 BMP 3011 3012 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE (BMP) (Applies Only To Chapter 21A.48 Of This 3013 Title) 3014 3015 ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION PROJECT 3016 3017 ET OR ETo 3018 3019 ETAF 3020 3021 EVAPOTRANSPIRATION (ET) RATE 3022 3023 EVERGREEN 3024 3025 LANDSCAPE BMPs MANUAL 3026 97 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 3027 OVERSPRAY 3028 3029 PERENNIAL 3030 3031 TIER 2 WATER TARGET 3032 3033 TREASURED LANDSCAPE 3034 3035 WATER BUDGET 3036 3037 3038 SECTION 30. Repealing the Text of Subsection 21A.62.050.D. That Subsection 3039 21A.62.050.D of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Definitions: Illustrations of Selected 3040 Definitions: Landscape Area), shall be repealed in its entirety as follows: 3041 D. Landscape Area. Reserved. 3042 3043 SECTION 31. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its 3044 first publication. 3045 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________, 3046 2024. 3047 ______________________________ 3048 CHAIRPERSON 3049 ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: 3050 3051 ______________________________ 3052 CITY RECORDER 3053 3054 3055 Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. 3056 3057 Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. 98 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 3058 3059 ______________________________ 3060 MAYOR 3061 ______________________________ 3062 CITY RECORDER 3063 (SEAL) 3064 3065 Bill No. ________ of 2024. 3066 Published: ______________. 3067 Ordinance Amending Landscaping Regulations (legislative)v2 3068 3069 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: Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: Landscaping and Buffers Chapter Text Amendment STAFF CONTACT: Nan Larsen, Senior Planner nannette.larsen@slcgov.com or 801-535-7645 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Landscaping and Buffers Ordinance as recommended by the Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This is a text amendment for a complete rewrite and reorganization of the Landscaping and Buffers Chapter of the zoning ordinance to better support the City’s adopted policies related to reducing water use, enhancement of the urban forest, reduction in the urban heat island, improve air quality, and improvements to air quality and green infrastructure city-wide. Reorganization and clarity of the ordinance was of upmost importance for both the public’s understanding and for city administration. On September 6, 2022, the Planning Division and Public Utilities held a work session with the City Council to get initial feedback on priorities related to changes to landscaping regulations to help achieve city policies and goals. The report that was prepared for the City Council briefing is included in the staff report to the Planning Commission as found in Planning Commission records b). The proposed Landscaping and Buffers Chapter changes are based on the feedback received 11/27/2023 -# '*//*җ уѶ20231фѷ3уҘ 12/0у/2023 12/0у/2023 4)PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED AFTER PLANNING COMMISSIONS STAFF REPORT PUBLISHED Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. From:Amanda Dillon To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Comment on new Landscaping Ordinance - Planning Commission Meeting Date:Tuesday, April 25, 2023 10:38:19 PM Hey Nan! I was chatting with Amanda Roman and she let me know that tomorrow is when the new landscaping ordinance goes in front of the planning commission. Congrats on getting these revised policies to this point! I had the chance to skim through it earlier today and wanted to submit two official comments. SLC's website said to reach out to you as the staff listed at the top of the report. Let me know if I should reach out somewhere else to get this comment officially recorded. The first comment is in regards to plant height in the park strip. The proposed ordinance says: Plant height is limited to 22” to preserve clear views from intersection driveways, alleys, and streets, to preserve line of sights for people, and to prevent areas that some people may find unsafe when visibility is blocked. One issue we've found with this limited plant height is that it makes it hard to put planter boxes or similar into the park strip because we are so limited in height. As a developer of infill multifamily housing, we find that many of our residents let their pets relieve themselves in the park strips on any planted vegetation. The high acidity of their urine/feces makes it so that most plants die immediately and don't really grow back, leaving barren and unattractive park strips. One solution we've found that helps keep the park strips vegetated and looking nice is putting plants in planter boxes, which makes it harder for pets to disturb them. However, to create one that is hard for pets to get into, the planter box needs to be at least 12" tall. With the plant height restriction, that means we can only put a plant in that will mature to 10" tall. This really narrows down the selection of plants we can use to beautify the park strips and prevents us from designing attractive landscaped right of way areas for the City. It would be great to have a slight modification in this part of the code that would allow for taller plant heights if those are planted in garden boxes or the like. The second comment is more of a clarification question. On page 6 of the ordinance, in the second paragraph, it says "rocks (over a certain size)" but no where else in the code does it give any specifics about that size. Can more definition/clarity be added on this point? Thanks so much! Let's get together soon. Amanda Amanda Dillon Giv Development 2 from the Council during the briefing, feedback from several departments including Public Utilities, Urban Forestry, and Enforcement, begins to implement strategies in the Urban Forest Action Plan. ZONING REGULATIONS AND LANDSCAPING: Title 21A, SLC zoning code, regulates landscaping in several ways for several purposes. Generally, landscaping is regulated in the zoning code to reduce the heat island effect, reduce stormwater runoff, reduce auditory and visual impacts of certain uses, improve aesthetics, and make use of the health benefits of being in a more natural environment. These goals are accomplished by regulating landscaping in certain locations of a property depending on the use or district. The zoning code regulates landscaping in the following locations: Park strips: The strip of vegetation that is usually between the street and the sidewalk. Park strips vary in size and form, different standards for different park strip sizes are proposed. Yard areas: Front or corner side yards are identified as required landscaped yards. Yard areas are where the building is required to be setback from the property line, where buildings are prohibited, and other structures like fences and sheds are limited. Outside of a required landscaped yard, there are no specific vegetation requirements in a required yard, except for buffer yards (if required) or parking lot landscaping (if applicable). Buffers: The purpose of buffer areas is to mitigate potential impacts between dissimilar zoning districts. Landscaping in buffer areas is utilized to reduce auditory or visual impacts on an adjoining property. Parking lots: Landscaping standards in parking lots are utilized to reduce the auditory, visual, or temperature impacts of a large surface area that is paved. This type of landscaping takes the form of interior and perimeter parking lot landscaping and generally applies to parking lots with 10 or more stalls. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: What’s Staying? Several standards that are currently required in the landscaping chapter will remain:, - Regulated landscaping locations. - 33% vegetation standard. - 20% hard surfacing limitations. - Landscaping and irrigation designed depending on watering needs. - Drip and spray irrigation on separate valves. - Park Strip less than 36” in width are exempt from some landscaping standards. - Landscaping buffer tree and shrub quantities. - Mulching depth and permeability standards. From:Bruce A. Hamilton To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Case PLNPCM2023-00098: oppose vegetation requirements on park strips Date:Monday, April 24, 2023 10:54:24 PM Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. Re: Planning Commission, April 26 agenda, case PLNPCM2023-00098: It is insane to require vegetation on park strips in this age of droughts. Please oppose all such existing and new zoning requirements. --Bruce (Bruce A. Hamilton, Salt Lake City, UT) Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. From:Margaret Holloway To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) PLNPCM2023-00098 Date:Tuesday, April 25, 2023 10:40:34 AM The goal of the city is to increase the canopy throughout the city. But what I see is a stumbling block is the fact of a permanent irrigation line to a street tree. I was quoted 3000 dollars just to connect a irrigation connection to my water line. If this is required of ALL homeowners who would like a tree or are going to be required to have a tree planted To whom is going to pay this bill? That quote was just to dig down to the water line and connect a meter. That does not include the line to the tree. I understand the need to encourage watering the tree. But if this is not done correctly you can have the water go into reverse and contaminate the water supply. It has happened when people try to do plumbing themselves. Now how is this even reasonable? All you need is a hose . The city gave buckets to the homeowners that had their trees taken out by Rocky Mountain power on 900 west. They were told to haul 5 gallons to the tree each week or 10 days. Which sounds reasonable... But how do you fill the bucket with a hose...... And if they had given them a hose instead maybe they would have watered the trees. But they didn't and they did not get watered They all died except a couple that did..... The city plants trees into parks without water and then they die. The new trees the city planted on 1200 west there were 10 all but 2 died Because the sprinklers were turned off and the new trees need help for the first few years. The city turns off the sprinklers or cuts back and the trees die. But here you are requiring homeowners to spend upward of 3,000 to put a line in maintain it when you just need a hose..... I water my street tree with a soaker hose every other week if it doesn't get enough water like last 2 years.... The canopy changes over the life of the tree.....You MUST water under the canopy..... It only benefits the tree if you water under the growing canopy... This is where a soaker hose is important.. it goes straight to the roots.... But to make the decision that everyone has to pay upto 3,000 dollars to put a permanent line to where it isn't going to do what you want it to do.... seems missguided. The city just planted 30 more trees in Rosewood In Rosepark..... if they have to cut off the water again will they make it? It depends this year they have a chance because of all the water in the soil. But last year they lost 5 from the previous year lack of water. The west side needs the trees but forcing people to put in an expensive hook up when a 30 dollar hose will do ... But last year you just drive around and see the trees they had planted in the parks that died. So why is the city going to require something of homeowners that the city does not do itself? Please reconsider this it won't do the trees any good to water where they can't use it.,..It will not get the city where it wants to go with the canopy. If there are actually any new houses built in the city i can see where this might come into play before everything is installed. But since we don;t have any place to build new houses you are telling existing homeowners what to do. after the fact of 60 or more years. Margaret Holloway 1412 west 1100 north SLC Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. From: To:Larsen, Nannette; Planning Public Comments Cc:Wharton, Chris; City Council Liaisons; slcgreen; Subject:(EXTERNAL) Public Comment on Petition PLNPCM2023-00098 - 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates Date:Tuesday, April 25, 2023 12:51:52 PM Attachments:21A.48 Nextdoor posting 1.4 K Views 5 Days .pdf Public Comment on Petition PLNPCM2023-00098 - 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates From: Stanley Holmes 4-25-2023 Dear Salt Lake City Planning Commission, I urge you to reject the proposed ordinance rewrite of 21A Zoning that was submitted as Petition PLNPCM2023-00098 - "21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates" as flawed and problematic on several fronts. The set of proposed amendments to Title 21A Zoning should be remanded back to Salt Lake City's Planning Division ("Division") for revision and a new, more appropriately noticed 45-day public comment period to be opened by the Division before a corrected set of proposed Title 21A Zoning amendments is brought before the Planning Commission ("Commission"). The proposed changes to Title 21A Zoning Chapter 48 under consideration now would have significant, wide-ranging, and costly impacts for many Salt Lake City ("City") property owners of various means and for all city taxpayers. That the Division would rely primarily on community council chairs to, at their individual discretion and in a timely manner, notify the general public of statutory/regulatory changes of this scope and magnitude can be most graciously characterized as cavalier. Division records indicate that only four comments were received during the 45-day comment period and that Sugarhouse C.C. was the only community council to actively engage. I learned from city staff that the Division’s notification system had been used, but found that there are no water conservation, landscaping, energy conservation, environment, or other sustainability categories listed. Through which category did the Division send the landscaping code updates notice; and how many city residents actually get notices through that means? Please be advised, and let the public record show, that on April 20, 2023, I posted on the community blog --Nextdoor.com-- information about the proposed Title 21A Zoning changes and ways that interested citizens could submit public comments. Over the next five days, Nextdoor.com reported 1,400 views and there were 48 public comments. Please see evidence of this included with the Addendum at the close of my comment and attached. Those folks on Nextdoor.com were Salt Lake City residents who missed the initial comment period that ended on March 27th and, quite likely, also did not know about your April 26 Planning Commission meeting or their opportunities to submit public comments before the zoning/ordinance changes had become a ‘done deal.’ Outrageous. I am also quite surprised and disappointed that there was no input from the Sustainability Department, and wonder how their input was solicited. SLCGreen is copied on this comment, as are my District 3 Councilman Chris Wharton and the City Council Liaisons. City officials should have known that not every community council would post or distribute the notice. Not every potentially interested and impacted citizen is on a community council distribution list or regularly checks a community council's website. One might wonder to what extent the Division was truly desirous of robust public input, having solicited comments by such a narrow and undependable means. The Commission should insist upon a proper re-do of the public comment period and extend its further consideration of any Title 21A Zoning Chapter 48 amendments until legitimate opportunities for public input have occurred. The proposed Petition PLNPCM2023-00098 - "21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates" are themselves in several ways inadequate and problematic. Their 'as is' endorsement by the Commission and the City Council would, upon attempted implementation and enforcement by the City, certainly result in strong opposition that would include costly litigation. Please recall that the most recent revision of 21A.48 was in the year 2000, prior to over two decades of climate change-exacerbated heat increases and drought that finally prompted state and local officials to take action. The updates now under consideration were supposed to deal more effectively with the climate change-related impacts. Let me begin with the proposed re-write of 21A.48.010, the Purpose and Intent section. While the earlier version calls for promoting "the prudent use of water", the update would remove this and make no mention of water conservation as a priority. The lead "purpose" of a revised chapter 21A.48 would be to "increase Salt Lake City's urban tree canopy"; and the lead "intent" would be to "promote and enhance the community's appearance." While trees are nice, useful, and can be aesthetically pleasing, the City is located in the second driest U.S. state and is experiencing an unprecedented, worsening drought. Water conservation should not only have been mentioned in the proposed re-write of 21A.48.010, but been listed as a priority goal, as has been done by other Utah municipalities. Why was this not done? Under the current zoning ordinance, Section 21A.48.060 refers to Park Strip Landscaping and one of the "intent" items is to "encourage water conservation". But the proposed re-write (update) would change the title of 21A.48.060 to "Landscape Requirements" and remove the water conservation reference. The re-write of 21A.48.060 has a new "Park Strip Standards" section that adds the requirement of at least one "street tree" in the park strip. Additional park strip trees would be required, depending on the park strip length. The current ordinance has no park strip tree requirement. Therefore, residents who've implemented water-wise park strip measures --in compliance with the existing ordinance -- that do not include at least one street tree would be required to add a tree and, according to the 21A.48.040 re-write, see that it is "irrigated with a permanent automatic irrigation system." A hydrozoned irrigation system would be required, so that tree(s) watering can be isolated from any water needed for other vegetation. The park strip abutting property owner would have to pay for the new park strip tree-plus-irrigation requirement. That could be quite costly, especially if the park strip has to be excavated to install the required irrigation system. The Commission should assume that some residents will be unable to afford this and that others who had been compliant would rather fight the compliance rules change in court. Please consider the burden on low-income families, especially if the $25-per-day violation fine is retained. The Commission should also consider that the City's Department of Community and Neighborhood's Civil Enforcement staff would have to be expanded and that additional budgetary provisions would have to be made for the City's legal team. Litigation could delay implementation and enforcement of parts or all of the proposed 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates for an extended period of time. And aside from pushback from angry residents delaying implementation of the proposed ordinance updates, the sheer magnitude of any effort to achieve widespread compliance should sober city planners and policy-makers. Have Division staff conducted a city-wide, on-street survey of the number of park strips that would require tree-planting and new irrigation plumbing? Have they calculated how many contractors, and how many years, would be required to accomplish full implementation? Then, there's the additional per-tree water requirement times however many park strips would be affected. At this point, I'll add that there are some positive aspects of the proposed ordinance re-write, such as 21A.48.040.E.1., which says that "All irrigation systems shall be maintained in good operating condition to eliminate water waste and run-off into the public right-of-way." Drip irrigation is also mentioned in 21A.48.040.E, though it could have been promoted. Some of the proposed re-write items are not clear. For example, 21A.48.040.C.2. "Exceptions" circles back to itself. And under 21A.62 "Definitions", the Park Strip Landscaping section says that park strip landscaping may include "lawn", which is normally a reference to turf. The re-write, under 21A.48.060 and 21A.48.080, prohibits turf in park strips. There is also a reference to the right-of- way line's relevance if there is no sidewalk, but the dimensions of the right-of-way line are not given. As a final point to this comment, it concerns me that the City Planning Division failed to take a holistic view of the abutting residential property owner's landscape unless a new home is being constructed or the floor area of an existing structure(s) is being expanded by 50% or more. The overall vegetative contribution of individual residential properties that are not undergoing structural change is ignored by the proposed 21A Zoning rewrite's determination of compliance or non- compliance with new park strip requirements. I can imagine situations where the owner of a well- wooded, well-vegetated residential property is forced to install and water a park strip tree while the owner of a minimally vegetated property who happens to have a tree in the park strip is left alone. Where is the environmental justice in that? Salt Lake City needs to do a better job of conserving water. The proposed amendments to Title 21A Zoning are inadequate to the task, as they do not give water conservation the top priority status our current megadrought crisis demands. I urge the Commission to deny Petition PLNPCM2023-00098 - "21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates" and send it back to the Division for revision and a properly noticed, 45-day public review and comment period. I thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of the points I raised and your directive to have the ordinance revised in a more transparent way that better engages the public and serves the City's best interests. Stanley Holmes 846 N. East Capitol Blvd. Salt Lake City, UT 84103 Addendum: My attempt to use Nextdoor.com to notify the public of proposed 21A.48 changes, first posted on April 20, 2023, is copied below. In five days, 1,400 views and 48 resident comments. The Planning Division got 4 public comments in 45 days. Stan Holmes Author •West Capitol Hills•0 mi SLC Park Strip, Landscape Policy Changes Public comments are being taken by the Salt Lake City Planning Division and Planning Commission as they consider city-wide changes to the Landscaping Chapter of the Zoning Code. This includes proposed revision of the Park Strip ordinance under which many city residents have been penalized for their water conservation efforts. The proposed Park Strip policy revision would require one "street tree" every 30 feet and vegetation covering at least 30% of the area. See all proposed amendments at... www.slcdocs.com/Planning/Online%20Open%20Houses/2023/02 2023/PLNPCM2023- 00098/02102023%20DRAFT%20Landscaping%20Updates_Posted.pdf The Planning Commission will consider landscape/park strip ordinance changes at its April 26 meeting. Public comments can be submitted in-person or via email to and . Reference case number PLNPCM2023-00098 in the subject line. The agenda for next Wednesday's (April 26) Planning Commission meeting is at... www.slcdocs.com/Planning/Planning%20Commission/2023/PC04.26.2023/PC04.26.2023agenda.pdf Whatever the Planning Commission decides will then be presented to the City Council for final approval. Now is the time to shift from opinion to action and file a public comment. Stan Holmes Author •West Capitol Hills•0 mi The email addresses that were stripped are planning.comments and nannette.larsen that are both at slc.gov. They are also listed in the April 26 agenda at... www.slcdocs.com/Planning/Planning%20Commission/2023/PC04.26.2023/PC04.26.2023agenda.pdf also attached: TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Project Chronology 2.Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3.Petition Initiation 4.Public Comments Received After Planning Commission Staff Report Published 5.Public Utilities Director Statement Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. From:Chelsea Benjamin To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Report to include as part of public record for today"s planning commission meeting Date:Wednesday, April 26, 2023 11:00:08 AM Attachments:2022 WRA Artifical Turf Report.pdf Hello Nannette, I would like the following report to be included as part of the public record during the Planning Committee discussion on the new landscaping ordinance today. Here is a link to the report, and I have attached it as a PDF to this email. https://westernresourceadvocates.org/publications/is- artificial-turf-a-beneficial-water-conservation-tool-in-the-west/ Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do to include it in the Planning Commission’s discussion today. Thank you, Chelsea Benjamin photo Chelsea Benjamin Water Policy Fellow | WesternResourceAdvocates.org 2260 Baseline Road, Suite 200 | Boulder, CO 80302 Is Artificial Turf a Beneficial Water Conservation Tool in the West? December 2022 Author: Chelsea Benjamin Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Water Management ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Temperature Impacts ................................................................................................................................... 4 Lifecycle Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Harmful Chemicals ........................................................................................................................................ 5 PFAS Contamination ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Microplastic Contamination.......................................................................................................................... 7 Soil Quality .................................................................................................................................................... 7 Pet Waste Buildup ......................................................................................................................................... 8 Cost ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 3 - And encroachment standards in the park strip or public right of way. - Maintaining the City’s resident’s eligibility for “rip your strip” rebate programs through the CUWCD (Central Utah Water Conservancy District) and Utah Department of Natural Resources. What’s New? The significant new additions to the landscaping chapter aim to: - Improve water conservation by: o Requiring a landscaping or irrigation professional letter of compliance with irrigation and landscaping standards. o Requiring a WaterSense automatic irrigation controller. o Prohibiting water waste. o Creating standards for irrigation systems to be designed and maintained to maximize water efficiency. - Simplify and clarify through: o Requiring separate plans for planting, grading, and irrigation. o Addressing artificial turf. o Consolidating buffer sizes. o Updating the Freeway Landscape buffer better comply with goals and intent of chapter. o Creating tables and graphics where possible. o Removing duplicate or wordy standards that were difficult to implement. o Quantifying, where possible, minimum landscaping standards. - Prioritizing trees by: o Allowing tree canopy to count toward vegetation coverage standards and requiring the largest tree appropriate to the landscape location in most zoning districts. o Ensuring tree health by requiring Urban Forestry review of alterations to street trees and root zone protection. o Improving tree survival rates by requiring a permanent irrigation system for street trees when a landscape plan is required (new construction, or a commercial property where the landscaping is being updated by 50% or more, or a commercial addition that increases the floor area by 50% or more). o Requiring trees in the Northwest Quadrant. - Reduce the urban heat island by: o Creating parking lot landscaping standards directed at reducing the urban heat island effect. o Establishing rock mulch limitations. o Allowing tree canopy to count toward landscape coverage and requiring street trees where new construction is proposed. - Reduce stormwater runoff by: Introduction Artificial turf is a landscaping alternative made of plastic that mimics the look, feel, and function of a natural grass lawn or athletic field. Artificial turf has become more popular in Colorado and the West in recent years for its ability to reduce landscape water use in the face of unprecedented drought and water security challenges; the region now accounts for 24% of the artificial turf market share in the United States, with most being used for athletic fields. In recent years, many communities across the West have mounted turf replacement programs to encourage residents to save water used on outdoor landscapes in the face of prolonged drought. Communities are also limiting the amount of high water use, non-functional turf that can be installed in new development and instead requiring landscaping alternatives. As momentum continues to grow around reducing high water use turfgrass in our communities, water conservation practitioners, land use planners, landscape professionals and community members are asking: is artificial turf a worthwhile landscaping alternative, especially for residential properties? While artificial turf may reduce landscape water demand compared to traditional cool season turf, research shows that artificial turf can also have significant environmental and economic drawbacks. This report explores the current state of the research behind the benefits and drawbacks of artificial turf as it relates to: water management, temperature impacts, lifecycle analysis, PFAS contamination, harmful chemicals, microplastic contamination, pet waste buildup, and cost. While much of the data available are from studies of artificial turf athletic fields, most findings are applicable to properties with smaller footprints as well. Water Management Artificial turf has gained popularity in large part for its ability to reduce outdoor water use. One study found that full-sized, 1.32 acre, natural grass sports fields can use up to 1.5 million gallons of water for irrigation per year depending on geographic location. The Synthetic Turf Council estimates that same- sized artificial turf athletic fields can save 500,000 to 1 million gallons of water per year (8.7 to 17.4 gallons/sq-ft), and that a turf lawn of 1,800 square feet can save 99,000 gallons of water per year, or about 70% of a homeowner’s water bill. In the arid Western United States, the need for water conservation has been a driver of artificial turf demand. Artificial turf for residences has proven especially popular in drought-stricken California, where some areas were limited to one day of outdoor watering per week in the summer of 2022 due to water shortages. While artificial turf companies tout water savings as a main benefit of artificial turf, this is not always the case. Studies have found that on a warm, sunny day artificial turf can measure up to 80 degrees hotter than the ambient air temperature. In one study, an artificial turf field measured 160 degrees while the ambient air temperature was 87 degrees. On an athletic playing field, one solution to this heat is to water the artificial turf. A large amount of water needs to be applied to achieve a cooling effect, and it has been found that this cooling effect lasts only minutes before temperatures rebound. Some sports arenas have attempted to solve the problem by installing misters that apply water to the turf field throughout sports events. Others find that irrigation of artificial turf improves traction and athletic performance; one university in North Carolina going so far as to apply for a business exemption to water their artificial turf athletic fields during a drought. An additional concern is the effect of artificial turf on groundwater recharge. Cities in California that once encouraged the replacement of natural grass with artificial turf have since changed their policies upon discovering that artificial turf can increase stormwater runoff and prevent groundwater recharge. Los Angeles offered a rebate for homeowners who replaced irrigated grass with artificial turf until 2016, when they revised their program’s requirements to provide a rebate only for replacement with xeriscape landscaping. Los Angeles realized that artificial turf reduces the amount of rainwater that soaks into the ground after a storm, and that more stormwater flushed out to sea via the stormwater system. Temperature Impacts Artificial turf can reach temperatures up to 80 degrees higher than the ambient air temperature due to its material composition and color, as well as the color and heat retention abilities of infill materials used. This excess heat contributes to urban heat island effect in cities, as heat from the synthetic turf elevates the ambient air temperature and disperses into the local environment. One researcher found that some of the hottest areas in New York City are artificial turf fields, rivaling black colored roofs in their heat retention abilities. Research has shown that excessively hot artificial athletic fields can lead to heat stress, especially in children who are more susceptible than adults, turf burns, and the cancellation of athletic events due to unsafe playing conditions. Artificial turf heat can also be an issue when used in landscaping, as pets and children use the turf for play on warm days. Urban heat island effect can also increase the demand for energy for air conditioning, and can increase pollution as natural grass areas are removed. Natural grass absorbs the sun’s heat during the day, and slowly releases it at night, contributing a cooling effect to the surrounding environment, as well as removing pollutants from the air. The artificial turf industry has responded to temperature issues and has developed products that can repel UV rays, better disperse heat, and even mimic the evaporative cooling effects of natural grass. Some types of artificial grass have been developed specifically for areas like Arizona that have extreme high temperatures during the summer. Manufacturers claim that heat-repellent synthetic turf measures 10-20% cooler than grasses with high heat retention. Another heat reduction measure is the infill material chosen; crumb rubber and sand infill materials can contribute to extreme artificial turf temperatures due to their color and heat-retention abilities. Special infill materials have been developed that when wet with water, will slowly release the water over time, mimicking the evaporative cooling properties of natural grass and reducing the hottest temperatures by 50 degrees. Cooling technologies seem to be distributed across price points, but largely cannot match the cooling properties of natural grass or other plants. Lifecycle Analysis In the early 1990s, the United States had a mounting problem with the disposal of used automobile tires; they were costly to dispose of and created pest and fire hazards in landfills. It was then discovered that discarded tire rubber could easily be recycled into small pellets to be used as “infill” to stabilize artificial turf athletic fields and lawns. The infill is now mainly used for large athletic field installations and industry experts estimate that the artificial turf industry now recycles one-twelfth of all automobile tires disposed of each year. One artificial turf athletic field can use 20,000 to 40,000 used tires as crumb rubber infill. Infill is added during installation, and as needed to replace infill that migrates out of the artificial turf area. Artificial turf has an average lifespan of 8-10 years before an athletic field becomes worn out, or a residential lawn loses its formerly lush appearance. The Synthetic Turf Council, an artificial turf industry group, insists that artificial turf is recyclable, and that its members actively recycle the spent turf it sells. Investigative journalists and concerned citizens have documented otherwise in the Netherlands and in the United States. The Netherlands requires artificial turf to be recycled. A few Dutch companies claim to be artificial turf recyclers; these companies accept payment to recycle spent turf and provide removal services. However, investigative journalists have found that several of these companies have no active facilities for turf recycling. The companies do not recycle the artificial turf they accept, but either hold on to it indefinitely in growing piles in municipalities with lax regulations or sell it to new customers who repurpose the turf, rather than recycle its components into new materials. In the United States, there are no regulations that pertain to the disposal or recycling of artificial turf. Most municipalities will accept artificial turf in local landfills. Fees to dispose of large amounts of turf, such as from athletic fields, can be extremely expensive. As artificial turf owners are not held responsible for the turf at the end of its life, it is often illegally dumped, or a small fee is paid to store the turf on an abandoned lot rather than paying disposal or recycling fees. Piles of discarded turf create fire and chemical hazards, just as discarded automobile tires did in the 1990s. Although a Danish artificial athletic field recycler, Re-Match, has plans to open an artificial turf recycling facility in Pennsylvania, and has recently expanded its European operations to the Netherlands and France, life cycle concerns for end-of-life artificial turf athletic fields and synthetic residential landscaping remain an active problem the world over. Harmful Chemicals Artificial turf eliminates the need for pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers that are traditionally used to maintain a lawn or sports field; the plastic turf and its base layers block the growth of weeds and pests that otherwise might invade natural grass. However, artificial turf contains many chemicals of concern. These chemicals can migrate into the surrounding environment as the plastic material degrades when exposed to heat and light. The majority of research on artificial turf focuses on athletic fields, and many specifically on the chemicals related to crumb rubber infill. Crumb rubber infill is the cheapest infill material on the market and is often used in athletic field installations. It is less likely to be used for artificial lawns, but the following research discussed can at times apply to residential installations. The cheapest infill material on the market is crumb rubber infill made from recycled discarded tires. Crumb rubber infill is most often used for athletic fields, as it provides a durable playing surface. However, crumb rubber infill has been found to release chemicals as it degrades. Crumb rubber infill has been analyzed and found to contain 197 carcinogenic chemicals. Alternative infill materials include EPDM rubber, TPE plastic, and recycled athletic shoe material, as well as natural materials like sand, cork, and zeolite clay. A study comparing infill materials found that almost all contain chemicals of concern, except natural infill materials, which may conversely be susceptible to mold growth, or cause negative respiratory effects. Studies have found that organic contaminants and heavy metals in crumb rubber leach into stormwater runoff, posing hazards to the surrounding environment, aquatic life, and human health. Studies have also found that Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) from crumb rubber infill can aerosolize during play on artificial turf athletic fields. VOCs can cause respiratory irritation and have been linked to the development of cancer. While there are no fully conclusive studies on the human health effects of exposure to artificial turf, studies have been conducted on the effects of crumb rubber infill chemicals on earthworms, an invertebrate, and on chicken embryos, a vertebrate. Two experiments have been conducted on the effects of earthworm exposure to crumb rubber infill. The first experiment tested the effect of exposure to new crumb rubber infill, and found that after one week of incubation in contaminated soil, the exposed earthworms had noticeably lower body weight than those in clean soil. A second, similar, experiment was conducted using recycled tire crumb rubber infill. In this experiment, the exposed earthworms quickly died in a stress test, demonstrating a marked decrease in resilience to stress when exposed to chemicals in recycled tire rubber. Another study that examined the effects of crumb rubber leachate on fertilized chicken embryos during their development process found that approximately half of the fertilized eggs exposed to the leachate developed extreme malformations, while the unexposed group developed into healthy chicken embryos. Although no conclusive studies have been conducted on the direct effects of artificial turf on human health, anecdotal collections of statistics have raised concerns about artificial turf’s potential connection to cancer development in humans. In 2013, one women’s soccer coach compiled a list of 38 US soccer players who had developed cancer, mainly leukemia and cancers of the blood. Many of the players were goalies, who regularly dive into artificial turf. Health experts have been unable to reach consensus on whether artificial turf and the use of crumb rubber infill can be linked to cancer or other human health effects. Despite this lack of consensus, the presence of known carcinogens in artificial turf blades and infill and the results of the animal studies have raised alarm. PFAS Contamination PFAS chemicals are widely found in artificial turf because they are used in the artificial turf production process and are typically added as a coating to the grass blades as they are manufactured. The chemicals can break down and leach into the environment when exposed to heat and light after artificial turf is installed. PFAS chemicals are also known as “forever chemicals” because they do not break down under normal environmental conditions, and can last in the environment for hundreds of years, or longer. PFAS chemicals are also associated with negative health effects in humans and wildlife. Studies on the human health effects of PFAS chemicals have found that the chemicals bioaccumulate in human tissues and can lead to liver effects, immunological effects, developmental effects, endocrine effects, decreased fertility, cardiovascular effects, and can contribute to the development of cancers. PFAS can cause similar problems in animals and can also bioaccumulate in plants. In 2020, one New Hampshire community attempted to purchase PFAS-free artificial turf to minimize exposure risks. The community tested the turf they had been sold, and found that it did contain PFAS chemicals. The company claimed that the levels of PFAS in the turf were below EPA accepted maximum levels of the chemical and could safely be labeled “PFAS-free”. However, the EPA has recently concluded that no amount of PFAS chemicals are safe in drinking water, which is concerning as many components of artificial turf installations regularly make their way into surrounding waterways. Microplastic Contamination In addition to the chemical concerns surrounding artificial turf, there are also significant concerns relating to microplastic pollution. Artificial turf plastic grass blades can break off from the turf surface and migrate into the surrounding environment, creating microplastic pollution as they break down into smaller pieces over time. Artificial turf athletic fields that use crumb rubber infill can be even greater sources of microplastic pollution. One study in Norway found crumb rubber infill pieces in 85% of water samples taken in waterbodies downstream from artificial turf fields, and in 42% of samples taken from locations upstream. Microplastic pollution from artificial turf fields accounts for over one third of total microplastic pollution in Norway. Similarly, researchers have found that artificial turf fields are the second highest source of microplastic pollution in Sweden. Swedish authorities estimate that large artificial athletic fields lose 2-3 tons of infill to the surrounding environment per year. Microplastic pollution is a concern for actively used artificial turf fields, and for discarded fields that await recycling or incineration or are illegally dumped. Discarded fields have the potential to release microplastic pollution into the surrounding environment indefinitely. Artificial turf lawns also can release microplastics via the grass blades’ degradation over time, and depending on the choice of infill will also release infill particles into the environment. Researchers are only beginning to understand what the effects of this pollution might be. Study of the effects of microplastics is relatively new. Studies have found the tiny particles worldwide, including in remote wilderness areas that have no human visitors, and in the umbilical cords of newborn babies. The effects of microplastic pollution on human health and the environment are still relatively unknown, but some early studies suggest that microplastic exposure and ingestion can cause harm to human health and the environment. One study in particular found that microplastics added to soil disturb natural biological processes and change soil structure. Knowledge of the long-term effects of microplastics will continue to develop over time. Soil Quality Artificial turf installation requires the removal of the existing top level of soil and heavy soil compaction to create a smooth surface for the turf. Compaction negatively effects the soil structure, disturbs the soil’s microbial activity, and can damage tree roots. After soil is compacted for athletic field installation, several layers are added between the soil and the artificial turf surface to level the playing field, improve storm water drainage, and provide cushioning. In artificial turf lawn installations, plastic and wire layers may be added beneath the turf for protection from burrowing animals, and weeds. In addition to the effects of soil compaction, artificial turf changes the quality of the soil beneath it by starving the soil of water, air, and light. Artificial turf has also been shown to degrade over time, leaching chemicals from the plastic turf material and the infill materials into stormwater runoff that can soak into surrounding soils, further disturbing soil health. Pet Waste Buildup Pet waste can build up over time on artificial turf, and additional maintenance is required to keep artificial lawns fresh. Artificial turf companies have designed special types of turf to improve pet waste drainage and claim that it can better eliminate waste than natural grass. Pet-friendly infill has also been created with a special coating to prevent odors and the growth of bacteria. Despite these measures, artificial turf needs to be rinsed off after use by pets. To fully sanitize artificial turf when pet waste builds up, infill must be vacuumed out and a special cleaner applied to break down urine and other waste. Natural grass and other plant installations do not need this type of maintenance and special products; the elements naturally break down remnant pet waste. Cost A New York Times investigation compared costs for artificial turf lawns. Bids to install a large artificial turf grass lawn averaged $10,000. The average lifetime of artificial grass is 10 years or less and there are maintenance costs associated with artificial turf, and costs associated with removal and replacement at end of life. Natural grass lawns are likely to have longer lifespans if managed sustainably. Natural lawn costs increase substantially if located in an area that requires supplemental irrigation. One way to lower such costs is to install drought-resistant or low-water species of grass in drought-prone regions, though irrigation systems will likely be needed even if used less frequently. Regarding athletic fields specifically, many schools and universities choose to install artificial turf rather than natural grass fields because artificial turf is a durable play surface that allows for continuous use, while natural grass can require rest between athletic activities. Artificial turf can also save on maintenance costs associated with irrigation and mowing. However, artificial turf has been shown to require heat related closures, maintenance such as brushing and sanitization, regular replacement of infill material, and even irrigation to improve heat conditions and playability. The Toxics Use Reduction Institute (TURI) has conducted several studies comparing costs between artificial fields and natural grass fields that show that organically managed natural grass fields can improve play conditions, reduce wear and tear related closures, and lower maintenance costs. Costs to install a variety of natural grass field installations range from $0.60-$5.00 per square foot, and estimates for artificial turf costs range from $4.50-$10.25 per square foot. TURI’s research concludes that artificial turf athletic fields can cost 2 to 10 times more than organically managed natural grass fields over their life cycles when accounting for installation fees, maintenance fees, and disposal and replacement fees at the end of an artificial turf’s lifecycle. Many sports facilities decide that the investment is worth it 1)PROJECT CHRONOLOGY because artificial turf can extend playing time, and be used in any season or weather condition, including in snow. Conclusion Artificial turf has gained popularity, particularly in the increasingly arid West, as it conserves water used on outdoor landscapes and sports fields, among other reasons, like extending playing time for athletic activities. While artificial turf eliminates the need for pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers used on natural grass, it can have considerable drawbacks. Artificial turf can have unexpected negative impacts to water supplies including requiring watering for cooling on hot days and hindering groundwater recharge. The heat generated by artificial turf can increase urban heat island effect and cause heat- related injuries. To date, there are few sustainable options for artificial turf recycling, leading to stacks of discarded artificial turf building up the world over. In addition to the above issues, the chemicals and microplastic particles that make up artificial turf can leach into the environment, causing environmental and health impacts not yet entirely known. And, while many artificial turf companies tout the material as more cost-effective, cost comparisons with natural grass show that in some cases artificial turf is significantly more expensive. Better alternatives to artificial turf exist in the form of water wise landscaping, including drought-resistant and native species of grasses, trees, shrubs, and perennials. Water-wise landscaping can reduce irrigation water use significantly, with some native plants and grasses requiring no or very little supplemental irrigation. While water savings vary depending on what is installed, compared to cool season turf, water-wise plantings provide numerous other benefits such as pollinator habitat, reduced fertilizer and pesticide use, and groundwater recharge. As the West faces a hotter and drier future, we must continue to research and assess opportunities for reducing landscape water demand while maximizing benefits and minimizing negative consequences. For residential property owners seeking to be more water efficient or wanting lower maintenance landscaping, artificial turf is likely not the hoped-for solution due to costs and wide-ranging environmental and potential health impacts. From:Christopher C. Nixon To:Planning Public Comments; nannette@slcgov.com Cc:jan Nixon Subject:(EXTERNAL) Comment on Landscaping, Park Strip Changes to Code 21A.48 Date:Wednesday, April 26, 2023 12:25:04 PM Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. To Whom It May Concern, I just learned of this public comment opportunity through our neighborhood social media, not from city officials. Apparently, the first comment opportunity has come and gone with little publicity. Salt Lake City must try harder to not only save water, but also to provide the public with more chances to have a say in what we can do as individuals and neighbors. The water crisis is serious. City officials need to get serious, too. What Salt Lake City needs to do first is to stop all the water waste on park strips and adjoining properties. Every day in the summer, I see broken and badly adjusted sprinklers watering the street and sidewalks. I’ve received two citations from SLC Civil Enforcement wanting to penalize me for getting rid of park strip turf and putting in a water-wise, attractive rock garden. What is Civil Enforcement doing about the gutter rivers from the wastrels that are mismanaging their landscape and park strip water? Do city planners need water-wise residents to submit photos and addresses of these residential, commercial, and industrial wastrels across the city? I know neighbors who would like to have a say in this but also missed the opportunity. The city planning division should re-open the public comment period and have it properly noticed in the Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune. KSL and KUER would air PSAs to let people know. Please get serious about the drought situation and bring the residents onboard to find solutions. Thank you. Jan Nixon Salt Lake City Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. From:Margaret Holloway To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) design presented on landscaping last night Date:Thursday, April 27, 2023 11:25:34 AM I see a design with a tree in the corner with mulch and drought bushes spotted around. The problem with mulch is that leaves that fall from the tree can not be raked or blown without removing the mulch with the leaves. So that is a problem I was going to put bark and mulch like this buyt my trees drop small leaves and large leaves during the year. WHich i saw before i did this new landscaping. So it sounds and looks good until the trees drop leaves. Margaret Holloway 1412 west 1100 north Salt Lake City, Utah Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. From:Kyle Deans To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) PC Date:Tuesday, May 16, 2023 12:41:42 PM Nannette, I am sending this in regards to the Landscaping and Buffers Amendments. I am in full support of anything that can help reduce the consumption of water by SLC residents, especially when it comes to non essential ornamental landscapes. Kyle Deans SLC Resident 4 o Allow stormwater curb cuts. o Require bioretention for parking lots with 50 or more stalls in the Parking Chapter (21A.44). SUMMARY OF PROPOSED LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERS CHAPTER: The proposed Landscaping and Buffers Chapter is outlined and briefly described below: 21A.48: Landscaping and Buffers Purpose and Intent: Explains the purpose of establishing a landscape chapter and the intent of the standards. - Increase tree canopy, protect and preserve public trees, reduce heat island, reduce stormwater runoff, improve air quality, enhance community appearance from the public realm, mitigate impacts through buffer between uses, and promote water conservation. Applicability: Applies to all properties in SLC, any updates must comply. Existing landscaping that does not comply with the regulations of the chapter do not need to come into compliance unless there is a change made to the landscaping for single- and two- family districts, or if the floor area or the number of parking stalls required increases by 50% or more for all other uses. Authority: What modifications can be applied; Zoning Administrator may make modifications to standards to better comply with the intent of the chapter, or in coordination with the Urban Forestry, Police, or Public Utilities. Responsibility & Maintenance: Establishes the responsibilities of the property owner and ongoing maintenance required in regard to landscaping maintenance in general, landscape yards, park strips, street trees, and irrigation. - Clearance from the public right-of-way. - Maintained in good condition. - Lists specific responsibilities for street trees and irrigation systems. - Height limitations within the sight distance triangle to prevent vision obstructions from approaching traffic. Landscape Plan: Required for new construction of a primary structure and when an addition increases the floor area by 50%, or modifies any required landscaping by 50% . - Landscape plans require a planning plan, a grading plan, and an irrigation plan. Lists specific criteria for each. Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. From: To:Larsen Nannette Cc:Planning Public Comments; City Council Liaisons; Gliot Tony; Subject:(EXTERNAL) Second Public Comment on 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates Date:Thursday, July 20, 2023 4:57:24 PM Attachments:West Side Street UHI Despite Park Strip Trees jpg Freshly Black Topped West Side Street UHI.jpg Public Comment Follow-Up to 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates From: Stanley Holmes 7-20-2023 Dear Salt Lake City Planning Division, As a follow-up to my 4-25-202 public comment [copied further below] urging the S.L.City Planning Commission to reject the proposed 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates, I submit the following inquiry along with suggestions for improvement of your Urban Forest Action Plan adopted Feb. 2023. First, the inquiry. Some residents have asked me whether the new park strips street tree requirement applies to park strips abutting existing homes as well as to new homes and remodeled homes. My responses have included references to the Salt Lake City Planning Division's ordinance revision proposal report that was submitted to the SLC Planning Commission on April 26, 2023, the day the Commission considered proposed Landscape and Buffers Chapter [21A.48] Amendments. That report included the Planning Commission Draft as Attachment B. My counsel to residents for whom the ordinance revision is unclear is that, as worded, the new park strips street tree requirement applies everyone, with few exceptions. I point to the following document components which, taken together, substantiate this: The 4-26-2023 document states that it is intended to "Specify responsibilities of the property owner." Applicability [21A.48.020] chapter provisions state that the ordinance "[A]pplies to all properties within the city, unless otherwise exempted in another chapter." Responsibility & Maintenance [21A.48.040] chapter provisions state that, with reference to park strips, "The owner of the property abutting the park strip shall be responsible for the correct installation, maintenance, repair, or replacement of all landscaping vegetation..." and include "Providing sufficient irrigation to a street tree located in the abutting park strip." That section proceeds to list multiple requirements for irrigation systems. The Landscape Plan chapter, 21A.48.050, indicates that a landscape plan is only required for "[New] construction of a primary structure" and alterations to an [existing] property that increase the floor area by 50% or more. The next chapter, Landscape Requirements [21A.48.060], however, makes no distinction between properties requiring a landscape plan and those that do not, when it states that "Where there are conflicting standards in this chapter, the more restrictive requirements shall apply." Park Strip Standards include "Minimum of 1 street tree..." and, for overall vegetation, "Minimum 33% coverage." The General Standards chapter, 21A.48.080, states that "All landscape improvements in the required landscape locations, as described in 21A.48.060 and 21A.48.70 shall meet the regulations described in this section." Under the chapter's Specific Park Strip Standards section, the Street Trees:Substitutions rule is that the Urban Forester "may approve a substitute of the required street tree provision for a cash in lieu payment..." In the Key Considerations section, under Consideration 2, the SLC Planning Division's 4-26-2023 document references its Urban Forest Action Plan, then concludes that the proposed landscaping chapter will include the requirement that "[S]treet trees are required in every park strip depending on the length of the park strip." [Attachment A, Water Conservation and Landscaping Regulations Council Briefing Report, includes specific observations and recommendations in its Water Conservation and Landscaping Regulations. It acknowledges that "property owners are not aware" of landscape zoning rules and criticizes the current landscape chapter's "lack of clarity" and consequent problems that include resident violations and subsequent [civil] enforcement actions. My takeaway is that the Division has identified a problem, but not corrected it.] Looking again at the Planning Commission Draft: The first textual content specifying applicability to new construction does not occur until chapter 21A.48.050, Landscape Plan, where it states that such a plan shall be required for new construction and modification of an existing property's floor plan by 50% or more. Up to that point, the revision suggests that requirements apply to all residences...with a few exceptions. Prior to 21A.48.050 we have: ~ 21A.48.020: Applicability... "The provisions of this chapter apply to all properties within the city, unless otherwise exempted..." ~ 21A.48.040: Responsibility and Maintenance ... "The owner of the property abutting the park strip shall be responsible for...all landscaping vegetation." "Providing sufficient irrigation to a street tree located in the abutting park strip." "shall provide water adequately and efficiently to each street tree..." Then, in 21A.48.060 under Park Strip Standards, the document sets a minimum of one street tree per park strip and a minimum 33% vegetation. No distinction is made between existing properties and those requiring a landscape plan. If the Commission intended to exempt existing properties, it should have stated that. I therefore conclude that the SLC Planning Division document fails to convince me that the revised ordinance requirements would only apply to new projects or non-residential landscape sites. While there are separate chapters in the Division and Commission portions of document that apply to new projects and changes to existing residential property floor plans, and there are later chapters citing variations for certain areas, such as the Northwest Quadrant, there are no residential park strip requirement waivers or exemptions specified in prior chapters. Nor is it stated in introductory sections, such as Project Description or later in Purpose & Intent, that the ordinance update does not apply to most existing residential properties. General applicability of the park strip street tree requirement should have been clearly stated up front, but was not. Since the proposed ordinance update is not clear about all who would be subjected to the new park strip street tree requirement, my counsel is that SLC residents whose park strips have no trees should assume they will be required to make changes if the Commission-approved ordinance update is adopted by the Salt Lake City Council. What would you say to SLC residents who feel threatened by the proposed ordinance update? Finally: Some comments on the Urban Forest Action Plan (UFAP)… Inasmuch as the City is concerned about the urban heat island (UHI) effects of <33% vegetation covered park strips, and is focusing on irrigated park strip street trees as a solution, I am surprised that the UFAP lacks details about the UHI of super-wide residential streets, especially on the West Side. For example, 1100 West and 400 North are 77 feet wide. That's the width of seven or eight car lanes…all imposing intense UHI effects and trying-to- stay-cool cost burdens on economically vulnerable families. The only [passing] reference to the option of street trees median strips is a sketch on page 76. There's no discussion of the functionality of street trees median strips, which could be quite useful in reducing UHI on wide residential streets. I have attached to this comment the photo of a West Side street block whose park strips are full of trees. Notice the huge area of exposed street pavement still drawing and radiating heat. Another attached photo shows a recently black-topped street. Why is the City still coating streets with black when lighter alternatives are available? There are other cost-burden, mitigation responsibility, and water conservation topics that should inform improvements to the Urban Forest Action Plan and the revision of city ordinance 21A.48 prior to the City Council's scheduling of public hearings and its final vote. Thank you for your attention to questions and suggestions raised in this, my second, public comment to the City regarding plans, policies, and programs to address climate change impacts that threaten our quality of life. And please let me know when any potential revisions are available to the public prior to City Council hearings. Thanks. Petition: PLNPCM2023-00098 September 6, 2022 City Council briefing to get initial feedback on potential changes to landscaping regulations. February 8, 2023 Text amendment to update the Landscaping and Buffers chapter initiated. February 10, 2023 Notice emailed to recognized organizations City-wide. February 10, 2023 The proposed code changes were posted to the Planning Division’s Online Open House webpage. March 20, 2023 The Planning Division presented proposed code changes to Sugar House Community Council. Public comments and questions were accepted. April 19, 2023 Public hearing notices were posted on City and State websites. April 21, 2023 Staff Report posted online and sent to the Planning Commission. April 26, 2023 Planning Commission forwards a positive recommendation to City Council. May 8, 2023 Draft ordinance forwarded to the Attorney’s Office for review. June 7, 2023 Ordinance corrections forwarded to the Attorney’s Office. June 12, 2023 Ordinance corrections forwarded to the Attorney’s Office. Ordinance returned from the Attorney’s Office. June 15, 2023 Ordinance corrections forwarded to the Attorney’s Office. June 22, 2023 Reviewed ordinance returned from the Attorney’s Office. June 29, 2023 Ordinance forwarded again to the Attorney’s Office, reviewed final received from Attorney’s Office. August 29, 2023 Corrected ordinance returned to Attorney’s Office for final review. September 26, 2023 Final ordinance version received from Attorney’s Office. September 27, 2023 Transmitted to CAN administration. October 26, 2023 Council Office informed of needed modifications to the ordinance. Caution: This is an external email. Please be cautious when clicking links or opening attachments. Stanley Holmes 846 N. East Capitol Blvd. Salt Lake City, Utah 84103 Quoting "Larsen, Nannette" <Nannette.Larsen@slcgov.com>: Stanley, Thank you for your comments. I will forward them to the Planning Commission for commission members to view before the public hearing tomorrow. Best, NANNETTE LARSEN | (She/Her) Senior Planner PLANNING DIVISION | SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION Mobile: (801) 535-7645 Email: Nannette.Larsen@slcgov.com WWW.SLC.GOV/PLANNING WWW.SLC.GOV From: Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2023 12:52 PM To: Larsen, Nannette <Nannette.Larsen@slcgov.com>; Planning Public Comments <planning.comments@slcgov.com> Cc: Wharton, Chris <Chris.Wharton@slcgov.com>; City Council Liaisons <City.Council.Liaisons@slcgov.com>; slcgreen <slcgreen@slcgov.com> Subject: (EXTERNAL) Public Comment on Petition PLNPCM2023-00098 - 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates Public Comment on Petition PLNPCM2023-00098 - 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates From: Stanley Holmes 4-25-2023 Dear Salt Lake City Planning Commission, I urge you to reject the proposed ordinance rewrite of 21A Zoning that was submitted as Petition PLNPCM2023-00098 - "21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates" as flawed and problematic on several fronts. The set of proposed amendments to Title 21A Zoning should be remanded back to Salt Lake City's Planning Division ("Division") for revision and a new, more appropriately noticed 45- day public comment period to be opened by the Division before a corrected set of proposed Title 21A Zoning amendments is brought before the Planning Commission ("Commission"). The proposed changes to Title 21A Zoning Chapter 48 under consideration now would have significant, wide-ranging, and costly impacts for many Salt Lake City ("City") property owners of various means and for all city taxpayers. That the Division would rely primarily on community council chairs to, at their individual discretion and in a timely manner, notify the general public of statutory/regulatory changes of this scope and magnitude can be most graciously characterized as cavalier. Division records indicate that only four comments were received during the 45-day comment period and that Sugarhouse C.C. was the only community council to actively engage. I learned from city staff that the Division’s notification system had been used, but found that there are no water conservation, landscaping, energy conservation, environment, or other sustainability categories listed. Through which category did the Division send the landscaping code updates notice; and how many city residents actually get notices through that means? Please be advised, and let the public record show, that on April 20, 2023, I posted on the community blog --Nextdoor.com-- information about the proposed Title 21A Zoning changes and ways that interested citizens could submit public comments. Over the next five days, Nextdoor.com reported 1,400 views and there were 48 public comments. Please see evidence of this included with the Addendum at the close of my comment and attached. Those folks on Nextdoor.com were Salt Lake City residents who missed the initial comment period that ended on March 27th and, quite likely, also did not know about your April 26 Planning Commission meeting or their opportunities to submit public comments before the zoning/ordinance changes had become a ‘done deal.’ Outrageous. I am also quite surprised and disappointed that there was no input from the Sustainability Department, and wonder how their input was solicited. SLCGreen is copied on this comment, as are my District 3 Councilman Chris Wharton and the City Council Liaisons. City officials should have known that not every community council would post or distribute the notice. Not every potentially interested and impacted citizen is on a community council distribution list or regularly checks a community council's website. One might wonder to what extent the Division was truly desirous of robust public input, having solicited comments by such a narrow and undependable means. The Commission should insist upon a proper re-do of the public comment period and extend its further consideration of any Title 21A Zoning Chapter 48 amendments until legitimate opportunities for public input have occurred. The proposed Petition PLNPCM2023-00098 - "21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates" are themselves in several ways inadequate and problematic. Their 'as is' endorsement by the Commission and the City Council would, upon attempted implementation and enforcement by the City, certainly result in strong opposition that would include costly litigation. Please recall that the most recent revision of 21A.48 was in the year 2000, prior to over two decades of climate change-exacerbated heat increases and drought that finally prompted state and local officials to take action. The updates now under consideration were supposed to deal more effectively with the climate change-related impacts. Let me begin with the proposed re-write of 21A.48.010, the Purpose and Intent section. While the earlier version calls for promoting "the prudent use of water", the update would remove this and make no mention of water conservation as a priority. The lead "purpose" of a revised chapter 21A.48 would be to "increase Salt Lake City's urban tree canopy"; and the lead "intent" would be to "promote and enhance the community's appearance." While trees are nice, useful, and can be aesthetically pleasing, the City is located in the second driest U.S. state and is experiencing an unprecedented, worsening drought. Water conservation should not only have been mentioned in the proposed re-write of 21A.48.010, but been listed as a priority goal, as has been done by other Utah municipalities. Why was this not done? Under the current zoning ordinance, Section 21A.48.060 refers to Park Strip Landscaping and one of the "intent" items is to "encourage water conservation". But the proposed re-write (update) would change the title of 21A.48.060 to "Landscape Requirements" and remove the water conservation reference. The re-write of 21A.48.060 has a new "Park Strip Standards" section that adds the requirement of at least one "street tree" in the park strip. Additional park strip trees would be required, depending on the park strip length. The current ordinance has no park strip tree requirement. Therefore, residents who've implemented water-wise park strip measures --in compliance with the existing ordinance -- that do not include at least one street tree would be required to add a tree and, according to the 21A.48.040 re-write, see that it is "irrigated with a permanent automatic irrigation system." A hydrozoned irrigation system would be required, so that tree(s) watering can be isolated from any water needed for other vegetation. The park strip abutting property owner would have to pay for the new park strip tree-plus-irrigation requirement. That could be quite costly, especially if the park strip has to be excavated to install the required irrigation system. The Commission should assume that some residents will be unable to afford this and that others who had been compliant would rather fight the compliance rules change in court. Please consider the burden on low-income families, especially if the $25-per-day violation fine is retained. The Commission should also consider that the City's Department of Community and Neighborhood's Civil Enforcement staff would have to be expanded and that additional budgetary provisions would have to be made for the City's legal team. Litigation could delay implementation and enforcement of parts or all of the proposed 21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates for an extended period of time. And aside from pushback from angry residents delaying implementation of the proposed ordinance updates, the sheer magnitude of any effort to achieve widespread compliance should sober city planners and policy-makers. Have Division staff conducted a city-wide, on-street survey of the number of park strips that would require tree-planting and new irrigation plumbing? Have they calculated how many contractors, and how many years, would be required to accomplish full implementation? Then, there's the additional per-tree water requirement times however many park strips would be affected. At this point, I'll add that there are some positive aspects of the proposed ordinance re-write, such as 21A.48.040.E.1., which says that "All irrigation systems shall be maintained in good operating condition to eliminate water waste and run-off into the public right-of-way." Drip irrigation is also mentioned in 21A.48.040.E, though it could have been promoted. Some of the proposed re-write items are not clear. For example, 21A.48.040.C.2. "Exceptions" circles back to itself. And under 21A.62 "Definitions", the Park Strip Landscaping section says that park strip landscaping may include "lawn", which is normally a reference to turf. The re-write, under 21A.48.060 and 21A.48.080, prohibits turf in park strips. There is also a reference to the right-of-way line's relevance if there is no sidewalk, but the dimensions of the right-of-way line are not given. As a final point to this comment, it concerns me that the City Planning Division failed to take a holistic view of the abutting residential property owner's landscape unless a new home is being constructed or the floor area of an existing structure(s) is being expanded by 50% or more. The overall vegetative contribution of individual residential properties that are not undergoing structural change is ignored by the proposed 21A Zoning rewrite's determination of compliance or non- compliance with new park strip requirements. I can imagine situations where the owner of a well- wooded, well-vegetated residential property is forced to install and water a park strip tree while the owner of a minimally vegetated property who happens to have a tree in the park strip is left alone. Where is the environmental justice in that? Salt Lake City needs to do a better job of conserving water. The proposed amendments to Title 21A Zoning are inadequate to the task, as they do not give water conservation the top priority status our current megadrought crisis demands. I urge the Commission to deny Petition PLNPCM2023-00098 - "21A.48 Landscaping and Buffers Updates" and send it back to the Division for revision and a properly noticed, 45-day public review and comment period. I thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of the points I raised and your directive to have the ordinance revised in a more transparent way that better engages the public and serves the City's best interests. Stanley Holmes 846 N. East Capitol Blvd. Salt Lake City, UT 84103 Addendum: My attempt to use Nextdoor.com to notify the public of proposed 21A.48 changes, first posted on April 20, 2023, is copied below. In five days, 1,400 views and 48 resident comments. The Planning Division got 4 public comments in 45 days. Stan Holmes Author •West Capitol Hills•0 mi SLC Park Strip, Landscape Policy Changes Public comments are being taken by the Salt Lake City Planning Division and Planning Commission as they consider city-wide changes to the Landscaping Chapter of the Zoning Code. This includes proposed revision of the Park Strip ordinance under which many city residents have been penalized for their water conservation efforts. The proposed Park Strip policy revision would require one "street tree" every 30 feet and vegetation covering at least 30% of the area. See all proposed amendments at... www.slcdocs.com/Planning/Online%20Open%20Houses/2023/02_2023/PLNPCM2023- 00098/02102023%20DRAFT%20Landscaping%20Updates_Posted.pdf The Planning Commission will consider landscape/park strip ordinance changes at its April 26 meeting. Public comments can be submitted in-person or via email to and . Reference case number PLNPCM2023-00098 in the subject line. The agenda for next Wednesday's (April 26) Planning Commission meeting is at... www.slcdocs.com/Planning/Planning%20Commission/2023/PC04.26.2023/PC04.26.2023agenda.pdf Whatever the Planning Commission decides will then be presented to the City Council for final approval. Now is the time to shift from opinion to action and file a public comment. Stan Holmes Author •West Capitol Hills•0 mi The email addresses that were stripped are planning.comments and nannette.larsen that are both at slc.gov. They are also listed in the April 26 agenda at... www.slcdocs.com/Planning/Planning%20Commission/2023/PC04.26.2023/PC04.26.2023agenda.pdf also attached: 5)PUBLIC UTILITIES DIRECTOR STATEMENT 5 - Requires Landscape Architect licensed with the State or a US-EPA WaterSense certified professional signature and letter of completion. Landscape Requirements: Describes required landscape locations, landscape location sizes, and specific landscape standards per location. Landscape locations include park strip, landscaped yards, surface parking lot landscaping, and buffer areas. - Establishes minimum ground coverage and tree planting in all landscape areas. - Describes locations where turf is permitted, and the coverage allowed. - Describes impervious surface coverage maximums. - Establishes where landscape buffers are required, the size, location, and coverage, shrub, and tree planting requirements. Parking Lot Landscaping: Applies to surface parking lots with 10 or more stalls. - Interior landscape areas and perimeter parking lot landscaping required. Describes size, location, exceptions, and vegetation requirements in these areas that include trees, shrubs, and ground cover. - Curbs are required where no biodetention is utilized. Standards: Requires specific landscape installation and landscape material standards that apply to all regulated landscaping locations. - Requires drought tolerant, adaptive, or native species. - Establishes limitations and standards on turf, mulch, and berming. Prohibits artificial turf. - Describes specific park strip material standards that includes ground cover regulations, pathways, stormwater detention allowances, and permitted encroachments. Private Lands Tree Preservation: Establishes process and standards for removing a tree on private lands. This section has not been changed, it is expected the Urban Forestry Division will update this section in the coming years as they continue to work on updates to better respond to the Urban Forest Action Plan. Appeal: Right to appeal statement. From:Briefer, Laura To:Larsen, Nannette Cc:Thompson, Amy; Bench, Nikole; Rice, Marian; Duer, Stephanie; Draper, Jason Subject:RE: Landscaping Chapter Planning Commission Public Hearing Tonight Date:Wednesday, April 26, 2023 1:02:05 PM Attachments:image002.png image003.png Good afternoon, Nannette – please let me know if this will be useful tonight for the questions concerning artificial turf– see below: Artificial turf has the potential to impact water quality and stormwater runoff in the following ways: 1.The combination of soil compaction in the installation of artificial turf and the material that is used does not allow water to be retained onsite. As such, this is considered an impermeable surface. This contributes to additional stormwater runoff from a site, which can have negative downstream impacts, such as flashier and increased stormwater flows. 2.As stormwater flows across impermeable surfaces it picks up and carries pollutants that get deposited in receiving water bodies, such as the Jordan River and streams that flow through our city. All stormwater that flows through Salt Lake City ultimately heads toward Great Salt Lake. 3.Pollutants of concern that can emanate directly from artificial turf include micro-plastics and PFAS compounds (https://www.epa.gov/pfas/pfas-explained). PFAS compounds are “forever chemicals” that pose health risks to people and animals. It is unclear whether all artificial turf contains PFAS compounds, but there is evidence that at least some of it does. To our knowledge, it is not currently tested and certified regarding the presence or absence of PFAS. Microplastics also pose health risks to people and animals. Both PFAS and microplastics are ubiquitous in the environment, and there is much concern nationally and globally about this pollution. 4.Artificial turf also needs to be washed periodically, which could contribute runoff that contains cleaning chemicals. Pet feces needs to be removed from artificial turf, and pathogens from pet feces could be introduced into stormwater during cleaning. Regulatory and health considerations with respect to PFAS compounds: Salt Lake City Public Utilities is obligated to comply with drinking water and clean water regulations promulgated by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and enforced by both the Utah Department of Environmental Quality and the EPA. The EPA is prioritizing the regulation of PFAS in drinking water and in cradle to grave hazardous materials regulations (https://www.epa.gov/pfas/key-epa-actions- address- pfas#:~:text=On%20August%2026%2C%202022%2C%20EPA,for%20cleaning%20up%20their%20c ontamination). In March 2023, EPA proposed new very stringent regulations for six PFAS compounds with a proposed maximum contaminant level of four (4) parts per trillion, showcasing that EPA is extremely concerned about the health risks associated with PFAS in drinking water. The EPA is also considering new regulations under the Clean Water Act which would affect stormwater and wastewater discharges. Finally, EPA is considering new PFAS regulations under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, also known as Superfund). This primarily impacts environmental remediation for PFAS-contaminated soil and water, and there is some concern about the potential long thread of liability associated with PFAS contamination. Please let me know if you have any further questions. I have added Jason and Stephanie to this email thread too. LAURA BRIEFER, MPA | (She/Her/Hers) DIRECTOR Department of Public Utilities | Salt Lake City Corporation Office: (801) 483-6741 Cell: (385) 252-9379 Email: Laura.Briefer@slcgov.com www.slc.gov/utilities www.slc.gov Signature: Email: Alejandro Sanchez (Dec 4, 2023 13:15 MST) alejandro.sanchez@slcgov.com 11152023 Transmittal FINAL Final Audit Report 2023-12-04 Created:2023-11-27 By:Aubrey Clark (aubrey.clark@slcgov.com) Status:Signed Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAA0PzvbpGjNz77WUcjaXmTX2mPGTprNRHF "11152023 Transmittal FINAL" History Document created by Aubrey Clark (aubrey.clark@slcgov.com) 2023-11-27 - 6:43:40 PM GMT Document emailed to Blake Thomas (blake.thomas@slcgov.com) for signature 2023-11-27 - 6:46:21 PM GMT Email viewed by Blake Thomas (blake.thomas@slcgov.com) 2023-11-27 - 6:54:35 PM GMT Document e-signed by Blake Thomas (blake.thomas@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2023-11-27 - 8:29:54 PM GMT - Time Source: server Document emailed to Alejandro Sanchez (alejandro.sanchez@slcgov.com) for signature 2023-11-27 - 8:29:57 PM GMT Email viewed by Alejandro Sanchez (alejandro.sanchez@slcgov.com) 2023-11-27 - 8:31:28 PM GMT New document URL requested by Blake Thomas (blake.thomas@slcgov.com) 2023-12-04 - 8:11:11 PM GMT Document e-signed by Alejandro Sanchez (alejandro.sanchez@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2023-12-04 - 8:15:44 PM GMT - Time Source: server Document emailed to rachel otto (rachel.otto@slcgov.com) for signature 2023-12-04 - 8:15:48 PM GMT Email viewed by rachel otto (rachel.otto@slcgov.com) 2023-12-04 - 10:33:18 PM GMT Document e-signed by rachel otto (rachel.otto@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2023-12-04 - 10:34:11 PM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed. 2023-12-04 - 10:34:11 PM GMT November 6, 2023 Ordinance with needed corrections forwarded to the Attorney’s Office. November 14, 2023 Corrected ordinance returned to Attorney’s Office for final review. November 15, 2023 Transmitted to CAN administration. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On April 26, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed text amendment and voted 10 to 1 to recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed Landscaping and Buffers Chapter amendments with two recommended modifications to the draft ordinance: • Define a landscape or irrigation specialist. The draft ordinance language has been updated to address this and now requires review and signature by a Landscape Architect, licensed with the State of Utah, or a US-EPA WaterSense Labeled Certified Professional. The previous draft included a generalized statement about a landscaping or irrigation professional, during the Planning Commission hearing comments questions were raised on the need to define what constitutes a landscaping or irrigation professional. • Remove all language that permits artificial turf. The existing Landscaping and Buffers chapter does not allow artificial turf in required landscaped locations. The chapter draft the Planning Commission reviewed on April 26th, permitted artificial turf in front and corner yard landscaping locations as an impervious surface, which is limited to a maximum of 20% of the required landscaping. In all other required landscaping locations, artificial turf was prohibited. Additionally, artificial turf would have had to meet certain material standards such as individual grass blade length and quantity as well as infill material type. With the Planning Commission’s recommended modification, the artificial material standards and its inclusion in the impervious surface has been removed. Now included in the draft language is a statement that artificial turf is prohibited anywhere landscaping is regulated by the chapter. Where landscaping is not regulated in this chapter, artificial turf would be allowed (such as the rear yard), as it is today in unregulated landscaping areas. The commission’s recommendation was based on a discussion centered around artificial turfs impact on stormwater runoff and possible harmful chemicals contained in the manufacturing process. MODIFICATIONS MADE AFTER PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: Following the positive recommendation from Planning Commission, planning staff made corrections to the draft chapter for the City Council to consider. The current draft ordinance reflects these changes: Landscaping buffer table - Inconsistencies were found and updated between specific district landscaping buffer references, within the I, RP, EI, and MU districts, and the proposed chapter’s required landscaping buffers. Also updated the table to maintain a required landscaping buffer between multi- family residential and commercial districts, residential and Business Park, residential and Research Park, and required a landscaping buffer in Extractive Industries and Mobile Home Districts when abutting any zoning district. Added a buffer between manufacturing districts and open space. 7 - Included language that a freeway landscape buffer is required on properties abutting a freeway. Parking lot landscaping - Added a provision that parking lot interior landscaping must include no less than 5% of the total parking lot. This provision ensures there is sufficient amount of landscaping to reduce the urban heat island effect regardless of the parking lot design. - Deleted the vehicle sales and lease lot provision that required a 5’ landscaping buffer in the front and corner side yard. The parking lot perimeter landscaping provision already ensures that a greater setback with sufficient landscaping would apply. - Included in the perimeter parking lot landscaping specific section references of 21A.44.060 and 21A.36.020 that address where a parking lot may be allowed in a yard area. - Clarified that the perimeter parking lot landscaping that abuts a building does not need to be included in the tree calculation. Clarified that the vehicle overhang area may be included in the perimeter parking lot landscaping width. - Specified parking lot interior landscaping allowed locations, minimum size, and ratio of trees and shrubs required. - Specified in 21A.44.060 that parking lots with 10 or more stalls or within 20’ of a lot line are subject to the landscaping chapter. Landscaping graphics - Consolidated the residential and nonresidential landscaping locations graphics into a single graphic that addresses both residential and nonresidential zoning districts. Updated the parking lot landscaping graphics to show the approximate number of trees required based on approximated scale and size of the interior and perimeter parking lot landscaping areas. Revision - Revised the purpose and intent section in the landscaping chapter that simplified language and listed purposes and intents based on priority. Multiple Section Deletions - Landscaping related terms and definitions as they are no longer referenced in the ordnance: Evapotranspiration rate, Best Management Practice, Landscape BMPs manual, Evergreen and Perennial, Overspray, Maximum extent practicable, Tier 2 water target, Treasured landscape, Landscaping vegetation, Water budget, and a duplicative Street tree definition. - Language in the applicability section that referenced that the entire chapter 48 may be exempted if permitted in other sections of the zoning code. There are no other sections that allow for an exception from the entire chapter 48, specific sections exception language within the proposed chapter have remained. - Removal of Bond requirement to comply with State Code. Multiple Section Clarifications - In the landscape requirements section of the landscaping chapter clarified that where conflict between specific district standards and this landscaping chapter the specific district standards shall prevail. - In the Foothills and Foothills Protection District removed titles in the landscape plan requirements to be consistent with the rest of the section. 8 - Clarified precedence language in the Design Standards section where conflicting language may occur between the design standards and the district specific standards. Clarified where percent tree canopy coverage is required in the design standards table, the tree canopy cannot be counted toward vegetation coverage in the downtown districts. Removed vegetation coverage and streetscape landscaping to ensure vegetation coverage and streetscape landscaping applies to all properties not just the downtown and CG districts. - Included language that clarified landscaping installation process during winter months through a temporary certificate of occupancy. - In the park strip standards table, specified where the center of a park strip is. - In the authority section, stated simply which departments or divisions may provide input to the zoning administrator when the provisions of the landscaping chapter may be waived. Removed qualifying provisions required when departments or divisions may recommend a landscaping waiver. - Clarified in the landscape plan section, permitted modification if the change is from one plant species to another with similar watering needs. - Specified in the CSHBD district sufficient soil volumes for street trees must be approved by Urban Forestry. PUBLIC PROCESS: Recognized Organizations: All recognized organization chairs city-wide were notified on February 10th, 2023, of the proposed text amendments. The Planning Division presented the proposed code amendments to the Sugar House Community Council on March 20th, 2023 and accepted comments and answered questions. Open House: A virtual open house was hosted on Planning’s website and published via list serve on February 10th, 2023. The open house information included the most recent version of the landscaping and buffers chapter draft. The open house page was continually updated to include the most recent draft amendments and public hearing dates. Public Hearing Notification: Notice of the public hearing was posted on City and State websites and emailed via list serve to subscribers on April 19th, 2023. Planning Commission Public Hearing: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the text amendments on April 26, 2023. The Planning Commission provided a positive recommendation to City Council on the proposed amendments. Planning Commission Staff Report Public Comments Received: We received 14 public comments, as of the date this memo was transmitted. The public comments ranged from concerns of enforceability of some of the standards, landscaping rocks and their contribution to the urban heat island, landscaping materials on the sidewalk and unkempt landscapes, vegetation and vegetation maximum height 9 in the park strip, costs associated with requiring permanent irrigation, water waste, allowing native grass species, and public noticing procedures. Comments included statements encouraging waterwise landscaping and improving water conservation in landscaping areas. There were also statements where there was some misunderstanding on when a street tree is required. Where possible staff clarified when a street tree is required to the public – in a park strip over 36” in width and for new construction for single- and two- family developments. PLANNING COMMISSION (PC) RECORDS: a)PC Agenda of April 26, 2023 (Click to Access) b)PC Staff Report of April 26, 2023 (Click to Access Report) c)PC Minutes for April 26, 2023 (Click to Access) d)PC Video for April 26, 2023 (Click to Access) EXHIBITS: 1) Project Chronology 2) Notice of City Council Public Hearing 3)Petition Initiation 4) Public Comments Received after Planning Commission Staff Report Published 5)Public Utilities Director Statement 2)NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2023-00098 – A petition initiated by Mayor Erin Mendenhall to amend the Salt Lake City Zoning Code for the Landscaping and Buffers Chapter Text Amendment. This proposal includes amendments that will be affected City-wide. The proposed code amendments seek to better address landscaping regulations and seek to reduce water consumption, enhance the urban forest, and improve air quality and green infrastructure city-wide. The proposed amendment also seek to clarify, simplify, and reorganize the landscaping and buffer chapter to be more user friendly. 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 Nannette Larsen at 801-535-7645 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail nannette.larsen@slcgov.com People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance in order to participate in this hearing. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535- 7600, or relay service 711. 3) PETITION INITIATION SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 406 WWW.SLC.GOV PO BOX 145480 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5480 TEL 801-535-7757 FAX 801-535-6174 PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Erin Mendenhall Cc: Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer; Blake Thomas, Department of Community and Neighborhoods Director; Michaela Oktay, Deputy Planning Director From: Nick Norris, Planning Director Date: January 27, 2023 Re: Initiate Petition to Amend Text in the Zoning Ordinance to Update the Landscaping Chapter This memo is to request that a petition is initiated directing the Planning Division to update the Landscaping Chapter to better address the needs of the City and the changing climate being experienced along the Wasatch Front. Amendments to the Landscaping Chapter will also better conform to Plan Salt Lake. In Plan Salt Lake direction to reduce water consumption, protect and enhance the urban forest, and improve green infrastructure in the City’s neighborhoods is emphasized. To achieve these goals amending the landscaping chapter is necessary to reduce barriers to water conservation while improving water and air quality. In addition to providing best management practices to reduce barriers and incentive water conservation, is promoting accessible conservation strategies and standards in the Zoning Ordinance. The updates to the Landscaping chapter will accomplish this by quantifying best practices and creating visual elements to the chapter to better achieve accessibility needs of the residents in the City. As part of the process, the Planning Division will follow the City adoption process for zoning text amendments, which includes citizen input and public hearings with the Planning Commission and City Council. The adoption process will include collaboration with other City Departments and the Central Utah Water Conservancy District to ensure best management practices are utilized. This memo includes a signature block to initiate the petition if that is the decided course of action. If the decided course of action is to not initiate the application, the signature block can remain blank. Please notify the Planning Division when the memo is signed or if the decision is made to not initiate the petition. Please contact me at ext. 6173 or nick.norris@slcgov.com if you have any questions. Thank you. Concurrence to initiate the zoning text amendment petition as noted above. _____________________________________ ______________ Erin Mendenhall, Mayor Date Item B13 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 PUBLIC HEARING MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke, Senior Analyst DATE:March 5, 2024 RE: Annual U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Grant Funding Allocations 2023-2024: Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG), HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) and Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) MOTION 1 – CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING I move that the Council close the public hearing and refer the item to a future date for action. MOTION 2 – CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING I move that the Council continue the public hearing to a future date. Staff Note: All public comments received through any communication channel will be included in the City’s report to HUD. 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: Ben Luedtke, Senior Analyst DATE: March 5, 2024 RE: Annual U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Grant Funding Allocations 2023-2024: Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG), HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) and Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Department’s annual grant programs are one of the most significant non-pandemic related ongoing funding sources the City receives from the Federal Government. Fiscal Year 2025 is the last year subject to the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan which identifies funding goals, strategies, and a targeted area for spending CDBG dollars on public infrastructure and economic development. The relevant advisory boards have reviewed and the Mayor has recommended a list of grant awards (see attached funding log). The Council will make the final grant awards decision. See the additional info section for the goals and strategies applications must advance to qualify for these grant funds which is also provided on the last page of the Attachment 2 funding log. See Attachment 3 for a map of the target area. The Council is scheduled to hold a hybrid public hearing on Tuesday, March 5 to hear from the public and grant applicants regarding community needs for the 2024-2025 funding cycle. As seen in most years, the requested funding from applicants is significantly greater than available funds. Requests are 208% of available funding: $17,891,136 is requested compared to $8,590,365 in available funding. HUD has not confirmed the City’s final awards so estimates based on the amounts last year are used. The timing of HUD announcing final awards is unknown in part because of uncertainty around Congress passing a new Federal budget. The resident advisory boards provided contingency recommendations in the event funding is more or less than estimated. The board’s recommendations are shown on the Funding Log at the end of each grant and a summary table in the additional info section below. The table below summarizes requested and available funding by grant. Grant Request Available Requests as % of Funding Available CDBG 10,268,630$ 5,197,763$ 198% ESG 962,608$ $ 303,100 318% HOME 5,487,156$ 2,156,661$ 254% HOPWA 1,172,742$ 932,841$ 126% TOTAL 17,891,136$ 8,590,365$ 208% Project Timeline: Set Date: February 20, 2024 1st Briefing & Public Hearing: March 5, 2024 2nd Briefing: March 19, 2024 3rd Briefing: April 2, 2024 (if needed) Potential Adoption Vote: April 9, 2024 Page | 8 Summary of Available Funding by Grant The table below shows funding sources by grant. Note that only CDBG and HOME grant programs see some funds returned as program income from loan repayments. The City has a new practice of adding program income to the annual HUD grant allocations. Previously some program income sat unused for years. The new practice is meant to ensure funding is made available to benefit residents and better adhere to HUD guidance. When prior year grant awards are recaptured, it means the program or project was unable to use the funding as intended which happens for various reasons. Grant Source Amount Total Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) HUD Award $ 3,397,763 $5,197,763 Recaptured Funding $ 800,000 Program Income $ 1,000,000 Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) HUD Award $ 303,100 $303,100 Recaptured Funding $ 0 HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) HUD Award $1,023,661 $2,156,661 Recaptured Funding $ 333,000 Program Income $ 800,000 Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) HUD Award $932,841 $932,841 Recaptured Funding $ 0 Program Income CDBG and HOME funding is used for a few programs that generate income typically repayment of low or no interest loans. The amounts can fluctuate such as when someone decides to payback a loan early. The programs that generate income include downpayment assistance, first-time homebuyer mortgages, and certain rehabilitation programs. Sources of Recaptured Funding from Prior Years Listed below are the several sources of recaptured funding for CDBG, HOME, and HOPWA. Each year some of the awards are unable to be used for various reasons (e.g. completed under budget, contracts expired, project or program was unsuccessful). These funds are recaptured and made available in the next cycle so the taxpayer funds can benefit residents instead of sitting unused. Note the recaptured amounts for FY2025 are slightly less than the total of the individual items listed below. This was caused by final expenses coming in below the estimated costs. The difference in amounts will be added for recapture to the next grant funding cycle. Historically, ESG has the lowest level of federal funding available, are the most competitive, and the least likely to go unused and be available for recapture later. $800,000 Recaptured for CDBG Program Year 2022-2023: - SLC CDBG Administration - $24,768.78 - NWSL, Home Rehabilitation & Improvement - $119,587.00 - Catholic Community Services, Case Management - $0.03 - South Valley Sanctuary, DV Assistance - $3.50 - Children’s Center of Utah, Preschool Program - $1,999.49 - SLC - Transportation, Low-income transit passes - $11,248.75 - YWCA Utah, DV Services - $0.40 Prior Program Year(s): - Salt Lake City - HAND, Housing Rehabilitation & Homebuyer Programs - $455,842.40 - Salt Lake City - Housing Stability, Targeted Repairs - $197,583.25 Page | 9 $200,000 Recaptured for HOME Program Year 2022-2023: - SLC HOME Administration - $375.08 - CDCU, Down Payment Assistance - $167,822.88 - NWSL, Down Payment Assistance - $66,691.00 - South Valley Sanctuary, TBRA - $6,851.88 Program Year(s) 2021-2022 (and prior): - SLC HOME Administration, $93,210.15 $287,752 recaptured for CDBG-CV - Comunidaades Unidas/Communities United - $63,069 - International Rescue Committee/Food Delivery - $13,665.57 - International Rescue Committee/Spice Kitchen - $3,053.95 - NWSL Mortgage Assistance - $122,578.16 - Utah’s Promise/Food Delivery - $6,062.91 - SLC CDBG-CV Administration - $79,340.41 Community Development and Block Grant (CDBG) Total CDBG Funding Requests: $10,268,630 (198% of available) Total Available for Allocation: $5,197,763 CDBG funds focus on community development with an emphasis on physical improvements. The Community Development & Capital Improvement Programs Advisory Board (CDCIP) submits funding recommendations for this grant. CDBG funds are allocated to organizations in four categories: - City Administration (limited to 20% of the annual grant award) - Housing - Neighborhood Improvements: transportation and economic development infrastructure (subject to target area see Attachment 3 for map) - Public Services (limited to 15% of the annual grant award) Public Services This category is directed to services for individuals in need and not necessarily to physical improvements. This is typically the most competitive category. Funding is awarded to non-profits and governmental entities that provide programming to meet the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan’s goals. This category is limited to 15% of the annual CDBG award. The Mayor has recommended funding requests that add up to the 15% maximum. If the Council would like to allocate money to any application beyond the Mayor’s recommended funding in this category, then those funds must be shifted from another public services application. Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Total ESG Funding Requests: $962,608 (318% of available) Total Available for Allocation: $303,100 ESG funds focus on preventing homelessness and providing services to persons experiencing homelessness. The Community Development & Capital Improvement Programs Advisory Board (CDCIP) submits funding recommendations for this grant. ESG funds are allocated to organizations providing services in three categories: - City Administration (limited to 7.5% of the annual grant award) - Street Outreach and Emergency Shelter (Part 1 and limited to 60% of the annual grant award) - Homelessness Prevention, Rapid Re-Housing, Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS) (Part 2) HOME Investment Partnership Total HOME Funding Requests: $5,487,156 (254% of available) Total Available for Allocation: $2,156,661 HOME Investment Partnership focuses on expanding the supply of quality affordable housing for low-to- moderate-income residents. The Community Development & Capital Improvement Programs Advisory Board (CDCIP) submits funding recommendations for this grant. HUD mandates 15% of the annual grant award go to Page | 10 community housing development organizations (CHDO). There are several requirements for CHDO status including annual certification with the City, be a private nonprofit organization, and who serves on the governing board. The requirements are sometimes perceived as onerous such as an annual recertification process. No new agencies have been certified as a CHDO in recent years. This challenge has been observed nationally and is not unique to Salt Lake City. Partially in response to these challenges, Congress has suspended the 24-month spending deadline for CHDO funds. The Council provided policy guidance for CHDO funds to be added to the RDA’s annual affordable housing development NOFA to try and help utilize the funding. Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) Total HOPWA Funding Requests: $1,172,742 (126% of available) Total Available for Allocation: $932,841 HOPWA is the only federal program dedicated entirely to the housing needs of people living with HIV/AIDS. The Community Development & Capital Improvement Programs Advisory Board (CDCIP) submits funding recommendations for this grant. Increasing HOPWA Funding The chart below compares the City’s annual HOPWA award over nine fiscal years. It shows a $567,016 increase or 155%. The three other annual grants from HUD have not seen a similar increase; CDBG and ESG have been relatively flat and HOME has seen a modest increase. The City has awarded over $5.6 million of HOPWA grant funds during the nine years. The trend of increasing annual HOPWA awards is a result of the 2016 Housing Opportunities Through Modernization Act. It adjusted the federal funding formula to better reflect HIV epidemic data. Continued funding increases like those seen over the past eight years are not expected to continue because the phased formula adjustment has now been fully implemented. $365,825 $932,841 $- $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000 $800,000 $900,000 $1,000,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Comparing HOPWA Annual Award FY2017 to FY2025 Page | 11 Eviction Data The Housing Stability Division shared the below chart of eviction data from the Utah Third District Court. It’s important to note that the Third District Court handles cases county-wide and this data is not specific to Salt Lake City. The data also does not represent whether an eviction was authorized by the court, dismissed, or settled another way. The City has a disproportionate share of renters in the county. According to the Gardner Policy Institute, since 2010, the amount fluctuates between 25% - 30% of all renters countywide. This year, the advisory board funding recommendations favor rental assistance over homeownership and downpayment assistance. Their deliberations highlighted the significantly greater number of individuals and families served by rental assistance compared to homeownership assistance because of the cost difference. Chart of Evictions Filed in Third District Court ATTACHMENTS 1. FY 2024-25 Grant Recommendations by Combined Score 2. FY 2024-25 HUD Grants Funding Log 3. Target Area Map for CDBG Neighborhood Improvements Category in 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan 4. Organizations with Multiple Applications ACRONYMS AMI – Area Median Income CDBG – Community Development Block Grant CDCIP – Community Development and Capital Improvement Programs Advisory Board CHDO – Community Housing Development Organization CLT – Community Land Trust ESG – Emergency Solutions Grant FTE – Full time employee FY – Fiscal Year HOME – HOME Investment Partnership Program HOPWA – Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS HRC – Homeless Resource Center HUD – Housing and Urban Development LMI – Low-to-Moderate Income NOFA – Notice of Funding Availability NWSL – NeighborWorks Salt Lake RDA – Redevelopment Agency STRMU – Short-Term Rental, Mortgage and Utility (Assistance) TBRA – Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Page | 2 Inclusion of One-time Federal Pandemic-related Funding ($287,752 of CDBG-CV from the CARES Act recaptured after not being used, and $1,501,608 of HOME-ARPA for rental assistance) This year, the Administration also included two separate funding categories of one-time federal pandemic- related funding. $287,752 of one-time CDBG-CV funding authorized by the CARES Act (labeled “CV” for coronavirus to distinguish from regular annual CDBG funds). The Council originally appropriated these and other CARES Act funds in FY2021. The $287,752 was recaptured after the original awards were not used. The resident advisory board and the Administration recommend a new open and competitive application process for the CDBG-CV funds or targeted outreach to annual CDBG applicants to determine whether they have eligible expenses. The single application for these funds scored low and the Board stated it’s not a good fit for these one- time public funds in part because the proposed uses are a for-profit business and a national service area instead of locally focused. The other one-time federal pandemic-related funding category is $1,501,608 of HOME-ARPA funding authorized by the American Rescue Plan Act or ARPA. In March 2023, the Council identified the $1.5 million for rental assistance. Six applications were received for these funds and the full $1.5 million is proposed to be awarded across all applicants. The total requested funding is $2,303,635 which is 153% of the available funding. Goal of the briefing: Discuss the Council’s federal grant priorities, receive a briefing about funding recommendations, ask questions about applications, and award funding to eligible programs and projects. Scoring Applications and Funding Recommendations Projects receive scores and funding recommendations from the Community Development and Capital Improvement Program or CDCIP resident advisory board. The advisory board funding recommendations are provided to the Mayor and City Council. The Council receives another set of funding recommendations from the Mayor. The final decision is made by the Council for grant award amounts. Attachment 1 shows projects ranked by the combined score within each grant category. Attachment 2 is the funding log for all four annual HUD grants and the two one-time federal pandemic-related grants. The funding log has more details than Attachment 1 such as project and program descriptions and prior year award amounts for returning applications. The funding log combines advisory board and Administration scores as shown in the far-right column where maximum potential scores are also shown. A Single Difference between Mayoral and Board Recommendations This year, the advisory board and mayoral funding recommendations are identical except for one difference in the CDBG housing category. The board recommended $220,000 for CDBG Housing #6 Fix the Bricks which funds the federally required local match for low and moderate income residents to participate in the seismic retrofits program. The Mayor recommended the $220,000 to CDBG Housing #8 Shared Equity Program / Community Land Trust. The Administration stated the Community Land Trust has fewer funding options currently than Fix the Bricks, maintaining affordable housing is a priority for the Mayor, and the $220,000 would likely be enough to buyback a home from a property already in the Trust. The Administration provided the below table with updated Fix the Brick program metrics as of February 23, 2024. Fix the Bricks Metrics as of February 23, 2024 Waitlist: Applications with no funding Over 4,000. Working with IMS to clean up the list to inquire whether applicants are still at the same address and are still interested in the program. Backlog: Applications funded but not started 366 In Progress: Site Visits, Pre-Bids, Contract Review 45 Under Contract: Executed contract, construction in progress 31 Completed Jobs: Project completed and paid out 67 Homeowner GF Match Grant FY 23: (Closed) Budget $84,000.00 Spent $56,106.20 Homeowner GF Match Grant FY 24: (Open) Budget $ 84,000.00 Spent $30,802.50 Page | 3 $30,000 Minimum Funding Award Several years ago, the City established a minimum funding level for grant awards. HUD recommends a $35,000 minimum award for projects. The Housing Stability Division recommends $30,000 after consultations with applicants. The minimum award is aimed at maximizing community benefits from grant awards. The intent of this policy is to balance the burden for the Administration and recipient organizations to manage grant funds with the goal of having positive impacts in the community. This year, no applications were disqualified for requesting less than the minimum funding requirement. Disqualified Applications Two applications were disqualified this year because they were determined to be ineligible, that is, the services would not advance one of the goals and strategies in the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan. The applications are: - CDBG Public Services #28 – Ruff Haven Crisis Sheltering for companion animals of homeless individuals and families which had requested $42,900. o Housing Stability staff shared the following clarification from HUD about why this application was deemed ineligible: “if it was part of a larger activity that took a holistic approach to removing housing barriers (such as a service that also helped low-income persons improve credit, learn financial skills, find employment), or if this was one piece of a larger shelter that also provided shelter for homeless persons, then there would be a better case for it. But, as it stands, as a standalone service that is not part of a larger holistic approach to housing/shelter, it is unfortunately not eligible.” - CDBG Public Services #29 – Neighborhood House Association’s Early Childhood Education program which had requested $87,387. There was an error where the organization applied to the neighborhood improvements category, but the proposed uses are ineligible under that funding category. Housing Stability staff provided technical assistance to the applicant to try and avoid the issue in the future. It should be noted that the organization and the specific program have applied for and received funding in the CDBG Public Services category for several years before. Returning Applications without Funding Recommendations There are five returning applications that received grant awards last year but did not receive a funding recommendation this year as follows: - CDBG Public Services #12 – International Rescue Committee’s digital divide program for refugees and new Americans requested $60,000 but is not recommended to receive funding. Last year the program received $30,489. - CDBG Public Services #16 – Salt Lake American’s refugee language and social services program requested $30,000 but is not recommended to receive funding. Last year the program received $30,000. - CDBG Public Services #25 – Wasatch Community Gardens’ Green Team employment program requested $39,884 but is not recommended to receive funding. Last year the program received $30,489. - CDBG Public Services #27 – YWCA’s domestic violence shelter requested $218,990 but is not recommended to receive funding. Last year the program received $56,249. - CDBG Public Services #29 – Neighborhood House Association’s Early Childhood Education program requested $87,387 from the Neighborhood Improvements category but the proposed uses are ineligible (see disqualified application section above). The error resulted in the application being disqualified. It should have been submitted to the Public Services category. It should be noted that the organization and the specific program have applied for and received funding in the CDBG Public Services category for several years before. New Applications This year there are 17 new applications for CDBG which is more than usual. There are also four new applications for ESG, three for HOME and no new applications for HOPWA. Note that some of the new applications represent new programs offered by returning organizations that have applied to fund different programs they operate. The new applications are highlighted yellow as new in the middle column titled “Previous Grant Awards” on the funding log (Attachment 2). Page | 4 Organizations with Multiple Applications (See Attachment 4 for a detailed list of the individual grants grouped by organization) Some organizations submit applications for the same program seeking funding from multiple grants. Others submit applications narrowly tailored to each grant and for different programs. Organizations with multiple applications are listed alphabetically below. The total funding requested and recommended awards are listed. $450,000 requested by Alliance House for the same project and recommended to receive $318,000. $100,000 requested by Catholic Community Services and recommended to receive $60,000. $429,800 requested by Community Development Corporation of Utah but not recommended for funding. $2,762,124 requested by the County Housing Authority and recommended to receive $522,223. $91,881 requested by Family Promise and recommended to receive $63,000. $1,269,200 requested by First Step House and recommended to receive $1,092,500. $476,572 requested by Friends of Switchpoint but not recommended for funding. $758,000 requested by NeighborWorks for downpayment assistance and recommended to receive $358,000. $620,000 requested by Odyssey House and recommended to receive $435,000. $3,028,550 requested by Salt Lake City Housing Stability Division and recommended to receive $1,752,550. - Note that program administration costs are not included in these totals $361,169 requested by Shelter the Homeless for operational expenses and recommended to receive $60,000. $218,431 requested by South Valley Sanctuary and recommended to receive $208,431. $1,142,936 requested by The Road Home and recommended to receive $787,000. $182,919 requested by the Utah AIDS Foundation and recommended to be fully funded. $1,346,536 requested by Utah Community Action and recommended to receive $933,224. $334,867 requested by Volunteers of America and recommended to receive $234,867. $560,000 requested by WeeCare for the same program but not recommended for funding. The applications are: $443,990 requested by YWCA and recommended to receive $221,000. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. Questions and/or Potential Funding Shifts – Does the Council have any questions about the advisory board and mayoral funding recommendations? Do any Council Members have potential funding shifts between applications they are considering? 2. New Application Process or Direct Award(s) for CDBG-CV Recaptured Funding – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration what approach is preferred to use the $287,752 of recaptured funds. Some options include a new open and competitive application process, checking with FY2021 applicants that fully spent their awards, or select an eligible expense category (housing assistance, public service agency, community stabilization, or small business) and ask the Administration to recommend programs and projects. The deadline to spend all CDBG-CV funding is December 3, 2026. 3. Fix the Bricks 366 Funded Projects Backlog – The Council may wish to ask the Administration what additional resources could help address the backlog of funding but not started projects. 4. Policy Guidance for 2025 – 2029 Consolidated Plan – The Council may wish to share early policy feedback with the Administration about potential changes to the goals and strategies. Page | 5 ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION Increasing CDBG Housing Category Funding The chart below compares the annual funding in the housing category of CDBG over nine fiscal years. The Council identified affordable housing as a priority several years ago. The chart shows that a greater amount of CDBG funding has gone to housing in recent years. It’s important to note that the Council’s policy guidance is aligned with increasing CDBG housing funding. The recent policy decision to add program income to the City’s annual CDBG award from HUD increases the amount of funding available for housing (instead of funds sitting unused over multiple years in dormant accounts). The funding over nine fiscal years is $18,283,261 in total assuming the FY2025 recommended amounts are approved by the Council. The funding has gone to several housing assistance programs during this time and some applications have been included every year. Examples of how this funding was used are first time homebuyer assistance, the City’s Community Land Trust, rehabilitation of existing housing, development of new multifamily housing, emergency home repairs (large and small), and accessibility improvements. Note: FY2025 is funding recommended by the advisory board and Mayor CDBG Neighborhood Improvements Category Target Area in 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan (Attachment 3) The target area creates geographic boundaries for spending CDBG funding on economic development and public infrastructure improvements. These applications are included in the CDBG Neighborhood Improvements category on the funding log. Examples of these project types include small business façade improvement grants, public transit improvements, and creation of ADA ramps. The geographic target areas do not apply to housing or public services category applications. Focusing federal grants in these target areas is intended to maximize community impact and stimulate investments from other entities into the neighborhoods. The Council chose the current boundaries to align Census tracts with relatively high concentrations of poverty and to overlap with three RDA project areas: North Temple, 9-Line, and State Street. 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan This is the last year under the City’s existing 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan. It governs the goals and strategies that determine eligibility for HUD grant funding and identifies geographic target areas for CDBG neighborhood improvement category funding. Housing Stability shared the below tentative timeline for creating the new plan. - March 2024 through July 2024 – Data collection and analysis - May 2024 – Begin community engagement (will be ongoing for several months) - June 2024 – Begin public, community partner agency consultations - June/July 2024 – Convene internal and external stakeholder groups for in-depth discussions (will be ongoing for a few months and include consultations with Council) - Fall 2024 – Create a draft plan incorporating consultations and community input $1,130,000 $1,415,000 $1,050,900 $2,263,557 $1,855,073 $2,035,800 $2,048,837 $3,333,547 $3,150,547 $- $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 $4,000,000 Total CDBG Housing Funding Comparing Annual Housing Category CDBG Funding FY2017 to FY2025 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Page | 6 - Late 2024 through Early 2025 – Review community feedback and draft plan with Mayor and Council, to receive additional input and recommendations. - April 2025 – Adoption of Consolidated Plan Funding Contingencies The advisory board provided recommendations in case final grant funding amounts from HUD are more or less than the estimated amounts. These funding contingencies are summarized in the table below. The Council may wish to identify which funding contingencies are supported in the event HUD’s confirmation of final funding amounts isn’t available by the scheduled vote on April 9. Grant If MORE Funding Available If LESS Funding Available CDBG Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. ESG Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Do not exeed the 60% Part 1 funding cap. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000. Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Do not exeed the 60% Part 1 funding cap. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000. HOME Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award for the CHDO Set-Aside. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. HOPWA Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award to program administration. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 3% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. COUNCIL FUNDING CONTINGENCIES Note that there are no funding contingencies for the CDBG-CV or HOME-ARPA one-time federal funding related to the pandemic because these are awards from prior years so the final actual amounts are known. Page | 7 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Goals and Strategies The City must report progress to HUD on how funding awards advance the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan goals. In past years, some applicants that received funding were not aligned with the five-year plan. As a result, the services provided by those organizations could not be reported to HUD. If a city does not adequately fund applications advancing the five-year plan, then HUD could view the program as underperforming, lower future grant award amounts, and/or audit the city’s program. The below table summarizes the goals and strategies of the current consolidated plan. Goals Strategies Housing: Provide expanded housing options for all economic and demographic segments of Salt Lake City’s population while diversifying housing stock within neighborhoods 1. Support housing programs that address the needs of aging housing stock through targeted rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within the neighborhoods 2. Support affordable housing development that increases the number and types of units available for qualified residents 3. Support programs that provide access to home ownership 4. Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and/or end homelessness 5. Support programs that provide connection to permanent housing upon exiting behavioral health programs 6. Provide housing and essential supportive services to persons with HIV/AIDS Transportation: Promote accessibility and affordability of multimodal transportation options 1. Within eligible target areas, improve bus stop amenities as a way to encourage the accessibility of public transit and enhance the experience of public transit 2. Within eligible target areas, expand and support the installation of bike racks, stations, and amenities as a way to encourage use of alternative modes of transportation 3. Support access to transportation, prioritizing very low- income and vulnerable populations Community Resiliency: Provide tools to increase economic and/or housing stability 1. Support job training and vocational rehabilitation programs that increase economic mobility 2. Improve visual and physical appearance of deteriorating commercial buildings - limited to CDBG Target Area 3. Provide economic development support for microenterprise businesses 4. Direct financial assistance to for-profit businesses 5. Expand access to early childhood education to set the stage for academic achievement, social development, and change the cycle of poverty 6. Promote digital inclusion through access to digital communication technologies and the internet 7. Provide support for programs that reduce food insecurity for vulnerable population Homeless Services: Expand access to supportive programs that help ensure homelessness is rare, brief and non- reoccurring 1. Expand support for medical and dental care options for those experiencing homelessness 2. Provide support for homeless services including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency Overflow Operations 3. Provide support for programs undertaking outreach services to address the needs of those living an unsheltered life 4. Expand case management support as a way to connect those experiencing homelessness with permanent housing and supportive services Behavioral Health: Provide support for low income and vulnerable populations experiencing behavioral health concerns such as substance abuse disorders and mental health challenges 1. Expand treatment options, counseling support, and case management for those experiencing behavioral health crisis APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST CDCIP BOARD FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS MAYOR FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS ASSIST Inc.Emergency Home Repair & Accessibility 80.00 950,000$ 747,547$ 747,547$ Odyssey House Inc. Lighthouse and Martindale Roof Replacement 74.86 80,000$ 80,000$ 80,000$ YWCA Utah Roof Replacement for Transitional Housing Facility 74.29 225,000$ 221,000$ 221,000$ First Step House Facilities Renovations and Improvements 73.39 302,000$ 290,000$ 290,000$ Salt Lake City NIS Team Home Repair Program 70.25 850,000$ 671,000$ 671,000$ NeighborWorks Salt Lake Downpayment Assistance and Home Rehab 70.13 400,000$ 358,000$ 358,000$ Salt Lake City NIS Team Fix the Bricks 69.50 240,000$ 220,000$ -$ Alliance House 1805 South Main Street 69.38 300,000$ 221,000$ 221,000$ ICAST Solar Energy and Green Rehabilitation 69.13 2,000,000$ 342,000$ 342,000$ Salt Lake City NIS Team Shared Equity Program 67.67 500,000$ -$ 220,000$ 5,847,000$ 3,150,547$ 3,150,547$ Salt Lake City NIS Team Neighborhood Business Improvement Program 69.83 885,000$ 708,000$ 708,000$ WeeCare, Inc. DBA Upwards BOOST Program 49.00 280,000$ -$ -$ 1,165,000$ 708,000$ 708,000$ Advantage Services Provisional Supportive Employment Program 81.46 85,000$ 63,164$ 63,164$ Salt Lake Donated Dental Services Community Dental Project 83.92 55,000$ 40,000$ 40,000$ First Step House Peer Support Services 83.13 80,000$ 61,500$ 61,500$ Odyssey House Inc. Odyssey House Bus Passes 82.13 90,000$ 47,000$ 47,000$ Odyssey House Inc. Odyssey House Transitional Housing 81.38 150,000$ 85,000$ 85,000$ First Step House Employment Preparation and Placement 81.00 50,000$ 33,000$ 33,000$ Catholic Community Services Employment/Lifeskills Coordinator 80.88 50,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Catholic Community Services Chef Trainer at CCS Kitchen Academy 80.46 50,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Children's Center Utah Therapeutic Preschool Program 78.75 110,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Legal Aid Society of Salt Lake Domestic Violence Victim Assistance Program 78.75 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ The Road Home Gail Miller Resource Center 78.38 101,048$ 30,000$ 30,000$ The Road Home Housing Staffing 77.92 50,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Fourth Street Clinic Health and Housing Transition Team 77.25 97,144$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Shelter the Homeless Inc.GMRC & GEK Security and Food 76.63 132,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ South Valley Sanctuary Domestic Violence Shelter Director 76.17 40,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ The INN Between Medical Respite and End of Life Housing 76.00 100,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Utah Legal Services Inc.Poverty Disruptor Project 76.00 50,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ YWCA Utah DV & Residential Services 74.54 218,990$ -$ -$ Friends of Switchpoint, Inc Airport Permanently Supportive Case Management 72.88 238,286$ -$ -$ Friends of Switchpoint, Inc Fairpark Permanently Supportive Case 72.75 238,286$ -$ -$ Wasatch Community Gardens Green Team Job Training Program 72.42 39,884$ -$ -$ Boys and Girls Club of Greater Salt Lake Behavioral Health & Build Community Resiliency 71.67 116,153$ -$ -$ Community Development Corp of Utah Housing Counseling 71.38 55,000$ -$ -$ International Rescue Committee Digital Inclusion to Increase Economic Stability for Refugees 69.25 60,000$ -$ -$ Salt Lake American Survival Services for Refugees 69.13 30,000$ -$ -$ Utah's Promise (United Way) Basic Needs for SLC Residents 68.13 45,000$ -$ -$ Children's Media Workshop TravelWell Schools 50.67 85,000$ -$ -$ Ruff Haven Crisis Sheltering Application Determined Ineligible N/A 42,900$ -$ -$ Neighborhood House Association Application Determined Ineligible N/A 87,387$ -$ -$ 2,577,078$ 659,664$ 659,664$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability / Finance / Attorney Administration of Grant Programs N/A 679,552$ 679,552$ 679,552$ 679,552$ 679,552$ 679,552$ 10,268,630$ 5,197,763$ 5,197,763$ APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST CDCIP BOARD FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS MAYOR FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS WeeCare, Inc. DBA Upwards BOOST Program 59.88 280,000$ -$ -$ 280,000$ -$ -$ CDBG-CV - $287,752 CDBG-CV CDBG PUBLIC SERVICES CATEGORY CDBG HOUSING CDBG NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS CATEGORY 2024-25 Federal Grant Funding Board Recommendations COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT - $5,197,763 (CDBG Public Services cannot exceed $659,664) CDBG ADMIN Attachment 1 - Applications Listed by Combined Score APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST CDCIP BOARD FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS MAYOR FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS First Step House Resource Center Program 83.25 60,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Volunteers of America, Utah Youth Resource Center 79.79 100,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Family Promise Salt Lake Family Promise Shelter Operations 79.00 51,881$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Shelter the Homeless Inc.Shelter Operations GMRC & GEK 78.25 229,169$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Volunteers of America, Utah Geraldine E. King Women's Resource Center 77.67 60,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ Soap2Hope Harm Reduction Street Outreach 74.13 154,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 655,050$ 180,000$ 180,000$ Utah Community Action Rapid Re-Housing 81.5 152,938$ 34,368$ 34,368$ The Road Home Rapid Re-Housing 79.38 91,888$ 33,000$ 33,000$ Family Promise Prevention and RRH Services 77.75 40,000$ 33,000$ 33,000$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability ESG Program Administration N/A 22,732$ 22,732$ 22,732$ 307,558$ 123,100$ 123,100$ 962,608$ 303,100$ 303,100$ APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST CDCIP BOARD FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS MAYOR FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS South Valley Sanctuary Domestic Violence Housing Assistance 82.14 178,431$ 178,431$ 178,431$ First Step House FSH Recovery Housing Program 81.86 500,000$ 500,000$ 500,000$ Volunteers of America, Utah Youth Resource Center TBRA 80.00 174,867$ 174,867$ 174,867$ The Road Home Tenant-Based Rental Assistance 79.71 350,000$ 350,000$ 350,000$ Utah Community Action Tenant-Based Rental Assistance 79.29 233,142$ 233,142$ 233,142$ Salt Lake Valley Habitat for Humanity Affordable Home Ownership 75.29 600,000$ 464,305$ 464,305$ Housing Opportunities Inc.New City Plaza Apartments 73.00 2,000,000$ -$ -$ Salt Lake City NIS Team Homebuyer Program 72.00 400,000$ -$ -$ Community Development Corp of Utah Down Payment Assistance 71.86 374,800$ -$ -$ NeighborWorks Salt Lake Down Payment Assistance 69.86 420,000$ -$ -$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability HOME Program Administration (10%)N/A 102,366$ 102,366$ 102,366$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability CHDO Set Aside (15%)N/A 153,550$ 153,550$ 153,550$ 5,487,156$ 2,156,661$ 2,156,661$ APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST CDCIP BOARD FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS MAYOR FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Asian Association of Utah HOME-ARP TBRA 81.29 265,693$ 193,608$ 193,608$ Odyssey House Inc.HOME-ARP TBRA 80.71 300,000$ 223,000$ 223,000$ The Road Home HOME-ARP TBRA 80.00 550,000$ 344,000$ 344,000$ Utah Community Action HOME-ARP TBRA 80.00 760,742$ 466,000$ 466,000$ First Step House HOME-ARP TBRA 78.43 277,200$ 178,000$ 178,000$ Alliance House HOME-ARP TBRA 77.14 150,000$ 97,000$ 97,000$ 2,303,635$ 1,501,608$ 1,501,608$ APPLICANT PROJECT/PROGRAM SCORE REQUEST CDCIP BOARD FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS MAYOR FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Utah AIDS Foundation Supportive Services Program 88.50 75,319$ 75,319$ 75,319$ Utah AIDS Foundation Mental Health Services 87.17 107,600$ 107,600$ 107,600$ Housing Connect Tenant Based Rental Assistance 80.33 762,124$ 522,223$ 522,223$ Utah Community Action Housing Info/STRMU/PHP/Supportive Services 78.57 199,714$ 199,714$ 199,714$ Salt Lake City Housing Stability Division HOPWA Administration N/A 27,985$ 27,985$ 27,985$ 1,172,742$ 932,841$ 932,841$ HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS - $932,841 HOPWA CATEGORY CATEGORY PART 2: HOMELESS PREVENTION & RRH CATEGORY HOME-ARP CATEGORY EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT - $303,100 (Part 1 cannot exceed $181,860) HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM - $2,156,661 (CHDO Set-Aside $153,550) PART 1: SHELTER & STREET OUTREACH HOME HOME -ARP TENANT BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE (TBRA) - $1,501,608 Estimated 2024-2025 Funding Available: 5,197,763$ Category Maximum Allocated Balance 2024-2025 Admin (20%):879,552$ 679,552$ 200,000$ 2024-2025 Public Services (15%):659,664$ 659,664$ -$ 2024-2025 Housing & Neighborhood Improvements:3,858,547$ 3,858,547$ -$ 1 FY23-24 679,552$ REQUEST:679,552$ FY22-23 710,934$ CDCIP:679,552$ FY21-22 701,832$ MAYOR:679,552$ FY20-21 701,833$ COUNCIL:679,552$ FY19-20 686,791$ 5 YR TOTAL 3,480,942$ REQUEST:679,552$ CDCIP:679,552$ MAYOR:679,552$ COUNCIL:679,552$ 1 Alliance House Inc.REQUEST:300,000$ CDCIP:221,000$ MAYOR:221,000$ COUNCIL:221,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 2 ASSIST, Inc. FY23-24 926,766$ REQUEST:950,000$ FY22-23 700,000$ CDCIP:747,547$ FY21-22 700,000$ MAYOR:747,547$ FY20-21 391,373$ COUNCIL:747,547$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 391,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 3,109,139$ 3 First Step House FY23-24 379,703$ REQUEST:302,000$ Recovery Residence Rehabilitation FY22-23 322,000$ CDCIP:290,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:290,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:290,000$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 701,703$ SALT LAKE CITY CDBG PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/25 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN HOUSING FUNDING CAPS AS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL REGULATION REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 15.5% 15.5% 15.5% Funding for salaries and operational expenses to administer and monitor the federal grants, and to conduct the community processes. Funding may be utilized by: Attorney's Office Finance Department Housing Stability Division CITY ADMINISTRATION Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's Office Note: 20% ($879,552) is the maximum amount allowed CITY ADMINISTRATION TOTAL 15.5% APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME# 80.00 REQUEST/RECOMMENDED The funds will be used to demolish and help rebuild 1805 S Main Street to be a 16 deeply affordable and safe housing units An application was also submitted to HOME-ARPA #1 for the same project. This application is to demolish the existing nine unit structure and build a new 16 unit housing structure. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 69.38 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. NEW Funds for critical rehabilitation at 720 Valdez Dr. 411 N Grant St. and 379 N redwood Rd. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 73.39 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. 1805 S Main Street Rebuild Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Supporting salaries, operational, and rehabilitation activities including plumbing, heating & electrical, radon testing/mitigation, roof repair, accessibility ramps, and accessibility design projects, etc.Emergency Home Repair & Accessibility and Community Design Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 1 4 FY23-24 462,389$ REQUEST:2,000,000$ FY22-23 300,000$ CDCIP:342,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:342,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:342,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 762,389$ 5 Odyssey House Inc.REQUEST:80,000$ CDCIP:80,000$ MAYOR:80,000$ COUNCIL:80,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 6 REQUEST:240,000$ CDCIP:220,000$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 7 FY23-24 711,027$ REQUEST:850,000$ FY22-23 500,000$ CDCIP:671,000$ FY21-22 600,000$ MAYOR:671,000$ FY20-21 485,600$ COUNCIL:671,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 439,873$ 5 YR TOTAL 2,736,500$ 8 Salt Lake City - Housing Stability Division FY23-24 406,253$ REQUEST:500,000$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:-$ Shared Equity Program FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:220,000$ FY20-21 250,000$ COUNCIL:220,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 656,253$ 9 Neighborworks of Salt Lake FY23-24 406,267$ REQUEST:400,000$ FY22-23 196,837$ CDCIP:358,000$ Home Rehabilitation & Improvement FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:358,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:358,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 603,104$ 10 YWCA Utah REQUEST:225,000$ CDCIP:221,000$ MAYOR:221,000$ COUNCIL:221,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: REQUEST:5,847,000$ CDCIP:3,150,547$ MAYOR:3,150,547$ COUNCIL:3,150,547$ REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97Roof Replacement for YWCA Utah's Transitional Housing Facility HOUSING TOTAL 60.61% 112.5% 60.6% 60.6% Providing Solar Energy and Green Rehab to low to moderate income or LMI Community Land Trust program. Provides low to moderate income homebuyers the opportunity to purchase a home by removing the cost of the land. The resident will purchase the home/land improvements. Salt Lake City retains ownership of the land to ensure future affordability. 70.25 Housing: Support programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance, and/or housing subsidy, and/or financing. 70.13Program to provide assistance to low to moderate-income (LMI) residents through home rehabilitations and down payments An application was also submitted to HOME #5 for the same purpose.Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 67.67 Housing: Support programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance, and/or housing subsidy, and/or financing. Funds will be used to replace YWCA Utah's Kathleen Robison Huntsman (KRH) transiontal housing facility's roof NEW 74.29 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. Home Repair Program Salt Lake City - Housing Stability Division Salaries and operational support for the Housing Rehabilitation and Target Repair programs that provide home repair services that address health, safety, and structural issues for low income homeowners. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 74.86 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. 69.50 Housing: Support programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance, and/or housing subsidy, and/or financing. 69.13 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. ICAST will implement solar PV with or without battery storage systems that include key rehabilitative aspects in multi-unit housing Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 HOUSING APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS Lighthouse and Martindale Clinic Roof Replacement Salt Lake City - Housing Stability Division Fix the Bricks International Center for Appropriate and Sustainable Technology (ICAST) Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Funds will be used to provide the two connecting facilities with a new roof NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Funds will be used to provide seismic retrofits to low to moderate income or LMI residential homes Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 NEW Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 2 1 Salt Lake City - Housing Stability Division FY23-24 925,000$ REQUEST:885,000$ FY22-23 650,000$ CDCIP:708,000$ FY21-22 502,000$ MAYOR:708,000$ FY20-21 425,883$ COUNCIL:708,000$ FY19-20 319,642$ 5 YR TOTAL 2,822,525$ 2 REQUEST:280,000$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: REQUEST:1,165,000$ CDCIP:708,000$ MAYOR:708,000$ COUNCIL:708,000$ 1 Advantage Services Inc REQUEST:85,000$ CDCIP:63,164$ MAYOR:63,164$ COUNCIL:63,164$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 2 Boys and Girls Club of SL REQUEST:116,153$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 3 Catholic Community Services of Utah REQUEST:50,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 4 Catholic Community Services of Utah REQUEST:50,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 81.46 Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLANREQUEST/RECOMMENDED Behavioral Health and build Community Resiliency Program Behavioral Health: Expand treatment options, counseling support, and case management for those experiencing behavioral health crisis. Funding would provide salary/benefits for a Chef Trainer, who provides classroom and hands-on instruction regarding food safety, health codes, understanding and using equipment, and the preparation of a full-range of foods. This application is for the same program but a different employee position than the application immediately below. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME Community Resiliency: Economic Development efforts via supporting the improvement and visibility of small businesses through façade improvement programs. WeeCare, Inc. dba Upwards NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS: TRANSPORTATION & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INFASTRUCTURE - SEE ATTACHMENT 3 FOR TARGET AREA MAP Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP) Provide grant money to businesses for facade improvements, focusing on small businesses and target areas. PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDSPROJECT DESCRIPTION 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN PUBLIC SERVICES 13.6% 13.6% NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS: TRANSPORTATION & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INFASTRUCTURE TOTAL Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 69.83 22.4% Provide paid supportive employment to individuals who are experiencing homelessness, formerly homeless, or staying at the Homeless Resource Centers Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS 13.6% Funds will be used to expand ecnomnic opportunites for daycare providers in SLC by training them to use essential tools to make their operations more efficent and supporting hiring new LMJ's An application was also submitted to CDBG-CV for the same program. NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 49.00 Boost Program / Business Operations & Optimization Support & Tolls for Child Care Providers Community Resiliency: Provide ecnomic development support for microenterprise buisness Chef Trainer at CCS Kitchen Academy Community Resiliency: Provide support for programs that reduce food insecurity for vulnerable population. NEW Provisional Supportive Employment Program Community Resiliency: Provide job training/vocational training programs targeting low-income and vulnerable populations. NEW Provide Staff and operation costs for trauma-informed care and services that support their mental and emotional health NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 71.67 80.46 Employment/Lifeskills Coordinator at CCS Kitchen Academy Community Resiliency: Provide support for programs that reduce food insecurity for vulnerable population. Funding would provide salary/benefits for a Employment/Lifeskills Coordinator, who provides classroom and hands-on instruction regarding food safety, health codes, understanding and using equipment, and the preparation of a full-range of foods. This application is for the same program but a different employee position than the application immediately above. NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 80.88 Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 3 5 Children's Center Utah FY23-24 30,489$ REQUEST:110,000$ Therapeutic Preschool Program FY22-23 55,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:30,000$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 85,489$ 6 Children's Media Workshop REQUEST:85,000$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 7 REQUEST:55,000$ CDCIP:-$ Housing Counseling MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: COUNCIL:-$ 8 First Step House FY23-24 30,000$ REQUEST:50,000$ FY22-23 30,299$ CDCIP:33,000$ FY21-22 41,700$ MAYOR:33,000$ FY20-21 47,000$ COUNCIL:33,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 30,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 178,999$ 9 First Step House FY23-24 30,000$ REQUEST:80,000$ FY22-23 30,000$ CDCIP:61,500$ FY21-22 48,000$ MAYOR:61,500$ FY20-21 50,000$ COUNCIL:61,500$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 38,806$ 5 YR TOTAL 196,806$ 10 Friends of Switchpoint, Inc REQUEST:238,286$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 11 Friends of Switchpoint, Inc REQUEST:238,286$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: PUBLIC SERVICES APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Community Resiliency: Build resiliency by providing tools to increase economic and/or housing stability. NEW 72.75 Behavioral Health: Expand treatment options, counseling support, and case management for those experiencing behavioral health crisis. 71.38 Community Resiliency: Expand access to early childhood education to set the stage for academic achievement, social development, and change the cycle of poverty. Community Resiliency: Provide job training/vocational training programs targeting low-income and vulnerable populations. Salaries and administrative costs for Peer Support Services (PSS) Program which provides peer-based supportive services, delivered by certified Peer Support Specialists. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 83.13Peer Support Services Behavioral Health: Expand treatment options, counseling support, and case management for those experiencing behavioral health crisis. Provide operational costs for the Travel/Well program which provides mapping and safety tools to increase safe pedestrian travel. This is one of only two applications that advance the City's transportation goal in the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan. There have been few transportation applications during the five years. NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 50.67 Community Development Corporation of Utah Travel/Well Schools Transportation: Support access to transportation prioritizing very low-income and vulnerable populations This program provides treatment for preschool-aged children, who have been the victims of assault or trauma, and who are struggling to succeed in childcare or preschool. Follow up with intensive group therapy to gain resilience and learn essential skills. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 78.75 Provide salary and direct operational costs for a housing/homeowner counseling program Provide supportive employment services to high-risk, high-need individuals in our community caught in the cycles of relapse, mental illness, incarceration, homelessness, and unemployment. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 81.00 Funds will provide salary for case management for homeless seniors and veterans aged 55+ located at Point at Airport This application is for the same program but at a different location two block away from the application immediately below. NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 72.88Airport Permanently Supportive Case Management Program Behavioral Health: Expand treatment options, counseling support, and case management for those experiencing behavioral health crisis. Funds will provide salary for case management for homeless seniors and veterans aged 55+ Located at Point at Fairpark This application is for the same program but at a different location two block away from the application immediately above. NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97Fairpark Permanently Supportive Case Management Program Employment Preparation and Placement (EPP) Program Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 4 12 International Rescue Committee FY23-24 30,489$ REQUEST:60,000$ FY22-23 40,000$ CDCIP:-$ FY21-22 54,400$ MAYOR:-$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 44,629$ 5 YR TOTAL 169,518$ 13 Legal Aid Society of Salt Lake FY23-24 30,000$ REQUEST:30,000$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 30,000$ 14 Odyssey House Inc.REQUEST:90,000$ CDCIP:47,000$ MAYOR:47,000$ COUNCIL:47,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 15 Odyssey House Inc.REQUEST:150,000$ CDCIP:85,000$ MAYOR:85,000$ COUNCIL:85,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 16 FY23-24 30,000$ REQUEST:30,000$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:-$ Survivial Services of Refugees FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 30,000$ 17 Salt Lake Donated Dental Services FY23-24 49,692$ REQUEST:55,000$ Community Dental Project FY22-23 42,500$ CDCIP:40,000$ FY21-22 44,400$ MAYOR:40,000$ FY20-21 44,000$ COUNCIL:40,000$ FY19-20 48,510$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 5 YR TOTAL 229,102$ 18 Shelter The Homeless FY23-24 -$ REQUEST:132,000$ FY22-23 30,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 30,000$ 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 82.13 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 PUBLIC SERVICES Provide bus passes to low to moderate income or LMI clients and clients in their Harm Reduction Programming This is one of only two applications that advance the City's transportation goal in the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan. There have been few transportation applications during the five years. Funds will be used for the Domestic Violence Victim Assitance Program to provide free legal representation to victims of domestic violence, regardless of their income. 81.38NEW 78.75 Funds will facilitate Digital Inclusion staff to support refugee and other new Americans access/learn digital technology skills, critical to improving their economic and housing stability. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 69.25Digital Skills & Education Access to Build Resiliency Refugees and New Americans Community Resiliency: Promote digital inclusion through access to digital communication technologies and the internet. Domestic Violence Victim Assistance Community Resiliency: Build resiliency by providing tools to increase economic and/or housing stability. APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED House Bus Passes Transportation: Support access to transportation prioritizing very low-income and vulnerable populations Provide financial assistance for low to moderate income or LMI clients to move into transitional housing post in-patient treatment and while living in transitional housing An application was also submitted to HOME-ARPA #4 for the same purpose. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97Transitional Housing Housing: Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and end homelessness Salt Lake American Language Interpretation Translation and Guidance, Social Service Facilitators, Survival Resources and Services Facilitation of Access to Survival Resources and Services to refugee community Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 69.13 Community Resiliency: Provide support for programs that reduce food insecurity for vulnerable population. GMRC & GEK Security and Food Community Resiliency: Provide support for programs that reduce food insecurity for vulnerable population 83.92 76.63 Salaries, supplies, and lab fees for Community Dental Project, to support homeless and low-income individuals with dental services. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Homeless Services: Expand support for medical and dental care options for those experiencing homelessness Provide security within the Gail Miller Resource Center or GMRC & Geraldine E. King or Resource Center GEK facilities 24/7 and to provide 2 meals a day to those in the two facilities CDBG Public Services #21 was submitted by The Road Home for operational expenses at the GMRC. ESG Part 1 #3 was submitted by Shelter the Homeless for operational expenses at the same shelters. Also, ESG Part 1 #5 was submitted by VOA for operational expenses at the GEK. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 5 19 South Valley Sanctuary FY23-24 30,489$ REQUEST:40,000$ FY22-23 40,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 100,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 30,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 5 YR TOTAL 200,489$ 20 The Inn Between FY23-24 50,776$ REQUEST:100,000$ End of Life Care and Medical Respite FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 45,599$ 5 YR TOTAL 96,375$ 21 The Road Home FY23-24 55,450$ REQUEST:101,048$ Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 72,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:30,000$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 127,450$ 22 The Road Home FY23-24 50,000$ REQUEST:50,000$ Housing Staffing FY22-23 40,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:Homeless Services: Expand case management support as a way to h i i h l ih h i FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:30,000$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 90,000$ 23 United Way of Salt Lake REQUEST:45,000$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 24 Utah Legal Services REQUEST:50,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 25 Wasatch Community Gardens FY23-24 30,489$ REQUEST:39,884$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:-$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:-$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 30,489$ PUBLIC SERVICES APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Domestic Violence Case Manager and Housing Assistance Homeless Services: Expand case management support as a way to connect those experiencing homelessness with permanent housing and supportive services. Provides homeless individuals who need hospice or other end of life care and temporary medical respite housing for homeless individuals experiencing a medical crisis. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Homeless Services: Provide support for homeless services including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency overflow operations. Provide salary and benefits to the shelter director to work alongside victim advocates and survivors to provide emergencty shelter and supportive services Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 76.17 76.00 Poverty Disrupter Project Provide Salary and benefits and direct operational costs to the Poverty Disrupter Project that is aimed to expand employment and finanicial stability for low to moderate income or LMI residents Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 76.00 Community Resiliency: Provide job training/vocational training programs targeting low-income and vulnerable populations. NEW Behavioral Health: Support programs that provide connection to permanent housing upon exiting behavioral health programs. Support may include, but is not limited to supporting obtaining housing via deposit and rent assistance and barrier elimination to the extent allowable to regulation Operational support for the Gail Miller Resource Center to help with emergency shelter, clothing, access to showers, support with community resources, and connection to community housing options. CDBG Public Services #18 and ESG Part 1 #3 were submitted by Shelter the Homeless for operational expenses at the same shelters. 78.38 The housing navigation staff work at four of the resource centers and coordinate with other service providers to serve households referred into the program. Utah's Promise: Basic Needs for SLC Residents 68.13Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 NEWProvide customer-centric referral connection services to SLC residents in need that include warm transfers, follow-up services, and client satisfaction surveys. Homeless Resource Centers Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:Homeless Services: Expand case management support as a way to connect those experiencing homelessness with permanent housing and supportive services. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 77.92 Provides farm-based employment, work readiness training, job placement assistance, and mentoring for women facing and/or experiencing homelessness. Request for One-time expenses related to farm move including partial soil removal and disposal, Geotextile layer, Importing clean soil, and palletizing and moving supplies. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 72.42Green Team Program Community Resiliency: Provide job training/vocational training programs targeting low-income and vulnerable populations. Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 6 26 FY23-24 40,456$ REQUEST:97,144$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:30,000$ Health and Housing Transtion Team FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 40,456$ 27 YWCA Utah FY23-24 56,249$ REQUEST:218,990$ FY22-23 37,778$ CDCIP:-$ FY21-22 33,900$ MAYOR:-$ FY20-21 58,285$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 58,285$ 5 YR TOTAL 244,497$ 28 Ruff Haven Crisis Sheltering REQUEST:42,900$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 29 Neighborhood House Association REQUEST:87,387$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: PUBLIC SERVICES APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN YWCA’s secure, emergency shelter offers 36 onsite and 4 overflow units to victims left homeless due to domestic violence. Provide salary and benefits for essential shelter staffing infrastructure. There was an error where the program applied to the neighborhood improvements category, but the proposed uses are ineligible under that funding category. Housing Stability staff provided technical assistance to the applicant to try and avoid the issue in the future. It should be noted that the organization and the specific program have applied for and received funding in the CDBG Public Services category for several years before. INELIGIBLE Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 N/AEnhancing Early Childhood Education Address social determinatnes of health including acces to health care and housing stability. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 77.25 Community Resiliency: Expand Access to health care and housing stability. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 74.54DV and Residential Services Wasatch Homeless Health Care, Inc. dba Fourth Street Clinic Crisis Sheltering Services for Companion Animals of Homeless Individuals and Families HUD provided guidance that this application is ineligible because as a standalone service the primary beneficiary is the animal and not the intended qualified population of individuals experienceing homelessness. If the service was part of a larger holistic approach removing housing barriers, then a better case could be made for eligibility. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 N/AINELIGIBLE Homeless Services: Provide support for homeless services including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency overflow operations. Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 7 REQUEST:2,577,078$ CDCIP:659,664$ MAYOR:659,664$ COUNCIL:659,664$ FUND REQUEST Housing 5,847,000$ Neighborhood Improvements: Transp & ED 1,165,000$ Public Services 2,577,078$ Administration 679,552$ TOTAL FUNDS REQUESTED:10,268,630$ CDCIP Board Recommendations: Administration Analysis: ESTIMATED 24-25 GRANT AWARD: 15.0% TOTALS 5,197,763$ If a decrease in funding: Estimated Program Income:1,000,000$ Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Note: 15% is the maximum amount allowed per HUD regulations Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. COUNCIL: 5,197,763$ -$ COUNCIL: -$ 15.0% MAYOR:-$ FUND AVAILABILITY 3,397,763$ Reallocated CDBG: 15.0% If an increase in funding: 5,197,763$ CDCIP: Fund the agencies at the above Final Funding Recommendation CDCIP: 800,000$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:5,197,763$ FUNDS ALLOCATED MAYOR: AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION PUBLIC SERVICES TOTAL 75.8% Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 8 180,000$ Max Allowed for Part 1:181,860$ 100,368$ 303,100$ 1 Family Promise Salt Lake FY23-24 30,408$ REQUEST:51,881$ Community Family Shelter FY22-23 30,247$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: 5 YR TOTAL 60,655$ 2 First Step House FY23-24 40,636$ REQUEST:60,000$ FY22-23 36,248$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 49,250$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 60,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY19-20 50,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 236,134$ 3 Shelter the Homeless REQUEST:229,169$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: 4 Soap2Hope REQUEST:154,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: 5 Volunteers of America, Utah FY23-24 30,408$ REQUEST:60,000$ FY22-23 65,048$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 38,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ FY19-20 -$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: 5 YR TOTAL 163,456$ 6 Volunteers of America, Utah FY23-24 30,408$ REQUEST:100,000$ FY22-23 45,249$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 44,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 46,000$ COUNCIL:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY19-20 44,115$ 5 YR TOTAL 209,772$ REQUEST:655,050$ 216.12% CDCIP:180,000$ 59.39%Max 60% MAYOR:180,000$ 59.39%Max 60% COUNCIL:180,000$ 59.39%Max 60% Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 79.79 APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 77.67Geraldine King Women's Resource Center Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations Operational and essential services of the VOA Youth Resource Center, which serves homeless and at risk teens age 15-22. SALT LAKE CITY ESG PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/2025 Part 1 Funding: Street Outreach and Emergency Shelter: Part 2 Funding: Homelessness Prevention, RRH, HMIS, and Admin: 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 2024-2025 Funding Available: PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS# Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 REQUEST/RECOMMENDED The Funds would be used for the repair and maintenance of the facilities Gerald E King (GEK) and Gail Miller Resource Center (GMRC). As well as supporting the cost of utilities, insurance and the purchase of an estimated 90 bed replacements CDBG Public Services #18 was submitted by Shelter the Homeless for operational expenses at the same shelters. CDBG Public Services #21 was submitted by The Road Home for operational expenses at the GMRC. Also, ESG Part 1 #5 was submitted by VOA for operational expenses at the GEK. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 First Step House will provide on-site behavioral health assessment, referral, and peer support services to individuals at the Men's Homeless Resource Center. PART 1 - STREET OUTREACH AND EMERGENCY SHELTER The FPSL family shelter program utilizes 12 Salt Lake Valley buildings to shelter homeless families. Each shelter location houses 3-4 families at a time for one week at a time. Homeless Resource Center Program Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations 83.25 79.00 Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations 78.25Shelter Operation GMRC &GEK Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations NEW The funds will help provide services such as nightly outreach to provide essential care and connect with case management, client referrals to community health partners, prevention/education advocacy for harm reduction, and transportation services such as the UTA bus fare program NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 74.13 Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations Harm Reduction Street Outreach Program *FUNDING FOR PART 1 CANNOT EXCEED $181,860 STREET OUTREACH AND EMERGENCY SHELTER TOTAL Operational and service expenses for the Geraldine E. King Women's Resource Center. CDBG Public Services #18 and ESG Part 1 #3 were submitted by Shelter the Homeless for operational expenses at the same shelters. Homeless Youth Resource Center Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 9 1 REQUEST:40,000$ CDCIP:33,000$ MAYOR:33,000$ COUNCIL:33,000$ Consolidated Plan Objective: 2 REQUEST:152,938$ Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: CDCIP:34,368$ Rapid ReHousing (RRH)MAYOR:34,368$ COUNCIL:34,368$ Consolidated Plan Objective:Housing Programs: Rent assistance in the form of rapid 3 The Road Home FY23-24 34,337$ REQUEST:91,888$ FY22-23 51,816$ CDCIP:33,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:33,000$ FY20-21 40,765$ COUNCIL:33,000$ Consolidated Plan Objective: FY19-20 84,077$ 5 YR TOTAL 210,995$ REQUEST:284,826$ CDCIP:100,368$ MAYOR:100,368$ COUNCIL:100,368$ 1 Salt Lake City Corporation FY23-24 22,732$ REQUEST:22,732$ FY22-23 22,510$ CDCIP:22,732$ FY21-22 22,630$ MAYOR:22,732$ FY20-21 22,446$ COUNCIL:22,732$ FY19-20 21,843$ 5 YR TOTAL 112,161$ REQUEST:962,608$ CDCIP:303,100$ MAYOR:303,100$ COUNCIL:303,100$ 962,608$ AVAILABLE TO ALLOCATE: ESTIMATED 24-25 GRANT AWARD:303,100$ CDCIP BOARD:303,100$ -$ REALLOCATION:-$ MAYOR:303,100$ -$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE: $ 303,100 COUNCIL:303,100$ -$ CDCIP Board Recommendation:Fund the agencies at the above Final Funding Recommendation If an increase in funding If a decrease in funding 7.5% 7.5%To provide management, oversight, and monitoring of the ESG program. Administration: 7.5% of ESG allocation. Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000. APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Do not exeed the 60% Part 1 funding cap. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000. HOMELESS PREVENTION & RAPID REHOUSING & HMIS TOTAL Program Administration PART 2 - HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION, RAPID RE-HOUSING, AND HMIS UCA will staff case workers who receive clients from their intake system, assess each client, and provide a case management Family Promise Salt Lake Funds will help provide rental assistance to families facing homelessness, security and utility deposits, utility payments, rental application fees, and case management Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 77.75 Prevention and RRH Services Housing Programs: Rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance NEW NEWSalt Lake Community Action dba Utah Community Action 81.50 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION:FUNDS ALLOCATED: Requested Funds ADMINISTRATION Rapid Re-Housing Program Salary support for case managers in The Road Home’s Rapid Re-housing Program working with participants, combined with short-term rental assistance. HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION, RAPID RE-HOUSING, HMIS, AND ADMINISTRATION 79.38 Housing Programs: Rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance 7.5% 7.5% Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 10 Estimated 2024-2025 Funding Available:-$ 1 FY23-24 213,950$ REQUEST:374,800$ FY22-23 200,000$ CDCIP:-$ Down Payment Assistance FY21-22 200,000$ MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 200,000$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 200,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 1,013,950$ 2 REQUEST:500,000$ CDCIP:500,000$ Recovery Housing Program MAYOR:500,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:500,000$ 3 REQUEST:2,000,000$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: New City Plaza Apartments COUNCIL:-$ 4 REQUEST:600,000$ CDCIP:464,305$ Affordable Home Ownership MAYOR:464,305$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:464,305$ 5 FY23-24 -$ REQUEST:420,000$ FY22-23 208,661$ CDCIP:-$ Down Payment Assistance FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 208,661$ 6 FY23-24 138,431$ REQUEST:178,431$ FY22-23 138,500$ CDCIP:178,431$ DV Survivor Housing Assistance FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:178,431$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:178,431$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 276,931$ 7 FY23-24 349,839$ REQUEST:350,000$ FY22-23 200,000$ CDCIP:350,000$ TBRA program FY21-22 200,000$ MAYOR:350,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 200,000$ COUNCIL:350,000$ FY19-20 200,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 1,149,839$ 8 FY23-24 208,757$ REQUEST:233,142$ FY22-23 167,669$ CDCIP:233,142$ TBRA program FY21-22 167,669$ MAYOR:233,142$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 70,000$ COUNCIL:233,142$ FY19-20 70,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 684,095$ Utah Community Action 79.29 NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 73.00 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. 82.14 75.29 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance and/or housing subsidy and/or financing. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 71.86 69.86 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance and/or housing subsidy and/or financing. Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance and/or housing subsidy and/or financing. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 81.86 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 NEW Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Community Development Corporation of Utah Direct aid in the form of grants/loans not to exceed $39,000 each to first- time low to moderate income or LMI home buyers in Salt Lake City for down payment assistance. Direct aid in the form of grants/loans not to exceed $100,000 each to first- time low to moderate income or LMI home buyers in Salt Lake City for down payment assistance. An application was also submitted to CDBG Housing #9 for the same purpose. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Tenant Based Rental Assistance for survivors of domestic violence. Funds will be used to rehabilitate housing intended for those aged 62 and older Salt Lake Valley Habitat for Humanity Funds will be used to provide zero interest mortgages to low to moderate income or LMI residents on newly built homes slated to be completed in 2026 NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Housing Opportunities Inc.; Project Subsidiary of the County Housing Authority First Step House Funds will be used for rehabilitation associated with mold and meth remediation as well as carpet, paint, and sprinkler system located at 434 S 500 E and 426 S 500 E SALT LAKE CITY HOME PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/2025 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/ RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Available to Allocate2,156,661$ APPLICANT/PROJECT NAME# Operational support, direct client rental assistance through Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA). An application was also submitted to HOME-ARPA #5 for the same purpose. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Neighborworks Salt Lake South Valley Sanctuary Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) for eligible clients in The Road Home's Rapid Re-housing Program. An application was also submitted to HOME-ARPA #6 for the same purpose. The Road Home Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 79.71 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 11 9 Volunteers of America, Utah FY23-24 99,732$ REQUEST:174,867$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:174,867$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:174,867$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:174,867$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 99,732$ 10 Salt Lake City Corporation FY23-24 349,076$ REQUEST:400,000$ Salt Lake City Homebuyer Program FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:-$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 349,076$ 11 Salt Lake City Corporation FY23-24 153,550$ REQUEST:153,550$ FY22-23 153,718$ CDCIP:153,550$ FY21-22 984,634$ MAYOR:153,550$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 1,066,667$ COUNCIL:153,550$ FY19-20 939,266$ 5 YR TOTAL 3,297,835$ 15% of HOME Award: $ 153,550.00 12 Salt Lake City Corporation FY23-24 102,366$ REQUEST:102,366$ Program Administration FY22-23 97,486$ CDCIP:102,366$ FY21-22 97,486$ MAYOR:102,366$ FY20-21 95,750$ COUNCIL:102,366$ FY19-20 88,507$ 5 YR TOTAL 481,595$ 10% of HOME Award: $ 102,366 REQUEST:5,487,156$ CDCIP:2,156,661$ MAYOR:2,156,661$ COUNCIL:2,156,661$ ESTIMATED 24-25 GRANT AWARD:1,023,661$ ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME:800,000$ REALLOCATION:333,000$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:2,156,661$ If an increase in funding If a decrease in funding Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97YRC TBRA Program Funds will be used for development activities including acquisition, new construction, and rehabilitation of existing housing. Funds will be used for development activities including acquisition, new construction, and rehabilitation of existing housing. Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) for eligible clients at the Youth Resource Center (Pilot) N/ACombined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 72.00 Housing Programs: Housing development that increases the number of units available for income eligible residents (Acquistion, New Construction). Housing Programs: Housing development that increases the number of units available for income eligible residents (Acquistion, New Construction). APPLICANT/PROJECT NAME Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award for the CHDO Set-Aside. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. CHDO Set Aside; Community Housing Development Organization PROJECT DESCRIPTION REQUEST/ RECOMMENDED MAYOR: FUND AVAILABILITY:AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION: Funding to administer the HOME program (10% of the total HOME allocation). CDCIP Board Recommendation: Fund the agencies at the above Final Funding Recommendation -$ COUNCIL: CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: -$ -$ PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. 80.00 Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 12 Estimated 2024-2025 Funding Available: -$ 1 Housing Connect; County Housing Authority FY23-24 629,102$ REQUEST:762,124$ FY22-23 519,185$ CDCIP 522,223$ Tenant Based Rental Assistance FY21-22 489,332$ MAYOR:522,223$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 510,797$ COUNCIL:522,223$ FY19-20 438,020$ 5 YR TOTAL 2,586,436$ 2 Utah AIDS Foundation FY23-24 75,319$ REQUEST:75,319$ HOPWA Supportive Services FY22-23 70,000$ CDCIP 75,319$ FY21-22 30,000$ MAYOR:75,319$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 30,000$ COUNCIL:75,319$ FY19-20 30,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 235,319$ 3 Utah AIDS Foundation FY23-24 107,600$ REQUEST:107,600$ Mental Health Services FY22-23 100,000$ CDCIP 107,600$ FY21-22 50,000$ MAYOR:107,600$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:107,600$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 257,600$ 4 Utah Community Action FY23-24 172,835$ REQUEST:199,714$ STRMU/PHP/Supportive Services FY22-23 195,736$ CDCIP 199,714$ FY21-22 85,099$ MAYOR:199,714$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 162,044$ COUNCIL:199,714$ FY19-20 127,099$ 5 YR TOTAL 742,813$ 5 Salt Lake City Corporation FY23-24 27,985$ REQUEST:27,985$ Program Administration FY22-23 25,205$ CDCIP 27,985$ FY21-22 18,026$ MAYOR:27,985$ FY20-21 16,003$ COUNCIL:27,985$ FY19-20 14,166$ 5 YR TOTAL 101,385$ 3% of HOPWA Award: $ 27,985 1,172,742$ 932,841$ 932,841$ 932,841$ ESTIMATED 2024-2025 GRANT AWARD: $ 932,841 -$ REALLOCATION:-$ -$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:932,841$ -$ TOTAL MAYOR: APPLICANT/PROJECT NAME# CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: Provides short term rental, mortgage, and/or utilities (STRMU) assistance, permanent housing placement (PHP), and supportive services to persons with HIV/AIDS To provide management, oversight, and monitoring of the HOPWA program. Provides Mental Health Services to persons with HIV/AIDS COUNCIL: REQUEST: CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: 81.57 Behavioral Health: Support programs that provide connection to permanent housing upon exiting behavioral health programs. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 80.29 Housing Programs: Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and end homelessness. 932,841$ SALT LAKE CITY HOPWA PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/2025 Provides Supportive Services to persons with HIV/AIDS PROJECT DESCRIPTION REQUEST/ RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Provides Tenant Based Rental Assistance to households with HIV/AIDS Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 76.88 PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS Available to Allocate 83.00 Housing Programs: Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and end homelessness. Housing Programs: Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and end homelessness. Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award to program administration. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. If a decrease Allocate 3% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. CDCIP Board Recommendation: Fund the agencies at the above Final Funding Recommendation AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION: If an increase FUND AVAILABILITY: COUNCIL: MAYOR: Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 13 Final 2024-2025 Funding Available: -$ 1 Alliance House REQUEST:150,000$ 1805 S Main Street Rebuild CDCIP 97,000$ MAYOR:97,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:97,000$ 2 Asian Association of Utah REQUEST:265,693$ Tenant Based Rental Assistance CDCIP 193,608$ MAYOR:193,608$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:193,608$ 3 First Step House REQUEST:277,200$ Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA)CDCIP 178,000$ MAYOR:178,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:178,000$ 4 Odyssey House Inc REQUEST:300,000$ Transtition to Permanent Housing CDCIP 223,000$ MAYOR:223,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:223,000$ 5 Utah Community Action REQUEST:760,742$ UCA HOME ARPA TBRA CDCIP 466,000$ MAYOR:466,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:466,000$ 6 The Road Home REQUEST:550,000$ Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA)CDCIP 344,000$ MAYOR:344,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:344,000$ 2,303,635$ 1,501,608$ 1,501,608$ 1,501,608$ 2024-2025 GRANT AWARD: $ 1,501,608 -$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE: $ 1,501,608 -$ -$ SALT LAKE CITY HOME-ARPA PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/2025 1,501,608$ Available to Allocate PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/ RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLANAPPLICANT/PROJECT NAME# Provides Tenant-Based Rental Assistance. This program will divert refugee, immigrant, and victims of trafficking (VOT) community members, especially those with language barriers, from potential homelessness situations and into resources provided at AAU, including housing prevention, rehousing, and supportive services Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 81.29 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Not Applicable; One-time federal funding related to the pandemic Provides Tenant Based Rental Assistance to near homeless and individuals with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) An application was also submitted to CDBG Housing #1 for the same project. This application is for short-term rental assistance to the current residents living at the housing structure which will be demolished and rebuilt. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 77.14 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Not Applicable; One-time federal funding related to the pandemic Administration Analysis: HOME-ARP Administration funding was allocated by Council prior to this awarding cycle. Final award amount is known, so no contingencies are necessary. FUND AVAILABILITY:AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION: CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: MAYOR: COUNCIL: TOTAL REQUEST: CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: MAYOR: COUNCIL: 80.00 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 80.00 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Provide TBRA and Security Deposit assistance for elderly individuals or clients with disabilities An application was also submitted to HOME #8 for the same purpose. Provide TBRA and Security Deposit assistance for individuals who are participating in The Road Homes Rapid Re-Housing program and in need of finaicial assistance An application was also submitted to HOME #7 for the same purpose. Not Applicable; One-time federal funding related to the pandemic Not Applicable; One-time federal funding related to the pandemic Provide First and Last Month Rent for those moving out of transitional Housing. The program aims to provide stable housing for clients transitioning into permanent housing after residential treatment and for outpatient clients needing tenant-based rental assistance An application was also submitted to CDBG Public Services #15 for the same purpose. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 78.43 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 80.71 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Provide TBRA and Security Deposit assistance for individuals to provide stablized housing after tranistioning out of a sober living Not Applicable; One-time federal funding related to the pandemic Not Applicable; One-time federal funding related to the pandemic Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 14 Final 2024-2025 Funding Available: 287,752$ 1 REQUEST:280,000$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 280,000$ -$ -$ -$ 2024-2025 GRANT AWARD: $ 287,752 287,752$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:287,752$ 287,752$ 287,752$ CDCIP Board recommends that SLC open an additional competitive application and solicit additional applications for consideration. 59.88 Community Resiliency: Provide ecnomic development support for microenterprise buisness MAYOR: COUNCIL: FUND AVAILABILITY:AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION: Administration Analysis: CDBG-CV Administration funding was allocated by Council prior to this awarding cycle. Final award amount is known, so no contingencies are necessary. WeeCare, Inc. dba Upwards CDCIP Advisory Board Recommendation: Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Boost Program / Business Operations & Optimization Support & Tolls for Child Care Providers Funds will be used to expand ecnomnic opportunites for daycare providers in SLC by training them to use essential tools to make their operations more efficent and supporting hiring new low to moderate income jobs or LMJs An application was also submitted to CDBG Neighborhood Improvements #2 for the same program. Not Applicable; One-time federal funding related to the pandemic SALT LAKE CITY CDBG-CV PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/2025 287,752$ Available to Allocate PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/ RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLANAPPLICANT/PROJECT NAME# CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: MAYOR: COUNCIL: TOTAL REQUEST: CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 15 Grant If MORE Funding Available If LESS Funding Available CDBG Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. ESG Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Do not exeed the 60% Part 1 funding cap. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000. Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Do not exeed the 60% Part 1 funding cap. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000. HOME Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award for the CHDO Set-Aside. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. HOPWA Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award to program administration. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Allocate 3% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. COUNCIL FUNDING CONTINGENCIES Note that there are no funding contingencies for the CDBG-CV or HOME-ARPA one-time federal funding related to the pandemic because these are awards from prior years so the final actual amounts are known. Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 16 Goals Strategies Housing: Provide expanded housing options for all economic and demographic segments of Salt Lake City’s population while diversifying housing stock within neighborhoods 1. Support housing programs that address the needs of aging housing stock through targeted rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within the neighborhoods 2. Support affordable housing development that increases the number and types of units available for qualified residents 3. Support programs that provide access to home ownership 4. Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and/or end homelessness 5. Support programs that provide connection to permanent housing upon exiting behavioral health programs 6. Provide housing and essential supportive services to persons with HIV/AIDS Transportation: Promote accessibility and affordability of multimodal transportation options 1. Within eligible target areas, improve bus stop amenities as a way to encourage the accessibility of public transit and enhance the experience of public transit 2. Within eligible target areas, expand and support the installation of bike racks, stations, and amenities as a way to encourage use of alternative modes of transportation 3. Support access to transportation, prioritizing very low-income and vulnerable populations Community Resiliency: Provide tools to increase economic and/or housing stability 1. Support job training and vocational rehabilitation programs that increase economic mobility 2. Improve visual and physical appearance of deteriorating commercial buildings - limited to CDBG Target Area 3. Provide economic development support for microenterprise businesses 4. Direct financial assistance to for-profit businesses 5. Expand access to early childhood education to set the stage for academic achievement, social development, and change the cycle of poverty 6. Promote digital inclusion through access to digital communication technologies and the internet 7. Provide support for programs that reduce food insecurity for vulnerable population Homeless Services: Expand access to supportive programs that help ensure homelessness is rare, brief and non-reoccurring 1. Expand support for medical and dental care options for those experiencing homelessness 2. Provide support for homeless services including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency Overflow Operations 3. Provide support for programs undertaking outreach services to address the needs of those living an unsheltered life 4. Expand case management support as a way to connect those experiencing homelessness with permanent housing and supportive services Behavioral Health: Provide support for low income and vulnerable populations experiencing behavioral health concerns such as substance abuse disorders and mental health challenges 1. Expand treatment options, counseling support, and case management for those experiencing behavioral health crisis ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Goals and Strategies Note: language in BLUE is additional information added by Council staff Last Updated March 1, 2024 Attachment 2 - FY2025 HUD Grants Funding Log Page 17 Attachment A to Adoption Motion Sheet ATTACHMENT 4 Organizations with Multiple Applications Some organizations submit applications for the same program seeking funding from multiple HUD grants. Others submit applications more narrowly tailored to each HUD grant and for different programs. Organizations with multiple applications are listed alphabetically below. The underlined sentence shows the total funding request and recommended award. The points underneath show the individual applications by grant. $450,000 requested by Alliance House for the same project and recommended to receive $318,000. - CDBG Housing #1 – $300,000 requested to demolish and rebuild their facility with 16 deeply affordable housing units. It’s recommended to receive $221,000. - HOME-ARPA #1 – $150,000 requested and recommended to receive $97,000. $100,000 requested by Catholic Community Services for the Kitchen Academy Program and recommended to receive $60,000. - CDBG Public Services #3 – $50,000 requested for Kitchen Academy program chef trainer. It’s recommended to receive $30,000. - CDBG Public Services #4 – $50,000 requested for Kitchen Academy coordinator. It’s recommended to receive $30,000. $429,800 requested by Community Development Corporation of Utah but not recommended for funding. - CDBG Public Services #7 – $55,000 requested for a housing counseling program but it’s not recommended for funding. - HOME #1 – $374,800 for down payment assistance but not recommended for funding. $2,762,124 requested by the County Housing Authority and recommended to receive $522,223. - HOME #3 – $2 Million requested for rehabilitating City Plaza Apartments but is not recommended for funding. - HOPWA #1 – $762,124 requested for tenant based rental assistance. It’s recommended to receive $522,223. $91,881 requested by Family Promise and recommended to receive $63,000. - ESG Part 1 #1 – $51,881 requested for short-term shelter expenses. It’s recommended to receive $30,000. - ESG Part 2 #1 – $40,000 requested for rental assistance and recommended to receive $33,000. $1,269,200 requested by First Step House and recommended to receive $1,092,500. - CDBG Housing #3 – $302,000 requested for rehabilitation of two residences used in treatment programs. It’s recommended to receive $290,000. - CDBG Public Services #8 – $50,000 requested for employment preparation and placement program. It’s recommended to receive $33,000. - CDBG Public Services #9 – $80,000 requested for peer support services program. It’s recommended to receive $61,500. - ESG Part 1 #2 – $60,000 requested for behavioral health services at the men’s homeless resource center. It’s recommended to receive $30,000. - HOME #2 – $500,000 for remediating residentials units contaminated by mold and/or meth, fire sprinkler system replacements, and minor improvements. It’s recommended to be fully funded. - HOME-ARPA #3 – $277,200 requested for tenant based rental assistance for clients existing sober living facilities. It’s recommended to receive $178,000. $476,572 requested by Friends of Switchpoint but not recommended for funding. - CDBG Public Services #10 – $238,286 requested for case management staff serving the Point At Airport but not recommended for funding. - CDBG Public Services #11 – $238,286 requested for case management staff serving the Point At Fairpark but not recommended for funding. $758,000 requested by NeighborWorks for downpayment assistance and recommended to receive $358,000. - CDBG Housing #9 – $400,000 requested and recommended to receive $358,000. - HOME #5 – $420,000 requested but not recommended for funding. $620,000 requested by Odyssey House and recommended to receive $435,000. - CDBG Housing #5 – $80,000 requested for clinic roof replacement. It’s recommended to be fully funded. - CDBG Public Services #14 – $90,000 requested to provide free bus passes to low and moderate income clients. It’s recommended to receive $47,000. - CDBG Public Services #15 – $150,000 requested for transitional housing assistance. It’s recommended to receive $85,000. - HOME-ARPA #4 – $300,000 requested for rental assistance to tenants exiting transitional housing. It’s recommended to receive $223,000. $3,028,550 requested by Salt Lake City Housing Stability Division and recommended to receive $1,752,550. - CDBG Housing #6 – $240,000 requested to cover the federally required local match so low and moderate income residents can participate in the seismic retrofits program. The advisory board recommended $220,000 of funding and the Mayor does not recommend funding. - CDBG Housing #7 – $850,000 requested for the Home Repair Program (large and small projects). It’s recommended to receive $671,000. - CDBG Housing #8 – $500,000 requested for the Shared Equity Program / Community Land Trust. The advisory Board did not recommend funding while the Mayor recommended $220,000. - CDBG Neighborhood Improvements #1 – $885,000 requested for small business façade improvement program. It’s recommended to receive $708,000. - HOME #10 – $400,000 requested for homebuyer program but is not recommended for funding. - HOME #11 – $153,550 required by HUD to be set aside for Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO). The Council previously gave policy guidance that these funds should be added to the annual RDA affordable housing development NOFA. - Note that program administration costs are not included in this list $361,169 requested by Shelter the Homeless for operational expenses and recommended to receive $60,000. - CDBG Public Services #18 – $132,000 requested for operational expenses at the Miller and King homeless resource centers. It’s recommended to receive $30,000. - ESG Part 1 #3 – $229,169 requested for operational expenses at the Miller and King homeless resource centers. It’s recommended to receive $30,000. $218,431 requested by South Valley Sanctuary and recommended to receive $208,431. - CDBG Public Services #19 – $40,000 requested for domestic violence shelter director. It’s recommended to receive $30,000. - HOME #6 – $178,431 requested for domestic violence survivor rental assistance and recommended to be fully funded. $1,142,936 requested by The Road Home and recommended to receive $787,000. - CDBG Public Services #21 – $101,048 requested for operational expenses at the Miller resource center and recommended to receive $30,000. - CDBG Public Services #22 – $50,000 requested for housing navigation staff working at four homeless resource centers and recommended to receive $30,000. - ESG Part 2 #3 – $91,888 requested for rapid rehousing case managers and recommended to receive $33,000. - HOME #7 – $350,000 requested for tenant based rental assistance and recommended to be fully funded. - HOME-ARPA #6 – $550,000 requested for tenant based rental assistance as part of a rapid rehousing program. It’s recommended to receive $344,000. $182,919 requested by the Utah AIDS Foundation and recommended to be fully funded. - HOPWA #2 – $75,319 for supportive services and recommended to be fully funded. - HOPWA #3 – $107,600 for mental health services and recommended to be fully. $1,346,536 requested by Utah Community Action and recommended to receive $933,224. - ESG Part 2 #2 – $152,938 requested for rapid rehousing and recommended to receive $34,368. - HOME #8 – $233,142 requested for tenant based rental assistance and recommended to be fully funded. - HOPWA #4 – $199,714 requested for housing assistance and supportive services and recommended to be fully funded. - HOME-ARPA #5 – $760,742 requested for tenant based rental assistance to clients that are elderly and/or with disabilities. It’s recommended to receive $466,000. $334,867 requested by Volunteers of America and recommended to receive $234,867. - ESG Part 1 #5 – $60,000 requested for operational expenses at the women’s homeless resource center. It’s recommended to receive $30,000. - ESG Part 1 #6 – $100,000 requested for operational expenses at the youth homeless resource center. It’s recommended to receive $30,000. - HOME #9 – $174,867 requested for tenant based rental assistance and recommended to be fully funded. $560,000 requested by WeeCare for the same program but not recommended for funding. The applications are: - CDBG Neighborhood Improvements #2 – $280,000 requested for childcare provider training but is not recommended for funding. - CDBG-CV – $280,000 requested for childcare provider training but is not recommended for funding. $443,990 requested by YWCA and recommended to receive $221,000. - CDBG Housing #10 – $225,000 for a transitional housing facility roof replacement. It’s recommended to receive $221,000. - CDBG Public Services #27 – $218,990 requested for domestic violence shelter operational expenses but not recommended to receive funding. ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ________________________ Date Received: _________________ Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date sent to Council: _________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: 2/20/2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community and Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: Appropriation Resolution adopting Funding Allocations for the One-Year Annual Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding, Community Development Block Grant CARES Act (CDBG-CV) funding, Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funding, HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funding, HOME Investment Partnerships American Rescue Plan Program (HOME-ARP) funding, and Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) funding for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 and approval of the signing of Grant Agreements between Salt Lake City and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). STAFF CONTACT: Tony Milner, Director, Housing Stability Division 801-535-6168, tony.milner@slcgov.com Dillon Hase, Community Development Grant Supervisor, Housing Stability Division 801-535-6402, dillon.hase@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Resolution RECOMMENDATION: Set a schedule for work sessions and required public hearing, and ultimately approve the included resolution adopting funding allocations for the One-Year Annual Action Plan. This will help the Administration ensure compliance with HUD regulations requiring submission of the 2024- 2025 One-Year Annual Action Plan (also referred to as the Annual Action Plan) by May 15, 2024. BUDGET IMPACT: No impact to City General Fund. Grant funds will be received from HUD for 2024-2025. rachel otto (Feb 21, 2024 12:28 MST)02/21/2024 02/21/2024 Estimated 2024-2025 Funding Available:2,156,661$ FY23-24 213,950$ REQUEST:374,800$ FY22-23 200,000$ CDCIP:-$ Down Payment Assistance FY21-22 200,000$ MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 200,000$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 200,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 1,013,950$ REQUEST:500,000$ CDCIP:500,000$ Recovery Housing Program MAYOR:500,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:-$ REQUEST:2,000,000$ CDCIP:-$ New City Plaza Apartments MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:-$ REQUEST:600,000$ CDCIP:464,305$ Affordable Home Ownership MAYOR:464,305$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:-$ FY23-24 -$ REQUEST:420,000$ FY22-23 208,661$ CDCIP:-$ Down Payment Assistance FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 208,661$ FY23-24 138,431$ REQUEST:178,431$ FY22-23 138,500$ CDCIP:178,431$ DV Survivor Housing Assistance FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:178,431$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 276,931$ FY23-24 349,839$ REQUEST:350,000$ FY22-23 200,000$ CDCIP:350,000$ TBRA program FY21-22 200,000$ MAYOR:350,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 200,000$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 200,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 1,149,839$ FY23-24 208,757$ REQUEST:233,142$ FY22-23 167,669$ CDCIP:233,142$ TBRA program FY21-22 167,669$ MAYOR:233,142$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 70,000$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 70,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 684,095$ Volunteers of America, Utah FY23-24 99,732$ REQUEST:174,867$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:174,867$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:174,867$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 99,732$ Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Neighborworks Salt Lake South Valley Sanctuary Tenant Based Rental Assistance for eligible clients in The Road Home's Rapid Re-housing Program. Tenant Based Rental Assistance for survivors of domestic violence. The Road Home Operational support, direct client rental assistance through Tenant Based Rental Assistance. SALT LAKE CITY HOME PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/2025 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/ RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Available to Allocate2,156,661$ APPLICANT/PROJECT NAME Community Development Corporation of Utah Direct aid in the form of grants/loans not to exceed $39,000 each to first- time LMI home buyers in Salt Lake City for down payment assistance. Direct aid in the form of grants/loans not to exceed $100,000 each to first- time LMI home buyers in Salt Lake City for down payment assistance. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 71.86 69.86 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance and/or housing subsidy and/or financing. Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance and/or housing subsidy and/or financing. First Step House Funds will be used for rehabilitation associated with mold and meth remediation as well as carpet, pain, and sprinkler system located at 434 S 500 E and 426 S 500 E Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 81.86 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. NEW Housing Opportunities Inc.Funds will be used to rehabilitate housing intended for those aged 62 and older Salt Lake Valley Habitat for Humanity Funds will be used to provide zero interest mortgages to LMI residents on newly built homes slated to be completed in 2026 NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 79.71 80.00 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 73.00 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. 82.14 75.29 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance and/or housing subsidy and/or financing. Utah Community Action 79.29 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97YRC TBRA Program Tenant Based Rental Assistance for eligible clients at the Youth Resource Center (Pilot) Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. HOME Page 9 Salt Lake City Corporation FY23-24 349,076$ REQUEST:400,000$ Salt Lake City Homebuyer Program FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:-$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 349,076$ Salt Lake City Corporation FY23-24 153,550$ REQUEST:153,550$ CHDO Set Aside FY22-23 153,718$ CDCIP:153,550$ FY21-22 984,634$ MAYOR:153,550$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 1,066,667$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 939,266$ 5 YR TOTAL 3,297,835$ 15% of HOME Award: $ 153,550.00 Salt Lake City Corporation FY23-24 102,366$ REQUEST:102,366$ Program Administration FY22-23 97,486$ CDCIP:102,366$ FY21-22 97,486$ MAYOR:102,366$ FY20-21 95,750$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 88,507$ 5 YR TOTAL 481,595$ 10% of HOME Award: $ 102,366 REQUEST:5,487,156$ CDCIP:2,156,661$ MAYOR:2,156,661$ COUNCIL:-$ ESTIMATED 24-25 GRANT AWARD:1,023,661$ ESTIMATED PROGRAM INCOME:800,000$ REALLOCATION:333,000$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:2,156,661$ If an increase in funding If a decrease in funding Administration Analysis: MAYOR: FUND AVAILABILITY:AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION: Funding to administer the HOME program (10% of the total HOME allocation). CDCIP Board Recommendation: Fund the agencies at the above Final Funding Recommendation -$ COUNCIL: No additional comments Allocate 10% of the annual HOME award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award for the CHDO Set-Aside. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: 2,156,661$ -$ Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Funds will be used for development activities including acquisition, new construction, and rehabilitation of existing housing. Funds will be used for development activities including acquisition, new construction, and rehabilitation of existing housing. N/ACombined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 72.00 Housing Programs: Housing development that increases the number of units available for income eligible residents (Acquistion, New Construction). Housing Programs: Housing development that increases the number of units available for income eligible residents (Acquistion, New Construction). HOME Page 10 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The City is an entitlement entity and eligible under Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 24, Part 91, et. al., to receive CDBG funds in the estimated amount of $3,397,763, ESG funds in the estimated amount of $303,100, HOME funds in the estimated amount of $1,023,661, and HOPWA funds in the estimated amount of $932,841 from HUD for the 2024-2025 program year. The City’s process for allocating these funds includes a competitive application process followed by a thorough review of applications by the Community Development and Capital Improvement Program (CDCIP) Board, a resident advisory board. The CDCIP Board provides funding recommendations that are forwarded to the Mayor for consideration. The Mayor then provides funding recommendations that are forwarded along with the CDCIP Board’s recommendations to the City Council. To receive and allocate these funds to specific subrecipients, the City Council is required to adopt the Annual Action Plan allocating HUD funds that principally benefit low- to-moderate income (LMI) residents. The Annual Action Plan must align with the Salt Lake City 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan (Consolidated Plan) as adopted by the City Council and approved by HUD. The City Attorney’s Office reviewed the included resolution (Exhibit A: Resolution 2024-2025 Federal Grant Award and One-Year Annual Action Plan, attached with 2024-2025 One-Year Annual Action Plan Funding Recommendations Log) and approves it as to form. In addition to the annual entitlement award amounts, the City will also reallocate recaptured CDBG funds in the amount of $800,000, recaptured HOME funds in the amount of $333,000, and recaptured CDBG-CV funds in the amount of $287,752. The City will also allocate HOME-ARP Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) funds in the amount of $1,501,608. The HOME-ARP Allocation Plan adopted by the City Council on February 21, 2023, and approved by HUD set-aside funds in the amount of $1,501,608 for TBRA activities, $529,979.00 for Administration, and $1,501,608 for Development of Affordable Rental Housing. The $1,501,608 for Development has been included with the RDA’s annual Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) and will be allocated as part of that process. The following table represents the estimated entitlement funding the City will receive for the 2024-2025 program year. As of this date, HUD has not yet published the finalized award amounts. Entitlement Funding Grant Amount Community Development Block Grant $3,397,763 Emergency Solutions Grant $303,100 HOME Investment Partnerships Program $1,023,661 Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS $932,841 Note: This table represents estimated 2024-2025 entitlement funding awards based on the grant award from the previous funding program year. 2024-2025 Entitlement Funding amounts will be updated once HUD issues notification of final funding awards. Estimated 2024-2025 Funding Available: 932,841$ 1 Housing Connect FY23-24 629,102$ REQUEST:762,124$ Tenant Based Rental Assistance FY22-23 519,185$ CDCIP 522,223$ FY21-22 489,332$ MAYOR:522,223$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 510,797$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 438,020$ 5 YR TOTAL 2,586,436$ 2 Utah AIDS Foundation FY23-24 75,319$ REQUEST:75,319$ HOPWA Supportive Services FY22-23 70,000$ CDCIP 75,319$ FY21-22 30,000$ MAYOR:75,319$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 30,000$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 30,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 235,319$ 3 Utah AIDS Foundation FY23-24 107,600$ REQUEST:107,600$ Mental Health Services FY22-23 100,000$ CDCIP 107,600$ FY21-22 50,000$ MAYOR:107,600$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 257,600$ 4 Utah Community Action FY23-24 172,835$ REQUEST:199,714$ STRMU/PHP/Supportive Services FY22-23 195,736$ CDCIP 199,714$ FY21-22 85,099$ MAYOR:199,714$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY20-21 162,044$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 127,099$ 5 YR TOTAL 742,813$ 5 Salt Lake City Corporation FY23-24 27,985$ REQUEST:27,985$ Program Administration FY22-23 25,205$ CDCIP 27,985$ FY21-22 18,026$ MAYOR:27,985$ FY20-21 16,003$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 14,166$ 5 YR TOTAL 101,385$ 3% of HOPWA Award: $ 27,985 1,172,742$ 932,841$ 932,841$ -$ ESTIMATED 2024-2025 GRANT AWARD: $ 932,841 -$ REALLOCATION:-$ -$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:932,841$ 932,841$ If a decrease 932,841$ SALT LAKE CITY HOPWA PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/2025 Provides Supportive Services to persons with HIV/AIDS PROJECT DESCRIPTION REQUEST/ RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Provides Tenant Based Rental Assistance to households with HIV/AIDS Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 76.88 PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS Available to Allocate APPLICANT/PROJECT NAME 83.00 Housing Programs: Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and end homelessness. Housing Programs: Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and end homelessness. FUND AVAILABILITY: TOTAL MAYOR: Provides short term rental, mortgage, and/or utilities assistance, permanent housing placement, and supportive services to persons with HIV/AIDS To provide management, oversight, and monitoring of the HOPWA program. Provides Mental Health Services to persons with HIV/AIDS COUNCIL: REQUEST: CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION: 81.57 Behavioral Health: Support programs that provide connection to permanent housing upon exiting behavioral health programs. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 80.29 Housing Programs: Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and end homelessness. CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: Allocate 3% of the annual HOPWA award to program administration. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. No additional comments COUNCIL: MAYOR: Administration Analysis: Allocate 3% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. CDCIP Board Recommendation: Fund the agencies at the above Final Funding Recommendation If an increase HOPWA Page 11 Final 2024-2025 Funding Available: 1,501,608$ Alliance House REQUEST:150,000$ 1805 S Main Street Rebuild CDCIP 97,000$ MAYOR:97,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:-$ Asian Association of Utah REQUEST:265,693$ Tenant Based Rental Assistance CDCIP 193,608$ MAYOR:193,608$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:-$ First Step House REQUEST:277,200$ Tenant Based Rental Assistance CDCIP 178,000$ MAYOR:178,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:-$ Odyssey House Inc REQUEST:300,000$ Transtition to Permanent Housing CDCIP 223,000$ MAYOR:223,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:-$ Utah Community Action REQUEST:760,742$ UCA HOME ARP TBRA CDCIP 466,000$ MAYOR:466,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:-$ The Road Home REQUEST:550,000$ Tenant Based Rental Assistance CDCIP 344,000$ MAYOR:344,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: COUNCIL:-$ 2,303,635$ 1,501,608$ 1,501,608$ -$ 2024-2025 GRANT AWARD: $ 1,501,608 -$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:1,501,608$ 1,501,608$ 1,501,608$ Provide First and Last Month Rent for those moving out of transitional Housing. The program aims to provide stable housing for clients transitioning into permanent housing after residential treatment and for outpatient clients needing tenant-based rental assistance Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 78.43 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 NEW NEW 80.71 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Provide TBRA and Security Deposit assistance for individuals to provide stablized housing after tranistioning out of a sober living 80.00 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 80.00 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. Provide TBRA and Security Deposit assistance for elderly individuals or clients with disabilities NEW Provide TBRA and Security Deposit assistance for individuals who are participating in The Road Homes Rapid Re-Housing program and in need of finaicial assistance NEW TOTAL REQUEST: CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: MAYOR: COUNCIL: Administration Analysis: HOME-ARP Administration funding was allocated by Council prior to this awarding cycle. Final award amount is known, so no contingencies are necessary. FUND AVAILABILITY:AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION: CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: MAYOR: COUNCIL: Provides Tenant Based Rental Assistance to near homeless and individuals with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 77.14 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. NEW Provides Tenant-Based Rental Assistance. This program will divert refugee, immigrant, and victims of trafficking (VOT) community members, especially those with language barriers, from potential homelessness situations and into resources provided at AAU, including housing prevention, rehousing, and supportive services Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 81.29 Housing Programs: Housing programs that provide applicable rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance. NEW SALT LAKE CITY HOME-ARP PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/2025 1,501,608$ Available to Allocate APPLICANT/PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/ RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Final 2024-2025 Funding Available: 287,752$ REQUEST:280,000$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 280,000$ -$ -$ -$ 2024-2025 GRANT AWARD: $ 287,752 287,752$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:287,752$ 287,752$ 287,752$ CDBG-CV Administration funding was allocated by Council prior to this awarding cycle. Final award amount is known, so no contingencies are necessary. WeeCare, Inc. dba Upwards CDCIP Advisory Board Recommendation: Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Boost Program / Business Operations & Optimization Support & Tolls for Child Care Providers CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: MAYOR: COUNCIL: TOTAL REQUEST: CDCIP ADVISORY BOARD: Funds will be used to expand ecnomnic opportunites for daycare providers in SLC by training them to use essential tools to make their operations more efficent and supporting hiring new LMJ's NEW CDCIP Board recommends that SLC open an additional competitive application and solicit additional applications for consideration. 59.88 Community Resiliency: Provide ecnomic development support for microenterprise buisness SALT LAKE CITY CDBG-CV PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/2025 287,752$ Available to Allocate APPLICANT/PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/ RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN MAYOR: COUNCIL: FUND AVAILABILITY:AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION: Administration Analysis: The following table represents the dollar amounts for funds that have been recaptured from previous program years and are available for reallocation for the 2024-2025 program year. These are funds that were positively identified as available for recapture, because of agreement expiration or project completion, at the end of the most recently closed HUD program year. Any recaptured funds retain the federal requirements, eligibility criteria and limitations of the original federal funding source. Also of note, the 20% Administrative and Planning cap and the 15% Public Services cap for CDBG are both hard tied to the HUD program year and do not carry forward. Therefore, any recaptured CDBG funding may not be allocated to Administration and Planning or Public Services programs, rather they would only be available to use for the Housing and Neighborhood Improvements category as defined within the Consolidated Plan. Reallocated Funding Grant Amount Community Development Block Grant $800,000 HOME Investment Partnerships Program $333,000 CDBG-CV $287,752 In addition to annual entitlement funding and recaptured funding available for reallocation, there is also anticipated Program Income funding that needs to be allocated to projects and activities for the upcoming 2024-2025 program year. The following table represents the estimated dollar amounts for Program Income funding, that will be received during the program year and will be available for allocation. Program Income generated with HUD funding is required to be expended prior to any entitlement funds being drawn down. This means that, as a best practice, the anticipated Program Income should be allocated for programming at the time of annual entitlement funding, to ensure regulatory compliance. Since Program Income funding to be allocated is based on estimates of revenue not yet received, it is often necessary to build in contingencies for increases or decreases in funding. Housing Stability staff can provide guidance to the Council in making such determinations and will work with Finance to ensure compliance with City budget processes. Also of note, CDBG Program Income generated during the program year retains the 20% Administration and Planning cap and the 15% Public Services cap, increasing the funding available to be put towards these categories. While the Administration is not seeking additional Administration and Planning funding, it does present an opportunity for additional funding to be allocated to Public Services activities. Program Income Funding Grant Amount Community Development Block Grant $1,000,000 HOME Investment Partnership Program $800,000 The following table represents the estimated total funding available, including entitlement funding the City will receive for the 2024-2025 program year, the funds that have been recaptured from previous program years now available for reallocation for the 2024-2025 program year, and the Program Income funding estimated to be received during the 2024-2025 program year. The funding recommendations contained within Exhibit A are based on this amount of total funding availability. Total Estimated Funding Grant Amount Community Development Block Grant $5,197,763 Emergency Solutions Grant $303,100 HOME Investment Partnership Program $2,156,661 Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS $932,841 CDBG-CV $287,752 HOME-ARP TBRA $1,501,608 The CDCIP Board (“Board”) reviewed applications for the HUD entitlement programs this year; CDBG, ESG, HOME, and HOPWA, HOME-ARP TBRA, and the CDBG-CV program. After thorough review and scoring the Board made funding recommendations. Given the timing of the Board review and the HUD announcements of final award amounts, the Board used an estimated amount of funding for each grant, based upon the grant awards from the prior federal program year. The Board also included recommended contingencies on projects that should receive increases or decreases of funding if the final allocation amounts were different than amounts estimated at the time of the board meetings. The Board’s recommendations were forwarded to the Mayor for review and consideration. As of the date of this transmittal, HUD has not released the final award amounts for the entitlement grants. The funding amounts for HOME-ARP TBRA and CDBG-CV funding is final, so there were no contingencies provided by the Board. The 2024-2025 One-Year Annual Action Plan Funding Recommendations Log (attached to Exhibit A) for all grants will be attached to the resolution after the City Council has made final funding decisions. • One important item of note, there was only one (1) application for the CDBG-CV funding, however the Board unanimously determined that they would not recommend funding to the applicant, and instead recommended the City open another competitive application process to solicit additional applications. Their reasoning for this was that they did not feel the application would be a good use of public funds due to the for-profit nature of the business, even though technically eligible for CDBG funding, and the national, rather than local, service area of the applicant. Housing Stability is able to open a new competitive application process for the CDBG-CV funds. The timeline to expend all CDBG-CV funds is December 3, 2026. Alternatively, to address impacts of the pandemic in a timelier manner, Housing Stability could reach out to other CDBG program applicants not currently recommended for funding or that are recommended for reduced funding, to determine whether their programs could be tailored to fit within the parameters of the CV funding. Per the adopted Substantial Amendment for the CARES Act funding, the City’s CDBG-CV funds are currently approved for programs that support Housing Stability, Public Services, Small Businesses, Community Stabilization, and Other Covid-related response/recovery. The Council may also remember that there is a 15% Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) set-aside requirement for the annual HOME entitlement award. This CHDO set-aside is included as part of the funding recommendations provided to the Council. A CHDO must fit a certain criterion regarding who serves on their board, the organizational legal status, capacity, and is a private, nonprofit organization. An agency eligible to be qualified as a CHDO must also go through a certification process with the City each year in which they wish to be considered for CHDO set-aside funding. A CHDO set-aside eligible project is one in which there is creation or development of affordable rental or homebuyer housing. Rental assistance, homeowner rehabilitation, and down payment assistance are not eligible expenses under the CHDO set-aside. The Housing Stability Division is now coordinating with the RDA on the inclusion of these funds in the annual RDA NOFA process. As such, the allocation of those funds to specific projects is not included here. PUBLIC PROCESS: From July 2023 through October 2023, Housing Stability staff conducted a number of public engagement activities, including but not limited to, an electronic survey and attendance at a variety of public events to receive input on how federal funding could be prioritized. The survey was offered in English and in Spanish. A total of 340 responses were received. The public was asked to give input on their top priorities of the goals identified in the Consolidated Plan. Priority ranking for each goal of the Consolidated Plan were provided, as follows: • Housing – Build new affordable housing and homeownership for low-income populations. • Homeless Services – Homeless Resources Centers operations and emergency shelter. • Behavioral Health – Treatment, counseling, and case management for behavioral health. • Transportation – Provide transit passes to low-income populations. • Build Community Resiliency – Early childhood education. A General Needs Hearing was also held during a Salt Lake City Council meeting on November 16, 2023, as a required HUD forum to allow the public an opportunity to voice general ideas or concerns regarding community needs. A total of eleven (11) public comments were received and were related to increased affordable housing opportunities, homeless services, mental health services, youth services, and other community needs. The CDCIP Board members were provided results derived from the community engagement process, as well as feedback received during the General Needs Hearing. The Board considered the community feedback on priorities and how they align with the goals of the Consolidated Plan when identifying projects to be recommended for the 2024-2025 program year. The CDBG, CDBG-CV, ESG, HOME, HOME-ARP, and HOPWA applications were reviewed during nine (9) public meetings by the CDCIP Board between October 23, 2023, and January 22, 2024. In- person, small group meetings with applicants, referred to as Nano Sessions, were held on January 8, 2024, preceding a public board meeting. CAN and Housing Stability provided Mayor Mendenhall with the CDCIP Board’s funding recommendations for review on February 5, 2024. The Mayor made one (1) change to the Board’s recommendations, shifting $220,000 in recommended CDBG Housing funding, from the Fix the Bricks Program application to the Shared Equity Program application. The remainder of the Board’s recommendations were accepted by the Mayor. EXHIBIT: A. Resolution 2024-2025 Federal Grant Award and One-Year Annual Action Plan, attached with 2024-2025 One-Year Annual Action Plan Funding Recommendations Log Estimated 2024-2025 Funding Available: 5,197,763$ Category Maximum Allocated Balance 2024-2025 Admin (20%):879,552$ -$ 879,552$ 2024-2025 Public Services (15%):659,664$ -$ 659,664$ 2024-2025 Housing & Neighborhood Improvements:3,858,547$ -$ 3,858,547$ FY23-24 679,552$ REQUEST:679,552$ FY22-23 710,934$ CDCIP:679,552$ FY21-22 701,832$ MAYOR:679,552$ FY20-21 701,833$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 686,791$ 5 YR TOTAL 3,480,942$ REQUEST:679,552$ CDCIP:679,552$ MAYOR:679,552$ COUNCIL:-$ Alliance House Inc.REQUEST:300,000$ CDCIP:221,000$ MAYOR:221,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: ASSIST, Inc. FY23-24 926,766.00$ REQUEST:950,000$ FY22-23 700,000.00$ CDCIP:747,547$ FY21-22 700,000.00$ MAYOR:747,547$ FY20-21 391,373.00$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 391,000.00$ 5 YR TOTAL 3,109,139.00$ First Step House FY23-24 379,703.00$ REQUEST:302,000$ Recovery Residence Rehabilitation FY22-23 322,000.00$ CDCIP:290,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:290,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 701,703.00$ FY23-24 462,389.00$ REQUEST:2,000,000$ FY22-23 300,000.00$ CDCIP:342,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:342,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 762,389.00$ Odyssey House Inc.REQUEST:80,000$ CDCIP:80,000$ MAYOR:80,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. Providing Solar Energy and Green Rehab to LMI Emergency Home Repair & Accessibility and Community Design 1805 S Main Street Rebuild Funds will be used to provide the two connecting facilities with a new roof NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97Lighthouse and Martindale Clinic Roof Replacement APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME International Center for Appropriate and Sustainable Technology (ICAST) PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Supporting salaries, operational, and rehabilitation activities including plumbing, heating & electrical, radon testing/mitigation, roof repair, accessibility ramps, and accessibility design projects, etc. 80.00 REQUEST/RECOMMENDED The funds will be used to demolish and help rebuild 1805 S Main Street to be a 16 deeply affordable and safe housing units Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 69.38 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and di if i th h i t k ithi i hb h d NEW 74.86 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and di if i h h i k i hi i hb h d Funds for critical rehabilitation at 720 Valdez Dr. 411 N Grant St. and 379 N redwood Rd. 69.13 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 73.39 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. ICAST will implement solar PV with or without battery storage systems that include key rehabilitative aspects in multi-unit housing Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 SALT LAKE CITY CDBG PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/25 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN HOUSING FUNDING CAPS AS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL REGULATION APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 15.5% 15.5% 0.0% Funding for salaries and operational expenses to administer and monitor the federal grants, and to conduct the community processes. Funding may be utilized by: Attorney's Office Finance Department H i S bili Di i i CITY ADMINISTRATION Housing Stability Division / Finance / Attorney's Office Note: 20% ($879,552) is the maximum amount allowed CITY ADMINISTRATION TOTAL 15.5% CDBG Page 1 1 RESOLUTION NO.________ OF 2024 A resolution adopting funding allocations for the One-Year Annual Action Plan for 2024-2025 to include U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding, Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funding, HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funding, Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) funding, Community Development Block Grant CARES Act (CDBG-CV) funding, and HOME Investment Partnerships American Rescue Plan Program (HOME-ARP) funding. WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation (City) is eligible under Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 24, Part 91, et. al., to receive HUD CDBG funds in the amount of $3,397,763, ESG funds in the amount of $303,100, HOME funds in the amount of $1,023,661, and HOPWA funds in the amount of $932,841, from HUD for the 2024-2025 program year; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City HOME-ARP Allocation Plan adopted by City Council on February 21, 2023, set-aside $1,501,608 for HOME-ARP Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) activities; and WHEREAS, the City will also reallocate from prior program years recaptured CDBG funds in the amount of $800,000, recaptured HOME funds in the amount of $333,000, and recaptured CDBG-CV funds in the amount of $287,752; and WHEREAS, the City will also allocate CDBG program income in the amount of $1,000,000 and HOME program income in the amount of $800,000; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the people of Salt Lake City that the City file an application with HUD for said funds in accordance with 24 CFR Part 91; and WHEREAS, in order to receive said funds, the City is required to adopt an One-Year Annual Action Plan; and WHEREAS, to develop a One-Year Annual Action Plan, a competitive application process was administered to solicit funding requests from non-profit organizations, community organizations, and internal City departments for projects to be funded; and WHEREAS, the Community Development and Capital Improvement Program Advisory Board and Mayor reviewed applications and made recommendations for funding allocations that were forwarded to the City Council for consideration and approval; and WHEREAS, the public notices, hearings, and other pre-submission requirements as set forth in 24 CFR Part 91 have been accomplished by the City, including but not limited to the following: a public comment period open from March 5, 2024 through April 8, 2024, and a City Council public hearing held on March 5, 2024 to consider the projects to be funded through the 2024-2025 One-Year Annual Action Plan; and 2 WHEREAS, the City Council does now meet on this day of April 9, 2024 to adopt funding allocations for the City’s 2024-2025 One-Year Action Plan for CDBG, ESG, HOME, HOPWA, CDBG-CV, and HOME-ARP funds. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, as follows: 1. That the City hereby adopts funding allocations as set forth in Exhibit “A” to be incorporated into the 2024-2025 One-Year Annual Action Plan for CDBG, ESG, HOME, HOPWA, CDBG-CV, and HOME-ARP funds. 2. That the Mayor, as the official representative of Salt Lake City, or her designee, is hereby authorized to submit to HUD the 2024-2025 One-Year Annual Action Plan for CDBG, ESG, HOME, HOPWA, CDBG-CV, and HOME-ARP funds, together with such additional information and certifications as may be required under 24 CFR Part 91. 3. That the Mayor, as the official representative of Salt Lake City, or her designee, is hereby authorized to sign and execute a grant agreement with HUD (the “HUD Grant Agreement”) regarding the funds described in the 2024-2025 One-Year Annual Action Plan, and any and all subsequent agreements between the City and other public entities resulting from and consistent with the HUD Grant Agreement, subject to final approval as to form by the City Attorney. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of April 9, 2024. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By _____________________________ CHAIR Approved as to form: __________________________ Kimberly Chytraus Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date: ___________________________ ATTEST: _________________________________ City Recorder February 20, 2024 3 CITY RECORDER EXHIBIT “A” 2024-2025 One-Year Annual Action Plan Funding Recommendations Log REQUEST:240,000$ CDCIP:220,000$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY23-24 711,027$ REQUEST:850,000$ FY22-23 500,000$ CDCIP:671,000$ FY21-22 600,000$ MAYOR:671,000$ FY20-21 485,600$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 439,873$ 5 YR TOTAL 2,736,500$ Salt Lake City - Housing Stability Division FY23-24 406,253$ REQUEST:500,000$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:-$ Shared Equity Program FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:220,000$ FY20-21 250,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 656,253$ Neighborworks of Salt Lake FY23-24 406,267$ REQUEST:400,000$ FY22-23 196,837$ CDCIP:358,000$ Home Rehabilitation & Improvement FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:358,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 603,104$ YWCA Utah REQUEST:225,000$ CDCIP:221,000$ MAYOR:221,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: REQUEST:5,847,000$ CDCIP:3,150,547$ MAYOR:3,150,547$ COUNCIL:-$ Salt Lake City - Housing Stability Division FY23-24 925,000$ REQUEST:885,000$ FY22-23 650,000$ CDCIP:708,000$ FY21-22 502,000$ MAYOR:708,000$ FY20-21 425,883$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 319,642$ 5 YR TOTAL 2,822,525$ REQUEST:280,000$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: REQUEST:1,165,000$ CDCIP:708,000$ MAYOR:708,000$ COUNCIL:-$ 13.6% Funds will be used to expand ecnomnic opportunites for daycare providers in SLC by training them to use essential tools to make their operations more efficent and supporting hiring new LMJ's NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 49.00 Boost Program / Business Operations & Optimization Support & Tolls for Child Care Providers Community Resiliency: Provide ecnomic development support for microenterprise buisness APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME Community Land Trust program. Provides low to moderate income homebuyers the opportunity to purchase a home by removing the cost of the land. The resident will purchase the home/land improvements. Salt Lake City retains ownership of the land to ensure future affordability. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS Salt Lake City - Housing Stability Division Funds will be used to provide seismic retrofits to LMI residential homes Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Fix the Bricks NEW Provide grant money to businesses for facade improvements, focusing on small businesses and target areas. 13.6% 0.0% NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS: TRANSPORTATION & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INFASTRUCTURE TOTAL Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 69.83 22.4% Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 69.50 Housing: Support programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance, and/or housing subsidy, d/ fi i70.25 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97Roof Replacement for YWCA Utah's Transitional Housing Facility Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: HOUSING TOTAL 0.00% 112.5% 60.6% 60.6% 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLANREQUEST/RECOMMENDED Community Resiliency: Economic Development efforts via supporting the improvement and visibility of small businesses through façade improvement programs. Funds will be used to replace YWCA Utah's Kathleen Robison Huntsman (KRH) transiontal housing facility's roof NEW 74.29 Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and di if i h h i k i hi i hb h d WeeCare, Inc. dba Upwards Home Repair Program Salt Lake City - Housing Stability Division Salaries and operational support for the Housing Rehabilitation and Target Repair programs that provide home repair services that address health, safety, and structural issues for low income homeowners. NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS: TRANSPORTATION & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INFASTRUCTURE Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP) Housing: Support programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance, and/or housing subsidy, and/or financing. 70.13Program to provide assistance to low to moderate-income (LMI) residents through home rehabilitations and down payments Housing: Support housing programs that address needs of aging housing stock through targeting rehabilitation efforts and diversifying the housing stock within neighborhoods. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 67.67 Housing: Support programs that provide access to home ownership via down payment assistance, and/or housing subsidy, and/or financing. CDBG Page 2 Advantage Services Inc REQUEST:85,000$ CDCIP:63,164$ MAYOR:63,164$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: Boys and Girls Club of SL REQUEST:116,153$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: Catholic Community Services of Utah REQUEST:50,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: Catholic Community Services of Utah REQUEST:50,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: Children's Center Utah FY23-24 30,489$ REQUEST:110,000$ Therapeutic Preschool Program FY22-23 55,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 85,489$ Children's Media Workshop REQUEST:85,000$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: Community Development Corporation of REQUEST:55,000$ Housing Counseling CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: COUNCIL:-$ First Step House FY23-24 30,000$ REQUEST:50,000$ FY22-23 30,299$ CDCIP:33,000$ FY21-22 41,700$ MAYOR:33,000$ FY20-21 47,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 30,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 178,999$ First Step House FY23-24 30,000$ REQUEST:80,000$ FY22-23 30,000$ CDCIP:61,500$ FY21-22 48,000$ MAYOR:61,500$ FY20-21 50,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 38,806$ 5 YR TOTAL 196,806$ Friends of Switchpoint, Inc REQUEST:238,286$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: Provide supportive employment services to high-risk, high-need individuals in our community caught in the cycles of relapse, mental illness, incarceration, homelessness, and unemployment. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 81.00 Funds will provide salary for case management for homeless seniors and veterans aged 55+ located at Point at Airport NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 72.88Airport Permanently Supportive Case Management Program Behavioral Health: Expand treatment options, counseling support, and case management for those experiencing behavioral health crisis. Employment Preparation and Placement (EPP) Program Community Resiliency: Provide job training/vocational training programs targeting low-income and vulnerable populations. Salaries and administrative costs for Peer Support Services (PSS) Program which provides peer-based supportive services, delivered by certified Peer Support Specialists. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 83.13Peer Support Services Behavioral Health: Expand treatment options, counseling support, and case management for those experiencing behavioral health crisis. 80.46 Employment/Lifeskills Coordinator at CCS Kitchen Academy Provide operational costs for the Travel/Well program which provides mapping and safety tools to increase safe pedestrian travel. NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 50.67 Funding would provide salary/benefits for a Employment/Lifeskills Coordinator, who provides classroom and hands-on instruction regarding food safety, health codes, understanding and using equipment, and the preparation of a full-range of foods. NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 80.88 Provide salary and direct operational costs for a housing/homeowner counseling program Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Community Resiliency: Build resiliency by providing tools to increase economic and/or housing stability. Community Resiliency: Provide support for programs that reduce food insecurity for vulnerable population. Community Resiliency: Provide support for programs that reduce food insecurity for vulnerable population. Transportation: Support access to transportation prioritizing very low-income and vulnerable populations 71.38 Travel/Well Schools This program provides treatment for preschool-aged children, who have been the victims of assault or trauma, and who are struggling to succeed in childcare or preschool. Follow up with intensive group therapy to gain resilience and learn essential skills. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 78.75 Community Resiliency: Expand access to early childhood education to set the stage for academic achievement, social development, and change the cycle of poverty. Chef Trainer at CCS Kitchen Academy NEW Provisional Supportive Employment Program NEW APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME Provide paid supportive employment to individuals who are experiencing homelessness, formerly homeless, or staying at the Homeless Resource Centers Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDSPROJECT DESCRIPTION 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN PUBLIC SERVICES REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 81.46 Behavioral Health and build Community Resiliency Program Provide Staff and operation costs for trauma-informed care and services that support their mental and emotional health NEW NEW Funding would provide salary/benefits for a Chef Trainer, who provides classroom and hands-on instruction regarding food safety, health codes, understanding and using equipment, and the preparation of a full-range of foods. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 71.67 Community Resiliency: Provide job training/vocational training programs targeting low-income and vulnerable populations. Behavioral Health: Expand treatment options, counseling support, and case management for those experiencing behavioral health crisis. CDBG Page 3 Friends of Switchpoint, Inc REQUEST:238,286$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: International Rescue Committee FY23-24 30,489$ REQUEST:60,000$ FY22-23 40,000$ CDCIP:-$ FY21-22 54,400$ MAYOR:-$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 44,629$ 5 YR TOTAL 169,518$ Legal Aid Society of Salt Lake FY23-24 30,000$ REQUEST:30,000$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 30,000$ Odyssey House Inc.REQUEST:90,000$ CDCIP:47,000$ MAYOR:47,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: Odyssey House Inc.REQUEST:150,000$ CDCIP:85,000$ MAYOR:85,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY23-24 30,000$ REQUEST:30,000$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:-$ Survivial Services of Refugees FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 30,000$ Salt Lake Donated Dental Services FY23-24 49,692$ REQUEST:55,000$ Community Dental Project FY22-23 42,500$ CDCIP:40,000$ FY21-22 44,400$ MAYOR:40,000$ FY20-21 44,000$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 48,510$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: 5 YR TOTAL 229,102$ Shelter The Homeless FY23-24 -$ REQUEST:132,000$ FY22-23 30,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 30,000$ South Valley Sanctuary FY23-24 30,489$ REQUEST:40,000$ FY22-23 40,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 100,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 30,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 5 YR TOTAL 200,489$ The Inn Between FY23-24 50,776$ REQUEST:100,000$ End of Life Care and Medical Respite FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 45,599$ 5 YR TOTAL 96,375$ The Road Home FY23-24 55,450$ REQUEST:101,048$ Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Operational support for the Gail Miller Resource Center to help with 78 38 Provide salary and benefits to the shelter director to work alongside victim advocates and survivors to provide emergencty shelter and supportive services Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 76.17 76.00 GMRC & GEK Security and Food Community Resiliency: Provide support for programs that reduce food insecurity for vulnerable population 83.92 76.63 Domestic Violence Case Manager and Housing Assistance Homeless Services: Expand case management support as a way to connect those experiencing homelessness with permanent housing and supportive services. Provides homeless individuals who need hospice or other end of life care and temporary medical respite housing for homeless individuals experiencing a medical crisis. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Homeless Services: Provide support for homeless services including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency overflow operations. Salaries, supplies, and lab fees for Community Dental Project, to support homeless and low-income individuals with dental services. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Homeless Services: Expand support for medical and dental care options for those experiencing homelessness Provide security within the GMRC & GEK facilities 24/7 and to provide 2 meals a day to those in the two facilities Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 House Bus Passes Provide financial assistance for LMI clients to move into transitional housing post in-patient treatment and while living in transitional housing Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97Transitional Housing Salt Lake American Language Interpretation Translation and Guidance, Social Service Facilitators, Survival Resources and Services Facilitation of Access to Survival Resources and Services to refugee community Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 69.13 Community Resiliency: Provide support for programs that reduce food insecurity for vulnerable population. Transportation: Support access to transportation prioritizing very low-income and vulnerable populations Housing: Support rent assistance programs to emphasize stable housing as a primary strategy to prevent and end homelessness Funds will facilitate Digital Inclusion staff to support refugee and other new Americans access/learn digital technology skills, critical to improving their economic and housing stability. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 69.25Digital Skills & Education Access to Build Resiliency Refugees and New Americans Community Resiliency: Promote digital inclusion through access to digital communication technologies and the internet. Domestic Violence Victim Assistance Community Resiliency: Build resiliency by providing tools to increase economic and/or housing stability. Funds will provide salary for case management for homeless seniors and veterans aged 55+ Located at Point at Fairpark NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97Fairpark Permanently Supportive Case Management Program Behavioral Health: Expand treatment options, counseling support, and case management for those experiencing behavioral health crisis. 78.75 NEW Provide bus passes to LMI clients and clients in their Harm Reduction Programming Funds will be used for the Domestic Violence Victim Assitance Program to provide free legal representation to victims of domestic violence, regardless of their income. 81.38 72.75 NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 82.13 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 CDBG Page 4 FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 72,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 127,450$ The Road Home The housing navigation staff work at four of the resource centers and FY23-24 50,000$ REQUEST:50,000$ Housing Staffing FY22-23 40,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:Homeless Services: Expand case management support as a way to FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 90,000$ United Way of Salt Lake REQUEST:45,000$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: Utah Legal Services REQUEST:50,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: Wasatch Community Gardens FY23-24 30,489$ REQUEST:39,884$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:-$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:-$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 30,489$ Wasatch Homeless Health Care, Inc. dba Fourth Street Clinic FY23-24 40,456$ REQUEST:97,144$ FY22-23 -$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 -$ 5 YR TOTAL 40,456$ YWCA Utah FY23-24 56,249$ REQUEST:218,990$ FY22-23 37,778$ CDCIP:-$ FY21-22 33,900$ MAYOR:-$ FY20-21 58,285$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: FY19-20 58,285$ 5 YR TOTAL 244,497$ Ruff Haven Crisis Sheltering REQUEST:42,900$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: Provides farm-based employment, work readiness training, job placement assistance, and mentoring for women facing and/or experiencing homelessness. Request for One-time expenses related to farm move including partial soil removal and disposal, Geotextile layer, Importing clean soil, and palletizing and moving supplies. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 72.42Green Team Program Community Resiliency: Provide job training/vocational training programs targeting low-income and vulnerable populations. Address social determinatnes of health including acces to health care and housing stability. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 77.25Health and Housing Transtion Team Community Resiliency: Expand Access to health care and housing stability. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 74.54DV and Residential Services Crisis Sheltering Services for Companion Animals of Homeless Individuals and Families Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 N/AINELIGIBLE Homeless Services: Provide support for homeless services including Homeless Resource Center Operations and Emergency overflow operations. YWCA’s secure, emergency shelter offers 36 onsite and 4 overflow units to victims left homeless due to domestic violence. Provide salary and benefits for essential shelter staffing infrastructure. Poverty Disrupter Project Provide Salary and benefits and direct operational costs to the Poverty Disrupter Project that is aimed to expand employment and finanicial stability for LMI residents Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Behavioral Health: Support programs that provide connection to permanent housing upon exiting behavioral health programs. Community Resiliency: Provide job training/vocational training programs targeting low-income and vulnerable populations. 76.00NEW emergency shelter, clothing, access to showers, support with community resources, and connection to community housing options. 78.38 Utah's Promise: Basic Needs for SLC Residents 68.13Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 NEWProvide customer-centric referral connection services to SLC residents in need that include warm transfers, follow-up services, and client satisfaction surveys. Homeless Resource Centers Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy:Homeless Services: Expand case management support as a way to connect those experiencing homelessness with permanent housing and supportive services. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 77.92 CDBG Page 5 Neighborhood House Association REQUEST:87,387$ CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal & Strategy: REQUEST:2,577,078$ CDCIP:659,664$ MAYOR:659,664$ COUNCIL:-$ FUND REQUEST Housing 5,847,000$ Neighborhood Improvements: Transp & ED 1,165,000$ Public Services 2,577,078$ Administration 679,552$ TOTAL FUNDS REQUESTED:10,268,630$ CDCIP Board Recommendations: Administration Analysis: INELIGIBLE Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 N/AEnhancing Early Childhood Education 75.8% CDCIP: 800,000$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:5,197,763$ FUNDS ALLOCATED MAYOR: PUBLIC SERVICES TOTAL 0.0% TOTALS -$ AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION If an increase in funding: 5,197,763$ CDCIP: Fund the agencies at the above Final Funding Recommendation FUND AVAILABILITY ESTIMATED 24-25 GRANT AWARD:3,397,763$ Reallocated CDBG: 15.0% If a decrease in funding: Estimated Program Income:1,000,000$ Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. Note: 15% is the maximum amount allowed per HUD regulations Allocate 20% of the annual CDBG award to program administration. Allocate 15% of the annual award and 15% of the estimated 2024-25 CDBG Program Income to Public Services. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000 or $10,000. COUNCIL: 5,197,763$ 5,197,763$ COUNCIL: -$ 15.0% MAYOR:-$ CDBG Page 6 -$ Max Allowed for Part 1:181,860$ -$ 303,100$ Family Promise Salt Lake FY23-24 30,408$ REQUEST:51,881$ Community Family Shelter FY22-23 30,247$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: 5 YR TOTAL 60,655$ First Step House FY23-24 40,636$ REQUEST:60,000$ FY22-23 36,248$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 49,250$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 60,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY19-20 50,000$ 5 YR TOTAL 236,134$ Shelter the Homeless REQUEST:229,169$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: Soap2Hope REQUEST:154,000$ CDCIP:30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: Volunteers of America, Utah FY23-24 30,408$ REQUEST:60,000$ FY22-23 65,048$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 30,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 38,000$ FY19-20 -$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: 5 YR TOTAL 163,456$ Volunteers of America, Utah FY23-24 30,408$ REQUEST:100,000$ FY22-23 45,249$ CDCIP:30,000$ FY21-22 44,000$ MAYOR:30,000$ FY20-21 46,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Goal/Strategy: FY19-20 44,115$ 5 YR TOTAL 209,772$ REQUEST:655,050$ 216.12% CDCIP:180,000$ 59.39%Max 60% MAYOR:180,000$ 59.39%Max 60% COUNCIL:-$ 0.00%Max 60% REQUEST:40,000$ CDCIP:33,000$ MAYOR:33,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Objective: Harm Reduction Street Outreach Program Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations *FUNDING FOR PART 1 CANNOT EXCEED $181,860 HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION, RAPID RE-HOUSING, AND HMIS Family Promise Salt Lake Funds will help provide rental assistance to families facing homelessness, security and utility deposits, utility payments, rental application fees, and case management Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 77.75 Prevention and RRH Services Operational and service expenses for the Geraldine E. King Women's Resource Center. Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations NEW The funds will help provide services such as nightly outreach to provide essential care and connect with case management, client referrals to community health partners, prevention/education advocacy for harm reduction, and transportation services such as the UTA bus fare program NEW Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 74.13 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 REQUEST/RECOMMENDEDAPPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME The Funds would be used for the repair and maintenance of the facilities Gerald E King (GEK) and Gail Miller Resource Center (GMRC). As well as supporting the cost of utilities, insurance and the purchase of an estimated 90 bed replacements Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 First Step House will provide on-site behavioral health assessment, referral, and peer support services to individuals at the Men's Homeless Resource Center. STREET OUTREACH AND EMERGENCY SHELTER The FPSL family shelter program utilizes 12 Salt Lake Valley buildings to shelter homeless families. Each shelter location houses 3-4 families at a time for one week at a time. Homeless Resource Center Program Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations 83.25 79.00 Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations 78.25Shelter Operation GMRC &GEK SALT LAKE CITY ESG PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2024/2025 Part 1 Funding: Street Outreach and Emergency Shelter: Part 2 Funding: Homelessness Prevention, RRH, HMIS, and Admin: 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN 2024-2025 Funding Available: PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 77.67Geraldine King Women's Resource Center Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations Operational and essential services of the VOA Youth Resource Center, which serves homeless and at risk teens age 15-22. Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 79.79Homeless Youth Resource Center Homeless Services: Homeless emergency shelter, resource center, or overflow operations STREET OUTREACH AND EMERGENCY SHELTER TOTAL Housing Programs: Rent assistance in the form of rapid NEW ESG Page 7 Salt Lake Community Action dba Utah REQUEST:152,938$ Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: CDCIP:34,368$ Rapid ReHousing (RRH)MAYOR:34,368$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Objective:Housing Programs: Rent assistance in the form of rapid 3 The Road Home FY23-24 34,337$ REQUEST:91,888$ FY22-23 51,816$ CDCIP:33,000$ FY21-22 -$ MAYOR:33,000$ FY20-21 40,765$ COUNCIL:-$ Consolidated Plan Objective: FY19-20 84,077$ 5 YR TOTAL 210,995$ REQUEST:284,826$ CDCIP:100,368$ MAYOR:100,368$ COUNCIL:-$ 1 Salt Lake City Corporation FY23-24 22,732$ REQUEST:22,732$ FY22-23 22,510$ CDCIP:22,732$ FY21-22 22,630$ MAYOR:22,732$ FY20-21 22,446$ COUNCIL:-$ FY19-20 21,843$ 5 YR TOTAL 112,161$ REQUEST:962,608$ CDCIP:303,100$ MAYOR:303,100$ COUNCIL:-$ 962,608$ AVAILABLE TO ALLOCATE: ESTIMATED 24-25 GRANT AWARD:303,100$ CDCIP BOARD:303,100$ -$ REALLOCATION:-$ MAYOR:303,100$ -$ TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE: $ 303,100 COUNCIL:-$ 303,100$ CDCIP Board Recommendation:Fund the agencies at the above Final Funding Recommendation If an increase in funding If a decrease in funding 81.50 No additional comments Administration Analysis: Combined Admin & CDCIP Score: Maximum score: 97 ADMINISTRATION Rapid Re-Housing Program Salary support for case managers in The Road Home’s Rapid Re-housing Program working with participants, combined with short-term rental assistance. HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION, RAPID RE-HOUSING, HMIS, AND ADMINISTRATION 79.38 Housing Programs: Rent assistance in the form of rapid rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance HOMELESS PREVENTION & RAPID REHOUSING & HMIS TOTAL Program Administration AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION:FUNDS ALLOCATED: 7.5% 0.0% 7.5% 7.5% UCA will staff case workers who receive clients from their intake system, assess each client, and provide a case management To provide management, oversight, and monitoring of the ESG program. Administration: 7.5% of ESG allocation. Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Do not exeed the 60% Part 1 funding cap. Add additional funding to the highest scoring applications up to 75% of the average board recommended amount before moving to the next highest scoring application. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000. Allocate 7.5% of the annual ESG award to program administration. Remove funding from the lowest scoring activities and then reduce additional applications from lowest to highest scoring. As much as practicable, round to the nearest $1,000. Requested Funds rehousing, homeless prevention, and housing stabilization assistance NEW ESG Page 8 Item C1 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Jennifer Bruno, Allison Rowland DATE:March 5, 2024 RE:RESOLUTION: UNIVERSITY OF UTAH BASEBALL STADIUM PUBLIC BENEFITS ANALYSIS MOTION 1 – ADOPT I move the Council adopt the resolution •approving the conclusions of the public benefit analysis, finding the lease fee waiver appropriate, and •authorizes the administration to enter into the ground lease with the University on the terms set forth in the Term Sheet MOTION 3 – DEFER I move that the Council defer the item to a future date for action. MOTION 4 – DENY I move that the Council not adopt the resolution. 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: Jennifer Bruno & Allison Rowland Budget & Policy Analysts DATE:March 5, 2024 RE: RESOLUTION: UNIVERSITY OF UTAH BASEBALL STADIUM PUBLIC BENEFITS ANALYSIS ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will be briefed on a public benefit analysis conducted by Salt Lake City that would allow the University of Utah to lease approximately 1.175 acres of City-owned land at a below-market rate and term for 99 years. The land is located at approximately 1735 Sunnyside Avenue and is currently used for a softball field and a multipurpose field at Sunnyside Park. The University requested this lease to facilitate expansion of its baseball playing field to meet National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) requirements. The University has stated that this lease would enable sufficient expansion of the baseball playing field to avoid the need to construct undesirable elements, such as a 35-foot wall between the western boundary of Sunnyside Park and the ballfield. The Administration believes the benefits from an expanded ballpark, which would be available to the public when not in use by the University teams (pending negotiations), combined with a $4.2 million contribution from the University for new amenities at Sunnyside Park, would be sufficient to ensure that the proposed agreement represents an overall benefit for the public. The Administration is recommending that the Council approve the public benefits analysis, as it believes the agreement is in the long-term interest of the City. A public hearing on this item is scheduled for tonight, February 20, 2024. Goal of the briefing: Review the public benefit analysis and, after a public hearing, consider adopting a resolution which would authorize the below-market ground lease rate and term to the University of Utah. Item Schedule: Briefing: February 6, 2024 Public Hearing: February 20 Potential Action: TBD Page | 2 Proposed Leased Area and New University Ballfield Design Page | 3 Note: The above image is a concept rendering used to explore options and make cost estimates. Results from the City’s forthcoming community engagement process may change this design substantially. Page | 4 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND BACKGROUND A.Lease Term. The proposed lease term is $1 per year for a 99-year term. The 2023 fair market value of the property was assessed at $0.68 per square foot, for a total of $434,279. B.The Public Benefits Analysis. 1.Legal Framework. Under Utah Code 10-8-2 (1)(a)(v), after first holding a public hearing, a municipality may “authorize municipal services or other nonmonetary assistance to be provided to a nonprofit entity, whether or not the municipality receives consideration in return.” The University of Utah qualifies as a nonprofit entity. The Council will consider scheduling a public hearing on this potential agreement for February 20, 2024. 2.Public Benefits Identified. The University has already decided to build this new stadium. The only question for the City is whether the benefits of the proposed below-market ground lease of adjacent property outweigh the alternatives, which would include the installation of a 35-foot high wall on University property. The Administration’s Public Benefits Analysis found that such a wall would obstruct existing sight lines in Sunnyside Park that provide natural surveillance and improve park safety. The specific public benefits from allowing the University to build a ballpark with an outfield that would extend onto City-owned property in Sunnyside Park are summarized below. a. A $4.2 million contribution from the University for new amenities at Sunnyside Park (and potentially relocating softball fields). b. Potentially, when not in use by University teams (subject to negotiation): i. allowing the City to program a multi-use field within the future ballpark; ii. allowing City and public access to a portion of the leased acreage, including a proposed berm and other landscape features; and, iii. allowing City and public access to amenities like bathrooms and concessions maintained by the University and located inside the future ballpark. c. Promoting the City’s reasonable goals and objectives as set forth in the SLC Public Lands Master Plan, Reimagine Nature. These include: i. Expanding the amenities in Sunnyside Park to allow it to support more users and uses, including, potentially, additional active programming that brings people out for art, events, programs, recreation, and community. ii. Leveraging resources to make the public space more usable for both the public and the University while preserving the open space and use of Sunnyside Park. iii. Expanding the usable area in Sunnyside Park, provided that the University agrees to allow public access onto portions of the University property for recreational purposes. 3.City Code Relating to Open Space Inventory. Leasing this part of the park property for use as a baseball facility would comply with City Ordinance 2.90.070 (C), since it would continue to be “in accordance with [its] intended use.” For this reason, the lease does not trigger the legal process that includes extended public notice for this proposed disposition of open space. POLICY QUESTIONS Page | 5 1. The Council may wish to discuss options to provide replacement softball fields with lighting, given that the existing fields at Sunnyside are heavily used by recreation-level leagues. a. The Council could discuss potential funding sources with the Administration. The Administration has estimated that if a lighted softball field is constructed on City land, it could cost approximately $1.5 million. There is a cost efficiency in building two ($2.5 million), and additional parking would cost approximately $750,000. b. Vacant City land exists that could host additional softball fields. The Council could also ask Public Lands if there are any other softball fields in its inventory where lights could be added, to ensure users of Sunnyside Park softball fields have access to fields on the same basis as they do currently. The Administration has indicated that they have a submitted a CIP application for additional soccer fields at the RAC, and softball could be added to that project or funded separately. c. Staff note: The original proposal for the Regional Athletic Complex (RAC) included several lighted softball and baseball fields, but these were ultimately not constructed due to cost constraints. d. The Council could ask the Administration if impact fees are eligible to use for enhanced amenities at Sunnyside park, which could free up funds from the University to use towards replacing the softball fields. 2. The Chair of the Yalecrest Community Council submitted a communication to the Council expressing opposition to the proposal (attached). See item B3 above as it relates to the assertion that this action violates 2.90.070 Removal Of Lands From The Open Space Lands Inventory of the City code. 3. The Council may wish to ask the Administration about the timeline for the University’s stadium construction. 4. The Council may wish to ask the Administration how programming and activities are proposed to be managed at the ballpark to minimize impacts on neighboring residential areas and wildlife that use the area. 5. The Council has authorized significant expansion to the Public Lands Department in recent years, both to provide the basic staffing needed by e new department, and to help ensure timely and efficient use of the $85 million bond which was approved by voters in late 2022. Would the Council like to request additional information on how Public Lands could accommodate another large project into its existing queue? 1 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council Members FROM: Tyler Murdock, Deputy Director, Salt Lake City Public Lands Kristin Riker, Director, Salt Lake City Public Lands SUBJECT: Update on University of Utah Proposal to Lease 1.175 Acres of Sunnyside Park DATE: March 4, 2024 This memo provides updates on key considerations regarding the University of Utah’s request to lease 1.175 acres of Sunnyside Park for the construction and operation of a new collegiate baseball stadium and address issues raised in the public hearing. An initial letter was provided to City staff on January 4th from the University outlining the proposed public benefits of the proposal. Administration completed a Public Benefits Analysis (“PBA”), taking into account the benefits outlined by the University along with several additional considerations. Following the formal City Council briefing and subsequent meetings with University officials, City staff have compiled the following updates to several sections of proposed benefits to add clarity and context. An updated design concept drawing of the ballpark and related facilities is attached. Design Elements: The PBA describes how the lease to the University will eliminate the need for a 35-foot wall in the outfield between the ballpark and Sunnyside Park. An additional consideration is that the lease to the University will allow the ballpark building to be offset approximately 20 feet from the Guardsman Way right of way. The design concept drawing contemplates that some improvements such as walkways and footings may be within the offset area. The University’s original proposal did not have any setback, meaning that the ballpark would be directly adjacent to the sidewalk. The 20-foot offset will benefit the use and safety of Guardsman Way. Recreational Access to Ballpark Outfield: The University of Utah initially listed “access to the ballpark for community events” as one of the public benefits, including the use of the ballpark outfield as an additional recreation field during baseball off-season months (Mid-May thru October). However, it has since been clarified that the ballpark facilities and outfield may be rented by the public, and the rental to city residents and recreational groups will be a fee that covers the operational costs, which are not yet determined. While the facility could still be used for reserved community events, the operational cost required for hourly use will likely be prohibitive for public recreational community field reservations. Therefore, the use of the ballpark outfield for public recreational programming should not be considered a 2 public benefit until the operational costs are identified and deemed reasonable for recreational use. Public Access to Shared Facilities: The University initially listed the “designed integration of the ballpark into Sunnyside Park, including added amenities like restrooms and concessions or food trucks with outward accessibility to park patrons” as a public benefit. Concessions will be available to the public only when the facility is paid for and reserved for community events. The University has confirmed that they will construct restrooms within the leased area that will be outward facing and available for public use during park hours, except when the stadium is reserved for University or private events. The restrooms are being constructed at an additional estimated cost of $600,000 to the University. Restroom access may be considered part of a public benefit. Public Access to Leased Area: The leased area is located between the outfield and the park, separated by a fence on each side. During use of the ballpark, the leased area will function as outfield grass seating and landscaped berm. The University has agreed to allow public access to the leased area all the time except during ballfield events. Additional Structures on Leased Area: To preserve the setback along Guardsman Way, the University has planned to construct an indoor baseball hitting practice facility and restrooms on a portion of the leased area. Based on preliminary drawings, the building is expected to be approximately 28 feet tall from the ballfield side and 128 feet wide, however due to the grade change in the leased area, it appears that the facility will sit 16 feet high from the perspective of a park user on the east side of the leased area. The University will allow use of the practice facility by city residents and recreational groups for a fee that covers only operational costs. The University will also construct restrooms adjacent to the practice facility in the leased area that will be open to public except during events in the ballfield. Construction Timeline: The proposed leased area will be publicly available for field reservations until June 30, 2024. The lease will state that the University’s possession begins July 1, 2024. Additionally, there has been some discussion about whether the University contractors could construct the proposed park amenities in connection with the ballfield improvements. We have not yet determined if this is allowable under the City’s procurement code, although it could provide some benefits in both time and cost. If it is determined that the University will construct these amenities, the City will require 4-6 months of public engagement to determine the scope of the park improvements prior to construction design from the University. Alternatively, if the City is responsible for 3 construction, it would follow the typical Capital Improvement schedule, taking all steps that are prudent and reasonable to complete planning, design, and construction within a 3-year time period. The University has requested that the City follow reasonable efforts to install all upgrades in Sunnyside Park within 3 years of the lease agreement. Tree Preservation: The proposed leased area contains four Giant Sequoia trees. It appears the University’s construction of the design concept will impact one or two of the trees. While the University has expressed willingness to explore necessary steps to protect these trees, they have not agreed to their preservation. City staff has initiated a formal tree appraisal. Through an assessment, the city will determine tree condition, species, size, site condition and an approximate appraised value of each tree. It is recommended that the lease agreement should require the University’s best efforts to protect and preserve these trees and will follow the City’s best practices for tree protection zones. If a tree is not preserved on City property, the City typically charges mitigation fees determined by an evaluation and assessment of the tree. The University has stated that any mitigation fees should be charged against the $4.2 million donation. The University could also be required to replace any removed trees. Costs to City: The University is donating $4.2 million to the City as the primary public benefit for the lease, plus is investing an additional estimated $600,000 to construct restrooms that benefit the public using Sunnyside Park. The City will agree to spend $4.2 million on upgrades in Sunnyside Park. The lease to the University will result in the following costs to the City: • Loss of a softball field with lighting: replacement cost is estimated to be $1.5 million. The cost to construct 2 softball fields with lights and the associated parking is estimated to be $3.2 million. o The cost of replacing the lost softball field could be potentially paid for with City funds or the University donation. o The cost of construction of a new softball field and parking could potentially be paid for with City funds, or the University donation. • Loss of one multi-use field: replacement cost is estimated to be $865,000. The replaced multi-use field could potentially be paid for with City funds or the University donation. The leased area has an assessed value of approximately 0.68/square foot, equating to approximately $434,279. The appraised value would be higher. The rent based on the assessed value would be approximately $34,742 for the first year and the City typically applies a 3% annual increase. 4 Land Use Restrictions: City staff has been made aware of some potential land use restrictions on a portion of the leased area arising from the City’s acquisition of the property from the federal government. City staff is researching these potential restrictions and their effect. Proposed Lease Terms: See attached draft term sheet. We appreciate your attention to these matters and look forward to further discussions to ensure the best possible outcome for all parties involved. Please feel free to contact me if you require any additional information or clarification. PROPOSED TERM SHEET (DRAFT – NOT FINAL) 5 Term Sheet Lease to University of Utah –Sunnyside Park Term: 99 years; the parties can mutually agree on an extension. Commencement Date: July 1, 2024 Rent: $1/year Additional Consideration: The University will pay the City $4.2 million for park and recreation improvements, plus construct a restroom that will benefit the public using Sunnyside Park at the estimated cost of $600,000. The City will spend $4.2 million on park improvements at Sunnyside and the University has requested that the City will use reasonable efforts to complete the park improvements within 3 years from the execution of the lease. Use: Recreational fields and related amenities including restrooms and a practice facility, fencing, and landscaping improvements. Easement: The University and City will have a reciprocal access easement on the north side of the ballpark. Operating Conditions: 1. The ballpark (including a multiuse field in the outfield) will be available for rent by the City, city residents, and recreational groups when not in use by the University in accordance with the University’s policies, if the renter covers operation costs for its use. The University anticipates that the ballpark will have year-round availability during non-collegiate use, with high availability between May through August and November, and December, and lower availability at other times of the year. 2. The practice facility will be available for rent by the City, city residents, and recreational groups when not in use by the University in accordance with the University’s policies, if the renter covers operation costs for its use. 3. The restrooms within the leased area will be outward facing and available for public use during park hours, except when the stadium is reserved for University or third-party events. 4. There will be public access to the leased property when ballpark is not in use. PROPOSED TERM SHEET (DRAFT – NOT FINAL) 6 5. The University will use best efforts to protect the 4 existing Grand Sequoia trees on the leased property and will follow the City’s best practices for tree protection zones. There may be a mitigation fee charged for the removal of any trees. 6. The ballpark facility will set back the improvements from Guardsman Way not less than approximately 20 feet from right of way boundary. Lease Conditions: There may be additional conditions or restrictions based on any use restrictions in favor of the federal government. Final terms of the ground lease will be negotiated by the administration on advice from the City Attorney’s office. UPDATED DESIGN CONCEPT DRAWING (NOT FINAL) 7 UPDATED DESIGN CONCEPT DRAWING (NOT FINAL) 8 RESOLUTION NO. _____ OF 2024 (Authorizing Ground Lease Rate and Term to The University of Utah) WHEREAS, the University of Utah (“University”) owns real property adjacent to Sunnyside Park where its practice baseball field is located. The University is designing a new ballpark to serve the University’s baseball program and meet the practice and competition needs of the program (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the University desires to enter into a ground lease from the City a portion consisting of 1.175 acres of the City’s property on 1735 Sunnyside Avenue, Salt Lake City, and designated as Sunnyside Park (the “Leased Area”) to allow the University to expand the outfield of the baseball field to meet National Collegiate Athletics Association requirements; and WHEREAS, the City is willing to grant to the University a ground lease rate for the Leased Area in the amount of $1.00 per year for a term of 99 years (the “Lease Fee Waiver”) as a result of the Analysis so long as the conditions of the ground lease are met as outlined; and WHEREAS, Utah Code Section 10-8-2 (1)(a)(i) allows public entities to provide nonmonetary assistance and waive fees to and for nonprofit entities after a public hearing; and WHEREAS, though Utah Code Section 10-8-2 does not require a study for such waiver or assistance, in this case the Administration voluntarily performed an analysis of the nonmonetary assistance to the nonprofit corporation (the “Analysis”); and WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted a public hearing relating to the foregoing, in satisfaction of the requirements of Utah Code Section 10-8-2; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the Analysis, and has fully considered the conclusions set forth therein, and received comments submitted to the Council in writing and during the public hearing. 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, as follows: 1. The City Council hereby adopts the conclusions set forth in the Analysis, and hereby finds and determines that, for all the reasons set forth in the Analysis, the Lease Fee Waiver is appropriate under these circumstances. 2. The City Council approves the ground lease terms outlined on the attached term sheet (the “Term Sheet”) and hereby authorizes the City administration to negotiate the final terms of the ground lease, including terms included or terms at least as beneficial to the City. 3. The City Council further authorizes the City administration to execute the ground lease and any other relevant documents consistent with this Resolution and incorporating such other terms and agreements as recommended by the City Attorney’s office. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, on _________, 2024. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By: ______________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ____________________________ CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM: Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office By: ___________________________ Kimberly Chytraus, Senior City Attorney 3 Term Sheet Lease to University of Utah –Sunnyside Park Term: 99 years; the parties can mutually agree on an extension. Commencement Date: July 1, 2024 Rent: $1/year Additional Consideration: The University will pay the City $4.2 million for park and recreation improvements, plus construct a restroom benefiting and available to the public using Sunnyside Park at the estimated cost of $600,000. The City will spend $4.2 million on park improvements at Sunnyside Park and acknowledges the City will use reasonable efforts to complete the park improvements within 3 years from the execution of the lease as requested by the University. Use: Recreational fields and related amenities including restrooms and a practice facility, landscaping improvements and fencing. Easement: The University and City will have a reciprocal access easement on the north side of the ballpark. Operating Conditions: 1. The ballpark (including a multiuse field in the outfield) will be available for rent by the City, city residents, and recreational groups when not in use by the University in accordance with the University’s policies, if the renter covers operation costs for its use. The University anticipates that the ballpark will have year-round availability during non-collegiate use, with high availability between May through August and November, and December, and lower availability at other times of the year. 2. The practice facility will be available for rent by the City, city residents, and recreational groups when not in use by the University in accordance with the University’s policies, if the renter covers operation costs for its use. 3. The restrooms within the leased area will be outward facing and available for public use during park hours, except when the stadium is reserved for University or third-party events. 4. There will be public access to the leased property when ballpark is not in use. 5. The University will use best efforts to protect the four existing Grand Sequoia trees on the leased property and will follow the City’s best 4 practices for tree protection zones. A mitigation fee may be charged for the removal of any trees. 6. The ballpark facility will be set back the improvements from Guardsman Way not less than approximately 20 feet from right of way boundary. Lease Conditions: There may be additional conditions or restrictions based on any use restrictions in favor of the federal government. All remaining terms will be negotiated by the administration on advice from the City Attorney’s office. MARY BETH THOMPSON Finance Director ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238 PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455 TEL 801-535-6394 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ________________________ Date Received: ___________ Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date sent to Council: ___________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 23, 2024 Victoria Petro FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer Katherine Lewis, City Attorney SUBJECT: Authorizing a below-market ground lease for the University of Utah for approximately 1.175 acres of Salt Lake City owned property that would allow the University to expand its baseball playing field to meet the NCAA requirements for a competition field. The ground lease will be structured to require a $1.00 per year payment over a 99-year lease term: Public Benefit Analysis under Utah Code Section 10-8-2. SPONSOR: NA STAFF CONTACT: Kimberly Chytraus, City Attorney (801) 535-7685 Kristin Riker, Director of Parks and Public Lands Department Randy Hillier, Policy and Budget Analyst (801) 535-6606, DOCUMENT TYPE: Public Benefits Analysis and Recommendation RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Salt Lake City Council approve a below- market ground lease of 1.175 acres of Salt Lake City owned property at approximately 1735 Sunnyside Avenue to the University of Utah to facilitate the expansion of the University’s baseball playing field to meet NCAA requirements for a competition field. Expanding the property on which the field is built will allow the design to avoid undesirable elements such as the need for a 35-foot wall between the ballfield and the western boundary of Sunnyside Park. Under the proposed ground lease between the City and the University, the City will maintain ownership of the Leased Area. The ground lease will be structured to require a $1.00 per year payment over the 99-year lease term. The ground lease will require that the Leased Area be used solely for recreational and baseball field purposes, with defined access to the public. The 2023 lease value of the City Property is approximately $0.68/square foot, based on the assessed value. Katherine Lewis (Jan 23, 2024 17:25 MST) April Patterson (Jan 23, 2024 18:06 MST) April Patterson rachel otto (Jan 23, 2024 18:22 MST) 01/23/2024 01/23/2024 3 enhanced improvements at Sunnyside Park. In addition to the $4.2 million, park impact fees may be available for additional amenities. The final type of amenities would be determined through a community engagement process. The University Concept Plan illustrates some possible amenities that could be constructed: 1. Increasing the number of multi-use sports fields. The City could increase the number of multi-use sports fields from four fields to five fields (two would be new) and an option to program the outfield of the collegiate field as a possible sixth multi-use field. 2. Providing two new multi-use fields. The two newly constructed multi-use fields could be programmed for 130 days per year with an average of 500 participants/per week playing 28 weeks equates to 13,000 user visits/per year. 3. Three Pickleball Courts. Pickleball use has continued to rapidly increase throughout Salt Lake City. For the past two years there has been a constituent Capital Improvement Project (“CIP”) request to add pickleball courts at Sunnyside Park. 4. Walking path that would increase the perimeter path up to 1.7 miles from 0.8 miles. 5. Additional parking areas. Public Lands also recommends that the ground lease be contingent on securing an agreement with the University that provides for the following benefits to the City’s reasonable satisfaction: 1. Allowing the City to program the multi-use field within the stadium during non-collegiate use. 2. City/public access to a portion of the 1.175 acres for public use during non-collegiate activities. This area would include the proposed berm behind the baseball field and other landscape features. 3. City/public access to amenities such as bathrooms and concessions maintained by the University and located inside of the ballpark for community use. Upon approval of the lease terms, the Administration will negotiate a ground lease with the University that will require these benefits and conditions as well as those required by Council. If the Leased Area ever ceases to be used for the permitted purpose or the University does not provide the required benefits or meet the required conditions, the City will be able to terminate the ground lease. III. Salt Lake City’s Purposes and Enhancing the Quality of Life for Residents. The National Recreation and Park Association has studied the impact of parks and recreational areas on the economy, health, and wellness. It found that physical activity, access to green spaces, and services and programming that promote better health outcomes lead to less reliance on medication, fewer trips to the hospital, and lower healthcare costs. There is significant research that connects parks with positive mental health, resulting from both increased physical 4 activity and being near green space. This may include reductions in stress levels and antisocial behaviors. Parks can promote social cohesion, which is associated with reduced levels of depression, stress, and cardiovascular issues. Parks can also improve air quality, help communities adapt to changes in the climate (including providing shade in areas seeing increased heating), and provide support to disaster planning and social resilience. The Project may effectively expand the size of Sunnyside Park if the University allows public access onto portions of the University property for recreational purposes. Allowing the installation of a 35-foot wall would negatively impact the City Property by obstructing lines of sight that provide natural surveillance, impacting park safety. In addition, the University’s commitment to enhance the amenities at Sunnyside Park increases its usefulness to the public and provides additional recreation facilities. The additional open space and amenities have a positive effect on the community’s physical and mental health. IV. Accomplishing Salt Lake City’s Goals. The Master Plan has five main goals of what the Public Lands Department is aiming to achieve over the next 10-20 years: (1) Sustain: Environmental Health and Sustainability; (2) Connect: Accessible and Connected Green Spaces; (3) Welcome: Active, Authentic and Inclusive Places; (4) Protect: A Commitment to Stewardship; and (5) Grow: Expand our Public Lands System. Support of the Project with the ground lease accomplishes several of the City’s goals and priorities. (3) Welcome: Active, Authentic and Inclusive Places. Ideal parks are actively used by the community, inclusive for all ages, abilities and cultures and strive to be authentic, or reflective of the neighborhood and community’s culture. The Public Lands Department, in alignment with the Mayor’s 2021 citywide vision, is committed to looking at top-down and bottom-up community driven solutions to welcoming more people. Expanding the fields and amenities in Sunnyside Park will allow the City to welcome more people and supports active programming that brings people out to their parks for art, events, programs, recreation, and community. (4) Protect: A Commitment to Stewardship. The Public Lands Department leads the stewardship and care of urban green spaces and seeks out opportunities to partner with advocacy groups and schools to educate on how the public can be stewards of the land. Partnering with the University achieves this goal by leveraging resources to make the public space more usable for both the public and the University while preserving the open space and use of Sunnyside Park. (5) Grow: Expand our Public Lands System. Sunnyside Park could effectively be expanded to meet the goal of increasing the size and access of the City park space. In a fully developed area, it is challenging to increase recreational opportunities as the population grows. The use of the ballpark property will help grow the City’s park system and will provide additional recreational use to the community. Partnering with the University will improve the quality of the amenities offered at Sunnyside Park. In addition, with funds to build new softball fields and a parking lot at the RAC, the Public Lands system will be expanded by up to 7 acres. 5 CONCLUSION The development of the Project by the University incorporating the Leased Area will be a benefit to residents of the City as outlined and conditioned in this memo. Providing a below-market ground lease for the Parcel is an appropriate use of City resources to achieve the City’s goals and enhancing the safety, health, prosperity, moral well-being, peace, order, comfort, or convenience of the residents of Salt Lake City. 6 EX H I B I T A De p i c t i o n o f L e a s e d A r e a ( R e d H a t c h M a r k s ) 7 EX H I B I T B De p i c t i o n o f E x i s t i n g S u n n y s i d e P a r k C o n f i g u r a t i o n 8 Un i v e r s i t y C o n c e p t P l a n The lease would impact an existing city-owned softball field and multi-purpose field located at Sunnyside Park; however, the expanded ballfield could provide certain benefits to the public and users of Sunnyside Park, including field use and access to additional amenities. BUDGET IMPACT: NA BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing RESOLUTION NO. _____ OF 2024 (Authorizing Ground Lease Rate and Term to The University of Utah) WHEREAS, the University of Utah (“University”) owns real property adjacent to Sunnyside Park where its practice baseball field is located. The University is designing a new ballpark to serve the University’s baseball program and meet the practice and competition needs of the program (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the University desires to ground lease from the City a portion consisting of 1.175 acres of the City’s property on 1735 Sunnyside Avenue, Salt Lake City, and designated as Sunnyside Park (the “Leased Area”) to allow the University to expand the outfield of the baseball field to meet National Collegiate Athletics Association requirements; and WHEREAS, the City is willing to grant to the University a ground lease rate for the Leased Area in the amount of $1.00 per year for a term of 99 years, so long as the conditions of the ground lease are met (the “Lease Fee Waiver”); and WHEREAS, Utah Code Section 10-8-2(1)(a)(i) allows public entities to provide nonmonetary assistance and waive fees to and for nonprofit entities after a public hearing; and WHEREAS, though Utah Code Section 10-8-2 does not require a study for such waiver or assistance, in this case the Administration voluntarily performed an analysis of the nonmonetary assistance to the nonprofit corporation (the “Analysis”); and WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted a public hearing relating to the foregoing, in satisfaction of the requirements of Utah Code Section 10-8-2; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the Analysis, and has fully considered the conclusions set forth therein, and all comments made during the public hearing. 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, as follows: 1. The City Council hereby adopts the conclusions set forth in the Analysis, and hereby finds and determines that, for all the reasons set forth in the Analysis, the Lease Fee Waiver is appropriate under these circumstances. 2. The City Council hereby authorizes the City administration to negotiate the ground lease on the conditions set forth in the Analysis, or on more terms beneficial to the City, and execute the ground lease and any other relevant documents consistent with this Resolution and incorporating such other terms and agreements as recommended by the City Attorney’s office. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, on _________, 2024. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By: ______________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ____________________________ CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM: Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office By: ___________________________ Kimberly Chytraus, Senior City Attorney 1 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council Members SUBJECT: Informal Analysis of Public Benefits Provided by The University of Utah Baseball Field Expansion in Exchange for a Below-market Ground Lease of Property DATE: January 23, 2024 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Salt Lake City (the “City”) owns real property located at approximately 1735 Sunnyside Avenue, Salt Lake City, consisting of approximately 27.5 acres and designated as Sunnyside Park (the “City Property”). The University of Utah (the “University”)owns the property adjacent to the City Property to the northwest on Guardsman Way where its practice baseball field is located. The University is designing a new ballpark to serve the University’s baseball program and meet the practice and competition needs of the program by expanding the ballpark outfield (the “Project”). The redesign is necessitated by the loss of access to Smith’s Ballpark, which has been the historic home for University of Utah Baseball. The new ballpark must also meet the National Collegiate Athletics Association requirements for a competition field, which would result in the design incorporating several less desirable elements due to the existing site constraints, including a 35-foot wall between the ballfield and the western boundary of Sunnyside Park and no setback from Guardsman Way. To mitigate the less desirable design elements on the site, the University has requested, and the City administration desires, to ground lease a portion of the City Property to the University to expand the outfield of the baseball field, in the approximate amount of 1.175 acres (the “Leased Area”), depicted on Exhibit A attached hereto. Attached as Exhibit B are (1) a depiction of the current Sunnyside Park layout, and (2) the University’s conceptual plan for the rebuild baseball field and Sunnyside Park amenities (the “University Concept Plan”). The lease would impact an existing softball field and a multi-purpose field at Sunnyside Park. However, the expanded ballfield could provide certain benefits to the public and users of Sunnyside Park, including field use and access to additional amenities. In addition, granting a ground lease would allow the ballpark to have a reasonable non-buildable setback from Guardsman Way and would eliminate the need for the 35-foot wall between the ballfield and the western boundary of Sunnyside Park. LEGAL FRAMEWORK Under Utah law, after first holding a public hearing, a municipality may “authorize municipal services or other nonmonetary assistance to be provided to a nonprofit entity, whether or not the municipality receives consideration in return.” Utah Code §10-8-2(1)(a)(v). Because the University is a nonprofit entity, the City may waive the fair-market rental rates it would ordinarily be required to receive for use of the City Property so long as the municipal legislative body first holds a public hearing regarding the waiver and authorizes the Administration to enter into the ground lease at the below-market lease rate. 2 Utah Code §10-8-2(3) outlines the purposes for which a municipal body may appropriate funds as “for any purpose that, in the judgment of the municipal legislative body, provides for the safety, health, prosperity, moral well-being, peace, order, comfort, or convenience of the inhabitants of the municipality.” The factors that must be considered in determining the propriety of such an appropriation or waiver if made to any type of entity or individual other than a nonprofit entity are set forth under Utah Code §10-8-2(3)(e). Here, it may be helpful to consider the same factors: (1) The specific benefits (including intangible benefits) to be received by the City in return for the arrangement; (2) The City’s purpose in making the appropriation, including an analysis of how the safety, health, prosperity, moral well-being, peace, order, comfort, or convenience of the residents of Salt Lake City will be enhanced; and (3) Whether the appropriation is “necessary and appropriate” to accomplish the reasonable goals and objectives of the City in the area of economic development, job creation, affordable housing, blight elimination, resource center development, job preservation, the preservation of historic structures and property, and any other public purpose (emphasis added). TERMS OF THE GROUND LEASE AND PUBLIC BENEFITS PROVIDED I. Terms of Ground Lease; Costs to the City Under the proposed ground lease between the City and the University, the City will maintain ownership of the Leased Area. The ground lease will be structured to require a $1.00 per year payment over the 99-year lease term. The ground lease will require that the Leased Area be used solely for recreational and baseball field purposes, with defined access to the public. The 2023 lease value of the City Property is approximately $0.68/square foot, based on the assessed value. The assessed fair market value of the Leased Area is $434,279. Impacts to the City include the loss of 1.175 acres of Sunnyside Park. Granting the lease will result in the removal of one existing softball field and one existing multi-use/lacrosse field. However, the net result could be the loss of two softball fields at Sunnyside Park which could be replaced by different park amenities such a multiple multi-use fields and other amenities, depending on the reconfiguration of the fields and amenities selected through a community engagement process. One potential reconfiguration and additional amenities is shown on the University Concept Plan. II. Public Benefits Provided by the Project. The Project will provide certain benefits to the City and promotes the City’s reasonable goals and objectives set forth in the SLC Public Lands Master Plan, “Reimagine Nature,” adopted June 7, 2022 (the “Master Plan”). In exchange for the ground lease of the Leased Area, the University has offered to commit $4.2 million to be used by the City for replacement of impacted park land and amenities and Item C4 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 ADOPTION MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY24 TO: City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke, Sylvia Richards, Allison Rowland, Jennifer Bruno, and Kira Luke DATE: March 5, 2024 RE: Budget Amendment Number Four of FY2024 MOTION 1 – ADOPT REMAINING ITEMS I move that the Council adopt an ordinance amending the Fiscal Year 2024 final budget of Salt Lake City including the employment staffing document and amend the Appointed Pay Plan only for items as shown on the motion sheet. Staff note: Council Members do not need to read the individual items being approved below; they are listed for reference. Item I-1 is no longer needed and therefore not listed below for adoption. A-2: Short-Term Rental Identification Software ($49,000 Ongoing from General Fund Balance) A-4: Liberty Park Greenhouse Stabilization and Entrance Gates ($31,250 from General Fund Balance for Ongoing Greenhouse Operations, $248,015 Reappropriation of Vacancy Savings One-time to CIP for Greenhouse Repairs, and $37,110 Reappropriation of Vacancy Savings One-time to CIP for Entrance Gates) A-5: Public Lands One-Time Budget Reallocation ($558,000 one-time of Vacancy and Attrition Savings; $333,000 to the Fleet Fund and $225,000 to Contract Temporary Labor) A-6: Fire Station 1 Perimeter Fencing ($130,275 one-time from Fire Impact Fees as Excess Capacity Reimbursement to the General Fund and Transfer to CIP Fund) A-8: Police Overtime Ongoing Budget Increase ($1,829,000 from General Fund Balance in FY2024 and Ongoing in future fiscal years) A-11: Replacing Two Traffic Signals Damaged in Accidents ($250,000 one-time from General Fund Balance) A-12: Medical 911 Dispatch Software Change to Improve Response Times ($165,793 one-time from the Emergency 911 Dispatch Fund or E-911 Fund) A-13: Outside Legal Counsel for the City Attorney’s Office ($250,000 one-time from General Fund Balance) D-1: Creating a Planning & Design Division in the Public Lands Department and Reclassifying an FTE to be the Appointed Division Director (Budget Neutral in FY2024 Using Vacancy Savings) Note that if the Council supports item D-1, the related ordinance amendment changing City Code Chapter 2.08.130 would be listed separately on the March 5 formal meeting agenda the same night as the next Budget Amendment #4 adoption vote D-2: Ongoing Landfill Projects Pass-through Revolving Fund for Module 8 ($1 Million One-time in the CIP Fund) D-3: Parking Garage Loan Pass-through Funds for Debt Service Payment on State Infrastructure Bond ($1.1 Million One-time from the General Fund to the Debt Service Fund) G-1: Bloomberg Philanthropies Wake the Great Salt Lake ($1,000,000 from Misc. Grants Fund) G-2: State of Utah Increase Homeless Mitigation Grant ($216,439.66 from Misc. Grants Fund I-2: Housekeeping Move of CDBG Dormant Program Income ($6,133,511 from the Housing Loan Fund to the Grants Fund) MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT I move that the Council 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, Allison Rowland, Jennifer Bruno, Kira Luke DATE: March 5, 2024 RE: Budget Amendment Number 4 of Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 NEW INFORMATION At the February 20 work session, the Council reviewed additional items and passed a straw poll in support of item I-2 to move CDBG dormant program income from the Housing Fund to the Grants Fund to improve federal tracking and compliance reporting. Some Council Members requested that the Administration include new traffic signals, roundabouts, and new roads as part of the ongoing evaluation to update the transportation section of the Impact Fee Facilities Plan which will come to the Council for adoption. The discussion touched on potential policy guidance for these transportation system improvements and ideal annual funding. The Council may revisit this topic as part of the Capital Improvement Program in FY2025. The Council also discussed considering new FTEs in the Police Department vs increasing overtime funding as a topic for the next annual budget. At the formal meeting, the Council closed the public hearing and adopted four time sensitive items that were previously straw polled with unanimous support as summarized in the prior staff report (below). The budget amendment is still open. The Council is scheduled to review the remaining items and potentially vote on March 5. New Attachment 2: Transmittal Amending City Code Chapter 2.08.130 Administrative Organization for the Public Lands Department and Creating a Planning & Design Division The Administration transmitted the ordinance amendment on February 13. It adds to the list of Public Lands Department functions “the division of planning and design” and “management and execution of the planning, design, and construction of public lands capital projects.” This would formally change the structure of the Department. This relates to item D-1 to create a Planning and Design Division in the Public Lands Department and reclassify an existing Planning Manager FTE to be the appointed Division Director at a higher pay grade. If the Council supports item D-1, the ordinance amendment would be listed separately on the March 5 formal meeting agenda the same night as the next Budget Amendment #4 adoption vote. Update for Item I-1 Potential Funding to Buyback Single-family Homes with Right of First Refusal Item I-1 is a placeholder to buyback single family homes where the City has an existing contractual option. The Housing Stability Division shared an update that some of the owners who expressed interest in selling have changed their minds at this time. The existing budget may be enough to cover the one remaining potential buyback. This item could be revisited in Budget Amendment #5 if needed. The Administration is preparing a draft Community Land Trust and first-time homebuyer program policies for the Council’s consideration which could include how to handle buyback options and funding.  Information below was provided to the Council at earlier briefings  Project Timeline: Set Date: February 6, 2024 1st Briefing: February 13, 2024 2nd Briefing & Public Hearing: February 20, 2024 3rd Briefing: March 5, 2024 Potential Action: March 5, and/or March 26, 2024 At the February 13 briefing, the Council discussed and unanimously passed nonbinding straw polls for four items as listed below. The Council is scheduled to continue reviewing proposed items at the February 20 work session briefing. There is a new Council-added item I-2 which the Administration requested after the budget amendment was transmitted. The write-up for A-4 is updated based on new information from the Public Lands Department after the first briefing staff report was published. Four Straw Polls A-1: Air Quality Incentives Program Expansion for Electric Bikes and Indoor Air Purification ($230,000 from Nondepartmental Holding Account and Satisfying Condition on the Funds) - The Council’s straw poll was to approve these funds for FY2024 only as a one-time transfer to the Sustainability Department. The Council also signaled to the Administration that new contracts for the program should not assume ongoing funding for the existing incentive categories. Council Members expressed an interest to review the income-qualified amounts and percentages and continue the department role clarity discussion including how the air quality incentives program can follow that legislative policy guidance. - Council Member Wharton highlighted potential confusion for some residents if the City on one hand is issuing vouchers for non-pedal assisted electronic bikes while on the other hand prohibiting those bikes on certain trails and natural lands. He suggested this information and other rules be provided to program participants at the time of voucher issuance. A-7: Increase in Fleet Maintenance Capacity ($399,909 from General Fund Balance) - The Council’s straw poll was to support early advertising of the three new mechanic FTEs. The hiring of the positions would be after a vote formally approving the funding and updating the staffing document to authorize the positions. - Council Members expressed support for increasing maintenance capacity to avoid greater costs in the future. They also requested that the FY2025 budget reflect how to address the multiple challenges to keep the City’s vehicle fleet well maintained such as continuing supply chain uncertainty, staffing levels, and leasing vs purchasing vehicles. A-9: Mobile Phone Data Extraction Software ($194,540 from the IMS Fund Balance) - The Council’s straw poll is to support this item to avoid likely cost increases. A-10: Versaterm Case Service Software Upgrade ($203,148 from the IMS Fund) - The Council’s straw poll is to support moving ahead with this item to avoid a yearlong delay if funding were unavailable until next fiscal year. - Council Members expressed support for increasing the public’s access and options to file public safety reports. This includes up to 30 languages for verbal communications and up to 60 for texting and form based communications. This is part of a larger streamlining process including an upcoming launch of mySLC later this year. The current mobile app contract is scheduled to end in November and be replaced with the new consolidated system. Updated Write-up Based on New Information from the Public Lands Department A-4: Liberty Park Greenhouse Stabilization and Entrance Gates ($31,250 from General Fund Balance for Ongoing Greenhouse Operations, $248,015 Reappropriation of Vacancy Savings One-time to CIP for Greenhouse Repairs, and $37,110 Reappropriation of Vacancy Savings One-time to CIP for Entrance Gates) There are three separate appropriations proposed in this item. Two are related to the greenhouses in the center of Liberty Park. A recently completed facility condition assessment concluded the greenhouses are significantly deteriorated and damaged. As a result, they are closed and not being used for operations. The original building was constructed in 1902 and multiple additions were added in later decades around the historic house in the center. The facilities are estimated to cover 11,000 square feet. $2 million is a high-level cost estimate to address the multiple issues identified in the assessment. The $37,110 one-time reappropriation of vacancy savings in the Public Lands Department would purchase several gates to control afterhours access to Liberty Park. The gates would be posted at the north and south entrances as well as east and west along the interior vehicle loop. The Historic Landmarks Commission would need to review and approve the gates. The $31,250 from General Fund Balance is partial year funding for ongoing greenhouse operations. These funds could be used for temporary operations such as to rent a mobile temporary office, rent underutilized greenhouse spaces at the University of Utah to continue the native plant program, and pay related utilities. The total annual cost that would need to be included in the FY2025 annual budget is estimated to be $62,500. The $248,015 one-time reappropriation of vacancy savings in the Public Lands Department would be used for urgent repairs to an east bay. The Department and Engineering Division completed a preliminary structural assessment with external architects. The cost estimate for urgent repairs to the east bay is $283,720. The $35,705 gap would be covered by the existing budget in the Public Lands Department. Further structural assessments will determine the extent of necessary repairs and refine cost estimates. A CIP request may be submitted to fund some or all the structural repairs and renovations. I-2: Placeholder for Housekeeping Move of CDBG Dormant Program Income ($6,133,511 from the Housing Loan Fund to the Grants Fund) This includes three separate budgets the Council previously approved and were later approved by HUD as a substantial amendment to the City’s 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan. They are $5.6 million for property acquisition, $250,000 for the small business façade improvement program within the targeted geographic area, and $250,000 for Westside sidewalks. The Administration stated that moving the funds would improve the City auditor’s ability to meet federal single audit compliance requirements. Currently the federal CDBG dollars are comingled with non- federal housing loans. This transfer is a housekeeping item that’s not legally required but is a best practice for government accounting. This also furthers the Council’s goal of enhancing oversight of federal grant programs with the new grants administrator FTE in the Finance Department that was approved in Budget Amendment #3  Information below was provided to the Council at earlier briefings  Budget Amendment Number Four includes 20 proposed amendments, $4,464,748 in revenues and $9,248,709 in expenditures of which $3,860,205 is from General Fund Balance and requesting changes to nine funds. Additionally, the transmittal indicates there is an increase of three FTE’s for the Fleet Fund in A-7 Increase Fleet Maintenance Capacity. Tracking New Ongoing General Fund Costs for the Next Annual Budget (See Attachment 1 at the end of this staff report) The chart of potential new ongoing General Fund costs for the FY2025 annual budget is available as Attachment 1 and included at the end of this document. If all the items are adopted as proposed by the Administration, then the FY2025 annual budget could have $2,253,085 of new ongoing costs. The total new ongoing costs from Budget Amendments 1 through 4 would be $7,452,172. It’s important to note that $3.1 million of that could be covered by the Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation State Grant assuming the Legislature continues to appropriate sufficient funds under the current formula and law. Fund Balance If all the items are adopted as proposed, then General Fund Balance would be projected at 31.73% which is $83,247,761 above the 13% minimum target of ongoing General Fund revenues. It’s important to note that while Fund Balance at this level is healthy the FY2025 annual budget (like the FY2024 annual budget) is anticipated to have a relatively large structural deficit necessitating use of one-time Fund Balance. The latest revenues update from Finance also shows that sales tax revenues are coming in about $3 million below budget. The Administration has requested straw polls for the following items: A-1: Air Quality Incentives Program Expansion for Electric Bikes and Indoor Air Purification ($230,000 from Nondepartmental Holding Account and Satisfying Condition on the Funds), A-7: Increase in Fleet Maintenance Capacity ($399,909 from General Fund Balance) A-9: Mobile Phone Data Extraction Software ($194,540 from the IMS Fund Balance) and A-10: Versaterm Case Service Software Upgrade ($203,148 from the IMS Fund) 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 The Administration indicates that revenues are trending below the initial budget projections. At this time, Finance staff are projecting revenues to remaining consistent with current estimates for the remainder of FY 2024. Consistent with the update provided to Council on January 16, 2024, modifications have been made primarily to Sales Tax, resulting in a decrease of approximately $3 million. 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 #4. Based on those projections the adjusted fund balance is projected to be at 31.73%. 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. The table below 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: Air Quality Incentives Program Expansion for Electric Bikes and Indoor Air Purification ($230,000 from Nondepartmental Holding Account and Satisfying Condition on the Funds) See pages 23 – 29 of the Administration’s transmittal for an overview of the proposed expansion. Note: The Administration has requested a straw poll for part of this item. The new funding is proposed to be split into two parts: $200,000 for e-bike vouchers to approximately 350 residents and $30,000 for indoor air purification to approximately 60 households. The program would partner with five local bike shops to supply the bikes, safety accessories, education, and basic maintenance support. The program would also partner with the City’s Handyman and Home Repair Programs in the Housing Stability Division to provide indoor air purifiers, HVAC filters, air quality monitors, and single burner induction cooktops. The Council approved an Air Quality Incentives Program Coordinator FTE in the annual budget to administer the existing gas-power lawnmower exchange program and the proposed expansion. The table below shows proposed bike voucher amounts based on the applicant’s income and type of bike. If the Council approves program funding, then issuing a request for proposal or RFP would be the next step. The Administration has requested a straw poll on the e-bike portion of the program expansion. Bike Type Standard Voucher Income-Qualified Voucher City and Commuter $400 $1,000 Adaptive $600 $1,200 Cargo & Utility $800 $1,400 In the FY2024 annual budget, the Council put $230,000 into a Nondepartmental holding account for a potential expansion of the City’s air quality incentives program and approved the below condition on the appropriation as part of the budget adoption ordinance. The Council also adopted the below legislative intent identifying the Sustainability Department as priority for a policy discussion on role clarity and updating City Code. The Council could first address the role clarity question, so the outcome informs whether and how to expand the air quality incentives program. In prior discussions, some Council Members expressed interest in more clearly defining the City’s role, avoiding duplication of services between levels of government and local service providers / organizations, and recognizing the competing funding needs of core city services. For example, on one end of the spectrum could be the City directly providing services to residents, on the other end the City convenes and funds existing service providers to administer programs and services, or a hybrid approach between the two. Conditional Appropriation -- Air Quality Incentives Program $230,000 of new ongoing funding for an expanded Air Quality Incentives Program is hereby adopted contingent upon the Administration providing a written proposal of the program policy (such as but not limited to: income- qualification guidelines, prioritization criteria, maximum awards by incentive type, equity considerations, and other details) and Council approval of the program policy and goals. Legislative Intent from the FY2024 Annual Budget Adoption Motion Sheet Department Role Clarity in Ordinance - It is the intent of the Council to ask the Attorney’s Office to propose updates to the City’s code that define and discuss the respective roles of City departments. This review should include, but not be limited to, the Sustainability, Economic Development, and Public Lands Departments. Per Council discussion, Sustainability is the priority. $250,000 Existing Ongoing for Gas-powered Lawnmower Exchange Air Quality Incentives Program The Council previously funded $250,000 annually over three years for a gas-powered lawnmower exchange program in partnership with the State. Residents can choose to participate in the Call 2 Haul program for old gas-powered lawnmowers to be picked up and recycled. The State has ended the residential component of the program to solely focus on commercial landscaping businesses. The City has more flexibility to tailor goals and eligibility by taking on the residential portion of the program. The Sustainability Department plans to broaden eligible incentives beyond lawnmowers to other gas-powered lawn maintenance equipment such as weed whackers, edgers, trimmers, leaf blowers, snowblowers, etc. Policy Questions: ➢Department Role Clarity – The Council may wish to continue the discussion of providing role clarity and how the Air Quality Incentives Program could follow that direction (e.g., City directly provides services to residents, convenes and funds local organizations to administer the program, or hybrid approach). ➢E-bike Programs Provided by Other Entities – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if they have reviewed other e-bike incentive programs offered in the Salt Lake Market to evaluate whether there is greater efficiency partnering with those programs. Staff is aware of a program offered to all Salt Lake County residents by the Utah Clean Air Partnership (UCAIR), as well as Utah Clean Energy (UCE). ➢Types of Air Quality Incentives – Does the Council support the proposed mix of air quality incentives (e.g., e- bikes, indoor air purifiers, and electric yard maintenance equipment) to advance the City’s goals or are different targeted incentives preferred? The Council may also wish to discuss how the expanded Air Quality Incentives Program would balance indoor air quality improvements which benefit the members of the immediate household (and where people spend most of their time) with reducing outdoor air pollution which benefits all residents and visitors in the local airshed. ➢Air Quality Incentives Equity Considerations – The Council may wish to provide policy guidance to the Department for how to prioritize an expanded air quality incentives programs such as outreach to support geographic equity, the proposed income-qualified approach and amounts, limiting a maximum of two vouchers per household, identifying at least half of the funding for low to moderate income households, focusing indoor air quality incentives on neighborhoods with greater levels of pollution and asthma rates, etc. A-2: Short-Term Rental Identification Software ($49,000 Ongoing from General Fund Balance) This budget item would purchase software and training to help the Civil Enforcement Division monitor and enforce violations by short-term rentals that do not comply with City codes. These would include ADUs (Accessory Dwelling Units), as well as apartments, single-family homes, and other structures. The Division worked with IMS and the Innovations Team to identify options for software, but the software costs will be charged to Civil Enforcement as the only entity using it. The software will allow inspectors to identify these properties more quickly and easily, saving time to be used on other priorities. This funding includes $39,000 for the software and $10,000 for training. Two Civil Enforcement positions were added in the last annual budget. A-3: WITHDRAWN A-4: Liberty Park Greenhouse Stabilization and Entrance Gates ($31,250 from General Fund Balance for Ongoing Temporary Greenhouse Operations, $248,015 Reappropriation of Vacancy Savings One-time to CIP for Greenhouse Repairs OR Stay in Operational Budget for Temporary Greenhouses, and $37,110 Reappropriation of Vacancy Savings One- time to CIP for Entrance Gates) There are three separate appropriations proposed in this item. Two are related to the greenhouses in the center of Liberty Park. A recently completed facility condition assessment concluded the greenhouses are significantly deteriorated and damaged. As a result, they are closed and not being used for operations. Parts of the facilities are historic dating back to the late 1930s and possibly earlier. $2 million is a high-level cost estimate to address the multiple issues identified in the assessment. The $37,110 one-time reappropriation of vacancy savings in the Public Lands Department would purchase several gates to control afterhours access to Liberty Park. The gates would be posted at the north and south entrances as well as east and west along the interior vehicle loop. The Historic Landmarks Commission would need to review and approve the gates. The $31,250 from General Fund Balance is partial year funding to rent a mobile temporary office, rent underutilized greenhouse spaces at the University of Utah to continue the native plant program, and pay related utilities. The total annual cost that would need to be included in the FY2025 annual budget is estimated to be $62,500. The $248,015 one-time reappropriation of vacancy savings in the Public Lands Department would be used for temporary greenhouses (“hoop houses”), fencing, access to water, and a new transformer. The Department and Engineering Division are currently working on a structural review of the greenhouses. The review results could change the Department’s recommendation to use these funds for repairs to the east and west greenhouses if possible. At the time of publishing this staff report an update was pending on which option the Administration is recommending (e.g., repairs to the greenhouses vs temporary greenhouses) and clarification of what expenses qualify as capital expenditures in the CIP Fund. A-5: Public Lands One-Time Budget Reallocation ($558,000 one-time of Vacancy and Attrition Savings; $333,000 to the Fleet Fund and $225,000 to Contract Temporary Labor) The Department of Public Lands wishes to reallocate $558,000 from attrition and vacancy savings to other expense categories. Under this proposal, the Department would: - transfer a one-time amount of $333,000 to the Fleet Fund for new equipment, and - reallocate a one-time amount of $225,000 to the operations and maintenance budget to cover contracted services through June 30, 2024. The equipment that Public Lands wishes to purchase includes two wide-area mowers ($133,000 each) and one mini- excavator for irrigation system repairs ($67,000). These would ensure that the regular repairs needed on their current models do not result in unnecessary work delays. At last check, the lag between ordering and delivery of this equipment is around 18 months. The Department would use the remaining $225,000 to contract temporary labor to perform essential maintenance in parks, on medians, and on right of way properties from early spring to June 30, 2024. This additional labor would relieve the excess workloads for existing staff and ensure that new FTEs hired with additional FY24 budget are able to keep pace with Council and public expectations. Most of the FTEs funded in FY24 have been hired or are anticipated to be hired soon, though the Department acknowledges ongoing challenges with recruitment and retention. It is working with the City Human Resources Department to promote hiring through several different initiatives. Public Lands does not anticipate requesting a pay increase for seasonal staff for FY25, which now stands at $17.85 per hour, but notes that the labor market remains highly competitive. A-6: Fire Station 1 Perimeter Fencing ($130,275 one-time from Fire Impact Fees as Excess Capacity Reimbursement to the General Fund and Transfer to CIP Fund) Fire Station 1, at 211 South 500 East, is located on the corner of 500 East and 200 South. It has one driveway that enters the parking lot from 500 E. and another that enters from 200 S. The parking lot is not well lit and is secluded. The location, pedestrian traffic, and access from two directions has led to many issues over the years. - People often cut through the parking lot to get to the businesses on 500 E. - Persons experiencing homelessness have set up camping spots in the parking lot. - When returning to the station at night, crews have seen people running out of the parking lot on multiple - occasions. - Since 2019, SLC PD has opened 14 cases related to issues in the parking lot. Including vehicle theft, prowling, and - property theft. - Since 2018, SLC PD has responded to 45 calls at the station that were not made into active cases. It is the Salt Lake City Fire Department’s priority to provide a safe area to conduct emergency response and for our employees to park and secure their private property while on shift. The department believes that a gated fence to the parking lot would assist in creating a safer area to conduct emergency responses and in preventing crime. The Facilities Division has received estimates for installation of security fencing at the perimeter of Fire Station 1. This will include chain link at the rear perimeter and ornamental fencing and gates at the front of the station and two access points. Fire impact fees excess capacity is proposed to be utilized for this request. This project would be combined with the Fire Station #1 Apparatus Bay Extension project that was fully funded in FY2024 CIP. Combing the projects might result in less disruption to the neighborhood and potential cost savings. A-7: Increase in Fleet Maintenance Capacity ($399,909 from General Fund Balance) The Administration is requesting three (3) new FTE mechanics and additional funding to address immediate Fleet maintenance needs. As identified in the transmittal, due to significant changes in the automotive industry during the Pandemic, costs and delivery times for parts and vehicles have increased and some orders have been cancelled, resulting in an older fleet requiring more maintenance. Fleet mechanics have been offered overtime to work longer shifts. More vehicles have been sent to outside vendors for maintenance, and Fleet has used 73% of its maintenance budget in the first six months of the fiscal year. As a result of these factors, the Administration indicates Fleet is unable to keep up with the recent growth of departments and the corresponding increase of Fleet vehicles for new employees. The full cost of a new mechanic position is $104,195 each or $312,585 annually for three new FTEs. To add the 3 new mechanics at this time, Fleet would need the following: 3 FTE Fleet Mechanics (last 3 months FY23-24) $91,809 Education & Training – one-time $42,100 IMS Expense (software, hardware) one-time $9,000 Outside Repair – Mechanical (sublet) one-time $257,000 Total Costs to General Fund for FY2024 $399,909 Fleet indicated that they previously requested one-time budget adjustments to supplement sublet costs and has limited the number of vehicles sent out to external vendors. This has caused increased wait times for vehicle repairs which will continue to increase if Fleet is unable to add capacity, either with internal or external resources. Additionally, preventative maintenance may be delayed as repairs are prioritized, potentially causing a ripple effect on fleet vehicles by deteriorating faster and needing more intensive repairs soon. Council staff asked if costs for outside vendor vehicle repairs are typically greater than hiring more mechanic FTEs. Fleet indicated that to increase Fleet capacity to the same levels as the 3 FTEs would produce, Fleet would need $650,000 to pay for outside repairs. Fleet further indicated their total annual budget (FY24) for outside vendor vehicle repairs is $1,197,688 which was increased by 10% from FY23 to keep up with inflation. A-8: Police Overtime Ongoing Budget Increase ($1,829,000 from General Fund Balance in FY2024 and Ongoing in future fiscal years) This item would double the annual ongoing overtime budget for the Police Department from $1,814,784 to $3,643,784. This fiscal year, most of the funds would be used for “mitigation officers” which the Administration states would focus on reducing illegal camping, park safety, and the Downtown Safety Initiative. The Department stated the increasing volume of calls for service related to mitigation services has required increasing use of overtime this fiscal year. In particular, overtime needs increased from calls related to the temporary sanctioned campground and from the County Health Department requests for enhanced mitigation impact clean ups. As of late January, the actual overtime expenses for the Police Department were nearly $2.8 million which exceeds the $1,814,784 overtime budget line item. Vacancy savings are often used to cover overtime shifts. The Police Department has over $7 million of unused budget lapse to General Fund Balance at the end of FY2023. The Department does not anticipate a similarly large amount of unused budget at the end of FY2024 because of increasing overtime and progress to reach full staffing of both sworn and civilian positions. In Budget Amendment #3, the Council recently approved $500,000 for police officer overtime related to the temporary sanctioned campground using ARPA funds that were budgeted but not spent in prior fiscal years. Progress to Reach Full Staffing The Department reports a high officer participation rate in the retention and hiring bonuses program where an $8,500 bonus is provided in exchange for a two-year employment commitment. As of February 6, there were 21 vacant sworn officer positions and 11 vacant civilian positions. Three lateral police officer hires and seven civilian hires are in process. A new hire academy is planned in May. Upcoming Requests for New Police Officer FTEs The Department states requests for new police officer FTEs are being planned. An application to the Homeless Shelter Cities Mitigation State Grant is planned for a new squad dedicated to calls for service related to the permanent micro shelter community at approximately 750 West and 550 South. The squad would include one sergeant and five regular police officers. This would be like the two squads dedicated to the Miller and King Homeless Resource Centers. The same state grant currently pays for 17.5 FTEs including the two squads. It’s important to note that the annual grant award is subject to appropriations by the Legislature. Policy Questions: ➢Alternative Response Programs and Mitigation Officers – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration how mitigation officer overtime fits into the City’s diversified public safety response approach (police civilian response team, community health access team or CHAT, park rangers, street ambassadors, partnership with mobile crisis outreach teams or MCOT, rapid intervention team). Over the past few years, the Council has significantly expanded these alternative response programs so police officers can focus on more serious crimes. ➢Available Vacancy Savings to Cover Overtime – The Council may wish to ask the Administration when Workday entries will be completed so budget to actual reporting and available vacancy savings can be shared. Vacancy savings could be used to fund some overtime this fiscal year instead of General Fund Balance. ➢Overtime Budget Increases vs New FTEs – The Council may wish to ask the Administration to evaluate when increasing FTEs (civilian and sworn officers) makes sense vs increasing the ongoing overtime budget. Overtime hourly wages cost the City more than regular hourly rates. ➢Metrics on Mitigation Calls for Service – The Council may wish to ask the Administration to provide metrics on mitigation calls for services including how these needs have changed, where they are occurring, and diverting calls to alternative response programs. A-9: Mobile Phone Data Extraction Software ($194,540 from the IMS Fund Balance) Note: The Administration has requested a straw poll for this item. This budget request addresses the outdated and inefficient process of mobile phone data extraction used by various departments. Currently, investigations incur staff time costs of $3,000-$6,000 per case, with additional expenses for training and forensics-grade computers. Currently, the Police Department, Fire Department, and Human Resources all require the ability to extract data during investigations. The existing practice has been put together to meet short-term needs and relies on the availability of individual staff and more powerful computers than would typically be needed by the positions who conduct investigations. The recommended solutions standardize the data extraction process and make the software available to all positions who do investigative work. IMS reports that the recommended solution also provides better security for the personal data extracted. The software is intended to be more compatible with what’s used by other law enforcement and judicial partners, like the District Attorney’s Office, which enables the City to work more securely and collaboratively when sharing information. A-10 -Versaterm Case Service Software Upgrade ($203,148 from the IMS Fund Balance) Note: The Administration has requested a straw poll for this item This request is for an improved case service solution for the Police Department, replacing the current Coplogic online reporting system. The FY2024 budget included $48,954 for a new case service program, but implementation couldn't begin until after case management was moved to the cloud. Since the original quote, the vendor has added more features and improvements to the software, resulting in the $203,148 cost. Since the new features include enhancements that will be beneficial to multiple departments, like Dispatch and Fire, the general fund will see a reduction of $48,954 while the full cost will be allocated from IMS Fund Balance. Enhancements include public availability in multiple languages, and a phone tree to better direct calls to the non-emergency line. This software provides the public with options to report an issue via phone, app, or web browser, as opposed to the existing solution that was only available online. The Department has requested a straw poll for this item. The vendor currently has a yearlong waitlist but based on Salt Lake City’s prior relationship and commitment to the software, is willing to begin implementation this fiscal year if funds are committed. A-11: Replacing Two Traffic Signals Damaged in Accidents ($250,000 one-time from General Fund Balance) Traffic signals at two separate intersections in the City have been damaged by non-city vehicles. (Gladiola and California signals were damaged by a semi-truck roll over; 200 West 100 South signals were damaged by a grade-all forklift hitting the mast arm and spinning the pole foundation.) The damage is severe enough that they cannot be repaired by our inhouse technicians. Street’s staff has obtained quotes for the repairs needed from our contracted vendor. This work will ultimately be paid for by the insurance companies of the outside entities who caused the damage. However, Risk has informed us that best practice is for the repairs to be managed by the City, and then to be reimbursed by the insurance companies. This will ensure the City receives full compensation for the damages as the total cost will only be known after the work is complete. Public Services does not have sufficient funding in our budget to cover the cost of repairs. No long- term impact to the general fund is expected as, once the work is completed, Risk will seek reimbursement from the insurance companies, and the money will go back to the general fund. The timing of this reimbursement is unknown and may not be in the same fiscal year as the expenditures are incurred. This request is for $250,000 which includes a 10% contingency on the quotes that we have received. This is a replacement only - no design necessary; no upgrade and no addition to be made and is not a CIP project. A-12: Medical 911 Dispatch Software Change to Improve Response Times ($165,793 one-time from the Emergency 911 Dispatch Fund or E-911 Fund) The 911 Department is requesting one-time funds to change the medical dispatch protocol equipment and processes which is expected to improve response times. It’s important to note that on an annual basis the Department already exceeds the industry best practice for 90% of 911 calls to be answered within 10 seconds. This software change is expected to improve the time a call is in queue waiting for sufficient information before it can be dispatched. The Association of Public-safety Communications Officials or APCO IntelliComm EMD Protocol is used by the Valley Emergency Communications Center or VECC. The City’s 911 Department and VECC already use the same computer aided dispatch or CAD systems but do not use the same medical protocol. This item would further integrate a more seamless handoff between the agencies when a call for service needs to be transferred. The CAD system can only use one medical protocol. This means that a dispatch must take additional time to change a call to fit the parameters in each dispatch center’s medical protocol before help can be dispatched. The 911 Department and VECC are responsible for providing emergency dispatch services in the Salt Lake Valley. The Utah Legislature directed the Utah Communications Authority to help create a “unified statewide 911 emergency services network” and “coordinate the development of an interoperable computer aided dispatch platform.” This item would advance this state goal. This item is also a follow up to findings from a 2019 performance audit of the 911 Department that recommended continued use of standardized script-based software but noted the current medical dispatch ProQA software scored poorly on public safety service provider feedback assessments. The E-911 Fund revenues come from a 911 excise tax paid on phone bills. The E-911 Fund has its own Fund Balance (savings account) that ended FY2023 with approximately $5.2 million. This fund has provided several software and hardware upgrades for the Department in recent years. A-13: Outside Legal Counsel for the City Attorney’s Office ($250,000 one-time from General Fund Balance) This is a request from the City Attorney’s Office for a one-time appropriation of $250,000 from General Fund Balance to hire outside counsel to handle items where the Attorney’s Office needs additional or specialized expertise or where the Attorney’s Office is recused. Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources (None) Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources (None) Section D: Housekeeping D-1: Creating a Planning & Design Division in the Public Lands Department and Reclassifying an FTE to be the Appointed Division Director (Budget Neutral in FY2024 Using Vacancy Savings) This is a follow up from Budget Amendment #2 when the request was originally proposed. In that budget opening, the Council transferred four existing landscape architects from the Engineering Division in the Public Services Department to the Public Lands Department and increased the pay grade to 34 for the existing Planning Manager merit position. The Department is requesting approval for the remaining part of the proposal to create a new division called the Planning and Design Division and convert the Planning Manager position to be an appointed division director position at pay grade 35. Vacancy savings would be used to cover the increased compensation for the new division director for the remainder of FY2024. The next annual budget would need to include $12,113 ongoing for the position. This item would also amend the Appointed Pay Plan to add the new division director. The new division would include the new appointed director, four landscape architects transferred in Budget Amendment #2 (one Senior Landscape Architect (Grade 34), two Landscape Architect IIIs (Grade 30), and one Landscape Architect II (Grade 27)), and two project managers currently in the Public Lands Department. The Attorney's Office is working on an amendment to City Code Chapter 2.08 Administrative Organization that is expected later this year. It would update the sections for Public Lands and Public Services to reflect the responsibilities being transferred along with the FTEs. It’s part of a larger update that the Attorney’s Office is already working on for the Chapter. A legal best practice is for divisions and associated responsibilities is to be listed by department in this section of City Code. D-2: Ongoing Landfill Projects Pass-through Revolving Fund for Module 8 ($1 Million One-time in the CIP Fund) The landfill unallocated CIP account has been receiving revolving funds for various ongoing landfill projects. The funds placed in the account are applied to individual projects and then reimbursed to the General Fund. Module 8 is the next step in the series of landfill modules where refuse will be placed. It is needed to continue the expansion of the landfill to accommodate ongoing growth. Module 8 is approximately 40 acres and has a clay liner and HDPE welded liner underneath to protect the groundwater from the landfill leachate. There have been change orders to Module 8 that require the fund to be replenished. This reimbursable fund also needs to be in place for current and future projects on a revolving basis. Public Services’ Engineering Finance bills the County after services are provided. This is a pass-through cost that used to reside under Waste and Recycling but has since been moved to Engineering. Since Engineering oversees the improvements, it was determined that Public Services should process the pass-through costs as well. D-3: Parking Garage Loan Pass-through Funds for Debt Service Payment on State Infrastructure Bond ($1.1 Million One-time from the General Fund to the Debt Service Fund) This is a housekeeping item related to the State Infrastructure Bond repayment. This item is to transfer the $1.1M received from the State to the Debt Service Fund, to support the approximate $7 million State Infrastructure Bond for the construction of a parking garage. Section E: Grants Requiring No Staff Resources E-1: WITHDRAWN Section F: Donations (None) Section G: Grant Consent Agenda G-1: Bloomberg Philanthropies Wake the Great Salt Lake ($1,000,000 from Misc. Grants Fund) Salt Lake City applied for a grant with Bloomberg Philanthropies. The grant aims to educate and inspire residents and visitors to identify possible solutions and take action locally and nationally. Public art projects will be structured around major themes such as water conservation, air quality, agriculture, industry, environmental and social justice, including indigenous rights and lake ecology. Salt Lake City's proposed project consists of 1) a series of 3-5 significant artworks created by world-renowned artists across the city. These artists will be selected to leverage their notoriety and practice while bringing awareness to our civic issues. 2) a series of temporary public art projects by local and regional artists and organizations in various disciplines, including but not limited to performers, sculptors, painters, muralists, printmakers, filmmakers, poets, new media, etc. By commissioning our local community of artists to create context and site-specific artworks about the Great Salt Lake, our local community will be able to reflect on this crisis in new and compelling ways. Bloomberg Philanthropies is awarding the City $1,000,000 to fund the two-year public art project, Wake the Great Salt Lake. Salt Lake City will be providing a match of $1,060,000 with in-kind staff time and other grant funding. A public hearing was held on April 18, 2023. G-2: State of Utah Increase Homeless Mitigation Grant ($216,439.66 from Misc. Grants Fund The State has given the City an increase for the Homeless Mitigation grant. As a reminder, the City was awarded $3,107,201 for FY 2024. This award was for 1) Public Safety staff, program supplies, equipment, and vehicle maintenance, 2) Two sub-awards for Volunteers of America and Downtown Alliance, and 3) two HEART Coordinators, a Case Manager, half the salary of a grant’s person along with training, travel, and program supplies. Due to the City hosting overflow beds, the City will receive additional funds for FY 24. In total, the City will receive $650,000. Two-thirds of that funding will go directly to shelter providers. The City will retain $216,439.66, which is required to be put toward public safety. This money will be used for PD overtime in the Rio Grande area around the new Temporary Shelter Community. The original grant was approved as part of Budget Amendment No. 2 on 10/17/23. Section I: Council-Added Items I-1: Placeholder for Potential Funding to Buyback Single-family Homes with Right of First Refusal ($TBD) This is a placeholder item pending upcoming information about the potential to buyback properties in the City’s first-time homebuyer program and possibly adding them to the Community Land Trust. ATTACHMENTS 1. Potential New Ongoing General Fund Costs Approved in Midyear Budget Amendments (Chart) 2. Transmittal Amending City Code Chapter 2.08 Administrative Organization for the Public Lands Department and Creating a Planning & Design Division ACRONYMS ADU – Accessory Dwelling Unit APCO International – Provides Emergency Medical Dispatch BA – Budget Amendment CAD – Computer Aided Design CAN – Department of Community and Neighborhoods CIP – Capital Improvement Program Fund E-Bike – Electric Bike EMD – Emergency Medical Dispatch FTE – Full Time Employee FY – Fiscal Year FOF – Funding Our Future GF – General Fund HDPE – High Density Polyethylene HVAC – Heating, Ventilation & Air Conditioning IMS – Information Management Services Misc. – Miscellaneous RMS – Records Management System RDA – Redevelopment Agency RFP – Request For Proposal SAA – Special Assessment Area TBD – To Be Determined VECC – Valley Emergency Communications Center ATTACHMENT 1 Council Request: Tracking New Ongoing General Fund Costs Approved in Midyear Budget Amendments Council staff has provided the following list of potential 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 costs 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 $12,113 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. Returned as item D-1 in Budget Amendment #4 #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. #3 A-1: Fire Department (4 New FTEs)$292,638 4 New Medical Response Paramedic FTEs Annual cost; this assumes the Fire Department requests two new entry level firefighters to replace the two that were converted into civilian paramedics #3 A-4 City Attorney’s Office Legislative Division (4 New FTEs)$594,441 Legislative Affairs Director (E34) • Senior City Attorney (E39) • Special Projects Analyst (E26) • Administrative Assistant (N21) Focus on legislative affairs, with special emphasis on the legislative session Annual cost #3 A-9: Adding Multimodal Specialized Road Markings Maintenance Funding into the Streets Division’s Base Budget $200,000 #3 A-10: Downtown Parking Pay Station Replacements $271,985 Would be paid annually over six fiscal years from FY2025 – FY2030. The Council left Budget Amendment #3 open to consider this item later #4 A-2: Short-term Rental $49,000 Budget Amendment Item Potential Cost to FY2025 Annual Budget Full Time Employee (FTEs)Notes Identification Software #4 A-4: Liberty Park Greenhouses $62,500 #4 A-7: Increase Fleet Maintenance Capacity $312,585 3 New Mechanics 3 new FTE mechanics, education/training, software/hardware, maintenance from outside vendor. Request to finish this fiscal year is $399,909. #4 A-8: Police Officer Overtime $1,829,000 This item would double the annual line item for police officer overtime TOTALS $7,452,172 32 FTEs of which 19 are New 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 LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DIRECTOR 034X CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBER-ELECT N/A* EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL OFFICE 041X COUNCIL LEGAL DIRECTOR 039X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - CITY COUNCIL 039X ASSOCIATE DEPUTY DIRECTOR COUNCIL 037X LEGISLATIVE & POLICY MANAGER 037X SENIOR ADVISOR CITY COUNCIL 037X SENIOR PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 033X COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL 031X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST III 031X COMMUNITY FACILITATOR 031X OPERATIONS MANAGER & MENTOR – CITY COUNCIL 031X PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 031X POLICY ANALYST/PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 028X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST II 028X CONSTITUENT LIAISON/POLICY ANALYST 027X CONSTITUENT LIAISON 026X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST I 026X ASSISTANT TO THE COUNCIL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 025X COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT/AGENDA 024X COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 021X COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 041X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 037X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY SERVICES 037X DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (ENGINEER) 037X PLANNING DIRECTOR 037X 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 APPENDIX B – APPOINTED EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT Effective June 25, 2023 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 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 PLANNING & DESIGN 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. SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. ______ of 2024 (Fourth 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 therein. The City Council adopted certain proposed amendments at the City Council meeting held on February 20, 2024, while reserving consideration of other proposed amendments until a later date. Additional proposed amendments to the duly adopted budget, including any necessary amendments to the employment staffing document 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: 2 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 staffing changes specifically stated herein, attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance shall be, and the same hereby are adopted and incorporated into the budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including 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 __________, 2024. ________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________ Mayor’s Action: ____ Approved ____ Vetoed _________________________ MAYOR ATTEST: _______________________________ 3 CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. _________ of 2024. Published: ___________________. Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Approved As To Form ___ _______ Jaysen Oldroyd 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: February 1, 2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: FY24 Budget Amendment #4 - Revised SPONSOR: NA STAFF CONTACT: Greg Cleary (801) 535-6394 or Mary Beth Thompson (801) 535-6403 DOCUMENT TYPE: Budget Amendment Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that subsequent to a public hearing, the City Council adopt the following amendments to the FY 2024 adopted budget. BUDGET IMPACT: REVENUE EXPENSE GENERAL FUND $0.00 $3,860,205.00 FLEET FUND $723,909.00 $723,909.00 CIP FUND $1,415,400.00 $1,415,400.00 IMPACT FEES FUND $0.00 $130,275.00 SUSTAINABILITY FUND $0.00 $230,000.00 911 COMMUNICATIONS FUND $0.00 $165,793.00 IMS FUND $9,000.00 $406,688.00 MISCELLANEOUS GRANTS FUND $1,216,439.66 $1,216,439.66 DEBT SERVICE FUND $1,100,000.00 $1,100,000.00 TOTAL $4,464,748.66 $9,248,709.66 Gregory Cleary (Feb 1, 2024 09:03 MST) Gregory Cleary April Patterson (Feb 2, 2024 08:03 MST) April Patterson rachel otto (Feb 2, 2024 10:06 MST) 02/02/2024 02/02/2024 DEP~o\R.TMENT OF F1NAN CE Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #4 - Revised Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 8 For questions, please include Kristin Riker, Tyler Murdock and Gregg Evans In FY2024 BA2, Public Lands requested to move four (4) full-time landscape architect positions to Public Lands Department. This was in response to the urgency and high expectations that the City and the public have regarding the 100+ existing parks, trails, and open space capital projects, and particularly the dozens of high profile projects from 2022's Sales Tax Revenue Bond and General Obligation (or GO) Bond. The request included the creation of a Division with a Division Director to oversee and facilitate immediate and efficient project delivery. BA2 was left open with the intent to revisit the request to create an appointed Division Director position. At this time, the Department of Public Lands is requesting a FY24 $0 housekeeping budget amendment to reclassify the Public Lands Department's Planning Manager position (Grade 33) to an appointed Planning & Design Division Director (Grade 35). The cost difference will be made up by the Department's FY 23/24 budget's vacancy savings and the ongoing funding will be included in the department’s general budget request in the following fiscal year (FY 24/25). The updated appointed pay plan provided by HR is also included to reflect this change. D-2: Ongoing Landfill Projects CIP $1,000,000.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: JP Goates, Mark Stephens For questions, please include JP Goates, Kimberley Schmeling, Mark Stephens and Jorge Chamorro The landfill unallocated CIP account has been receiving revolving funds for various ongoing landfill projects. The funds placed in the account are applied to individual projects and then reimbursed to the General Fund. Module 8 is the next step in the series of landfill modules where refuse will be placed. It is needed to continue the expansion of the landfill to accommodate ongoing growth. Module 8 is approximately 40 acres and has a clay liner and HDPE welded liner underneath to protect the groundwater from the landfill leachate. There have been change orders to Module 8 that require the fund to be replenished. This reimbursable fund also needs to be in place for current and future projects on a revolving basis. Public Services’ Engineering Finance bills the County after services are provided. This is a pass-through cost that used to reside under Waste and Recycling but has since been moved to Engineering. Since Engineering oversees the improvements, it was determined that Public Services should process the pass-through costs as well. D-3: Transfer from Transportation to Debt Service for Garage Loan from State GF $1,100,000.00 Debt Service $1,100,000.00 For questions, please include Mary Beth Thompson, Greg Cleary, Marina Scott, Samantha Kenney and Gabby Ewell This is a housekeeping item related to the State Infrastructure Bond repayment. This item is to transfer the $1.1M received from the State to the Debt Service Fund, to support the approximate $7m State Infrastructure Bond for the construction of a parking garage. Section E: Grants Requiring No Staff Resources Section F: Donations Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #4 - Revised Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 9 Section G: Consent Agenda Consent Agenda G-1: Bloomberg Philanthropies Wake the Great Salt Lake Misc. Grants $1,000,000.00 Department: Salt Lake City Arts Council (ED) Prepared By: Felicia Baca; Amy Dorsey Salt Lake City applied for a grant with Bloomberg Philanthropies. The grant aims to educate and inspire residents and visitors to identify possible solutions and take action locally and nationally. Public art projects will be structured around major themes such as water conservation, air quality, agriculture, industry, environmental and social justice- including indigenous rights and lake ecology. Salt Lake City's proposed project consists of 1) a series of 3-5 significant artworks created by world-renowned artists across the city. These artists will be selected to leverage their notoriety and practice while bringing awareness to our civic issues. 2) a series of temporary public art projects by local and regional artists and organizations in various disciplines, including but not limited to performers, sculptors, painters, muralists, printmakers, filmmakers, poets, new media, etc. By commissioning our local community of artists to create context and site-specific artworks about the Great Salt Lake, our local community will be able to reflect on this crisis in new and compelling ways. Bloomberg Philanthropies is awarding the City $1,000,000 to fund the two-year public art project, Wake the Great Salt Lake. Salt Lake City will be providing a match of $1,060,000 with in-kind staff time and other grant funding. A public hearing was held on April 18, 2023. G-2: State of Utah Increase Homeless Mitigation Grant Misc. Grants $216,439.66 Department: Housing Stability/Police Department (Community and Neighborhoods) Prepared By: Michelle Hoon; Amy Dorsey The State has given the City an increase for the Homeless Mitigation grant. As a reminder, the City was awarded $3,107,201 for FY 2024. This award was for 1) Public Safety staff, program supplies, equipment, and vehicle maintenance, 2) Two sub-awards for Volunteers of America and Downtown Alliance, and 3) 2 HEART Coordinators, a Case Manager, half the salary of a grant’s person along with training, travel,and program supplies. Due to the City hosting overflow beds, the City will receive additional funds for FY 24. In total, the City will receive $650,000. 2/3 of that money will go directly to shelter providers. The City will retain $216,439.66, which is required to be put toward public safety. This money will be used for PD overtime in the Rio Grande area around the new Temporary Shelter Community. A public hearing was held for the Homeless Mitigation Grant on September 19, 2023. Section I: Council Added Items BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Revenue for FY 2024 Budget Adjustments The chart below presents General Fund Projected Revenues for FY 2024. To date, revenues are trending below the initial budget. At this time, Finance staff are projecting revenues to remaining consistent with current estimates for the remainder of FY 2024. Consistent with the update provided to Council on January 16, 2024, modifications have been made primarily to Sales Tax, resulting in a decrease of approximately $3 million. Revenue FY23-FY24 AnnualBudget FY23-24 Amended Budget NewProjection Amended Variance Favorable/(Unfavorable) Revenue Property Taxes 131,752,713 131,752,713 131,752,713 0 Sales,Use & Excise Taxes 117,129,000 117,129,000 114,129,000 (3,000,000) Franchise Taxes 12,348,127 12,348,127 12,341,052 (7,075) TotalTaxes 261,229,840 261,229,840 258,222,765 (3,007,075) Revenue Charges For Services 4,745,443 4,745,443 5,770,419 1,024,976 Fines & Forfeitures 2,561,547 2,561,547 2,567,590 6,043 Interest Income 8,000,000 8,000,000 8,000,000 0 InterfundService Charges 26,131,213 26,131,213 26,144,079 12,866 Intergovernmental Revenue 5,134,621 5,134,621 5,234,598 99,977 Licenses 18,434,301 18,434,301 18,436,598 2,297 Miscellaneous Revenue 2,958,012 2,958,012 2,978,339 20,327 ParkingMeter Revenue 2,801,089 2,801,089 2,801,089 0 ParkingTickets 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,499,955 (45) Permits 22,445,026 22,445,026 22,497,613 52,587 Property Sale Proceeds -- -0 Rental & Other Income 681,604 681,604 682,104 500 OperatingTransfers In 9,938,944 9,938,944 9,938,944 0 TotalW/O SpecialTax 105,331,800 105,331,800 106,551,328 1,219,528 ObjectCodeDescription Sales Tax Addition1/2%49,084,479 49,084,479 49,484,479 400,000 TotalGeneralFund 415,646,119 415,646,119 414,258,572 (1,387,547) Impact Fees - Summary Confidential Data pulled 07/20/2023 Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area Area Cost Center UnAllocated Cash Notes: Impact fee - Police 8484001 1,402,656$ 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 I 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$ $273,684 UnAllocated Budget Amount 8484001 1,402,656$ ~~_________L_____L_______l_________L____J D ~~~ =====-====~-===l===f=~===== -===== -=====-=====-====I ~ I I I I ♦ ~r----=====---==±==+=------==JI______ I I - I I I I I ~ - I I I I I ~ Atachmens A-1 Ver 1/9/2024 Page 1 of 7 Clean Air SLC Initiative The Sustainability Department is developing Clean Air SLC, an initiative that aims to distribute equipment and information to help residents improve air quality in their communities and inside their homes.Clean Air SLC will distribute resources through three incentive programs: E-Bike Rebates, Indoor Air Quality Tools, and Electric Yard Care Equipment. The City Council supported the creation of an Air Quality Incentives Program during the Citywide FY24 budget process. Budget was appropriated to continue offering Electric Yard Care Equipment exchanges and hire a new full-time employee (FTE) to help design and administer a more comprehensive Air Quality Incentives Program tailored for Salt Lakers. During the FY24 budget process, the City Council requested that the Sustainability Department provide a written proposal of the program policy and goals for the Electric Bike Rebates and Indoor Air Quality incentives before approving funding for those two incentives. Summaries of the three Air Quality Incentives Programs are provided below: 1) Electric-Bike (E-bike) Rebate Program will distribute vouchers to encourage the purchase of e-bikes as transportation alternatives to cars. 2) Indoor Air Quality Program will distribute indoor air purifiers, HVAC filters, and induction stoves though the City’s existing housing programs. 3) Electric Yard Care Equipment Program will offer rebate for residents to purchase electric yard care equipment, such as snowblowers, lawn mowers, leaf blowers, etc. The Sustainability Department continues to work closely with the Utah Division of Air Quality on the details of this program. This program is not addressed in this document because the Department is waiting on critical decisions from DAQ before designing this program. The Department is requesting $230,000 to fund the E-bike Rebate and Indoor Air Quality Programs. Funding is needed for the Department to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the E-bike Program and to purchase equipment for the Indoor Air Quality Program, the next critical steps in program development. The purpose of this document is to provide information for the City Council about the currently proposed E-bike Rebate and Indoor Air Quality program design, the programs for which funding is being requested. The proposed program components described here are based on feedback from internal and external stakeholders and research of similar programs in other cities. Program details are still under development and will be finalized this Winter and Spring. The Department looks forward to incorporating the City Council’s feedback into the proposed program design. The Department considers this first round a pilot launch and will adjust future launches according to public needs, lessons learned during the pilot launch, and City policy priorities. The Department plans to e CLEAN &Dfil SLC 0 CLEAN &llfil SLC Ver 1/9/2024 Page 2 of 7 explore available federal and other funding sources to provide supplementary funding for this program in the future. Establishing a successful pilot will be an important step in securing additional funding sources. 1. E-Bike Rebate Program Overview The E-Bike Rebate Program will provide financial incentives for e- bikes purchased as a transportation alternative to reduce vehicle miles traveled. The goal of this program is to make e-bikes more accessible and affordable and inspire residents to embrace a greener and healthier mode of transportation while contributing to the reduction of transportation-related emissions in our city. The Department anticipates using $200,000 of the budget amendment request for the E-bike Rebate Program and aims to launch this program in Summer 2024. The proposed program description provided in this document is based on feedback and information collected from local bike shops, bike organizations, and similar programs. The actual program design may change with additional feedback from stakeholders and depending on the results of the RFP process. Research that informed the proposed program design include: - Bike shops:The Department interviewed five local e-bike suppliers to gather information on the types of bikes provided, warranty options, and educational and service support provided. The Department also collected feedback on key program components, such as anticipated voucher amounts and redemption process, e-bike specifications, and procurement process. The bike shops interviewed represented a range of business types and included a local e-bike manufacturer and retailer, locally owned businesses, a national manufacturer and retailer, and a national retailer. - Bike organizations:The Department gathered feedback and explored partnership opportunities with Bike Utah and other local organizations. Additionally, the Department researched policy documents prepared by national bicycling organizations, such as The League of American Cyclists and People for Bikes. - Other E-Bike Incentives Programs:The Department conducted extensive researched on e-bike incentive programs across the country and have been in close communication with UCAIR about the Magnum+UCAIR E-Bike Incentive Program, which launched Summer 2023. This research was intended to understand different program options, models, and lessons-learned. 1.1. Vouchers and Applicant Eligibility Criteria The Department anticipates vouchers will range from $400 to $1,400 depending on bike type and income. Higher voucher amounts will be available to income-qualified applicants. Vouchers will be used at the point-of-sale to reduce the purchase price of the e-bike. The table below provides a summary of the anticipated voucher amounts: CLEAN~ &Om. SLC \3(C) 0 CLEAN &lll;l SLC Ver 1/9/2024 Page 3 of 7 Bike Type Standard Voucher Income-Qualified Voucher City and Commuter $400 $1,000 Adaptive $600 $1,200 Cargo & Utility $800 $1,400 1.1.1. Eligible E-Bikes Below is a list of the anticipated eligible e-bike types and specifications. Final equipment eligibility is subject to change. 1) Eligible E-Bike Types a) Cargo & utility b) City and commuter c) Adaptive d) Mountain and gravel bikes are not eligible 2) Eligible bike classes: Classes 1, 2, and 3 3) Max nominal power output (motor): 750 watts 4) Be newly manufactured or purchased, with original proof of purchase. 5) Have a MSRP of not more than $4,000 6) Manufacturer’s warranty must be available for frame, battery, and components for a period of not less than one (1) year. 7) Electrical drive system must be certified by an accredited testing laboratory for compliance with UL 2849 or EN 15194 1.1.2. Voucher Distribution It is anticipated that the application period will be open for at least one week for the general public. Vouchers will be distributed through a lottery system, ensuring a fair and random allocation among participants. The Department proposes to prioritize vouchers distribution to income-qualified applicants to ensure this program benefits a demographic that may face financial barriers to adopting e-bikes for transportation and welcomes the City Council’s feedback on how to design this prioritization structure. The Department is considering strategies to effectively encourage low-income residents to apply, such as targeted outreach, a longer application period, and bike safety training events. These strategies are further discussed in Section 1.3. Voucher recipients will be able to redeem their vouchers at any of the participating bike shops. The Sustainability Department has been working with IMS to develop a program application and an automated voucher reimbursement process. 1.1.3. Applicant Eligibility Applicants must be residents of Salt Lake City and 18-years of age or older. A valid driver’s license or other State-issued ID card will be required to apply. A utility bill or bank statement will be required to demonstrate proof of residency. Each household will be eligible to receive up to two vouchers. e CLEAN &llfil SLC Ver 1/9/2024 Page 4 of 7 1.1.4. Income-Qualified Applicants To receive an income-qualified voucher, applicant must meet one of the following criteria: 1) Have a household income of less than 80% AMI. See below for income limits amounts per household size. HOUSEHOLD SIZE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LOW INCOME 80% AMI $57,350 $65,550 $73,750 $81,900 $88,500 $95,050 $101,600 $108,150 Source:https://www.slc.gov/housingstability/wp-content/uploads/sites/59/2022/08/HOME-Income-Limits-2022-23.pdf 2) Be currently registered in an approved state or federal income-qualified program. A list of approved programs include: • UTAH Family Employment Program • UTAH Medicaid • UTAH HeadStart • UTAH Home Energy Assistance Training Program HEAT To qualify for the income qualified voucher, applicants can submit one of the following documents: • Tax document (W-2, 1099) for all income-earning members of the household • Employer attestation(s) to verify income • Proof of enrollment in another State or federal income-qualifying assistance program 1.2. E-Bike Suppliers Feedback gathered from potential bike suppliers has been incorporated into a draft RFP. The competitive selection process will be initiated if funding is appropriated by the City Council. The Department anticipates selecting up to 5 suppliers for the e-bike program. Suppliers will be selected based on the quality of bikes sold, proposed bike safety accessory packages, level of maintenance support provided, and staff experience and knowledge of e-bikes. Anticipated bike eligibility requirements and supplier responsibilities are listed below, but all are subject to change. Suppliers must have a storefront within Salt Lake City boundaries and will be responsible for the following: • Voucher Redemption o Verifying identity of holder of the voucher with a valid driver’s license or government-issued identification. o Verifying voucher expiration date, eligibility of the e-bikes with program requirements and/or a list of eligible bike models. o Fulfilling voucher recipients' orders within a 14-day period from purchase. • Voucher Reimbursement e CLEAN &llfil SLC Fi s c a l Y e a r 2 0 2 3 - 2 4 B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 4 - R e v i s e d Ex p e n d i t u r e FY 2 0 2 3 - 2 4 A d o p t e d Bu d get g - E x pen s e BA # 1 T o t a l B A # 2 T o t a l BA # 3 T o t a l B A # 4 T o t a l BA # 5 T o t a l To t a l E x p e n s e Ge n e r a l F u n d ( F C 1 0 ) 44 8 , 5 1 4 , 9 1 8 2 0 4 , 2 0 0 . 0 0 (7 6 3 , 9 5 0 . 0 0 ) 1, 7 3 0 , 7 3 1 . 8 9 3 , 8 6 0 , 2 0 5 . 0 0 45 3 , 5 4 6 , 1 0 4 . 8 9 Cu r b a n d G u t t e r ( F C 2 0 ) 3, 0 0 0 3, 0 0 0 . 0 0 DE A T a s k F o r c e F u n d ( F C 4 1 ) 1, 3 9 7 , 3 5 5 1, 3 9 7 , 3 5 5 . 0 0 Mi s c S pec i a l S e r v i c e D i s t r i c t s ( F C 4 6 ) 1, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 66 4 , 2 9 3 . 7 0 2, 3 6 4 , 2 9 3 . 7 0 St r e e t L i g h t i n g E n t e r p r i s e ( F C 4 8 ) 6, 0 4 4 , 1 1 9 6, 0 4 4 , 1 1 9 . 0 0 Wa t e r F u n d ( F C 5 1 ) 17 7 , 9 5 3 , 7 8 7 17 7 , 9 5 3 , 7 8 7 . 0 0 Se w e r F u n d ( F C 5 2 ) 30 1 , 8 3 2 , 6 2 2 30 1 , 8 3 2 , 6 2 2 . 0 0 St o r m W a t e r F u n d ( F C 5 3 ) 22 , 9 4 7 , 4 7 4 22 , 9 4 7 , 4 7 4 . 0 0 Ai r p o r t F u n d ( F C 5 4 , 5 5 , 5 6 ) 52 0 , 4 3 8 , 9 9 7 52 0 , 4 3 8 , 9 9 7 . 0 0 Re f u s e F u n d ( F C 5 7 ) 28 , 2 6 3 , 7 9 2 23 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 28 , 4 9 3 , 7 9 2 . 0 0 Go l f F u n d ( F C 5 9 ) 17 , 9 3 8 , 9 8 4 17 , 9 3 8 , 9 8 4 . 0 0 E- 9 1 1 F u n d ( F C 6 0 ) 3, 8 0 0 , 3 8 5 16 5 , 7 9 3 . 0 0 3, 9 6 6 , 1 7 8 . 0 0 Fl e e t F u n d ( F C 6 1 ) 32 , 4 9 8 , 7 5 0 1 4 , 4 6 1 , 7 9 3 . 0 0 97 5 , 1 7 7 . 0 0 7 2 3 , 9 0 9 . 0 0 48 , 6 5 9 , 6 2 9 . 0 0 IM S F u n d ( F C 6 5 ) 38 , 7 0 2 , 1 7 1 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 6, 0 0 0 . 0 0 4 , 5 3 1 , 0 8 3 . 0 0 40 6 , 6 8 8 . 0 0 43 , 6 5 4 , 9 4 2 . 0 0 Co u n t y Q u a r t e r C e n t S a l e s T a x f o r Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n ( F C 6 9 ) 9, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 (2 0 5 , 1 7 7 . 0 0 ) 9, 4 9 4 , 8 2 3 . 0 0 CD B G O p e r a t i n g F u n d ( F C 7 1 ) 5, 5 9 7 , 7 6 3 46 , 6 4 2 . 5 0 5, 6 4 4 , 4 0 5 . 5 0 Mi s c e l l a n e o u s G r a n t s ( F C 7 2 ) 8, 9 1 9 , 9 1 7 16 , 1 9 7 , 4 2 3 . 0 0 2 , 2 3 4 , 4 7 3 . 2 9 1, 2 1 6 , 4 3 9 . 6 6 28 , 5 6 8 , 2 5 2 . 9 5 Ot h e r S p e c i a l R e v e n u e ( F C 7 3 ) 40 0 , 0 0 0 65 , 4 7 2 . 0 0 46 5 , 4 7 2 . 0 0 Do n a t i o n F u n d ( F C 7 7 ) 50 0 , 0 0 0 50 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Ho u s i n g L o a n s & T r u s t ( F C 7 8 ) 10 , 2 1 2 , 0 4 3 10 , 2 1 2 , 0 4 3 . 0 0 De b t S e r v i c e F u n d ( F C 8 1 ) 34 , 8 9 4 , 9 7 9 5, 7 7 7 , 7 8 4 . 0 0 1 , 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 41 , 7 7 2 , 7 6 3 . 0 0 CI P F u n d ( F C 8 3 , 8 4 & 8 6 ) 29 , 7 0 8 , 2 8 6 2 1 8 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 25 , 4 8 5 , 8 9 3 . 2 5 1, 5 4 5 , 6 7 5 . 0 0 56 , 9 5 7 , 8 5 4 . 2 5 Go v e r n m e n t a l I m m u n i t y ( F C 8 5 ) 3, 3 7 0 , 0 1 2 3, 3 7 0 , 0 1 2 . 0 0 Ri s k F u n d ( F C 8 7 ) 63 , 5 7 4 , 6 5 5 63 , 5 7 4 , 6 5 5 . 0 0 - To t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t I t e m s 1, 7 6 8 , 9 1 4 , 0 0 9 1 4 , 8 9 2 , 9 9 3 . 0 0 4 1 , 6 5 5 , 1 3 1 . 9 5 15 , 0 9 0 , 7 1 4 . 6 8 9 , 2 4 8 , 7 0 9 . 6 6 - 1, 8 4 9 , 8 0 1 , 5 5 8 . 2 9 Bu d g e t M a n a g e r An a l yst , C i t y Co u n c i l Co n t i n gen t A ppro pri a t i o n 4 Ver 1/9/2024 Page 5 of 7 o Submitting vouchers to the Sustainability Department’s Program Administrator for reimbursement within 10 business days from date of transaction along with receipts. • Customer Education/Support o Providing a smooth and consistent process for users picking up their e-bikes. Suppliers must explain and set expectations with customers about e-bike maintenance and care. o Sharing cycling and e-bike ownership educational materials provided by Salt Lake City to program participants. o Providing information to support recipients registering their bikes with the manufacturer and the Salt Lake City police department. o Providing an opportunity for voucher recipients to test ride e-bikes before the final sale. • Bike Safety and Maintenance Support o Offering a discount on bike safety accessories, including helmets, lights, patch kits, and locks, to voucher recipients at the time of purchase. o Providing a free 90-day tune-up on bikes sold from their location. o Installing and maintaining on-site flat prevention systems. 1.3. Outreach Strategy The Department is currently developing an outreach plan and tools. The plan will outline details for press releases, social media posts, and other promotions. This plan will also detail strategies to reach low-income residents, such as partnerships with organizations working in these communities, culturally appropriate materials, and bike safety training and bike demonstration events to educate new and inexperienced bike riders. Graphically designed materials are being developed and include logos, social media templates, brochure templates, and other resources, which you can see in this document. The Department will work with IMS’ Civic Engagement and Media Teams and the Transportation Division in the development of the outreach plan and tools.The Department welcomes the City Council’s feedback on the outreach strategy. 1.4. Program Metrics The Department will track metrics to measure the effectiveness and impact of the program. Some of these metrics could include: • Engagement rates with outreach materials • Percentage of applicants that are new to bike riding • Applicant demographics • Percentage of vouchers redeemed • Follow-up survey to gauge usage frequency, miles travelled, car miles replaced, costs to operate, and participant satisfaction with purchased e-bike and the program • Estimated greenhouse gas and air pollutant emission reductions • Number of educational sessions conducted, number of attendees 0 CLEAN &llfil SLC Ver 1/9/2024 Page 6 of 7 1.5. Other Considerations It is important to recognize that bike storage, riding etiquette, parking, and infrastructure are critical considerations that can impact the adoption of cycling as a transportation alternative. While the Department cannot resolve all these issues through a voucher program, we are assessing the challenges and identifying opportunities to incorporate solutions into this program, for example through requiring discounted safety equipment, assistance with registering bikes, analyzing bike storage and security solutions to propose and work with partners to support implementation, and continuing to develop relationships with bike advocacy organizations to assist with education and outreach. Through this program the Department will continue to explore opportunities to work in partnership to address challenges to the adoption of e-bikes as transportation. Recognizing these issues cannot be quickly resolved, this program can be a catalyst to systematically address some of these challenges. 2. Indoor Air Quality Program Research continues to show how the air inside our homes can, at times, be more polluted and harmful to health than the air outside. Furthermore, during high pollution periods, outdoor air can infiltrate homes and buildings, impacting the health of those inside. Thankfully, there are simple equipment and behavioral measures that can significantly improve indoor air quality. For these reasons, the Sustainability Department began an educational campaign in 2022 around indoor air quality, hosting a partnership event to learn about the latest research, and incorporating messaging on the SLCgreen social media platforms, blog posts and website. Under the leadership of Mayor Mendenhall, in the FY24 budget process the Department proposed enhancing the air quality incentives program by providing tools that will directly improve the air inside people’s homes, particularly those who have lower household incomes. To do so, the Department plans to collaborate with the Housing Stability Division’s Handyman and Home Repair programs to distribute high-efficiency HVAC filters, air purifiers, and single-burner induction cooktops. The Department anticipates using $30,000 of the budget amendment request for this Indoor Air Quality program. Based on Housing Stability’s program data from past years, the Department anticipate working with 60 homes over a one-year period. The number of homes served will depend on the number of applicants the housing programs enroll, and types of repairs performed. If funding is approved, the Department will begin working with contractors for the Handyman and Home Repair programs to start distributing indoor air quality tools. 2.1. Indoor Air Quality Assessment For their existing programs, Housing Stability staff conducts a home assessment to assist residents with their applications and evaluate the rehabilitation needs of the home. The Department plans to work with Housing Stability staff to collect information during these assessments to identify the appropriate indoor air quality interventions for each home, such as furnace type and age, stove type (gas vs. electric), age of household members, and health concerns (such as respiratory and heart diseases). CLEAN~ &Dfil SLC _lQ-% 0 CLEAN &llfil SLC Ver 1/9/2024 Page 7 of 7 2.2. Indoor Air Quality Equipment The Department proposes distributing the following interventions: • High-efficiency furnace filters with efficiency ratings of MERV 13 or higher will be offered along with instructions for replacing filters, and reminders for filter replacement. MERV 13 filters are not appropriate in all instances because they can diminish the efficiency and performance of the furnace. An assessment of the age and condition of the furnace will be conducted, and the highest-efficiency option will be provided if a MERV 13 filter is not appropriate. • Air Purifiers will be offered to homes where residents have health conditions exacerbated by poor air quality or where high efficiency filters cannot be installed. • Single-burner induction stoves will be offered to homes that have gas stoves. Stoves fueled by natural gas can result in high levels of indoor air pollution. Program participants will be provided information on the impact of gas stoves on indoor air quality and will be offered a single-burner induction stove along with appropriate cookware. • Indoor Air Quality Monitors will be offered as a tool to increase awareness of how routine activities impact indoor air quality. 2.3. Educational Components This program will also include an educational component to help residents understand how to improve indoor air quality in their homes. The materials will discuss strategies for improving indoor air quality and will include instructions for the materials distributed by our program. These materials will be distributed through the City’s Handyman and Home Repair Programs. Sustainability is also exploring partnerships with other organizations, such as community health workers, to distribute educational materials and promote the City’s Handyman and Home Repair Programs and the Clean Air SLC programs. 2.4. Program Metrics & Outcomes The Department will track metrics to measure the effectiveness and impact of the program. Some of these metrics could include: • Engagement rates with outreach materials • Percentage of applicants interested in these interventions • Types and number of interventions installed • Applicant demographics • Follow-up survey to gauge usage frequency, impact of educational material, and satisfaction with the program 0 CLEAN &llfil SLC The table below presents updated Fund Balance numbers and percentages, based on the proposed changes included in Budget Amendment #4. Please note, at the time of this transmittal, two items are still under consideration from Budget Amendment #3 and are considered in the fund balance calculation below. With the complete adoption of Budget Amendment #4, the available fund balance will adjust to 31.73 percent of the FY 2024 Adopted Budget. The fund balance calculation above has been adjusted to account for the FY 2023 year end numbers after the completion of the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report. FOF GF Only TOTAL FOF GF Only TOTAL Beginning Fund Balance 18,395,660 141,728,022 160,123,682 24,825,461 178,695,454 202,575,741 Budgeted Change in Fund Balance (2,100,608) (20,736,262) (22,836,870) (3,657,641) (29,211,158)(32,868,799) PriorYearEncumbrances (3,162,300) (17,260,909) (20,423,209) (2,592,884) (18,663,765)(21,157,931) Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 13,132,752 103,730,851 116,863,603 18,574,936 130,820,531 148,549,011 BeginningFundBalance Percent 22.79% 25.00% 24.85%35.49% 33.36% 33.42% YearEnd CAFR Adjustments Revenue Changes - -- -- - Expense Changes (Prepaids, Receivable, Etc.) (2,257,746) (2,257,746)(2,484,423) (2,484,423) Fund Balance w/ CAFR Changes 13,132,752 101,473,105 114,605,857 18,574,936 128,336,108 146,064,588 Final FundBalance Percent 22.79% 24.46% 24.37%35.49% 32.72% 32.86% Budget Amendment Use ofFund Balance BA#1 Revenue Adjustment - (475,000) (475,000)- -- BA#1 Expense Adjustment -- -(204,200) (204,200) BA#2 Revenue Adjustment - -- -- - BA#2 Expense Adjustment - -- -763,950 763,950 BA#3 Revenue Adjustment - 6,000,000 6,000,000 - -- BA#3 Expense Adjustment - (6,538,000) (6,538,000)- (1,730,732) (1,730,732) BA#4 Revenue Adjustment - 194,600 194,600 - -- BA#4 Expense Adjustment - (7,584,328) (7,584,328)- (3,860,205) (3,860,205) 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)- -- Change in Revenue - -- -- - Change in Expense Fund Balance Budgeted Increase - -- -- - --Adjusted Fund Balance 21,928,113 157,840,137 178,933,386 18,574,936 123,304,921 141,033,401 AdjustedFundBalance Percent 38.05% 38.05% 38.05%35.49% 31.44% 31.73% Projected Revenue 57,634,742 414,859,025 470,299,454 52,338,120 392,166,803 444,504,923 Salt Lake City General Fund TOTAL Fund Balance Projections FY2024 BudgetFY2023 Budget Projected Atachmens A-12 REQUEST FOR WAIVER – APCO CONTRACT SalLake Ciy’s E991 Deparmen(he “Deparmen”) hereby asks he SalLake Ciy Corporaon (“Ciy”) ChieProcuremenOcer o waive he sandard procuremenprocess and allow he Deparmen o pursue a conrac or medical dispach proocols and processes wih he Associaon oPublic-Saey Communicaons Ocials Inernaonal, Inc. (“APCO”). A procuremenwaiver is needed in his siuaon because: 1. The Ciy needs o mach exisng medical dispach proocol equipmenand processes currenly being used by he SalLake Valley Emergency Communicaons Cener (“VECC”). (SalLake Ciy Code subsecon 3.24.160(1)(b)) 2. The supplies and services needed o mach VECC’s dispach proocol equipmenand processes is only available rom a sole source, and a soliciaon process would be exremely unlikely o produce a meaningul compeon. (SalLake Ciy Code subsecon 3.24.160(1)(a)) 3. A waiver o he soliciaon process in his siuaon would be in he besinereso he Ciy and he convenience o he public. (SalLake Ciy Code subsecon 3.24.160(1)(d)) BACKGROUND In recenyears,he Uah Sae Legislaure expressed a srong ineresin ensuring he 911 services beween PSAPS are rapid, ecien, and ineroperable. See Uah Code Subsecon 63H-7-302(1). The Ciy’s E911 Deparmenand VECC are he wo primary Public Saey Answering Poins (“PSAPs”)ha provide dispach services or he SalLake Valley. Because he wo enes share he responsibiliy o providing dispach services in he SalLake Valley,hey are consanly working ogeher o provide as and accurae responses o calls seeking emergency dispach services. Using a ruly ineroperable sysem is crucial o providing medical dispach services o he public in a rapid and ecienmanner. In ac,o provide emergency dispach services as quickly and accuraely as possible, and a he urging ovarious Sae governmenenes,he Ciy and VECC use a shared, or common, compuer aided dispach program (“CAD”) known as Versaerm. However,he Ciy and VECC currenly do nouse he same medical dispach proocols. VECC previously issued a reques or proposals relaed o medical dispach proocols and seleced he Associaon oPublic-Saey Communicaons Ocials Inernaonal, Inc (“APCO)o provide VECC’s medical dispach proocols and relaed services. Since moving o APCO, VECC has noed ha he me required o dispach a medical call has signicanly reduced – resulng in help being sen aser han wha he Ciy is currenly experiencing operang using Pro-QA dispach proocols. A highlighed comparison using he sascal CAD repors or Augus1so Augus20h 2023 is aached. The me a call is “In Queue” represens he me a call is waing or sucieninormaon beore ican be dispached on. One reporshows SalLake Ciy Fire (CF) and he oher shows Unied Fire (UF). The me beore dispach services are able begin dispaching any re/medical response is whais highlighed in he “In Queue” column. The aached documens indicae ha he “In Queue”me or SalLake Ciy using ProQA are commonly over a minue or an overall average o1.53 minues. This is under he required 2 minues o sarhelp or a medical call. However,he aached documens also show ha Unied Fire (UF), which is dispached by VECC using APCO’s medical proocol haallows hem o dispach when cerain pieces oinormaon are obained (whereas ProQA’s dispach proocols would normally preven his more rapid dispach approach) resuls in an average oonly 39 seconds “In Queue” beore VECC begins sending help. These resuls indicae ha, even disregarding he eciencies gained by he Ciy and VECC operang oa single proocol sysem,he overall me “In Queue” beore SalLake Ciy Fire could be dispached on medical calls would be much lower using APCO’s medical proocol ha does nohinder he Ciy’s abiliy o begin sending help once he dispaching process reaches a poin where ibecomes clear wha ype ohelp is needed. Currenly he ProQA dispaching sofware prevens he Ciy rom aking acon unl he dispach process is enrely complee. The Ciy’s connued use oProQA’s dispaching sofware would also nobe conducive o accomplishing he shared CAD requiremens expressed by he legislaure because connued use odieren dispaching proocols, noonly slows he Ciy’s dispach responses down bualso hinders dispach processes hroughouSalLake Couny. The Versaerm CAD can only use one medical proocol and he ac ha he Ciy and VECC currenly use dierenmedical proocols creaes unnecessary complicaons haarise when a 911 call needs o be ranserred beween he Ciy and VECC. In such siuaons each agency has o ake me o change he call o  he parameers in each dispach cener’s medical proocol beore help can be dispached. By conracng wih APCO or medical dispach services,he Ciy can achieve a genuinely ineroperable common CAD sysem hawill he eliminae delays in me,he inecienuse oresources, and he connuiy gaps hacurrenly arise when calls are ranserred beween dispach ceners. FIRST BASIS FOR WAIVER: MATCH EXISTING EQUIPMENT AND PROCESSES - CONTRACTING WITH APCO WILL ALLOW THE CITY TO MATCH VECC’S EXISTING EQUIPMENT AND PROCESSES. Conracng wih APCO o provide medical dispach proocol services will allow he Ciy o mach is PSAP parner’s exisng medical dispach proocol equipmenand processes such ha he Ciy and VECC will be able o joinly ulize an ineroperable CAD sysem hapermis calls o he ranserred smoohly and consisenly rom one PSAP o he oher. This ineroperable sysem would be a signicanupgrade rom he currendisjoined approach haprevens eiher VECC or he Ciy rom being able o use he CAD’s ull unconaliy. In conras, I he Ciy obains is medical dispach proocols rom any vendor oher han APCO,he abiliy or he Ciy and VECC o use a ully ineroperable CAD sysem disappears and he currenineciencies inherenin a less-han ineroperable sysem will persis. SECOND BASIS FOR WAIVER: SOLE SOURCE – APCO IS THE SOLE VENDOR THAT THE CITY CAN SELECT IF IT WANTS TO ACHIEVE A FULLY INTEROPERABLE CAD SYSTEM THAT WILL REDUCE DELAYS AND FACILITATE THE RAPID AND EFFICIENT PROVISION OF MEDICAL DISPATCH SERVICES. Moso he raonale supporng his reques or a sole source waiver is already addressed in he preceding paragraph. APCO is he only vendor who can mach VECC’s exisng equipmenand processes, and APCO is hereore he only vendor he Ciy can selec o achieve a genuinely ineroperable CAD sysem haeliminaes he exisng ineciencies and ully mees he Sae governmen’s expecaon ha he enre SalLake Valley will operae on a common CAD THIRD BASIS FOR WAIVER: BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY – CONTRACTING WITH APCO IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY BECAUSE RESULTS IN AN INTEROPERABLE COMMON CAD SYSTEM AND BECAUSE APCO’S SYSTEM, INDEPENDENT OF ANY INTEROPERABLE EFFICIENCIES, IMPROVES THE CITY’S ABILITY TO TIMELY PROVIDE MEDICAL DISPATCH SERVICES. Having a ully ineroperable common CAD hawill allow or he seamless ransion ocalls and inormaon beween VECC and Ciy is in he besineress o he Ciy and is residens. The mely and compeenprovision omedical dispach services o persons in need omedical assisance is an incredibly imporanservice o he public. However, even setng aside he benes o he ully ineroperable CAD sysem, conracng wih APCO or medical dispach services will bene he public. Afer moving o APCO, VECC noced he signicanimprovemens relaed o he me in which help could be dispached in response o medical emergencies. The circumsances in which SalLake Ciy dispach services operae are very similar o he circumsances presenaVECC, and iis reasonable o conclude hamany o he benes VECC has realized by conracng wih APCO should also be realized by he Ciy. CONCLUSION: For all o he reasons saed above,he Ciy’s E911 Deparmenis requesng ha he ChieProcuremen Ocer waive he sandard procuremenprocess in his siuaon and allow he Ciy o pursue enering ino a conracwih APCO or he provision omedical dispach proocol services. While we believe ha all o he reasons supporng a reques or waiver are jused, any o he hree bases or waiver described above would by iselbe sucien o gran he E911 Deparmen’s waiver reques. Atachmens D-1 911 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 LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DIRECTOR 034X CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBER-ELECT N/A* EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL OFFICE 041X COUNCIL LEGAL DIRECTOR 039X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - CITY COUNCIL 039X ASSOCIATE DEPUTY DIRECTOR COUNCIL 037X LEGISLATIVE & POLICY MANAGER 037X SENIOR ADVISOR CITY COUNCIL 037X SENIOR PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 033X COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL 031X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST III 031X COMMUNITY FACILITATOR 031X OPERATIONS MANAGER & MENTOR – CITY COUNCIL 031X PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 031X POLICY ANALYST/PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 028X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST II 028X CONSTITUENT LIAISON/POLICY ANALYST 027X CONSTITUENT LIAISON 026X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST I 026X ASSISTANT TO THE COUNCIL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 025X COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT/AGENDA 024X COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 021X COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 041X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 037X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY SERVICES 037X DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (ENGINEER)037X PLANNING DIRECTOR 037X BUILDING OFFICIAL 035X DIRECTOR OF HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 035X DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (PLANNER)035X YOUTH & FAMILY DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X APPENDIX B – APPOINTED EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT Effective June 25, 2023 Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #4 - Revised Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 1 Section A: New Items A-1: Air Quality Incentives Program Sustainability $230,000.00 Department: Sustainability Prepared By: Angie Nielsen For questions, please include Debbie Lyons, Angie Nielsen Sustainability proposed the creation of a new Air Quality Community Incentives Program for the FY 2024 budget and requested $230,000 to expand the incentives beyond landscaping equipment to include e-bikes, indoor air purifiers, HVAC filters, and other items to help improve air quality in the community and indoors. The City Council supported creation of the program but requested that Sustainability provide a written proposal of the program policy and goals before releasing funds for the additional incentives. Sustainability recently hired the new FTE approved in FY 2024 and has been working on program design. This budget amendment serves to provide a description of the proposed program and to request additional funding which is needed for Sustainability to move forward with soliciting RFPs, the next critical step in program development. Below is a description of the proposed program. Sustainability is in the process of compiling a separate document detailing the Air Quality Incentives Program Plan, which will be made available to the City Council before the Budget Amendment is briefed. The Department is also currently working with Purchasing on the RFP scope of work but are awaiting budget approval before finalizing and releasing the RFP. 1) E-BIKE PROGRAM ($200,000) Sustainability has collaborated with other City Departments to design the program application, back-end system for the vouchers, the procurement process, and logos and branding design. Sustainability has also met with several local bike shops to get their input on the anticipated program design and contract process. To meet the goal of a Spring launch, it is crucial that an RFP be published as soon as possible so the suppliers can be selected, contracts prepared, and the implementation details finalized. The department anticipates: -Working with up to five bike shops with physical storefronts in Salt Lake City to serve as suppliers for the program. - Vouchers will be made available for cargo bikes ($800 standard voucher/$1,400 income-qualified voucher), commuter bikes ($400 standard/$1,000 income-qualified), and adaptive bikes ($600 standard/$1,200 income-qualified). Off-road bikes will not be eligible. Higher voucher amounts will be available for income-qualified applicants. Discounts will be applied at the time of purchase. 50% of program funds will be reserved for low-income vouchers. -Assuming most applicants select commuter bikes, and 50% of the funds go to low-income applicants, approximately 350 vouchers could be distributed. -Suppliers will be expected to provide a discount on bike safety accessories (helmets, lights, locks, etc), help educate customers on bike safety and etiquette, provide test rides, and provide basic maintenance support. 2) INDOOR AIR QUALITY ($30,000) The department will work with the Housing Stability Division’s Handyman and Home Repair Programs to distribute high- efficiency HVAC filters, air purifiers, and single burner induction cooktops to homeowners served by these programs. Sustainability anticipates reaching approximately 60 homes. This program will also include an educational component to help residents understand how to improve indoor air quality in their homes, such as brochures and in-person consultations. Air quality monitors may also be included as a tool to help residents become aware of how routine activities impact indoor air quality. Sustainability has asked that the E-Bike portion of this item be straw polled to move the RFP process forward. Please reference the attached documents for a program overview. I 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 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, remov 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. 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 LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DIRECTOR 034X CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBER-ELECT N/A* EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL OFFICE 041X COUNCIL LEGAL DIRECTOR 039X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - CITY COUNCIL 039X ASSOCIATE DEPUTY DIRECTOR COUNCIL 037X LEGISLATIVE & POLICY MANAGER 037X SENIOR ADVISOR CITY COUNCIL 037X SENIOR PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 033X COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL 031X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST III 031X COMMUNITY FACILITATOR 031X OPERATIONS MANAGER & MENTOR – CITY COUNCIL 031X PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST 031X POLICY ANALYST/PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 028X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST II 028X CONSTITUENT LIAISON/POLICY ANALYST 027X CONSTITUENT LIAISON 026X PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST I 026X ASSISTANT TO THE COUNCIL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 025X COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT/AGENDA 024X COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 021X COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 041X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 037X DEPUTY DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY SERVICES 037X DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (ENGINEER)037X PLANNING DIRECTOR 037X BUILDING OFFICIAL 035X DIRECTOR OF HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 035X DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (PLANNER)035X YOUTH & FAMILY DIVISION DIRECTOR 035X APPENDIX B – APPOINTED EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT Effective June 25, 2023 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 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 The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $4,464,748.66 in revenue and $9,248,709.66 in expenses. The amendment proposes changes in nine (9) funds, with an increase of three (3) FTEs in the Fleet program. The proposal includes 12 initiatives for Council review and additional housekeeping items. 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 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, remov 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. SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. ______ of 2024 (Fourth 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 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 __________, 2024. ________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________ Mayor’s Action: ____ Approved ____ Vetoed _________________________ MAYOR ATTEST: _______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. _________ of 2024. Published: ___________________. Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Approved As To Form ___ _______ Jaysen Oldroyd Num b e r /Na m e Fu n d R e v e n u e A m o u n t Ex p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t R e v e n u e A m o u n t Ex p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t On g o i n g o r O n e - ti m e F T E s 1 A i r Qua l i t y In c e n t i v e s P r o gra m Su s t a i n a b i l i t y - 2 3 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On goi n g - 2 S h o r t - T e r m R e n t a l I d e n t i f i c a t i o n S o f t w a r e G F - 4 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On goi n g - 3 W i t h d r a w n pri o r t o t r a n s m i t t a l 4 I m m e d i a t e N e e d s i n L i b e r t y P a r k - O n g o i n g C o s t s G F - 3 1 , 2 5 0 . 0 0 On g o i n g - 4 Im m e d i a t e N e e d s i n L i b e r t y P a r k - U s e o f V a c a n c y a n d At t r i t i o n S a v i n gs GF - ( 2 8 5 , 1 2 5 . 0 0 ) On e - t i m e - 4 Im m e d i a t e N e e d s i n L i b e r t y P a r k - U s e o f V a c a n c y a n d At t r i t i o n S a v i n gs GF - 2 8 5 , 1 2 5 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 4 I m m e d i a t e N e e d s i n L i b e r t y P a r k - T r a n s f e r t o C I P C I P 28 5 , 1 2 5 . 0 0 2 8 5 , 1 2 5 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 5 Pu b l i c L a n d s O n e - t i m e B u d g e t R e a l l o c a t i o n - U s e o f Va c a n c y an d A t t r i t i o n S a v i n gs GF - ( 5 5 8 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ) On e - t i m e - 5 Pu b l i c L a n d s O n e - t i m e B u d g e t R e a l l o c a t i o n - U s e o f Va c a n c y an d A t t r i t i o n S a v i n gs GF - 2 2 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 5 Pu b l i c L a n d s O n e - t i m e B u d g e t R e a l l o c a t i o n - U s e o f Va c a n c y an d A t t r i t i o n S a v i n gs GF - 3 3 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 5 Pu b l i c L a n d s O n e - t i m e B u d g e t R e a l l o c a t i o n - T r a n s f e r to F l e e t Fl e e t 33 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 3 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 6 F i r e S t a t i o n 1 F e n c i n g Im pac t F e e - 1 3 0 , 2 7 5 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 6 F i r e S t a t i o n 1 F e n c i n g CI P 13 0 , 2 7 5 . 0 0 1 3 0 , 2 7 5 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 7 I n c r e a s e F l e e t M a i n t e n a n c e C a pac i t y GF - 3 4 8 , 8 0 9 . 0 0 On goi n g - 7 I n c r e a s e F l e e t M a i n t e n a n c e C a p a c i t y G F - 5 1 , 1 0 0 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 7 I n c r e a s e F l e e t M a i n t e n a n c e C a p a c i t y F le e t 34 8 , 8 0 9 . 0 0 3 4 8 , 8 0 9 . 0 0 On g o i n g 3. 0 0 7 I n c r e a s e F l e e t M a i n t e n a n c e C a p a c i t y F le e t 42 , 1 0 0 . 0 0 4 2 , 1 0 0 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 7 I n c r e a s e F l e e t M a i n t e n a n c e C a pac i t y IM S 9, 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 8 P o l i c e C l e a n N e i ghb o r h o o d s T e a m s G F - 1 , 8 2 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On goi n g - 9 P u b l i c S a f e t y Syst e m s S o f t w a r e IM S - 1 9 4 , 5 4 0 . 0 0 On goi n g - 10 V e r s a t e r m C a s e S e r v i c e GF - ( 4 8 , 9 5 4 . 0 0 ) On e - t i m e - 10 V e r s a t e r m C a s e S e r v i c e IM S - 2 0 3 , 1 4 8 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 11 O u t s i d e T r a f f i c S i gna l R e pai r GF - 2 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 12 A P C O I n t e l l i C o m m - E M D P r o t o c o l 911 C o m m - 1 6 5 , 7 93. 0 0 On e - t i m e - 13 C i t y At t o r n e y - O u t s i d e C o u n s e l GF - 2 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 1 Pl a n n i n g & D e s i g n D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r R e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n t o Appoi n t e d ( G r a d e 35) GF - - On g o i n g - 2 O n goi n g La n d f i l l P r o jec t s CI P 1,00 0 ,00 0 . 0 0 1 ,00 0 ,00 0 . 0 0 On goi n g - 3 Tr a n s f e r f r o m T r a n s p o r t a t i o n t o D e b t S e r v i c e f o r Ga r a ge L o a n f r o m S t a t e GF - 1 , 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 3 Tr a n s f e r f r o m T r a n s p o r t a t i o n t o D e b t S e r v i c e f o r Ga r a ge L o a n f r o m S t a t e De b t S e r v i c e 1, 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - Se c t i o n E : G r a n t s R e qui r i n g No N e w S t a f f R e s o u r c e s - Fi s c a l Y e a r 2 0 2 3 - 2 4 B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 4 - R e v i s e d Co u n c i l A p p r o v e d Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n P r o p o s e d Se c t i o n A : N e w I t e m s Se c t i o n D : H o u s e k e e p i n g Se c t i o n F : D o n a t i o n s Se c t i o n C : G r a n t s f o r N e w S t a f f R e s o u r c e s Se c t i o n B : G r a n t s f o r E x i s t i n g S t a f f R e s o u r c e s 1 Fi s c a l Y e a r 2 0 2 3 - 2 4 B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 4 - R e v i s e d Co n s e n t A g e n d a # 3 1 Bl o o m b e r g P h i l a n t h r o p i e s W a k e t h e G r e a t S a l t L a k e Mi s c G r a n t s 1, 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 On e - t i m e - 2 St a t e o f U t a h I n c r e a s e H o m e l e s s M i t i gat i o n G r a n t Mi s c G r a n t s 21 6 ,439.6 6 2 1 6 ,439.6 6 On e - t i m e - To t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t It e m s 4, 4 6 4 , 7 4 8 . 6 6 9 , 2 4 8 , 7 0 9 . 6 6 - - 3. 0 0 In i t i a t i v e N u m b e r / N a m e Fu n d Re v e n u e A m o u n t Ex p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t R e v e n u e A m o u n t Ex p e n d i t u r e Am o u n t On g o i n g o r O n e - ti m e F T E s To t a l b y Fu n d , Bu d get A m e n d m e n t # 4: Ge n e r a l F u n d GF - 3 , 8 6 0 , 2 0 5 . 0 0 - - - Fl e e t F u n d Fl e e t 72 3 , 9 0 9 . 0 0 7 2 3 , 9 0 9 . 0 0 - - 3. 0 0 CI P F u n d CI P 1, 4 1 5 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 4 1 5 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 - - - Im p a c t F e e F u n d Im p a c t F e e - 1 3 0 , 2 7 5 . 0 0 - - - Su s t a i n a b i l i t y F u n d Su s t a i n a b i l i t y - 2 3 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - - - 91 1 C o m m u n i c a t i o n s F u n d 91 1 C o m m - 1 6 5 , 7 9 3 . 0 0 - - - IM S F u n d IM S 9, 0 0 0 . 0 0 4 0 6 , 6 8 8 . 0 0 - - - Mi s c e l l a n e o u s G r a n t s F u n d Mi s c G r a n t s 1, 2 1 6 , 4 3 9 . 6 6 1 , 2 1 6 , 4 3 9 . 6 6 - - - De b t S e r v i c e F u n d De b t S e r v i c e 1, 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 , 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - - - To t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t 4 , 4 6 4 , 7 4 8 . 6 6 9 , 2 4 8 , 7 0 9 . 6 6 - - 3. 0 0 Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n P r o p o s e d Co u n c i l A p p r o v e d Se c t i o n I : C o u n c i l A d d e d I t e m s Se c t i o n G : C o u n c i l C o n s e n t A g e n d a - - G r a n t A w a r d s 2 Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #4 - Revised Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 2 A-2: Short-Term Rental Identification Software GF $49,000.00 Department: CAN Prepared By: Antonio Padilla / Ken Anderson For questions, please include Antonio Padilla, Ken Anderson, Blake Thomas, Tammy Hunsaker and Brent Beck On April 4th, 2023, the City Council approved significant updates to the ADU ordinance. With this ordinance, the council desires to properly monitor and enforce ADUs used as short-term rentals that are non-compliant with city codes. To properly monitor permitted ADUs and ensure compliance, the city would like to contract with a company to identify rental properties used and marketed as short-term rentals accurately. Inspectors are tasked with sifting through large amounts of data to identify a potential non-compliant property manually. It is necessary to implement this strategy as soon as possible to use our resources more efficiently. CAN has coordinated with IMS and the Innovations Team prior to the decision to move forward with an amendment request. However, since this software is specific to Civil Enforcement, the decision was made to house the budget in CAN instead of IMS. The anticipated annual cost of the short-term rental software is $39,000 per year, with a 3-year agreement. Keeping up with the latest enforcement trends is necessary by sending our inspectors for training annually for short-term rental and code enforcement. The cost of training would be approximately $10,000. The total amount needed is $49,000 annually. A-4: Immediate Needs in Liberty Park GF –Ongoing Costs $31,250.00 GF - Use of Vacancy & Attrition Savings ($285,125.00) GF - Use of Vacancy & Attrition Savings $285,125.00 CIP $285,125.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Toby Hazelbaker For questions, please include Kristin Riker, Toby Hazelbaker and Gregg Evans The Department of Public Lands is requesting a budget amendment for Liberty Park needs totaling $316,375. A $285,125 portion of this is slated for one-time use to address the greenhouse and gates CIP needs discussed in the narrative below. This one-time portion will come from this fiscal year’s Public Lands vacancy and attrition savings which will be transferred to CIP for project completion. The remaining $31,250 is being requested from the general fund balance for ongoing costs at Liberty Park. The breakdown of all $316,375 in costs is contained in the table below. Ongoing Costs Greenhouse Costs $31,250 One-time Greenhouse Costs $248,015 One-time Gate Costs $37,110 Total Costs to General Fund for FY 2024 $316,375 The first request is to aid in the displacement of staff and operations at the Liberty Park Greenhouse due to a recent facilities condition assessment that has deemed the greenhouse to be unsafe for City employees. The second is for the purchase of gates to block roads at Liberty Park, due to increased after-hours cars entering the park. Greenhouse –In October 2023, Public Lands received a Facility Condition Assessment contracted by the Facilities Division within Public Services. The assessment identified several concerns, and that structurally, the main house, the south green house and the concrete deck over the underground garage are severely damaged. Staff and operations are no longer using this facility and the department is working on a temporary solution to accommodate operations while design and construction of a new facility is worked out. An FY 2025 CIP application will be submitted for design and to create construction documents for the mitigation and repairs of the facility. Public Lands and Engineering are currently working to secure a contractor for a structural review of the site. Depending on the outcome of that review, the current request for Fi s c a l Y e a r 2 0 2 3 - 2 4 B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t # 4 - R e v i s e d Cu r r e n t Y e a r B u d get S u m m a r y, pro v i d e d f o r i n f o r m a t i o n o n l y FY 2 0 2 3-2 4 Bu d get , In c l u d i n g Bu d get A m e n d m e n t s Re v e n u e FY 2 0 2 3 - 2 4 A d o p t e d B u d g e t - R e v e n u e BA # 1 T o t a l B A # 2 T o t a l BA # 3 T o t a l B A # 4 T o t a l BA # 5 T o t a l To t a l R e v e n u e Ge n e r a l F u n d ( F u n d 1 0 0 0 ) 44 8 , 5 1 4 , 9 1 8 0 . 0 0 0. 0 0 0 . 0 0 0. 0 0 44 8 , 5 1 4 , 9 1 8 . 0 0 Cu r b a n d G u t t e r ( F C 2 0 ) 3, 0 0 0 3, 0 0 0 . 0 0 DE A T a s k F o r c e F u n d ( F C 4 1 ) 1, 3 9 7 , 3 5 5 1, 3 9 7 , 3 5 5 . 0 0 Mi s c S pec i a l S e r v i c e D i s t r i c t s ( F C 4 6 ) 1, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 0. 0 0 1, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 St r e e t L i g h t i n g E n t e r p r i s e ( F C 4 8 ) 4, 6 8 1 , 1 8 5 4, 6 8 1 , 1 8 5 . 0 0 Wa t e r F u n d ( F C 5 1 ) 17 6 , 6 3 7 , 2 8 8 17 6 , 6 3 7 , 2 8 8 . 0 0 Se w e r F u n d ( F C 5 2 ) 28 9 , 9 4 1 , 1 7 8 28 9 , 9 4 1 , 1 7 8 . 0 0 St o r m W a t e r F u n d ( F C 5 3 ) 19 , 8 6 5 , 8 9 2 19 , 8 6 5 , 8 9 2 . 0 0 Ai r p o r t F u n d ( F C 5 4 , 5 5 , 5 6 ) 40 3 , 5 1 3 , 0 0 0 40 3 , 5 1 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Re f u s e F u n d ( F C 5 7 ) 25 , 2 4 0 , 4 5 9 0. 0 0 25 , 2 4 0 , 4 5 9 . 0 0 Go l f F u n d ( F C 5 9 ) 12 , 7 1 0 , 0 6 7 12 , 7 1 0 , 0 6 7 . 0 0 E- 9 1 1 F u n d ( F C 6 0 ) 3, 9 2 5 , 0 0 0 - 3, 9 2 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Fl e e t F u n d ( F C 6 1 ) 32 , 1 0 8 , 9 6 9 3 6 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 97 5 , 1 7 7 . 0 0 7 2 3 , 9 0 9 . 0 0 33 , 8 4 4 , 8 5 5 . 0 0 IM S F u n d ( F C 6 5 ) 36 , 2 5 4 , 3 5 7 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 6, 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 9, 0 0 0 . 0 0 36 , 2 9 0 , 3 5 7 . 0 0 Co u n t y Q u a r t e r C e n t S a l e s T a x f o r Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n ( F C 6 9 ) 9, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 9, 7 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 CD B G O p e r a t i n g F u n d ( F C 7 1 ) 5, 5 9 7 , 7 6 3 - 5, 5 9 7 , 7 6 3 . 0 0 Mi s c e l l a n e o u s G r a n t s ( F C 7 2 ) 8, 9 1 9 , 9 1 7 16 , 1 9 7 , 4 2 3 . 0 0 1 , 7 0 5 , 7 0 0 . 7 9 1, 2 1 6 , 4 3 9 . 6 6 28 , 0 3 9 , 4 8 0 . 4 5 Ot h e r S p e c i a l R e v e n u e ( F C 7 3 ) 40 0 , 0 0 0 62 , 4 1 6 . 0 0 46 2 , 4 1 6 . 0 0 Do n a t i o n F u n d ( F C 7 7 ) 50 0 , 0 0 0 50 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Ho u s i n g L o a n s & T r u s t ( F C 7 8 ) 14 , 6 5 9 , 0 4 3 14 , 6 5 9 , 0 4 3 . 0 0 De b t S e r v i c e F u n d ( F C 8 1 ) 32 , 3 4 1 , 5 8 6 1, 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 33 , 4 4 1 , 5 8 6 . 0 0 CI P F u n d ( F C 8 3 , 8 4 & 8 6 ) 30 , 1 9 9 , 7 5 6 2 1 8 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 25 , 4 8 5 , 8 9 3 . 2 5 4 1 0 , 1 7 7 . 0 0 1, 4 1 5 , 4 0 0 . 0 0 57 , 7 2 9 , 2 2 6 . 2 5 Go v e r n m e n t a l I m m u n i t y ( F C 8 5 ) 3, 8 8 8 , 5 8 1 3, 8 8 8 , 5 8 1 . 0 0 Ri s k F u n d ( F C 8 7 ) 60 , 9 3 2 , 1 3 7 60 , 9 3 2 , 1 3 7 . 0 0 To t a l o f B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t I t e m s 1, 6 2 3 , 6 3 1 , 4 5 1 2 6 3 , 8 0 0 . 0 0 4 1 , 7 5 1 , 7 3 2 . 2 5 3, 1 0 3 , 0 5 4 . 7 9 4 , 4 6 4 , 7 4 8 . 6 6 - 1, 6 7 3 , 2 1 4 , 7 8 6 . 7 0 3 Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #4 - Revised Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 3 funding could be used in one of two ways. The first and most desirable will be to make repairs to the East greenhouse (the West greenhouse and office area are very unlikely to be eligible for repair). The second option will be to purchase hoop houses for the annual plants, fencing to protect the temporary greenhouses, access to water, and to supply power with a new transformer. The current transformer is near capacity and cannot serve this temporary solution. The new transformer will be used for the greenhouse once mitigation or reconstruction is complete in either option. The Department is requesting funds to rent a mobile office with restrooms for the staff based out of the greenhouse.The one-time amount requested has been calculated to cover the cost of the hoop house option, as the structural review is not complete. SLC Trails and Natural Lands will rent underutilized greenhouse space at University of Utah to maintain the native plant program. The City will provide learning opportunities in plant propagation and production, and native plants, for University students. Liberty Park Gates –The open road into Liberty Park is leading to significant afterhours activity. This includes vehicle camping, the sale of drugs, vandalism (wire is being pulled from light posts by attaching the wire to vehicle bumpers), and other crime. In addition, many vehicles remain on site through the night after closing hours. As both Code Enforcement and Police increase efforts to secure the park at closing time, without locked gates, it is not feasible to fully achieve. Exterior gates to the main park loop (both north and south locations) will control vehicle access to the park after hours, where interior gates along the interior loop (both east and west) will help control parking problems as well as late evening vandalism, unpermitted events and illegal event parking issues in the future. The gates selected are simple, stock, tube- steel, black-painted, manual swinging and hand-locked. The historic preservation group is satisfied with the proposed solution. A-5: Public Lands One-time Budget Reallocation GF - Use of Vacancy & Attrition Savings ($558,000.00) GF - Use of Vacancy & Attrition Savings $225,000.00 GF - Use of Vacancy & Attrition Savings $333,000.00 Fleet $333,000.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Gregg Evans For questions, please include Kristin Riker and Gregg Evans The Public Lands Department is requesting a budget amendment to reallocate $558,000 as a one-time move of funds from the department’s existing personnel budget generated by attrition and vacancy savings to other operational expense categories. The Department is proposing to transfer a one-time amount of $333,000 to the Fleet Fund to order critical operational equipment for redundancy purposes, and to reallocate a one-time amount of $225,000 to the operations and maintenance budget to cover one-time contracted services. This item does not include a requested allocation from general fund fund balance. The $333,000 request mentioned above is to procure two (2) additional mowers and an excavator. The large-area mower is in regular use in the Parks division. Mowers range in age from 2010 to 2019, with a median age of 8.5 years where the average retirement age for these mowers is 10 years. At one point during the 2023 season, four of eight wide-area mowers were out of service, and it is not uncommon to have two or three units out of service at any time. Irrigation repairs are another constant in the Parks Division. Staff utilize mini excavators to dig up and repair lines. When this aging excavator equipment fails, there are increased delays in repairing leaks and breaks and a greater chance of dead trees, turf, and shrubs. Based on the latest bids for this equipment the ordering lead time was around 18 months. With lead times this far out, ordering this equipment now will significantly accelerate the purchasing process and delivery of equipment. The $225,000 request mentioned above is to address staff challenges. Hiring full and part-time positions has become increasingly challenging for the Public Lands Department, which has generated attrition and vacancy savings this year. When positions are not filled, a backlog of work accumulates. The Department is proposing to utilize contracted labor in Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #4 - Revised Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 4 this instance to maintain continuity of operations and relieve workloads for existing staff. Without contracted labor, essential maintenance functions cannot be performed as expected by the public and the Council. A-6: Fire Station 1 Fencing Impact Fees $130,275.00 CIP $130,275.00 Department: Public Services and Fire Prepared By: JP Goates / Michael Fox For questions, please include JP Goates, Kimberley Schmeling, Michael Fox, Jorge Chamorro and Karl Lieb Fire Station 1, at 211 South 500 East, is located on the corner of 500 East and 200 South. It has one driveway that enters the parking lot from 500 E. and another that enters from 200 S. The parking lot is not well lit and is secluded. The location, pedestrian traffic, and access from two directions has led to many issues over the years. • People often cut through the parking lot to get to the businesses on 500 E. • Persons experiencing homelessness have set up camping spots in the parking lot. • When returning to the station at night, crews have seen people running out of the parking lot on multiple occasions. • Since 2019, SLC PD has opened 14 cases related to issues in the parking lot. Including vehicle theft, prowling, and property theft. • Since 2018, SLC PD has responded to 45 calls at the station that were not made into active cases. It is the Salt Lake City Fire Department’s priority to provide a safe area to conduct emergency response and for our employees to park and secure their private property while on shift. The department believes that a gated fence to the parking lot would assist in creating a safer area to conduct emergency responses and in preventing crime. The Facilities Division has received estimates for installation of security fencing at the perimeter of Fire Station 1. This will include chain link at the rear perimeter and ornamental fencing and gates at the front of the station and two access points. Fire impact fees excess capacity is proposed to be utilized for this request. A-7: Increase Fleet Maintenance Capacity GF $348,809.00 GF $51,100.00 Fleet $348,809.00 Fleet 42,100.00 IMS 9,000.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: Julie Crookston / Jorge Chamorro For questions, please include Jorge Chamorro, Julie Crookston, Kimberley Schmeling, Denise Sorensen and Nancy Bean For the last several years the Fleet division has been extremely conservative in its budget requests as leadership was determining how Fleet maintenance needs had changed due to the long-lasting impacts of the pandemic. The pandemic caused drastic changes to the automotive industry, such as increased costs and delivery time for parts and vehicles, with some vehicle orders being completely cancelled. These issues have resulted in an older fleet that has more maintenance needs at the same time the size of the fleet has increased as departments grow. Additionally, there were drastic changes to vehicle usage during the pandemic, which are now showing lasting consequences. All these factors have necessitated creative measures to maintain adequate Fleet services. During the FY 2024 budget process, the department was hopeful it could continue to maintain its level of services for one more year with the intention to ask for more resources during the FY 2025 budget process. However, this approach is no longer sufficient. Fleet has been sending more and more vehicles to outside vendors for repairs, i.e. sublet and offering Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #4 - Revised Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 5 overtime to existing mechanics, such that 73% of the budget for those items has already been used while only half the year has elapsed. Additionally, multiple departments in the City have experienced operational impacts due to the slow turnaround of vehicles. Unless more resources are dedicated to increased Fleet maintenance capacity, turnaround time for vehicles will continue to increase, causing City operations to be adversely affected as City employees are unable to perform their work without a vehicle. Three new mechanics (FTEs) and minimal sublet funding are being requested. The total amount needed for this request will be $399,909. An amount of $9,000 is also included for IMS to provide the necessary hardware and software for each new hire. A detailed breakdown of expenses is outlined below. Fleet Mechanics (3 FTE)–on-going $91,809 Education & Training –one-time $42,100 IMS Expense (software, hardware) one-time $9,000 Outside Repair –Mechanical (sublet) one-time $257,000 Total Costs to General Fund for FY 2024 $399,909 Adding three (3) new mechanics to the Fleet shop would increase capacity in the long term such that Fleet could maintain service levels while utilizing normal amounts of sublet and overtime funding. The original intent was to request these FTEs in the upcoming budgetary process; however, fleet maintenance capacity needs to be increased more quickly. It is anticipated that these mechanics could be hired between February and March, but until then, Fleet will need to continue subletting at the increased rates utilized so far this year. A-8: Police Clean Neighborhoods Teams GF $1,829,000.00 Department: Police Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich For questions, please include Shellie Dietrich and Chief Brown The Salt Lake City Police Department is requesting $1,829,000 to staff officers (hereby referred to as “mitigation officers”), on overtime, as part of the City’s ongoing efforts to reduce illegal camping, improve park safety, and to enforce the Department’s Downtown Safety Initiative (DSI). Currently, the Department is utilizing two (2) full-time sergeants to coordinate and manage mitigation officers working on overtime focused on enforcing the law, prioritizing public safety, and reducing victimization while simultaneously demonstrating compassion and empathy for the city’s unsheltered community. Due to the sheer volume of calls for service and current staffing levels, the Department does not have the available resources that can be dedicated for mitigation services without the use of overtime. In October 2023, with the increase of shelter bed availability, the Department increased the number of mitigation officers, utilizing overtime from both ARPA grant funding and general fund. These mitigation officers are primarily assigned around the “Temporary Shelter Community” (TSC) in the Rio Grande District but may assist, as needed, in other areas within the City. Within the TSC, a private contractor provides security 24/7 for operational needs. If there is a call for police services, SLCPD officers would respond. The mitigation officers, in addition to regular proactive patrol work, are frequently requested by the Salt Lake County Health Department to assist with enhanced mitigation impact clean ups. Due to fluctuation in officer availability for mitigation overtime shifts and delays in the Department’s staffing retention program, the Department had unspent budget in FY23 from vacancy savings. However, the Department does not anticipate having a large budget savings at the end of FY24 due to its increase in hiring and other financial needs including coverage for patrol calls for service and increased staffing needs for public order events, that may be covered using FY24 vacancy savings. For the remainder of FY24 and FY25, the Department will need to rely on overtime funding to staff mitigation officers, especially during the summer months when the City’s unsheltered population historically increases as the number of I Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #4 - Revised Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 6 shelter beds decreases with the emergency winter shelters closing. The Department anticipates, and is planning for, additional FTEs for the Department to sustain its mitigation efforts. In the future, the Department intends to request additional officers for one (1) sergeant and five (5) officers. This squad will be similar to the Department’s Homeless Resource Center squads but will have a responsibility area that includes the future home of the state’s Micro Community Shelter (MCS). The MCS will qualify as a Tier 1 shelter, and is expecte d to be located on 700 West, just south of Interstate 80. This squad will only be a portion of the needed staffing as it will only cover four-10-hour days out of seven-24-hour periods. The phased deployment will coincide with hiring and training of new officers. Full implementation of the grant funded squad is expected within 15-18 months. A-9: Public Safety Systems Software IMS $194,540.00 Department: Police /IMS Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich / Aaron Bentley For questions, please include Aaron Bentley, Shellie Dietrich, Joseph Anthony and Gloria Cortes This request is for a software solution that provides investigative tools for accessing and extracting electronic data from cell phones, offered by Cellebrite. The current process is very labor and resource intensive. This software will provide the needed tools and reduces costs to IMS in the PC replacement program and software staff. The capability for Police and Fire investigators to utilize data extraction for case investigations is very limited. The current software solution is not functional on the computers that these positions have, which is creating extensive delays in investigations and case resolution. Without this software upgrade, IMS would need to replace currently existing computers with computers that have additional functionality, including more robust storage, and better video and graphic cards. Police has worked closely with IMS in determining the best long-term solution, leading to this recommendation. The amount requested to support this need is $194,540 in ongoing cost. A-10: Versaterm Case Service GF ($48,954.00) IMS $203,148.00 Department: Police / IMS Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich / Aaron Bentley For questions, please include Aaron Bentley, Shellie Dietrich, Joseph Anthony and Gloria Cortes This request is for Versaterm Case Service. Versaterm is the records management system (RMS) and computer aided design (CAD) system utilized by public safety. Case Services is a versaterm product that integrates with the RMS/CAD. It provides an online reporting solution for the community to report non-emergency calls for service online.They’re provided with a case number and routed to the proper area for response. This is a software upgrade that is now required with the Versaterm upgrade to 8.1 that has significant enhancements efficiencies and will provide efficiencies for the public safety departments within the city and improved customer service for the community. This upgrade provides enhanced online reporting including NIBRs data collection and validation and case auto-transcription of general offense reports of non-emergency incident entered through Case Service Reporting. It streamlines the process of receiving reports from Loss Prevention / Shoplift departments with a reporting process for big box retailers. Also significant improvements were made to the Case Service dashboard to provide better insight into quantities, types, and status of all Case Service submissions. This software also provides a phone tree for non-emergency calls to public safety. A-11: Outside Traffic Signal Repair GF $250,000.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: Julie Crookston For questions, please include Julie Crookston, Jorge Chamorro, Mark Stephens Traffic signals at two separate intersections in the City have been damaged by non-city vehicles. (Gladiola and California signals were damaged by a semi-truck roll over; 200 West 100 South signals were damaged by a grade-all forklift hitting the mast arm and spinning the pole foundation.) The damage is severe enough that they cannot be repaired by our in- house technicians. Street’s staff has obtained quotes for the repairs needed from our contracted vendor. This work will ultimately be paid for by the insurance companies of the outside entities who caused the damage. However, Risk has informed us that best practice is for the repairs to be managed by the City,and then to be reimbursed by the insurance Salt Lake City FY 2023-24 Budget Amendment #4 - Revised Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 7 companies. This will ensure the City receives full compensation for the damages as the total cost will only be known after the work is complete. Public Services does not have sufficient funding in our budget to cover the cost of repairs. No long- term impact to the general fund is expected as, once the work is completed, Risk will seek reimbursement from the insurance companies, and the money will go back to the general fund. The timing of this reimbursement is unknown and may not be in the same fiscal year as the expenditures are incurred. This request is for $250,000 which includes a 10% contingency on the quotes that we have received. This is a replacement only - no design necessary; no upgrade and no addition to be made and is not a CIP. A-12: APCO IntelliComm –EMD Protocol 911 Comm $165,793.00 Department: 911 Communications Prepared By: Lisa Kehoe For questions, please include Lisa Kehoe, Megan Dickerson and Sandee Moore The City needs to match existing medical dispatch protocol equipment and processes currently being used by the Salt Lake Valley Emergency Communications Center (“VECC”). (Salt Lake City Code subsection 3.24.160(1)(b))-The City’s continued use of ProQA’s dispatching software would also not be conducive to accomplishing the shared CAD requirements expressed by the legislature because continued use of different dispatching protocols, not only slows the City’s dispatch responses down but also hinders dispatch process es throughout Salt Lake County. The Versaterm CAD can only use one medical protocol and the fact that the City and VECC currently use different medical protocols creates unnecessary complications that arise when a 911 call needs to be transferred between the City and VECC. In such situations each agency must take time to change the call to fit the parameters in each dispatch center’s medical protocol before help can be dispatched. By contracting with APCO for medical dispatch services, the City can achieve a genuinely interoperable common CAD system that will eliminate delays in time, allow for the inefficient use of resources, and ease the continuity gaps that currently arise when calls are transferred between dispatch centers. If the department doesn’t move forward with this new equipment, it will be forced to continue with the existing equipment that is inefficient and renew the old contract. The costs shown are all one-time expenditures. Once implemented, the department will have the ability to train its staff members instead of outsourcing through another agency. If industry standards require an update to the protocols, those will not be an additional accrued cost. Funding will come from the E911 fund, which has a fund balance of $5,256,661 as of June. Please see the attached document for further detail. A-13: City Attorney –Outside Counsel GF $250,000 Department: City Attorney Prepared By; Greg Cleary For questions, please include Katie Lewis, Mary Beth Thompson, or Greg Cleary. The City Attorney Department is requesting $250,000 from fund balance (general fund) to support needs for outside counsel. Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section D: Housekeeping D-1: Planning & Design Division Director Reclassification to Appointed (Grade 35) GF $0.00 Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Tyler Murdock 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: 2/22/2024 Erin Mendenhall, Mayor Date Sent to Council: 2/22/2024 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: February 22, 2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Erin Mendenhall, Mayor SUBJECT: Administration Appointment Recommendation STAFF CONTACTS: Erin.Mendenhall@slcgov.com April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Administration Appointment Recommendation RECOMMENDATION: The administration recommends the council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and give advice and consent to appoint Jill Remington Love, Chief Administrative Officer – Mayor’s Office BUDGET IMPACT: None 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: 2/9/2024 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 2/9/2024 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 2/9/2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Appeals Hearing Officer STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Appeals Hearing Officer RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Clayton Preece member of the Appeals Hearing Officer. 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 February 9, 2024 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Dear Council Member Petro, Listed below is my recommendation for the membership appointment for the Appeals Hearing Officer. Clayton Preece to be appointed for a five 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: 2/9/2024 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 2/9/2024 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 2/9/2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Appeals Hearing Officer STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Appeals Hearing Officer RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Aaron McKnight member of the Appeals Hearing Officer. 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 February 9, 2024 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Dear Council Member Petro, Listed below is my recommendation for the membership appointment for the Appeals Hearing Officer. Aaron McKnight to be appointed for a five 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: 2/26/2024 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 2/26/2024 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 2/26/2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Airport Board STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Airport Board RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Craig Smith member of the Airport 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 February 26, 2024 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Dear Council Member Petro, Listed below is my recommendation for the membership appointment for the Airport Board. Craig Smith 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: 2/9/2024 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 2/9/2024 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 2/9/2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Business Advisory Board STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Business Advisory Board RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Brittany Dew member of the Business 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 February 9, 2024 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Dear Council Member Petro, Listed below is my recommendation for the membership appointment for the Business Advisory Board. Brittany Dew to be appointed for a four year term starting from date of City Council advice and consent and ending on Monday, December 25, 2028. I respectfully ask for your consideration and support for this appointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall, Mayor cc: file Item E2 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 DATE:March 5, 2024 RE:Council Member Policy C.16 – Comments at Council Meetings Comment rules, and procedures MOTION 1 (suspend the Council’s practice and adopt) I move that the Council suspend our typical practice and adopt the resolution. I further move that the Council direct Council staff to expand options for the public to submit videos of their recorded comments. MOTION 2 (do not adopt) I move that the Council not adopt the resolution. 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 DATE:March 5, 2024 RE:Council Member Policy C.16 – Comments at Council Meetings Comment rules, and procedures ISSUE AT A GLANCE The Council will discuss possible changes to the Council’s Policy Manual, Section C.16 related to Comments at Council Meetings. The policy, rules, and procedure are in place to ensure that City business is able to be conducted in a reasonable and orderly manner. The Council has established meeting rules and procedures within legal guidelines and with the following goals in mind: •Safe environment: To create a safe atmosphere that is not intimidating so that people are encouraged to participate, attend, and share their viewpoint, even if it conflicts with others in the audience, •Feedback forum: To provide an open comment period for the public to address the Council on a variety of topics affecting the City (that is not otherwise scheduled for a public hearing). •Orderly & Efficient Meeting: To allow adequate time for public comment, required hearings, deliberation, Council action, and other necessary and scheduled City business. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. Many jurisdictions have structured their public comment agenda differently than Salt Lake City. The Council has received feedback about considering some of the changes to the general comment section during formal Council meetings. Does the Council wish to consider any of these changes: a. Overall time limit: Does the Council wish to implement a time limit to the general comment section? b. Amount of time for each speaker: Does the Council wish to change the two-minute limit per speaker? c. Variety of topics: Does the Council wish to implement a system other than “first- come, first-served” so that a variety of topics can be covered by the people who came to speak? (i.e. a lottery or self-selection based on topic) d. Frequency of General Comment: Does the Council wish to consider holding General Comment once per month? Page | 2 e. End time for the meeting: Does the Council wish to consider setting a maximum end time for Council meetings? f. Other? 2. The Council may wish to discuss with the City Attorney whether any of the rules or procedures can be adjusted in the moment if a unique situation allows. (For example, depending on the number of people signed up to speak, could the Council adjust the time available to each speaker for one night, or extend any time limits, etc.) 3. The Council may wish to direct staff to make updates to the Public Meeting Rules of Decorum and/or Policy Manual as appropriate, to include any approved changes. ADDITIONAL / BACKGROUND INFORMATION The existing Public Meeting rules / “Rules of Decorum” (attached) already cover: •General information about the public comment opportunities at the Council meetings and how to register whether attending in-person or remotely. •Public Meeting Rules designed to maintain the: o Creation of a safe and comfortable forum for people to participate o Prohibition of discriminatory language addressing a person or group’s religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, color, descent, gender, sexual orientation, disability, age, or other identity factor. o Security and safety of all meeting attendees o Protection of historic elements The Council may wish to make edits, addition, or clarifications to the Rules of Decorum or Council Policy Manual regarding Public Comment. •Registration window: specify when registration for public comment is open – starting and ending time (Note: the Council has already requested to change this to 7:30 p.m. or at the closure of a hearing.) •Any new time limits •Comments about city issues should be addressed to the Council as a body, or the Council and Mayor as a group, and shall not be addressed to individual elected officials. •Clarify: o Public comment may not address any public hearing topics o Constituents may not sign-up on behalf of others o Speaking time may not be combined with another speaker ATTACHMENTS: 1. Current Council Public Meeting Rules of Decorum 2. Sample Public Comment rules from other cities 3. Council Policy Manual Section C.16: Comments at City Council Meetings 4. Utah State Code - Open & Public Meetings Act, Part 2: Meetings 5.Utah State Code - Open & Public Meetings Act, Part 3: Enforcement Salt Lake City Council Welcomes Your Comments There are two sections on the Council agenda where constituents can address the Council for two minutes. All information submitted during public comment becomes part of the public record. Those in attendance must follow the Public Meeting Rules outlined below. Public Hearings: During this meeting section, the public may comment on public hearing items listed on the Council's formal meeting agenda. Speakers must limit their comments to the public hearing topic. You can register to comment until the Council closes the hearing. Public Comments to the City Council: The general comments section allows the public to address the Council about any item not scheduled for a public hearing or any other City business. Registration ends at 7:30 p.m. Note: The public comment portion of the meeting is generally for constituents to speak and the Council to listen, however, there may be times when a Council Member may request a point of personal privilege from the Chair to ask a question or make a brief remark. Steps for Public Comment In-Person Attendees • Fill out a public comment card. Check the box indicating that you want to speak. If you do not want to speak, check the appropriate box, and write your comments on the back. Hand your comment card to a Council staff member. Please fill out a comment card for each public hearing and general comment section you want to submit a comment for. • Council staff will call upon everyone signed up to speak in the order cards are received. • When called upon to approach the podium, say your name into the microphone, and then proceed with your comments (providing the area of the city where you live is also helpful to the Council). • If you run out of time to speak, you can write your comments on a comment card. Zoom Attendees • Access the Zoom meeting information at SLCCouncil.com. Fill out the registration. Once registered, Council staff will add you to the speakers' queue. • You will receive an email with a link to join the webinar. Click on the link and follow the prompts. You may join 30 minutes before the meeting starts. • When you join the meeting, your camera and microphone are turned off. Council staff will call on you when it is your turn to speak and unmute your microphone. After your two minutes are up, Council staff will mute your microphone and move on to the next commentor. • If you run out of time to speak, please email your comments to council.comments@slcgov.com or call 801-535-7654. Please observe the two-minute time limit so everyone may have a chance to speak. People cannot combine their time so that one person speaks longer than another (i.e., “Joe” cannot give his time to “Jane” to allow “Jane” to speak for four minutes). If you speak to a public hearing item, you may speak again during general comment if your issue is on a new topic. Please note that registration for public comments ends at 7:30 p.m., about 30 minutes after the formal meeting starts. Public Meeting Rules Council meetings are a place for people to feel safe and comfortable participating in their government. A respectful and safe environment allows a meeting to be conducted in an orderly, efficient, effective, and dignified fashion, free from distraction, intimidation, and threats to safety. We welcome everyone, so please be mindful and keep comments free of discriminatory language referring to a person or group based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, color, descent, gender, sexual orientation, disability, age, or other identity factor. To support a respectful meeting, actions that disrupt the meeting, intimidate other participants, or may cause safety concerns are not allowed. For example: • Council staff or security officers may ask you to open any large bags, purses, or backpacks for inspection. They may also request changes to the placement of recording equipment or other props to help facilitate the meeting. • Jeering, cheering, clapping, and waving signs may intimidate other speakers and cause a disruption, so please refrain from such activities. • Please respect the room's historical elements, such as keeping feet off furniture, avoiding leaning or touching paintings and other décor, and no food or drinks in the Council Chamber (Room 315). • Generally, props and equipment are not allowed. If you have a prop or piece of equipment integral to a presentation, please clear its use with a staff member or security officer before entering the meeting room. • Signs are permitted; however, so that they do not cause disruption or block the view of others, please follow these guidelines: signs should be able to be kept at your feet or on your lap; sticks or dowels are not allowed; signs can be kept near the podium on the floor during your turn to speak. • If you have questions about the proper placement of recording equipment or recording in general, please coordinate this with a security officer or staff member before the beginning of the meeting who will make requests to help ensure that it does not disrupt the meeting or make other attendees feel uncomfortable. • If you have written remarks, a document, or other items you may want the City Council to review, refrain from approaching the dais. Instead, please give them to Council staff, who will distribute them to Council Members. Failure to follow these rules of order may result in removal from the meeting. Other Ways to Provide Comment to the City Council Email: council.comments@slcgov.com Phone: 801-535-7600 24-Hr Comment Line: 801-535-7654 Write: Salt Lake City Council P.O. Box 145476 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-5476 When providing additional information or comments to the Council, it is helpful to submit a set of bullet points, such as: • Clearly state your question • Issue/concern/problem • Support/objections to the proposal • Information you want the Council to know • Recommendations for solutions Last updated: February 2024 Attachment 2 Samples from other cities Excerpts from Berkeley City Council Rules: •During the public comment period for each Action Item, the Presiding Officer will request that persons wishing to speak, line up at the podium to be recognized and to determine the number of persons interested in speaking at that time. •If ten or fewer persons are interested in speaking on an individual Action Item, each speaker may speak for two minutes. If there are more than ten persons interested in speaking on an item, the Presiding Officer may limit the public comment for all speakers on the item to one minute per speaker. Speakers are permitted to yield their time to one other speaker, however no one speaker shall have more than four minutes. •This procedure also applies to public hearings except those types of public hearings specifically provided for in this section, below. •persons will be selected by lottery to address matters not on the Council agenda.If five or fewer persons submit speaker cards for the lottery, each person selected will be allotted two minutes each. If more than five persons submit speaker cards for the lottery, up to ten persons will be selected to address matters not on the Council agenda and each person selected will be allotted one minute each. •Persons wishing to address the Council on matters not on the Council agenda during the initial ten-minute period for such comment, must submit a speaker card to the City Clerk in person at the meeting location and prior to commencement of that meeting. •The remainder of the speakers wishing to address the Council on non-agenda items will be heard at the end of the agenda. Speaker cards are not required for this second round of public comment on non-agenda matters. •For the second round of public comment on non-agenda matters, the Presiding Officer retains the authority to limit the number of speakers by subject. The Presiding Officer will generally request that persons wishing to speak, line up at the podium to be recognized to determine the number of persons interested in speaking at that time. Each speaker will be entitled to speak for two minutes each unless the Presiding Officer determines that one-minute is appropriate given the number of speakers. •Pursuant to this document, no Council meeting shall continue past 11:00 p.m. unless a two- thirds majority of the Council votes to extend the meeting to discuss specified items. If any agendized business remains unfinished at 11:00 p.m. or the expiration of any extension after 11:00 p.m., it will be referred to the Agenda & Rules Committee for scheduling pursuant to Chapter II, Section F. In that event, the meeting shall be automatically extended for up to fifteen (15) minutes for public comment on non-agenda items. •People addressing the Council may first give their name in an audible tone of voice for the record. All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a body and not to any member thereof. No one other than the Council and the person having the floor shall be permitted to enter into any discussion, either directly or through a member of the Council, without the permission of the Presiding Officer. No question shall be asked of a Councilmember except through the Presiding Officer. Summary of Portland, OR rules: •Portland Oregon allows a few people to sign up for communications slots at each meeting. •Members of the public may sign up in advance for a Communication spot on the agenda. Communications allow members of the public to address Council for three minutes about a topic of their choosing. •Communications are the first item heard at the Wednesday morning meeting and five spots are available. Individuals may sign up for a Communication once a month. •Communications should only be scheduled after the topic has been brought to the attention of the appropriate bureau or Commissioner. The Ombudsman's Office may also be helpful in resolving concerns. •View ARA-7.02 Policy for more information about Communications •People are allowed to comment once per month. https://www.portland.gov/council-clerk/engage-council Denver, CO •The session lasts for 30 minutes, starting at 5:00 p.m. and ending at 5:30 p.m. when the full council meets, mostly on Mondays. You can subscribe to the weekly schedule here, which will always let you know when meetings are. •To speak, you need to sign up, and it's first-come, first-served. •The council tries to hear from as many people as possible in those 30 minutes but not everyone who signed up might be able to speak. If you don't get to speak, you to try again at another session or to reach out to your member and/or the at-large members directly. Find out who your council member is here. If you already know who your member is, find their contact info here. •If you are called to speak, you'll have three minutes to talk about anything related to the city, except for things that are scheduled to get their own public hearing. Click here to learn about public hearings. •You can choose speak in person in the council chamber (1437 Bannock Street, 4th floor), or online using Zoom. If you choose to speak via Zoom, you'll receive a link after signing up. •If you have handouts or other written materials to go with your comments to the council, we are happy to put them in each of the members' mailboxes to read later. They will not be handed to members during the session. You must bring enough copies for all 13 members -- we cannot make copies for you. If you are called to speak, let the members know you gave the materials so they know to look for it. It is helpful if you put your name and contact information on the materials in case a member wishes to contact you. You can give them to the staff member inside the chamber at the secretary's desk. •If you have spoken in the General Public Comment Session in the last week or the last three months, then new people get to speak before you. This is because we want to give everyone the chance to use their voice. There will be sessions where not everyone will get to speak. •Note that the council members will not respond to any speaker during the General Public Comment Session. Council members can follow up with speakers later, if they choose. Sign up opens Friday at 11:00 a.m. and closes Monday at 3:00 p.m. You can sign up at the link below or by calling 720-337-2000. https://www.denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments- Offices-Directory/Denver-City-Council/Public-Input/General-Public-Comment Guidelines for Public Comment Period And Public Hearings The presiding officer has discretion in enforcing these guidelines for the orderly and civil conduct of City Council meetings. The guidelines below apply to both the public comment period and legislative public hearings before Council unless noted otherwise. 1. Public comment period is provided at the discretion of the City Council. 2. Sign-up sheets for speaking during the public comment period and public hearings will be available 30 minutes before the start of the meeting. Citizens may not sign up on behalf of others. 3. For the public comment period, each speaker is allowed three minutes, unless time is extended by the presiding officer. The public comment period may be limited to 15 minutes. A time limit may be imposed for individual testimony at a public hearing. 4. Meeting attendees may not “donate” their speaking time to another person. 5. Speakers are not permitted to comment during the public comment period on topics that come up later as a public hearing item. 6. All remarks should be addressed to the Council as a whole. 7. Speakers shall refrain from comment or behavior that involves: a. Disorderly speech or action; name-calling or personal attacks; obscene or indecent remarks; and derogatory comments on personalities; b. Advertising or promoting the sale of products, services, or private enterprise; c. Promoting any contest or lottery; and d. Promoting candidates for public office or upcoming ballot measures. 8. Any person who engages in speech or action as described in Section 7.a, when such speech or action disrupts, disturbs or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of any Council meeting, may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be barred from further audience before the Council during that meeting. 9. Any person who engages in speech or action as described in Sections 7.b-d may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be barred from further audience before the Council during that meeting. 10. In addition to the limits specified above, the presiding officer may set other reasonable, viewpoint-neutral limits to prevent disruption of Council business. Attachment 3 Council Policy Manual Section C.16: Comments at City Council Meetings C.16 COMMENTS AT COUNCIL MEETINGS (11/2004) a. During the Comments portion of Council meetings, members of the audience are encouraged to address the Council and/or Mayor concerning any item pertaining to City business. Audience members addressing the Council and/or Mayor are required to speak into the microphone at the podium, clearly state their name and indicate if they are a resident of Salt Lake City. The Council will allow two minutes for the requestor to address the Council. For individuals who are speech- impaired, the time frame will be extended from two minutes to four minutes per person. The same consideration will be given to individuals using speech interpreters. Utah Code Page 1 Part 2 Meetings 52-4-201 Meetings open to the public -- Exceptions. (1) A meeting is open to the public unless closed under Sections 52-4-204, 52-4-205, and 52-4-206. (2) (a) A meeting that is open to the public includes a workshop or an executive session of a public body in which a quorum is present, unless closed in accordance with this chapter. (b) A workshop or an executive session of a public body in which a quorum is present that is held on the same day as a regularly scheduled public meeting of the public body may only be held at the location where the public body is holding the regularly scheduled public meeting unless: (i) the workshop or executive session is held at the location where the public body holds its regularly scheduled public meetings but, for that day, the regularly scheduled public meeting is being held at different location; (ii) any of the meetings held on the same day is a site visit or a traveling tour and, in accordance with this chapter, public notice is given; (iii) the workshop or executive session is an electronic meeting conducted according to the requirements of Section 52-4-207; or (iv) it is not practicable to conduct the workshop or executive session at the regular location of the public body's open meetings due to an emergency or extraordinary circumstances. Renumbered and Amended by Chapter 14, 2006 General Session Amended by Chapter 263, 2006 General Session 52-4-201.3 Local school boards -- Public comment. (1) As used in this section, "local school board" means a board elected under Title 20A, Chapter 14, Part 2, Election of Members of Local Boards of Education. (2) (a) A local school board holding a meeting that is open to the public under Section 52-4-201 shall allow a reasonable opportunity for the public to provide verbal comments that are germane to the authority of the local school board. (b) Subsection (2)(a) does not apply to a meeting that is: (i) a work session; or (ii) an emergency meeting as described in Subsection 52-4-202(5). (3) No later than July 1, 2023, a local school board shall adopt a written policy that provides a reasonable opportunity for the public to provide both verbal and written comments in a meeting of the local school board that: (a) is open to the public; and (b) is not a meeting described in Subsection (2)(b). (4) The written policy described in Subsection (3) may limit public verbal and written comments to topics that are germane to the authority of the local school board. Enacted by Chapter 100, 2023 General Session 52-4-202 Public notice of meetings -- Emergency meetings. (1) Utah Code Page 5 (iii) within three business days after holding an open meeting, make an audio recording of the open meeting available to the public for listening. (h) A public body shall establish and implement procedures for the public body's approval of the written minutes of each meeting. (i) Approved minutes of an open meeting are the official record of the meeting. (5) All or any part of an open meeting may be independently recorded by any person in attendance if the recording does not interfere with the conduct of the meeting. (6) The written minutes or recording of an open meeting that are required to be retained permanently shall be maintained in or converted to a format that meets long-term records storage requirements. (7) Notwithstanding Subsection (1), a recording is not required to be kept of: (a) an open meeting that is a site visit or a traveling tour, if no vote or action is taken by the public body; or (b) an open meeting of a special district under Title 17B, Limited Purpose Local Government Entities - Special Districts, or special service district under Title 17D, Chapter 1, Special Service District Act, if the district's annual budgeted expenditures for all funds, excluding capital expenditures and debt service, are $50,000 or less. Amended by Chapter 16, 2023 General Session 52-4-204 Closed meeting held upon vote of members -- Business -- Reasons for meeting recorded. (1) A closed meeting may be held if: (a) (i) a quorum is present; (ii) the meeting is an open meeting for which notice has been given under Section 52-4-202; and (iii) (A) two-thirds of the members of the public body present at the open meeting vote to approve closing the meeting; (B) for a meeting that is required to be closed under Section 52-4-205, if a majority of the members of the public body present at an open meeting vote to approve closing the meeting; (C) for an ethics committee of the Legislature that is conducting an open meeting for the purpose of reviewing an ethics complaint, a majority of the members present vote to approve closing the meeting for the purpose of seeking or obtaining legal advice on legal, evidentiary, or procedural matters, or for conducting deliberations to reach a decision on the complaint; (D) for the Political Subdivisions Ethics Review Commission established in Section 63A-15-201 that is conducting an open meeting for the purpose of reviewing an ethics complaint in accordance with Section 63A-15-701, a majority of the members present vote to approve closing the meeting for the purpose of seeking or obtaining legal advice on legal, evidentiary, or procedural matters, or for conducting deliberations to reach a decision on the complaint; (E) for a project entity that is conducting an open meeting for the purposes of determining the value of an asset, developing a strategy related to the sale or use of that asset; Utah Code Page 6 (F) for a project entity that is conducting an open meeting for purposes of discussing a business decision, the disclosure of which could cause commercial injury to, or confer a competitive advantage upon a potential or actual competitor of, the project entity; or (G) for a project entity that is conducting an open meeting for purposes of discussing a record, the disclosure of which could cause commercial injury to, or confer a competitive advantage upon a potential competitor of, the project entity; or (b) (i) for the Independent Legislative Ethics Commission, the closed meeting is convened for the purpose of conducting business relating to the receipt or review of an ethics complaint, if public notice of the closed meeting is given under Section 52-4-202, with the agenda for the meeting stating that the meeting will be closed for the purpose of "conducting business relating to the receipt or review of ethics complaints"; (ii) for the Political Subdivisions Ethics Review Commission established in Section 63A-15-201, the closed meeting is convened for the purpose of conducting business relating to the preliminary review of an ethics complaint in accordance with Section 63A-15-602, if public notice of the closed meeting is given under Section 52-4-202, with the agenda for the meeting stating that the meeting will be closed for the purpose of "conducting business relating to the review of ethics complaints"; (iii) for the Independent Executive Branch Ethics Commission created in Section 63A-14-202, the closed meeting is convened for the purpose of conducting business relating to an ethics complaint, if public notice of the closed meeting is given under Section 52-4-202, with the agenda for the meeting stating that the meeting will be closed for the purpose of "conducting business relating to an ethics complaint"; or (iv) for the Data Security Management Council created in Section 63A-16-701, the closed meeting is convened in accordance with Subsection 63A-16-701(7), if public notice of the closed meeting is given under Section 52-4-202, with the agenda for the meeting stating that the meeting will be closed for the purpose of "conducting business relating to information technology security." (2) A closed meeting is not allowed unless each matter discussed in the closed meeting is permitted under Section 52-4-205. (3) (a) An ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, contract, or appointment may not be approved at a closed meeting. (b) (i) A public body may not take a vote in a closed meeting, except for a vote on a motion to end the closed portion of the meeting and return to an open meeting. (ii) A motion to end the closed portion of a meeting may be approved by a majority of the public body members present at the meeting. (4) The following information shall be publicly announced 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 by name, of each member of the public body, either for or against the motion to hold the closed meeting. (5) Except as provided in Subsection 52-4-205(2), nothing in this chapter shall be construed to require any meeting to be closed to the public. Amended by Chapter 169, 2022 General Session Utah Code Page 7 Amended by Chapter 422, 2022 General Session 52-4-205 Purposes of closed meetings -- Certain issues prohibited in closed meetings. (1) A closed meeting described under Section 52-4-204 may only be held for: (a) except as provided in Subsection (3), 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, or to discuss a proposed development agreement, project proposal, or financing proposal related to the development of land owned by the state, if public discussion 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; (g) investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct; (h) as relates to the Independent Legislative Ethics Commission, conducting business relating to the receipt or review of ethics complaints; (i) as relates to an ethics committee of the Legislature, a purpose permitted under Subsection 52-4-204(1)(a)(iii)(C); (j) as relates to the Independent Executive Branch Ethics Commission created in Section 63A-14-202, conducting business relating to an ethics complaint; (k) as relates to a county legislative body, discussing commercial information as defined in Section 59-1-404; (l) as relates to the Utah Higher Education Savings Board of Trustees and its appointed board of directors, discussing fiduciary or commercial information; (m) deliberations, not including any information gathering activities, of a public body acting in the capacity of: (i) an evaluation committee under Title 63G, Chapter 6a, Utah Procurement Code, during the process of evaluating responses to a solicitation, as defined in Section 63G-6a-103; (ii) a protest officer, defined in Section 63G-6a-103, during the process of making a decision on a protest under Title 63G, Chapter 6a, Part 16, Protests; or (iii) a procurement appeals panel under Title 63G, Chapter 6a, Utah Procurement Code, during the process of deciding an appeal under Title 63G, Chapter 6a, Part 17, Procurement Appeals Board; (n) the purpose of considering information that is designated as a trade secret, as defined in Section 13-24-2, if the public body's consideration of the information is necessary to properly conduct a procurement under Title 63G, Chapter 6a, Utah Procurement Code; (o) the purpose of discussing information provided to the public body during the procurement process under Title 63G, Chapter 6a, Utah Procurement Code, if, at the time of the meeting: Utah Code Page 8 (i) the information may not, under Title 63G, Chapter 6a, Utah Procurement Code, be disclosed to a member of the public or to a participant in the procurement process; and (ii) the public body needs to review or discuss the information to properly fulfill its role and responsibilities in the procurement process; (p) as relates to the governing board of a governmental nonprofit corporation, as that term is defined in Section 11-13a-102, the purpose of discussing information that is designated as a trade secret, as that term is defined in Section 13-24-2, if: (i) public knowledge of the discussion would reasonably be expected to result in injury to the owner of the trade secret; and (ii) discussion of the information is necessary for the governing board to properly discharge the board's duties and conduct the board's business; (q) as it relates to the Cannabis Production Establishment Licensing Advisory Board, to review confidential information regarding violations and security requirements in relation to the operation of cannabis production establishments; (r) considering a loan application, if public discussion of the loan application would disclose: (i) nonpublic personal financial information; or (ii) a nonpublic trade secret, as defined in Section 13-24-2, or nonpublic business financial information the disclosure of which would reasonably be expected to result in unfair competitive injury to the person submitting the information; (s) a discussion of the board of the Point of the Mountain State Land Authority, created in Section 11-59-201, regarding a potential tenant of point of the mountain state land, as defined in Section 11-59-102; or (t) a purpose for which a meeting is required to be closed under Subsection (2). (2) The following meetings shall be closed: (a) a meeting of the Health and Human Services Interim Committee to review a report described in Subsection 26B-1-506(1)(a), and the responses to the report described in Subsections 26B-1-506(2) and (4); (b) a meeting of the Child Welfare Legislative Oversight Panel to: (i) review a report described in Subsection 26B-1-506(1)(a), and the responses to the report described in Subsections 26B-1-506(2) and (4); or (ii) review and discuss an individual case, as described in Subsection 36-33-103(2); (c) a meeting of the Opioid and Overdose Fatality Review Committee, created in Section 26B-1-403, to review and discuss an individual case, as described in Subsection 26B-1-403(10); (d) a meeting of a conservation district as defined in Section 17D-3-102 for the purpose of advising the Natural Resource Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture on a farm improvement project if the discussed information is protected information under federal law; (e) a meeting of the Compassionate Use Board established in Section 26B-1-421 for the purpose of reviewing petitions for a medical cannabis card in accordance with Section 26B-1-421; (f) a meeting of the Colorado River Authority of Utah if: (i) the purpose of the meeting is to discuss an interstate claim to the use of the water in the Colorado River system; and (ii) failing to close the meeting would: (A) reveal the contents of a record classified as protected under Subsection 63G-2-305(82); (B) reveal a legal strategy relating to the state's claim to the use of the water in the Colorado River system; Utah Code Page 9 (C) harm the ability of the Colorado River Authority of Utah or river commissioner to negotiate the best terms and conditions regarding the use of water in the Colorado River system; or (D) give an advantage to another state or to the federal government in negotiations regarding the use of water in the Colorado River system; (g) a meeting of the General Regulatory Sandbox Program Advisory Committee if: (i) the purpose of the meeting is to discuss an application for participation in the regulatory sandbox as defined in Section 63N-16-102; and (ii) failing to close the meeting would reveal the contents of a record classified as protected under Subsection 63G-2-305(83); (h) a meeting of a project entity if: (i) the purpose of the meeting is to conduct a strategy session to discuss market conditions relevant to a business decision regarding the value of a project entity asset if the terms of the business decision are publicly disclosed before the decision is finalized and a public discussion would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the project entity asset under consideration; or (B) prevent the project entity from completing on the best possible terms a contemplated transaction concerning the project entity asset; (ii) the purpose of the meeting is to discuss a record, the disclosure of which could cause commercial injury to, or confer a competitive advantage upon a potential or actual competitor of, the project entity; (iii) the purpose of the meeting is to discuss a business decision, the disclosure of which could cause commercial injury to, or confer a competitive advantage upon a potential or actual competitor of, the project entity; or (iv) failing to close the meeting would prevent the project entity from getting the best price on the market; and (i) a meeting of the School Activity Eligibility Commission, described in Section 53G-6-1003, if the commission is in effect in accordance with Section 53G-6-1002, to consider, discuss, or determine, in accordance with Section 53G-6-1004, an individual student's eligibility to participate in an interscholastic activity, as that term is defined in Section 53G-6-1001, including the commission's determinative vote on the student's eligibility. (3) In a closed meeting, a public body may not: (a) interview a person applying to fill an elected position; (b) discuss filling a midterm vacancy or temporary absence governed by Title 20A, Chapter 1, Part 5, Candidate Vacancy and Vacancy and Temporary Absence in Elected Office; or (c) discuss the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of the person whose name was submitted for consideration to fill a midterm vacancy or temporary absence governed by Title 20A, Chapter 1, Part 5, Candidate Vacancy and Vacancy and Temporary Absence in Elected Office. Amended by Chapter 263, 2023 General Session Amended by Chapter 328, 2023 General Session Amended by Chapter 374, 2023 General Session Amended by Chapter 521, 2023 General Session 52-4-206 Record of closed meetings. (1) Except as provided under Subsection (6), if a public body closes a meeting under Subsection 52-4-205(1), the public body: Utah Code Page 10 (a) shall make a recording of the closed portion of the meeting; and (b) may keep detailed written minutes that disclose the content of the closed portion of the meeting. (2) A recording of a closed meeting shall be complete and unedited from the commencement of the closed meeting through adjournment of the closed meeting. (3) The recording and any minutes of a closed meeting shall 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 the disclosure would infringe on the confidentiality necessary to fulfill the original purpose of closing the meeting. (4) Minutes or recordings of a closed meeting that are required to be retained permanently shall be maintained in or converted to a format that meets long-term records storage requirements. (5) A recording, transcript, report, and written minutes of a closed meeting are protected records under Title 63G, Chapter 2, Government Records Access and Management Act, except that the records: (a) may be disclosed under a court order only as provided under Section 52-4-304; and (b) shall be disclosed, upon request, to the Office of the Legislative Auditor General under Section 36-12-15. (6) If a public body closes a meeting exclusively for the purposes described under Subsection 52-4-205(1)(a), (1)(f), or (2): (a) the person presiding shall sign a sworn statement affirming that the sole purpose for closing the meeting was to discuss the purposes described under Subsection 52-4-205(1)(a),(1)(f), or (2); and (b) the provisions of Subsection (1) of this section do not apply. Amended by Chapter 21, 2023 General Session 52-4-207 Electronic meetings -- Authorization -- Requirements. (1) Except as otherwise provided for a charter school in Section 52-4-209, a public body may convene and conduct an electronic meeting in accordance with this section. (2) (a) A public body may not hold an electronic meeting unless the public body has adopted a resolution, rule, or ordinance governing the use of electronic meetings. (b) A resolution, rule, or ordinance described in Subsection (2)(a) that governs an electronic meeting shall establish the conditions under which a remote member is included in calculating a quorum. (c) A resolution, rule, or ordinance described in Subsection (2)(a) may: (i) prohibit or limit electronic meetings based on budget, public policy, or logistical considerations; (ii) require a quorum of the public body to: (A) be present at a single anchor location for the meeting; and (B) vote to approve establishment of an electronic meeting in order to include other members of the public body through an electronic connection; (iii) require a request for an electronic meeting to be made by a member of a public body up to three days prior to the meeting to allow for arrangements to be made for the electronic meeting; (iv) restrict the number of separate connections for members of the public body that are allowed for an electronic meeting based on available equipment capability; Utah Code Page 11 (v) if the public body is statutorily authorized to allow a member of the public body to act by proxy, establish the conditions under which a member may vote or take other action by proxy; or (vi) establish other procedures, limitations, or conditions governing electronic meetings not in conflict with this section. (3) A public body that convenes and conducts an electronic meeting shall: (a) give public notice of the electronic meeting in accordance with Section 52-4-202; (b) except for an electronic meeting described in Subsection (5), post written notice of the electronic meeting at the anchor location; and (c) except as otherwise provided in a rule of the Legislature applicable to the public body, at least 24 hours before the electronic meeting is scheduled to begin, provide each member of the public body a description of how to electronically connect to the meeting. (4) (a) Except as provided in Subsection (5), a public body that convenes and conducts an electronic meeting shall provide space and facilities at an anchor location for members of the public to attend the open portions of the meeting. (b) A public body that convenes and conducts an electronic meeting may provide means by which members of the public may attend the meeting remotely by electronic means. (5) Subsection (4)(a) does not apply to an electronic meeting if: (a) (i) the chair of the public body determines that: (A) conducting the meeting as provided in Subsection (4)(a) presents a substantial risk to the health or safety of those present or who would otherwise be present at the anchor location; or (B) the location where the public body would normally meet has been ordered closed to the public for health or safety reasons; and (ii) the public notice for the meeting includes: (A) a statement describing the chair's determination under Subsection (5)(a)(i); (B) a summary of the facts upon which the chair's determination is based; and (C) information on how a member of the public may attend the meeting remotely by electronic means; (b) (i) during the course of the electronic meeting, the chair: (A) determines that continuing to conduct the electronic meeting as provided in Subsection (4)(a) presents a substantial risk to the health or safety of those present at the anchor location; and (B) announces during the electronic meeting the chair's determination under Subsection (5)(b) (i)(A) and states a summary of the facts upon which the determination is made; and (ii) in convening the electronic meeting, the public body has provided means by which members of the public who are not physically present at the anchor location may attend the electronic meeting remotely by electronic means; (c) (i) the public body is a special district board of trustees established under Title 17B, Chapter 1, Part 3, Board of Trustees; (ii) the board of trustees' membership consists of: (A) at least two members who are elected or appointed to the board as owners of land, or as an agent or officer of the owners of land, under the criteria described in Subsection 17B-1-302(2)(b); or Utah Code Page 12 (B) at least one member who is elected or appointed to the board as an owner of land, or as an agent or officer of the owner of land, under the criteria described in Subsection 17B-1-302(3)(a)(ii); (iii) the public notice required under Subsection 52-4-202(3)(a)(i)(B) for the electronic meeting includes information on how a member of the public may attend the meeting remotely by electronic means; and (iv) the board of trustees allows members of the public attending the meeting by remote electronic means to participate in the meeting; or (d) (i) the public body is a special service district administrative control board established under Title 17D, Chapter 1, Part 3, Administrative Control Board; (ii) the administrative control board's membership consists of: (A) at least one member who is elected or appointed to the board as an owner of land, or as an agent or officer of the owner of land, under the criteria described in Subsection 17D-1-304(1)(a)(iii)(A) or (B), as applicable; or (B) members that qualify for election or appointment to the board because the owners of real property in the special service district meet or exceed the threshold percentage described in Subsection 17D-1-304(1)(b)(i); (iii) the public notice required under Subsection 52-4-202(3)(a)(i)(B) for the electronic meeting includes information on how a member of the public may attend the meeting remotely by electronic means; and (iv) the administrative control board allows members of the public attending the meeting by remote electronic means to participate in the meeting. (6) A determination under Subsection (5)(a)(i) expires 30 days after the day on which the chair of the public body makes the determination. (7) Compliance with the provisions of this section by a public body constitutes full and complete compliance by the public body with the corresponding provisions of Sections 52-4-201 and 52-4-202. (8) Unless a public body adopts a resolution, rule, or ordinance described in Subsection (2)(c) (v), a public body that is conducting an electronic meeting may not allow a member to vote or otherwise act by proxy. (9) Except for a unanimous vote, a public body that is conducting an electronic meeting shall take all votes by roll call. Amended by Chapter 100, 2023 General Session 52-4-208 Chance or social meetings. (1) This chapter does not apply to any chance meeting or a social meeting. (2) A chance meeting or social meeting may not be used to circumvent the provisions of this chapter. Enacted by Chapter 14, 2006 General Session 52-4-209 Electronic meetings for charter school board. (1) Notwithstanding the definitions provided in Section 52-4-103 for this chapter, as used in this section: (a) "Anchor location" means a physical location where: Utah Code Page 13 (i) the charter school board would normally meet if the charter school board were not holding an electronic meeting; and (ii) space, a facility, and technology are provided to the public to monitor and, if public comment is allowed, to participate in an electronic meeting during regular business hours. (b) "Charter school board" means the governing board of a school created under Title 53G, Chapter 5, Charter Schools. (c) "Meeting" means the convening of a charter school board: (i) with a quorum who: (A) monitors a website at least once during the electronic meeting; and (B) casts a vote on a website, if a vote is taken; and (ii) for the purpose of discussing, receiving comments from the public about, or acting upon a matter over which the charter school board has jurisdiction or advisory power. (d) "Monitor" means to: (i) read all the content added to a website by the public or a charter school board member; and (ii) view a vote cast by a charter school board member on a website. (e) "Participate" means to add content to a website. (2) (a) A charter school board may convene and conduct an electronic meeting in accordance with Section 52-4-207. (b) A charter school board may convene and conduct an electronic meeting in accordance with this section that is in writing on a website if: (i) the chair verifies that a quorum monitors the website; (ii) the content of the website is available to the public; (iii) the chair controls the times in which a charter school board member or the public participates; and (iv) the chair requires a person to identify himself or herself if the person: (A) participates; or (B) casts a vote as a charter school board member. (3) A charter school that conducts an electronic meeting under this section shall: (a) give public notice of the electronic meeting: (i) in accordance with Section 52-4-202; and (ii) by posting written notice at the anchor location as required under Section 52-4-207; (b) in addition to giving public notice required by Subsection (3)(a), provide: (i) notice of the electronic meeting to the members of the charter school board at least 24 hours before the meeting so that they may participate in and be counted as present for all purposes, including the determination that a quorum is present; (ii) a description of how the members and the public may be connected to the electronic meeting; (iii) a start and end time for the meeting, which shall be no longer than 5 days; and (iv) a start and end time for when a vote will be taken in an electronic meeting, which shall be no longer than four hours; and (c) provide an anchor location. (4) The chair shall: (a) not allow anyone to participate from the time the notice described in Subsection (3)(b)(iv) is given until the end time for when a vote will be taken; and (b) allow a charter school board member to change a vote until the end time for when a vote will be taken. Utah Code Page 14 (5) During the time in which a vote may be taken, a charter school board member may not communicate in any way with any person regarding an issue over which the charter school board has jurisdiction. (6) A charter school conducting an electronic meeting under this section may not close a meeting as otherwise allowed under this part. (7) (a) Written minutes shall be kept of an electronic meeting conducted as required in Section 52-4-203. (b) (i) Notwithstanding Section 52-4-203, a recording is not required of an electronic meeting described in Subsection (2)(b). (ii) All of the content of the website shall be kept for an electronic meeting conducted under this section. (c) Written minutes are the official record of action taken at an electronic meeting as required in Section 52-4-203. (8) (a) A charter school board shall ensure that the website used to conduct an electronic meeting: (i) is secure; and (ii) provides with reasonably certainty the identity of a charter school board member who logs on, adds content, or casts a vote on the website. (b) A person is guilty of a class B misdemeanor if the person falsely identifies himself or herself as required by Subsection (2)(b)(iv). (9) Compliance with the provisions of this section by a charter school constitutes full and complete compliance by the public body with the corresponding provisions of Sections 52-4-201 and 52-4-202. Amended by Chapter 415, 2018 General Session 52-4-210 Electronic message transmissions. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to restrict a member of a public body from transmitting an electronic message to other members of the public body at a time when the public body is not convened in an open meeting. Enacted by Chapter 25, 2011 General Session Utah Code Page 2 (a) (i) A public body shall give not less than 24 hours' public notice of each meeting. (ii) A specified body shall give not less than 24 hours' public notice of each meeting that the specified body holds on the capitol hill complex. (b) The public notice required under Subsection (1)(a) shall include the meeting: (i) agenda; (ii) date; (iii) time; and (iv) place. (2) (a) In addition to the requirements under Subsection (1), a public body which holds regular meetings that are scheduled in advance over the course of a year shall give public notice at least once each year of its annual meeting schedule as provided in this section. (b) The public notice under Subsection (2)(a) shall specify the date, time, and place of the scheduled meetings. (3) (a) Subject to Subsection (3)(c), a public body or specified body satisfies a requirement for public notice by publishing the notice for the public body's jurisdiction, as a class A notice under Section 63G-30-102, for at least 24 hours. (b) A public body whose limited resources make compliance with the requirement to post notice on the Utah Public Notice Website difficult may request the Division of Archives and Records Service, created in Section 63A-12-101, to provide technical assistance to help the public body in its effort to comply. (c) A public body or specified body that is required, under this chapter and Section 63G-30-102, to post notice in a public location within the affected area may comply with the requirement by posting the notice in, on, or near: (i) the anchor location for the meeting; or (ii) the structure or other area where the meeting will be held. (4) A public body and a specified body are encouraged to develop and use additional electronic means to provide notice of their meetings under Subsection (3). (5) (a) The notice requirement of Subsection (1) may be disregarded if: (i) because of unforeseen circumstances it is necessary for a public body or specified body to hold an emergency meeting to consider matters of an emergency or urgent nature; and (ii) the public body or specified body gives the best notice practicable of: (A) the time and place of the emergency meeting; and (B) the topics to be considered at the emergency meeting. (b) An emergency meeting of a public body may not be held unless: (i) an attempt has been made to notify all the members of the public body; and (ii) a majority of the members of the public body approve the meeting. (6) (a) A public notice that is required to include an agenda under Subsection (1) shall provide reasonable specificity to notify the public as to the topics to be considered at the meeting. Each topic shall be listed under an agenda item on the meeting agenda. (b) Subject to the provisions of Subsection (6)(c), and at the discretion of the presiding member of the public body, a topic raised by the public may be discussed during an open meeting, even if the topic raised by the public was not included in the agenda or advance public notice for the meeting. Utah Code Page 3 (c) Except as provided in Subsection (5), relating to emergency meetings, a public body may not take final action on a topic in an open meeting unless the topic is: (i) listed under an agenda item as required by Subsection (6)(a); and (ii) included with the advance public notice required by this section. (7) Except as provided in this section, this chapter does not apply to a specified body. Amended by Chapter 100, 2023 General Session Amended by Chapter 435, 2023 General Session 52-4-203 Written minutes of open meetings -- Public records -- Recording of meetings. (1) Except as provided under Subsection (7), written minutes and a recording shall be kept of all open meetings. (2) (a) Written minutes of an open meeting shall include: (i) the date, time, and place of the meeting; (ii) the names of members present and absent; (iii) the substance of all matters proposed, discussed, or decided by the public body which may include a summary of comments made by members of the public body; (iv) a record, by individual member, of each vote taken by the public body; (v) the name of each person who: (A) is not a member of the public body; and (B) after being recognized by the presiding member of the public body, provided testimony or comments to the public body; (vi) the substance, in brief, of the testimony or comments provided by the public under Subsection (2)(a)(v); and (vii) any other information that is a record of the proceedings of the meeting that any member requests be entered in the minutes or recording. (b) A public body may satisfy the requirement under Subsection (2)(a)(iii) or (vi) that minutes include the substance of matters proposed, discussed, or decided or the substance of testimony or comments by maintaining a publicly available online version of the minutes that provides a link to the meeting recording at the place in the recording where the matter is proposed, discussed, or decided or the testimony or comments provided. (c) A public body that has members who were elected to the public body shall satisfy the requirement described in Subsection (2)(a)(iv) by recording each vote: (i) in list format; (ii) by category for each action taken by a member, including yes votes, no votes, and absent members; and (iii) by each member's name. (3) A recording of an open meeting shall: (a) be a complete and unedited record of all open portions of the meeting from the commencement of the meeting through adjournment of the meeting; and (b) be properly labeled or identified with the date, time, and place of the meeting. (4) (a) As used in this Subsection (4): (i) "Approved minutes" means written minutes: (A) of an open meeting; and (B) that have been approved by the public body that held the open meeting. (ii) "Electronic information" means information presented or provided in an electronic format. Utah Code Page 4 (iii) "Pending minutes" means written minutes: (A) of an open meeting; and (B) that have been prepared in draft form and are subject to change before being approved by the public body that held the open meeting. (iv) "Specified local public body" means a legislative body of a county, city, town, or metro township. (v) "State public body" means a public body that is an administrative, advisory, executive, or legislative body of the state. (vi) "State website" means the Utah Public Notice Website created under Section 63A-16-601. (b) Pending minutes, approved minutes, and a recording of a public meeting are public records under Title 63G, Chapter 2, Government Records Access and Management Act. (c) Pending minutes shall contain a clear indication that the public body has not yet approved the minutes or that the minutes are subject to change until the public body approves them. (d) A public body shall require an individual who, at an open meeting of the public body, publicly presents or provides electronic information, relating to an item on the public body's meeting agenda, to provide the public body, at the time of the meeting, an electronic or hard copy of the electronic information for inclusion in the public record. (e) A state public body shall: (i) make pending minutes available to the public within 30 days after holding the open meeting that is the subject of the pending minutes; (ii) within three business days after approving written minutes of an open meeting: (A) post to the state website a copy of the approved minutes and any public materials distributed at the meeting; (B) make the approved minutes and public materials available to the public at the public body's primary office; and (C) if the public body provides online minutes under Subsection (2)(b), post approved minutes that comply with Subsection (2)(b) and the public materials on the public body's website; and (iii) within three business days after holding an open meeting, post on the state website an audio recording of the open meeting, or a link to the recording. (f) A specified local public body shall: (i) make pending minutes available to the public within 30 days after holding the open meeting that is the subject of the pending minutes; (ii) within three business days after approving written minutes of an open meeting, post and make available a copy of the approved minutes and any public materials distributed at the meeting, as provided in Subsection (4)(e)(ii); and (iii) within three business days after holding an open meeting, make an audio recording of the open meeting available to the public for listening. (g) A public body that is not a state public body or a specified local public body shall: (i) make pending minutes available to the public within a reasonable time after holding the open meeting that is the subject of the pending minutes; (ii) within three business days after approving written minutes of an open meeting: (A) post and make available a copy of the approved minutes and any public materials distributed at the meeting, as provided in Subsection (4)(e)(ii); or (B) comply with Subsections (4)(e)(ii)(B) and (C) and post to the state website a link to a website on which the approved minutes and any public materials distributed at the meeting are posted; and Utah Code Page 1 Part 3 Enforcement 52-4-301 Disruption of meetings. This chapter does not prohibit the removal of any person from a meeting, if the person willfully disrupts the meeting to the extent that orderly conduct is seriously compromised. Enacted by Chapter 14, 2006 General Session 52-4-302 Suit to void final action -- Limitation -- Exceptions. (1) (a) Any final action taken in violation of Section 52-4-201, 52-4-202, 52-4-207, or 52-4-209 is voidable by a court of competent jurisdiction. (b) A court may not void a final action taken by a public body for failure to comply with the posting written notice requirements under Subsection 52-4-202(3)(a) if: (i) the posting is made for a meeting that is held before April 1, 2009; or (ii) (A) the public body otherwise complies with the provisions of Section 52-4-202; and (B) the failure was a result of unforeseen Internet hosting or communication technology failure. (2) Except as provided under Subsection (3), a suit to void final action shall be commenced within 90 days after the date of the action. (3) A suit to void final action concerning the issuance of bonds, notes, or other evidences of indebtedness shall be commenced within 30 days after the date of the action. Amended by Chapter 435, 2023 General Session 52-4-303 Enforcement of chapter -- Suit to compel compliance. (1) The attorney general and county attorneys of the state shall enforce this chapter. (2) The attorney general shall, on at least a yearly basis, provide notice to all public bodies that are subject to this chapter of any material changes to the requirements for the conduct of meetings under this chapter. (3) A person denied any right under this chapter may commence suit in a court of competent jurisdiction to: (a) compel compliance with or enjoin violations of this chapter; or (b) determine the chapter's applicability to discussions or decisions of a public body. (4) The court may award reasonable attorney fees and court costs to a successful plaintiff. Renumbered and Amended by Chapter 14, 2006 General Session Amended by Chapter 263, 2006 General Session 52-4-304 Action challenging closed meeting. (1) Notwithstanding the procedure established under Subsection 63G-2-202(7), in any action brought under the authority of this chapter to challenge the legality of a closed meeting held by a public body, the court shall: (a) review the recording or written minutes of the closed meeting in camera; and (b) decide the legality of the closed meeting. Utah Code Page 2 (2) (a) If the judge determines that the public body did not violate Section 52-4-204, 52-4-205, or 52-4-206 regarding closed meetings, the judge shall dismiss the case without disclosing or revealing any information from the recording or minutes of the closed meeting. (b) If the judge determines that the public body violated Section 52-4-204, 52-4-205, or 52-4-206 regarding closed meetings, the judge shall publicly disclose or reveal from the recording or minutes of the closed meeting all information about the portion of the meeting that was illegally closed. (3) Nothing in this section may be construed to affect the ability of a public body to reclassify a record, as defined in Section 63G-2-103, as provided in Section 63G-2-307. Amended by Chapter 425, 2018 General Session 52-4-305 Criminal penalty for closed meeting violation. In addition to any other penalty under this chapter, a member of a public body who knowingly or intentionally violates or who knowingly or intentionally abets or advises a violation of any of the closed meeting provisions of this chapter is guilty of a class B misdemeanor. Enacted by Chapter 263, 2006 General Session 1 RESOLUTION No. _____ of 2024 (Updating Council Meeting Rules and Section C.16 of the Council Policy Manual relating to Open Public Comment in the Formal Meeting) WHEREAS, each of the Salt Lake City Council’s formal meeting agendas include a period of time for public comment, in which the City Council seeks to receive input on a variety of topics from a wide array of speakers. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council maintains a Policy Manual that includes agreed upon expectations and standards related to staff practice and routine procedures, including meeting management and public comment opportunities. WHEREAS, the City Council public comment period is provided at the discretion of the City Council. WHEREAS, there are multiple ways, in addition to the general comment period, for the public to contact the City Council and share input. WHEREAS, the City Council meeting rules are established to create a safe and comfortable environment for participation. WHEREAS, the City Council must, on occasion, balance the important public value received from public comment with the equally important public value of running an efficient and effective public meeting, to conduct the public’s business. WHEREAS, in order to balance these two competing and equally important interests, the City Council has determined that it is in the public’s best interests to limit the amount of total time for open public comment at each formal meeting. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, that, at each formal meeting, the total time for open public comment will be limited to one hour, and each individual commenter will have two minutes to comment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council’s Public Meeting Rules, Rules of Decorum and Section C.16 (relating to Comments at Council Meetings) of the Policy Manual will hereby be updated to reflect these changes. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, on ___________, 2024. Salt Lake City Council __________________________ Council Chair Victoria Petro 2 ATTEST: _________________________ City Recorder Approved as to form: _________________________ City Attorney SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION SWORN STATEMENT SUPPORTING CLOSURE OF MEETING I, ____________________, acted as the presiding member of the Salt Lake Council, which met on ___________________ in person and online. 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 di scuss the following: §52-4-205(l)(a) discussion of the character, professional competence, or physica l 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 litigatio n; §52-4-205(l)(d) strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, includ ing 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) di sclose the appraisal or estimated val ue of the property under consideration; or (B) pre vent the public body from completing the transact ion on the best possible term s; (ii) if the public body previously gave public n otice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sa le are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sal e; §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 privile ged 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 meetin g at which the closed meeting was approved: (a)the reason or reasons for holding the close d meeting; (b)the l ocation where the clo sed meeting will be held; and (c)the vote of each member of the public body eithe r for or against the motion to hold the closed meeting. The recording and any minutes of the cl osed meeting will include: (a)the date, time, and place of the meetin g; (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 i s required to close a meeting under §52-4-205(1)(a) or (f), but a record by electronic rec ording or detailed minutes is not re quired; and Pursua nt to §52-4-206(1), a record by electronic recording and/or detailed written minutes i s 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: : Electronic recording Detailed written minutes I hereby swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Council Presiding Member Date of Signature Victoria Petro March 5, 2024 Victoria Petro (Mar 18, 2024 14:34 MDT) Mar 18, 2024 Sworn Statement March 5. 2024 Work Session Final Audit Report 2024-03-18 Created:2024-03-08 By:STEPHANIE ELLIOTT (stephanie.elliott@slcgov.com) Status:Signed Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAsFp6fB9tEf2HBvVlrswv09ubFHUnrnbC "Sworn Statement March 5. 2024 Work Session" History Document created by STEPHANIE ELLIOTT (stephanie.elliott@slcgov.com) 2024-03-08 - 5:35:52 PM GMT Document emailed to victoria.petro@slcgov.com for signature 2024-03-08 - 5:36:50 PM GMT Email viewed by victoria.petro@slcgov.com 2024-03-09 - 5:38:46 AM GMT New document URL requested by victoria.petro@slcgov.com 2024-03-18 - 6:59:50 PM GMT Email viewed by victoria.petro@slcgov.com 2024-03-18 - 7:01:38 PM GMT Signer victoria.petro@slcgov.com entered name at signing as Victoria Petro 2024-03-18 - 8:34:17 PM GMT Document e-signed by Victoria Petro (victoria.petro@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2024-03-18 - 8:34:19 PM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed. 2024-03-18 - 8:34:19 PM GMT