Loading...
03/26/2024 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WORK SESSION   March 26, 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: 09:09:19 Note: Dates not identified in the project timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. Item start times and durations are approximate and are subject to change. Work Session Items   1.Informational: Updates from the Administration ~ 2:00 p.m.  15 min. The Council will receive information from the Administration on major items or projects in progress. Topics may relate to major events or emergencies (if needed), services and resources related to people experiencing homelessness, active public engagement efforts, and projects or staffing updates from City Departments, or other items as appropriate. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Recurring Briefing Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   2.Informational: 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan ~ 2:15 p.m.  30 min. The Council will receive a briefing about the 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan which covers the blocks adjacent to 300 West between approximately 1000 South and 2100 South. The update of the plan will provide guidance on anticipated development in the area. The City was awarded funding from the Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) for the development of the small area plan. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 26, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   3.Informational: State Legislative Briefing ~ 2:45 p.m.  30 min. The Council will receive a briefing about issues affecting the City that may arise during the 2024 Utah State Legislative Session. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 16, 2024; Tuesday, February 6, 2024; Tuesday, February 13, 2024; Tuesday, February 20, 2024; and Tuesday, March 26, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   4.Ordinance: Window Requirements for New Construction in The City’s Local Historic Districts ~ 3:15 p.m.  20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code and amend the adopted design standards for residential and multifamily structures pertaining to the regulation of windows in the H Historic Preservation Overlay which includes properties within local historic districts and landmark sites. The proposed amendments add clarity to existing processes in terms of appropriate window materials, window location, and window installation in new construction projects. The City currently has 14 local historic districts and approximately 150 Landmark Sites. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 26, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 2, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 7, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, May 21, 2024   5.Informational: Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee 2024 Annual Report ~ 3:35 p.m.  20 min. The Council will be briefed by the Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee to review the 2024 Annual Report. The report includes information and recommendations about market comparisons of City employee salaries, compensation strategies, and is presented for consideration each year prior to the City's budget review process. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 26, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   6.Tentative Break ~ 3:55 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   7.Informational: Sister Cities Annual Report 2023 ~ 4:15 p.m.  20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about the Sister Cities Annual Report. The report includes a summary of the accomplishments achieved in 2023 and an outline of potential objectives and priorities for the future. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 26, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   8.Informational: Cultural Core and THE BLOCKS Update ~ 4:35 p.m.  20 min. The Council will receive an update on the Cultural Core initiative, now known as “THE BLOCKS.” The update will include an executive summary of year seven and the budget plan for year eight. The annual update is a requirement of the interlocal agreement between Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County to develop, improve and market arts and cultural activities in downtown Salt Lake City. The goal of the Cultural Core initiative is to enhance downtown as a key cultural center for the city, region, and nation. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 26, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   9.Ordinance: Temporary Closure of 7200 West Between Interstate 80 and California Avenue ~ 4:55 p.m.  20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about temporarily closing a segment of 7200 West between I-80 and California Ave to mitigate unsafe conditions. State law allows temporarily closing certain streets until the unsafe conditions are mitigated or up to two years, whichever is less. Recurring illegal dumping activity on and adjacent to the road has worsened the risk of fire and caused mitigation expenses to the City. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 26, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, March 26, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, April 2, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD   10.Informational: Council Retreat Follow-up ~ 5:15 p.m.  30 min. The Council will review the list of projects that were raised at the Council’s annual retreat on Tuesday, January 23, 2024, and discuss priorities and next steps. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, March 26, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   11.Board Appointment: Business Advisory Board – Kristen Lavelett ~ 5:45 p.m.  5 min The Council will interview Kristen Lavelett 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 26, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 26, 2024   Standing Items   12.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair   Report of Chair and Vice Chair.    13.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.    14.Tentative Closed Session -  - The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session. A closed meeting described under Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including, but not limited to: a. discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; b. strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; c. strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; d. strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; e. strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; f. discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and g. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act.    CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, March 21, 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 26, 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 •Gas Stations Near Water Bodies •Planning Commission April 10, 2024 •Prohibiting Demolition of Housing for Parking •Planning Commission Recommend Adoption Public Lands •Cottonwood Park (D1) & Peace Labyrinth (D2) •Now available in English and Spanish Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canBallpark NEXT / RDA Ballparknext.com Planning slc.gov/planning Thriving in PlaceTransportation •600/700 North Reconstruction (D1) •Open House – March 28 4:30 -6:30 – Backman Elementary •Livable Streets •Engagement for zones 5 -9 (High priority) •Ballpark, Jordan Meadows, Fairpark, Central City, Poplar Grove •Engineering for Zones 2 -4 are at 40% •Zones 10-15 will be next with engagement expected in April •Sugar House Safe Side Streets (CCIP) (D7) •Traffic Calming construction this summer •Traffic circle is being designed •Other elements being considered as well Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canBallpark NEXT / RDA Ballparknext.comThriving in PlaceMayor's Office Community & Neighborhoods slc.gov/canBallpark NEXT / RDA Ballparknext.comThriving in PlaceEvents Event Start Date Event Location Hosting Organization ACE Funded Noori Screendance Festival 04/06/24 Utah Museum of Contemporary Art loveDANCEmore Yes National Federation of the Blind of Utah Annual Convention 04/11/24 Sheraton Salt Lake City National Federation of the Blind of Utah Yes Homeless Resource Fair 04/12/24 Pioneer Park SLC Homeless Engagement and Response Team No Stay Salty: Lakefacing Stories Exhibit 04/13/24 Salt Lake City Main Public Library Of Salt and Sand Yes Events are collected from Ace funded events, City sponsored events, and publicly permitted events. This is not meant to be an all -inclusive list of all events going on in the City. Homeless Resource Center Utilization: •99% Full- Base Shelter Capacity + Winter beds Encampment Impact Mitigation/ Rapid Intervention: •EIM- Industrial Area- Decade, Gustin & Ninigret Drives •RIT- Westside- Folsom Trail, Mead/Fayette/ Brooklyn Ave & Liberty Park Resource Fair: •Friday, April 12 9:30 -12:30 @ Pioneer Park Hygiene Kit Drive: •Drop Off now until March 29th @ 155 E 900 S #200 & 338 W Hansen Ave. •Amazon wishlist: https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/GTU NDHSGEQYV?ref_=wl_share •Kit Assembly Party April 2 @ Sorenson Unity Ctr. •Benefits GEK & GM HRC's •https://www.slc.gov/homelessness/whats-happening- now/ 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 Emergency Shelter Planning Summer '24 •OHS seeking to keep as many winter shelter beds as possible open from May -October •MVP Continues to increase capacity Winter '24-25 •Winter shelter planning has already commenced •March 30- Projected beds needed & funds available for next winter's plans •August 1 - Plan submitted by local task force to State OHS for review •August 15- OHS response to local plans •October 1- April 30-implementation of winter plans 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 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Nick Tarbet DATE:March 26, 2024 RE: 300 W Corridor/Central Pointe Station Area Plan Mid-process update PROJECT TIMELINE: Briefing: March 26, 2024 Set Date: Public Hearing: Potential Action: ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Council will receive a mid-process update from planning staff and the project consultant on the 300 West Corridor / Central Pointe Station Area Plan. The Council received a briefing at the beginning of the project on June 13, 2023. The project website can be viewed at: 300 West Corridor & Central Pointe Station Area Plan. The website includes information on the draft plan vision and guiding principles, plan framework, future land use concepts, and public realm improvement concepts. The project area covers the blocks adjacent to 300 West between approximately 1000 South and 2100 South. In March 2022, the City was awarded funding from the Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) for the new small area plan. WFRC provided $139,500 for the plan development and the City provided a match of $10,500, for a total budget of $150,000. According to the Transmittal this planning effort is focused on the area extending from 1700 South to 2100 South and from I-15 to West Temple. The State recently adopted legislation that directs cities to develop “Station Area Plans” for the areas around transit stations and this plan is intended to fulfill that requirement for the area around the Central Pointe Station, which is located on the south edge of the plan area at the intersection of the TRAX line and 2100 South. Page | 2 Page | 3 According to the project website, it is now in the fourth phase of the process. Pages 2-3 of the Transmittal outline the public engagement efforts undertaken to this point, including the visioning and scenario development as well as the general themes that have emerged during the engagement efforts. The Existing Conditions report provides “information regarding existing public policies related to the area both directly and indirectly, demographic information, recent development trends and built and environmental conditions.” The full report is included as Exhibit 1 in the transmittal letter. However, page four outlines the key takeaways from the report. The Plan priorities are outlined on page 5 of the Transmittal letter. The Council may wish to review these and let staff know if there are any questions about the priorities. •Support the use of the 300 West bikeway improvements. •Support the use of the TRAX station by increasing the surrounding population and ridership. •Support new development and public improvements that create a pedestrian-friendly environment. •Help the City meet its housing goals while balancing the need to provide and retain businesses and services in the area. •Meet the State requirements for a “station area plan,” which include promoting the following objectives: o To increase the availability and affordability of housing, including moderate income housing; o To promote sustainable environmental conditions; o To enhance access to opportunities; and o To increase transportation choices and connections. 300 West Corridor Plan & Central Pointe Station Area Plan City Council| March 26, 2024 Study Area South Salt Lake Ballpark Station Central Pointe Station The 300 West Corridor is currently identified as being a “regional commercial/industrial” place that supports big box and auto-centric development patterns. Recent and planned improvements to the streetscape aim to make the corridor more pedestrian, bike and transit friendly. These investments, along with new housing developments, are changing the nature of land uses along the corridor. Project Statement Project Vision The 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan establishes a plan of action for Salt Lake City and its partners, private developers, and other stakeholders to reimagine the area and define a framework that can direct change over the next two decades. With the potential to incorporate a walkable and mixed-use district, new public spaces, and a variety of housing types, that will increase residential density, while also maintaining existing businesses and encouraging new ones as part of mixed-use developments. This will help increase vibrancy in the area while responding to housing needs and affordability goals. Project Process & Community Engagement MAY - JUNE 2023 Focus Groups Community Interviews Social Pinpoint engagement City Council briefing JULY - AUG 2023 Project team work session Existing conditions research and analysis Alternatives development SEPT - DEC 2023 Technical Committee Alternatives Open House Online survey Community Council meeting JAN - MAY 2024 Draft plan development Draft plan Open House Draft plan online survey Planning Commission and City Council briefings PC recommendation Project Process & Community Engagement Character Create a mixed-use, walkable neighborhood with more green areas and trees Housing Increase housing options and density, while preserving existing single-family neighborhoods and incorporating affordable housing options Economic Development Support mixed-use development while providing affordable commercial and warehouse space Transportation Improve pedestrian safety and multimodal connections, as well as access to the TRAX station Key Takeaways Project Principles Proposed Plan Character Area – Central Pointe TOD Maximum Height=120’ Density=50+ du/acre Central Pointe TOD Public Realm Character Area – 300 West Mixed Use & Commercial Maximum Height=75’ Density=40-60 du/acre 300 West Mixed Use & Commercial Public Realm Character Area – Transition Edge with Linear Park Maximum Height=60’ Density=25-40 du/acre Transition Edge with Linear Park Public Realm Character Area – 1700 South Residential & Mixed Use Maximum Height=120’ Density=40-60 du/acre Character Area – Creative Industrial/ Office Edge Maximum Height=65’ Density=NA Proposed Plan Alternative Character Area – Low Scale Residential Maximum Height=45’ Density=25-40 du/acre Circulation Open Space Engagement Link to StoryMap Take the Survey ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL rachel otto (Feb 9, 2024 14:04 MST) Date Received: 02/09/2024 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date sent to Council: 02/09/2024 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: February 8, 2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods _ SUBJECT: 300 West Corridor/Central Pointe Station Area Plan – Mid-Process Update STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Echeverria, Senior Planner, daniel.echeverria@slcgov.com, 801- 535-7165 DOCUMENT TYPE: Information Only RECOMMENDATION: Review information regarding the planning process. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: In June 2023, City Planning Staff provided an introduction and overview of the proposed planning process for the 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan to the City Council. The update was in accordance with Resolution 14 of 2020, which directs the administration to provide updates to the Council during a plan development effort. Following that City Council briefing, the project team began public outreach for the planning effort and the planning effort is currently ongoing. This transmittal is intended to provide an update on the public outreach efforts, materials developed by the consultant team so far, key plan priorities as informed by community input, and a timeline for the next planning efforts. For background, this planning effort is focused on the area extending from 1700 South to 2100 South and from I-15 to West Temple. The State recently adopted legislation that directs cities to develop 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 “Station Area Plans” for the areas around transit stations and this plan is intended to fulfill that requirement for the area around the Central Pointe Station, which is located on the south edge of the plan area at the intersection of the TRAX line and 2100 South. Part of this planning effort also involves implementation of the plan through zoning changes, and those changes will be developed following the plan's adoption. Public Engagement Efforts and Process Below is a list of engagement activities held for the project so far with key details of the activities. All of the city-hosted online and in-person engagements were publicized with direct mailers (businesses, property owners, and residents, including all apartment building units, in and near the project area), e- mails to city-maintained contact lists (listserv), and social media postings. Summer 2023 - Visioning • Initial online outreach for general concerns and ideas. o Webpage included an interactive map allowing people to add location-specific comments to the map o Open from July to September 2023 o 765 unique visitors to the site o 65 persons provided 163 comments. o The top comments pertained to pedestrian or bicycle safety concerns or were general suggestions (26% of comments for each). o The comments with the most upvotes from participants pertained to pedestrian and bicycle safety or connections. o An overview of the input provided is in Exhibit 2. • Met with area stakeholders including both one-on-one and in a formal stakeholder meeting setting, including Council Member Mano, City departments, UDOT, UTA, and South Salt Lake. o Meetings were intended to provide an introduction to the project and get initial input and information on their organization or department’s plans that impact the area. o Held on various dates. • Consultant-led conversations with local businesses, residents, and property owners (phone calls, e-mails, on-site visits). o The intent of this outreach was to have a conversation and get in-depth responses from individuals about their concerns and hopes for the area. o 18 individuals participated in the conversations. o A summary and excerpts of the conversations are in Exhibit 3. Fall/Winter 2023 – Scenario Development • Draft scenario meeting with stakeholders to help inform draft scenarios. • In-person Open House for draft scenarios input. o For this engagement the consultant prepared two draft scenarios that illustrate how the area might look in the next 20 years.  Scenario 1 was the lower intensity scenario, showing lower intensity new development and limited full-scale redevelopment of properties. The scenario showed limited in-fill around existing buildings on vacant or parking lot property.  Scenario 2 was the higher intensity scenario, showing high density and scale new development and full-scale redevelopment of most properties west of the TRAX line. o Held on September 26th in the late afternoon/early evening at Ballpark Playground and on the 27th during the morning commute hours at the Central Pointe TRAX Station. o 45 persons participated in the open houses. o The boards from the open houses are in Exhibit 4. o An overview of the feedback from the open houses is in Exhibit 5. o Elements (such as building types or transportation improvements) shown in Scenario 1 received more preference votes than Scenario 2 (34 versus 27). o Generally there was support for more density and development in the area, but there were concerns about new development on West Temple. • Online engagement/survey held from October to mid-December o The online survey included an overview of the draft scenarios and asked for respondents’ preferences regarding the two scenarios. o 320 persons participated in the survey. o About 30% of participants live in the area, with 30% working near the area, and 60% shopping or visiting the area. o Preference for the scenarios was generally split, with participants overall slightly preferring scenario 2 more than 1. o Respondents were asked to rate how important particular concepts were to the future of the area, like “mixed-use development” or “retain existing housing.” The highest-rated concept was “Walkable district with dining and shopping options.” o An overview of the responses is in Exhibit 6. • Ballpark Community Council update on the draft scenarios - December 7th o Attendees provided questions/comments regarding integration with other planning efforts, trees/tree canopy coverage, freeway expansion, and retention of big box stores. Winter/Spring 2024 (Current Phase) – Draft Plan Development • The consultant is currently developing a draft plan based on feedback on the draft scenarios. • Additional outreach will be held for the plan draft to get feedback. • The final draft will be taken through the adoption process, including formal Planning Commission and City Council meetings and hearings. General Community Input Themes The input received has been wide-ranging, but some key themes have emerged from that input and are listed below. Concerns: • Concerns with scale and density of development along West Temple. • Concerns with the loss of retailers that provide needed services to the general area. • Concerns with lack of green space, including trees and heat island impacts. • Concerns with lack of pedestrian amenities. Support: • Support for more housing generally. • Support for better pedestrian-focused design and pedestrian-friendly features. • Support for bicycle-related improvements. • Support for more green space and trees. Existing Conditions Report The project team has produced an existing conditions report that provides information regarding existing public policies related to the area both directly and indirectly, demographic information, recent development trends, and built and environmental conditions. The full draft report is attached in Exhibit 1. Below are some key takeaways from the report: • The number of households in the area has increased by about 60% since 2010. (291 to 465) • The population has increased by about 30% since 2010. (582 to 829) • In the last three years, 335 new units were added to the area, comprised of two new apartment buildings and a townhome development. The next most recent major residential development was in 2016 with approximately 112 units added by the Housing Authority of Salt Lake City. • Based on current Census Bureau estimates and racial categories, most of the population is “white” at 66%, followed by the category “other races” at 11.5%, and “two or more races” at 11.8%. Approximately 28% of the population have a Hispanic origin. This is not a racial category and is a separately tracked data point by the Census. • There is a large daytime worker population of 2,015 people working in the businesses in the study area. • There are 35 policies in the 2005 Central Community Plan applicable to the area, with 21 of those having been implemented or currently underway to implementation. • This area of the City has a tree canopy coverage similar to downtown, which is generally low, with 1% to 11% of the area covered by trees. This is much lower than most single-family residential areas of the City, which generally have 20% to 36% tree canopy coverage. • There are no public facilities, such as public parks, police stations, fire stations, or libraries in the study area. The existing conditions report is a draft document that may be updated as the plan is prepared and will become an addendum to the plan itself. Plan Priorities Guiding Plan Development The plan’s priorities are informed by the plan area scope, City initiating petition, funding grant parameters from Wasatch Front Regional Council, State of Utah requirements for “station area plans,” project team analysis, and community input. The key goals of the plan include: • Support the use of the 300 West bikeway improvements. • Support the use of the TRAX station by increasing the surrounding population and ridership. • Support new development and public improvements that create a pedestrian-friendly environment. • Help the City meet its housing goals while balancing the need to provide and retain businesses and services in the area. • Meet the State requirements for a “station area plan,” which include promoting the following objectives: o To increase the availability and affordability of housing, including moderate income housing; o To promote sustainable environmental conditions; o To enhance access to opportunities; and o To increase transportation choices and connections. Next Steps The consultant is in the process of developing a draft plan document. That document will be shared with the community with an in-person meeting with the community council, an in-person open house, and will be shared online in a format that provides the opportunity for additional community feedback. Based on that feedback, the draft will be refined and finalized. The draft will then go to the Planning Commission to begin the formal review and adoption process. EXHIBITS: 1) Existing Conditions Report Draft 2) 1st Phase Engagement Report – General Ideas and Concerns Map Activity 3) 1st Phase Engagement – Community Interviews 4) 2nd Phase – Open House “Draft Scenario” Boards 5) 2nd Phase Engagement Report – September Open Houses 6) 2nd Phase Engagement Report – Online Survey Exhibit 1: Existing Conditions Report Draft 77 02 EXISTING CONDITIONS 78 | Existing Conditions PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION Boundaries In addition to Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County, this analysis references the study area, which is bounded by 1700 S, 450 W, 2100 S, and West Temple Street (Figure 1). The corridor is primarily auto dominant with exclusively general commercial businesses, including big box stores such as Home Depot, Sam’s Club, and Costco. There are seven multifamily buildings along the corridor, including one managed by the Housing Authority of Salt Lake City (HASLC). The eastern edge of the study area is dominated by single family residential land uses. The Central Pointe TRAX station anchors the site on the south. Geographic Areas of Focus It should be noted that the project area for the 300 West and Central Pointe Station area extends from 2100 South to 1000 South. Because the recently adopted Ballpark Plan contains an existing conditions evaluation for the area between 1700 South and 1000 south, this existing conditions report is focused solely on the area between 1700 South and 2100 South. Recommendations that stem from this planning effort will build upon those set forth in the Ballpark Plan. LAND USE & ZONING Existing Land Uses and Zoning The area between 1700 South and 2100 south and 200 West to I-15 is within the General Commercial (CG) zoning district (Figure 2). There is a mix of zoning districts that between West Temple and 200 West, including Residential Office (RO), Moderate Density Multi-Family (RMF-35 and RMF-45), Corridor Commercial (CC), Community Business District, and Single Family Residential (R-1-5000). The General Commercial district allows for a variety of commercial uses including retail, entertainment, office, residential, heavy commercial, light manufacturing, and warehouses. Recent code updates from the Downtown Building Heights & Pedestrian Space Code project included increasing the maximum height in this district from 60 feet to 75 feet and decreasing the minimum front yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet. Developments that implement a maximum setback of 10 feet are required to require seating, landscaping, or weather protection. Additionally, projects in the CG Zone are required to provide a midblock walkway if a midblock walkway on the subject propriety has been identified in a master plan that has been adopted by the city. The 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan presents an important opportunity to advance recommendations for mid- block walkways to promote pedestrian connectivity in the project area. The single-family residential district is the second most prevalent land use, which allows for single-family dwellings on lots that are at least 5,000 square feet in size. The other districts allow for single-family and two-family dwellings, Existing Conditions | 79 Figure 1: Study Area 80 | Existing Conditions office, and small-scale commercial services; higher density housing is allowed in the moderate density multi-family (RMF-35 and -45) and residential office (RO) districts. The maximum height in these districts ranges from 35’ to 75’. Figure 2: Study Area Zoning. Source: Salt Lake City Zoning Map Harris Ave Harris Ave Hansen Ave Grove Ave Hartwell Ave Hartwell Ave Westwood Ave ¯ Plan Study Area Zoning Districts RMF-35 Commercial Corridor General Commercial RMF-45 Moderate Density Multi-Family I-15 NB Fw y 30 0 W Je ff e r s o n St W e s t Te m p l e St Ri c h a r d s St Ri c h a r d s St 82 | Existing Conditions PREVIOUS PLAN REVIEW Two relevant plans were reviewed by the project team in order to build upon and progress relevant planning efforts that have occurred within and adjacent to the 300 West Corridor & Central Pointe Station project area: • Ballpark Station Area Plan (2022) • Central Community Master Plan (2005) The City has several other general plans with policies that cover the area. Please see appendix A for a review of those plans and policies. The following is a brief summary that highlights key takeaways and other information deemed to be relevant to the 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area planning effort. The Ballpark Plan The Ballpark Plan was completed in 2022 and is considered a guiding document for portions of the 300 West project, especially as it overlaps with the northern portion of the corridor from 1000 South to 1700 South. The Ballpark Plan contains several “big moves” for the future. These address light rail connectivity and integration into the neighborhood, better utilizing parking lots and vacant properties, and placemaking. A bike lane is recommended on 300 West, the majority of which has already been built. The plan illustrates a desire for the project area to support pedestrian activity through a redeveloped urban interface and pedestrian focused uses throughout the study area. These plans include redesigning the urban streetscape to promote pedestrian safety from vehicular traffic. This includes a streetscape design that incorporates bike lanes, medians, and pedestrian lighting. Character Areas The plan identifies several character areas, one of which is the “300 West Transitional Area.” This is described as a corridor that is transitioning from an industrial and major commercial area to one that supports higher density mixed use. The plan separates the 300 West Transitional Area into four Character Areas. The area east of 300 West and south of 1300 South is noted as experiencing transition around several large scale, long-term uses. Long-term tenants that are anticipated to remain are Lowes Home Improvement, the Gail Miller Homeless Resource Center, and the Utah State Liquor Store. The plan recommends adding multi- family housing, public amenities, and neighborhood serving commercial uses. The Plan promotes commercial uses on the ground floor as a way to transition from big box retail to desired multifamily development throughout the area. The area west of 300 West and south of 1300 South is also expected to transition; the plan recommends using the properties that have transitioned as a guide for future zoning updates. The “Heart of the Neighborhood” character area also overlaps with the project area, from 1300 South to Hope Avenue. The plan recommends Existing Conditions | 83 Figure 3: Ballpark Plan Character Areas. Source: Ballpark Station Area Plan, 2022. applying “Transit Station Area District Zoning” to support higher densities, entertainment uses, and redevelopment. Multi-modal access is recommended through existing properties and parking lots to the east on 1400 South (dependent on owner agreement). The plan recommends that streetscape elements include art and historic interpretation, shaded pedestrian corridors, and visual elements that relate to the Ballpark neighborhood. The plan includes a discussion regarding a future “transit hub” at 1700 South serving both light rail and east-west bus service. Although not formally in any City transportation plans, members of the community recommended a future transit station. The plan notes that the “should adopt an “urban form” including extensive 84 | Existing Conditions “last mile” connections to surrounding neighborhoods and uses and implementation of appropriate Transit Supportive Zoning.” Along 1700 South between the TRAX line and West Temple, the plan identifies the future land use as the “Medium Density Transitional Area.” The plan identifies the area for redevelopment that “should include medium density housing and commercial buildings with reduced height along the West Temple frontage adjacent to the neighborhood character area.” Although the current Public Utilities facility property is included in the “medium density” area, the property is identified more specifically as a “future catalytic area for community uses and open space. Property on the east side of West Temple at 1700 South is designated as “Neighborhood Areas.” The plan notes that these areas were “down- zoned” and that the “scale and density of this area should be maintained with targeted redevelopment of vacant abandoned structures with new or rehabilitated structures at a comparable scale and character as the existing housing stock. Plan Study Area Ballpark Station Area Plan - Future Land Use Map Places of Interest Adopted Project Catalyst Area Community Recommended Catalyst Area Community Recommended Gateway Area Future Community Amenity Proposed Future 1700 S TRAX Station Future Land Use Concept Overlays Areas with Opportunity to Integrate Additional Green Space Future Land Use Concept 300 West Transitional Area Heart of the Neighborhood / Ballpark Entertainment Zone Main Street Area Medium Density Transitional Area Neighborhood Areas State Street Corridor Figure 4: Map of the Ballpark Plan future land use designations for properties located near the boundary of the plan study area. 40 0 W W 30 0 W 20 0 W/ T R A X We s t Te m p l e St em p l e St Ma i n St St a t e St Existing Conditions | 85 Table 1: Ballpark Station Area Plan Review Matrix POLICY / ACTION STATUS Land Use FLUM and Future Specific Plans Invest in a public library within the station area that can serve as a neighborhood anchor and public amenity space or a community center to provide community meeting and education space, and/or recreation facilities. Underway Residential Land Use Promote a diversity in the size of new units in the neighborhood to accommodate residents in different stages of life, including families with children. No progress Explore alternative options for ownership strategies including land trusts and co-ops. No progress Provide down-payment assistance or other programs for qualifying residents Underway Provide education and renter legal assistance to help current renters stay in place. Underway Commercial Land Use Need for public amenities and neighborhood serving commercial should be added to this area No progress Institutional Land Use Preserve existing social services and provide additional services as development occurs to support housing options and access to opportunity at a variety of income levels. No progress Parks, Open Space and Recreation Include a wayfinding and signage campaign that makes it easier to explore nearby parks, trails and public spaces Underway Access and Mobility Install pedestrian crossings east and west of TRAX on 1300 South on either side of the UTA crossing barrier. Underway Where appropriate, development proposals incorporate access to existing and planned TRAX crossings. No progress Study the potential future lane re-configuration of 1300 South to eliminate or narrow traffic lanes and expand and improve the sidewalk. No progress Utilize existing alleyways, mid-block, and truncated connections to create a system of bike and pedestrian pathways through the neighborhood. No progress Widen and enhance sidewalks to improve pedestrian comfort through the addition of street furnishings, pedestrian lighting and a buffer from moving traffic. No progress Reconfigure Ballpark TRAX Station to change from a suburban-style station that has northern platform access only from the east parking lot into an urban-style station that allows access from both the east and west sides of the station. This would include new access at the north end of the platform from Lucy Avenue/200 West on the west side of the TRAX rails No progress Redevelop part of the current surface parking lots to transit supportive uses that include retail, shops, and service near the Ballpark Station platform. No progress Establish a pedestrian crossing to the east and west of the UTA crossing barrier across 1300 South. Underway Study future crossings south of the 1300 South crossing at the TRAX line. No progress Utilize unused rail spur that is proposed for a light rail extension into the Granary District and the possibility of an adjacent trail, which is also being evaluated. Underway 86 | Existing Conditions Table 2: Ballpark Station Area Plan Review Matrix Continued POLICY / ACTION (continued) STATUS This recommendation connects West Temple to 300 West. This connection is dependent on a future agreement with UTA to provide a TRAX crossing on or near 1400 South. No progress Urban Design Require activation of the 1300 South frontage with restaurants, shops, street furniture and trees. No progress Implement streetscape improvements to accommodate pedestrian volumes. No progress Allow heights comparable to heights in other Urban Station Areas. No progress Require development proposals to include mid-block and other connections to break down current large commercial blocks into smaller, more walkable blocks. No progress Integrate green space and “green” elements into the urban landscape. Unknown Identify a strategy to bury power lines as development in the Ballpark Neighborhood occurs. No progress Environment Enhance the urban tree canopy in under-served areas of the neighborhood and require additional street trees and urban greenery with new development. Underway Maintain all green spaces with trash receptacles, pedestrian lighting and pedestrian furniture. No progress Ensure funding for additional maintenance and staffing as additional green space is added. No progress Existing Conditions | 87 Central Community Master Plan The Central Community Plan (2005) encompasses a broader area than the Ballpark Plan, including all of Downtown, the Gateway, the Granary, Central City, 9th and 9th, Liberty Wells, and the project area (referred to as “People’s Freeway neighborhood planning area” Figure 4). The plan identifies issues of mitigating impacts related to incompatible land use adjacencies, transitioning to transit- oriented development, improving infrastructure and landscaping of commercial and industrial areas, and retaining lower density zoning south of 1700 South. The plan also identifies challenges of pedestrian circulation due to interspersed residential land uses and major roadways. High Density Transit-Oriented development is proposed between 200 West and 300 West, from Paxton Avenue to High Avenue (the TRAX line and stops had just been constructed). This land use emphasizes a mix of land uses with pedestrian access, including residential, retail, office, cultural, institutional, open space, and public uses. The other portion of the project area (High Avenue to 2100 South) is identified as regional commercial/industrial. This land use is characterized as attracting large volumes of traffic from customers and employers and would attract tenants such as automobile dealers, light manufacturing, assembly, and “big box” and “superstore” retailers. The future land use map reflects these land use policies (Figure X). Amendments to the Central Community Plan Figure 5: People’s Freeway Neighborhood. Source: Central Community Master Plan (2005) Policy/Action Implementation Tracking Relevant policies and actions that are recommended in these two plans are provided via the following matrix. Table 3 provides an understanding of the city’s progress on policy topics the Master Plan update is expected to address: • Land use • Access and mobility • Historic preservation • Urban design • Environment • Public utilities and facilities 88 | Existing Conditions Table 3: Central Community Master Plan Review Matrix POLICY / ACTION STATUS Land Use FLUM and Future Specific Plans “Review the zoning district map and initiate and process appropriate zoning petition changes to make the zoning district map consistent with the Future Land Use map of the Central Community Master Plan.” No progress “Mitigate impacts relating to the adjacency of residential and non-residential / heavy commercial land uses.” No progress Improve infrastructure and landscaping of commercial and industrial areas. Underway “Retain the current lower density zoning south of 1700 South to preserve the character of this area.” Implemented Residential Land Use Continue and develop programs that assist development of rental and owner-occupied affordable housing, residential rehabilitation and neighborhood improvement programs. Implemented Evaluate distribution and spacing of independent senior, assisted and elderly care residential facilities. Such facilities should be located near accessible commercial retail sales and service land uses and mass transit stops or stations. Unknown Consider site-specific land use studies and plans for residential infill development areas including targeting specific residential areas for block redesign and/or infrastructure improvements. No progress Create a separate TOD zoning district that includes residential land use and urban design regulations to support transit and pedestrian developments. Underway Commercial Land Use “Evaluate neighborhood commercial nodes to determine appropriate design guidelines and amend zoning regulations and maps appropriately. Implement a neighborhood commercial node program that addresses land use, design, infrastructure, funding assistance and boundaries relevant to neighborhood commercial and residential growth patterns.” No progress Evaluate and amend City ordinances to encourage the use of transfer of development rights, first right of refusal (city authority), and density bonus incentives. Underway Institutional Land Use Review zoning regulations to allow institutional, cultural and entertainment facilities within Transit Oriented Development areas to create destinations and increase accessibility. Implemented Parks, Open Space and Recreation Support a long-range park construction schedule to implement a Parks and Recreation Master Plan for the Central Community. Underway Encourage Community Councils to implement public participation programs that include plant- a-tree, playground equipment placement, and park maintenance. No progress Support the proposed trail system that will serve the Central Community No progress Transit-Oriented Development Create Transit Oriented Development zoning regulations and apply to the transit areas depicted on the Future Land Use map. Underway Develop pedestrian amenities in high-density areas near light rail stations. No progress Existing Conditions | 89 POLICY / ACTION (continued) STATUS Access and Mobility Improve circulation so it is safe for residents and children who must cross busy roadways to get to school or other public services. Underway Develop ways to address the isolation between major roadways and improve pedestrian orientation. Underway Incorporate the Transportation Master Plan policies during the site plan review process. Unknown Incorporate the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan policies during site plan review of development applications. Continue to develop bike paths and trails on 300 East, 800 and 1300 South, and 200 West. Unknown Encourage interior mid-block access corridors for more convenient pedestrian and non- motorized circulation through the City’s 10-acre block neighborhoods. Underway Coordinate with the Utah Transit Authority on the location of bus stops and transfer points to support the community land use patterns. Underway Provide improved and safer pedestrian corridors connecting People’s Freeway to the residential areas east of State Street, especially for school children. Implemented/Ongoing Evaluate City policies for the conversion of private streets to public streets for roadways that do not comply with standard city street specifications. Implemented Investigate the use of shared parking between day and evening land uses to encourage off- street parking. Implemented Historic Preservation Investigate ways to assist property owners in maintaining or rehabilitating historic properties to satisfy design guidelines. Evaluate a grant or matching loan program to assist residential and commercial property owners in the maintenance and renovation of historicproperties. Implemented Urban Design Consider creating a compatibility ordinance for new construction (infill), renovations, and restorations in some areas or neighborhoods. No progress Support design guidelines that support neighborhood and community development in Transit Oriented Development districts with emphasis on pedestrian and residential spaces and the public realm. Implemented Consider the use of CPTED principles of all public parks, open space and recreation facilities. Implemented Encourage the relocation of overhead utilities underground during new construction and when replacing outdated facilities. No progress Provide street trees and replace dead or damaged trees in parks and open space areas. Implemented Environment Review all building permits to determine if sites are located in 100-year floodplains. Require that buildings in a floodplain be designed to resist flooding. Implemented Develop programs and literature to help educate citizens about the importance of groundwater protection and appropriate handling and disposal of potential contaminants. Underway Consider policies to promote further conservation and decrease water waste. Underway Develop transportation and parking policies that favor use of mass transit and non-motorized transportation methods in order to help reduce cumulative air emissions. Implemented/Ongoing 90 | Existing Conditions Amendments to the Central Community Plan After the Central Community plan’s original adoption, there were four amendments to the future land use designations of properties within the study area. The changes are reflected in the map in Figure 6. Each of the future land use designation amendments also included changing the zoning to a similar designation. The amendments and the properties they impacted are listed below: Ordinance 79 of 2008 - This amended the property at 1812 S West Temple from low density residential (1-15 dwelling units an acre) to Medium High Density Residential (30-50 dwelling units an acre.) This amendment supported the building of a new multi- family development by the Salt Lake City Housing Authority. Ordinance 14 of 2016 - This amendment was part of a City effort that affected several properties throughout the broader Ballpark neighborhood. Within the study area, it impacted five properties near 1746 S West Temple and two properties near 1888 S West Temple. The amendment changed their designation from Medium Density Residential (30 to 50 dwelling units an acre) to Low Density Residential (1 to 15 dwelling units an acre). The amendments were intended to stabilize housing in the neighborhood by encouraging investment in existing homes and to keep the development intensity compatible with the lower scale neighborhood. Ordinance 23 of 2017 - This changed the designation of property at 1978 S West Temple from Medium Density Residential to Medium Residential/ Mixed Use. This change supported the expansion of an existing office building. Ordinance 26 of 2022 - This changed the designation of property at 1948/1950 S West Temple from Medium Density Residential to Medium Residential/Mixed Use. This change was intended to support the expansion of an existing business on the property. Ordinance 66 of 2023 - This changed the designation of the property at 1720 and 1734 S West Temple from Low Density Residential (1 top 15 dwelling units an acre) to Medium Density Residential (30 to 50 dwelling units an acre.) The change was intended to support new residential development. The property was previously amended by Ordinance 14 of 2016, discussed previously in this section. Existing Conditions | 911 Salt Lake City Planning Division 1/16/2024 Figure 6: Map showing the future land uses designated in the Central Community Plan. The amendments to the plan since its adoption are also highlighted. Harris Ave Harris Ave 1600 S Hansen Ave 1700 S 1830 S Grove Ave Hartwell Ave Hartwell Ave Westwood Ave 2100 S ¯ Plan Study Area Central Community Future Land Use Map Amendments (Ord./Year) Low Density Residential (1-15 dwelling units/acre) 66 of 2023/14 of 2016 Medium Density Residential (15-30 dwelling units/acre) 14 of 2016 Medium High Density Residential (30-50 dwelling units/acre) 23 of 2017 Medium Residential/Mixed Use (10-50 dwelling units/acre) 26 of 2022 Residential/Office Mixed Use 79 of 2008 High Mixed Use (50 or more dwelling units/acre) Community Commercial Regional Commercial/Industrial Medium Density Transit Oriented Development (10-50 dwelling units/acre) High Density Transit Oriented Development (50 or more dwelling units/acre) Open Space Institutional I-15 NB Fw y 30 0 W Je ff e r s o n St We st Te m p l e St Ri c h a r d s St Ri c h a r d s St 92 | Existing Conditions Future Near Term Transportation Improvements 1700 South, from 300 West to Redwood Road is slated for resurfacing in summer of 2024. As part of this resurfacing, the lanes between 300 West and 900 West may be reconfigured. The Transportation Division has created a concept for the stretch between 300 West and 900 West that removes one vehicle travel lane in each direction while also creating wider and more comfortable buffered bike lanes. These changes are meant to improve safety and east-west connections for people riding bicycles, since bike lanes will go from relatively narrow spaces at the edge of the roadway to much wider, paint-buffered lanes that are only next to one lane of vehicles. The Transportation Division has analyzed traffic volume data for the full project extent and is confident that one vehicle travel lane in each direction will support the relatively low vehicle traffic volumes on this corridor. Figure 7: Cross-sections of 1700 South showing existing (four travel lanes) and proposed (two travel lanes) conditions. Existing Proposed Existing Conditions | 93 300 West Public Utilities Existing Conditions Water There is an existing 8” water main on the east side of 300 West, installed in 1995. This main is undersized and will need to be upsized to 12” to accommodate additional densification and fire demands. Public Utilities’ current approach would be to require upsizing as Public Utilities analyzes each development on the east side that applies for a building permit. There is an existing 12” water main on the west side of 300 West, installed in 2021 with the roadway reconstruction project. This main is adequate in size and does not need any upgrades/ improvements. Sewer There is an existing 21” sewer main down the center of 300 West, installed in 1939. This sewer main underwent repairs during the roadway reconstruction project. There are no current plans to address any other repairs/upsizes/improvements with this sewer main by Public Utilities. Based on Public Utilities’ modeling of existing conditions, there appears to be adequate capacity for future development. The pipe is approximately 10% to 25% full in this area. Public Utilities analyzes the proposed sewer flow of every development that applies for building permits and requires upsizing when the sewer main reaches 75% capacity. With the high rates of development, it is difficult to anticipate how long the available capacity will last. This information is only accurate with the existing conditions (as of September 2023) - each new development, redevelopment, or change of use has the potential to decrease the available capacity. This applies to all work within the entire sewer shed that contributes to this line, not just development along the 2100 South corridor. Storm Drain There is a new storm drain in 300 West, installed in 2022 with the roadway reconstruction project, plus old (1898) storm drain that was not upgraded with the roadway project. The storm drain should be sufficient, as long as all developments are held to the 0.2 cfs/ acre discharge requirements of Public Utilities. Public Utilities reviews each project that applies for building permits for conformance with this standard. 94 | Existing Conditions Figure 8: Map of water, sewer, and storm drain lines within the plan study area. 1700 S 0 335 2100 S 670 1,340 2,010 Feet Plan Study Area Sewer Main Water Main Storm Drain 30 0 W We s t Te m p l e St ¯ Existing Conditions | 95 SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS This section describes the socioeconomic conditions of the study area (Figure 9) including population and growth projection, age, race and ethnicity. Figure 9: Socioeconomic Conditions of Study Area. Source: ArcGIS Business Analyst Population & Growth Projections Between 2020 and 2022, the population in the study area grew from 668 to 829, a 24.10% growth rate, significantly higher than the city (2.11%) and county (3.37%) (Table 1). This may be due to the recent construction of multifamily buildings, including 21Lux (204 2100 S) and @2100 Apartments (1977 S 300 W). Projected growth for the study area between 2022 and 2027 is projected to be 3.98%, which is closer to the city (4.06%) and county (3.63%). Household & Growth Projections There are 465 households in the study area, compared to 86,737 in the city and 420,281 in the county. Between 2020 and 2022, the study area experienced a significantly higher growth rate, 15.10%, than the city (2.83%) and the county (3.71%). This is likely a result of the construction of new multifamily apartment buildings in the study area. The annual growth rate between 2022 and 2027 is projected to be 4.95%, which is more in line with the city at 5.42% and the county at 4.14%. The average household size for the study area (1.75) is smaller than both the city (2.26) and county (2.86). This suggests that there are fewer families with children in the study area and a higher percentage of single-income households, which could also be a product of the type of housing currently available. Age The median age for the study area is 36.2, which is higher than both the city (33.1) and county (33.0). The population of residents from the Baby Boomer generation (born between 1946 and 1964) is higher for the study area than for the city and county. This suggests a higher population of people who are retired and on fixed incomes. Taylor Gardens and Taylor Springs are 55+ senior apartment communities owned and managed by HASLC within the study area. These two apartment complexes most likely account for the high proportion of Baby Boomers. 96 | Existing Conditions Table 4: Population and Growth Projections POPULATION STUDY AREA SALT LAKE CITY SALT LAKE COUNTY 2010 Total Population 582 186,411 1,029,629 2020 Total Population 668 199,723 1,185,238 2010-2020 Growth Rate 14.8% 7.1% 15.1% 2022 Total Population 829 203,928 1,225,168 2020-2022 Growth Rate 24.10% 2.11% 3.37% 2027 Total Population 862 212,210 1,269,661 2022-2027 Growth Rate 3.98% 4.06% 3.63% 2030 Projected Population - 243,898 - 2040 Projected Population - 263,717 - 2050 Projected Population - 277,920 - Source: ESRI Table 5: Average Household Size and Annual Growth Rate, 2010-2027 HOUSEHOLDS STUDY AREA SALT LAKE CITY SALT LAKE COUNTY 2010 Households 291 74,547 342,613 2020 Households 404 84,349 405,229 2010-2020 Annual Growth Rate 38.83% 13.15% 18.28% 2022 Households 465 86,737 420,281 2020-2022 Annual Growth Rate 15.10% 2.83% 3.71% 2027 Households 488 91,442 437,683 2022-2027 Annual Growth Rate 4.95% 5.42% 4.14% 2010 Average Household Size 2.00 2.44 2.96 2020 Average Household Size 1.62 2.27 2.88 2022 Average Household Size 1.75 2.26 2.87 2027 Average Household Size 1.74 2.24 2.86 Source: ESRI Existing Conditions | 97 The proportion of people under 18 is projected to decline and the proportion of those over 70 is projected to increase between 2022 and 2027. There is also growth projected in the 20 to 29 age range, likely due to the newer construction of multi-family units in the area that may attract students and young adults. Area Median Income The median income for the study area ($39,758) is significantly lower than both the city ($70,189) and county ($85,944) (Table 5). The 2022-2027 projected growth rate in median incomes is 13.34%, which is also lower than the city (25.44%) and county (19.35%). More than one-third of residents in the study area (37.63%) earn less than $25,000, compared to the city (17.72%) and county (9.97%). The distribution of households earning $100,000 or more is lower in the study area (6.24%) than both the city (33.39%) and county (42.19%). This may be due in part to the higher percentage of the population above age 60 and the prevalence of public housing. (2.29%) Other Race Population (11.58%) and Population of Two or More Races (11.82%) than the city and county. The diversity index for the study area is 71.6, compared to the city (67.4) and the county (63.7). The ESRI Diversity Index is a measure of diversity that includes race and ethnicity – from 0 (no diversity) to 100 (complete diversity). When the index is closer to 100, an area’s population is more evenly divided across all racial and ethnic groups. EMPLOYMENT & COMMERCE Employment Population The total daytime population in the study area is 2,464, a 197% increase from the total residential population of 829 (Table 7). The daytime population of workers is 2,015, an 81.78% increase. The unemployment rate in the study area is 4.9%, more than double the city (2.1%) and county (1/9%) unemployment rates. Business Profile The study area is primarily a $39,758 commercial corridor with food and Study area median income (ESRI) Area Race and Ethnicity The racial makeup of the study area is similar to the city and county, with a majority white population (Table 6). The distribution is slightly higher for Black/ African American (3.98%) American Indian/Alaska Native populations dining accounting for a quarter of businesses followed by retail at 22.03% of businesses1. There are anchor tenants occupying pad sites with large parking lots including Costco, Sam’s Club, and Home Depot. Food and beverage businesses include fast food and fast casual national chains including McDonald’s and Jimmy 1 Accommodation/Food Services (NAICS 72) and Food Services and Drinking Places (NAICS 722) account for 12.72% of businesses each in the study area. Source: ESRI, July 2023. 98 | Existing Conditions Table 6: Median Household Income and Income Distribution HOUSEHOLD INCOME STUDY AREA SALT LAKE CITY SALT LAKE COUNTY 2022 Median Household Income $39,578 $70,189 $85,944 2027 Median Household Income $44,856 $88,045 $102,572 2022-2027 Annual Growth Rate 13.34% 25.44% 19.35% <$15,000 23.01% 10.82% 5.48% $15,000-$24,999 14.62% 6.90% 4.49% $25,000-$34,999 5.16% 7.33% 5.26% $35,000-$49,999 18.49% 10.23% 8.99% $50,000-$74,999 13.98% 17.19% 17.53% $75,000-$99,999 18.49% 14.15% 16.05% $100,000-$149,999 4.09% 17.31% 22.28% $150,000-$199,999 0.00% 7.42% 10.79% $200,000+ 2.15% 8.66% 9.12% Source: ESRI Table 7: Racial Distribution RACIAL DISTRIBUTION STUDY AREA SALT LAKE CITY SALT LAKE COUNTY White Population 66.10% 67.87% 71.22% Black/African American Population 3.98% 2.99% 2.03% American Indian/Alaska Native Population 2.29% 1.49% 1.13% Asian Population 3.62% 5.69% 4.43% Pacific Islander Population 0.60% 2.11% 1.84% Other Race Population 11.58% 9.79% 9.35% Population of Two or More Races 11.82% 10.07% 10.02% 2023 Hispanic Population 296 2,479 247,622 2023 Hispanic Population (%) 27.85% 17.24% 20.16% 2022 Diversity Index 71.6 67.4 63.7 Source: ESRI Table 8: Employment EMPLOYMENT STUDY AREA SALT LAKE CITY SALT LAKE COUNTY Total Population 829 203,928 1,225,168 Total Daytime Population 2,464 354,099 1,302,595 Daytime Population: Workers 2,015 265,978 741,325 Daytime Population: Workers (%) 81.78% 75.11% 56.91% Daytime Population: Residents 449 88,121 561,270 Daytime Population: Residents (%) 18.22% 24.89% 43.09% Civilian Population Age 16+ in Labor Force 408 120,140 682,155 Employed Civilian Population Age 16+ 388 117,625 669,524 Unemployment Rate (%) 4.9% 2.1% 1.9% Source: ESRI Existing Conditions | 99 John’s, as well as local restaurants, including Beans and Brews, Squatters and Wasatch Taproom, and Kathmandu II. Many of the businesses are auto oriented, such as autobody and repair shops. HOUSING What is Moderate Income Housing? Moderate income households are considered by the State of Utah to be those making less than 80% of the area median income (AMI). AMI is determined by the county in which the city is located. Other targeted income groups are defined as those making less than 50% and 30% of AMI (identified as very low- income and extremely low-income respectively). According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the affordable monthly housing payment for either mortgage or rent should be no more than 30% of gross monthly income (GMI) and should include utilities and housing costs such as mortgage, property taxes, and hazard insurance. To calculate affordability in relation to household size, HUD estimates median family income (MFI) annually for each metropolitan area and non- metropolitan county. It is not clearly stated in the Utah Code whether those of moderate income must be able to purchase a home, so the allowance is applied to both rental rates and mortgages. Affordable housing is any housing option that accommodates the targeted income groups and meets the payment requirements. Per HB462, if a municipality intends to apply for Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone (HTRZ) funding for station areas, then greater than or equal to 20% of the housing units must meet the definition of moderate income housing units. Area Median Income The area median income (AMI) is the midpoint of a region’s income distribution–half of the households in the region earn more and half earn less. AMI is important because each year HUD calculates the median income for every metropolitan region in the country and this statistic is used to determine whether families are eligible for certain affordable housing programs. HUD focuses on the entire region, not just the city, because families searching for housing are likely to look beyond the city itself to find a place to live. AMI is typically distinguished between three types of households. Per HUD, low-income is defined as households earning less than 80% of the AMI. Very low-income is defined as households earning less than 50% of the AMI. And extremely low-income is defined as households earning less than 30% of the AMI. Note: Moderate income housing, as defined by the State of Utah, is “housing occupied or reserved for occupancy by households with a gross household income equal to or less than 80% of the 100 | Existing Conditions median gross income for households of the same size in the county in which the city is located.” Salt Lake City’s 2023 Housing Plan includes the goal of entitling 10,000 new housing units throughout the city, with a minimum 2,000 units that are deeply affordable (30% AMI or below) and a minimum 2,000 units that are affordable (31-80% AMI).2 HUD Area Median Income Limits The area median income (AMI) for a family of four in the Salt Lake City MSA is $106,000. Table 9 shows the distribution of income levels for a family of four. Two-thirds of households in the study area are classified as low or extremely low income, with 48.80% of those being extremely low income. Because AMI thresholds outlined by HUD do not exactly match the distribution of households by income bracket as recorded by the U.S. Census Bureau, which is the source for ESRI data, the estimated number of households within each income level are matched as closely as possible with their corresponding income bracket. Therefore, the number of households within each AMI threshold should be considered an approximation. Housing Stock Existing Conditions Single vs. Multifamily Housing There are 137 single-family units in the study area, which are primarily located on the eastern edge of the study area, between the railroad tracks and W Temple Street. There are 559 existing multi-family units in the study area3. The neighborhood has seen a dramatic population increase due to the construction of multifamily buildings between 2016-2023. Additionally, there is one planned development of 47 units slated for 2023. The recent and planned construction includes luxury studio, 1- and 2-bedroom units, including a 160-unit market rate development at 1967 S 300 W. Four of the existing multi-family complexes are owned by the Housing Authority of Salt Lake City (HASLC), one caters to seniors and another houses Veterans. All four provide affordable housing. Total Occupied Units and Average Housing Tenure The study area has a higher percentage of renter occupied housing than the city and county (Table 14). There is also a higher percentage of vacant housing units in the study area than in the city and county. Vacancy is defined as any housing unit that is neither owner- nor renter-occupied. For example, short- term rental (i.e., Airbnb) properties are included in the vacancy rate. Projections for the area include 29.30% owner occupied housing and 70.70% renter occupied housing in 2027, with 2 https://www.slc.gov/can/wp-content/uploads/ sites/8/2023/05/Housing-SLC-Plan_No-Appendices.pdf 3 HASLC, CoStar Existing Conditions | 1011 10.95% vacancy . Rental housing generally indicates apartments. The percentage of renter-occupied housing within the study area has steadily increased over the past 12 years. While this isn’t necessarily a negative, generally it is preferred to see more of a balance between renter and owner-occupied housing because of the ability to cater to different household types and individuals. A wide variety of rental and for-sale homes can help to create economically and demographically diverse neighborhoods. For example, due to the existing housing stock of smaller rental units within the study area, it would be difficult for a growing family to stay in this neighborhood because of the lack of larger homes for purchase. Affordability Monthly Allowance for Rental and For-sale Products Table 11 illustrates the monthly allowance for rental and for-sale products based on the household size. An extremely low-income household with one person, which is 42.80% of the study area population, should pay no more than $558 per month in housing expenses ($22,300/12 x 30% = $558). These numbers are based on the assumption that households spend no more than 30% of their income on housing, which includes rent and expenses such as utilities and insurance. Taylor Springs is one of two 55+ affordable housing developments in the study area. Source: HASLC Figure 10: Location of multi-family buildings in the study area. Source: CoStar 102 | Existing Conditions Table 9: Distribution of Household Income INCOME LEVEL INCOME CLASSIFICATION AMI THRESHOLD FOR A FAMILY OF FOUR ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLDS PERCENTAGE <30% of AMI Extremely Low Income $31,800.00 199 42.80% 30% to 50% of AMI Low Income $31,800 -$53,000 86 18.49% 50% to 80% of AMI Moderate Income $53,000 - $84,800 65 13.98% 80% to 100% of AMI N/A $84,800 - $106,000 86 18.49% 100% to 120% of AMI N/A $106,000 - $127,200 19 4.09% >120% of AMI N/A >$127,200 10 2.15% Source: ESRI, HUD Table 10: Area Median Income by Household Size INCOME CATEGORY PERSONS IN HOUSEHOLD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Extremely Low Income (30% AMI) $22,300 $25,450 $25,650 $31,800 $35,140 $40,280 $45,420 $50,560 Very Low Income (50% AMI) $37,100 $42,400 $47,700 $53,000 $57,250 $61,500 $65,750 $70,000 Low Income (80% AMI) $59,400 $67,850 $76,350 $84,800 $91,600 $40,280 $105,200 $111,950 Median Family Income (100% AMI) $74,200 $84,800 $95,400 $106,000 $114,500 $123,000 $131,500 $140,000 Above Median Income (120%) $89,040 $101,760 $114,480 $127,200 $137,400 $147,600 $157,800 $168,000 Source: HUD Table 11: Affordability Monthly Allowance for Rental and For-sale Products INCOME CATEGORY PERSONS IN HOUSEHOLD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Extremely Low Income (30%) $558 $636 $641 $795 $879 $1,007 $1,136 $1,264 Very Low Income (50%) $928 $1,060 $1,193 $1,325 $1,431 $1,538 $1,644 $1,750 Low Income (80%) $1,485 $1,696 $1,909 $2,120 $2,290 $1,007 $2,630 $2,799 Median Family Income (100%) $1,855 $2,120 $2,385 $2,650 $2,863 $3,075 $3,288 $3,500 Above Median Income (120%) $2,226 $2,544 $2,862 $3,180 $3,435 $3,690 $3,945 $4,200 Source: HUD Table 12: Multifamily Properties in the study area PROPERTY ADDRESS PROPERTY NAME NUMBER OF UNITS YEAR BUILT 1977 S 300 W @2100 Apartments 82 2020 385 W 1700 S SUR17 Townhomes+ 47 2023 204 W 2100 S 21Lux 206 2021 1790 S West Temple Taylor Gardens Senior Apartments* 112 2016 1812 S West Temple Taylor Springs* 95 1901 1882 S West Temple Hidden Villa Apartments 32 1965 1926-1934 S West Temple Cedar Crest* 12 1967 1750 S Jefferson Circle Jefferson Circle Apartments* 20 - Total number of Units 606 Source: CoStar, HASLC +Under Construction *Indicates HASLC complex Existing Conditions | 103 REAL ESTATE TRENDS Retail Retail exists mostly along the 300 West corridor and includes big box stores like Home Depot, Costco, and Sam’s Club. Of the 847,000 square feet of retail along the corridor, 98.1% is leased and occupied. The 1.9% vacancy rate indicates that the retail in the study area is performing well. There has not been new retail in the last decade, suggesting demand and opportunity to develop, especially with the existing low vacancy rate. Office Many of the office buildings are located along West Temple on the eastern edge of the study area (Figure 10). There is 83,500 square feet of office space in the study area with a 0% vacancy rate. The area has not seen new office space since 1997 (Table 13). The negative net deliveries in the 2010s indicate demolition of two office buildings (Figure 11). The 100% lease rate indicates an opportunity for more office space. Table 13: Office properties in the stuDdGy a. rea Market Rent per square foot for office space within the study area has steadily increased since 2013, with current rental rates at $20.40 per square foot. Rental rates have increased annually, often keeping pace with inflation. Over the past ten years rental rates have increased on average between 0.5% and 6.6% annually. Class C office space is the lowest commercial rental option. They are often older buildings with lower quality finishes and few amenities. Class A and B buildings are newer, in premier locations, and feature amenities such as on-site parking, security, bike storage, valet, gyms, private outdoor space, and daycare centers. Industrial The study area includes 35 industrial properties, many of which are clustered along 1700 S on the northern edge of the study area, near the I-15 on/off ramp. Industrial space in the study area has a vacancy rate of 5.0% (35,000 square feet). PROPERTY ADDRESS CLASS YEAR BUILT STORIES PARKING SPACES PARKING RATIO 1719 S 300 W C 1979 1 - - 2005 S 300 W C 1976 2 30 4.74 140 W 2100 S C 1975 2 84 2.89 1776 S West Temple C - 1 45 3.73 1978 S West Temple B 1997 2 55 2.15 Source: CoStar 104 | Existing Conditions View of 300 West looking east. Source: Design Workshop.. Real Estate Glossary of Terms Net Absorption: For existing buildings, the measure of total square feet occupied less the total space vacated over a given period of time. Lease renewals are not factored into net absorption. However, in a lease renewal that includes the leasing of additional space, that additional space is counted in net absorption. Pre-leasing of space in non-existing buildings (Planned, Under Construction or Under Renovation) is not counted in net absorption until actual move in, which by definition may not be any earlier than the delivery date. Absorption: Refers to the change in occupancy over a given time period. Lease renewals are not factored into absorption unless the renewal includes the occupancy of additional space. (In that case, the additional space would be counted in absorption.) Pre-leasing of space in non-existing buildings (e.g., Proposed, Under Construction, Under Renovation) is not counted in absorption until the actual move-in date. Delivery Assumption: In context of Property Professional analytic forecasting, a user-entered variable for projecting vacancy rates. This assumption variable is for net deliveries and can be entered as a fixed or variable rate. Vacancy Rate: Expressed as a percentage - it identifies the amount of New/Relet/Sublet space vacant divided by the existing rentable building area. This can be used for buildings or markets. Existing Conditions | 105 MOBILITY Existing Strengths & Assets Existing Barriers & Challenges Future Improvements (Relevant Plan Recommendations) OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS A ADDITIONAL PLAN REVIEW Additional Plan Review | 111 CONTENTS PLANNING CONTEXT – SALT LAKE CITY AND SOUTH SALT LAKE Plan Salt Lake .......................................................................................................................... 113 Housing SLC – 2023 to 2027 ................................................................................................. 113 Thriving in Place ...................................................................................................................... 115 Community Preservation Plan – (Historic Preservation Policy Plan) .................................. 116 Urban Forest Action Plan........................................................................................................ 116 Open Space Plan ..................................................................................................................... 120 Public Lands General Plan – Imagine Nature ....................................................................... 121 Lighting Master Plan ............................................................................................................... 123 Salt Lake City Transit Plan ...................................................................................................... 124 Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan ...................................................................................... 125 Major Street Plan (Part of the City’s Transportation Master Plan) ....................................... 129 Utah Unified Transportation Plan (2023 - 2050)/WFRC Regional Transportation Plan .... 130 Adjacent Jurisdiction Plans – South Salt Lake ..................................................................... 134 112 | Additional Plan Review LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: The Plan Salt Lake cover page .................................................................................................................... 113 Figure 2: The Housing SLC cover page . ................................................................................................................... 115 Figure 3: The City’s Thriving in Place plan includes policies to help mitigate housing displacement ................... 115 Figure 4: Map from the Urban Forestry Action Plan showing the percentage of land covered by tree canopy per census tract ....................................................................................................................................................... 117 Figure 5: Map showing the location of street trees in the study area The data is from 2019 and does not reflect the tree plantings done along 300 West in 2023 .................................................................................................. 119 Figure 6: Map showing the trails proposed near the study area in the Open Space Plan .................................... 120 Figure 7: Map from the Public Land plan showing near term and transformative project sites near the study area . .......................................................................................................................................................................... 122 Figure 8: Map of streetlight density from Lighting Master Plan............................................................................... 123 Figure 9: Map of the Frequent Transit Network plan from the Transit Master Plan along with current bus routes by frequency . ................................................................................................................................................ 124 Figure 10: Multi-use trails, neighborhood byways, and enhanced pedestrian crossing map from the Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan ........................................................................................................................................................ 126 Figure 11: Bicycling Network Existing Conditions and 20 Year Vision Map from the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan ............................................................................................................................................................... 127 Figure 12: Map from the South Salt Lake Strategic Mobility Plan showing existing and proposed bicycle and pedestrian improvements within the study area . .................................................................................................. 128 Figure 13: Transportation improvements identified in the 2023-2050 Unified Transportation Plan ..................... 131 Figure 14: Map from the South Salt Lake Strategic Mobility Plan showing existing and proposed bicycle and pedestrian improvements within the study area . .................................................................................................... 132 Figure 15: Future land use map from the South Salt Lake General Plan showing the proposed future land uses in the study area . ..................................................................................................................................................... 61 Additional Plan Review | 113 PLANNING CONTEXT – SALT LAKE CITY AND SOUTH SALT LAKE Several Salt Lake City plans provide policies and guidance directly or indirectly related to the study area and immediately adjacent areas . The study area is adjacent to South Salt Lake, which has a few different plans that cover the area . Salt Lake City’s and South Salt Lake’s plans that affect the area are discussed below . Plan Salt Lake Plan Salt Lake is the City’s Citywide general plan . The plan establishes general policies that are intended to be implemented throughout the City . The plan includes policies related to housing, transportation, sustainability, economic development, and recreation . Most of the policies in the plan can be applied to any area of the City and are focused on preparing the City for growth, while being sustainable and maintaining and improving livability in the City’s neighborhoods . The policies are intended to guide the City toward the plan’s long-term vision for the City in 2040 . The plan provides a framework for all neighborhood, community, and element plans, and that framework also applies to the forthcoming 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan . There are several “2040 Targets,” or long-term goals, from the plan that are applicable to this planning effort . Examples include: 1 . Neighborhoods: Community amenities (parks, natural lands, libraries, schools, recreation centers) located within 1/4th mile walking distance of every household 2 . Housing: Increase diversity of housing types for all income levels throughout the city 3 . Growth: Increase Salt Lake City’s share of the population along the Wasatch Front 4 . Transportation: Reduce single occupancy auto trips 5 . Parks: Parks or open space within walking distance of every household . 6 . Air Quality: Reduce emissions . 7 . Beautiful City: Pedestrian oriented design standards incorporated into all zoning districts that allow residential uses . 8 . Equity: Decrease combined cost of housing and transportation 9 . Government: Increase public participation Figure 1: Figure 1 The Plan Salt Lake cover page . Housing SLC – 2023 to 2027 The City recently adopted a new citywide housing “element” or plan, titled Housing SLC – 2023 to 2027 . This plan builds on the prior City housing plan Growing SLC – 2018 to 2022 and was structured to comply with recent State requirements for each Utah city to create a “moderate income housing plan” that “provides a realistic opportunity to meet the need for additional moderate income housing within the municipality during the next five years .” The State defines moderate income housing as “housing occupied or reserved for occupancy by households with a gross household income equal 114 | Additional Plan Review to or less than 80% of the median gross income for households of the same size in the county in which the housing is located .” Within the plan, Cities are required to choose from a selection of specific State required “strategies” to help meet the city’s need for moderate income housing . The plan establishes three key goals with metrics intended to track those goals . These are: Goal 1: Make progress toward closing the housing gap of 5,500 units of deeply affordable housing and increase the supply of housing at all levels of affordability . Metric: A . Entitle 10,000 new housing units throughout the city . 1 . Minimum 2,000 units deeply affordable (30% AMI or below) 2 . Minimum 2,000 units affordable (31% - 80% AMI) Goal 2: Increase housing stability throughout the city . Metrics: A . Track, analyze, and monitor factors that impact housing stability in the city . B . Assist 10,000 low-income individuals annually through programs funded to increase housing stability by the City . C . Dedicate targeted funding to: 1 . Mitigate displacement 2 . Serve renter households 3 . Serve family households 4 . Increase geographic equity 5 . Increase physical accessibility Goal 3: Increase opportunities for homeownership and other wealth and equity building opportunities . Metric: A . Provide affordable homeownership and wealth and equity building opportunities to a minimum of 1,000 low-income households . The City is required to choose from a number of State established “strategies” to accomplish the moderate-income housing goals . Many of the strategies apply citywide and could have some level of impact to this area; however, strategies more directly related to this area include: Strategy E: Zone or rezone for higher density or moderate income residential development in commercial or mixed-use zones near major transit investment corridors, commercial centers, or employment centers • 2023 Action: Adopt zoning or land use ordinance to increase density limits in the Ballpark neighborhood of the city • 2024 Action: Monitor response to increased density in the Ballpark neighborhood through annual reporting on number of new permits, number of units created, etc . (ongoing) Strategy G: Amend land use regulations to allow for higher density or new moderate income residential development in commercial or mixed- use zones near major transit investment corridors • Action: Increase building height limits in compatible areas of the city Strategy J: Implement zoning incentives for moderate income units in new developments Strategy P: Create a housing and transit reinvestment zone pursuant to Title 63N, Chapter 3, Part 6, Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Act • Action: Establish at least one housing and transit reinvestement zone (HTRZ) in the city Additional Plan Review | 115 2023-2027 • 2023 Action: Redevelopment Agency to engage in conversations with interested parties • 2024 Action: Work through details and application to establish an HTRZ • 2025 Action: Establish HTRZ Strategy V: Develop and adopt a station area plan in accordance with Section 10-9a-403 .1 • 2024 Action: Planning staff work with Planning Commission, City Council, and the public to develop new SAPs for station areas where such SAPs are needed Strategy W: Create or allow for, and reduce regulations related to, multifamily residential dwellings compatible in scale and form with detached single-family residential dwellings and located in walkable communities within residential or mixed-use zones Figure 2: The Housing SLC cover page . Thriving in Place The City recently adopted a plan intended to help mitigate housing displacement and prevent the loss of existing affordable housing in the City, titled Thriving in Place . The plan includes a wide range of policies intended to limit displacement . These include policies aimed at the creation of new regulations to prevent displacement and creation of tenant rights information and assistance resources . Most of the policies relate to the creation of Citywide programs to support the plan’s goals . Policies more directly related to the subject area include: Strategic Priority 3C: Facilitate Creation of More Diverse Housing Choices • Create More Diverse Housing Choices in All Areas so that people can find housing that meets their needs in locations that work for them . • Adopt and implement additional middle housing policies and programs as part of the Housing SLC plan and in conjunction with other Thriving in Place actions to ensure a diversity of also include the ADU policies, tools, and resources described in Strategic Priority 3B . Strategic Priority 3E: Prioritize Long-Term Affordability, Integrated Services, and Transit Access • Prioritize Long-Term Affordability, Integration of Support Services, and Access to Transit and Other Amenities to create stable living environments where lower income families and residents can thrive . Figure 3: The City’s Thriving in Place plan includes policies to help mitigate housing displacement 116 | Additional Plan Review Community Preservation Plan – (Historic Preservation Policy Plan) The City’s Community Preservation Plan, adopted in 2012, provides goals and policies generally related to preservation of historic buildings and neighborhoods . There are a wide range of policies that cover items such as historic preservation regulations and administration of those regulations, narrowing the focus of new historic districts to preserving significant history rather than just character preservation, encouraging adaptive reuse of historic structures, and encouraging historic structure preservation as a means of meeting City sustainability goals . There are no location specific policies that apply to the study area . There are a limited number of historically significant buildings identified in City materials and datasets within the study area; however, there may be other historically significant properties that could be identified with a historic survey . Please see the discussion of existing historic resources on page 139 . Urban Forest Action Plan The Urban Forest Action Plan, adopted in February 2023, contains policies related to growing and protecting the City’s urban forest . A large amount of the plan focuses on identification of the existing urban forest condition and conditions or policies that may be negatively impacting the urban forest . The plan includes maps showing tree coverage (both private and public trees) by census tract (Figure 4) . The census tract that covers the study area extends from 900 South to 2100 South and from I-15 to State Street . The plan notes that the census tract has “1 – 11%” tree coverage . This compares to the highest coverage rates in the City of “27 - 36%” found generally in or near highly single-family residential areas, such as Sugar House, East Bench, Avenues, and parts of Capitol Hill . The plan also includes a map of surface temperatures by Census Tract for a specific date – July 31, 2020 . The census tract covering this area notes a range of 118 – 121 degrees Fahrenheit . This area of the City is more commercial than other areas of the City and those commercial uses generally do not have yards with vegetation, including trees, and often do not have enough park strip space to include street trees . These factors contribute to the low tree canopy rating and higher average surface temperatures in the area . The Urban Forest Action Plan outlines several key goals, objectives, and actions to enhance the city’s urban environment . Most of these are general and apply citywide, but some that relate more specifically to this planning effort include: Goal: Incorporate the urban forest into all of Salt Lake City’s planning and project implementation efforts to mitigate environmental impacts . Mid-Term Action: Incorporate canopy cover (or tree stocking) goals into all new master and area plans . Goal: Improve growing conditions for the urban forest in challenging sites Objective: Amend the city code to strengthen tree protection and codify ecosystem service value . Near-Term Action: Recommend changes to the zoning code to increase trees where they will mitigate environmental impacts . Goal: Protect trees on city-owned land and in the right of way Objective: Incorporate Mitigation Techniques into Urban Forestry’s Planting Strategies Near-Term Action: Identify and prioritize large park strips that would give ample space for large trees, even allées (double rows) of trees . Additional Plan Review | 117 Tree Cover Percent by Census Tract Surface Temperature by Census Tract - July 31 Tree Cover Percent by Census Tract 1 - 11 % 11 - 20 % 20 - 27 % 27 - 36 % Surface Temperature by Census Tract - July 31 108 - 112° F 112 - 115° F 115 - 118° F 118 - 121° F Salt Lake City Census Tract Analysis 2019 AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY (ACS) TRACT DATA Salt Lake City Tree Canopy Cover ¯ Salt Lake City Surface Temperature (5:05 p.m. MDT, July 31, 2020) ¯ Figure 4: Map from the Urban Forestry Action Plan showing the percentage of land covered by tree canopy per census tract . Mi l e s Mi l e s 0 3. 5 7 0 3. 5 7 118 | Additional Plan Review Near Term Action: Plant large evergreens property bordering freeways to mitigate air pollution . Long Term Action: Plant deciduous trees on the north and east sides of streets to conserve energy (blocking the southern and western sun in the summer and allowing it to passively warm buildings in the winter) . Goal: Coordinate with Regional Agencies and neighboring municipalities on urban forest planning and expansion to improve air and water quality . Partner with neighboring municipalities to add trees to high-volume traffic corridors, or other shared areas with poor air quality . Objective: Create framework for partnerships between municipal and state agencies, nonprofits, and volunteers to equitably preserve and grow the urban forest . Long Term Action: Partner with neighboring municipalities to add trees to high-volume traffic corridors, or other shared areas with poor air quality . Long Term Action: Planning to create policies and incentives to expand the urban forest on private land, including parking lots, using existing regulations in the City code), including amendments to the City Code where feasible . Goal: Implement equity through irrigation distribution Objective: The city assumes irrigation responsibility for all park strip trees, beginning in the most impacted neighborhoods . Mid-Term Action: Assume responsibility for watering park strip trees in locations where local urban heat island effects are greatest . Goal: Plan for equitable urban forest expansion in neighborhoods and business districts Near Term Action: Plant trees to create microclimates that increase access to summer shade and winter sun . Near Term Action: Plant trees to strategically provide shade on roadways to increase asphalt lifespan . Goal: Rethink row to allocate more space for trees & pedestrians Objective: On streets with low traffic volumes, create a strategy to reduce vehicle lanes, and lane widths, where supported by future traffic projection data . Goal: Enhance City’s image and livability through incorporating pedestrian-first streetscape design . Objective: Amend zoning code to introduce new urban design criteria for spacing and scale of trees Near Term Action: Recommend new tree spacing requirements based on environmental benefit and urban design criteria . Near Term Action: Recommend tree height and scale at maturity requirements based on average heights in zoning districts . Near Term Action: Recommend including shade on all active transportation routes in the City’s revised Complete Streets ordinance . Near Term Action: Require additional trees at transit stops and along transit routes . Goal: Develop urban forest districts throughout residential and commercial areas to enhance sense of place . (This goal includes several actions related to the creation of specific urban forest “districts” that would ultimately provide guidance for specific types of trees in particular districts.) Additional Plan Review | 119 Plan Study Area Street Tree Inventory - 2019 Street Tree Figure 5: Map showing the location of street trees in the study area . The data is from 2019 and does not reflect the tree plantings done along 300 West in 2023 . Hartwell Ave 30 0 W We s t Te m p l e St 120 | Additional Plan Review Open Space Plan The 1992 City Open Space Plan shows the location of potential trails throughout the City . The plan includes one trail adjacent to the study area, located within the Ballpark Plan area on the north end of the study area . The proposed trail is shown on an abandoned rail line . However, the rail line property was sold to private property owners and so the trail was never implemented by the City . The 2005 Central Community Plan includes a policy supporting implementation of the trail system shown in the Open Space plan, but no progress has been made on the rail spur trail in Ballpark since that time . There are currently no near-term plans for implementation of the trail . Figure 6: Map showing the trails proposed near the study area in the Open Space Plan 1300 S 1700 S Additional Plan Review | 1211 Public Lands General Plan – Imagine Nature The City recently adopted a new plan focused on City public lands, titled Reimagine Nature . Though there isn’t a specific public lands improvement identified in the study area, the plan has several general policies and “action items” applicable to the area and this small area planning effort . These include the following: • Central City Near Term Investments (Policies) • Identify opportunities for separated bike lane/ multiuse paths • Encourage developers to create park space as part of their development for their residents, at a minimum . • Look for community garden and pocket park opportunities • Action 1.3B Engage the community and the Planning Division to develop or update holistic Community/Neighborhood Master Plans which include community priorities for park and public space investment and redesign, and which manage the impacts park renewal can have on the immediately adjacent community (i .e . gentrification) by developing innovative partnerships (such as with housing providers), considering impacts, using a community-led approach to design and management, and advocating for planning and policy that reduces displacement . • Action 1.2D Engage with the Planning Division, Housing & Neighborhood Development, Economic Development Department, and other City entities to further community goals for housing, business development, community health and livability through collaboration with Public Lands . • Action 1.3A Modify city development codes to simplify park improvement projects and mitigate technical obstacles like inaccurate park zoning or internal property subdivisions within park spaces . • Action 1.3C Integrate the work of Planning & Public Lands; actively engage Public Lands staff in future Area and Neighborhood Master Plans, and engage Planning staff in future park master plans and improvement plans . 122 | Additional Plan Review LEGEND NEAR-TERM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS HIGH EQUITY PRIORITY MEDIUM EQUITY PRIORITY LOW EQUITY PRIORITY TRANSFORMATIVE PROJECTS HIGH EQUITY PRIORITY MEDIUM EQUITY PRIORITY LOW EQUITY PRIORITY PROPOSED TRAILS EXISTING ELEMENTS PARKS AND NATURAL LANDS GOLF COURSES CEMETERY EXISTING TRAILS STUDY AREA Figure 7: Map from the Public Land plan showing near term and transformative project sites near the study area . Additional Plan Review | 123 Lighting Master Plan The Salt Lake City Lighting Master Plan was adopted in 2021 . The plan provides guidance on transitioning the City’s lighting to LED based lighting and balancing lighting needs with energy use and environmental (light pollution) concerns . The plan prioritizes lighting improvements in areas underserved by existing lighting, that are in or near “high priority conflict areas” defined as areas where there is increased pedestrian or bicycle activity . These “conflict areas” include bus stops, light rail stops, and neighborhood byways (pedestrian and bicycle priority corridors identified in the City Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan discussed in a following section) . The plan includes a map showing streetlight locations and the subject area does not appear to be underserved in general . However, there may be small areas, such as along the 1700 West bike route near 300 West, that may warrant being prioritized based on the plan’s direction . Figure 8: FMap of streetlight density from Lighting Master Plan Area 124 | Additional Plan Review Salt Lake City Transit Plan The Transit Master Plan, adopted in 2017, primarily discuses goals, policies, and priorities related to the City’s “Frequent Transit network” (FTN .) The FTN is a set of “designated transit corridors that offer frequent, reliable service connecting major destinations and neighborhood centers seven days a week and in the evenings .” The network is divided into Tier 1 and Tier 2 lines, intended for near- and medium-term implementation and longer-term implementation based on future conditions and community input, respectively . There is one FTN Tier 1 bus route in the project area on 2100 South . The next nearest FTN bus route is on State Street, two blocks to the east of the project area . The plan also identifies the TRAX line on 200 West as a Tier 1 FTN line . Although not identified as an FTN route, 300 West is currently served by bus route 17 between 1700 South and 2100 South . Figure 9: Map of the Frequent Transit Network plan from the Transit Master Plan along with current bus routes by frequency . ¯ Plan Study Area Bus Route by Frequency Transit Master Plan - Frequent Transit Network Transit Facilities UTA Rail Stops 15 Minutes 30 Minutes Tier 1 (Near to Medium Term Implementation) Tier 2 (Longer Term Implementation) 70 0 W 40 0 W 30 0 W 30 0 W 20 0 W/ T R A X We s t Te m p l e St We s t Te m p l e St Ma i n St St a t e St Additional Plan Review | 125 The plan also priorities specific corridors for moderate or high levels of investment . The nearest corridor identified as a high priority on State Street and is designated for a moderate level of investment . The plan includes a map identifying “transit propensity” by census block group . The “propensity” level is based on the combine densities of low-income households, zero vehicle households, seniors aged 65 and older, and the disabled population The blocks in this area are shown as being somewhere near the middle of the higher end of the spectrum . The Transit Master Plan explains that the plan does not include any specific land use or zoning recommendations; rather it provides information for coordination of land use plans to ensure that growth is supportive of goals in the plan . The plan discusses several goals that are intended to improve connections to transit . The following goals and policies from the plan are applicable to the 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan: • Create economically vibrant, livable places that support use of transit . Align transit investments with transit-supportive land use policies and development . • Land use density and transit service should be developed in concert to ensure their mutual benefit and success . High-quality transit modes that provide frequent service and a high-level of amenities require supportive land use to generate enough riders to be cost-effective . • The Transit Master Plan does not dictate priorities for land use plan updates; rather it provides information for coordination of land use plans, to ensure that future land development patterns are supportive of Transit Master Plan goals . • Pages 85 and 141 of the plan provide guidelines for transit service upgrades based on density, such as development density around Central Pointe Station . • Create pedestrian and bicycle routes using mid-block crossings and passageways, wide sidewalks, and signage; • Designate a well-connected network of multiuse paths; buffered and protected bike lanes; neighborhood byways; and regular bike lanes that provide direct connections to local destinations • Provide interior block connections, mid-block crossings, and a pedestrian and bicycle network that connects to destinations and transit stops Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan The City adopted a plan focused on bicycle and pedestrian improvements in 2015 titled the Salt Lake City Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan . The plan establishes recommended routes for enhanced pedestrian and transportation improvements, such as trails, wide multi-use paths, or enhanced bicycle lanes . The plan recommends that West Temple be a “neighborhood byway” with a timeframe for any needed improvements to fully realize this designation to be completed in the next 10-20 years . The plan defines neighborhood byways as the following and notes the types of improvements intended for these: Neighborhood byways are multi-modal linear facilities on streets with low traffic volumes and speeds . Additionally, intersection improvements that allow bicyclists and pedestrians to cross 126 | Additional Plan Review large or busy streets are critical to their utility . Wayfinding signage and shared lane markings are also important components . Traffic diversion and calming measures are often used when traffic volumes or speeds are higher than desirable . A proposed network of “neighborhood byways” taps quiet neighborhood streets and formalizes them into transportation corridors designed to crisscross the city and link to key destinations including neighborhood retail areas and corridors, parks, schools, and transit stations . Few changes are needed on the quiet streets themselves; the network is realized by providing for safe, often signalized crossings at the major barrier streets, and reducing traffic volumes to make walking safer and more enjoyable . “Neighborhood byways” is a term recognizing that these corridors create a network for both pedestrians and bicyclists . The plan identifies 1700 South as an “East- West Pedestrian Priority Corridor” targeted as a priority for pedestrian improvements . 1700 South currently includes a striped bike lane, separated by vehicle traffic by a single lane striping . The plan recommends buffered or protected bike lanes on 1700 South from State Street to just west of I-215 as a long term (10-20 year) recommendation . The City is considering near term changes to some of this section of 1700 South, including within the plan study area, to implement this . Please see the discussion on page 92 .. Figure 10: Multi-use trails, neighborhood byways, and enhanced pedestrian crossing map from the Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan . Recommended Pedestrian Spot Improvements Enhanced Road Crossings and Signals Paxton Intersections and Signage 1300 S New Pavement and Curb Cuts Structure Improvements Neighborhood Byways Crossings & Improvements Recommended Facilities Multi-Use Paths (0-10 Yrs) 1700 S Multi-Use Paths (10-20 Yrs) Transvalley Corridor* 15 East-West Pedestrian Priority Corridors Neighborhood Byways (0-10 Yrs) H Neighborhood Byways (10-20 Yrs) Existing Facilities Multi-Use Paths Natural Surface Trails (Bonneville Shoreline) Existing Transit and Other Facilities 13 0 0 S 13 J a We s t 20 0 E Additional Plan Review | 127 9 0 0 W W e s t T e m p l e 2 0 0 E 1300 S 300 West is also identified for the same “buffered or protected bike lane” improvements as another long term recommendation . These were implemented with fully separated, raised bike lanes (separated from vehicle traffic by curb and park strip) constructed on the west side of 300 West, with the City’s reconstruction of 300 West in 2023 . The lanes end short of 2100 South at Hartwell Avenue (1940 S), so future opportunities could be explored by the City to fully link the path to South Salt Lake’s bicycle path on the south side of 2100 South . There are no specific improvements identified for 2100 South . 2100 South is a State road and is planned and maintained by the State; however, the City has ownership and responsibility for improvements outside of the vehicle roadway behind the curb, such as park strips and sidewalks . The plan also includes several general policies that apply citywide that are intended to help encourage bicycling and walking and promote its safety . Examples include intersection updates, signal light timing changes, improved bike lane maintenance, wayfinding, event promotion, and safety enforcement efforts . Recommended Bikeways Multi-Use Paths 900 S Buffered or Protected Bike Lanes Bike Lanes Neighborhood Byways Neighborhood Byways Crossings & Improvements Shared Roadways* Bikeways Proposed in Univ. of Utah Bicycle Master Plan Requires Further Study Transvalley Corridor** Existing Bikeways All Existing Bikeways Natural Surface Trails (Bonneville Shoreline) Existing Transit Facilities TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Stop TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Line ¦15 Paxton Herbert 1700 S Hollywood Ramo 2100 S Parley's Trail *Includes marked & signed shared roadways Figure 11: Bicycling Network Existing Conditions and 20 Year Vision Map from the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan . 1700 S 4 0 0 3 0 0 W 4 0 0 E 5 0 0 E 5 0 0 E 6 0 0 E 128 | Additional Plan Review t. l South Salt Lake Bike Lane Context South Salt Lake’s portion of 300 West, south of 2100 South, currently does not have any specific bicycle improvements within about a block of 2100 South, similar to Salt Lake City on the north side . However, a block south of 2100 South, the road layout includes a narrow, unprotected bike lane within the shoulder of the road . There is an unsigned, segment of striped shoulder that may function as a bike lane on the west side of 300 West that extends from about 2100 South to Andy Ave/TRAX line . South Salt Lake’s portion of West Temple has bike lanes that extend all the way to the 2100 South intersection . The lanes are a mix of conventional on road bike lanes, both buffered (with buffer striping) and simply striped . The street is identified in South Salt Lake’s Strategic Mobility Plan as a “Proposed high comfort bike route on (an) existing bike lane .” Future (2020) Parley’s Trail Bridge (2020) Need access from 900 W to new Parley’s Trail bridge 2100 S 15 Upgrade Parley’s Trail New I-80 access Upgrade interchange Potential pedestrian bridge, E. Oak- land Avenue Parley’s Trail 80 Repair/ Rebuild Upgrade Bridge Crossing 2700 S Legend Existing Trail Proposed Trail Existing Bike Route Proposed Bike Route TRAX and Streetcar Proposed Greenway/Trail Future Bike Route Proposed high comfort bike route on existing bike lane Proposed high comfort bike route on proposed bike lane Sidewalk and bicycle facility improvements Schools Sidewalk Improvement or add new sidewalk Parks and Open Space Improve Existing Pedestrian Crossing Proposed Pedestrian Crossing Increase ped/bike safety/comfort at highway underpass crossings Pedestrian access needed 1/2 mile radius Existing TRAX Station Proposed / Future TRAX Station Bike Crossing/ Intersection Proposed Bridge Crossing Figure 12: Map from the South Salt Lake Strategic Mobility Plan showing existing and proposed bicycle and pedestrian improvements within the study area . 50 0 E 30 0 E 20 0 E Ma i n St . W Te m p l e 30 0 W 70 0 W 90 0 W 1 Additional Plan Review | 129 Trails Nearby existing and planned trails include the Parley’s Trail, located generally along the east- west running S-line (east of 200 West) and TRAX lines (west of 200 West, heading west to West Valley) in the area . Crossings The Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan doesn’t identify any specific crossing improvements within or adjacent to the study area boundary . Major Street Plan (Part of the City’s Transportation Master Plan) The City has an adopted Major Streets Plan (last amended in 2018) that identifies the location of existing and future planned City streets . It also classifies streets by type, which provides guidance for the width and type of improvements that should be constructed within the street, such as the number of vehicle lanes, park strips, and sidewalk requirements, that a street should include . The Major Streets Plan identifies the following streets and designations in the plan area: • West Temple – Collector Street • 300 West - Arterial City Street • 1700 South – Arterial City Street • 2100 South – Arterial State Route • All other streets are local streets . The plan describes these streets as the following: Arterial State Routes: These are State Highways operated and maintained by the Utah Department of Transportation . State Routes typically operate as Arterial streets . Arterial City Streets: These streets facilitate through traffic movement over relatively long distances such as from one end of the city to the other and from neighborhood to neighborhood . Arterials are generally Multi-Lane streets carrying high traffic volumes at relatively high speed limits . These are commuter streets and typically offer controlled access to abutting property . Collector Streets: Collector streets provide the connection between Arterial and Local streets . Collectors can be Multi-Lane but are meant to carry less traffic at lower speeds and for shorter distances than Arterials . They provide direct access to abutting property and carry a mix of local traffic and commuter traffic headed for nearby destinations . There are no new streets proposed for the study area in the Major Streets Plan . As the guiding document for the location of new City streets, if new streets are proposed within a new general plan, the Major Streets Plan should be amended to reflect those . South Salt Lake Context The South Salt Lake Strategic Mobility Plan identifies a trail corridor along Interstate 15, proposing that it be located either on the east or west side of that freeway and continuing north into Salt Lake City . South Salt Lake Context The South Salt Lake Mobility Plan calls for a crossing on 2100 South at the TRAX line at approximately 200 West . 130 | Additional Plan Review Utah Unified Transportation Plan (2023 - 2050)/WFRC Regional Transportation Plan The Utah Unified Transportation Plan is a statewide transportation plan, representing a collaboration among the state’s metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) and the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) . These organizations come together to compile and prioritize a variety of transportation projects or improvements across the state . These are categorized into one of three phases or priorities - 2023 to 2032 (phase 1), 2033 to 2042 (phase 2), and 2043 to 2050 (phase 3) . The projects identified in the plan area come from the Regional Transportation Plan managed by the Wasatch Front Regional Council, the MPO that covers the study area . The most recent version of the plan (2023- 2050) identifies three future bicycle related improvements (shown in the associated map as “AT” or Active Transportation projects) on the edges of the study area . These include a bicycle lane on 300 West from Hartwell Avenue (1940 S) to the Central Pointe TRAX Station, an at-grade pedestrian crossing at 300 West across the 2100 South intersection, and new buffered bike lanes on 1700 South from 300 West to Redwood Road . For context, currently the bike lanes on 300 West stop about one block short of the 2100 South intersection, on both the South Salt Lake (south) and Salt Lake City (north) sides of the street . The proposed improvements would connect those two routes . The buffered bike lanes proposed for 1700 South may be implemented by the City with forthcoming restriping to 1700 South (see page 92.) For automobile related improvements, the plan identifies general 2100 South “operational improvements” from I-15 to State Street as a phase 1 improvement . The plan also identifies the following improvements to I-15: • Managed motorways implementation – Phase Needed 1 • Variable Pricing Implementation (I-15 Variable-Priced Freeway Lanes Operations from Davis County Line to Utah County Line) - Phase Needed 2 • Freeway Widening, I-15 (Northbound) Widening from 400 South to I-215, Phase Needed 1 • Freeway HOT Lanes (I-15 Dual HOT Operations from Davis County Line to Utah County Line) – Phase Needed 3 The plan also identifies the following transit improvements: • 300 West Corridor Core Route (10 min service) from North Temple FrontRunner Station to Central Pointe TRAX Station – Phase 1 • Foothill Drive - 2100 South Core Route (10 min service) from University South Campus TRAX Station to Central Pointe TRAX Station – Phase 1 • Lake Park Core Route (15 min service) from 5600 West to Central Pointe TRAX Station – Phase 2 Additional Plan Review | 1311 Highway 2100 South Operations from I-15 to State Street I-15 Improvements Active Transportation 1700 South Buffered Bike Lane from Redwood Road to 300 West 300 West Protected Bike Lane from Hartwell Avenue to Central Pointe TRAX Station via Utopia Avenue Transit 1700 South Core Route (15 min service) from Redwood Road to Foothill Drive 300 West Corridor Core Route (10 min service) from North Temple FrontRunner Station to Central Pointe TRAX Foothill Drive - 2100 South Core Route (10 min service) from University South Campus TRAX Station to Central Lake Park Core Route (15 min service) from 5600 West to Central Pointe TRAX Station Mainline TRAX Improvements from 1300 South to I-80 S-Line Street Car Double Tracking from Central Pointe S-Line Station to Highland Drive Site Specific Improvements 300 West At-Grade Pedestrian / Bike Crossing @ 2100 South Central Pointe Station Transit Hub @ 2100 South and TRAX Figure 13: Transportation improvements identified in the 2023-2050 Unified Transportation Plan . Hansen Ave 1700 S Jefferson Cir 1830 S Hartwell Ave Westwood Ave 2100 S 0 335 670 1,340 2,010 Feet ¯ I-15 SB Fwy 45 0 W 30 0 W Je ff e r s o n St We s t Te m p l e St 132 | Additional Plan Review t. l Adjacent Jurisdiction Plans – South Salt Lake The plan’s study area is located on the south edge of the City boundary, which for this area is 2100 South . The neighboring jurisdiction is South Salt Lake . Their future plans may impact Salt Lake City’s plans and vice versa . It’s important to coordinate planning efforts to help ensure the area functions cohesively . Although South Salt Lake’s current plans are cited here, South Salt Lake is in the process of creating a new small area plan that will provide new guidance for the area around Central Pointe Station, so the policies cited here may change in the near term . South Salt Lake Mobility Plan Context South Salt Lake has an adopted transportation element plan titled the South Salt Lake Strategic Mobility Plan . The plan includes policies that cover all forms of transportation including walking, bicycling, and driving . The plan identifies 300 West as an “existing bike route” and calls for Future (2020) Parley’s Trail Bridge (2020) Need access from 900 W to new Parley’s Trail bridge 2100 S 15 Upgrade Parley’s Trail New I-80 access Upgrade interchange Potential pedestrian bridge, E. Oak- land Avenue Parley’s Trail 80 Repair/ Rebuild Upgrade Bridge Crossing 2700 S Legend Existing Trail Proposed Trail Existing Bike Route Proposed Bike Route TRAX and Streetcar Proposed Greenway/Trail Future Bike Route Proposed high comfort bike route on existing bike lane Proposed high comfort bike route on proposed bike lane Sidewalk and bicycle facility improvements Schools Sidewalk Improvement or add new sidewalk Parks and Open Space Improve Existing Pedestrian Crossing Proposed Pedestrian Crossing Increase ped/bike safety/comfort at highway underpass crossings Pedestrian access needed 1/2 mile radius Existing TRAX Station Proposed / Future TRAX Station Bike Crossing/ Intersection Proposed Bridge Crossing Figure 14: Map from the South Salt Lake Strategic Mobility Plan showing existing and proposed bicycle and pedestrian improvements within the study area . 50 0 E 30 0 E 20 0 E Ma i n St . W Te m p l e 30 0 W 70 0 W 90 0 W 1 Additional Plan Review | 133 “Sidewalk and bicycle facility improvements” to the section of 300 West located between 2100 South and the S-Line Corridor/Parley’s Trail . Other related policies from the plan are discussed in the context of the Salt Lake City Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan on page 125 . South Salt Lake General Plan and Future Land Uses The South Salt Lake General Plan, adopted in 2021, identifies the area south of 2100 South between I-15 and State Street as the “Downtown South Salt Lake Area” with the area divided into the “Core” and “Transition” areas . The plan’s discussion of these areas is below: This area is divided into subareas based on distance from the station platforms . This area should be considered for a future civic center with a community gathering area for public use . The core subarea is 1/4 mile from the station platform . The transitional subarea is the remaining area of the Neighborhood . Core Area: This area is the closest to transit and supported by access to major arterials and the I-15 interchange . This area can support the highest densities in the city . • Within 1/4 mile of TRAX or Streetcar Station • Density is not limited . Buildings must meet minimum and maximum setback, height minimum, and parking requirements only • Retail and service uses existing or planned in the immediate area • Public realm improvements to enhance the pedestrian environment, provide connectivity to community amenities and services and encourage community interaction • Installation of pedestrian amenities on primary street frontages to create walkable and human-scaled environments that encourage walking, bicycling, and transit use . • Street trees and landscaping Transition Area: This area is beyond the 1/4 mile distance from the transit station, but is within the Downtown South Salt Lake Neighborhood . This area can support high densities . • Within the Downtown South Salt Lake Neighborhood • More than 1/4 mile from transit station • Density is not limited . Buildings must meet minimum and maximum setback, height minimum and maximum, and parking requirements • Retail and service uses existing or planned in the immediate area • Public realm improvements to enhance the pedestrian environment, provide connectivity to community amenities and services, and encourage community interaction • Installation of pedestrian amenities on all street frontages to create walkable and human-scaled environments that encourage walking, bicycling, and transit use • Street trees and landscaping The plan also identifies “Community Gateways” where special improvements should be made . One of these is at 2100 South around 300 West . The plan describes these areas and what kinds of improvements should be made with the following: These areas mark primary access points to South Salt Lake, the areas where people are coming into the community from adjacent jurisdictions . Urban design standards, streetscape treatments, and monument and wayfinding signage will increase the visibility of South Salt Lake in the region . 134 | Additional Plan Review FIGURE III-10: FUTURE LAND USE MAP Figure 15: Future land use map from the South Salt Lake General Plan showing the proposed future land uses near the study area . COMMUNITY MILLCREEK GENERAL LEGEND South Salt Lake City Boundary Public Facilities Granite District Schools Fire Stations Public Libraries Police Station Trailheads PARLEY’S TRAIL Existing Proposed MILLCREEK TRAIL Existing Proposed Existing Proposed JORDAN RIVER PARKWAY TRAIL Jordan River Parkway Streams Salt Lake County South Salt Lake Transit Station Proposed Transit Proposed Transit Station TOD Area Central Pointe Half Mile Radius Transit Line TRANSIT STATION SUPPORTIVE AREA Transit Station Supportive Area FUTURE LAND USE CONCEPT AREA Medium Density Mixed Use Area Rail Serviced Commercial Area Business District Area Institutional Low-Medium Residential Area Low-Medium Mixed Use Area NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER AREAS NATURAL PRESERVATION AREAS OPEN SPACE Natural Preservation Area New Park Space Opportunity FUTURE CORRIDOR CONCEPT AREAS Gateway Areas Catalyst Areas Roads Highways ST A T E ST 5 0 0 E B ADDITIONAL EXISTING CONDITIONS REVIEW Additional Existing Conditions Review | 135 CONTENTS ADDITIONAL NON-PLAN EXISTING CONDITION ITEMS ................. 137 South Salt Lake Current Zoning ............................................................................................. 137 State of Utah Transit Station Area Plan Requirements Context .......................................... 138 Preservation and Historic Resources...................................................................................... 139 Environmental Hazards ........................................................................................................... 139 Traffic Counts ........................................................................................................................... 139 Public Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 142 Parks Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................ 143 Public Street Trees .................................................................................................................. 145 Geological Hazards .................................................................................................................. 146 City Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP) Façade Grants .................... 146 136 | Additional Existing Conditions Review LIST OF FIGURES Figure 16: Map of the South Salt Lake zoning subdistricts in the MPMU zone . .................................................... 137 Figure 17: Map showing DEQ data points in the area . ............................................................................................. 140 Figure 18: Average annual daily traffic for routes within or along the study area for the period from 2010 to 2020, excluding Interstate 15 . The numbers from 2020 are lower due to declines in traffic related to COVID-19 .......... 141 Figure 19: Map showing the location of public facilities near the study area ......................................................... 142 Figure 20: The needs assessment map from the Parks and Public Lands Needs Assessment shows the area generally having a high need for additional parks and open space . ................................................................... 143 Figure 21: The report identifies areas within 1/2 walking distance to a park, showing much of the study area not being within 1/2 mile walking distance of a park ................................................................................................... 144 Figure 22: Map of street trees in the study area The map does not reflect recent tree planting done by the City along 300 West . ....................................................................................................................................................... 145 Figure 23: Flood hazard map from FEMA showing limited flood hazards in the study area ................................ 146 Additional Existing Conditions Review | 137 ADDITIONAL NON-PLAN EXISTING CONDITION ITEMS South Salt Lake Current Zoning To the south of the project area is South Salt Lake’s Downtown MPMU (Master Planned Mixed Use) district (Figure 16) . Zoning regulations for this district can be found in the Downtown South Salt Lake Form Based Code and Design Standards . Within this district are three subdistricts which abut the project area on 2100 South: Mixed Use, Retail Destination, and Station . These subdistricts allow for most commercial uses that are allowed in other commercial zones, although auto-oriented and high-intensity uses are prohibited in the station subdistrict . The minimum building height is 50’ in the Station subdistrict, 32’ in the Mixed Use subdistrict, and 26’ in the Retail Destination subdistrict . There is no maximum building height . Figure 16: Map of the South Salt Lake zoning subdistricts in the MPMU zone . 138 | Additional Existing Conditions Review State of Utah Transit Station Area Plan Requirements Context The Utah legislature has adopted a requirement for municipalities to adopt “Station Area Plans” around transit stations . The plan being developed for this study area is intended to satisfy those requirements . Station area plans are required to promote the following objectives: i . Increasing the availability and affordability of housing, including moderate income housing; ii . Promoting sustainable environmental conditions; iii . Enhancing access to opportunities; and iv . Increasing transportation choices and connections . The requirements also provide guidance on actions the City may consider implementing as part of the station area plan to promote each of the above objectives . These include: Objective (i) A . Aligning the station area plan with the moderate income housing element of the municipality’s general plan; B . Providing for densities necessary to facilitate the development of moderate income housing; C . Providing for affordable costs of living in connection with housing, transportation, and parking; or D . Any other similar action that promotes the objective . Objective (ii) A . Conserving water resources through efficient land use; B . Improving air quality by reducing fuel consumption and motor vehicle trips; C . Establishing parks, open spaces, and recreational opportunities; or D . Any other similar action that promotes the objective . Objective (iii) A . Maintaining and improving the connections between housing, transit, employment, education, recreation, and commerce; B . Encouraging mixed-use development; C . Enabling employment and educational opportunities within the station area; D . Encouraging and promoting enhanced broadband connectivity; or E . Any other similar action that promotes the objective . Objective (iv) A . Supporting investment in infrastructure for all modes of transportation; B . Increasing utilization of public transit; C . Encouraging safe streets through the designation of pedestrian walkways and bicycle lanes; D . Encouraging manageable and reliable traffic conditions; E . Aligning the station area plan with the regional transportation plan of the applicable metropolitan planning organization; or F . Any other similar action that promotes the objective . Additional Existing Conditions Review | 139 Preservation and Historic Resources There are no national or local historic districts and no local or national landmarks within the study area . One national historic district, Boulevard Gardens, abuts the study area on the east side of West Temple at about 1791 S West temple . One building within the study area that isn’t covered by a landmark designation, but that has some historical significance is the Stanley F Taylor Home, located on the Salt Lake Housing Authority property at 1812 S West Temple . The building was required to be preserved as part of a development approval process for the multi-family housing that surrounds it . Although the Stanley F Taylor Home subsequently went through a landmark designation process, it ultimately was not designated as a landmark by the City due in part to building alterations done after its original construction . There may be other buildings or properties that warrant a historic designation in the study area; however, no historic surveys have been done within the study area . Environmental Hazards The Utah Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) maintains a database of facilities or sites that may have the potential for environmental impacts, such as fuel tanks, or that are associated with existing environmental contamination (Figure 17) . Contaminated sites identified and regulated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) are commonly known as Superfund sites . There are no Superfund sites identified in the DEQ database in this area . There are a number of fuel tanks within the planning area, generally associated with existing or former gas stations . There is one site within the area on the department’s air emissions inventory and that is a printing company with large printing presses . There is a site on the north end of West Temple associated with the department’s voluntary cleanup program whereby the property owner has agreed to actions to prevent exposure to the existing contamination . This was done as part of a redevelopment of the property for a large multi- family housing development . Traffic Counts The Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) maintains annual average daily traffic data for their streets and higher traffic City streets that intersect their streets . UDOT defines this as: The total volume of vehicle traffic of a highway or road for a year divided by 365 days. It is meant to represent traffic on a typical day of the year. UDOT maintains data for 2100 South, West Temple, 300 West, and 1700 South . Traffic counts for these routes from the most recent 11 years is shown in the graph (Figure 18) . 300 West saw a gradual increase in traffic between 2013 and 2019 . 1700 South remained relatively stable from 2010 to 2019, declining by about 1,000 vehicles from 2010 to 2013, and then gradually increasing back to a peak of 12,232 in 2019 . For West Temple, the data shows a jump from 3,490 to 5,180 from 2010 to 2011 and saw a gradual increase to a peak of 5,804 in 2019 . For 2100 South, the data shows yearly increasing levels of traffic from 2013 to 2019, but then a drop in 2020 . All the 2020 traffic counts are lower than the 2019 counts, likely due to COVID-19’s impact on travel that year . 140 | Additional Existing Conditions Review Hansen Ave 1700 S Jefferson Cir 1830 S Hartwell Ave 0 335 2100 S 670 1,340 2,010 Feet Westwood Ave ¯ Plan Study Area Air Emissions Inventory Permitting and Compliance Approval Orders Dry Cleaners Hazardous Waste and Used Oil Facilities Environmental Incidents Enforceable Written Assurances Petroleum Storage Tanks Water Rights Points of Diversion CERCLA/Superfund Site Assessments TIER2 Facilities List Toxic Release Inventory Voluntary Cleanup Program Figure 17: Map showing DEQ data points in the area . I-15 SB Fw y 45 0 W 30 0 W Je f f er s o n St We s t Te m p l e St Additional Existing Conditions Review | 141 30,000 25,000 21,815 22,820 22,365 21,805 22,990 22,045 24,211 24,865 25,114 25,566 22,830 20,000 15,000 10,000 15,133 15,542 15,697 15,980 14,305 14,265 13,980 13,630 13,780 14,370 14,270 11,440 11,584 11,897 12,016 12,232 10,915 10,700 10,430 10,545 11,000 10,923 5,000 3,490 5,180 5,080 4,950 5,005 5,220 5,497 5,645 5,701 5,804 5,183 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Year 300 West (2100 South via 300 West) 2100 South (300 West to State Street via 2100 South) West Temple (2100 South via West Temple) 1700 South (300 West via 1700 South) Figure 18: Average annual daily traffic for routes within or along the study area for the period from 2010 to 2020, excluding Interstate 15 . The numbers from 2020 are lower due to declines in traffic related to COVID-19 . Av e r a g e An n u a l D a i l y Tr a f f i c (V e h i c l e s ) 142 | Additional Existing Conditions Review Public Facilities Public facilities include things like parks, fire stations, police stations, community centers, and libraries . There are no such facilities within the study area, but there are some facilities just outside the boundary of the area . There is one small City park located at 1560 S West Temple known as Ballpark Playground (previously named People’s Freeway Park .) The recently adopted Ballpark Plan also identifies the existing Public Utilities facility that surrounds this playground as a future larger park site if the facility moves locations . There is a greenspace identified on some online mapping services as Jefferson Circle Park, located at about 1750 S Jefferson Circle . However, this is a private green space associated with the Salt Lake Housing Authority’s residential development and not a public park . There is a fire station located at 77 W 1300 s on the north-east corner of the baseball park property (City owned) and the ballpark stadium building itself currently houses a police substation that was added in 2022 . The City is also planning to build a new public library at approximately 1410 S West Temple . Figure 19: Map showing the location of public facilities near the study area . Plan Study Area Parks Library (Future) Police Substation Fire Station 70 0 W 40 0 W 30 0 W 30 0 W 20 0 W/ T R A X We s t Te m p l e St Ma i n St St a t e St Additional Existing Conditions Review | 143 N Population Density Household Income Youth & Children Ages 0-17 Seniors Ages 65+ Areas of Potential Growth High Needs Areas Parks Needs Assessment In 2019, the City published the Salt Lake City Parks and Public Lands Needs Assessment report, which was an effort to identify the areas of the city with the most needs for parks and/ or open spaces to help inform future park and open space site selection efforts . The report analyzed the entire City to identify areas with high needs for such spaces, using a combination of population density, household income, density of persons under 18, density of seniors, and areas of potential future growth . Within the study area, the report identified the area between 200 West and West Temple under “Greater Need” and the area between I-15 and 200 West as being one level below that . As noted in the “Public Facilities” section above, the nearest public park to the study area is a small playground a block north of 1700 South . Future development of the Public Utilities property for additional community park or open space could help meet the open space needs in the area . The plan includes a map showing areas of the City that are within one-half mile walking distance to a park . Most of the study area is not within one- half mile walking distance to park . Although those areas generally are not residential, in recent years the area has seen an increase in multi-family residential uses, including following publication of the report, and those uses could support the inclusion of additional park space in the area . orthwest Salt Lake Regional Athletic Complex Westpointe Park Rosewood Park Ensign Peak Open Space Capitol Hill High Needs Areas Lesser Need Greater Need Jordan River §¦¨215 Riverside Park Cottonwood Park §¨¦15 600 N Memory Grove Park 11th Avenue Park 11th Ave City Cemetery Avenues North Temple St Sherwood Park Temple Square Pioneer Park South Temple St Library Square University of Utah 500 S Sunnyside Donner Trail West Salt Lake Jordan Park/ Peace Gardens §¨¦15 Glendale Park1700 S Liberty Park 1700 S Sunnyside Dr Park 1300 S Hogle Park Zoo H Rock East Bench 2100 S Central Community §¦¨80 2100 S Sugar House Park Parley's Historic Nature Park Sugar House Figure 20: The needs assessment map from the Parks and Public Lands Needs Assessment shows the area generally having a high need for additional parks and open space . Re d w o o d Rd 12 0 0 W 70 0 W We s t T e m p l e St St a t e St 70 0 E 13 0 0 E 17 0 0 E 21 0 0 E 144 | Additional Existing Conditions Review Uses Allowed 12 0 0 W St a t e St T ● ● ● !!A A !T A nal Park ● !A !A ! ! !A A R!iAver side ¦¨§15 11th Avenue A A ¦¨§215 Park A C!Aonstitution T 600 N !A Mem!Aory AA Park 11th Ave City !A! ! !A A !A ● North Temple St P!Aark !A Grov!e Park Temple Cemetery !A University 500 S Sherwood Park A A Square Pioneer Park South Temple St Library Square of Utah 500 S Sunnyside Jo Ar !dTan Park/ Peace Gardens !T Liberty Park Sunnyside Dr Park California Ave !!T !A Glendale Park 1700 S §¨¦15 1700 S 1300 S 2100 S West Salt Lake !T!T Central Community ¨¦§80 2100 S Sugar House Park !T Trailhead !A Trail Access Existing Hiking Only Trail Existing Multipurpose Trail Proposed Multipurpose Trail Existing Hiking/Mountain Biking Trail Proposed Hiking/Mountain Biking Trail 1/2 Mile Walk Distance Along Existing Trails & Streets Zoning: Residential Developed Parks Special Use Parks Natural Lands Cemetery Public Golf Courses County Parks Study Area Figure 21: he report identifies areas within 1/2 walking distance to a park, showing much of the study area not being within 1/2 mile walking distance of a park . Re d w o o d Rd 70 0 W We s t Te m p l e St 70 0 E 13 0 0 E 17 0 0 E 21 0 0 E ● A ● Additional Existing Conditions Review | 145 Public Street Trees The City has an inventory of existing public street trees . The inventory does not reflect the most recent tree planting efforts along 300 West . However, in general there is a lack of street trees in the study area, excepting the more residential areas on West Temple Street . Streets such as 1700 South and 2100 South have little or no park strip and the addition of street trees would require modifications to the curb line in some cases . Plan Study Area Street Tree Inventory - 2019 Street Tree Figure 22: Map of street trees in the study area . The map does not reflect recent tree planting done by the City along 300 West . 30 0 W We s t Te m p l e St 146 | Additional Existing Conditions Review Geological Hazards Faults: There are no fault lines that run through or immediately adjacent to the study area . Flood Hazards: Most of the study area is not within a flood hazard zone based on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood hazard maps . A small area toward the north-west corner is shown as being in an area with a 1% annual chance of a flood hazard, with the edges of that showing a 0 .2% annual chance of a flood hazard . There is also a strip shown in the south- west corner showing a 1% flood hazard, but the strip may reflect an older topographic condition prior to the developments that currently exist on the property . City Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP) Façade Grants The Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP) is a resource offered by Salt Lake City’s Housing Stability Division to help strengthen the City’s neighborhoods . Housing Stability utilizes federal funding to support local for-profit businesses by offering up to $50,000 in grants to improve their façades . The program boundary currently includes buildings and properties in the study area, but there have been no recipients within the study area since being expanded to cover the area in 2021 . Figure 23: Flood hazard map from FEMA showing limited flood hazards in the study area . Plan Study Area Flood Hazard Zones 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard ¯ 2,010 Feet 1,340 0 335 670 2100 S Westwood Ave Hartwell Ave 1830 S Jefferson Cir 1700 S Hansen Ave I-15 SB Fw y 45 0 W 30 0 W Je f f e r s o n St We s t Te m p l e St DW LEGACY DESIGN® Legacy Design is the defining element of our practice. It is our commitment to an elevated level of design inquiry to arrive at the optimal solutions for clients. The process ensures that our projects reflect the critical issues facing the built environment and that they deliver measurable benefit to clients and communities. It is the foundation of the firm’s workshop culture and guides all projects. www.designworkshop.com Exhibit 2: 1st Phase Engagement Report – General Ideas and Concerns Map Activity SOCIAL PINPOINT ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY Social Pinpoint Project: Social Pinpoint-SLC300West Project Timeframe: 27 May 2023 MST to 14 Sept 2023 MST Social Pinpoint Project Description: The 300 West Corridor & SLC Central Pointe Station Area Plan Mapping Activity Welcome to the 300 West Mapping Activity! Use the online commenting on the map to tell us your ideas for opportunities or improvements along the 300 West corridor from 1000 South to 2100 South. Leer en español Cambie de idioma haciendo clic en el icono de la barra superior derecha. Google Translate is enabled on the map at the top right, so users can switch languages. Instructions • STEP 1: Review the Comment Icons from the left side bar—New public open spaces, new stores/dining options, add or keep parking, new housing, more trees, and pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern. • STEP 2: Click on the "Add a Comment" button at the top of the screen. A pop-up with a markers/icons will appear based on the Core Category you clicked on. • STEP 3: Once you've added your comments, go to the "Activity Tab" in the sidebar to see what others in the community have said. Feel free to "like" or "dislike" the comments you review in addition to your own. • STEP 4: Share with your friends! Your input will help guide Salt Lake City’s new plan and zoning for the area. For more information about those planning efforts please go to the main project webpage. Engagement Summary*: *(Some information is provided by Google Analytics and as such may be inaccurate due to end user ad blockers, disabled access to Google or data sampling.) There were 1886 Total Visits (The number of times this project was loaded or reloaded in a browser*.) 765 Unique Users (The total number of uniquely identified visitors*.) With Users spending and Avg Time (min) of 2:34 (Average amount of time that visitors spend on a page in the project*.) Of those, 65 have provided 163 Comments. Social Pinpoint Map Views as of January 2, 2024: The images below show overall Comment Type Percentages and Category Totals: For overall Comment Types users were able to input comments regarding a desire or need for new stores/dining options, new public open spaces, new housing, more trees, pedestrian or bicyclist safety concerns, new pedestrian connections, input something they “like” or “dislike” about existing conditions, as well as add suggestions/other comments within the 300W Social Pinpoint study area boundary between I-15, 900 S*, 1400 S, 1700 S, West Temple St, and 2100 S. Most users had comments or added markers regarding Pedestrian and/or Bicyclist Concerns and had Additional/ Other Suggestions (which can be found in a separate spreadsheet.) Little to no comments were found regarding Adding or Keeping Parking. 44 additions to the map were Suggestions/Other comments, 44 were Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concerns, 21 additions were areas that users found Something they disliked, 17 additions were areas where users requested New pedestrian connections, 15 additions were from users that found places that needed More trees, 11 additions were areas users wanted New housing, 10 additions from were Something they liked, 5 additions were regarding the need for New public open spaces, 4 additions were a request for New store/dining options. No (0) users placed a marker on the map to Add or keep parking. The top two comment types were Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concerns and Suggestions/other, both with 25.7% each. New pedestrian connections had 9.9% of votes, a request for More trees throughout the site area had 8.8%, and New housing had 6.4%. New stores / dining options and New public open spaces were both the lowest at 2.3% and 2.9% respectively. Something I dislike received 12.3% of votes while Something I like received 5.8%, suggesting that users overall would like to see improvement on the site. All additional comments are included as an attachment to this summary. Word Cloud: The word cloud was created from Users’ most commonly used words expressed in the comments. Parking and traffic were some of the most commonly used word in the comments, with one of the most “liked” or “upvoted” comments stating that “Suggestion/other: The whole corridor is extremely car-centric. Any public spaces that can be offered will be a vast improvement.” Pedestrian was another commonly used word, with the top or most-liked comment (33 likes) being “Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern: Getting a safer/more consistent bike and ped connection at this intersection would be a game changer. Central Pointe has some of the best transit service in the City, and it would be great to have a safer/ more comfortable connection to all of the businesses on the northwest side of the intersection” referring to the intersection at 300 W and 2100 S. Another top comment with 28 “likes” or “up votes” refers to the intersection between 1700 S and 300W stating “Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern: 17[00] South is a defacto bicycle byway. It would be nice to have an improved connection from the 3rd West trail to the east-west route here.” The second top comment with 29 “up votes” in regards to the intersection of the rail line and 2100 S was “New pedestrian connections: It would be great to have a north/south pedestrian and bicycle crossing right here.” The final comment in the top 5 most “liked” or “up voted” comments was “New pedestrian connections: Pedestrian crossing is desperately needed. People cross here now and they always will” at the same intersection as the previous “New pedestrian connections” comment, 2100 S and the rail line. Additionally, a comment that received 25 likes in regards to parking the lot next to Lowe’s stated “This parking lot is rarely full. Surely there is a better use than a heat island?” Most comments in relation to parking were geared towards there being too much. Sentiment Totals: The overall “Sentiment Totals”, or how Users felt by ratings on comment markers about the corridor as it exists today, was mostly Negative or Neutral with a total of 171 votes; 63 of those votes were Negative, 50 were Neutral, 35 were Positive, and 23 were Mixed. Social Pinpoint Map Overview – 1000 South to 2100 South The three below maps were exported from the Social Pinpoint webpage to provide a geographic overview of the types of comments received, indicated by their respective icons on the legend, and their locations. A live version of this map can be found at the below webpage: https://designworkshop.mysocialpinpoint.com/slc300west#/ ~1000 South to 1300 South 1300 South to 1700 South 1700 South to 2100 South Social Pinpoint Comments The following pages are an export of all the comments provided on the Social Pinpoint webpage, ranked by voting, with the most liked comments at the top of the list. All comments provided on the webpage could be liked or disliked by other participants. The category selected by the commenter (options listed below), and the number of likes and dislikes received by the comment, are displayed next to each comment. Comment Type Category Options: • New stores/dining options • New public open spaces • New housing • More trees • Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern • New pedestrian connections • Something I like • Something I dislike • Suggestions/Other Page 1 of 12 Social Pinpoint - Comments Getting a safer/more consistent bike and ped connection at this intersection would be a game changer. Central Pointe has some of the best transit service in the City, and it would be great to have a safer/more comfortable connection to all of the businesses on the northwest side of the intersection. 33 1 It would be great to have a north/south pedestrian and bicycle crossing right here. 29 0 17th South is a defacto bicycle byway. It would be nice to have an improved connection from the 3rd West trail to the east-west route here. 28 1 This whole corridor is extremely car centric. Any public spaces that can be offered will be a vast improvement. 28 4 Pedestrian crossing is desperately needed. People cross here now and they always will. 26 0 It should be illegal to build this much surface parking in Salt Lake City 26 0 This parking lot is rarely full. Surely there is a better use than a heat island? 25 1 This street was built for industry but is now home to a super popular climbing gym plus new apartments going up. Street needs to be redesigned for safety for all modes. Cars parked at corners/intersections and driveways reduce visibility and make it less safe. 24 1 The 300 W bike corridor ends several blocks short of the Parleys trail as well! This is a really unfortunate oversight and makes for a dangerous few blocks of sidewalk riding! 21 1 This freeway ramp is not necessary and it divides this area. Re-purpose it as park/trail space. 21 4 Put a TRAX station here 21 0 Break up this ocean of asphalt. Anything is better than surface parking. 19 0 Access into the train station off of 2100 South is too limited. It should be as easy as possible to roll your bike (or walk) off of the platform and toward whatever direction you're choosing to go. 19 0 Not sure how the city and state failed to connect the 300 West bike lane to the S-Line, but this was a huge missed opportunity that should be rectified to unlock the power of the 300 West cycle track. 19 1 The rock climbing gym is a great destination for the area. However, there are too many cars going in and out searching for parking. It would be nice to connect it better to the 300 West Trail. 19 0 Trees please! 18 0 Huge pedestrian crossing area with incredibly dangerous conditions. 18 1 These large open parking lots are a waste of space and cause temperatures to increase during summer. Why can't parking lots in this area be required to be underground and/or stacked? 18 2 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern New pedestrian connections Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Suggestions/Other New pedestrian connections Something I dislike New stores/dining options Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Something I dislike Suggestions/Other New public open spaces Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Something I like More trees Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Something I dislike Page 2 of 12 Social Pinpoint - Comments More trees Need more trees along 300 W here (and everywhere). The home depot parking lot is a serious heat island. 17 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern So many people cross here illegally because there is no safe north/south pedestrian and bicycle crossing. It seems like people are going to/from the Ballpark Trax stop to businesses to the south, like Lowes. 17 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern The city needs to stop ignoring 1700 South as a pedestrian and bicycle priority corridor. There are no safe routes on 1300 South or 2100 South. 1700 South fills this need, but it is not safe infrastructure. The city knows this, yet neglects prioritizing the work to make improvements. Now is the time. 17 0 Something I like Excellent bike path! Keep this up. 17 1 Suggestions/Other Please build another train station at 1700 South! This is a critical east-west corridor and we need to lay the groundwork now for what it will become. 17 0 New pedestrian connections Improving the pedestrian and bicycle connections to/from Central Pointe is essential. They could be improved in so many ways, even if it will be difficult. 16 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern this street is so dangerous for pedestrians— can we add cross walks along 13th at the trax 16 0 Suggestions/Other At the June Central 9th Community Council meeting, the representative from UDOT expressed interest in working with the community to enhance this underpass space and make it a safer, more walkable space. Let's aggressively pursue this! 16 0 More trees The 1700 S corridor between I15 and the TRAX line should have less lanes of traffic and more trees 15 1 New public open spaces A rare opportunity for a community space?? 15 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern This has the potential to be a much better cyclist-friendly intersection, maybe with bike boxes, bicycle crossing signals, etc. 15 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern The 300 West Cycle Track is a great connection to Central Point, but the trail stops one block short. If we can't extend the trail then turning lanes should be reduced to create room on the road for cyclists heading to Trax 15 0 Something I dislike The sudden right turn here for vehicles into the Home Depot parking lot is intense and somewhat unsafe. 15 0 More trees Need more trees to lower heat throughout the area. Feels like a concrete jungle that is hotter than the rest of the city. 14 1 New pedestrian connections Mid-block crossing needed to calm traffic and access Trax 14 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern This entire intersection should be made much more pedestrian and cyclist friendly. Raised crosswalks, maybe even a fully raised intersection or traffic circles. Huge convergence point that is much too favorable to cars, even with the trail addition 14 4 New housing We need as much mixed-use density around the train station as possible. Shops, houses, everything. Upzone the snot out of it. 13 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Pedestrian cross needed here. Why was a center median placed here? People cross here from the Walmart and it should be safely accommodated rather than making them cross live traffic. It’s a clear desire line that needs to be addressed instead of making people walk to these absurdly spaced out intersections. 13 3 Page 3 of 12 Social Pinpoint - Comments Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Traffic calming needed at driveways. Drivers are flying through stop signs and not yielding to people on the sidewalk and cycle path. 13 2 Something I like Some great businesses in this area. Worth making sure they can continue functioning and offering their services to the City. 13 0 Suggestions/Other Building Salt Lake wrote a story about how there is enough density in this area to support an urban transit stop here. The city should engage UTA to add a station. 13 0 New housing Every property within 1/2 mile of all trax stops should allow a significant amount of housing. There is way too much strip commercial on the north side of 2100 South 12 3 Suggestions/Other Are you coordinating this plan with South Salt Lake? It seems like they have big plans for this area. Nothing should be proposed without conversations with SSL. 12 0 Suggestions/Other Could this become an S-line-like multi-modal corridor? 12 0 New pedestrian connections It would be really cool to have a pedestrian bridge somewhere in this area. 11 1 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern The exit/entrance into Walmart is not great for bike and pedestrians. This entrance should be closed. 11 1 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern While it's great that there are bike signals, they currently don't add information the walk signal does not. They should stay lit until a bike cannot feasibly cross (like when cars get a yellow). These also should activate automatically along the entire corridor. Why should we have to stop at a green light, push a button, and wait an entire cycle? We should be encouraging walking and biking to reduce traffic and pollution. 11 0 Something I dislike I've never seen this parking lot full. Cars drive through the parking lot at high speeds to avoid the speed bumps on the west side. 11 0 Suggestions/Other We need a TRAX station here! 11 0 More trees The residential apartments here should open onto a tree-lined street. 10 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Crosswalks badly needed in this area. 10 0 Something I dislike It seems like there shouldn't be so much parking so close to a trax station. You don’t need a car to get here, so we shouldn't need so much parking. Surely we can use this space better 10 4 Something I like I’m actually really happy with the new bike lane and side walks, it really make walking much nicer and improved the whole area. 10 0 Something I like I am super happy with the new protected bike lane. I hope the city continues to build lanes just like this throughout the city. If our roads are wide enough to turn and oxcart they are wide enough to add protected bike lanes. For future designs, I would like to see raised dive ways out of business to slow traffic coming in and out of business to increase safety, instead of the bike lane dipping down. 10 0 More trees Anywhere people live - apartment buildings, spaces zoned residential - should have tree cover and shade. Otherwise this becomes a highly unpleasant heat island. 9 0 New housing This lot seems like a great opportunity for affordable housing? 9 0 New pedestrian connections Create a cut through here so residents on Lucy Ave don't have to go out and around on 1300 S to access the Trax station. 9 0 Page 4 of 12 Social Pinpoint - Comments contrary to other comments, this bottom right corner of sams club parking is ALWAYS empty, even during the busiest hours and holidays. i think more trees, grass, or even a small dog park would be great here because the people living in the apartments next door have only a tiny strip of grass to take their dogs out to. 9 0 The bike lanes on 300W are great but they need to connect with the ones on 1300S. Right now there is a gap between State St and 300W in bicycle connectivity on 1300S that really limits the usefulness of the bike lanes on both 300W and those on 1300S 9 0 No easy access to apartments, restaurants, businesses and gas station from southbound traffic causing more congestion at various other points. 9 0 This parking lot suffocates the train station. Needs to be dramatically reconfigured. 9 0 More trees near high-density housing. 8 0 Mid-block crossing needed for Grid City and other retail destinations and transit connections. 8 0 Many pedestrians and bikes cross here. Currently it's difficult to press the push button, especially by bike. Needs traffic calming and leading pedestrian interval. 8 0 so you build a nice new bike lane and then just give it up as it hits one of the most dangerous intersections around at 21st S and 300 W.? I understand it transitions to SSL after 21st and the City of South Salt Lake is almost completely devoid of bike planning but you could at least create some sort of system on the SLC side to get us through the intersection of death. 8 0 More pubs near housing! 8 0 As much mixed-use density around the train station as possible. Upzone! 7 0 This area belongs to “The Treasure Bin” but is totally neglected, it’s full of garbage, homless and workers go there, they drink and they leave their beer cans and garbage, it’s now a landfill full of random garbage. 7 0 The new bicycle signals at the intersections here are great! 7 0 Build a multi-use trail from here into the Granary and jumpstart the 4th west rail extension 7 0 Make this a multi-use trail crossing, similar to the S-Line, in anticipation of future Trax extensions to 400 west. 7 0 A bike path here would be awesome. connect 200w with 300w 7 0 more trees 6 0 more trees 6 0 if housing is built along 1300 s it needs more set back. the new apartment building doesn’t have enough sidewalk and no green space. and the grass between it and the trax station is a new danger zone w rodents in the unmoved grass! 6 0 New public open spaces Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Something I dislike Something I dislike More trees New pedestrian connections Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Something I like New housing Something I dislike Something I like Suggestions/Other Suggestions/Other Suggestions/Other More trees More trees New housing Page 5 of 12 Social Pinpoint - Comments New housing CostCo appears to be land-banking this section of land. Is there a way the city could work with the company that would lead to market-rate housing being added here? 6 0 New housing No need to have these large parking lots here. These could be repurposed as great townhomes/row houses. We need more housing in SLC not apartments. This area should not just be for retail box stores with massive parking lots. 6 0 New pedestrian connections Good location for a people-only modal filter crossing. 6 0 New stores/dining options Can we encourage a grocery store in this area? Walmart is not a grocery! 6 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Great modal filter and pedestrian cut through but currently designed with an invisible curb that presents a hazard to cyclists 6 0 Something I dislike Generally not in favor of isolating higher-density housing by itself in commercial areas, and so close to a major freeway. 6 2 Suggestions/Other A pedestrian/bike bridge or tunnel would be great in this high traffic area. 6 1 Suggestions/Other Remove a lane on each side and create a protected bike lane. Streets are meant for all, not just cars! 6 1 New pedestrian connections A pedestrian-only crossing here would create more vibrancy between the different residential pockets while enhancing access. 5 1 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Lucy Ave could be a great cycling street into and out of Ballpark station but this crossing is hostile and it dead ends at the tracks. 5 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern A pedestrian/bike pathway here would be nice so that you can get from The Marq Townhomes without walking all the way to 300 W first or climbing through a gap in the fence. 5 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Please paint the bicycle lane here. Residents of the new apartments are using it as a parking strip. 5 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern there should be a mid block crossing here. this block is incredibly uncomfortable to walk 5 0 Suggestions/Other Connect 400 West and Paxton Avenue as a Byway Route to the back side of the big box stores and new housing. 5 0 Suggestions/Other A bike path here would be awesome. connect 300w with 400w 5 0 More trees More trees needed generally in this area. Like others have said, it's absurdly hot in the summers due minimal buildings and tons of concrete 4 0 More trees this station has no shade at any time of day more trees or more shade structure would go a long way. being in a best buy parking lot is not doing the station any favors 4 0 New housing Same comment as over at best buy There is absolutly no need to have these large parking lots here. These could be repurposed as great townhomes/row houses. We need more housing in SLC not apartments. This area should not just be for retail box stores with massive parking lots. 4 0 New housing This massive parking lot is overkill! Same comment as over at best buy, there is no need to have these large parking lots here. These could be repurposed as great townhomes/row houses. We need more housing in SLC not apartments. This area should not just be for retail box stores with massive parking lots. 4 0 Page 6 of 12 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety Pedestrian or bicyclist safety Social Pinpoint - Comments New housing This massive parking lot is overkill! Same comment as over at best buy, there is no need to have these large parking lots here. These could be repurposed as great townhomes/row houses. We need more housing in SLC not apartments. This area should not just be for retail box stores with massive parking lots. 4 0 New pedestrian connections It appears (let me know if I'm wrong) that the city is just making the West side of 300 East travel friendly. I'm unsure as to why that was the chosen side - does it have more foot traffic? It seems like that wouldn't be the case with the train/housing being on the East side of 300 West. This area of sidewalk is absolute trash &amp; so dangerous. Turning here is SUPER dangerous. Please urge the city to focus on this portion. 4 0 New pedestrian connections This area of amazing retail businesses on 1700S all the way from W Temple over to State are terrific and could/should absolutely have a more accessible and protected pedestrian/bike thoroughfare, similar to the Central 9th neighborhood. 4 0 New pedestrian connections 1700 south is an important bike ped connection between east and west side. This can and should be safer and more comfortable to bike along. 4 0 New stores/dining options This row of buildings with no side setbacks would make a perfect dining, bar, and entertainment option 4 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern With the volume of traffic on 2100 South, Bicycles should be banned from using this street. SLC seems to be creating more bottlenecks by narrowing heavily traffic streets with Bicycles. Somehow enforcement needs to teach cyclists how to obey traffic rules. There are hundreds on near misses between bicycles and motor vehicles each day. SLC should designate bicycle routes and free some streets from bicycle traffic altogether. 4 34 concern I HAVE NOT SEEN A SINGLE PERSON USE THE BIKE YET. 4 22 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Many cyclists and pedestrians cross under the freeway here, but it is dangerous, and the sidewalk is the only safe option for cyclists. A multi- use trail north of Wal-Mart would be a great investment. 4 1 You ask how you could make the area more pedestrian and family friendly? How could you incentivize people using public transportation? Well you would need to make people feel safe and how do you do that you may ask ? Well first and foremost you take care of the homeless, the people tripping, screaming and yelling, that sure does not make me feel safe. concern I don't have a car, I use TRAX often and it can be quite disturbing at times. 4 2 Something I dislike THE CONES ON 300 WEST IS OUT OF CONTROL. ITS LIKE A MAZE. PLEASE DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS. THE CONTRACTOR IS MILKING THIS PROJECT AND WE ARE PAYING FOR IT. 4 4 Something I dislike hate target, hate costco, hate samsclub, like me trees, like me housing, like me rail lines 4 0 Page 7 of 12 Social Pinpoint - Comments Something I like We need another train/trax station at 1700 S. The two stations north and south are four blocks away and 1700 is closer to much more populated areas. 4 1 Suggestions/Other 300 West is an important thoroughfare for cars and for access to businesses. Restrictions on cars could cause major access problems for residents, consumers, and businesses and would not be an improvement. 4 26 Suggestions/Other While public input is always useful, I hope Salt Lake City officials understand that this is not a scientific (i.e., random-sample) survey and that the results are not necessarily representative of city residents. On this survey, responses are coming from a self-selecting sample, and therefore the validity of the survey is dubious. 4 1 Suggestions/Other Please ���� station more trash cans throughout all of 300 west. The place looks like a landfill. 4 0 New pedestrian connections The S-Line path/Parley's trail MUST connect to the Central Pointe platform. We shouldn't have to walk all the way around up to 2100 S to get from the path to the trax station. 3 0 New pedestrian connections making the Sline to bus connection easier would be so nice 3 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern I've seen multiple drivers blow through the pedestrian crossing signal here when I was trying to cross. Not sure if they were confused by construction, but maybe there is a a different option that would make it more clear that they have to stop? 3 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern This back entrance to Costco crossed the new bikeway and could use better signage for drivers to watch for cyclists coming from both directions. I worry there will be a collision here bas d on the speed that drivers turn right when traveling south. 3 0 There should be more patrolling, and law enforcement in all TRAX stations but specifically at Ballpark, I’ve seen people smoking crack at the station, Heck I’ve seen people sucking smoke out of heating a piece of aluminum paper inside the Train, who knows what that was, I got off the train right away. Something I dislike This station is full of homeless tripping on drugs quite uncomfortable and unsafe. 3 3 Something I dislike It is time this highway overpass be rerouted onto 300w! Or at the very least rerouted! 3 2 Something I like Sam's Club may do less business than Costco, but parking is needed especially during the Holiday Season. I can't imagine going to Sam's Club via Trax and purchasing a bale of Toilet Paper and Paper Towels and transporting them home via Trax. Leave this area alone 3 11 Suggestions/Other While it's outside of the study area, South Salt Lake needs guidance to help complete a better route for the Parleys Trail through this area. 3 0 Suggestions/Other Look for ways to add more north/south connections or walkways to reduce all types of traffic on 300 W. 3 0 Suggestions/Other A GreenBike station at or near the climbing gym would be very helpful as a last mile solution for commuting from Downton. A station at Ballpark and Central pointe would increase the usefulness. 3 0 Page 8 of 12 Social Pinpoint - Comments Suggestions/Other While outside the study area this right of way marks a very important piece of our past and future. This is the old Rio Grande Westers line meant to serve the Rio Grande Depot. This right of way is CENTRAL to the Rio Grande Plan which will establish a good central station in downtown. This plan MUST be done! 3 0 More trees there are little to no trees in this area. more would be great! 2 0 More trees More trees 2 0 New housing The south end of this HD lot is seldom used for anything legitimate and it attracts criminal activity. A proposal should be made to the land owner to spilt this lot and add apts with first floor businesses; ideally a grocery to support all the new housing in this food desert part of town. 2 0 New pedestrian connections blinking crosswalk here would be great - there is a lot of traffic coming in and out of the gas station but occasionally people cross between the shopping centers and it would be nice to have a safe place to cross 2 0 New public open spaces It would be great to add more public or green spaces to the area. 2 0 New public open spaces Dog park and trees 2 0 New stores/dining options New bars, restaurants and entertainment options would make the climbing gym a central part of a larger new district similar to RiNo in Denver 2 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern THE HOMELESSNESS IS AN REAL ISSUE IN THIS AREA. NOT GOOD FOR STARTING FAMILIES KIDS, WELL LETS BE HONEST 300 WEST IS A CESSPOOL, AND LETS GET THIS STRIAGHT IT IS ALL CAUSE BY THE CITY, THEY ARE 100% TO BLAME. 2 15 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern 1700s needs a remodel, this street would benefits from improved pedestrians and bicyclists access. Creating a connection from 17th South River Parkway to Wasatch Hollows would be ideal. 2 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern There is a BEAUTIFUL bike lane all the way to Home Depot, then it disappears and anyone not in a car has to risk their life crossing 21st South. Then they need to navigate a block south and two blocks west to connect to the Parleys trail. This zone of improvement should be expanded south to the Parleys trail to add a connection. The lack of connection greatly impeeds bike access from the Parley's trail along third south. A fluid connection MUST be built. 2 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern It would be good if the plan could envision a better pedestrian/cyclist connection between Central Pointe and the Parley's Trail/S-Line greenway. It's quite confusing right now. Personally, I know this is a SSL issue, but they should be involved with this. A 12' path on West Temple from the train to Parley's would be ideal. Even better if it cuts through the commonwealth room straight to the platform. 2 0 Page 9 of 12 Social Pinpoint - Comments Please don't put more bike lanes along this area on Third West. There are so many places around the city where bike lanes have been installed and are never used. These unused bike lanes simply impede the flow of traffic. Third West is a major route to businesses. Please don't make it difficult for customers to access these businesses. 2 14 HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY BEEN TO CALIFORNIA IN THIS CHAT. APARTMENT COMPLEX UPON APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH HOMELESS EVERYWHERE. I FEEL LIKE I'M THE ONLY ONE THAT SEES WHATS GOING ON HERE. THE CITY HAS SEEN TEAMED UP WITH DEVELOPERS AND FORCED ALL THE LOCAL BUISNESSES OUT. 2 12 SO CLEARLY THIS HAS ALL BEEN PLANNED OUT BY THE CITY AND WITH INVESTMENT GROUPS TO BUY UP ALL THE LAND AND PUSH OUT ALL THE OLD BUSINESSES EITHER BY MOVING OUT OR PUTTING OUT OF BUSINESS, WE WOULD ALL GLADLY LEAVE IF YOU WOULD ALL HELP US RELOCATE. 2 11 Why can't these large warehouse buildings and parking lots have some sort of solar powered panels or possibly private/public greenspace? 2 1 Currently this area is automobile-oriented, which makes sense as it is close to four freeway exits. Perhaps the investment in pedestrian amenities should be directed elsewhere. 2 5 We frequent Home Depot, Costco and PetSmart. Currently, there is no reason to walk since there is nothing to see between one parking lot and the next. The items we purchase are usually large and heavy, so we need our car. We also have our car serviced at Kia. If shade trees and interesting shops lined the sidewalk, we could be enticed to walk along 300 West while we wait. 2 0 Bike path right next to the freeway 2 0 more trees in all parking lots please 1 0 Rail trail that completes the connection between central pointe and 300 w bike lane 1 0 Why is the crossing median placed directly in front of Paramount? First responders and delivery vehicles can't access GMRC or neighboring businesses. This is a safety concern. 1 1 Please continue the 300 West separated bike path all the way to the TRAX station. (If that's not already in the works) 1 0 As a resident of this neighborhood, I believe that the primary concern is ensuring our safety. Presently, the homelessness issue in the area has escalated, and a significant portion of the homeless population here struggles with mental health issues or addiction, which can make their behavior unpredictable and unsettling for us. Our building has experienced multiple break-ins by homeless individuals seeking shelter from the cold. Don't get me wrong, I empathize with their struggles, but when it 1 0 HAS EVERY ONE ON THE THIS CHAT LOST THEIR MINDS ON THE PARKING GARAGE. HAS ANYONE BEEN IN THE WALMART GARAGE ON 1300 IT'S LIKE THE WALKING DEAD IN THERE 1 4 Something I dislike Something I dislike Suggestions/Other Suggestions/Other Suggestions/Other Suggestions/Other Suggestions/Other More trees New pedestrian connections Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Something I dislike Page 10 of 12 Social Pinpoint - Comments Something I dislike The new median here allows only cars to turn west into Home Depot if headed north bound. i.e. there is only one turn lane coming from the north bound lanes. I often see cars ignoring the right turn only signage here including UTA police vehicles. Additionally this has become a hassle getting to the apartments safely on the east side while traveling south on 300w. 1 1 Suggestions/Other How bout f**king finishing the road first? 1 0 Suggestions/Other 300 West would be a great spot for a new Trax line. Let's lay the groundwork now. 1 1 Suggestions/Other A bike path right next to the freeway. Add entrances to The Front Climbing Gym, The Marq Townhomes , and other businesses. Connect 400 W with 1300 S 1 0 Suggestions/Other There needs to be a city street placed at the end of Hansen Avenue connecting it to 1700 south. There is a large apartment complex planned to be built between Hansen Ave. and 1700 south. The traffic from Hansen Ave. to 300 West will be highly increased causing problems there. It would greatly help to alleviate traffic congestion along 300 W and allow more housing to be built at the same time. 1 0 Suggestions/Other This intersection is difficult to enter/exit. There is a large housing complex being planned to be built between 1700 south and Hansen Ave. Please purchase land at the west end of Hansen Ave. to allow for a second inlet/outlet to this street off 1700 south. It will greatly reduce the traffic problems at this intersection. 1 0 Suggestions/Other Fix this intersection. Widen the road in the Northbound direction so as to add a dedicated Left Turn Lane into Target. Please add a cue when striping. People turning left into Target cause back ups on the Northbound Through Lanes. 1 3 Suggestions/Other There is a big missed opportunity to create a bicycle network, instead of another bicycle path. The fantastic Kensington byway hopefully coming next year will only go to West Temple. If it were to be extended just two blocks west the city would move closer to a complete bicycle network. I know there is the Trax line and businesses, so maybe adding better lanes and crossing at 17th South and 13th South for pedestrians and bicyclists. 1 0 Suggestions/Other Unpopular opinion, but there really needs to be more East-West corridors on Trax and Frontrunner. Why not make another S-line type train that runs up 1300E to 700E and out toward the west to serve our underserved west side of I-15. With the Bees leaving the area this gives great opportunities 1 0 Suggestions/Other West Temple is being used to circumvent 300 W. The speeds are very fast. Around 40. Speed bulbs to slow traffic on this residential street would be preferred. 1 0 More trees Trees beautify this rough housing 0 0 New pedestrian connections I love the bike and pedestrian path on the West side of the street, but the pedestrian access is dangerous on the East side. Equal human treatment on both sides of the street will also improve business access on the East side. I love the bike lanes, but please mirror them in future designs. 0 0 Page 11 of 12 Social Pinpoint - Comments Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Why did the city put flat curbs at all four legs of this intersection? Someone waiting to cross the street will almost certainly be killed by a truck. 0 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern UTA Transit Police officers should ticket people who J-Walk. I have often had to slam on my brakes to avoid hitting homeless and TRAX users who unlawfully J-Walk. I recommend (Yes, I know how much a Pedestrian Bridge costs) installing a Pedestrian bridge right by the TRAX line to stop people from J-Walking. Much safer if a Pedestrian Bridge is installed. 0 17 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Serious problem with jay walking!!!! Increased potential of vehicle/pedestrian accidents. Suggest installing barriers to prevent illegal crossing. SLC has constructed more cross walks across 300 West but that DOES NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM!! Jay walkers live outside of the law without any fear of any consequence, and so far SLC has chosen to ignore the serious problem. 0 5 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Current design does not emphasize that you cannot turn right onto 9th after getting off the freeway. Many drivers turn right through the pedestrian / bike path in a dangerous manor. 0 0 Pedestrian or bicyclist safety concern Our building has experienced multiple break-ins by homeless individuals seeking shelter from the cold. Don't get me wrong, I empathize with their struggles, but when it comes to our property, I want to have the assurance that my family, including my kids and wife, will be secure. 0 0 Something I dislike YEAH THAT'S GOOD LETS PUT IN AS MANY TREES AS WE CAN, SINCE WE DON'T LIVE IN A DESERT OR ANYTHING 0 19 Something I dislike the fencing around the trax entrance/boarding zone makes it difficult to get to the train, it’s a lot of walking inefficiently to make the train. very easy to miss the train because of the fencing blocking the way 0 0 Something I dislike I acknowledge your efforts to enhance the neighborhood, and while the project appears promising, as a resident in the area, I would suggest focusing on addressing smaller issues initially, such as improving cleanliness and addressing the safety concerns related to the homeless population. The vicinity around the "Treasure Bin" has become quite unsightly, with a persistent garbage problem, giving it the appearance of a landfill. 0 0 Something I like Great to have more EV charging options like the ones here! 0 1 Suggestions/Other Who is receiving this survey? I question the validity of these public input opportunities because I suspect the audience is narrowly defined. You're probably not getting a wide enough sample of comments. 0 1 Suggestions/Other A bike path right next to the freeway. Add entrances to The Front Climbing Gym, Walmart, and other businesses. Connect 1300 S with 1700 S 0 1 Suggestions/Other Why are none of the new medians/cutouts safety striped with reflective paint? The cement disappears at dark. Does the city only care about bikes? HUGE safety issue for all people using 300 W 0 5 Page 12 of 12 Social Pinpoint - Comments Remove some of the grass by the utility pole and pour a concrete pad so the homeless people begging for money can have a safe place to stand. They are always there and I don't see them going away. 0 6 No need to do anything about the traffic here. Yes, cars will exit this street rapidly because they NARROWED the road by one lane. Therefore, when you see an opportunity to turn right, you have to go like a bat out of hell. REMEMBER, it is the PEDESTRIAN'S responsibility to watch for traffic. 0 8 It is a ROAD for cars! Of course it is favorable to cars. The problem isn't the road. The problem is pedestrians. 0 8 This area here becomes a traffic concern. There are people trying to turn into the Colony B apartments while people are trying to turn into Lowes. Unfortunately this is so close to a traffic light that putting a stop sign here might back up traffic. 0 0 walk signs should automatically turn when the light turns for cars, i should not have to race while walking to touch a button in time for the light 0 0 Suggestions/Other Suggestions/Other Suggestions/Other Suggestions/Other Suggestions/Other Exhibit 3: 1st Phase Engagement – Community Interviews Page 1 Landscape Architecture Planning Urban Design Strategic Services Environmental Graphic Design 22860 Two Rivers Road #1 Basalt, Colorado 81621 970.925.8354 designworkshop.com MEMORANDUM To: Daniel Echeverria, Wayne Mills, Nick Norris From: Design Workshop Date: Sept 19, 2023 Project Name: SLC 300 W Corridor & Station Area Plan Project #: 7078 Subject: Existing Conditions – Community Interviews Table of Contents Introduction and Process ................................................................................................................................................ 2 Interview Participants...................................................................................................................................................... 2 Emerging Community Values ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Bridging Conflicting Community Concerns...................................................................................................................... 3 Summary of Findings ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 Summary of Findings by Stakeholder Group .................................................................................................................. 6 Appendix: Selected Interview Quotes ............................................................................................................................. 8 Page 2 Introduction and Process The purpose of this report is to provide firsthand perspectives of the community around the 300 West corridor between 1700 South and 2100 South. Twenty-four residents, business owners, and landowners were selected in or adjacent to the project area for one-on-one interviews (over the phone and in-person). Questions were selected to understand the interviewee's perception of the area, challenges living or operating a business in the area, vision and priorities for public improvements, and future plans for living or doing business in the area. The first seven questions were consistent across interviews, with three additional questions varying by stakeholder group. While interviews were guided by a set list of questions, participants were encouraged to engage in open dialogue to allow participants to share their candid thoughts. The goal of this report is to start the process of cultivating community consensus by establishing a foundation of shared values that can inform decision-making for the 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan. Interview Participants Land Holders and Developers Steve Price, Price Reality Chris Zarek, Cowboy Partners Whit Hamlin, Market Place at 18th Mark Isaac, Pinyon8 Consulting (with BVD) Jeff Vitek, Boulder Ventures Development John Fleming, Boulder Ventures Development Alec Taylor, Boulder Ventures Development Joni Linton, Boulder Ventures Development Marty Biljanic, Boulder Ventures Development Business and Landowners Paul Pasquali, Accordions International Bill Davis, GBR Enterprise and former Ballpark Community Council Chair John Krueger, Krueger Automotive John Margetts, DynaPac Rotating Company Business Operators Melanie, Thompson, The Front Climbing Gym Matty Coles, The Front Climbing Gym Kate Lubing, HK Brewing Hannah Hendrickson, HK Brewing Residents Kevin Claunch, Resident Page 3 Emerging Community Values Through the analysis of the interview responses, common threads emerged that transcended specific issues or political leanings and pointed towards overarching themes and values shared by the community. These communal aspirations and shared goals can serve as the underpinning for future initiatives. • Enhance the perception of safety • Increase cleanliness of sidewalks, streets, and public spaces • Maintain high-quality connectivity for vehicular and bicycle access • Build additional green space and public space • Establish a neighborhood identity • Improve side street streetscape with complete sidewalks, lighting, and creating connections between dead ends • Preserve commercial identity and small business incubator environment • Promote service and entertainment-oriented businesses to support incoming residents and attract visitors • Transition or adapt outdated buildings • Encourage quality development design, materiality, amenities, and orientation to the public realm • Enhance pedestrian comfort and create new connections for walkability Bridging Conflicting Community Concerns Navigating the development and growth of a community often involves balancing a multitude of interests and concerns. The following highlights the critical zones where these diverging opinions are most evident. By understanding these tension points decision makers can better strategize on how to build consensus and create a more cohesive, inclusive neighborhood. • Maintaining vehicular access and ease vs. improving road safety and increasing multi-modal use • Preservation of single-family home community vs. increasing high-density housing developments • Creating a community of homeowners vs. increasing the number of renter households • Sustain existing neighborhood character vs. celebrating bold changes and creating a new neighborhood identity • Balancing housing affordability and economic diversity vs. desirable market-rate housing options and increasing neighborhood value • Improving the quality of new development vs. creating flexible zoning favorable to new development • Increase new commercial development vs. the preservation of affordable commercial space • Street parking availability vs. reducing parking minimums Page 4 Summary of Findings The overall vision by the residents, landowners, and business owners of the future of the 300 West Corridor is of a green, vibrant, and economically diverse neighborhood. The community desires parks and open spaces and the idea of a mixed-use neighborhood that integrates residential, commercial, and even light industrial elements resonates. The area's robust transportation links are seen as a unique strength and as catalysts for future growth. There's a call for beautifying the community, addressing safety, and elevating the quality of future developments. Business owners and landowners are keen to contribute positively to the neighborhood and are generally open to thoughtful redevelopment. While the community broadly agrees on the need for development many interviewees see the area as the last vestige of affordable commercial and warehouse spaces for budding local businesses. Some see a need for heavy redevelopment with higher-density housing and new commercial spaces. Many interviewees believe the area has a unique character worth preserving, while others see it as outdated or generic and see an opportunity to establish a new identity for the area. How the neighborhood evolves will depend on its ability to balance these varied interests and concerns. Creative solutions can build community consensus by understanding the shared community values and bridging the conflicting community concerns. The following is a narrative summary of the community interviews: How do you envision the future of the area in terms of growth, development, and planning? There's a shared appetite for green spaces and aesthetic improvement — people want parks and open space that enrich community life. Another strong point of agreement is the need for mixed- use spaces, incorporating both residential and commercial elements, and some light industrial to keep the area vibrant and economically diverse. There's also a collective acknowledgment that the area has significant growth potential, thanks in part to its large streets and established transportation links. Community members seem to agree that well-planned change is not only inevitable but could also be beneficial. Contradictions do exist, particularly when it comes to the type and scale of development. Additionally, opinions diverge on the role of commercial spaces, ranging from a desire to maintain a commercial character to others who would like to see residential development prioritized. In your opinion, what are the biggest challenges the area faces in terms of managing growth, development, and planning? A recurring concern for all community members interviewed is the problem of homelessness and the perception of safety. Additionally, frustrations around trash, camping, and cleanliness near freeways, bike lanes, and transit stations create a strain on the neighborhood. In terms of development, there's a dissatisfaction with the quality and design of recent constructions. Many express that these perceived low-quality builds not only degrade the community aesthetically but may also have long-term repercussions for neighborhood stability. Page 5 Many expressed the desire for a more diverse housing strategy that encompasses various income levels. While there's general enthusiasm for walkability, biking, and public transit, these amenities are viewed through the lens of perceived existing challenges such as homelessness, traffic congestion, poor maintenance of side streets, and limited parking spaces. Contradictions surface mainly around the issue of development and its effects. While some view new constructions and businesses as catalysts for improvement and beautification, others express concern that this development is haphazard and lacks thoughtful planning. Some see the influx of new development as a solution to crime, safety and the creation of a vibrant neighborhood, while others argue it exacerbates these issues. Which existing qualities or strengths of the area do you believe should be emphasized or leveraged in future growth, development, and planning efforts? The community views the 300 West Corridor as having a unique strength in terms of strong transportation infrastructure. Its proximity to transit options and major roadways is one of its greatest assets. Many see value in preserving the commercial and industrial identity of the area, viewing it as essential to its unique, funky character. The community believes that the existing retail landscape not only supports the current residential makeup but could also encourage further housing developments. Some community members believe that the industrial aspects will naturally fade, making room for a more commercial or mixed-use identity. Others see an opportunity for high-end manufacturing that would coexist with other forms of commercial and residential development in an eclectic neighborhood. How do you envision a successful balance between new development and preserving the area’s existing character and strengths? Many community members are concerned with the increase of high-density housing its impact on the neighborhood. Some expressed unease about the future of local businesses—from small retail shops to unique warehouse and manufacturing businesses. Seeing the corridor as a place for affordable commercial and warehouse spaces for start-ups and niche businesses, with few alternative locations in the city. There's an appetite for creative solutions like mixed-use zoning and the adaptive reuse of old buildings, particularly warehouses. Flexibility in land use is also seen as a compromise that could provide room for future adaptability. Not everyone agrees on the value or even the existence of a "neighborhood character" worth preserving. While some see the current buildings and businesses as integral to the community's identity, others regard them as outdated or too generic to warrant preservation. What specific types of amenities do you believe are needed to support the neighborhood? Page 6 One of the most prominent themes is the interest in more public spaces, including pocket parks, children's playgrounds, green spaces, and plazas that offer places to rest, socialize, and stay in the area. The idea of creating linear green space along the TRAX line is a frequent comment. The addition of a TRAX station at 1700 South is thought to be a pivotal addition that could catalyze community growth. Most see an opportunity for improvements in the public right of way for more pleasant and safe pedestrian and bike connections, particularly to the TRAX Stations as well as across the TRAX corridor, creating new connections through the neighborhood. The neighborhood's identity is also on the community members' minds. There's a shared feeling that the area lacks a sense of place and must develop its own unique character. Many feel that there is a need for more entertainment uses, such as theaters, bars, and essential retail spaces including grocery stores and coffee shops, to draw people into the neighborhood and create a place where residents want to stay. While there's a strong call for amenities and services that support a higher-density population, the existing lack of such amenities raises questions about how to strike a balance between development and livability. What barriers or challenges do you perceive when it comes to engaging the community in discussions about neighborhood growth and planning? | How can communication, transparency, and trust between the city and community be improved, and ensure that the community concerns and feedback are genuinely heard and addressed in decision-making processes? What strategies or approaches would you recommend? A consistent recommendation is that localized leadership—such as a business improvement district—should take an active role in both strategy and communication. Many believe that there needs to be a bigger, more compelling vision for the community's future that is communicated effectively and often. This would involve not just telling, but "selling" the benefits of projects and plans to the community. Some highlight the inadequacy of current communication channels, stressing the importance of direct outreach. Some also note that existing networks, e.g., neighborhood councils, are good platforms that are underutilized and could be better promoted for effective engagement. Perceptions of effectiveness vary among community members, possibly pointing to a lack of awareness or understanding about the platforms currently in place. Summary by Stakeholder Group Landowners Most property owners interviewed are looking to expand or upgrade their facilities, aiming to contribute positively to the neighborhood's aesthetic and function. Landowners who also operate businesses on their properties intend to stay in the neighborhood for the foreseeable future. They are open to the possibility of redevelopment, particularly multi-family development in the right circumstances and timing. Page 7 Landowners who are developers have more immediate plans. They are actively looking to build multifamily residential units. Challenges in implementing these plans include outdated utility infrastructure, incomplete side streets, road connectivity, and limiting zoning. Many expressed a desire for zoning regulations to be more flexible, enabling creative and efficient use of space. Parking and vehicular accessibility also emerged as common concerns, especially as the area becomes more dense. There is some tension between the desire for residential mixed-use development and maintaining established light industrial businesses, but there is a shared enthusiasm for improvements to the neighborhood. Business Owners Business owners discussed the general need to beautify the neighborhood, increase overall cleanliness, and the addition of green space and trees in the neighborhood. Many noted issues with pedestrian access, particularly for those coming from the local TRAX station. Currently, pedestrians find it challenging to navigate across busy roads, often resorting to jaywalking. Safe and pleasing road and rail pathways were discussed as essential for attracting more foot traffic to local businesses. Vehicular access is seen as a strength of the neighborhood for existing businesses and they stated a desire to maintain ease of access. Despite some challenges, a willingness exists among the business owners to not only continue their operations but to consider expanding operations. Residents Few residents within the project area responded to interview requests. Please see the selected interview quotes below. Page 8 APPENDIX Selected Interview Quotes Part 1: General How do you envision the future of the area in terms of growth, development, and planning? “For the time being I hope this little corner stays where it is… kind of commercial” “I'd like to see more green. I mean, it's nice having those little green strips next to the bike lane. Yeah. It's not like usable green space like gardens or parks” “A general transition to more residential. Making use of access to interstate provides great access to jobs” “Older warehouse and wholesale uses might not have a long life. Finding users right for the scale of existing buildings is a challenge. The corridor has a strong big box retail character. How do you transition from the car-centric commercial zone near the instate to a more multimodal, multifamily and light mixed use on the east” It all developed organically… it was close to downtown and had access… how about reinvesting into this area, and it’ll actually have a multiplier effect. ” “I think it's going to be more of the same, more commercial development, hopefully better design. They are going to see a bunch of residential. You can’t have a vibrant neighborhood without residential.” “If this turns into this vibrant urban neighborhood with a big warehouse in the middle of it. What do people do with… but then you start like talking to people and it's amazing the ideas that small business people come up with.” “The city has a plan, and they obviously want a lot of apartments here. I don't know that I love that, but I see it, I think that's what they're gonna do no matter what.” “Salt Lake City just dumped a ton of money into redoing the street here along 300 West, which we appreciate. And it does have the potential for growth...it seems like residences … primarily is where the growth is gonna be in this area… but I don't think manufacturing is a main thrust of area of the city anymore.” “We felt like this neighborhood was in the path of progress… The area is so primed for growth with huge streets, rail, and a bike corridor. It just needs the right zoning.” “I anticipate that we are going to over-densify. If I had a say in the matter, I would want it to stay a single family area… I'd love for it to remain a place where families could raise their kids… It's a major housing area for our area for our part of the city probably need to stay that way, and probably need to have single-family homes as much as we also need higher-density options. We need services, it would be great to see some services coming into our area.” Page 9 “There's a lot of advantages to our area. There's a lot of room, a lot of people, a lot of room for services to bring people into the area. But that doesn't work if we continue to attack the roads.” “I can see this area getting more dense with restaurants. I could see this area becoming a vibrant spot." “Thriving, lively, active, desirable, and car-free. Bars for socializing, restaurants, etc." “More permanent home solutions with street-side business. Islands of green spaces between to tie the residents together. Those little oases to bring people together make the space feel accessible and desirable.” “We believe densification near and around stations is good for the community, for people. TOD zoning makes a tremendous amount of sense. And if we're bonused, by doing more accouterments the city determines is mutually beneficial, we would entertain that. We would like to do more and be good stewards and partners with the city's vision.” “Having creative license within the area to do what the market will bear is probably the best circumstance for the city, rather than them arbitrarily deciding what we can and can't do in an area. This is one area that maybe fosters that creative license.” In your opinion, what are the biggest challenges the area faces in terms of managing growth, development, and planning? “Homelessness is a problem during summer months. A lot of times, those are the frustration I have with our neighbor, UDOT… Homeless people will live on the side of the freeway, and it's like a landfill behind us.” “I feel like we have a pretty significant problem with the unsheltered.” Han Hendrickson “Homelessness and crime. Some of that is a function of the location, the community is mostly dark and has a lot of vacant places for people who need a place to be. There are no eyes on the street. That’s a real challenge for developers and residents to pioneer when that is something they will have to face.” “There are a lot of environmental challenges that require expensive treatment or may exclude residential on the ground level. It’s challenging to find uses that activate the street level.” “Rezoning it properly, let’s be proactive about zoning, there is transit and everything else. Let’s look at the commercial zoning and try to do some big rezoning like Transit Oriented Zoning and RMU” “If you do nothing, you just gonna get this hodgepodge of development…. you have developers coming in saying, let's just do a big rectangular building, with poor design, no activation... So to me, the worst thing that can happen, do nothing. Just let things happen.” Page 10 “The TRAX station right around 2100 South, that is going to be a challenge because it’s such a busy street. You are starting to see that development around the Trax Station, but how do you connect?” “The city feels less safe. It’s more walkable and bikeable but it’s less safe” “We are building all this housing, inexpensive, poorly built, not even a brick façade” “These are functionally obsolete buildings for what you need today [for warehouse and manufacturing]. They … need lots of things for these businesses to work.” “There are these are short blocks and long blocks with tons of orphan alleys. The number of orphan alleys down there with and without easements is staggering. Also, this whole area is polluted.” “You've got to have someone like us willing to invest. But you've got to remove every barrier, every single barrier that you have to get through the city digestive track you've got to remove, it's not a zoning issue, you have to make sure you have a speed for businesses to want to relocate.” “We need the business ombudsman. You need someone in the city and economic development that can get shit done. You've got to get the businesses open and quick and you want them here.” “I have to run guys with tents off the new bike lane, and I've always got more transients, now that it's [300 West bike lane] done. That’s been frustrating…There's all kinds of stuff that I pick up. I always just come in Monday and clean up from the weekend and then get to work… The homeless is the biggest problem for sure. No question. No question.” “The street flows really well. Some of the side streets are awful, they need to come in and like fix them just in maintenance, but I don't think there's like traffic congestion… But I would love to not have that happen here.” “All that stucco and stick garbage stuff that they are building… Everything is cheap as you can build it… That's just not it's not going to be a long-term thing for a neighborhood that's going to make it better… there needs to be a standard… brick or something that's more visually appealing… maybe side yards and things like that.” “[Hanson Ave] is not equipped to handle any more traffic going in and out of it. Making sure that traffic can be routed and can get in and out of those areas.” “I know there's talk of people wanting to put in a TRAX station at 1700. South, if at all possibility I would be in favor of that as well, it would just make it easier for employees for people to take transit to work currently.” “I support the idea that of encouraging, biking, transit, walking, I actually highly support that. And I'm in favor of it.” Page 11 “I am worried about the ongoing issues with crime and homelessness in the immediate area surrounding the homeless center, and how it's going to affect business owners… I think that there are people on both sides of that fence who are ready to sell and get out. And some that are wanting a better solution. So I am in the I want a better solution camp. I'm not ready to sell and get out yet.” “My belief is that bringing in new construction and new housing and new developments is only going to help the cause of increasing the standards and the beautification of the neighborhood.” “What could make it even better is nighttime activity. This is a daytime market because there aren't any rooftops around.” “I don't see any [challenges]. There was a homeless issue but it’s not as bad. There has been some crime. Honestly the more new development, the less there is going to be.” “People are coming in and we need to have places for them to live. And arguing against it, it's kind of a losing argument. But there has to be a balance in terms of the services available to them. Otherwise, we have these huge residential sectors filled with people and nothing for them to do.” "It is very contained by vehicular barriers, creating a micro-ecosystem within that space." “The biggest roadblock is a fair amount of crime. We have a lot of care break-ins in our parking lot.” “Parking is a pretty big issue. We are looking to expand parking across the street.” “An issue is the amount of low-income housing and its effect on the space. It is important to have a mixture of incomes for housing.” “You’ve got a focus area that's bifurcated by a rail with no East-West cross access between 1700 South and 2100 South.” Which existing qualities or strengths of the area do you believe should be emphasized or leveraged in future growth, development, and planning efforts? “It’s got some of the best bike infrastructure in the city right now” “I think the areas that got to remain sort of commercial. And that's how I would envision it staying.” “I actually love the area here. We're a specialty business. So, it’s not like we need to be high profile, but certainly because of Costco, lots of people see us here. [I] Feel safe here for the most part.” “I think that it stays easy to access by cars. That's very important. I don't know if you know how much an accordion weighs, but they are like 30-35 pounds. This is not something that you go on a bicycle with or on TRAX” Page 12 “I think the ballpark District is so funky and fun and we should capitalize on it… keeping the industrial history of the place while keeping it chic and fun and people wanting to come “The Ballpark has a definitive identity. There is a lot there to tap into. If it develops in the right way, people will attach to it and give it life. The drivers are there, great access to transit, interstate, and emerging multimodal. People can get there and the big box retail generates activity.” “The fact that there is a commitment to the infrastructure pieces… I appreciate that people will be able to cross safely to get to a multimodal path. I wish they had gone a little further and separated the bike lane. The transportation department needs to be a bit bolder” “The reason people want to be there is jobs. These smaller buildings and smaller lots are going to be harder to redevelop. Opportunity is there for higher-end manufacturing, some way to support that in city policy and create jobs that pay well and are stable. Creating a live-work neighborhood.” “The big thing, they've already done it, they redid third west, you know, bike lanes… managing the traffic flow” “Maintaining the history of the area in terms of its commercial and industrial history, I think is important” “I would say the next 10 years or so, it's going to be, I'll call it mixed use. I think the manufacturing … pure industrial was probably going to go away. But I think that the commercials gotta stay” “We can’t have those big box stores leave” “The accessibility of the off ramps on 13th and 21st” “I do think that probably is a good place for housing… I like the CG zone, it's good that you can have somebody come in and do kind of whatever they want with the land… It leaves options for auto shops, or manufacturing… there's a lot of dead-end side streets that butt up against I15. And it's like those are great side streets to have a little manufacturing plant or something down at the end.” “I liked that it has kind of a unique makeup meaning like you've got everything from an insulation company to now there's some new housing developments.” “The dedicated bike lane is great infrastructure that should have residential everywhere you can.” “We welcome as much residential in the neighborhood. There is plenty of retail in the neighborhood to support it.” “We were a working-class community. People come into our community, they work, they grow their socio-economic status. We're very close to a major tax base. We are very close to major corridors… We are a great location. A great location to live and to leave.” Page 13 “The central point station is the busiest station on the Wasatch Front. So there's a strategic opportunity for us with our real estate investment in that location. Pedestrian connectivity from the north side to the South Side [of 2100 South] is pretty critical to us.” “If you can build a residential setting where people can come home and park and walk to the grocery store I think that's a big part of why Sugar House is so attractive. We have lots of grocery stores and lots of amenities, for people to come home, park, stay out of their car and have a big life. This area has the ability to have the same kind of intensity.” “I think it's convenience of circulation. Anybody on the Wasatch Front, can get here quickly via the freeway system, and now rail. You got to preserve the functionality of circulation. Because I think that's what makes this most appealing… The adjacency of services with rail and mass transit will continue to become more and more important. We shouldn't be trying to develop the city with more vehicular circulation, but also there are areas that their economic engines are 100% reliant on vehicular circulation.” How do you envision a successful balance between new development and preserving the area existing character and strengths? “I hope we don't see a lot more high-density housing here” “There is not enough parking for them (on site), so then they end up demanding that they have part of the streets to park on” “Don't just flood it all with houses. Maybe there's some like incentives to not ripping things down.” “If warehouse and small manufacturers, and retail don't own their space, it might be difficult to protect specialty shops. It would be great to fill in businesses moving out with high-end manufacturers and start-ups…We want to encourage those retailers and servicers within Salt Lake City. They provide a unique opportunity, and this is the right place for that. Not everything needs to be pushed to the northwest quadrant. “ “The incubators [space] it’s going away. I don't know of any available and it's going away quick” “I don't know how much character the neighborhood has” “I would argue for the preservation of a manufacturing space in that area, and could it continue as mixed use. That's what I would propose that we do… I think that'll be a disservice overall to the community [to zone out manufacturing]. Because there are a lot of businesses in that area “You've got businesses who have been in our area for 40 plus years, most of them are small businesses, so they don't necessarily have anywhere to go… I would argue for a continued mixed- use zoning in our in our area.” “Maybe the answer is to allow a backyard cottage. I think allowing the [single-family residential] neighborhoods to sit out on change is not realistic.” Page 14 “All these neighborhoods have mandated ground-floor retail with not a lot of flexibility. You end up with a lot of empty retail. Structured parking kills the neighborhood feel and pedestrian environment. So, there should be a required occupied uses on the ground floor but there should be flexibility. The ground floor should be required to be 15' to structure regardless of use to be adapted in the future, including parking structures.” “People are coming in and we need to have places for them to live. And arguing against it, it's kind of a losing argument. But there has to be a balance in terms of the services available to them. Otherwise, we have these huge residential sectors filled with people and nothing for them to do.” “There is a lot of opportunities for those buildings [warehouses] to be repurposed. There does seem to be an opportunity for these old buildings to take on entrepreneurial risk. To repurpose for local or new businesses" “I don't see much character or identity in the area. I see it as unnamed old buildings that are sometimes vacant, the Walmart/Target area. I don’t see a lot of Identity to preserve.” What specific types of amenities do you believe are needed to support the neighborhood? “If there could be maybe a little small park and more greenery” “I do like wider sidewalks… It makes no sense to me the narrow sidewalk right up to the units... And I just hope we see no more of that.” “Put in a little park…like there's a tiny kids playground, there's a place to fill up your water, and a couple of seats…having those little pockets would be awesome.” “There's not really any public space, it would be great to have more of those spaces… It's something you have to do. Long-term there are not a whole lot of public spaces to do community building. It is a place to drive in and drive out… Whatever zoning is settled on it needs to focus on the public realm, on the edges. Pocket parks would be great. Right now, it is a scenario where the public way is completely devoted to getting people in and out.” “I think that to develop a neighborhood it has to have an identity. It has to have a sense of place” “A transit amenity that would be really good… is a TRAX station on 1700 South, for sure” What are we doing with the public utilities land… let’s make it a park. How many opportunities in the downtown core to make a major urban park, not very many of them, but this is one” “If you do an S-Line type train here [to delta center] it changes things” “We've got to have arts districts arts, we've got to have a reason to bring people” “There's a whole TRAX line. Why did they not put the bike lane right there? It would have been perfect… It's totally safe. It's totally already laid out, you know where you're going… especially from 33rd down to 9th south or something.” Page 15 “What’s a little bit lacking in the neighborhood is entertainment. If you're going to put a high density of people in the area, you don't have movie theaters, there aren't any bars, or joints where people can hang out in the evening.” “I am personally very concerned about climate change. I am for anything you can do to require developers to build more sustainable buildings.” “Making sure there is a mix of incomes. Housing prices are currently reasonable. Trying to get ahead of housing affordability.” “If you are going to put in a bunch of housing people need places to congregate. Kids need grass to run on. The market can fix a lot of that.” “There is no way to get from single-family homes to the west. It is walled off from all this great retail. [A pedestrian crossing] would be a benefit for those neighbors.” “We need places to eat, we need things that will draw people into our neighborhood.” “For members [of the Front] , there isn't a reason for people to stay in the neighborhood. We have a few thousand members from across the valley. We've created a microsystem within the gym. A grocery store or a coffee shop might convince people to stay in the area. There is limited desirability in the area.” “Since it’s an Industrial area, our courtyard is a little oasis that brings a lot of life and character. The more green space with public access would bring a lot. A dog park would be cool.” What barriers or challenges do you perceive when it comes to engaging the community in discussions about neighborhood growth and planning? “We'd like to probably see more follow through and have everybody on the same page. It feels like everybody has these great ideas, but are we executing it collaboratively?” “It would have been cool to have some sort of committee or liaisons like actually physically going into the businesses that are around 300 West and being like, how are things going?” “It almost needs a business improvement district and to have Ballpark leadership is engaged.” “I think have a bigger overall vision and just start talking about it in a positive way. More often and frequently. They need to sell the idea, you need to talk about the benefits” “The city has a good network set up that I wasn't really aware of until recently, with the Neighborhood Council and the homeless center council, I think those are good ways to communicate… That's the only thing I'd suggest just promoting neighborhood council meetings.” “I don't see a lot of effort put out to engage the community. And when it is, it's through channels that are just insufficient” Page 16 “It's been hard to get involvement or engagement in these projects. The lack of engagement is due to a lack of ownership or understanding of their potential impact.” How can communication, transparency, and trust between the city and community be improved, and ensure that the community concerns and feedback are genuinely heard and addressed in decision-making processes? What strategies or approaches would you recommend? “I think as long as we're all notified and have a voice” “Transparency requires an intention to be transparent. And I don't quite see that a lot of things are kind of held back… It would be great if there's an effort to publicize those things.” Part 2: By Stakeholder Group Landowner What is your vision for the future of your property? “I want to remain as a commercial industry property… that it’s an asset to the neighborhood” “I just purchased a building on 300 West. I want to get it up to the standard of what 300 West has, I want it to look nice on the outside, and I want it to be nice on the inside.” “We're planning to continue to operate in the neighborhood. We are planning to expand which we are in the process of expanding right now. We actually purchased another company, and we're going to be moving that company from Pennsylvania to Salt Lake City.” “We are currently expanding our location to the north of us, nearly doubling our capacity. We are currently at capacity membership-wise. With that expansion, we look to improve our facilities and expand our offerings.” “It's likely residential, perhaps, with some mild variants of mixed-use. Densification would be helpful given the massive amount of really well-planned infrastructure at the station. We think that's a wonderful opportunity. That's why we bought it. So we'd like to be able to be sensitive to our neighbors, but be able to go much higher than 45 feet.” Do you have any plans for changes or redevelopment of your land in the near or distant future? “Increase Security” “We are building 200 family-focused units. On our ground level, we will have amenity space, a significant daycare, and a playground to serve those residents. We anticipate it to be long-term residents with large multigenerational families.” “We are really trying to set a tone. It's the gateway to the ballpark. We are hoping to do something that creates a center of gravity. We want it to be distinguished. The neighborhood right now is a little gritty.” Page 17 “I like what I do. So, I don't plan on making any changes. I keep my property up pretty good… I don't think I'm going to do anything for at least a few years. I did look at possibly doing some apartments here… I just didn't feel like it was time… I may redevelop it at some point, but not for a while, and I'd probably do housing” “If a land developer came in and offered enough money, I would consider selling and setting up shop somewhere else. But that would not be for at least five years…I want to stay if I can” “The buildings [Marketplace at 18th] are 15 years old and have a lot of economic life. I don’t think I am a candidate for redevelopment for decades.” “Flexibility around ground-floor retail is something that should be considered. There are times and places where it's really suitable. And there are other types of places where, frankly, it just is gonna fail. It's gonna be empty, and it's gonna cost more. You can activate the streetscape without having being required to have blanket retail.” “If we have flexibility with regards to layout and design and site circumstances, we can be far more creative, and far more efficient in space planning. When developing [new zoning], offering some subjective, well-thought-out alternatives, would be very, very helpful. And achieve a wonderful result.” What challenges do you anticipate in managing your land or implementing your plans? “We will see how the utilities go since there isn't a lot of updated infrastructure in place and may need to upgrade capacity.” “This is a difficult market to be developing in. In the short term, it will be a difficult neighborhood to develop as it cost as much as downtown without the same market rents.” “How do you keep this area from becoming North Temple? The infrastructure was invested in, and people came and built the shittiest product. And it will be there for decades. That's the face of the neighborhood right now. It may benefit the city to retain zoning that requires some design review to control quality development... That’s a reasonable check to make sure that things that are getting put in are making the most of the city investment.” “Investing in it…it's gonna appeal to tenants that want to be there because it's a vibrant neighborhood” “The only challenge I see as the neighborhood gets denser and there is more traffic it may get harder to get to my property.” “Parking and accessibility. In order to bring in more members we will need more parking.” Small Business Owner Page 18 What aspects of the neighborhood, if enhanced or changed, could create a positive difference for your operations? Could you also share any obstacles you've encountered in running your business here and how they might influence your plans moving forward? “A little bit cleaner, a little greener. That's all.” “Some more lights along the way… making this place walkable in the evening would be a game changer” “A clean and beautiful way to walk from the TRAX station. You kind of have to jaywalk right now. The traffic only stops when the train is going. Until you get to the [300 west] intersection.” If applicable, would you consider renewing your lease or continuing to operate in this location? What factors contribute to your decision? “We definitely consider it. Yeah, I mean, signage is a big thing… Nobody knows we're here” Do you have any plans for expanding your business or altering your business model in response to changes in the neighborhood? “We’d like to expand” Residents How comfortable do you feel living in the area? Are there any concerns that affect your comfort and the livability of the area? “My lady is trying to walk our twins around our neighborhood, and constantly running into people that are concerning, and to circumstances that are concerning. Finding yourself being followed.” How long have you lived in this neighborhood and what are your plans for staying in the future? “My lady would like us to leave within two years. She wants us to find a better option, specifically because of the changes that have occurred in our neighborhood.” Would you consider renewing your lease in the future? If no, what factors contribute to your decision? (No renters were interviewed for this report) Exhibit 4: 2nd Phase – Open House “Draft Scenario” Boards 0 500’ 1000 State Street Character Area Defined by small businesses along the length of the station area Main Street Character Area Defined by small local businesses, pleasant ped/bike environment, and medium-density residential West Template Character Area New development should maintain current character and scale and consider enhancing biking/walking environment and expand public spaces “Heart” of the Neighborhood Highest densities allowable to encourage mixed-use development Central Ninth Character Area New development should maintain current scale and massing along 900 S corridor 300 West Character Area New multi-family developments Unused railroad spur proposed for light rail extension into Granary District Addition of open space, public amenities and neighborhood-serving commercial Medium Density Transitional Area New medium density housing and commercial buildings with reduced height along West Temple frontage Neighborhood Area Targeted redevelopment of vacant or abandoned structures with new/ 2000 rehabilitated structures at comparable scale/character to existing housing THE PROJECT: 300 W CORRIDOR AND CENTRAL POINTE PLAN PROJECT SUMMARY The 300 W Corridor and Central Pointe Plan is a part of Salt Lake City’s larger mission to create a more connected, thriving city through improved transportation and thoughtful development. The plan will identify land use policies that support a multi-modal streetscape and citywide goals of strategic growth and development, connecting neighborhoods, and improving the public realm. The project team is collecting community input which will ultimately influence the final plan. The team conducted interviews and focus groups with key government agencies working in Salt Lake City to better understand the current context, issues, and opportunities within the project area. Community input was gathered through an interactive map where community members share comments and place pins on areas for possible interventions. Two scenarios are presented today with recommendations around land use (what type of building is allowed and where), mobility and transportation (streets, sidewalks, bike lanes, etc.), and character. Each scenario includes the recommendation for affordable housing, and mixed-uses, with creative and light industrial uses adjacent to I-15. Both scenarios emphasize improved east-west connectivity, traffic calming, and improved pedestrian and bicycle facilities. ENGAGEMENT TIMELINE PROJECT AREA AND SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan September 2023 WE ARE HERE! WINDOW 1 MAY - JUN 2023 • Technical Focus Groups • 1-on-1 Interviews • Social Pinpoint Mapping WINDOW 2 JUL - SEP 2023 • Project team work session • Public open house (2) • Online survey WINDOW 3 OCT-NOV 2023 • Project team work session • Small group meetings • Planning Commission meetings • City Council meeting WINDOW 4 JAN-APR 2024 • Project team work session • Planning Commission meetings • Virtual public office hours • City Council meeting Central Pointe TRAX station Sout AX Li n e 00 We s 30 0 WE S T 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan September 2023 YOUR VISION: WHAT WE HEARD FROM YOU HOUSING • Preserve existing single-family inventory while providing new medium and high-density multi-family units • Encourage quality development ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • Support light industrial and manufacturing, retail, food and dining • Preserve commercial identity with increased infill around big box stores • Prioritize and retain local, small businesses TRANSPORTATION • Improve multimodal safety and comfort, east-west connectivity between Ballpark District and People’s Freeway, and improve access to TRAX station • Increase cleanliness and repair infrastructure • Enhance pedestrian and biker comfort with increased amenities • Establish safe crossings with crosswalks and signage CHARACTER • Establish a mixed-use, walkable neighborhood with industrial/adaptive re-use aesthetic • Improve side street streetscapes and provide additional green space and public space • Enhance the perception of safety • Transition from commercial/industrial to transit- oriented development ANYTHING WE MISSED? SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS BELOW ANYTHING WE MISSED? SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS BELOW WHERE WOULD YOU PUT THE DESIRED AMENITIES WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA? INSTRUCTIONS Place a colored sticker at every location you think an amenity should be built TRANSIT STOPS SAFE CROSSING / CROSSWALKS BIKE LANES ELEVATED PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE NEW STREETS OPEN SPACE / PARKS September 2023 BALLPARK TRANSITION ZONE 1700 S COSTCO ASHLEY 1830 S SAM’S CLUB HARTWELL AVE HOME DEPOT 2100 S Central Pointe station 0 200’ 400’ 800’ 30 0 W 30 0 W TR A X LI N E TR A X LI N E w TE M P L E w TE M P L E 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan September 2023 SCENARIO 1: REPURPOSE Scenario 1 prioritizes re-purposing existing buildings and encourages new development within already developed sites, like the parking lots around buildings. This scenario would accommodate fewer new residential units than scenario 2 and overall would allow for only slightly more intensive development than what could be built today. This scenario proposes to create a new east-west connection at approximately 1940 South. CHARACTER Ecclectic mix of uses Network of small pocket parks ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Infill and retention of big box stores TRANSPORTATION Adaptive reuse of big box and industrial buildings East-west connections with bike lanes and new side roads HOUSING On-street crossing with HAWK signal to TRAX Bus stop amenities on 300 West Minimum 10% affordable housing Retain existing housing Townhomes and duplexes in Condos and apartments and adjacent to existing single- proximate to TRAX station and family neighborhoods 1700 South 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan September 2023 SCENARIO 2: RECONNECT Scenario 2 would accommodate more housing than scenario 1. This scenario would allow for redevelopment that is fairly more intensive than could be built today. In addition to the new east-west connection proposed in scenario 1, this scenario proposes to create several new streets near Costco to break up the large block into several smaller blocks. This scenario would allow the area to become a Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone, which would allow the City to use all new property tax generated by new development for improvements within the project area that would benefit the entire community. CHARACTER Walkable district with shopping and dining options Linear park spaces / “green streets” ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Redevelopment to mixed-use buildings TRANSPORTATION Office space Multi-use path adjacent to TRAX line on 200 West Structured pedestrian crossing across 2100 South East-west and north-south street connectivity HOUSING Minimum 20% affordable housing Gentle infill in existing neighborhoods Mixed use developments with activated ground floor Multi-family housing developments with amenities WHICH DO YOU PREFER? Place a sticker in the gray box for the option you prefer within each section SCENARIO 1: REPURPOSE SCENARIO 2: RECONNECT Minimum 10% affordable housing Minimum 20% affordable housing HOUSING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan September 2023 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan September 2023 300W 300W 15' 10' 7' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 7' 8' 10' setback multiuse green drive amenity zone path buffer lane drive turn drive drive lane lane lane lane buffer green space green sidewalk setback/ 56' COMMENTS (Proposed Low Density) COMMENTS (Proposed High Density) STREET SECTIONS Let us know how you feel about the below options SCENARIO 1: REPURPOSE SCENARIO 2: RECONNECT TELL US ABOUT YOURSELF 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan September 2023 I live alone I live with roommates I live with my family I live in senior housing I am currently unsheltered Other Under 18 18-24 25-44 45-64 65+ Exhibit 5: 2nd Phase Engagement Report – September Open Houses Page 1 of 8 Landscape Architecture Planning Urban Design Strategic Services Environmental Graphic Design 22860 Two Rivers Road Suite 102 Basalt, Colorado 81621 970.925.8354 970.920.1387 fax designworkshop.com Meeting Telephone Conference Call ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY To: Daniel Echeverria From: Jessica Garrow, Marianne Stuck, Carolyn Levine Date: November 29, 2023 Project Name: 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan Project: 7078 Subject: Engagement Summary Meeting Date: September 26th and 27th, 2023 Copy To: DW File Event Summary Two public events were held on September 26th and 27th. Both events were advertised via mailed flyers and on the project website. Both were held outdoors with interactive exhibit boards that allowed people to come and go as they pleased. Staff were on-hand to facilitate and answer questions. The first event was held on September 26 from 5-7 p.m. at the Ballpark Playground. Twenty-eight people attended, and most were residents who lived nearby and were visiting the park with their family or walking through the neighborhood and happened upon the event. The location was ideal for interacting with residents who otherwise may not attend a public meeting, including parents of small children. Attendees spent anywhere from a few minutes to an hour or more reviewing the exhibit boards and interacting with the staff. Of the 28 attendees, 12 live with their families, 2 live alone, and 2 are currently experiencing homelessness. The image below shows where residents live (in green) and work (in blue). Figure 1. Attendees placed a green sticker on a map of Salt Lake City to indicate where they live and a green dot to indicate where they work. 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan Community Open House Summary Page 2 of 8 The second event was held at Central Pointe TRAX station on September 27 from 7-9 am. It was intended to reach people who might not otherwise attend a public event by meeting them during their morning commute. The same information was presented at both events, though the morning event included fewer in-depth conversations as folks were often rushing during their morning commute. Seventeen people participated in the engagement and postcards with a project summary and link to the project website were handed out to dozens of commuters who did not have time to stop and chat. Many participants live just northeast of the project site, near the intersection of 1700 S and West Temple St and work near the intersection of 400 S and State Street and at least one participant was currently experiencing homelessness. Summary of Results A visual preference board was provided to seek feedback on different approaches to housing choices, economic development, transportation investments, and neighborhood character. Participants were asked to place stickers on the choices that they felt were most appropriate or needed in the area. Participants were not limited in the number of stickers they could place on the board. The below summary combines comments from both (morning and evening) engagement sessions into common themes and highlights any outlier comments. Scenario 1: Repurpose Preference Voting Scenario 1 received 34 preference votes (Figure 2) and more comments compared to Scenario 2. Preferences related to housing choices in Scenario 1 included: • Retaining existing housing - 4 stickers • Condos and apartments that are proximate to the TRAX station and 1700 S. – 4 stickers • Townhomes and duplexes in and adjacent to existing single-family homes – 3 stickers Preferences related to economic development in Scenario 1 included: • Adaptive reuse of the big box stores and industrial buildings – 6 • Retain and infill the big box stores – 2 Preferences related to transportation in Scenario 1 included: • On-street crossing with HAWK signal to the TRAX line – 4 • East-west bike lanes and new side roads – 4 • Bust stop amenities on 300 West – 1 Preferences related to character in Scenario 1 included: • Network of small pocket parks – 5 • Eclectic mixed uses – 1 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan Community Open House Summary Page 3 of 8 Figure 2. Scenario 1 Preference Survey Results Streetscape Feedback Participants commented on the street sections with positive comments such as approving of more trees, approving of the 15-foot setback amenity zone with a 10-foot multi-use path and 7-foot green buffer. One participant raised concerns about parking areas abutting sidewalks without a curb due to previous instances of vehicles parking and driving on the 300 W bike path. 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan Community Open House Summary Page 4 of 8 Figure 3. Street Section boards with participant comments after evening event on 9/26/23. General Comments and Concerns Some participants voiced concern about adding housing density. Concerns included the challenge of keeping the character of the area while adding density, and some participants suggested limiting apartments to two and a half stories or less while retaining single-family homes, while others advocated for allowing ADU’s with fewer restrictions. However, with more density, many participants noted that zoning regulations need to include more parking such as off-street parking and parking stalls that match the number of bedrooms in new housing developments. Conversely, one participant suggested the creation of a “park once” district, which implies creating flexibility for shared parking standards. For commercial spaces, participants were concerned about losing a hardware store if Home Depot left. Participants generally liked adaptive reuse as some are frustrated with the new high-rises and were concerned about keeping the character and history of the area. When it came to green spaces, participants echoed that local children and pets need more green space. Concerns about green space include the consideration of water use in the design. Participants suggested the neighborhood should be walkable like Sugarhouse, and that pedestrian and cyclist amenities should be added. Scenario 2 Feedback Summary Preference Voting Scenario 2 received 27 preference votes and fewer comments compared to Scenario 1. Preferences related to housing choices in Scenario 2 included: • Preference for mixed use development with an activated ground floor 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan Community Open House Summary Page 5 of 8 • Gentle infill in existing neighborhoods – 1 sticker • Multi-family housing developments with amenities – 0 stickers Preferences related to economic development in Scenario 2 included: • Redevelopment to mixed-use buildings – 8 stickers • New office space – 0 stickers Preferences related to transportation in Scenario 2 included: • Multi-use path adjacent to the TRAX line on 200 West – 5 stickers • Structured pedestrian crossing across 2100 S. – 4 stickers • East-west and north-south street connectivity – 2 stickers Preferences related to character in Scenario 2 included: • Walkable district with shopping and dining options – 2 stickers • Linear park spaces/“green streets” – 1 sticker Figure 4. Scenario 2 with stickers and comments. 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan Community Open House Summary Page 6 of 8 Streetscape Feedback Comments on the Scenario 2 streetscape were positive. Four participants stated that streetside dining is desirable. Other comments noted a preference for an activated sidewalk and streetscape, the green buffer in both scenarios, and separation between pedestrians and cyclists and vehicles. Some participants raised questions such as how the streetside dining would be maintained and cleaned, how the buildings would step back (similar to Sugarhouse), and how streetside dining might be combined with the setback amenity zone in Scenario 1. Participants also suggested adding parks and trees between the streetside dining areas, as well as a bike lane that is separate from vehicular traffic. General Comments and Concerns Several participants were in favor of increasing housing density and commercial development of the area. Participants advocated for ADUs and increasing the percentage of affordable housing, more apartments, focusing multifamily development on 2100 S. One participant would like to limit multi-family development in the heart of West Temple and would prefer single-family homes and duplexes. Participants noted that an increase in housing, commercial development, and more amenities is necessary. More specifically, participants noted that an increase in the height limit in existing commercial zones as well as the density of retail would increase walkability. One participant noted disbelief that retail could survive on the ground level of mixed-use buildings due to costs for business owners and not enough consumer activity. When it comes to transportation, many participants were interested in a TRAX station at 1700 S, a FrontRunner stop at Central Pointe station (between Murray and Salt Lake Central), and focusing 300 W and 2100 S on pedestrian and cyclist use including bike lanes and a multiuse path that connects to Parleys Trail. There were also concerns about the lack of trees at station platforms to mitigate heat. Other comments included checking the flooding potential of new east-west connections, concerns about homelessness, and preferring green streets over pocket parks in relation to water consideration. Which Scenario do you Prefer: Participants were asked to select their preference between the two proposed scenarios. Some participants mentioned that townhomes are preferred in existing residential areas, while a mix of medium and higher density housing is preferred for commercial areas / economic developments. Figure 5. Participant comments on the scenario comparison board. 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan Community Open House Summary Page 7 of 8 Location of Desired Amenities Feedback: Participants were asked to vote using a dot sticker on which amenities they would prefer to see and where in six categories: transit stops, safe crossing/crosswalks, bike lanes, elevated pedestrian bridge, news streets, and open space/parks. The results are below. Preference Voting • For new transit stops, nine participants located a new TRAX station at 1700 S. One participant located a bus stop at 2100 S and 300 W. • Safe crossings and crosswalks were located at the intersection of 2100 S and the TRAX line (5 stickers), ~1830 S and the TRAX line, 2100 S and 300 W (2 stickers), and 2100 S and West Temple (1 sticker). • Bike lane locations were located along 2100 S, 1700 S, and West Temple St (1 sticker each). • Elevated pedestrian bridges were located at the intersection of 300 West and 1830 South, 200 West (TRAX line) and 1830 South, 200 West (TRAX line) and 2100 South, and one on the TRAX Line between 2100 South and 1830 South. • Two new streets were identified, one that is a north-south connection between the west end of Hartwell Ave through 1830 S and the west end of 1700 S parallel to Interstate 15. The other new street would connect 1830 S across the TRAX line to Venture Way. • The southern parking lot at the west end of 1830 S was identified for new parks and/or open space. General Comments and Concerns Participants noted concerns about existing development patterns, such as parking lots that are typically only 25 percent full and could be repurposed as green spaces, or the vacant northwest corner of 1300 S and 300 W (outside 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan Community Open House Summary Page 8 of 8 the study area) that could be made more attractive in the long term. Other comments indicated that more bike lanes should be added and that the Ballpark area should be focused on people / smart growth and maintaining the charm of the area along with transit. There were varying opinions regarding additional transit service within the project area. Some stated that there should be a TRAX station at 1700 S while others stated that there should be no new TRAX stations and no new transit. One participant suggested turning the 1700 S TRAX land into a shopping retail area with stores like GNC or Baskin Robbins. Anything We Missed? Participants were asked to provide feedback on items they want to see included in the planning process and plan documents. Many participants suggested creating connections via multiple travel modes. For example, comments noted a potential connection between the bike path along 300 W to Parley’s Trail in South Salt Lake, the need for pedestrian crossings across the TRAX line between 1700 South and 2100 South, a new TRAX station at 1700 S, increasing general bike safety and creating a designated space for scooters, improving north-south bicycle and pedestrian connections across 2100 S, and bus connections along 2100 S and 300 W that have stops at essential services. One resident noted that people who need to access different types of related services (a parole office and regular drug testing) take this route often and could benefit from bus service. Some participants commented negatively on the current conditions of major streets, such as 1700 S and 2100 S being too dangerous to bike down with children and West Temple being too narrow for drivers. More comments focused on parking and development density, such as the lack of parking stalls for medium-high density housing, the need for increased parking on the street, wanting more economic development while preferring less high-density units, and concerns about increasing crime rates with new high-density units. Other participants want to create more services for people who are currently unsheltered, suggesting police presence is more threatening than helpful, the creation of a program to help integrate people into housing, and focusing efforts on creating housing and services rather than public green spaces. General comments included wanting more local character and green spaces, more trees, appreciation for the new 300 W improvements, utilizing parking lots for other uses like green space, concerns over UTA’s expansion in the valley, specifically when it comes to acquiring properties, and how the Public Utilities campus will be integrated into future development. Participants suggested additional amenities that the current scenarios do not specify such as skate parks, dog parks, an indoor pool, vending machines with snacks and water near Central Pointe Station, and more retail stores on the east side. 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan Community Open House Summary Exhibit 6: 2nd Phase Engagement Report – Online Survey Landscape Architecture Planning Urban Design Strategic Services 120 East Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 MEMORANDUM To: Project Team From: Design Workshop Date: December 21, 2023 Project Name: SLC 300 West Corridor Project #: 7078 Subject: Survey Results This memorandum provides an overview of the results from the survey administered SLC 300 West Corridor area plan. Around 320 people participated in the survey. Demographics • Majority of respondents were in the 25-34 age group (30% of respondents) • Majority of respondents were male (56.6% of respondents) • Majority of respondents were white (82.6% of respondents) • Majority of respondents shop/visit in the project area (60.3%) • Majority of respondents have only been involved in the project by visiting the project’s webpage (60.7%) 1. What is your age? 2. What is your gender? 3. What is your race/ethnicity? 4. What is your relationship with the project area? 5. How have you participated in the following events related to the 300 West Corridor and Station Area Plan? Scenarios • When asked on a sliding scale how they liked each scenario, participants preferred Scenario 2: Reconnect. • In the results shown below, the mean was higher at 7.12 score for Scenario 2: Reconnect over Scenario 1: Repurpose (6.39). • Scenarios 1 and 2 translated into density on the streetscapes. Scenario 1 proposed low density streetscapes while Scenario 2 proposed high density. When asked which streetscape they preferred: o Scenario 1 (119 responses/40.1%) o Scenario 2 (178 responses/59.9%) • In relationship to the project area, majority of respondents shop/visit the project area and prefer Scenario 2. Concepts • With all the ideas shared in both concepts, when asked to rate how important each one is for the project area, walkable district with dining and shopping option had the highest average rating. • In an extended response asking what concepts were missing the survey, respondents gave a variety of answers. Answers were grouped into the following categories, with the number of responses for each. Answers could fall into multiple categories: o More housing/density = 47 responses/11.7% o Less housing/density = 9 responses/2.2% o Homelessness = 6 responses/1.5% o Safety = 52 responses/12.9% o More green space = 39 responses/9.7% o More trees = 15 responses/3.7% o More sidewalks = 41 responses/10.2% o East-west connections = 7 responses/1.7% o North-south connections = 5 responses/1.2% o More bikeability and a bike/ped connection over 2100 S = 45 responses/11.2% o Walkability = 50 responses/12.4% o Mixed use = 43 responses/10.7% o Redevelopment = 22 responses/5.5% o Outdoor Space = 6 responses/1.5% o Do not change = 15 responses/3.7% I 14.0% 12.0% What is missing from the concepts? I I I 2.0% I What did you see in the concepts that is most appealing, and what we may have missed as an opportunity for the station Need road designs to slow down vehicles and create more space/use for active/pedestrian/bike modes. Higher density and mixed land uses should be occurring throughout all of Salt Lake City. I love the idea for an active sidewalk with a multi purpose path. It’s a great opportunity to develop 300 W more with the new and improved sidewalk/bike path. There is a great need for outdoor dining patio areas, shopping and hangout spots along 300W. With several breweries around, it would be nice to see more restaurants and amenities for the residents to walk to and use. I believe scenario two would work. If there are pocket parks developed, then you would not need the extra green space from scenario one just the green buffers. The 200 West multi-use paths would be fantastic and would see far more traffic than the 300 W path. The most appealing thing about these two options is increasing the livable spaces and reducing the drive-through nature of big box stores. I think this is a great start but I would like to emphasize that pedestrian and biking infrastructure needs to have heavy-duty physical barriers from cars for busier streets. 300 W looks like a glorified freeway, where speeds can exceed 50 mph. If 300 W is not going to have any traffic calming measures to prevent vehicles from traveling above 30 mph please include other physical barriers in line with the city's Vision Zero goal. Raise the new 300 W bike path to make it safer for use of this path. Right now, cars fly in and out of the store entrances/exits without even realizing it is a bike path. Concept 2 really promotes the opportunity to slow cars down which reduces noise, crashes, and deaths caused by vehicles. Also, there are more opportunities to move around the city by foot, bike, and public transit and not have to be so car dependent. The idea of being able to do the vast majority of my errands within walking and biking distance of my house is really appealing! Can there be active sidewalks with a mix of green space-- meaning-- can the green buffer ebb and flow dependent upon the size and scale of the development that it's in front of? I don't think a giant setback is needed for smaller, walkable storefronts, but, for Costco, if it gets repurposed, yes-- their setback should be larger and involve more public amenities. I fear an effort to repurpose existing plans will retain the industrial feel of the area that makes it unappealing for street traffic. Currently the big box stores and large warehouses make it necessary to drive--one doesn't really go to Home Depot and Costco on a bike after a quick lunch with a friend. I like better street engagement and landscaping. I wish there was more bicycle specific infrastructure. varied activities, diversity in housing age and type, and green spaces distributed throughout. Prefer the consistency of active sidewalks along the length of the road that is presented in option 2. The whole of 300 West should be walkable and provide varied services rather than designating one development as a walkable area. I think that this speaks to the idea that walkable areas aren't successful if you have to drive to them. Would like to see office integrated into mixed-use buildings rather than large, stand-alone buildings. Would like to see the big box retained but the parking lots reduced and infilled. The big-box businesses are able to provide resources that can't be found in other areas of the city. Would prefer that these are located along the freeway rather than in mixed use, fine-grained neighborhoods. Adaptive reuse of these large buildings doesn't necessarily reduce issues of over-parking, large massing, inactive street fronts, etc. Would like to see non-noxious light industrial integrated along the freeway or within mixed-use buildings. Wondering if there are ways to retain some older structures to provide for lower-cost commercial properties. Maybe just within certain areas. Like increased street connectivity so that walking and biking are not impractical. Also would like neighborhoods located east of the TRAX line to be able to access resources west of the line without using a car. I like the multiuse path along the TRAX line, particularly if it can encourage this addition along the rest of the lines, where it doesn't currently exist. Would very much like to see a 1700 South TRAX station. This would increase the feasibility of infill and transit use. This would also help to reduce train speeds and increase the safety of east-west connections. More housing and mixed use. We need a more walkable environment Walkable neighborhoods and increased access to green spaces - both majorly improve mental well-being and social connectivity in communities. A missed opportunity would be exploring expanded biking and walking infrastructure that incentivizes these forms of transportation, such as bike racks/lockers, benches/picnic tables, and potentially doing a bike lane, pedestrian sidewalk and narrow roadway. Make sure to prevent any new driver throughs Multi-use paths are a poor man's sidewalk. Pedestrians and cyclists deserve to have dedicated space on both sides of the street, and should not be forced to compete with each other in order to maximize convenience for drivers. Take away driving lanes before cramming bikes and pedestrians together. I don't think the different 300 W street cross sections should be billed as "low density" vs "high density." Both options have same number of lanes and road width, but more pedestrian/bike space is always a plus, and if anything, should allow for taller buildings than a narrower street, as there would ideally be more people out and about, with more destinations closeby. The sense of enclosure for drivers would come from the trees, not the buildings. What is proposed to bridge the gap between the end of the new cycle-track just north of the Home Depot to get across 2100 S? Or are people going to be directed to go east one block to a new facility along the TRAX? Scenario 1 is more forward thinking; Scenario 2 is more of the same disappointment I've seen elsewhere in Salt Lake City. While commercial displacement is an issue, I do like to see larger strip malls replaced with housing. I am also excited about the path parallel to the Trax line, The one in Sandy is great to ride. i am very worried about putting housing right on the highway -- it is a health risk! I like the idea of the multiple green space buffers, but with the ability to add in seating and outdoor patios, dog stations, etc to the green space closest to the building. Recently, in Sugar House there have popped up multiple buildings along 2100 S that are right up against the sidewalk/road and although I like the idea of that (feels more welcoming than a pushed back building and parking lot), it seems to create a visual issue when getting out onto 2100 S from the north/south roads without lights (400 East is an example). The extra green buffer in scenario 1 would give more of an opening for pedestrians, bikers, and cars to come onto the street safely, without having a building as a visual block. Although the drawings don't depict this happening, the "buildings closer to the street" description makes me prefer option 1, as 300 w is pretty bustling and will be even more so with even better amenities, but still has plenty of side street car traffic. Plus, more greenery and activation spaces are always good! Blending them together - even better. A general mixed-use neighborhood with mixed densities and amenities would be great. A pedestrian overpass would be a game changer, in addition to upzoning the whole area, allowing midrise or even Highrise buildings. So many proposed developments are being built right up to their maximum height limit. SLC is ready for buildings taller than 8 stories. Maybe allow special height limits for mass timber construction? Much much more sustainable and they act as a carbon sink when being built Love pedestrian overpasses. We desperately need more of these, particularly across 700E and State St. You are designing your dream city without any thought at to when the snows come. Wider sidewalks in a city that does not pick up the snow only means unusable sidewalks in the winter. What's the point? We own the Marketplace at 18th shopping center. It is 100% occupied with thriving tenants. Both of your concepts show the site being completely redeveloped. Tearing down this thriving neighborhood retail property will not make economic sense for decades, FYI I don't see any type of scenario that is, water conscious--having all of these plants and green space is not going to help conserve water. This is why cities like Las Vegas are ripping up lawn strips. 600 South now wastes tons of water...I've filmed all the water waste all over the road and sidewalks. We need to conserve and protect our water sheds! I do not believe reducing setbacks on a wide street such as 300 west will make the road feel more narrow. It will make the pedestrian feel less welcome. The effect you desire is not accomplished when you have a five lane road. We are losing our classic neighborhoods to huge developments - our city will be nothing but apartment buildings if we keep letting the large companies to develop our specs for their profit Continuing the 300 West bike path to and beyond 2100 s. Making it easier to get to central pointe station from 300 West Bike path. This area is in terrible need of parks/green space. Especially dog parks. I know it's likely bc it's outside of salt lake city, but you have to coordinate with SSL to get pedestrian/bike access to West Temple from Central Pointe Station. It is so hard to get to that trax stop on foot and bike. Also that best buy should be housing. It’s a big box retail, industrial area of our City. Bike lanes and greenways are useless. Put them in higher residential use areas. I prefer scenario two because it builds more housing and contributes more to building a community that is less car- dependent and is more livable. The city should prioritize dense infill development, pedestrian and bike infrastructure, and transit-oriented development. more trees More pedestrian friendly everywhere in the area 50% affordable housing should be the goal. This general district ought to prioritize tax revenue generation alongside beautification. Its transit connection to larger valley make it ideal for infill and multifamily. Though I am a strong supporter of neighborhood growth and preservation principles, I just don't see this as a 'neighborhood' and don't think we should dilute its primary function as a commercial/industrial district that generates funds needed to invest in other areas with higher likelihood of neighborhood improvement from investment (think central city, ballpark, downtown, liberty, etc.). Thanks! Nothing but if it has to be one or the other, Scenario 1 works best for me. My only concern is when are you planning to come for my property? Scenario 2 is good because this is a great location for DENSITY. How do possibly propose any of the concepts are realistic with commercial entities like Homedepot and Costco occupying the space?? Totally irresponsible to even suggest the possibilities! Newer, better use of space! Is there any way we could get the 300 West bike path to continue south past home depot and then east along the north side of 2100 South to the rail crossing and then call for a pedestrian crossing right there to get to the station? It seems like that's probably the most obvious way to connect to the station without relying on SSL to figure anything out. Same goes for 1700 South - I don't see any protected bike path to the proposed future TRAX station on either this plan or the Ballpark plan. It would be good to get that idea added here. The most appealing aspect in the concepts is creating an area where it is everything, all together - living, shopping, working, entertainment, etc. With this aspect in mind, the need for personal transportation should be greatly diminished and public transportation increased which would lower the need for automobile space. Scenario 2 in the Streetscape with high density is more ideal for this planning because it limits automobile use and would force other people that don't live in the area to find another thoroughfare route. Also, I am for reducing or limiting the green space in this area. The idea is a good one for those that live in the area; however, due to the amount of unhoused that congregate there, the green space would become their hovel living area and make it unsafe to those who live and work in the area...i.e. it won't be used for the positive purpose you intended it to be. Help to slow traffic and supports a safe environment for pedestrians and cyclists. Any scenario that entails getting rid of Costco seems like a waste of time to even consider. Are they contemplating closing one of the most successful stores in the country? I love the idea of creating more connection opportunities for pedestrians and cyclists. More parks/shared greenspace would be a nice addition. I also think retaining existing housing is important to protect from displacement. Push for more density The biggest issue for this area is the lack of east-west transportation to the Westside; this plan needs to address the major barriers created by Interstate 15 and the railroad tracks. Having nothing in the plan to address the biggest issue is a missed opportunity. Concept 2 feels like more of a transformation, and this area needs it. There's much better walkability and bikeability, more connectedness. Better use of the land that's there which would create a better neighborhood feel. However, I don't think multi-use paths will provide enough space for people walking and biking and the bike lane should remain separated and off street. Also sad to see the dozens of comments on completing the bike lane on 300 W to 2100 S ignored. I do like the Trax pedestrian connection across 2100 S and path alongside Trax. Things I liked most: 1. A mix of retaining existing housing and townhomes/duplexes. I'd also love to see tiny home neighborhoods. I like the streets with smaller lots like Harvard and Yale by SLCC. They have so much character compared to the condos/apartments being built. 2. Multi-use path adjacent to TRAX line on 200 West. I ride my bike a lot and love Sugarhouse Parley's Trail. 3. Linear park spaces / "green spaces" - think Parley's Trail but with restaurants, bars, and shopping along the green street corridors. 4. Pedestrian crossing structures and east-west and north-south street connectivity. Because this is important for a connected downtown. Also keeping it safe for walkers and bikers. 5. Any redevelopment or repurposing of existing buildings as well as infill of existing spaces. Walkable district with shopping and dining options is the most appealing component. I'm not sure how exactly the big box stores will be removed in Scenario 2. Seems like it would involve a lot of waiting around or cumbersome partnerships with several businesses that would only delay any meaningful development in the area. I like the photo of the mixed use attached to Costco. Let's not wait around for these businesses to leave. Let's build up next to them and integrate them into a walkable urban community. The most appealing part to me is the focus on safety of people other than just drivers. After that, I appreciate the commitment to mixed use development. I am opposed to removing Costco or Home Depot, or reducing their parking lot sizes. Not having access (including parking) to these stores will reduce the livability of the city for me and my family. We will have to drive farther from the Avenues to get to these stores (already a 20 minute drive). I do not like either scenario, but I prefer the one where Costco remains. I don't know how I'll park there if parking is reduced. I can't bike my groceries home from Costco. Please prioritize the livability and functionality of the city for current residents over accommodating new residents. All I saw in both scenarios is the city getting more money from taxes. AND STILL NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. Instead of a 1 to 10 or 2 to 10 ratio, it should be 80% to 90% affordable housing. Small local streets, but those are needed north of1700 South too. Enhancing density and walkability are the most important considerations in redesigning this area, and they are best served by option 2. There needs to be another grocery store option. I live in the other side of West Temple of Main Street. So not in the immediate area but it impacts my family and I. I would also like to see some options for some smaller lot single family homes. I realize this is not always attainable. But the city is losing families. You need them. Just having apartments or condos that cater to single folks and roommates is not sustainable. They will just move away once they do start a family. Amenities in buildings are nice but a city rec center and Libby along with parks could become a central gathering space. The lack of easy access to get from the Central Pointe Station to really anywhere is else needs to be considered more. Greening of the area is the most appealing. Tree equity is fantastic. You have completely forgotten existing smaller, independent businesses. Is the goal for all small business to move out of Salt Lake proper? There seems to be little concern about adding dense human populations to areas where businesses are needed. Is there additional planning to offset the west side food deserts? Stop approving ugly, characterless buildings right on the street, especially massive apartment buildings that take up the whole block and have zero green space. STOP allowing developers to bypass city ordinances!!! STOP allowing taller buildings and taller fences and less grass and more apartments. And START ENFORCING YOUR OWN RULES AND ORDINANCES! Scenario 1 Repurpose is much better because it retains the big box stores which generates sales tax revenue for the city and brings traffic to the area for smaller businesses. It appears the intent of scenario 2 reconnect is to push out the big box stores like Costco, Home Depot, and Sam's Club? I can't image that Salt Lake City will want to give up all that sales tax revenue? The big box stores bring the traffic to 300 west. without them, will commercial or retail be viable along 300 west or will it all transform into multi family housing? Where are people going to park in scenario 2? I think there should be a dedicated bike lane instead of a multiuse path - it would be a safer option. Comfortlll Trax stop at 1700 S is critical. The area has good density and it is a long way to walk to existing stations. Also no connection to the streetcar as part of this seems like a major missed opportunity. Consider redirecting big box traffic to a new frontage road to take cars away from corridors like 300 W where you want to see more people. Redesign 2100 S to be safer for people- pedestrian bridges are a huge indicator that your street network is only for cars, not people. While pocket parks are nice, if you want this to be a real neighborhood, build a real park. There is not enough green space in the area already. Pocket parks won't satisfy the need for proper greenspace. I want to see more housing in this area. there is such an absurd amount of commercial space surrounded by parking lots. bringing in some housing allows the same people who would be coming here anyways to walk, bike, or take public transit instead of drive because they can live closer. The 300 W corridor is a hellscape of cars and parking lots, but despite that, there is still a large amount of pedestrians that TRY to use the space without getting vehicular manslaughtered. Breaking up the large blocks, bringing in mixed use development with walking shopping and dining area. Adding infill housing of various sizes (apartments, townhouses, multifamily, etc). Enclosed streets with wide side walks and narrowed street and lanes making it safer for pedestrians and bike riders. In any considerations for redevelopment of areas adjacent to existing or planned public transit, it's critical to prioritize walkability and safe bicycle routes. The new bike lane on 300 W is a disaster. As a vehicle driver, when turning left or right to cross the path at a driveway or intersection, I have to watch for relatively fast moving bicycles that are effectively riding on the sidewalk in both directions; this is in addition to timing interactions with other vehicles on the streets. Whether turning left or right to cross the path in a vehicle, a driver has to look behind them to see if a fast moving bicycle is coming and time that interaction with other vehicle and pedestrian traffic. As a cyclist, the problem is far worse. Cyclists are already very vulnerable, so creating a dedicated path that gives a false sense of security where we are intentionally positioned in the blind spots of generally inattentive/distracted drivers is an unreasonable safety risk. There are far too many driveways and street crossings, and having cyclists, effectively on the sidewalk, travelling in a direction that is against vehicular traffic is well-documented as one of the most common causes of bicycle/vehicle collisions. Anywhere that bike and pedestrian routes are planned must be configured to keep these users as far away as possible from vehicle traffic/driveways/parking areas and with preferred access for these users to shops, restaurants, and residences. As a cyclist, I feel very strongly that it is better to have no bicycle-specific accommodations than to have poorly implemented ones that make the situation far worse than just riding in the street with vehicle traffic. Anywhere that bicycle infrastructure is planned must be configured to prioritize access for pedestrian/cycle use over vehicle use, minimize any vehicle crossings. With all that said, any new construction should be planned for vehicle access via side streets only, no direct driveway access from 300 W or 2100 S. And new/reconfigured businesses/multifamily residences should be required to provide preferred access from 300 W for peds/cycles. The higher density housing and business variety just makes sense anywhere near rail stations. I love the idea of repurposing big box stores into useable land. It's not that I don't like the stores themselves, but I despise the parking minimums that created parking lots twice the size of the stores wasting land. Seeing SLC repurpose parking lots gives me hope for this city. I like the addition of pedestrian and bike access as well! I've been loving the new 300W bike lane, but fine it surprising unsafe because cars are frequently parked in it waiting to turn. Sometimes I've had to slam on my breaks because cars drive into the bike lane. Adding more signage or slowing to prevent cars from parking in the 300w bike lane would be great! An additional bike addition is to connect the parleys trail to 300w. Navigating from West Haven Ave to the 300w bike trail is frightening. There is only a thin bicycle gutter with cars zipping by at 40mph. This single small stretch nearly ruins the two beautiful bike paths. Please extend the zone of this project by half a block and fix the connection of these two trails. Love the plans! Both are great, but two is better. Keep creating good designs SLC! I'm a little surprised to see that neither streetscape concept would retain the recently completed cycle track. My preference is for scenario 2 and it would be a shame to see dedicated space for bikes go away while also moving toward a more urban landscape. Also... 1700 South is probably very close to being ready for a TRAX station. I'd love to see that included in the long term plan for the area. Were the active sidewalk of scenario 2 included in scenario 1, I would have preferred Scenario 1. I think all of the plants along the buildings are problematic. I don't think they are well managed in the Gateway area. Offering more opportunity for patio-type commerce might reduce the pressure to maintain the plants and trees during changing weather cycles. As a life long salt lake city native, having our city become the model for pedestrian/bike/greenspace areas, would be a God-SEND. Please and thank you. Our city is a one of a kind globally. I hope my taxdollars go towards the correct future in terms of effeciency, ie, less cars, more people infrastructure. :) Added streets and trails to break up the area and encourage walking and biking instead of just driving to big box stores. A safe crossing over 21st would be much better than a Hawk. Revitalizing the area with mixed use and residential would be great. Prioritize long-term livability over short-term profit. Space-efficient townhomes and mixed-use buildings. Less yards and parking lots, more parks and walkability. More housing is more appealing Traffic calming and safer pedestrian crossings are most important. Without this the project is essentially pointless Active sidewalk In general, I am supportive of both scenarios as they are major improvements to the area. I love the idea of keeping some of the big box stores but building on top of (like the Costco rendering you all did). But I could also be in support of moving them out of the area entirely if that became the choice. I do think that connecting Central Point to the northern end of 21st South (and therefore 300 W north of 21st) is REALLY important. The over street pedestrian (and bike?) bridge as part of Scenario 2 seems massively needed. And in general, the more "aggressive" take on scenario 2 when it comes to walkability/bikeability/traffic easing seems majorly needed. I regularly bike and drive this area and see so many issues with the wonderful 300 W bike lane and how it connects to Central Point station. Some of this is on South Salt Lake to solve, but I greatly hope the city can work with Natalie Pinkney (if still in office post- election) and other actual SSL advocates for a more livable community. In general, I am excited the city has recognized as this as a bit of a weak spot in the current plans for 21st south and 300W and I look forward to seeing what we can do. Not just housing but make it deeply affordable housing. Add to and support current businesses not putting them out.Take out big, mostly unused parking lots. Driving/turn lanes and are excessively wide and could be reduced to 10’ and 8’ respectively to support reduced speeds and enable construction of dedicated on-street bike infrastructure I LOVE the emphasis on green space and connection to Trax stations. Public amenities like that are only useful if they are clean and people feel safe using them, though. Consideration must be made of how to keep crime and homeless camps out of this area, otherwise this is all a waste of time. Can we have a plan that retains housing and promotes green space and multi use pathways? More greenspace is incredible; however best we can encourage walkable + bikable cities I really like the idea of in-filling with mixed types of residential in the existing neighborhoods. Although I like the concept of being able to completely change the layout of the project area to create a new purpose, I think reimaginging existing structures and in-filling where possible is more eco friendly. I wish there were a way to make the bike lane protected. I do not want to bike around pedestrians and I want a solid barrier or curb between me and cars. Currently the new bike lanes on 300 W are fine, but the sidewalk is so narrow people walk in it all the time. It's not safe for anyone. Pedestrian infrastructure is the most important and appealing part of any redesign that goes forward. 300W has the opportunity to serve many nearby homes that can access the amenities by foot or bike, but only if it's safe from cars to do so. The raised bridge across 21st would meet this goal, as would the traffic calming techniques, described in the second street design proposal. I don't think we should encourage more car traffic in existing neighborhoods by adding any east/west connections. We do enough for cars, as is. More reusable energy and greenery! I think the most important thing is making the area people first and easy to connect on foot or by bike. I recently visited the corner of 1300 E and 3300 S and had to drive from the other side thrift store to home depot and then to harmons where I nearly died trying to walk to millcreek commons from the harmons parking lot. I felt insane driving those short distances but it was the safest route! In the redevelopment of this part of salt lake I would really love to see people first designs that make sense for pedestrians. The spaces need to be designed for people to walk or bike between the new developments, not pretty side walks in some sections. Large multi use path but protected and seperated from pedestrian buke lanes are also a must. We want to commute quickly in okaces like this The biggest appeal is walkability and green spaces. I like the incorporation of more green spaces. As a resident who lives on MacArthur Ave I think this area is lacking green spaces. It's a pretty industrial area. I'm all for getting rid of some of the industrial space that isn't really used by regular people, especially on 300 W, but think it's important to keep the big box stores. I think the traffic that the big box stores bring in supports a lot of the surrounding businesses in the area. I also don't see removing the big box stores as a realistic option. Traversing 2100S to the central point station can be a J walking adventure. It's possible now but will probably be more hectic as more people move into the area. I'm also all for building townhomes and housing next to adjacent single family homes but don't think anyone should be relocated. I'm also curious what will happen to the wood company behind our house if the bike lane goes in. It would significantly change the dynamic of our currently quiet backyard. Overall I think it's a great proposal but I think scenario 2 seems a little unrealistic. I don't want to see the currently successful businesses forced out to be replaced by empty businesses with high rent. Green space as much as possible. Ensure S line connects smoothly to get to airport More restaurants, library branch, doctor offices Protected bike infrastructure and trees As a resident in the current single family home area in these plans—I don’t find it necessary to create so many through streets to 300 W, I don’t see a need and I travel from west temple to 300 W multiple times a day. I like the idea of making the area more walking friendly with more shops/restaurants/breweries etc. in addition to improving the ability to move NS/EW and increasing density by adding in eclectic use/more affordable housing. My top preference was the easily accessible district with various dining and shopping choices. As a resident of this neighborhood, I believe that the primary concern is ensuring our safety. Presently, the homelessness issue in the area has escalated, and a significant portion of the homeless population here struggles with mental health issues or addiction, which can make their behavior unpredictable and unsettling for us. Our building has experienced multiple break-ins by homeless individuals seeking shelter from the cold. Don't get me wrong, I empathize with their struggles, but when it comes to our property, I want to have the assurance that my family, including my kids and wife, will be secure. Additionally, it's disheartening to note that my wife has encountered harassment on several occasions at Central Pointe Station, further highlighting the importance of addressing these safety concerns. The good news is that addressing these issues does not require a significant financial investment and could be implemented right away, providing relief and security to the residents of this neighborhood. I like the active sidewalk but i would also like to see some green space intermittently in there, that might already be the plan idk. I also really like the idea of giving a feeling of a narrow road for vehicle users. If there are any other design measures that are proven to work in other places even outside the USA, please also do that. I would rather see safe design fostering safer environments rather than a (losing) game of enforcement. added green spaces to make sidewalks and pedestrian paths / home areas more appealing and feel less urban. added dining / shopping. WALKABILITY, RESTAURANTS, AND LESS CARS Green spaces and pedalist/pedestrian friendly. Preserve the single family home areas that are thriving. No new single houses, townhomes/apts and walkability to restaurants/businesses. Minimize big box/parking lot sprawl and minimize standalone things with parking lots like fast food buildings. Green space, green streets, and ample setbacks from buildings. For sale housing rather than stacked rentals. I love the idea of additional east west connections as well as the green spaces and added walkable dining and other amenities. It would be nice to feel like this area has more of a central hub and that it is more of a community space. Activation at street level The pedestrian bridge over 2100 S is most appealing to me (I would prefer to never be on the same plane as cars, but I'll take what I can get), followed by anything that slows down cars. The more inconvenient it is to drive, the better our city becomes. Thank you for working on this. I like the walkable shopping and eating and mixed use spaces. I live nearby and enjoy the current stores so close. I don't feel excited about high density housing in that area, but it would be better with some more shopping and dining. The green space is kind of an after thought because right now it's just big huge stores, but green spaces always add to the ambience of the neighborhood. Just hope they don't make them ugly lawn everywhere that will waste water. Reluctant on green spaces if they mean just some lawn and a few trees. There needs to be a way to move people. 300 West is a major road that gets a lot of use so keeping traffic moving is a must. Please leave the area ALONE & focus on more important things that need funding!! STOP GENTRIFYING THE AREA! more multifamily affordable options. The bikepath extension from the end of the 300 W trail is sorely needed. It is almost impossible to go from Parleys trail to the 300 W and it is a crying shame. More density, less cars, less parking lots. Let's build a city where bikes, pedestrians, and transit users are prioritized. Cars should take a backseat for once. Reduce speed limits, make the space accessible for all road users. Create a place where people want to go, versus just pass by. I appreciate the greater ambition in Scenario 2 for creating a safe environment for walking and cycling, as well as the larger share of affordable housing units. A multi-use path along TRAX would make a huge difference for intermodal connectivity, as is already evident when one looks at the Porter-Rockwell trail that runs along the Blue Line between Sandy and Draper, or the Parleys Trail greenway along the S Line. Mixed-use development is one of the most effective strategies for creating walkable neighborhoods, and it is something I would like to see on a citywide level. R-1 zoning is an antiquated, midcentury idea and frankly should not exist in Utah's largest city. If we are going to meet the ever- growing demand for housing, we need to turn toward more space-efficient (and thus more eco-friendly) solutions. Overall, Scenario 2 does a better job at addressing this need. That said, there are some elements from Scenario 1 which I prefer. A HAWK signal, itself not a perfect solution, is still preferable to a bridge that requires pedestrians to go up a level and back down again. Pedestrian bridges make more sense when they cross over something at a lower level, such as a river or below-grade freeway, or when crossing over train tracks. In this case, the only benefit of a pedestrian bridge is that it is more convenient for drivers, while creating a more hostile experience for pedestrians. Thus, I would pick the HAWK signal and add traffic-calming measures for a safe, easy crossing experience. Furthermore, I like Scenario 1's emphasis on creative repurposing of historically industrial buildings. A neighborhood replete with eclectic local businesses is a far more desirable destination than a district of office buildings. Given the abundance of empty office space downtown, it makes little sense to dedicate more of our city to that purpose. I think the multiuse path along 200 West is a great idea, it could connect with the S-Line trail and perhaps extend north until it reaches downtown, integrating with the proposed Green Loop. Another multiuse trail perhaps on 1500 East, which could go to Sunnyside Avenue and then run back west towards Downtown. Would help make the 15th & 15th neighborhood a more walkable destination, the trail would also go within 1/8 mile of 9th & 9th (if it followed Sunnyside onto 800 South as it continued west), and would connect a total SLC loop that serves more residents. Future west side trails could connect easily, for instance Indiana Avenue could become an extension of the 800S/Sunnyside Avenue trail, and then could even connect with the Jordan River trail and other important west side connections. More car traffic lanes and less bike lanes There needs to be space between the streets and living quarters. Many new projects are built so close to the street that there are accidents just waiting to happen. You cannot force existing commercial buildings to repurpose or sell. Many are owned by small owners that are the heartbeat of the local economy. If not respected, you will begin a lost battle and waste millions of tax payer dollars. Politically you will lose faith to your indiscriminate agenda. A higher focus on small businesses utilizing existing structures is ideal. Especially the brick buildings already in tact. I feel it’s important to differentiate from Sugarhouse, which has demolished most of its previous character and nearly all of its history in favor of chains and apartments The less apartment complexes the better. Especially behind existing homes on those dead end streets. They create noise and reduce privacy and most the city is already overrun with apartments. They are ugly and typically are placed where buildings are that could have been repurposed for small businesses I liked seeing more atmosphere abs energy being brought to the area, with a safer ability to access 300W from West Temple. The narrow roadway would reduce the amount of accidents that happen on 2100 S. I chose reconnect to ensure that townhouses ARE NOT being built behind the existing homes on West Westwood, that would significantly reduce privacy for those homeowners and increase noise pollution. Increased green spaces and availability for small business. No to more apartments. Make this portion of the city different than the same ol same ol that is going on all over Salt Lake of tear down historic buildings, build bland apartments and low income housing. Rinse and repeat It looks like Costco and Home Depot are not present in Scenario 2--baffling since they're high revenue-generating and convenient since there is only one grocery store currently in the neighborhood (Winco). Scenario 2 seems dizzying, closed in, and chaotic that does little to add to the existing neighborhood. Scenario 1 gives me a "less is more" impression, providing more green space. Certainly not opposed to adding townhomes and duplexes to existing housing, if their size doesn't eclipse those existing homes. Hopefully changes could help slow and reduce traffic on West Temple, an oasis of trees and homes to be treasured and protected. The pedestrian bridge is the most appealing. Ease of access to trax is a must. Multiuse path along the trac line! East-west bike lanes! More trees and green space along roads. Retain existing housing and repurpose old buildings Love the ideas of retaining tree-lined areas and adding more connected green-spaces, paths, mini-parks. Absolutely pro bicycles and public transit, plus increased housing density while maintaining the existing single family housing. Would love for Costco to stay in the area, but ultimately would prefer Scenario 2 over 1 if it came down to an all-or-nothing type decision. the scenerios are crowding the area I really like the idea of more walkability between w temple and 300. Right now, with the trax there is a large barrier to get over there. I would also love to see more green spaces, restaurants/3rd spaces and shops in the area. I like the idea of repurposing the structures that are already there. This saves money and overall impacts the environment less. It will also impact the existing businesses and homes in the area less as well, as it probably requires less construction, overall. We already have a lot of walking outdoor malls as well as parks and green spaces in Salt Lake, so I don't think we need more of those. I would also strongly vote for the less expensive scenario. Adding green space and low income housing needs to be a priority as SLC faces climate change, increased pollution from cars and geographic conditions, and the increasing costs of living in our city. The existing buildings are old, unsightly, of no historical or architectural significance, and likely not worth rehabilitating. We just need all the greenspace we can possibly get Green spaces should include areas for pets and community gardens. Pedestrian traffic needs to remain safe from car traffic. Landlords cannot not raise rent with this new development (we are already paying high prices for apartments that are surrounded by air pollution, light pollution, noise pollution, and litter). I like the green space because it makes our city look a lot nicer but I also understand the need for bike lanes and wider lanes for traffic. One concern I have is the lack of street parking. I live on jefferson street and ever since the affordable housing complex popped up, our street parking in front of my house significantly decreased. The apartment complex visitors are now constantly parked right in front of my own house where I used to normally park. Make sure there is sufficient street parking Force the high density along 17th South, keep the other areas as commercial and single family. Stop letting multifamily/high density everywhere. 17th South is perfect place for it, as its already has a bunch! Still shows cars as the majority users of the Public ROW. More space for people not cars is most important in our shared public spaces. Path along Trax line. High density, walkability (connected paths), multi-use areas, trees for pedestrian shade Leaving it pretty much the way it is!! I like both concepts. The 300 W corridor between 1300S and 2100S need to be repurposed and reconnected. This part of Salt Lake City is "city" and cities are meant for people, not pollution and noise belching personal use vehicles. Our city would be a lot more livable with less cars on the streets and more people walking and biking through our beautiful city. Keep Costco! Create sustainable green spaces and reconsider large parking lots and rock park strips that contribute to higher heat. More trees with irrigation for sustainability. Thank you. I am both a business and property owner, several times over. I have always felt that the area had/has a very significant potential to redevelop and help the City meet many of its overall goals Scenario 2 allows for patios with the active sidewalk. I do still like scenario 1 to have more green space but scenario 2 is my favorite. Affordability requirements kill development potential unless the city is planning massive subsidies. I like any improvements that reduce the amount of space devoted to parking lots, reduce driving speeds and increase the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians if the residential uses are to be successful. I like the idea of mixed use with active ground floor, but don't see that being very successful elsewhere in the city. The area needs some kind of community space that is not private property, like a library or community recreation center. This could be adjacent to one of the pocket parks. Be bold in the intensity of development that is allowed. How are we going to fix the homeless problem in this area? There is a lot of theft, open drug use, drug transactions, human trafficking, deification, etc that happens right here in this neighborhood. If you build all these nice amenities like parks, benches / seating, etc. it will just attract more homeless people to hang out in the area. What is being done to prevent that? That is the MOST important issue in this area and it's what keeps this area from being a "nice" area. You will have to have a permanent and comprehensive solution to the homeless situation before building any new public space. Otherwise, you’re not going to get the usage and impact you want. No one will move in and walk around small parks and wider streets if there are homeless camps and vagabonds tucked in everywhere. Look at 200-300 East/South Temple -400 South and State St/600 South to 2100 South. No one will walk there because it is dangerous and gross. Fix those areas first before building new stuff. Trees What does this mean for existing businesses Appealing: - Light industrial. It's a use that is being demolished to make way for housing and is greatly needed. - Breaking up large blocks for street connectivity - Keeping big box stores and adding parking lot infill. The stores provide important goods and services for residents in SLC and the surrounding area. Missed Opportunity: - More creative and light industrial! There is huge demand and increasingly less supply in SLC! There are too many options and too much nuance. If the big box stores stay, green space, linear parks, and bike/ped access are important. If big box stay and have housing on or close to them, it starts to build a city-effect and setbacks should be reduced and bike/ped should have well defined and safe paths, not just access. High density development along TRAX line. Pedestrian crossing over 2100 South. As long as there are 4 lanes of fast traffic with a center turn lane, I can't imagine wanting to spend time near it. I love the idea of retaining the existing big box commercial buildings alongside new housing and mixed-use buildings. This reminds me of what is successful about the recent redevelopment in Sugar House. I'm less convinced that residential on top of existing big boxes would be very appealing, as is shown on top of the current Home Depot in Scenario 2. Continuing the new protected bike lanes along 300W should be a priority, which seems to be here. I'm not sure if a green corridor on 200 W would dilute traffic on these bike lanes or if it would supplement them. I would appreciate more detail on that, as visibly underutilized bike lanes could sap public support for infrastructure improvements. Demand for office space in this part of the city (as suggested by Scenario 2) currently seems quite low, but perhaps with additional street life and amenities that would change. Very important to have the street trees and pedestrial separation from vehicle traffic, but the high density will also help since demand for housing is still high. There are far greater needs in the city. This is just a solution looking for a problem. Don't waste the money. I like the more urban feel of 2 I like both street designs, although I would prefer to see both implemented depending on the adjacent structure/uses. I doesn't necessarily have to be a one size fits all. This area in particular is short on greenspace and tree inventory (being a former commercial/industri There is no need for 15 feet for an amenity zone. (Scenario 1) I do love the Multi Use Path. One thing I did notice that exists is the island next to Home Depot. That needs to go because we have people that are wanting to go North and they pull into the left turn lane to go INTO Home Depot in an attempt to turn LEFT to go North on 300 W. This prevents Northbound drivers from actually being able to turn into Home Depot as well as it blocks traffic in the Northbound direction AND Southbound until the car trying to turn North actually jams their ass into the Northbound lane. Also, we should not be using the Home Depot parking lot for other businesses. It is hard as hell to find a parking space at Home Depot as it is. Especially on weekends. No need to stick more businesses in there and making a bad parking situation worse. Please carefully consider driveways and car crossings at multi use paths. They create a situation where the cars have to pull into the ped path to get visibility for a safe turn. A squiggle in the path that leaves room for cars to pull ahead and ppl to cross behind might work? I live on MacArthur, which is one of the cul de sac streets along west temple. While I like the idea of connecting more east-west access, I worry about people wandering around more at night and the increase in theft/crimes in the area. One of the reasons I like the cul de sac is that people who don’t belong on the street generally don’t wander down it because there is no thru access. As for pedestrian crossing bridge on 2100 S, I’m not sure it would benefit much. I took the trax to school for the past 2 years and I found it was easy to cross 2100 S because the crossing guard comes down around every 4 minutes, which stops traffic and provides an opportunity to cross the street. I would rather see an over or underpass for the trax as this would alleviate much of the traffic congestion on 2100 s Mixed use infill around TRAX stations are essential for future growth. Focus on walkability and bikeablity. 300 W bike lane needs to be extended all the way through the project site I love the idea of pocket parks and a linear park Skeptical of park spaces if city is unwilling to address the homeless and drug addicted people. I like the idea of repurposing the older buildings and would prefer some increase in condo and townhomes but not too much apartment This area of the city is a good desert we need a grocery store! More green space NEEDED THAT WONT BE AN OBVIOUS ATTRACTION TO THE HOMELESS CAMPS! DO NOT WANT BUS STOPS ON 300 W!!!! NO MORE HIGH RISE HOUSING AND ADDED TRAFFIC IN AREA ! MORE POLICE PRESENCE IS NEEDED,HOMELESS PEOPLE IN AREA IS A HUGE PROBLEM, NEED MORE RETAIL,SHOPS, MOM AND POP NOT BIG BOX. MORE MIXED USE IS NEEDED. MORE ATTENTION TO DERELICT BUILDINGS For this district to flourish, there needs to be a focus on jobs/employment with higher paying jobs the AMI. For jobs close to where people live, economic clusters like Life Science, tech start-up culture and advanced light manufacturing need to be targeted and included in either scenario. A thriving area needs three essential legs on the community stool: work (jobs), live and play. Otherwise, this area becomes an urban suburb. More walkable cities, make UTA free, more affordable housing, more locally owned restaurants, safer walking neighborhoods You stupid fucks need to stop killing small businesses with construction. Fuck off I believe #2 in both cases is more realistic to the needs of growth. Sugarhouse and Downtown have taken the brunt of growth. Spread it out more. Most important is affordable housing so I support that aspect of Scenario 2 but, overall, feel better about Scenario 1 Leave the big-box corridor on 300 West but create connectivity for bikes and pedestrians. Allow high-density housing around TRAX station. As much green space as possible. Moving the area from car dominated big box shopping to bike and ped friendly fully activated neighborhood with housing and restaurants etc. This is a commercial and industrial area, not a place for walking the "neighborhood," going out to eat, or taking kids to a park. No one rides their bike or walks to Costco and Home Depot. Our access to these retailers has already been reduced by unnecessary bike lanes. The traffic on 2100 South from the freeway to Main Street is already super heavy. This area is BUSY!!! Let's be practical and not create a fantasy land with bike paths, sidewalks, and parks in an area ill- suited for this type of stuff. The only thing I like about this plan is the sky bridge over 2100 South to help keep pedestrians safe from the traffic. Building condos/apartments that do not have room for a business underneath is going to have negative consequences over time. We should only allow new multi-family housing structures to be made with room for stores/restaurants/etc underneath them, as that feeds into walkability being a useful or desirable thing for residents vs walking past many blocks of nothing but housing. make it easier to get from trax station to bike lanes The more green plants that can be included in the landscape, the better for all scenarios. Our air quality in the Salt Lake Valley is questionable, at best. Plants will help clear the air and keep summer temperatures a tad cooler. Higher percentage of affordable housing, more density and mixed use to accommodate our predictable birth rate and population growth Trees, pocket parks and setbacks. The item that wasn't discussed is pedestrian level lighting which I believe is extremely important for the entire area and City Wider sidewalks We need housing for the shelterless. Not more development to keep the pockets fat of the wealthy. This city sucks at being community driven. IKt would be nice to see you reuse the existing, Building new, taller, more dense apartments is already the norm. Take a break from more bigger, denser, buildings. We favor the most density possible I prefer a walkable eclectic mix of uses with green streets. The retention of the big box stores provides multiple benefits to the neighborhood including retaining sales taxes, employment opportunities, an access to fresh and healthy food. They attract other SLC residents to the area for shopping, dining, and entertainment as well. You can not get rid of Costco. It is the closest and best grocery store for many of us in 84104 other than the worlds worst smiths store (at 800 s 900 w) otherwise we have to go to downtown slc to shop. This is the main area people living downtown and in the avenues go for their big box store needs. Yes, housing is needed in the city but if you remove those big stores entirely, you'll force buying dollars online or out of the city. Create a large indoor Trax train station as a hub, especially in the winter months. Go big or go home! There is no reason to be "gentle" with density at UTA's highest-ridership station. This is the most connected location for public transit and land use should be maximized. We need to protect existing residents and businesses without sacrificing our neighborhood to giant scale development We need MUCH more affordable housing with home ownership (or townhouse, condo, etc) as an ultimate goal Owner occupied housing should be a priority. Are we no longer welcoming families with children? What is being done for those with limited mobility? The elderly? Not all SLC residents are able to rely on bikes, particularly in this area with our asthma rates 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: 3/21/24 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan – Third Process Update STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Echeverria, Senior Planner, daniel.echeverria@slcgov.com, 801-535- 7165 DOCUMENT TYPE: Information Only RECOMMENDATION: Review information regarding the planning process. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Planning Division last sent an update on the 300 West Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Plan efforts to the City Council in February 2024, providing a process update on the public engagement and plan materials developed up to that point. The materials included summaries of public input received from two rounds of public engagement, including a general outreach engagement activity focused on general ideas from the community, and a later, more directed outreach on two conceptual development scenarios for the plan area. Based on public input received as part of that prior public engagement, the project consultant has now developed detailed concepts for the area and a draft plan framework and has started public engagement for those materials. This transmittal is intended to provide an opportunity for the City Council to provide early input on the draft plan materials before a complete draft plan document is finalized, and the project team begins the formal plan adoption public process. J9;@ DGLLGҗ9JсфѶспсурхѷтп"2Ҙ птҝсфҝспсу птҝсфҝспсу The draft materials can be viewed on the public project webpage located here: https://arcg.is/1XbHLu A static copy of the webpage is attached for reference. This webpage functions as a “virtual” draft plan. The draft materials cover the plan vision and guiding principles, proposed “character areas” that provide general future land use guidance, and public realm improvement guidance. The guidance includes recommendations on land uses, massing, density, heights, open spaces, and circulation in the area. A full draft plan document has not yet been developed. Following a public engagement period, the consultant will complete a full, public draft plan document that includes detailed policies that help accomplish the concepts shown in the draft plan materials. The project team will then provide those materials for public review and input and start the formal adoption process. The project team outreach schedule for the draft plan materials includes the following: •Ballpark Community Council Presentation – March 7th •Online survey and draft plan webpage – March 7th and ongoing •Business Advisory Board Presentation– March 13th •City Council Briefing – March 26th •In-person Open House at Ballpark Playground – March 26th (evening) •City Department and Outside Agencies Stakeholder Briefing – March 27th •Planning Commission Briefing – March 27th EXHIBITS: 1)300 W Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Draft Plan Webpage Exhibit 1: 300 W Corridor and Central Pointe Station Area Draft Plan Webpage 300 West Corridor & Central Pointe Station AreaPlan A plan of action that envisions a walkable, mixed-use district with new public spaces, a variety of housing types and important services. Salt Lake City March 7, 2024 300 West Corridor & Central Pointe Station Area Plan Project Vision This project establishes a plan of action for Salt Lake City and its partners, private developers, and other stakeholders. The plan envisions a walkable and mixed-use district with new public spaces and a variety of housing types, including moderate- and affordable-income housing options. It also ensures that future developments and public improvements complement and support the use of the 300 West bikeway and Central Pointe TRAX Station. The plan promotes additional housing in the area to respond to housing needs, while also supporting new and existing businesses that provide important services to the neighborhood and wider area. The plan also helps the City meet citywide goals, including those established in Plan Salt Lake and the Housing SLC plan, as well as State-adopted goals for transit station areas. Project Principles Promote a walkable district that supports various types of mobility. Creating a pedestrian friendly corridor that supports all types of mobility and offers alternatives to the current auto-centric development will promote future redevelopment. Encourage mixed-use redevelopment along 300 West and close to the station area. A mix of commercial, office, creative industrial, and residential uses will create a vibrant and attractive place along 300 West. Create a system of public and private green spaces. The need for more green areas and public spaces was indicated by the community as one of the key aspirations for this area. Incorporate density near the station area through a variety of housing options. The plan proposes taller building heights and more density in key areas of the 300 West corridor and close to the Central Pointe Station to incentivize residential development and attract a variety of housing types. Public Engagement What we heard from the community... Character Create a mixed-use, walkable neighborhood with more green areas and trees. Housing Increase housing options and density, while preserving existing single-family neighborhoods and incorporating affordable housing options. Economic Development Support mixed-use development while providing affordable commercial and warehouse space. Transportation Improve pedestrian safety and multimodal connections, as well as access to the TRAX station. Engagement Schedule Engagement Summary Existing Conditions Geographic Area of Focus The project area for the 300 West and Central Pointe Station area extends from 1700 S, I-15, 2100 S, and West Temple Street. The corridor is primarily auto dominant with exclusively general commercial businesses, including big box stores such as Home Depot, Sam’s Club, and Costco. There are seven multifamily developments in the study area, including an affordable housing development managed by the Housing Authority of Salt Lake City (HASLC). The eastern edge of the study area along West Temple is a mix of single-family, multi- family uses, and commercial uses. The Central Pointe TRAX station anchors the area on the south. Existing Land Use and Zoning The area between 1700 South and 2100 South and 200 West to I- 15 is within the General Commercial (CG) zoning district. The area is predominantly used for commercial businesses, including large commercial retailers, but several formerly commercial properties have recently been redeveloped for apartment buildings. There is a mix of zoning districts between West Temple and 200 West, including Residential Office (RO), Moderate Density Multi- Family (RMF-35 and RMF-45), Corridor Commercial (CC), General Commercial (CG), Community Business (CB), and Single Family Residential (R-1-5000). This area is predominantly used for residential uses, including both single-family and multi-family, with a small number of commercial buildings also located in the area. Demographics Population Growth: Between 2020 and 2022, the population in the study area grew from 668 to 829, a 24.10% growth rate, significantly higher than the city (2.11%) and county (3.37%). Age: The median age for the study area is 36.2 years. The proportion of people under 18 is projected to decline and the proportion of those over 70 is projected to increase between 2022 and 2027. There is also growth projected in the 20 to 29 age range, likely due to the newer construction of multi-family units in the area that may attract students and young adults. Median Income: The median income for the study area is $39,758 which is significantly lower than both the city ($70,189) and county ($85,944). The 2022-2027 projected growth rate in median incomes is 13.34%. Household Characteristics: There are a total of 465 households in the study area and the average household size is 1.75. This suggests that there is a higher percentage of single-income households. Housing Existing Unit Types: There are 137 single-family units in the study area, which are primarily located on the eastern edge of the study area, between the railroad tracks and W Temple Street. There are 559 existing multi-family units and 47 planned units slated for 2023 within the study area. Four of the multi-family buildings in the study area provide affordable housing, including one that caters to seniors and another that houses Veterans. Housing Tenure: The study area has a higher percentage of renter occupied housing than the city and county. The percentage of renter-occupied housing has steadily increased over the past 12 years. Proposed Plan Corridor and Station Area Plan Concept The proposed plan for the 300 West Corridor and the Central Pointe Station area focuses on incorporating new mixed-use development around the station and establishing connections to the north and neighborhoods to the east, including the Ballpark area. It also explores the potential of incorporating a linear park along the TRAX line on UTA right-of-way that would connect the Central Pointe Station with 1700 South. A new plaza space is proposed along 2100 South, that will be framed by high-density residential development and first-floor commercial uses. The plan establishes affordable housing targets to help achieve citywide affordable housing goals. Ensuring that at least 10% of new residential units are affordable units will help the area qualify for a Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone, that could help fund the development of new affordable housing and other public infrastructure in the plan area. Circulation and Open Space Circulation An extension of the bicycle path along 300 West will help connect the corridor to the Central Pointe TRAX station, as well as the new redevelopment areas around 2100 South and 1700 South. Connections to the east are also prioritized and a protected bike lane along 1700 South should be prioritized, following recommendations from the 2015 Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan and the Street & Intersection Typologies Design Guide. The plan also supports a pedestrian crossing at the TRAX line on 2100 South, subject to further study and coordination with UDOT and UTA. To create smaller blocks and a more walkable grid, new east-west and north-south streets are proposed. This will allow for increased pedestrian crossings and a scale that is more conducive to pedestrian activity. Open Space The plan explores opportunities for incorporating additional public and private open space into the project area to create new spaces for neighbors to gather and socialize. This is intended to address the lack of existing open space in the area, and to keep up with the additional demand for outdoor recreation opportunities that are expected to follow redevelopment and increased residential density in the coming years. The new linear park and trail will become a central element of the transition edge, while green roofs will provide amenities for new residents and more permeable areas. A linear plaza along 2100 South will offer a place that serves new development, while connecting to the station area. Density and height allowances can also help encourage redevelopment to include public spaces in their plans and so achieve the goal of making this a greener neighborhood. Street trees will also play an important role in this goal, and it is proposed that all streets become tree-lined in the near future. This was one of the most supported ideas throughout the engagement process and will help to provide more shaded areas, increase permeable surfaces, and mitigate heat island effect. Character Areas Each character area includes different uses and dimensional goals to implement the overall project area vision. Specific standards related to the built form for each area, as well as how these relate back to the project principles, are identified in the following section. Character Areas Central Pointe TOD The Central Pointe TOD area creates a high-density development node along the intersection of 300 West and 2100 South. The proximity to the station presents an opportunity to incorporate a variety of housing options including affordable housing with easy access to transit. Commercial uses on the first floor create an active pedestrian area, and improved pedestrian crossings at 300 West and West Temple allow for better connectivity to the station area. Residential buildings are anticipated to include podium parking or parking garages, with green space and amenities on top. Surface parking lots should be located behind buildings and not face major streets or pedestrian connections. A new linear plaza is included along the north side of 2100 South between 300 West and West Temple to promote active pedestrian uses adjacent to the Central Pointe Station. The maximum building height for this area is generally 10 stories. 300 West Mixed-Use and Commercial The area along 300 West creates a new urban edge along the corridor, with medium to high-density buildings and ground floor active uses. Most buildings are intended to include a mix of residential and commercial uses, with ground floor active uses that promote an active pedestrian environment through the inclusion of uses that capture the attention of passers-by. Ground floor spaces could be activated with uses such as such as retail, restaurants, bars, or other similar uses that include visible activity from the sidewalk. Buildings will be located close to the public right of way to help define a pedestrian friendly scale with active sidewalks. The maximum building height for this area is generally 7 stories. 1700 South Mixed-Use and Residential The area around 1700 South provides an opportunity for a mix of commercial and residential uses. New fully residential buildings as well as mixed-use buildings with commercial uses on the lower levels and residential on upper levels provide an opportunity for a variety of housing styles and densities. Limited opportunities for commercial only buildings exist in this area, but the focus is on residential and mixed-uses. New street connections to create smaller blocks and an improved pedestrian experience are included. Parking is generally in parking garages with green space and amenities on top. The density proposed for this area would help support the use of a potential future 1700 South TRAX station. The maximum building height for this area is generally 10 stories. Transitional Edge with Linear Park To create a transition to the established residential neighborhoods to the east, the plan includes a medium and density edge, which includes taller 5-story buildings along 300 West and the TRAX line that help frame the mixed-use area, and lower 3 to 4-story buildings or townhomes that are compatible with the scale of adjacent single-family neighborhoods east of the TRAX line toward West Temple. This creates a transition from the higher intensity development along 300 West and major arterials, scaling down towards West Temple with increased heights moving away from West Temple. A linear green space with a trail is proposed to run along the TRAX line, creating a new green space and amenity for residents, as well as a connection to adjacent neighborhoods and future redevelopment along 1700 South. This area also includes limited low intensity commercial uses and office uses. The maximum building height for this area is generally 5 stories. Creative Industrial/ Office/ Commercial Edge A new creative district with a mix of light industrial, office, and general commercial uses will provide an opportunity for uses like creator spaces while responding to the current land uses of the area and providing a buffer between the mixed-use districts and Interstate (I-15). There are many existing commercial buildings within the project area with longtime tenants and owners. Many community members commute into the area to access these services. It is important to ensure these businesses have a place in the future of 300 West while also supporting additional infill opportunities. The plan anticipates newly constructed buildings and some larger buildings will remain well into the future, while providing opportunities to reuse other buildings for new mixed uses. Repurposing existing industrial buildings and allowing for some redevelopment will create an area that allows for new uses while maintaining the existing character and supporting job creation close the station. New parking garages could be included in this area to provide additional parking in the district. This could be an area well suited for more intensive office use or large-scale commercial given the large number of industrial lands west of the interstate. There are several existing businesses in the area, including large- scale commercial uses, that are anticipated to remain in the area well into the future. However, if those uses do relocate, the properties should be developed in a more pedestrian-oriented fashion, with ground floor engagement along 300 West and smaller, pedestrian scale, block sizes. The maximum building height for this area is generally 4 to 5 stories. Low Scale Residential A number of single-family cul-de-sacs and lower-scale apartment buildings are located between the TRAX line and West Temple. This scale should generally be preserved, and new development should focus on small scale infill projects, with heights that do not exceed 3 stories and dimensional standards similar to the existing massing of the current residential units. There is also an opportunity for homeowners to add additional units to existing homes. This area will also provide a transition between the higher-density redevelopment along 300 West and the residential neighborhoods to the east. The maximum building height for this area is generally 3 stories. Urban Design & Public Realm Guidelines New buildings are proposed to be set back from the public right of way to create an “Activity Zone” that can be used to provide pedestrian amenities and help create a more vibrant streetscape. This also includes an "Amenity Zone," creating a buffer between pedestrians and the high-capacity roadway of 2100 South. This space accommodates large street trees. Between regularly spaced trees this area can be utilized for bus stops, lighting, benches, art, bike racks, and ADA loading. A wide multi-use circulation path supports pedestrian comfort and allows for low-speed bike and scooter travel, connecting to transit stations, bike paths, and the neighborhood. A ten-foot activity zone adjacent to building facades facilitates outdoor dining, sales stands, and landscaping. Ground floor space facing the public street should have active uses with transparency from the pedestrian level. Stepbacks above the second story enhance the human-scale streetscape. Parking is located underground or within the building. Buildings adjacent to lower density residential areas should include landscape buffers and setbacks from property lines shared with low density neighborhoods. The west side of 300 West includes the recently constructed bicycle path, sidewalk, and landscape elements. East of 300 West is an opportunity for additional pedestrian comfort. Building setbacks will allow for a wider amenity space to accommodate medium to large street trees, with amenities like bus stops, lighting, benches, art installations, and bike racks. On both sides of the street, a ten-foot setback from the sidewalk is recommended to create an active streetscape. This setback creates an activity zone adjacent to building facades for outdoor dining, sales stands, and landscaping. Ground-floor spaces in these buildings should promote an active streetscape with active uses and transparency, while parking is placed underground or within the building. Stepbacks above the second story contribute to a human-scale streetscape. Residential developments are encouraged to incorporate outdoor amenity areas and green space to provided needed amenities in the neighborhood. Residential buildings should locate parking within the property, away from the street, and locate active uses and main building entrances on the ground floor adjacent to public streets.  To enhance connectivity in the area, a multi-use trail along the UTA Trax line is recommended with appropriate lighting and trees. Specific alignment, design, and feasibility requires further study.  Buildings adjacent to the transit line should include a stepback above the third story for daylight and sensitivity to adjacent lower density areas. Open space is recommended for all residential developments, with a landscaped buffer between the transit line or lower density areas. Take the Survey! Share your thoughts by taking the Community Feedback Survey! Scan the QR code or click the button below: Community Feedback Survey To take the survey in Spanish, click here. Share your thoughts by taking the Community Feedback Survey! Scan the QR code or click the button below: Community Feedback Survey To take the survey in Spanish, click here. Station Area Plan & House Bill 462 What is a Station Area Plan? A station area plan is a plan that examines the area approximately ½ mile from a fixed guideway transit station, focusing on the relationship between station access and land use growth, while optimizing connections and promoting transit-supportive land uses to create neighborhoods where people can access a diversity of housing, employment, and entertainment options with the use of an automobile. House Bill 462 (HB 462) The Utah Housing Affordability Amendments bill was adopted in June 2022, and it was a collaborative effort among numerous stakeholders, including the Commission on Housing Affordability, the Utah League of Cities and Towns, Wasatch Front Regional Council and Mountainland Association of Governments, Property Rights Coalition, Division of Housing and Community Development, the Utah Transit Authority, and various other public and private sector organizations, to help Utah to address its significant challenges on housing availability and affordability. Per Utah House Bill 462 (HB462), cities with fixed-guideway public transit stations such as FrontRunner, TRAX, or BRT, are required to develop a SAP for that station with the intent to advance shared goals by maximizing development potential around transit stations through a collaborative planning approach. The goals of HB462 are to increase the availability and affordability of housing, including moderate income housing; promote sustainable environmental conditions; enhance access to opportunities; and increase transportation choices and connections. Additional information about Station Area Plans can be found on the Wasatch Front Regional Council website. Additional background information regarding this planning effort and project team contact information for questions can be found on the City Planning Division webpage. 2024 LEGISLATIVE SESSION SYNOPSIS Legislative Affairs Division // March 26, 2024 •1,487 bill files, 934 bills introduced, and 591bills passed •SLC tracked 282 bills (30%) •30% reduction in tracked bills from 2023 to 2024 •Amended over 50 bills •44 high priority bills •1,520 comment solicitations •Seven bills vetoed by Governor Cox 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis DATA 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Bills Passed by Session Bill Requests Introduced Passed Legislature Passed House Passed Senate •Policy pillars •Challenging to kill bills •Data matters •Interim working groups 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis DYNAMICS 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Before Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Bills Numbered and Released by Week •Full-service license increase from 1 per 467 to 1 per 3,167 population over 7 years •Bar license increase from 1 per 10,200 to 1 per 7,246 population over 7 years •Portability inside hotels and resorts •Increase in beer tax from $13.10/barrel to $14.10 barrel over 4 years •Liquor and wine markup of .5% •New hospitality suite at the airport •Retail license can sell RTD cocktails of 10 ox or less at 10% ABV •Proximity exemption for downtown revitalization zone •City impact: Additional licenses and exemption for Delta Center project area redevelopment •Next steps: Notify city businesses of new license opportunities 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis HB 548 ALCOHOL AMENDMENTS •Implement a privacy program for personal data by May 1, 2025 •Provide notice of a data breach to an individual and the State •Obtain only a reasonable amount of personal data to achieve a specified purpose •Processing activities after May 1, 2024, shall be in compliance by January 1, 2027 •Can’t sell or share personal data •May not use covert surveillance of individuals unless permitted by law •Contractor compliance with personal data requirements •Notice, process to cure, district court action •Annual report to the State and HR training •City impact: Personal data storage and retention, staffing, and annual report •Next steps: City working group, IMS FTE, technical amendments, and city policy and procedures 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis HB 491 DATA PRIVACY AMENDMENTS •Public hearing required for a “compensation increase” for an “executive municipal officer” •Applies to mid-year promotions within executive employee class (i.e. deputy to director) and COLAs •Does not apply to new hires and promotions into executive employee class •Public hearing not required before increase is provided; only before a final or amended final budget including the increase is adopted •Public hearing can be in the same meeting as a general budget public hearing •Does not require “compensation increase” to be listed in any particular format •City impact: New budget hearing for salaries and mid-year compensation increase process •Next steps: Department training, public hearings, and salary setting 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis SB 91 LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICERS COMPENSATION AMENDMENTS •Prohibition on discriminatory statements in the hiring process •Establishes standards for requiring prohibited trainings •Preempts engagement in prohibited discriminatory practices •Requirements on activities a diversity, equity, and inclusion office may conduct •Limits the use of the word’s diversity, equity, and inclusion •City impact: Staff trainings •Next steps: Internal working group to establish policies that are congruent with state code but also aligned with Salt Lake City core principles of inclusion 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis HB 261 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY INITIATIVES •Impacts schools and publicly owned or controlled facilities •Does NOT impact use of bathrooms in publicly owned or controlled facilities •Prohibits individuals from accessing “sex designated” “changing rooms” that are open to the general public unless: •(1) individual’s sex at birth corresponds with the sex designation of the changing room; or •(2) the individual has amended their birth certificate and had a “primary sex characteristic surgery” to align with the sex designation of the changing room •Some exceptions for minor children, EMS, and maintenance workers •Complaints handled by law enforcement, potential for individual penalty •Privacy compliance plan required •New construction must include single-occupant facilities •City penalty can be up to $10,000 per/day and per/violation •City impact: Changing rooms compliance and new construction single-occupant requirements •Next steps: Training, compliance plan, and single occupancy in construction plans 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis HB 257 SEX BASED DESIGNATIONS •Establishes the District and state-wide interest •State Fair Park, state owned lands, Rocky Mountain Power site, a portion of the Jordan River, and private property •Tax collection starting October 2024; city retains 25% of property tax •Issue bonds on the public market •Municipal services provisions and private public safety •December agreements for land use vesting and RDA boundary adjustment •City impact: Taxes, land use, municipal services, and redevelopment of the west -side •Next steps: Tax Commission boundary, board appointee, and land use and RDA agreements 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis HB 562 UTAH FAIRPARK AREA INVESTMENT AND RESTORATION DISTRICT •Creates the revitalization zone for utilization of sales tax revenue •Permits the city to levy a .5% sales and use tax in the project area •Project area can be up to 100 acres •Requires a franchise agreement tied to NBA or NHL •Reporting to the State •State board can recommend a prosecutor per tem for the project area •City impact: Catalytic redevelopment of downtown and sales tax increase •Next steps: Franchise agreement and creation of the project area 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis SB 272 CAPITAL CITY REINVESTMENT ZONE AMENDMENTS •Requires a critical infrastructure study of relevant areas in 1st class county •Existing conditions, future demands, transportation, land use, and mitigation •Study must be completed by November 1, 2024 •Report to legislature no later than January 21, 2025 •City impact: Parley’s Canyon Mine, land use, air quality, and water •Next steps: Participate in study through partners 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis HB 502 CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE & MINING •Establishes the 11 member Utah Homeless Services Board •Statewide strategic plan focused on personal accountability •Office of Homeless Services reporting requirements •Shelter City Advisory Board •Expansion of the HRC if the government entity owns the facility and approves •City impact: Permanent seat for SLC mayor, enforcement, beds, and funding •Next steps: Continued collaboration with State, County, and city’s 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis HB 298 HOMELESSNESS SERVICES AMENDMENTS •$2.5 M – Shelter Cities Mitigation (ongoing) •$488, 800 (ongoing) & $2 M (one-time) – Home Court •$25 M (one-time) – Low Barrier Shelter •$11.8 M (one-time) – Statewide Homeless System Support 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis HOMELESS APPROPRIATIONS •Department debrief meetings •Analyze bills for city impact and next steps •Internal policy working groups •2025 policy priority development •Interim committees and working groups •Relationships with legislators and partners •Field trips •Stories 2024 Legislative Session Synopsis NEXT STEPS CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM:Brian Fullmer Policy Analyst DATE:March 26, 2024 RE: Window Requirements for New Construction in the City’s Local Historic Districts PLNPCM2023-00444 The Council will be briefed about a proposal requested by Mayor Mendenhall to update the zoning ordinance and text within the City’s Historic Residential Design Guidelines and Historic Apartment & Multifamily Building Design Guidelines handbooks. The changes would apply to the use of vinyl windows for new construction in the city’s 15 local historic districts (LHDs) and approximately 150 designated landmark sites. (Note: Two additional LHDs, Princeton Heights and Upper Yale, are in process as of the writing of this report. If adopted as proposed, these requirements would also apply to those LHDs.) A landmark site is defined in Chapter 21A.62.010 Salt Lake City Code as: Any historic site that has been designated in accordance with [City Code] or any site on the Salt Lake City Register of Cultural Resources. A landmark site includes an individual building, structure or feature or an integrated group of buildings, structures or features on a single site. Such sites are of exceptional importance to the city, state, region or nation and impart high artistic, historic or cultural values. A landmark site clearly conveys a sense of time and place and enables the public to interpret the historic character of the site. Planning staff noted the proposed changes include: •Adds a section to 21A.34.020(H) to clarify prohibited window material (vinyl) and window location, as well as a minimum window installation depth (3”). •Adds additional language to the Residential and Historic Apartments & Multi-family Design Guidelines to clarify historically appropriate window materials (wood, clad wood, and fiberglass) in new construction, the appropriate location and use of vinyl windows in new construction, and the use of aluminum storefront windows at the ground floor where there is a commercial use or Item Schedule: Briefing: March 26, 2024 Set Date: April 2, 2024 Public Hearing: May 7, 2024 Potential Action: May 21, 2024 Page | 2 amenity space associated with a multi-family building. To reiterate, the proposed changes would apply only to new construction in the city’s LHDs and landmark sites. Page 4 of the Planning Commission staff report included the following goals for the proposed ordinance update: •Ensure that the ordinance standards and design guidelines are met with regard to windows installed in new construction projects. •Provide consistency in windows approved for new construction projects; address the specific use of vinyl windows and window installation. The Historic Landmark Commission (HLC) reviewed the proposed text amendment at its November 2, 2023 meeting and held a public hearing at which no one spoke. The Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed text amendment at its January 10, 2024 meeting and held a public hearing at which no one spoke. The Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council. Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed text amendment and determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTION 1. Is the Council supportive of allowing vinyl windows on non-street facing façades of new buildings in LHDs and landmark sites on a case-by-case basis? 2. Is the Council supportive of requiring a minimum 3” window reveal on new buildings in LHDs and landmark sites? ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Salt Lake City, along with many other cities throughout the country, has design guidelines for infill construction in historic districts that help define elements of historic buildings that should be considered for new construction. This is to help integrate new buildings into historic areas of the city. These guidelines differ from those for alterations to existing historic structures, which include and conserve historic materials and building details. Planning staff noted that the evolution of standards for both new construction and historic buildings through the years has gradually helped projects succeed in design, length of review process, and required design revisions. It is Planning’s opinion that the proposed standards will build on the current ordinance by providing improved clarity for applicants, Planning staff, and the HLC when evaluating new construction. The following issues were identified by Planning staff as they relate to window materials and installation in LHDs: •Current design guidelines discourage the use of vinyl windows as they are not considered to be historically appropriate and are not a durable material. However, these windows are not prohibited. Design standards and guidelines encourage the use of durable materials but there is not consistency in defining what materials are acceptable. This resulted in the HLC requiring wood or metal clad wood windows on some projects, fiberglass or composite materials on others, and Page | 3 approval of vinyl windows for many projects. The updated ordinance provides additional clarity and consistency. •The City’s design guidelines and standards do not specify the depth of a window’s reveal, or how far it is set back from the wall plane. Section 21A.34.020.H(6)(c) of the City’s zoning ordinance states “Windows and other openings are incorporated in a manner that reflects patterns, materials, and detailing established in the district and/or setting.” Planning staff noted that “This is based on traditional building patterns and is intended to provide variation in the wall plane, creating visual interest….” [Administration’s transmittal, page 4.] To help clarify this, the proposed ordinance calls for window reveals to be a minimum of three inches. •Planning staff identified inconsistencies in the City’s Residential Design Guidelines, and Historic Apartment & Multifamily Building Guidelines documents as they relate to appropriate window materials and installation. The proposed ordinance amends language in these documents for consistency and clarity. Planning staff noted the Historic Landmark Commission regularly addresses issues of using vinyl windows, and not setting windows back from the wall plane. Of particular concern are larger multi-family residential developments that have many windows on several floors. Builders can save a considerable amount of money if they choose less expensive, often vinyl, windows. In addition, recent design trends frequently use materials that place windows at the wall plane rather than including a reveal of 3 or 4 inches. Setting windows back from the wall plane creates visual interest as light and shadow patterns vary throughout the day, and seasons. Planning reviewed current design guidelines for using vinyl windows in new construction in cities throughout the United States including Charleston, SC; Boise, ID; Charlotte, NC; Denver, CO; Nashville, TN; and Ogden, UT, among others. Most of the cities do not allow vinyl windows in new construction, though some allow them depending on location and visibility from the street. For the complete list, please refer to page 4 of the Planning Commission staff report. KEY CONSIDERATION Planning staff identified one key consideration related to the proposal, found on pages 5-7 of the Planning Commission staff report, and summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the Planning staff report. Consideration 1 – Compliance with City Goals, Policies, and Master Plans: Planning staff found the proposed amendments align with the following: •The City’s 2011 Preservation Philosophy, •The 2012 Community Preservation Plan, and •Plan Salt Lake (2015) ANALYSIS OF STANDARDS Attachment E (pages 21-22) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines zoning map amendment standards that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. The standards and findings are summarized below. Please see the Planning Commission staff report for additional information. Page | 4 Factor Finding Whether a proposed text amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the city as stated through its various adopted planning documents. Complies Whether a proposed text amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Complies Whether a proposed text amendment is consistent with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. Complies The extent to which a proposed text amendment implements best current, professional practices of urban planning and design. Complies PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • January 2023 – Petition assigned to Lex Traughber, Senior Planner. • March 2, 2023 – Historic Landmark Commission (HLC) work session. • May 4, 2023 – o Tour with HLC to view examples of windows in and near the Capitol Hill and South Temple LHDs. o HLC work session. • June 6, 2023 – Petition initiated by Mayor Mendenhall. • August 16, 2023 – Notice sent to all recognized organizations requesting comments on the proposed zoning ordinance text, and design guidelines language. • August 21, 2023 – Online open house posted to Planning Division website requesting comments on the proposed zoning ordinance text, and design guidelines language. • October 19, 2023 – HLC public hearing notice posted to City and State websites and Planning Division listserv. • October 23, 2023 – HLC meeting notice posted at Marmalade, Sweet, Anderson Foothill, and Main Libraries. • November 2, 2023 – HLC public hearing. The Commission suggested some minor wording changes and voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council. • January 10, 2024 – Planning Commission public hearing. The Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council. • January 11, 2024 – Planning staff requested an ordinance from the Attorney’s Office. • January 26, 2024 – Ordinance from the Attorney’s Office received by Planning Division. • February 22, 2024 – Transmittal received in City Council Office. CITY COUNCIL // MARCH 26, 2024 WINDOW REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE CITY’S LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICTS •Ensure the ordinance standards and guidelines are clear in regard to windows in new construction projects. •Provide consistency in reviews and clear expectations for applicants when developing project plans. PURPOSE Salt Lake City // Planning Division 1.Vinyl as an appropriate and durable window material 2.Manner of installation –window inset 3.Inconsistencies between design guidelines (residential vs. multi-family) ISSUES WITH CURRENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES Salt Lake City // Planning Division WINDOW EXAMPLES Salt Lake City // Planning Division Window examples from a recently approved and constructed multifamily development in one of the city’s local historic districts. Notice the difference in installation with the two different siding materials. WINDOW EXAMPLES Salt Lake City // Planning Division This is a good example of appropriate windows installed in a recently approved multi-family development in a local historic district. These windows have been installed with a 2-3” reveal in a variety of façade claddings. It’s important to note the traditional style of the window and also note that these windows are fibrex, a composite material. WINDOW EXAMPLES Salt Lake City // Planning Division This is a another good example of appropriate windows installed in a recently approved multi-family development in a local historic district. These windows have been installed with a 3” reveal in a variety of façade claddings. Similar to the last example, It’s important to note the traditional style of the window and also that these windows are fibrex, a composite material. WINDOW EXAMPLES –VINYL WINDOW Salt Lake City // Planning Division In this example, you can see the dimensions of a typical vinyl window as it would be viewed from the exterior of a structure. Notice the dimensions of the window components, particularly the rails and stiles. The overall window is also very simple in design which is not similar to historic window design and dimensions. WINDOW EXAMPLES –WOOD WINDOW Salt Lake City // Planning Division In this example, you can see the dimensions of a typical wood window. Notice the thicker/wider dimensions of the window components, as well as the different planes that compose the frame, sashes, rails and stiles. This type of window has a more complex or decorative appearance than a vinyl window. WINDOW HIERARCY OF DETAIL Salt Lake City // Planning Division READILY VISIBLE WINDOW EXAMPLE Salt Lake City // Planning Division QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS Salt Lake City // Planning Division Lex Traughber // Senior Planner Lex.traughber@slcgov.com ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director 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: February 15, 2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods SUBJECT: Petition PLNPCM2023-00444 – Window Requirements for New Construction in the City’s Local Historic Districts STAFF CONTACT: Lex Traughber, Senior Planner (801) 535-6184 or lex.traughber@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: The Historic Landmark Commission and the Planning Commission both voted to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for consideration. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Proposal Snapshot: The proposed text and guideline amendments impact properties subject to the H Historic Preservation Overlay which includes properties within local historic districts and landmark sites. Salt Lake City currently has 14 local historic districts and approximately 150 Landmark Sites. The proposed changes add clarity to existing processes in terms of appropriate window materials, window location, and window installation in new construction projects. The following summarizes the proposed changes: Proposed Changes/Additions: •Adds a section to 21A.34.020(H) to clarify prohibited window material (vinyl) and window location, as well as a minimum window installation depth (3”). __________________________ J9;@=DGLLGҗ=:ссѶспсурфѷпч!12Ҙ псҝссҝспсу псҝссҝспсу • Adds additional language to the Residential and Historic Apartments & Multi-family Design Guidelines to clarify historically appropriate window materials (Wood, clad wood, and fiberglass) in new construction, the appropriate location and use of vinyl windows in new construction, and the use of aluminum storefront windows at the ground floor where there is a commercial use or amenity space associated with a multi-family building. Issue Origin: Like many historic districts throughout the United States, new infill construction is a regulated design subject to review by local municipalities. In many cases, cities have created design guidelines that help define common elements of historic buildings that should be reflected in new construction. Many cities and towns also have specific ordinance standards addressing new construction as opposed to standards for the treatment of historic structures. This is the case for Salt Lake City. The approach to the design of alterations to historic structures, where it is critical to incorporate and conserve historic materials, forms, and details naturally vary from approaches toward new construction, in which the primary goal is to integrate the new building into the surrounding historic environs that create the character of the historic property or district. Salt Lake City has followed many of its peers in creating a dual set of standards for historic and new buildings in its historic districts, as well as creating design guidelines to specifically address new construction. A rudimentary set of standards were included in the city’s first preservation ordinance in 1976, with most design reviews of new construction reviewed by the then Historic Landmark Committee informally using unadopted, externally developed guidelines, usually developed based on national thinking at the time. In many cases, standards for additions were adapted for new construction. Issues of consistency raised their heads at times. Efforts to standardize both the approach and processes used by the HLC culminated in a new set of standards set forth in the 1995 zoning ordinance rewrite, shortly followed by published design guidelines completed in 1998, which included an extensive section on new construction. Consistent application and interpretation, particularly regarding design details such as window design, continued to be a problem. This factored into a larger reexamination of the city’s preservation program, in which clear and consistent, easy-to-understand standards and guidelines were cited as a goal by stakeholders including residents, developers, and policymakers. In 2012, the city rewrote its design guidelines for residential buildings, greatly expanding the guidelines for new construction. Guidelines for multi-family residential and commercial new constructions soon followed in 2015. Later, the city updated its ordinance standards for new construction, again with the goal of increased clarity and consistency. This evolution has gradually improved the success of projects, both in design and length of review processes and required design revisions. In particular, the new ordinance standards in 21A.34.020.H provide vastly improved clarity for applicants, planning staff, and the members of the HLC in the course of evaluating new construction. While the concepts of the earlier ordinance remain, the new standards elaborate on these concepts and provide clearer standards of approval that can be tied to adopted design guidelines. Evaluation: While broader issues such as building scale, massing, form, and primary materials are being successfully addressed with recent changes, it is increasingly apparent that the standards and guidelines could be improved for clarity when it comes to the design details of new buildings. In particular, issues have emerged in how the existing ordinance standards and guidelines are applied in the case of windows on new principal buildings (single and multifamily), particularly in terms of window material and the manner in which a window is installed. Issues with Current Standards and Design Guidelines: In general, there is ample direction in the city’s standards and guidelines regarding window size, shape, types, fenestration pattern, and location. All of these attributes are clearly apparent in the building design when it is submitted for review. Planning staff is able to make findings for the HLC, who can then determine whether the project meets these standards and determine whether the windows are appropriate. At present, inconsistencies arise in review in terms of window material and window installation. The issue is actually three fold: • First, the current design standards and guidelines somewhat dance around the use of vinyl as an appropriate window material. The design guidelines “discourage” the use of vinyl windows as they are not considered to be a historically appropriate nor a durable material, but they do not outright prohibit their use. There is little guidance toward consistency in what determines an appropriate window material, other than discouraging the use of vinyl as a non-durable material, and encouraging the use of “durable materials” (presumably wood, metal clad wood, composite, etc). As a result, the HLC has required wood or metal clad wood windows on some projects, fiberglass or composite on others, has approved vinyl in many instances, and in rare cases not addressed a window material at all in their final approval. • Second, design standards and guidelines are somewhat vague regarding the requirement for windows to be set back from the primary wall plane. Section 21A.34.020.H(6)(c) of the zoning ordinance states, “Windows and other openings are incorporated in a manner that reflects patterns, materials, and detailing established in the district and/or setting.” This is based on traditional building patterns and is also intended to provide variation in the wall plane, creating visual interest, and again references traditional design and construction methods. In response to this zoning requirement, planning staff has typically asked developers to include a minimum 3” window reveal and the HLC has approved this window installation detail many times. That said, nowhere in the design standards and guidelines is the depth of a window reveal outlined or stipulated. • Finally, the manner in which the issue of appropriate window materials and installation in new construction projects is not consistent between the various design guideline documents (Residential and Historic Apartment & Multifamily Buildings), and therefore they cause confusion and uncertainty. The Historic Apartment & Multifamily Building Guidelines are in fact more extensive and descriptive than the Residential Design Guidelines in terms of windows in new construction, however both documents could be ameliorated to provide more clarity. Consistency and clarity is needed between these documents, as well as the zoning ordinance, to further address windows in new construction projects. Scope and Severity of Problem: The problem outlined here is most apparent in large-scale multi-family residential projects which take up more and more time on each HLC agenda. Again, this is not a new phenomenon; ordinance revisions, new design guidelines, and process changes dealing specifically with window approvals are evidence that the HLC has wrestled with this many times before. However, the HLC is wrangling with an approach to windows in a broader building climate in Salt Lake City that has seen a record number of large-scale, multifamily residential projects proposed throughout the city. Logically, it also follows that the larger the building, the more windows the building will have. The window cost in multifamily buildings typically takes up a larger proportion of the overall budget than in smaller projects, making it an attractive line item on which to make changes or opt for less expensive, often vinyl, windows. Likewise, current design trends tend toward the use of materials that do not create a change in depth between the face of the wall plane and the face of the window. While the design guidelines call for materials that “provide a solid masonry character for lower floors and for the most public facades of the building.” (Guideline 12.69) it is typical to use another material such as siding or stucco on the upper stories of a large multifamily building, particularly those in which several levels of stick-built construction sit on a two or three-story concrete framed base. It is much more difficult to place a recessed window in these types of walls. Problems such as those enumerated above are much more common on these upper stories, and it is in these locations where problems are most apparent. Taking the observational or anecdotal data as well as the data analysis above into account, it is apparent that a goal for further reviews of new construction is to: • Ensure that the ordinance standards and design guidelines are met with regard to windows installed in new construction projects; • Provide consistency in windows approved for new construction projects; address the specific use of vinyl windows and window installation. Adopted Policy: Preservation Policy: In November, 2011, the Salt Lake City Council adopted a Preservation Philosophy (Resolution 53 of 2011) to guide the City’s Preservation Program. Some of the policy directives from this document relate directly to the current project, namely: • Achieve a successful city-wide historic preservation program by clearly conveying historic preservation objectives, opportunities, and benefits while consistently interpreting and applying the City's adopted standards and efficiently administering the process. • The Historic Preservation Overlay District standards are to be used as the basis for decision making when considering applications for Certificates of Appropriateness. Apply standards in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility. The proposed amendments aim to make standards clear and predictable to improve applicants’ understanding of the requirements and decision makers’ ability to efficiently administer the zoning ordinance. Community Preservation Plan: Another significant guiding document for Salt Lake City’s historic preservation program is the Community Preservation Plan (2012). This document adds context, detail, and direction in implementing the broad outlines of the city’s adopted preservation philosophy. The Community Preservation Plan has a number of policies related to the proposed amendments. The proposed amendments include new language to clarify appropriate and inappropriate window materials, placement/location, and installation in new construction projects in the City’s local historic district. The following policies outlined in this plan are relevant to the proposed amendments: Policy 4.2b: Improve user-friendliness of the decision-making process. The City will work to make participation in the preservation program as clear, predictable, and as easy as possible. This will be achieved through developing informational resources and making necessary procedural changes. Policy 4.2c: Ensure informational resources are available to assist applicants in knowing the requirements, and timeframes for each step to help them successfully navigate the process. Policy 6.1c: Encourage the use of sustainable building practices that comply with adopted policy, guidelines and regulations relating to historic preservation in the renovation and maintenance of historic structures. Policy 6.1d: Ensure adopted guidelines and regulations allow for the appropriate use of green building practices as they emerge. Policy 6.1e: The incorporation of green building practices is encouraged whenever they are compatible with best historic preservation practices. Plan Salt Lake: Finally, preservation is mentioned as a specific objective of Plan Salt Lake (2015), Salt Lake City’s citywide master plan with the guiding principle of “maintaining places that provide a foundation for the City to affirm our past.” Additional context and guidance are given to this citywide objective through a series of initiatives, many of which directly relate to and support the proposed changes. • Preserve and enhance neighborhood and district character. • Retain areas and structures of historic and architectural value. • Integrate preservation into City regulation, policy, and decision making. • Balance preservation with flexibility for change and growth. • Improve education and outreach about the value of historic preservation. The purpose statement for the H – Historic Preservation Overlay District is as follows: In order to contribute to the welfare, prosperity and education of the people of Salt Lake City, the purpose of the H historic preservation overlay district is to: 1. Provide the means to protect and preserve areas of the city and individual structures and sites having historic, architectural or cultural significance; 2. Encourage new development, redevelopment and the subdivision of lots in historic districts that is compatible with the character of existing development of historic districts or individual landmarks; 3. Abate the destruction and demolition of historic structures; 4. Implement adopted plans of the city related to historic preservation; 5. Foster civic pride in the history of Salt Lake City; 6. Protect and enhance the attraction of the city's historic landmarks and districts for tourists and visitors; 7. Foster economic development consistent with historic preservation; and 8. Encourage social, economic and environmental sustainability. The proposed amendments, in clarifying and updating language to incorporate new development criteria that are critical to the implementation of the city’s Historic Preservation Program are fully consistent with these purposes. Commission Recommendations: The Historic Landmark Commission reviewed this application on November 2, 2023, and voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for consideration. The Planning Commission considered this application on January 10, 2024, and subsequently voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for consideration. PUBLIC PROCESS: • March 2, 2023 – Work Session – A work session was held with the Historic Landmark Commission to obtain direction regarding the proposed amendments. The HLC asked for some additional follow-up information. • May 4, 2023 – Windows Tour – Conducted a tour with the Historic Landmark Commission to look at various examples (both good and bad) of window types and installations, in and around the Capitol Hill and South Temple Local Historic Districts. • May 4, 2023 – Work Session – A work session was held with the Historic Landmark Commission to obtain direction regarding the proposed amendments. The HLC directed Planning Staff to pursue a “hybrid” approach to the use of vinyl windows in new construction in the City’s historic districts. • August 21, 2023 – Open House – An on-line open house was posted to the Planning Division’s website to solicit comment from the public regarding the proposed zoning ordinance text language and design guidelines language. • October 23, 2023 – Consistent with State law, a notice of the Historic Landmark Commission meeting was posted at the Marmalade, Sweet, Anderson Foothill, and Main Libraries. • October 19, 2023 - Public notice for the November 2, 2023, HLC hearing was posted on City and State websites and Planning Division list serve. • November 2, 2023 – Historic Landmark Commission public hearing. The HLC voted unanimously to support the proposed changes and to forward a positive recommendation on to the City Council for consideration. • January 10, 2024 – Planning Commission public hearing. The PC voted unanimously to support the proposed changes and to forward a positive recommendation on to the City Council for consideration. HISTORIC LANDMARK & PLANNING COMMISSION RECORDS: a) HLC Agenda of November 2, 2023 (Click Here) b) HLC Minutes of November 2, 2023 (Click Here) c) HLC Staff Report of November 2, 2023 (Click Here) d) PC Agenda of January 10, 2024 (Click Here) e) PC Minutes of January 10, 2024 (Click Here) f) PC Staff Report of January 10, 2024 (Click Here) EXHIBITS: 1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING 3. ORIGINAL PETITION 4. ORDINANCE TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING 3. ORIGINAL PETITION 4. ORDINANCE 1. PROJECT CHRONOLOGY PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Window Requirements for New Construction in the City’s Local Historic Districts Petition PLNPCM2023-00444 January 2023 Petition assigned to Lex Traughber. March 2, 2023 A work session was held with the Historic Landmark Commission to obtain direction regarding the proposed amendments. The HLC asked for some additional follow-up information. May 4, 2023 Conducted a tour with the Historic Landmark Commission to look at various examples (both good and bad) of window types and installations, in and around the Capitol Hill and South Temple Local Historic Districts. May 4, 2023 A work session was held with the Historic Landmark Commission to obtain direction regarding the proposed amendments. The HLC directed Planning Staff to pursue a “hybrid” approach to the use of vinyl windows in new construction in the City’s historic districts. June 6, 2023 Petition initiated by Salt Lake City Mayor, Erin Mendenhall. August 16, 2023 A notification was sent to all Recognized Organizations to solicit comment regarding the proposed zoning ordinance text language and design guidelines language. August 21, 2023 An on-line open house was posted to the Planning Division’s website to solicit comment from the public regarding the proposed zoning ordinance text language and design guidelines language. October 19, 2023 Public notice for the November 2, 2023, HLC hearing was posted on City and State websites and Planning Division list serve. October 23, 2023 Consistent with State law, a notice of the Historic Landmark Commission meeting was posted at the Marmalade, Sweet, Anderson Foothill, and Main Libraries. November 2, 2023 Historic Landmark Commission public hearing. The HLC recommended a couple of small wording changes, but voted unanimously to support the proposed changes and to forward a positive recommendation on to the City Council for consideration. January 10, 2024 Planning Commission public hearing. The PC voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation on to the City Council for consideration. January 11, 2024 Requested an ordinance from the City Attorney’s Office. January 26, 2024 Received ordinance from the City Attorney’s Office. February 12, 2024 Transmittal submitted to CAN. 2. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2023-00444 – Window Requirements for New Construction in the City’s Local Historic District – A request made by Mayor Erin Mendenhall directing the Planning Division to update the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance and the Historic Residential and Multifamily/Historic Apartment Design Guidelines, to address the use of vinyl windows in new construction projects in the City’s Local Historic Districts (LHDs). As part of their study, the City Council is holding two advertised public hearings to receive comments regarding the petition. During these hearings, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The Council may consider adopting the ordinance on the same night of the second public hearing. The hearing will be held electronically: DATE: Date #1 and Date #2 TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: **This meeting will not have a physical location. **This will be an electronic meeting pursuant to the Salt Lake City Emergency Proclamation. If you are interested in participating in the Public Hearing, please visit our website at https://www.slc.gov/council/ to learn how you can share your comments during the meeting. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801)535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Lex Traughber at (801) 535-6184 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail at lex.traughber@slcgov.com People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance in order to participate in this hearing. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com , 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. 3. ORIGINAL PETITION 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: May 9, 2023 Re: Initiate Petition to Amend Text in the Zoning Ordinance, Residential and Multifamily Design Guidelines to Update, Coordinate, and Clarify the Use of Vinyl Windows in New Construction in the City’s Local Historic Districts (LHDs) This memo is to request that a petition be initiated directing the Planning Division to update the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance, the Historic Residential and Multifamily/Historic Apartment Design Guidelines, to coordinate and clarify the use of vinyl windows in new construction projects in the City’s Local Historic Districts (LHDs). Two work sessions have been held with the Historic Landmark Commission to discuss the matter and obtain proposal direction. The first work session was held on March 2, 2023 and the second was held on May 4, 2023. At the work session in May, the Historic Landmark Commission directed Planning Staff to pursue a “hybrid” approach to the use of vinyl windows in the City’s LHDs. A “hybrid” approach to the use of vinyl windows includes the exploration of where vinyl windows may be appropriate in new construction projects, how any vinyl windows are installed, and the relation of the vinyl window to proposed building cladding. A hybrid approach would allow for the reasonable use of vinyl windows on a new construction project along with the use of more historically appropriate windows such as wood, wood clad, or composite windows. As part of the process, the Planning Division will follow the City’s adoption process for zoning text amendments, which includes citizen input and public hearings with the Historic Landmark Commission, Planning Commission, and the City Council. 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 4. ORDINANCE 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2024 (An ordinance amending Section 21A.34.020 of the Salt Lake City Code and amending the adopted design standards for residential and multifamily structures pertaining to the regulation of windows in the H Historic Preservation Overlay District.) An ordinance amending Section 21A.34.020 of the Salt Lake City Code and the adopted design standards for residential and multifamily structures pertaining to the regulation of windows in the H Historic Preservation Overlay District pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2023- 00444. WHEREAS, on November 2, 2023, the Salt Lake City Historic Landmark Commission (“Landmark Commission”) held a public hearing to consider a petition submitted by Mayor Erin Mendenhall (Petition No. PLNPCM2023-00444) to amend Section 21A.34.020 of the Salt Lake City Code and the adopted design standards for residential and multifamily structures pertaining to the regulation of windows in the H Historic Preservation Overlay District; and WHEREAS, at its November 2, 2023 meeting, the Landmark Commission voted in favor of transmitting a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) and the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said petition; and WHEREAS, on January 10, 2024 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said petition; and WHEREAS, at its January 10, 2024 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of transmitting a positive recommendation to the City Council on said petition; and WHEREAS, after a public hearing on this matter the city council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 2 SECTION 1. Amending the text of Salt Lake City Code Subsection 21A.34.020.H. That Subsection 21A.34.020.H of the Salt Lake City Code (Zoning: Overlay Districts: H Historic Preservation Overlay District: Standards for Certificate of Appropriateness Involving New Construction or Alteration of a Noncontributing Structure) shall be, and hereby is amended to read as follows: H. Standards for Certificate of Appropriateness Involving New Construction or Alteration of a Noncontributing Structure: In considering an application for a certificate of appropriateness involving new construction, or alterations of noncontributing structures, the historic landmark commission, or planning director when the application involves the alteration of a noncontributing structure shall, using the adopted design guidelines as a key basis for evaluation, determine whether the project substantially complies with each of the following standards that pertain to the application to ensure that the proposed project fits into the established context in ways that respect and contribute to the evolution of Salt Lake City’s architectural and cultural traditions: 1. Settlement Patterns and Neighborhood Character: a. Block and Street Patterns: The design of the project preserves and reflects the historic block, street, and alley patterns that give the district its unique character. Changes to the block and street pattern may be considered when advocated by an adopted city plan. b. Lot and Site Patterns: The design of the project preserves the pattern of lot and building site sizes that create the urban character of the historic context and the block face. Changes to the lot and site pattern may be considered when advocated by an adopted city plan. c. The Public Realm: The project relates to adjacent streets and engages with sidewalks in a manner that reflects the character of the historic context and the block face. Projects should maintain the depth of yard and height of principal elevation of those existing on the block face in order to support consistency in the definition of public and semi-public spaces. d. Building Placement: Buildings are placed such that the project maintains and reflects the historic pattern of setbacks and building depth established within the historic context and the block face. Buildings should maintain the setback demonstrated by existing buildings of that type constructed in the district or site’s period of significance. e. Building Orientation: The building is designed such that principal entrances and pathways are oriented such that they address the street in the pattern established in the historic context and the block face. 2. Site Access, Parking, and Services: 3 a. Site Access: The design of the project allows for site access that is similar, in form and function, with patterns common in the historic context and the block face. (1) Pedestrian: Safe pedestrian access is provided through architecturally highlighted entrances and walkways, consistent with patterns common in the historic context and the block face. (2) Vehicular: Vehicular access is located in the least obtrusive manner possible. Where possible, garage doors and parking should be located to the rear or to the side of the building. b. Site and Building Services and Utilities: Utilities and site/building services (such as HVAC systems, venting fans, and dumpsters) are located such that they are to the rear of the building or on the roof and screened from public spaces and public properties. 3. Landscape and Lighting: a. Grading of Land: The site’s landscape, such as grading and retaining walls, addresses the public way in a manner that reflects the character of the historic context and the block face. b. Landscape Structures: Landscape structures, such as arbors, walls, fences, address the public way in a manner that reflects the character of the historic context and the block face. c. Lighting: Where appropriate lighting is used to enhance significant elements of the design and reflects the character of the historic context and the block face. 4. Building Form and Scale: a. Character of the Street Block: The design of the building reflects the historic character of the street facade in terms of scale, composition, and modeling. (1) Height: The height of the project reflects the character of the historic context and the block face. Projects taller than those existing on the block face step back their upper floors to present a base that is in scale with the historic context and the block face. (2) Width: The width of the project reflects the character of the historic context and the block face. Projects wider than those existing on the block face modulate the facade to express a series of volumes in scale with the historic context and the block face. (3) Massing: The shape, form, and proportion of buildings, reflects the character of the historic context and the block face. (4) Roof Forms: The building incorporates roof shapes that reflect forms found in the historic context and the block face. 5. Building Character: 4 a. Facade Articulation and Proportion: The design of the project reflects patterns of articulation and proportion established in the historic context and the block face. As appropriate, facade articulations reflect those typical of other buildings on the block face. These articulations are of similar dimension to those found elsewhere in the context, but have a depth of not less than 12 inches. (1) Rhythm of Openings: The facades are designed to reflect the rhythm of openings (doors, windows, recessed balconies, etc.) established in the historic context and the block face. (2) Proportion and Scale of Openings: The facades are designed using openings (doors, windows, recessed balconies, etc.) of similar proportion and scale to that established in the historic context and the block face. (3) Ratio of Wall to Openings: Facades are designed to reflect the ratio of wall to openings (doors, windows, recessed balconies, etc.) established in the historic context and the block face. (4) Balconies, Porches, and External Stairs: The project, as appropriate, incorporates entrances, balconies, porches, stairways, and other projections that reflect patterns established in the historic context and the block face. 6. Building Materials, Elements and Detailing: a. Materials: Building facades, other than windows and doors, incorporate no less than 80% durable material such as, but not limited to, wood, brick, masonry, textured or patterned concrete and/or cut stone. These materials reflect those found elsewhere in the district and/or setting in terms of scale and character. b. Materials on Street-Facing Facades: The following materials are not considered to be appropriate and are prohibited for use on facades which face a public street: vinyl siding and aluminum siding. c. Architectural Elements and Details: The design of the building features architectural elements and details that reflect those characteristic of the district and/or setting. 7. Windows: Windows and other openings are incorporated in a manner that reflects patterns, materials, and detailing established in the district and/or setting. a. Window installation depth: Window reveals shall be a minimum of three inches. b. Prohibited window material: Vinyl windows are not considered to be historically appropriate nor durable, and are prohibited for use where they are readily visible from the street (public and private). 8. Signage Location: Locations for signage are provided such that they are an integral part of the site and architectural design and are complementary to the principal structure. 5 SECTION 2. Amending the text of “A Preservation Handbook for Historic Residential Properties & Districts in Salt Lake City”. That the adopted design standards for residential structures in the H Historic Preservation Overlay District set forth in the manual titled “A Preservation Handbook for Historic Residential Properties & Districts in Salt Lake City” shall be, and hereby is amended to revise Chapter 12 in the section pertaining to “Windows” that begins on page 12:13 thereof to read as follows: Windows Window openings often provide a considerable degree of modeling to the building facades, with a distinctive recess (window reveal) of the plane of the window from the plane of the wall. This characteristic enhances the visual strength of a facade, conveying a sense of the depth and solidity of the wall, and distinct areas of shadow which change with the time of day and the season. This recess also helps to shelter the window and the window frame. Windows also provide a medium for fine detail and craftsmanship, using decorative pattern, lead and often stained glass. 12.20 Windows with vertical emphasis are encouraged. • A general rule is that the height of a vertically proportioned window should be twice the dimension of the width in most residential contexts. • Certain styles and contexts, e.g. the bungalow form, will often be characterized by horizontally proportioned windows. • See also the discussions of the character of the relevant historic district (PART III) and architectural styles (Ch.4, PART I). 12.21 Window reveals should be a characteristic of most facades. • This helps to emphasize the character of the facade modeling and materials. • It should enhance the degree to which the building integrates with its historic setting. • It also helps to avoid the impression of superficiality which can be inherent in some more recent construction, e.g. with applied details like window surrounds. • Typical historic window reveals are 3-4” in depth. 12.22 Windows and doors should be materials that appear similar in scale, proportion and character to those used traditionally in the neighborhood. 6 • Double-hung windows with traditional reveal depth and trim will be characteristic of most districts. • Window profiles should project from the plane of the glass creating a distinct hierarchy of detail for the window opening and the composition of the facade. • Durable window frame construction and materials should be used. • Window frame finish should be of durable architectural quality, chosen to complement the building design. • Wood, clad wood, and fiberglass are generally appropriate window materials. • Vinyl should be avoided as a non-durable material in the regional climate. • Vinyl windows, on rear and secondary facades, where they are not readily visible from the street (public or private), will be considered on a case-by-case basis. • See also the rehabilitation section on windows (PART II, Ch.3) as well as the discussions of specific historic districts (PART III) and relevant architectural styles (PART I, Ch.4). SECTION 3. Amending the text of “Design Guidelines for Historic Apartment & Multifamily Buildings in Salt Lake City”. That the adopted design standards for apartment and multifamily structures in the H Historic Preservation Overlay District set forth in the manual titled “Design Guidelines for Historic Apartment & Multifamily Buildings in Salt Lake City” shall be, and hereby is amended to revise Chapter 12 in the section pertaining to “Windows” that begins on page 12:57 thereof to read as follows: WINDOWS Of the many architectural characteristics of the design of a building façade, the design of the windows is perhaps the most important. Window openings provide a considerable degree of modeling and detail to the facades, with the window reveals creating a distinctive recess of the plane of the reflective window from the plane and texture of the wall. Window reveals enhance the sense of visual strength of the facade, conveying an impression of the depth, solidity and permanence of the wall. The difference in plane between window and wall surface also creates distinctive light, shadow and reflection which will change with the time of day, and also with the season. This recess also helps to shelter the window and the window frame, and helps to moderate solar gain. Window openings and design are the focus of finer frame detailing and craftsmanship, in the past using classical frame profiles, decorative subdivided or leaded lights and often stained glass. The form, the subdivision and the profiles of the window framing, their finishes and 7 colors, play a major role in creating the modeling, detailing, quality and richness, and consequently the perceived scale of the building. Design Objective The design of a new multifamily building should include window design subdivision, profiles, materials, finishes and details which ensure that the windows play their characteristic positive role in defining the proportion and character of the building and its contribution to the historic context. 12.71 Windows should be designed to be in scale with those characteristic of the building and the historic setting. • Excessive window scale in a new building, whether vertical or horizontal, will adversely affect the sense of human scale and affinity with buildings in the district. • Subdivide a larger window area to form a group or pattern of windows creating more appropriate proportions, dimensions and scale. 12.72 Windows with vertical proportion and emphasis are encouraged. • A vertical proportion is likely to have greater design affinity with the historic context. • It helps to create a stronger vertical emphasis which can be valuable integrating the design of a larger scale building within its context. • See also the discussion of the character of the relevant historic district and architectural styles (PART I). 12.73 Window reveals should be a characteristic of most facades. • These help to express the character of the facade modeling and materials. • Window reveals will enhance the degree to which the building integrates with its historic setting. • A reveal should be recessed into the primary plane of the wall, and not achieved by applying window trim to the façade. • This helps to avoid the impression of superficiality which can be inherent in some more recent construction, e.g. with applied details like window trim and surrounds. • A hierarchy of window reveals can effectively complement the composition of the fenestration and facades. • Typical historic window reveals are 3-4” in depth. 8 12.74 Windows and doors should be materials that appear similar in scale, proportion and character to those used traditionally in the neighborhood. • Window profiles should project from the plane of the glass creating a distinct hierarchy of detail for the window opening and the composition of the facade. • Durable window frame construction and materials should be used. • Window frame finish should be of durable architectural quality, chosen to complement the building design. • Wood, clad wood, and fiberglass are generally appropriate window materials. • Vinyl should be avoided as a non-durable material in the regional climate. • Vinyl windows, on rear and secondary facades, where they are not readily visible from the street (public or private), will be considered on a case-by-case basis. • Aluminum storefront windows may be appropriate at the ground floor where there is a commercial use or amenity space associated with a multi-family building, and will be considered on a case by case basis. • Dark or reflective glass should be avoided. • See also the rehabilitation section on windows (PART II, Ch.3) as well as the discussions of specific historic districts (PART III) and relevant architectural styles (PART I). SECTION 4. 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 _______________________. 9 Mayor’s Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2024. Published: ______________. Ordinance amending window regulations new construction in historic districts (final) APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney January 26, 2024 rachel otto (Mar 8, 2024 12:49 MST)03/08/2024 03/08/2024 SALT LAKE CITY CITIZENS’ COMPENSATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT 2024 1 PURPOSE & INTRODUCTION The Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC) was formed with the purpose of “…evaluating the total compensation levels of the city's elected officials, executives and employees and making recommendations to the human resources department, mayor and the city council…” (City Code Title 2, Chapter 2.35.050). Each year the committee is responsible for preparing and submitting a written report to the mayor and city council containing, among other things, recommendations on the “appropriate competitive position for the city relative to the compensation practices of comparable employers,” “wages and benefits of the city’s elected officials, executives and employees” and “general recommendations regarding the mix of compensation for the city’s employees, e.g., base salary, benefits, incentives” (City Code Title 2, Chapter 2.35.050.A.6) To provide city officials with the most valuable and relevant information, this report includes the Committee’s recommendations based on review of current economic conditions, salary budget forecasts, and local area market pay analysis including a more specialized review of wages paid to the City’s firefighters and police officers compared with other public entities in the state of Utah. Additional information intended to provide insight to comparable salaries paid to elected officials, department heads, and other key city leader in U.S. cities considered similar to Utah’s capital city are also highlighted in this year’s report. Respectfully, Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee Brandon Dew, Chair Jana Bake, Vice-chair J. Clair Baldwin Jeff Herring Casey Lund Mike Terry Jeff Worthington 1 Section One: Labor shortages, cost of labor and inflation continue to drive 2024 salary budgets Economic Factors While fears of resurgent inflation dominated much of the economic landscape in 2023, WorldatWork researchers make note in their 2023-24 Salary Budget Survey of the cautious optimism the nation’s economy is gradually cooling. As inflation begins to stabilize, focus is now turned to emerging demographic trends that suggest a tight labor market and unmet labor demands will be the reality of the foreseeable future. Now, even more than inflation, low unemployment rates and an on-going scarcity of labor are what continue to drive up the local cost of labor and dominate employers’ view when setting salary budgets. Salary Budget Forecasts Similar to trends previously set in 2022 and 2023, research among global compensation consulting firms Mercer, WorldatWork, and WTW (formerly known as Willis Towers Watson) confirms salary budget and wage increases are generally stabilizing just below the substantial 4.4% average salary increase given by U.S. employers in 2023.  According to Mercer's U.S. Compensation Planning Survey November 2023 (see Appendix A) edition, U.S. employers forecast raising their merit increase budgets by 3.5% and total salary increase budgets by 3.8% on average for 2024.  WorldatWork’s “2023-24 Salary Budget Survey” (see Appendix B) of 2,146 participants found U.S. employers are projecting a continuance of 4.1% pay increase budgets in 2024 and 3.6% average merit increases.  Willis Towers Watson (WTW) research (see Appendix C) also confirmed employers are planning an overall average salary increase of 4.0% for 2024. In addition to the foregoing salary budget projections, more detailed statistics obtained from WorldatWork’s 2023-24 Salary Budget Survey report provide insight to the projected and actual increases reported by participants based on the type of increase (Figure 1) and other factors including state, industry, and organization (Figure 2). 2 Figure 1 – Median Salary Increase Budgets, by Type of Increase Projected 2023 Actual 2023 Projected 2024 General Increase/COLA 3.0 % 1.1 % 1.0 % Merit Increase 3.5 % 4.0 % 3.5 % Other Increase 1.0 % 0.8 % 0.8 % Total Increase 4.0 % 4.0 % 4.0 % Note: “General Increase/COLA,” “Merit,” and “Other” do not add to the “Total Increase” because not every organization provides all three types of increases. When considering the added perspective of factors including state, industry, and organization size, it appears employers in the local Salt Lake City labor market are more likely to see overall salary budget increases ranging between 4-5% (Figure 2). Figure 2 – Median Total Salary Increase Budgets, by State, Industry, and Organization Size Projected 2023 Actual 2023 Projected 2024 By State, Utah 4.0 % 4.0 % 4.0 % By Industry, Public Administration 4.0 % 5.6 % 5.0 % By Organization Size, 2,500 - 9,999 4.0 % 4.5 % 4.0 % Finally, when considering the impact on and need for salary structure adjustments, WorldatWork salary budget survey participants are projecting a 3.0% median increase in 2024 to range minimums and maximums (Figure 3). Figure 3 – Salary Structure Increases, by Employee Category Projected 2023 Actual 2023 Projected 2024 Non-exempt Hourly 3.0 % 3.0 % 3.0 % Exempt Salaried 2.5 % 3.0 % 3.0 % Officers/Executives 2.5 % 3.0 % 3.0 % RECOMMENDATION: Considering the impact of current market conditions, including labor shortages, increased cost of labor and inflation on employer salary budgets in 2024, the Committee recommends leaders increase the City’s overall salary budget by no less than 5%. In conjunction with the City’s plans to grant actual general and/or merit increases, the Committee recommends an overall increase to the city’s salary range structures of no less than 3%. 3 Section Two: Local area market pay comparison The ability to effectively attract and retain key talent is based on management, adaptability, administration of the city’s pay structures, and employee base wage and salary rates. The committee reviewed market pay data obtained primarily from multiple locally based private or public employers with operations along the Wasatch Front. This approach was used because recruitment and applicant pool data historically has strongly suggested the city draws its talent from the local area and competes with other local employers for said talent. Results of the market pay analysis conducted this year were presented by the city’s human resources staff using the compensation management tool offered by Payfactors to aggregate the latest sources of market pay information available. To facilitate this review, the city organized 85 benchmark groups from its 1,045 active jobs (roughly 8% of jobs). The committee reviewed job pricing information obtained for each of the 85 benchmark job titles highlighted in this report. In total, these benchmarks cover 1,265 employees which represents approximately 38% of the city’s regular, full-time workforce. Because market data is not available to price all jobs, it is important to note that if a job title is not shown as a benchmark title it is instead tied to a benchmark for pricing purposes. For example, Accountant III is designated as the benchmark job for related titles in the same job family, including: - Accountant I - Accountant II - Accountant III (benchmark) - Accountant IV If market pay data indicates a particular benchmark job is significantly below market, then all levels of the job should be reviewed for potential pay adjustments—not just the benchmark job. This way the pay differences between levels of the same or similar jobs are appropriately maintained. The results of this year’s local market pay analysis are displayed in three separate work groups. This is done not only to account for the differences in each group’s unique wage structure and pay practices, but to also gauge the City’s success more effectively at positioning itself as a pay leader. These three work groups include:  AFSCME  Public Safety (including Firefighters, Police Officers, and Public Safety Dispatchers)  Non-Represented Employees The Committee continues to follow the guidelines listed below when determining an individual benchmark job’s compensation position relative to the market: 4 - Significantly lagging when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is less than or equal to 90%. - Slightly lagging when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is between 90.1% and 98%. - Competitive when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is between 98.1% and 109.9%. - Significantly leading when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is greater than or equal to 110%. GROUP FINDINGS & OVERALL SUMMARIES: Among the AFSCME workgroup, a total of 37 benchmark jobs, covering 402 employees, were evaluated (representing 45% of the total jobs surveyed). Market median (50th percentile) pay rates were compared to the Salt Lake City’s wage schedule top rate. The following list includes all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading. AFSCME Summary Benchmark  Job Count Overall  Average  Market  Position Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to  90% of market)2 90% Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)6 95% Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)19 105% Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)10 114% Overall Market Comparison 37 104% 5 2023 ‐ Job Title (Job Code)SLC Top Rate (union only) # SLC   Incumbents Market Salary (50th Percentile) Market  Comparison (SLC Top Rate vs  Market Median) Crime Scene Technician II (001779) $57,450 7 $64,700 89% Plans Examiner I (002127) $76,627 4 $84,900 90% Plumber II (000854) $64,792 1 $69,300 93% Water Meter Technician II (002714)$57,554 3 $61,700 93% Building Inspector III (001967)$84,469 7 $90,400 93% Maintenance Electrician IV (000168)$68,869 2 $71,800 96% Arborist II (001375)$59,238 4 $60,200 98% Asphalt Equipment Operator II (000909)$57,554 27 $58,600 98% Laboratory Chemist (002743)$80,454 2 $81,300 99% Evidence Technician II (002277)$57,450 1 $57,500 100% Senior Secretary (003030)$55,619 68 $55,200 101% Public Safety Dispatcher (002629)^$74,214 0 $72,842 102% Fleet Mechanic  (002675)$66,726 41 $65,600 102% Water Meter Reader II (006326)$49,525 3 $48,700 102% Custodian II (006090)$40,227 2 $38,600 104% Painter II (001347)$60,986 1 $58,600 104% Business Licensing Processor II (001964)$61,298 3 $59,100 104% Industrial Electrician IV (002658)*$80,454 18 $77,400 104% General Maintenance Worker III (002490)*$64,792 6 $62,000 105% Airport Airfield Operations Specialist (002619)**$76,627 23 $72,100 106% Senior Utilities Representative ‐ Customer Service (000199)$55,619 22 $52,100 107% HVAC Technician II (006050)$68,869 0 $63,600 108% Metal Fabrication Technician (001925)$68,869 9 $63,600 108% Waste & Recycling Equipment Operator II (002347)$57,554 5 $53,500 108% Water Plant Operator II (000966)$66,726 21 $61,900 108% Water Reclamation Facility Operator II (002722)$64,792 22 $59,400 109% Water System Maintenance Operator II (000975) $59,238 9 $54,400 109% Judicial Assistant II (002084) $61,298 9 $55,600 110% Airfield Maintenance Electrician (002746)* $93,184 15 $85,000 110% Carpenter II (001349) $60,986 11 $55,100 111% Concrete Finisher (001852) $62,899 21 $56,500 111% Civil Enforcement Officer I (001893) $63,398 0 $56,400 112% Airport Environmental Specialist II (002745) $84,469 11 $74,500 113% Warehouse Support Worker ‐ Airport (002022)$53,726 5 $47,000 114% Engineering Technician IV (000829)$69,472 1 $58,500 119% Parks Maintenance Technician I (002847)$48,069 0 $39,600 121% Office Technician II (001191)$55,619 11 $45,100 123% * = New Job this year **= Ma rket salary normalized to Salt Lake City ^= Select entities used in comparison. Compared against market median topped out rate. AFSCME Breakout 6 As a result of Resolution No. 201 (see Appendix E), as passed in June of 2023 by the City Council, the Committee decided to reassess the evaluation methodologies being used for comparison for the Public Safety workgroup. As stated in the resolution, the “policy objective is to ensure that the City’s firefighters and police officers are paid wages commensurate with or close to top of the market wages paid by public entities for such occupations in the State of Utah, especially among the State’s largest public safety agencies.” The Committee’s assessment involved determining criteria for which other public safety agencies should be included in the comparison, specifically for firefighter and police officers, while striving to follow the intent of the resolution. The Committee decided that the primary focus should be comparison to the top rate of pay found among the largest agencies in Utah. The threshold established on what constitutes a large agency was set at 90 or more full-time employees. The agencies included in the comparison results are as follows:  FIRE o Ogden City o Park City Fire District o Sandy City o South Davis Metro Fire Agency o South Jordan City o Unified Fire Authority o Weber Fire District o West Jordan City o West Valley City  POLICE o Layton City o Ogden City o Provo City o Sandy City o State of Utah o Unified Police Department o Utah County o Weber County o West Jordan City o West Valley City As alternative options for consideration, the Committee also refined the comparison further to determine the average top rate and median top rate among the selected agencies with 90 or more full-time employees. The market comparison for each breakout is illustrated below for each job. A total of 5 benchmark jobs, covering 659 employees, were evaluated (representing 7% of the total jobs surveyed) for the Public Safety workgroup. The following list includes all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading for the Top Rate breakout option. 1 Council Formal Meeting, June 13, 2023 – Item 17 7 The following list includes all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading for the Average Top Rate breakout option. The following list includes all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading for the Median Top Rate breakout option. 2023 ‐ Job Title (Job Code) SLC Top Rate # SLC   Incumbents Market Salary (Top Rate) Market  Comparison (SLC Top Rate vs  Market Top Rate) Police Officer (002654) $94,162 79 $108,206 87% Firefighter / Engineer ‐ all levels $83,762 57 $96,541 87% Fire Captain (008040)$102,502 44 $114,962 89% Firefighter / EMT ‐ all levels $78,291 70 $85,874 91% Firefighter / Paramedic ‐ all levels $90,438 79 $97,972 92% Firefighter and Police Officer ‐ Top Rate 2023 ‐ Job Title (Job Code) SLC Top Rate # SLC   Incumbents Market Salary (Average Top Rate) Market  Comparison (SLC Top Rate vs  Market Average  Top Rate) Fire Captain (008040) $102,502 44 $108,686 94% Firefighter / Engineer ‐ all levels $83,762 57 $88,611 95% Firefighter / Paramedic ‐ all levels $90,438 79 $92,134 98% Police Officer (002654)$94,162 49 $95,032 99% Firefighter / EMT ‐ all levels $78,291 70 $77,530 101% Firefighter and Police Officer ‐ Average 2023 ‐ Job Title (Job Code) SLC Top Rate # SLC   Incumbents Market Salary (Median Top Rate) Market  Comparison (SLC Top Rate vs  Market Median Top  Rate) Firefighter / Engineer ‐ all levels $83,762 57 $88,478 95% Fire Captain (008040)$102,502 79 $107,657 95% Firefighter / Paramedic ‐ all levels $90,438 79 $92,186 98% Police Officer (002654)$94,162 49 $94,806 99% Firefighter / EMT ‐ all levels $78,291 70 $76,877 102% Firefighter and Police Officer ‐ Median 8 Among the Non-Represented Employee workgroup, a total of 44 benchmark jobs, covering 204 employees, were evaluated (representing 52% of the total jobs surveyed). Market pay rates (calculated as the 50th percentile) were compared to the non-represented employee actual median wages/salaries. As with the other groups, the corresponding list ranks all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading. Non‐Represented Summary Benchmark  Job Count Overall  Average  Market  Position Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)2 83% Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)15 95% Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)16 102% Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)10 116% Overall Market Comparison 43 99% 9 2023 ‐ Job Title (Job Code) SLC Median   Employee   Salary # SLC  Incumbents Market Salary (50th Percentile) Market   Comparison (SLC Median  vs   Market  Median) Licensed Architect (002779)$100,573 2 $123,500 81% Cybersecurity Engineer II (002794)$117,909 1 $138,600 85% Software Engineer III (002145)^$110,882 0 $122,000 91% Paralegal (002201)$74,880 6 $82,200 91% Principal Planner (001733)**$81,524 11 $89,382 91% Human Resources Business Partner II (002811)$98,562 7 $105,800 93% Collections Officer (001376)$52,853 3 $56,300 94% Golf  Professional  II (002766)$86,432 2 $92,000 94% Legal  Secretary III (002814)$69,888 4 $73,400 95% Senior Recruiter (002438)*$88,924 2 $93,200 95% Office Facilitator II (002804)$63,222 34 $66,200 96% Systems Engineer III (002800)$125,439 2 $130,800 96% Forensic Scientist II (001974)$74,922 2 $78,100 96% Professional  Land Surveyor (001890)$86,617 1 $90,100 96% Golf  Course  Superintendent ‐ 18 Holes  (000936)$86,821 4 $90,300 96% Financial Analyst III (002773)$90,542 12 $93,800 97% Network Engineer II (002789)^$116,429 0 $119,900 97% Safety Program Manager (002790)$108,110 2 $109,200 99% Senior City Attorney (002319)$174,078 12 $175,700 99% Senior Human Resources Technician (001866)*$56,347 2 $57,000 99% Engineer IV (002198)$100,573 9 $100,900 100% Procurement Specialist II (000534)$74,955 1 $74,600 100% Auditor III (002822)$88,205 1 $87,700 101% Senior Claims Adjuster (002534)$84,698 1 $83,400 102% Executive  Assistant (001989)$78,623 14 $77,000 102% HRIS Analyst (002155)*$102,036 2 $99,100 103% Licensed Clinical Social Worker/Clinical  Mental  Health Counselor (002585) $81,856 9 $78,900 104% Victim Advocate (001765)$55,058 6 $53,000 104% Employee  Marketing  & Communications Specialist (002225)^$74,955 0 $71,800 104% Real  Property Agent (000370)$82,151 2 $78,300 105% Accountant III (001666)$84,786 9 $80,100 106% Learning & Development Specialist (002516)^$82,686 0 $77,300 107% Management Analyst (002757)$80,811 6 $74,200 109% Justice Court Judge (001601)$183,330 5 $165,200 111% Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Specialist (002154)$71,395 3 $64,000 112% City Payroll Administrator (001945)$77,111 2 $67,900 114% Program Coordinator ‐ Arts Council (001799)$73,601 3 $64,700 114% Technical Systems Analyst III (002203)^$82,680 0 $72,600 114% Social  Media  Specialist II (002603)^$74,955 0 $64,300 117% Civic Engagement Program Specialist (001821)$69,610 2 $58,600 119% Business Systems Analyst II (002338) $98,163 5 $80,400 122% Software Support Administrator II (001729)$93,344 5 $76,400 122% Network Support Administrator II (001396)$71,178 11 $56,100 127% ^ = Comparing against compensation  grade  midpoint in lieu of median wage  as job is currently vacant. *=New Job this year **= Market  salary normalized to Salt Lake  City Non‐Represented Breakout 10 RECOMMENDATION: The Committee continues to express its support for the City’s compensation strategy to position Salt Lake City as an area pay leader for employees. The Committee has long recognized that Salt Lake City employees deal with a volume of diverse situations and problems not seen by most other municipal entities in the state. Therefore, as the capital city it is in the City’s best interest to attract the most capable employees to all positions and to encourage them to stay. The Committee believes that compensation should be an important factor in this equation and that this policy will prove beneficial to the City’s citizens in the future. Furthermore, as funds permit, the committee recommends the mayor and city council appropriate financial resources necessary to grant market salary adjustments for employees in benchmark jobs identified in this report as lagging market. 1. Priority should be given to those lagging significantly; and, 2. Second priority should be given to those lagging slightly behind Market. 11 Section Three: Elected Officials, Department Directors & other key city leaders During 2023, the City’s Human Resources Department conducted a special survey designed to compare salaries of Elected Officials, Department Directors, and other key city leaders with their counterparts from similar U.S. cities (see Appendix F). Responses received during this year’s survey compared salaries of incumbents from a total of 32 cities (35% response rate) whose population size is between approximately 100,000 to 600,000. Elected Officials Salary comparisons for elected officials were based on, and limited to, entities with a similar type of government structure. For Salt Lake City’s Mayor comparison, results were limited to other cities with full- time mayors; similarly for the City Council, results were limited to other cities with part-time councils. Department Directors & Other Key City Leaders The Committee also reviewed data obtained for appointed executives, including department heads and others in key appointed city positions. Salaries were analyzed and considered based on the normalized median salary comparisons. The salary data was normalized to match salaries reported by each participant to Salt Lake City’s labor market by applying a geographic assessor provided by the Economic Research Institute (ERI). The geographic assessor accounts for variations in cost of labor among the various cities’ geographic locations. RECOMMENDATIONS: Considering the current Administration, while not new, is starting a new term and given the potential for changes in leadership throughout the city, the Committee recommends no specific action be taken at this time. The advice of the Committee is to allow additional time for city leaders and any potential changes in organizational structure to be thoroughly evaluated against the market findings before making any significant pay decisions. Appendices Appendix A Mercer QuickPulse US Compensation Planning Survey 2024 Projections 1/8/24, 2:41 PM Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey | 2024 Projections https://www.imercer.com/articleinsights/projected-salary-increase-budgets-holding 1/5 Projected salary increase budgets holding, for now Results of the 2023 Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey December 04, 2023 Blog Home Here we are! It’s the end of 2023 and we have one more look at what employers are forecasting for salary increase budgets for 2024. In addition, we have insights to share on promotions, off-cycle increases, salary structure adjustments, and some hot topics, such as pay transparency. Take a peek and see how this stacks up with what you are planning for next year. Merit and total increase budgets Both merit and total increase budgets are relatively unchanged from the last time we conducted the US Compensation Planning survey in August of this year. On average, the more than 900 participants in the US are forecasting 3.5% merit increase budgets and 3.8% total increase budgets. Only the total increase budget changed from earlier in the year, decreasing from 3.9%. When comparing industries, there are some differences. Healthcare continues to project increase budgets that are below the average, at 3.1% for merit increases. Those industries projecting above the overall average are Insurance/Reinsurance and Services (Non-financial), at 3.7% for merit increases. With 49% of companies still reporting that their budget status is “preliminary,” it’s quite possible that we could see actual increases lower than projected when we survey again in Q1 of 2024. What’s important is that you take this information, along with other reputable sources, and determine what’s right for your company. Your annual increase budget should make sense for your industry, desired competitive positioning, financial outlook, etc. Additionally, ensure that your budget includes funds for any adjustments needed to realign particular jobs or employees to mitigate pay compression or any necessary market adjustments. Manager discretion for merit distribution A question that comes up from time to time, particularly when you are revising your total rewards strategy, is “How much discretion should managers have when it comes to delivering merit increases?” or other pay adjustments. To take a pulse check on where employers are with empowering managers to make pay decisions, we asked, “What limitations or rules do managers have when it comes to the determination of an individual's base salary increase?” It seems that the most prevalent rules that managers must work within: Fall within the overall budget Fall within the salary range Fall into a recommended range provided based on select factors (e.g., position in range and performance) Incorporate increases determined by compensation (e.g., market adjustments or pay equity adjustments) Not exceed designated caps for pay increase On the other hand, 1% of companies (about 9) said that they allow managers ultimate discretion when it comes to the increase, with no limitations. Another group of respondents said that “everyone receives the same increase” (about 3%) and others stated that merit increases were formulaic (about 6%). 1/8/24, 2:41 PM Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey | 2024 Projections https://www.imercer.com/articleinsights/projected-salary-increase-budgets-holding 2/5 Promotion practices Although not much has changed recently in promotion practices, it warrants consideration because promotions and career development play such a significant role in the employee experience and total rewards strategy. Employers on average are planning to promote a little less than 10% of their workforce in 2024. On average, employees can expect to see a 9.2% pay increase for a one-level promotion. Half of employers are managing promotions through their existing salary and wages budget, or some other expense process. Just under 1 in 4 companies have a standalone promotion budget and are planning an average of 1.1% to cover the increase in salaries due to promotions. Off-cycle increases As we’ve seen in the last couple of compensation planning reports, employers’ use of off-cycle increases has slowed, but not disappeared. Per capita base salary changes, found by comparing the average per person base salary change over a period of time, shows that pay has moved on average 4.6%, which is larger than what was reported as the actual increase delivered in March of 2023: 3.8% merit and 4.1% total increases. Approximately half of employers reported that they have provided or will provide off-cycle increases in 2023, citing retention concerns, internal equity, and market adjustments as the most common reasons for doing so. While two-thirds of companies don’t budget for off-cycle increases, most do have an extensive approval process that typically involves several levels of line management as well as Human Resources and Compensation. Salary structures For the 87% of employers who utilize a formal salary structure, 3 out of 4 adjust the structures annually. Another 8% adjust them every 2 years. Of those who plan to adjust their structure in 2024, the average projected salary structure increase is 2.9%. Sharing salary ranges We know that employers are having to be more transparent about their pay levels, whether because they are required by law or as a voluntary act to build trust among employees. Beyond where legally required, 28% of employers are including salary ranges in job postings nationally with another 10% planning to do so. But what exactly are they sharing? If you take a look at job posting boards like Indeed, it’s obvious that what’s being shared is not consistent. When looking at a particular job, what’s shared as the pay range varies widely. Employers in the US Compensation Planning Survey reported that they most commonly are using the following in job postings: National, market-based pay range, regardless of (job) location Geographically adjusted pay range, based on location of job posting Subset of the pay range (e.g., do not disclose the full maximum of the salary range) Addressing compression and internal equity Increased pressure to be more transparent about pay means that employers have to prioritize addressing pay compression and internal equity issues. Only 17% of the 951 survey respondents reported that they have not experienced compression or internal equity issues; another 18% stated they “don’t know” or are “unsure.” The remaining respondents stated that they have done the analysis and are making adjustments (36%), that they will make adjustments outside the annual increase cycle (11%), or that they plan to address in 2024 (17%). Timely insights direct to you Does any of this come as a surprise to you? Or, perhaps it differs dramatically from what your organization is planning for 2024? As you know, what’s important is that you understand what your competitors are doing and then make decisions that are right for your unique circumstances. Sign up today to be notified when the next Compensation Planning Survey opens — participants receive the results at no cost. Looking for other Mercer insights to help you plan for 2024? Give us a call at 855-286-5302 or email one of our associates at surveys@mercer.com. How does that compare to the annual increase guidelines you are providing for your managers? Perhaps with more education and confidence to talk about pay, your managers could be given more discretion. 1/8/24, 2:41 PM Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey | 2024 Projections https://www.imercer.com/articleinsights/projected-salary-increase-budgets-holding 3/5 1/8/24, 2:41 PM Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey | 2024 Projections https://www.imercer.com/articleinsights/projected-salary-increase-budgets-holding 4/5 Mercer.com About us Contact us Terms of use Privacy Notice Accessibility statement Feedback Login-FAQs Cookie Notice 1/8/24, 2:41 PM Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey | 2024 Projections https://www.imercer.com/articleinsights/projected-salary-increase-budgets-holding 5/5 Manage Cookies Asia: Client Solutions Team: 65 6398 2323 Australia/NZ: 1800 645 186 (Sydney) +61 2 8864 6800 (International) / 0508 645 186 (Auckland) +64 9 984 3500 (International) Canada: 1-800-333-3070 Europe/ME/Africa: +48 22 376 17 32 (Warsaw) Latin America: +52 55 9628 7307 (Mexico) United States: Customer Service: 1-800-333-3070 | Global Software Helpdesk: +800 8300 0042 (11-digit global number, local toll charges apply). In the US, 1-800-866-7474. ©2024 Mercer LLC, All Rights Reserved Appendix B Workspan Daily Inflation, Labor Market Drive Merit Pay Increases Inflation, Labor Market Drive Merit Pay Increases for 2024 Workspan Daily December 22, 2023 By Michael J. O'Brien Employee Compensation Key Takeaways • Healthy salary increases. U.S. employers forecast raising their total salary budgets between 3.8% and 4.1% for 2024. • Influencing factors. Inflation and the labor market’s voluntary turnover rate may be dropping, but organizations are continuing to use compensation to distinguish themselves from competitors. • Other benefits to consider. Organizations need to take a total rewards focus to look beyond pay to further evaluate what employees value like healthcare and retirement. Inflationary pressures and concerns about a tight labor market continue to cloud the horizon as a trio of surveys point the way forward on 2024 compensation plans. U.S. employers forecast raising their merit increase budgets by 3.5% and total salary increase budgets by 3.8% on average for 2024, according to Mercer's U.S. Compensation Planning Survey November 2023 edition. WorldatWork’s “2023-24 Salary Budget Survey” of 2,146 participating organizations found U.S. employers are projecting 4.1% pay increase budgets in 2024 and 3.6% merit increases on average. Meanwhile, employers are planning an overall average salary increase of 4.0% for 2024, according to the latest Salary Budget Planning Survey by WTW. The pressures of the labor market, inflation and uncertainties continue to weigh-in for employers as they head into 2024 with their plans for pay increases, said Alicia Scott-Wears, a compensation content director at WorldatWork. Since the early 2010s, it has been typical to see U.S. salary budget increases in the range of 2.8 to 3.2%, Scott-Wears explained, so a salary budget range of 3.8 to 4.1% is a notable elevation — at average, 32% higher than pre-pandemic standard. “Still, a 4% increase is down from 2023, which saw actuals at 4.4%, so it’s a mild pullback, and globally, salary increase budgets are generally stabilizing or pulling back slightly in most cases,” she said. While both inflation and the labor market’s voluntary turnover rate may actually be dropping, organizations are continuing to use compensation as a main driver to distinguish themselves from competitors. “We are seeing healthy salary increases forecasted for 2024,” said Hatti Johansson, research director, reward, data and intelligence, at WTW. “Though economic uncertainty looms, employers are looking to remain competitive for talent, and pay is a key factor.” At the same time, she said, organizations should remember pay levels are difficult to reduce if markets deteriorate. “It’s best to avoid basing decisions that will have long-term implications on their organization on temporary economic conditions.” Trendspotting While pay growth remains strong for most organizations in the upcoming year, it is starting to slow down, according to Lauren Mason, senior principal, career, at Mercer. “We see that practices that had become the norm over the last two years — such as premiums for new hires and out-of-cycle pay increases — are slowing as well,” she said. Companies are becoming more prudent about their compensation spend, she said, as well as focusing on providing market and equity pay adjustments for employees as a result of pay compression or internal equity. The other trend is growth in hourly pay, according to Mercer research. • The median internal minimum wage (a company’s lowest wage or starting rate for any position) is now up to $16.70, up from $15.50 in 2022. • Across industries, median internal minimum wages vary, with the lowest rates being seen in retail (median of $13.80, which is notably the only industry below $15/hour), and the highest rate of $19.50 in energy. • Retail also had the fastest growing internal minimum wage (up from $12.20 last year, an increase of 13%). “It’s a reflection of the need for retail hourly wages to keep pace,” Mason said, “as many employees have transferable skills they can utilize in front-line roles in other higher paying industries such as services, banking or manufacturing.” There were no major shifts in 2023 related to pay for performance strategies, Mason said, as the vast majority of employers continue to indicate that they utilize performance as a key factor for differentiating merit awards. However, one “emerging” area of compensation is skill-based pay, which Mason said can provide many benefits, “such as aligning pay strategies to hot skills and rewarding the attainment of new skills.” Inflation Frustration How much does inflation affect how organizations plan on using merit pay increases in 2024? Inflation certainly adds more pressure on pay increase budgets, said Mason, but employers view cost of labor as the primary factor when setting budgets. And while there is a strong correlation between the economy and salary budgets, there are many factors that play into pay increases, said WTW’s Johansson. “Even as inflation cools, salary increases are — again — above inflation,” she said, “due to a healthy job market and successful business performance in many industries.” These days, when getting pay right is the absolute minimum requirement, said Johansson, organizations also need to continue to supplement pay with non-monetary elements, like workplace flexibility and focusing on the employee experience. “Companies need to take a total rewards focus to look beyond pay to look at what employees value like health care and retirement,” she said. Looking Ahead in 2024 As the labor market and economy continue to stabilize and pay growth gradually moderates, employers should brace themselves for a shift in the compensation landscape next year, said Johansson. “In this environment, it becomes crucial to strategically allocate compensation investments where they are most needed,” she said. “This includes prioritizing faster-moving market segments, such as hourly pay, as well as skills that are in high demand.” It's also essential to provide market and equity adjustments for employees who may have fallen behind. “With pay transparency on the rise, employers will face mounting pressure to not only explain, but also defend employee pay levels relative to the market and peers,” Johansson said. “Navigating these challenges successfully — with tighter budgets — will be key to getting compensation right in 2024.” Additionally, top skills and top performers will be a priority for employers in 2024, said WorldatWork’s Scott-Wears.  “Many employers have been challenged to retain top performing talent, so that may factor into allocations too,” she said. “Turnover is reportedly slowing globally, and inflation is easing slightly as well, so thoughtful allocations have the promise of being impactful with employees.” Editor’s Note: Additional Content For more information and resources related to this article see the pages below, which offer quick access to all WorldatWork content on these topics: About the Author Michael J. O'Brien Freelance Contributor at WorldatWork Michael J. O'Brien is a freelance writer for WorldatWork who has been covering the world of business since 2005. Appendix C WTW Survey Article 1/8/24, 2:43 PM U.S. pay raises to remain high 2024 WTW survey finds - WTW https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/news/2023/12/as-economic-uncertainty-looms-pay-rises-remain-high 1/3 PRESS RELEASE (HTTPS://WWW.WTWCO.COM/EN-US/INSIGHTS/ALL- INSIGHTS#SORT=%40FDATE13762%20DESCENDING&F:@ARTICLEZ45XCONTENTZ45XTYPE= [PRESS%20RELEASE]) U.S. pay raises to remain high in 2024, WTW survey December 7, 2023 Concerns over economic uncertainty not deterring employers from increasing pay ARLINGTON, VA, December 7, 2023 – U.S. employers are planning an overall average salary increase of 4.0% for 2024. That’s according to the latest Salary Budget Planning Survey by WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking and solutions company. Though down from the actual average increase of 4.4% in 2023, the numbers remain well above the 3.1% salary increase budget in 2021 and years prior. Inflationary pressures (55%) and concerns over a tight labor market (52%) are the primary influencing factors behind salary increase budgets, both cited by over half of employers surveyed. Yet, inflation is slowing down from the highs of recent years, and the labor market is shifting, with voluntary turnover and attrition at 11% overall. While still a common concern, fewer organizations are reporting issues with attraction and retention, down from 60% in 2022 to 48% currently. “We are seeing healthy salary increases forecasted for 2024,” said Hatti Johannsson, research director, Reward, Data and Intelligence, WTW. “Though economic uncertainty looms, employers are looking to remain competitive for talent, and pay is a key factor. At the same time, organizations should remember pay levels are difficult to reduce if markets deteriorate. It’s best to avoid basing decisions that will have long- term implications on their organization on temporary economic conditions.” Still, employers seek to strike a healthy balance within their total rewards packages. Non-monetary actions are a big focus for employers looking to attract and retain. At most organizations, these include more workplace flexibility (63%); broader emphasis on diversity, equity and inclusion (60%); and improving the employee experience (55%). Additionally, most employers have committed to hiring staff in a higher salary range (55%), undertaking compensation reviews of specific employee groups (54%) and raising starting salary ranges (49%), which could also be seen as a reflection of the increased emphasis on pay transparency. “ Though economic uncertainty looms, employers are looking to remain competitive for talent, and pay is a key factor.” Hatti Johannsson | Research Director, Reward, Data and Intelligence, WTW 1/8/24, 2:43 PM U.S. pay raises to remain high 2024 WTW survey finds - WTW https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/news/2023/12/as-economic-uncertainty-looms-pay-rises-remain-high 2/3 Related products Organizations also report moving toward greater work flexibility, as over half (55%) of employers offer a choice of remote, onsite or hybrid working, while 31% offer a flexible work schedule. As this trend grows, some companies are changing rewards in line with remote working: 13% of employers have taken action or are planning to change allowances, 10% of employers have or are planning to change benefits, and 11% have or are planning to adjust base pay. “With ongoing uncertainty, especially around pay transparency, we see organizations do better where there is a foundational level of understanding among all employees – on the compensation philosophy, the program design and how decisions about pay are made. Compensation is a sensitive topic and often managers feel uneasy when it comes to talking about pay. Our research shows the most commonly cited barrier to organizations communicating more openly about pay is the fear of employee reactions. We recommend training for managers on their role, how the compensation program works, and how to communicate it effectively. Improving the pay conversation goes a long way in improving the overall employee experience and further stabilizing the workforce,” said Sara Vallas, senior director, Employee Experience, WTW. About the survey The Salary Budget Planning Report is compiled by WTW’s Reward Data Intelligence practice. The survey was conducted in December 2023. Over 33,000 responses were received from companies covering over 150 countries worldwide. About WTW At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance. Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you. “ Improving the pay conversation goes a long way in improving the overall employee experience and further stabilizing the workforce.” Sara Vallas | Senior Director, Employee Experience, WTW Media contacts Ileana Feoli Public Relations, Health Wealth & Career, North America  Email (mailto:ileana.feoli@wtwco.com)  +1 212 309 5504 (tel:+1 212 309 5504) Stacy Bronstein  Email (mailto:stacy.bronstein@wtwco.com) (https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/solutions/products/salary-surveys) Salary Surveys Compete for and keep the talent you need with world-class salary surveys and salary benchmarking data across industries, countries and job levels. Getting compensation right is hard. We make it easy. Product Information  PRODUCT 1/8/24, 2:43 PM U.S. pay raises to remain high 2024 WTW survey finds - WTW https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/news/2023/12/as-economic-uncertainty-looms-pay-rises-remain-high 3/3 (https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/solutions/products/global-salary-and-employee-benefits-market-practice-reports) Global salary and employee beneits market practice reports Make informed workforce decisions with data from our extensive library of market practice reports, no participation required. Product Information  Related insights See all insights  (/en-us/insights/all-insights) Copyright © 2023 WTW. All rights reserved. PRODUCT Appendix D Utah DWS Blog Article 1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 1/6 Job Search (/jobseeker/index.html)Employers (/employer/index.html)Assistance (/assistance/index.html) The Utah Job Demand Buffer (/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah- job-demand-buffer) 26. December 2023 By Gwen Kervin Since March of 2022, the Federal Reserve has been raising interest rates in an attempt to cool inflation and slow the economy. However, so far, the effect on Utah’s labor market has been minimal. Constricted labor markets following the COVID pandemic caused employers to have a hard time filling open positions. Because employers struggled to find workers, a large gap developed in unmet labor demand. This elevated wages, which in turn lured marginal workers into the labor force, helping to fill some of the vacancies. While Utah continues to turn in job growth numbers, growth rates have come down from the highs experienced in 2021 and 2022, resulting in a reduction in the unmet labor gap. Because of this, any additional Fed rate moves could have a more immediate influence on the Utah labor market going forward. To understand the magnitude of the job buffer created by unmet Utah labor demand, it is helpful to look at the ratio of job openings to unemployed workers. The correlation between the two provides a proxy for how much labor is or isn’t available to fill job vacancies. In weak economies, there can be more idled workers than the volume of job postings. Conversely, in strong economies, there are more job postings than available workers. A balance between the two would be an economy with one available worker per job advertisement. However, when the volume of job openings noticeably exceeds the measure of available labor (the unemployed), it can serve as a signal that the labor supply internally is not sizable enough to support job growth. For example, in the early part of 2022, Utah’s ratio increased to 3.5. This implies that for every 350 job postings, there are only 100 available unemployed Utah laborers to fill the positions. If there are not enough workers internally to support growth, then attracting labor from outside the state is the needed remedy. Fortunately, Utah has been able to do just that as the state’s job growth remained at or above average through 2022 into the early part of 2023. However, as 2023 has progressed, the high ratio of job postings to workers has been moderating. Historically, Utah’s vibrant economy has kept this ratio above that of the United States. In fact, the only time that it approached levels near those in the nation was during and immediately following recessions.  1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 2/6 Prior to the pandemic, this ratio was well above that of the United States, but fell closer to levels seen in the rest of the nation in response to the economic pullback tied to COVID-era restrictions. However, soon after, the openings-to-unemployment ratio rose sharply, reaching 3.5 in January 2022. Although the openings-to-unemployment ratio is still at historically elevated levels, indicating elevated labor demand, it is clearly coming down. In July 2023, Utah’s job-openings-to-unemployment ratio was at 2.1, which is still noticeably higher than the U.S. rate of 1.5. Job openings can come about either because an employer needs to fill an existing position that has become vacant, or because the employer has decided to create a new position. When employees quit their jobs to move to a new one, it creates churn in the labor market, but does not represent growth in jobs. The number of people quitting their jobs can be used to get an idea of what portion of overall job openings can be attributed to churn versus job growth. In the United States, the number of people quitting their jobs in the pandemic’s aftermath increased and stayed elevated. This increase prompted a new catchphrase — The Great Resignation. It is only recently that U.S. quits have returned to levels more in line with pre- pandemic activity. Correspondingly, U.S. job openings also increased during the same period, indicating that a large portion of the overall job openings were due to churn rather than new, job-growth positions. 1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 3/6 A different picture emerges when looking at quits and job openings in Utah. The level of job openings in Utah increased several years before the pandemic hit. Increased quits were a part of this increase, moving higher at the end of 2017 and reaching a pre-pandemic high in the beginning of 2019. Nationally, churn and job growth were mostly flat before the pandemic, with largely little story to tell. Then the pandemic hit and created an instant recession. Recovery began shortly thereafter. Job openings went high in both the nation and Utah in the recovery period. Quits continued to remain low in Utah. On the other hand, quits across the United States began to rise. This largely says that in Utah the post-pandemic job openings increase was fueled more by job growth. Conversely, the national job openings seem fueled more by an overall shortage of labor which created a noticeable amount of labor turnover. Nationally, people were churning in search of better jobs and wages. Recent job growth numbers point to a loosening in Utah’s labor market. Monthly job growth estimates have come down from the highs seen in 2021 and 2022. It was in negative territory for most of 2020, but by 2021, it turned positive, with an average growth rate of 5.0%. By 2022, Utah’s average job growth rate was 4.2%, still well above historic highs. For comparison, from January 1991 through October 2023, Utah had a 2.7% average job growth rate, which is more in line with the growth rates seen in 2023. Year to date, the state’s average job growth rate is 2.6%. Utah’s tight labor market over the past several years has induced employers to raise wages to attract new workers, and it appears to have worked. Utah’s labor force participation rate, which accounts for those over the age of 16 who are either working or looking for work, has risen in the past year to 69.7% in September 2023. This is largely a full percentage-point increase in just the past half year. Given the population’s age distribution in Utah, a labor force participation rate close to 68.5% would point to a solidly employed labor force. A year ago, in September 2022, the labor force participation rate was at 68.8%. 1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 4/6 Wages driven higher by the state’s tight labor market have induced marginal workers who typically remain on the sidelines to enter the labor market. Over the past year, groups that have historically seen lower labor force participation rates, including teenagers, older workers, and women with school age children, have been entering the workforce. Younger workers in Utah, between the ages of 16 and 19, have increased their labor force participation rates by 4.0 percentage points, while those over the age of 65 have increased their participation by 1.4 points. By comparison, teens in the U.S. have seen a decline in their participation rates. Older U.S. workers have increased their rates only slightly over the last year, and have yet to recover their participation rates from pre-pandemic levels. Working- age women in Utah, between the ages of 25 and 44, who might have stayed out of the labor force due to childcare needs, have increased their participation rates by 4.1 percentage points compared to U.S. women, who increased their participation rates by only 0.7 points. An overall tighter local labor market in Utah and a faster increase in average hourly earnings over the past year have encouraged higher labor force participation rates among these marginal workers in Utah than in the rest of the United States. While marginal workers have helped to fill vacancies, recent job posting data indicates that employers are scaling back their demand for labor. While several of the industrial sector’s job postings remain aggressive in Utah overall, total job postings are down 11.3% from September 2022 to August 2023. Data from Lightcast, a job posting aggregator, indicates that unique online job postings over the last year have declined the most in the professional, scientific and technical services, and administrative support sectors. The educational services and transportation and warehousing industries also saw significant declines in the number of online job postings. Some of these decreases can be attributed to a natural pause in job postings following a dramatic increase in hiring as employers sought to rehire lost workers following the COVID pandemic. For example, both the educational services and professional, scientific and technical services sectors, which have seen a decline in online job postings, saw some of the largest increases in employment from the fourth quarter of 2020 to the first quarter of 2023. 1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 5/6 Higher wages and spending power have kept demand for services elevated, leading to an increase in job postings in accommodation and food services and other services, which includes repair, maintenance, and personal services. The state’s growing population and vibrant economy continue to support the construction sector, which saw a 3.9% increase in job postings over the past year. Finally, the health and social assistance sector, which had a difficult time attracting labor post COVID and will only grow as the population ages, has seen an increase in job postings as well. Tight labor markets in Utah have driven wages higher, luring marginal workers into the labor force, but there is evidence that Federal Reserve rate hikes have begun to loosen labor markets. The job buffer is declining, job postings are down, and job growth numbers have lowered to a more normalized level. However, there is still a healthy demand for workers in the accommodation and food services, construction, and health and social assistance sectors. Going forward, with the jobs gap reduced, the actions of the Fed are likely to have a more immediate impact on labor markets. The effects will have a stronger impact on broader U.S. labor markets, which have a smaller buffer and higher unemployment rates. However, higher interest rates could ultimately slow the Utah economy and soften labor demand going forward. Log in (/blog/Account/login.aspx) Home Utah Dept. of Workforce Services Blog (/blog/) Enter search term Search Recent Posts New Adoption Tax Credit Available for 2023 Taxes (/blog/post/2024/01/04/new-adoption-tax-credit-available-for-2023-taxes) The Utah Job Demand Buffer (/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer) Utah's Employment Summary: November 2023 (/blog/post/2023/12/22/utah-s-employment-summary-november-2023) Growing Apprenticeship Opportunities in Utah (/blog/post/2023/11/28/growing-apprenticeship-opportunities-in-utah) Higher Education’s Role in Utah’s Workforce (/blog/post/2023/11/20/higher-education-s-role-in-utah-s-workforce) Utah's Employment Summary: October 2023 (/blog/post/2023/11/17/utah-s-employment-summary-october-2023) Manufacturing Resilience: Exploring Advanced Manufacturing in Utah (/blog/post/2023/10/23/manufacturing-resilience-exploring- advanced-manufacturing-in-utah) Utah's Employment Summary: September 2023 (/blog/post/2023/10/20/utah-s-employment-summary-september-2023) Labor Market Data (/blog/post/2023/10/11/labor-market-data) 1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 6/6 Feedback (/jsp/feedback/) | Equal Opportunity (/department/contact/eo.html) | Contact Us (/department/contact/index.html) | Utah.gov Home (http://www.utah.gov) | Terms of Use (http://www.utah.gov/disclaimer.html) | Privacy Policy (http://www.utah.gov/privacypolicy.html) | Accessibility Policy (http://www.utah.gov/accessibility.html) © 2024 State of Utah A proud partner of the network Serving Utah's veterans (/blog/post/2023/09/28/serving-utah-s-veterans) Categories Blog (126) (/blog/category/Blog) Intergenerational Poverty (10) (/blog/category/Intergenerational-Poverty) Department (71) (/blog/category/Department) Refugee Office (14) (/blog/category/Refugee-Office) Service Providers (12) (/blog/category/Service-Providers) Youth (8) (/blog/category/Youth) Employers (67) (/blog/category/Employers) Job Seekers (59) (/blog/category/Job-Seekers) Explore Careers (14) (/blog/category/Explore-Careers) Job Preparation (14) (/blog/category/Job-Preparation) Training Resources (26) (/blog/category/Training-Resources) Veterans (10) (/blog/category/Veterans) Wages & Income (71) (/blog/category/Wages-Income) Labor Market (161) (/blog/category/Labor-Market) Temporary Assistance (19) (/blog/category/Temporary-Assistance) Utah State Office of Rehabilitation (33) (/blog/category/Utah-State-Office-of-Rehabilitation) Workforce Research and Analysis (71) (/blog/category/Workforce-Research-and-Analysis) Zip Code or City Find Find a Workforce Services Location Translate this Page Select Language Powered by Translate (https://translate.google.com) Follow Us (/blog) (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWFTWwPTm (https://www.linkedin.com/company/department- of-workforce-services) (https://twitter.com/JobsUT) (https://www.facebook.com/Utah.DWS) (https://www.instagram.com/jobsut/) Follow us on our Socials (https://jobs.utah.gov/followus.html) Appendix E City Resolution No. 20 - 2023 RESOLUTION NO. ____ OF 2023 Declaring Support for Top-of-Market Wages for Firefighters and Police Officers Employed by Salt Lake City Corporation WHEREAS, Salt Lake City is the capital city of the State of Utah, with growing public safety needs and service requirements. WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation (the “City”) is committed to recruiting and retaining the highest skilled and trained firefighters and police officers to serve Salt Lake City’s diverse and growing population. WHEREAS, pursuant to the Collective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution dated March 22, 2011 (“Collective Bargaining Resolution”), the City recognizes and engages in collective bargaining with the International Association of Firefighters Local 81, representing eligible employees (“IAFF”) and the Salt Lake Police Association, representing eligible employees (“SLPA”). WHEREAS, pursuant to the Collective Bargaining Resolution, the City periodically negotiates the wages for employees represented by the IAFF and SLPA. WHEREAS, the Collective Bargaining Resolution establishes a process for negotiating wages for IAFF- and SLPA-represented employees, and any negotiated wages are presented to the City Council as part of the Mayor’s annual budget. WHEREAS, in the fiscal year 2021, 2022 and fiscal year 2023 budgets, the City Council prioritized ensuring that the City’s firefighters and police officers were paid wages commensurate with or close to top of the market wages paid by public entities for such occupations in the State of Utah. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to express the policy objective that for fiscal year 2024 and for future fiscal years, the City’s firefighters and police officers be paid wages commensurate with or close to top of the market wages paid by public entities for such occupations in the State of Utah. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, the following: 1. In recognition of the unique challenges associated with being employed as a firefighter or police officer, especially in the capital city of the State of Utah, the Salt Lake City Council’s policy objective is to ensure that the City’s firefighters and police officers are paid wages commensurate with or close to top of the market wages paid by public entities for such occupations in the State of Utah, especially among the State’s largest public safety agencies. 2. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage. 20 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this_ day of June, 2023. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Darin Mano, Chair ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: Approved as to form: Salt Lake City Attorney'sOffice lk:= ernelewis (Jun 13, 2023 13:51 MDT) Cindy Lou Irishman, City Recorder Katherine Lewis, City Attorney 13th Katherine Lewis (Jun 17, 2023 12:55 MDT) Jun 17, 2023 Appendix F Elected Officials, Department Directors & Other Key City Leaders    The table below illustrates the normalized median wage of all responding entities for each job as surveyed by the Salt Lake City HR Department. Following best practices, a minimum of five entities were required to report on the composite of salary data to be used for comparison.  Job Code Job Title Number of Entities Average Years in Position Normalized Median # of 2023 Participants 32 002626 911 DISPATCH DIRECTOR 14 4.5 $134,993 006440 BUILDING OFFICIAL 21 5.3 $139,383 002470 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER  11 4.9 $175,120 002091 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 25 6.0 $198,053 002475 CHIEF HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICER 26 4.1 $182,089 001578 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 23 7.3 $186,879 002514 CHIEF INNOVATION OFFICER 7 2.0 $164,699 007010 CHIEF OF POLICE 26 3.7 $219,565 000249 CHIEF OF STAFF 19 2.9 $163,795 000504 CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER 13 4.7 $129,276 001553 CITY ATTORNEY 29 5.0 $220,515 002193 CITY BUDGET DIRECTOR 23 4.7 $140,540 000020 CITY COUNCIL MEMBER2 11 4.4 $23,964 004031 CITY ENGINEER 18 2.5 $163,068 000314 CITY RECORDER 16 3.2 $133,335 002342 CITY TREASURER 17 7.6 $151,200 000897 COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR 22 5.2 $152,710 002327 COMPLIANCE DIVISION DIRECTOR 7 1.9 $121,094 002511 DIRECTOR ‐ REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 4 Insufficient Data Insufficient Data 002060 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 17 3.9 $177,645 001992 DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 18 2.7 $177,045 006401 DIRECTOR OF HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 19 3.5 $136,789 002581 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC LANDS 10 3.5 $170,790 000579 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES 16 5.6 $201,366 001552 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC UTILITIES4 22 4.9 $189,064 002899 DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (ENGINEER)                10 2.6 $199,043 000021 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ‐  CITY COUNCIL OFFICE 10 7.2 $155,533 001551 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF AIRPORTS5 16 N/A $349,600 002176 FACILITIES DIVISION DIRECTOR 22 5.9 $136,172 008010 FIRE CHIEF 25 4.9 $210,259 002177 FLEET MANAGEMENT DIVISION DIRECTOR 23 5.0 $124,614 002178 GOLF DIVISION DIRECTOR 10 8.1 $107,270 000539 JUSTICE COURTS ADMINISTRATOR 16 4.4 $136,659 000001 MAYOR 1 15 5.6 $161,981 002405 PARKS DIVISION DIRECTOR       22 4.4 $143,713 004165 PLANNING DIRECTOR 21 4.1 $167,448 000002 SENIOR ADVISOR 11 3.3 $133,286 002036 SUSTAINABILITY / ENVIRONMENT DIRECTOR3 12 3.7 $149,165 002186 WASTE & RECYLCING DIVISION DIRECTOR3 12 3.7 $139,306 002326 YOUTH & FAMILY DIVISION DIRECTOR 9 6.6 $107,432 1: Compared against Full‐Time  ONLY Mayors 2: Compared against Part‐Time  ONLY City Council Members 3: Compared against select group of cities 4: Compared against additional cities beyond the general  participant list 5: Compared against ACI ‐NA salary survey ‐ Published 2022 City and County of Denver City of Boise City of Fresno City of Las Cruces City of Oakland City of Provo City of Seattle Des Moines Water Works City of Arvada City of Boulder City of Green Bay City of Las Vegas City of Oklahoma City of Reno City of Surprise Metro Nashville Government City of Baton Rouge City of Des Moines City of Kent City of Memphis City of Omaha City of Sacramento City of Tampa Pittsburgh Water & Sewer Authority City of Bellevue City of Everett City of Knoxville City of New Orleans City of Phoenix City of Salem City of Tempe West Valley City Participant List Prepared for and on behalf of the Committee by: Salt Lake City - Human Resources Department 349 South 200 East, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-5464 (801) 535-7900 Deb Alexander, Chief Human Resources Officer David Salazar, Compensation Manager Michael Jenson, Senior Compensation Analyst   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: Sylvia Richards Budget & Policy Analyst DATE:March 26, 2024 RE:Sister City Board Annual Report 2024 ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Administration has provided the Council with the annual report from the Sister City Board. As Council Members may recall, Sister City is a diplomatic program housed within the Department of Economic Development. The Council passed an ordinance in 2023 to establish an updated Sister City Board and to supervise program operations, ensuring the program’s longevity and effectiveness. The Board consists of seven to nine (7-9) voting members, and up to six (6) non-voting members, including up to two non-voting youth board members, ages 15-18. The program currently has six active Sister City relationships with the following cities: Matsumoto, Japan; Keelung, Taiwan; Chernivtsi, Ukraine; Torino, Italy; Izhevsk, Russia; and Trujillo, Peru, with the goal of fostering peace through mutual respect and cooperation. The transmittal indicates that success metrics for these relationships vary, encompassing cultural exchange, humanitarian aid, economic development, dignitary visits, and educational programs. Additional information about each city is available in the Administration’s report. The transmittal provides a list of goals that were completed in 2023 : •Filling of board member seats in Districts 3, 4, 5, 6 •Election of Chair Ross Chambless and Vice Chair John Wilson •Creation of Google Drive database for Board Members •Matsumoto, Japan Delegation Visit Success •Creation of six city subcommittees •Formation of the advisory committee to the board - members of the public •New Website Built for Sister Cities Program - https://saltlakesistercities.com/ •Student Virtual Exchange between Salt Lake City and Matsumoto, Japan Item Schedule: Briefing: March 26, 2024 No action necessary Page | 2 •Finalized By-Laws •Made contact with Torino, Italy Mayor Staff - led by Nicole Pessetto •Made contact with staff in Keelung, Taiwan The following goals are in progress: •Peru firefighter training •Identifying Board Members from Districts 1, 2 and 7, as well as youth representation •Digitizing past Sister City documents and images •SLC Mayor visit to Matsumoto, Japan • Meeting with community members with past knowledge of city relationships •Annual planning POLICY QUESTIONS ➢The question of whether there is a requirement or intention that Board members represent the various sister cities has been raised. Council staff checked the Sister City code, and there is no mention of a specific requirement that Board Members are to represent the sister cities. ➢Council Members may wish to ask if any additional City budget resources will be needed to improve the operations of this program. ➢Council Members may wish to ask what types of public outreach Economic Development will be engaged in to inform the public of the City’s Sister City relationships, activities and events. ➢The Council may wish to discuss their thoughts and ideas of how they would like to see sister city relationships move forward in the future. 2023 Annual Report Overview •Sister Cities established by President Eisenhower in 1956. •Salt Lake City has six active Sister City relationships. •Goal to promote peace through mutual respect, understanding, and cooperation. •Collectively hold tremendous potential and are vital assets for our city on the world stage. •Enhance Salt Lake City’s growth as a world leader with new technologies and trade, healthcare advancement and democratization, and building resilience in the face of global climate change. 2023 Goals & Priorities Complete: •Updated ordinance •New Board members: D3, 4, 5, 6, At Large •New Chair & Vice Chair •New Committees: City, Advisory, Membership •New bylaws •New website Ongoing: •Internal database organization •Digitizing past documents & images •Meetings with community members •Meetings with cities and State Dept •Diplomatic record keeping Relationship Updates Torino, Italy •Staff connected via Zoom call with Mayor Stefano Lo Russo's staff •Next steps: Further virtual meetings with staff and Mayor Lo Russo •Opportunities: Olympics, sports tourism, higher education, cultural exchange Matsumoto, Japan •SLC welcomed Matsumoto for a 65th anniversary trip. Visit included a proclamation ceremony & climate change panel •Two virtual education exchanges took place between Salt Lake City School District and Matsumoto students •Next steps: Reciprocal visit to Matsumoto •Opportunities: Sustainable tourism & outdoor rec, Olympics, education, cultural exchange Relationship Updates Trujillo, Peru •Firefighter training/education exchange with Trujillo and Lima airport is in progress •Board member Becerra helped support cultural dance event in August •Next steps: Welcome new Peruvian Consul General and support firefighter training •Opportunities: Water policy, education, cultural exchange Chernivtsi, Ukraine •Meetings to support refugees living in SLC with driver's license test language barriers and fundraising support •A letter of support and solidarity was signed by SLC Mayor and Council and delivered along with a gift by the World Trade Center in spring 2023 •Next steps: On hold •Opportunities: Higher education, cultural exchange Relationship Updates Keelung, Taiwan •The board met with the SLC Police Department to learn about the longstanding relationship with Keelung's police •The board met with community member with essential knowledge to gather and begin archiving documentation of the relationship •Next steps: On hold •Opportunities: Environmental concerns, “port” cities, cultural exchange Izhevsk, Russia •The board has not communicated with Izhevsk community members or staff due to current safety concerns •Next steps: On hold •Opportunities: Higher education, cultural exchange Thank You DEPARTMENT of ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ERIN MENDENHALL MAYOR LORENA RIFFO JENSON DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL _______________________ RACHEL OTTO, CHIEF OF STAFF DATE RECEIVED:2/9/2024 DATE SENT TO COUNCIL: 2/9/2024 __________________________________________________________________ TO:Salt Lake City Council DATE:2/8/24 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM:Lorena Riffo Jenson, Department of Economic Development SUBJECT:Sister Cities Annual Report 2023 STAFF CONTACTS:Katie Matheson, Marketing & Research Manager, Diplomacy Officer, Katherine.Matheson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE:Information Item RECOMMENDATION:Review Sister Cities 2023 Progress BUDGET IMPACT:N/A BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Sister Cities is a diplomatic program which is housed within the Department of Economic Development. In 2023, City Council passed an ordinance from the Department to establish an updated Sister Cities Board and to supervise program operations, ensuring the program’s longevity and effectiveness. This Annual Report offers a concise summary of the accomplishments achieved by the newly- established Sister Cities Board and the Sister Cities program in 2023, along with outlining potential objectives and priorities for the future. It also provides detailed insights into Salt Lake City's six Sister Cities, covering their present program status, commonalities, potential avenues for connection, and city descriptions. Currently, Salt Lake City maintains six active Sister City relationships with Matsumoto, Japan; Keelung, Taiwan; Chernivtsi, Ukraine; Torino, Italy; Izhevsk, Russia; and Trujillo, Peru, each rachel otto (Feb 9, 2024 14:01 MST) aimed at fostering peace through mutual respect and cooperation. The success metrics for these relationships vary, encompassing cultural exchange, humanitarian aid, economic development, dignitary visits, and educational programs. ATTACHMENTS: Sister Cities 2023 Annual Report PDF Salt Lake City Sister Cities Board Annual Report 2023 1 Program Background & History The Sister Cities program is strategically housed in the Department of Economic Development. Under the leadership of Mayor Erin Mendenhall and department staff, the city ordinance governing the board and program was adopted by City Council in February 2023. Today, Salt Lake City enjoys six active Sister City relationships with Matsumoto, Japan; Keelung, Taiwan; Chernivtsi, Ukraine; Izhevsk, Russia; Torino, Italy; and Trujillo, Peru. Though there is a vast range of diversity in these relationships, all share the common goal of promoting peace through mutual respect, understanding, and cooperation. Each relationship Salt Lake City established was created for a different reason, under different circumstances. The measure of success for one relationship may not be the best measure for another, yet all have the ultimate goal of promoting peace. The reasons behind the creation of each of our partnerships include cultural exchange programs, humanitarian aid, dignitary visits, economic development, and student, teacher and employee exchange programs. Throughout the life of a Sister City relationship the goals may change or evolve, and the level of connectivity and involvement may vary greatly due to shifting political priorities, constantly changing city administrations, or even governmental instability. These constant changes create an ever- evolving and fluctuating environment in which Sister City relationships must survive. To strengthen the Sister Cities program, the Department of Economic Development drafted a city ordinance to govern it and created an official Board to oversee the program. The adoption of the ordinance supports the future preservation of the program as well as its Board. It also demonstrates the strong commitment and support of the current Mayor and City Council. 2 The Sister Cities Board is made up of community representatives with strong ties and interests in the sister cities program. In addition to the Board, a group of local representatives work behind the scenes to accomplish the tasks that make these relationships work. Without the dedication and commitment of community volunteers, Board members, and Economic Development staff, we would not experience the level of success we have with our program. 2 A Message from the Chair 2023 was a year of revitalization for Salt Lake City’s sister cities. With the Covid pandemic behind us, a new Sister Cities board took the helm to begin a process of rebuilding and strengthening the Sister Cities program. In July we organized a successful visit with a delegation from our oldest sister city, Matsumoto, Japan, through which we hope to rekindle various economic and cultural exchange opportunities with this affiliation. We have also been helping to coordinate a training event next year for firefighters from our sister city, Trujillo, Peru, and we continue to seek new and promising opportunities for exchanges with Keelung, Taiwan, and Torino, Italy, as well as Chernivtsi, Ukraine and Izhevsk, Russia. As a board, we are working with city staff to develop specific protocols for fostering clear and genuine communications with our sister city counterparts and other international dignitaries. And we are crafting a process to receive and review requests for new sister city partnerships in addition to updating our board by-laws. Our city’s sister city programs collectively hold tremendous potential and should be seen as vital assets for our city on the world stage. The Sister Cities program has been reinvigorated since becoming restructured under the Department of Economic Development which has allowed these international relationships more opportunities to flourish and enhance Salt Lake City’s growth as a world leader with new technologies and trade, healthcare advancement and democratization, and building resilience in the face of global climate change. As Salt Lake City moves closer to “welcoming the world” again as the host city for the 2034 Winter Olympic Games we stand ready to support the City’s leadership with the exciting prospect of cultivating our city into an international center for the Winter Olympics and beyond. We encourage you as our city leaders to share your ideas and vision from our sister city relationships so that we can better support you and our communities. Ross Chambless Board Chair 3 Board Members Ross Chambless - Chair John Wilson - Vice Chair Annie Quan Missy Greis Nicole Pessetto Ricardo Becerra Matilyn Mortensen Sheri Sorenson Olga Efimova Ahimara Suarez Joe Zeidner Staff Katherine Matheson, Department of Economic Development - Board Manager & Diplomacy Officer Joshua Paluh, Department of Economic Development - Staff Review of 2023 Goals and Priorities Filing of board member seats in Districts 3,4,5,6 Election of Chair Ross Chambless and Vice Chair John Wilson Creation of Google Drive database for Board Members: Matsumoto, Japan Delegation Visit Success Creation of six city subcommittees Formation of the advisory committee to the board - members of the public New Website Built for Sister Cities Program -https://saltlakesistercities.com/ Student Virtual Exchange between Salt Lake City Students and Matsumoto, Japan Finalized ByLaws Made contact with Torino, Italy Mayor Staff - lead by Nicole Pessetto Made contact with staff in Keelung,Taiwan Complete: Peru firefighter training Finding Board Members from Districts 2 and 7, and youth representation Digitizing past Sister City documents and images SLC Mayor visit to Matsumoto, Japan Meeting with community members with past knowledge of city relationships Annual planning In progress/ongoing: 4 Sister City Relationship Updates Torino, Italy: Committee Members: Nicole Pessetto, John Wilson Summary: Staff members met via Zoom call with the Mayor staff in Torino this summer. The board hopes to continue to build a relationship with their staff and share knowledge on Olympic hosting, sports tourism, and higher education. Current Programming Status: Board member Pessetto connected SLC and the Mayor of Torino. A Zoom meeting occurred between DED staff and Torino Mayor staff in June 2023. The discussion focused on student exchange, innovation, sport, and tech. Board member Pessetto has been trying to connect the Polytechnico di Torino engineering program with a similar program at the University of Utah. Staff and Board have had difficulty contacting Torino staff after the initial meeting. Historical Images of the relationship were found online on a Facebook page about the relationship. Key Similarities with Salt Lake City: Hosted Olympic Winter Games (Torino - 2006) Geography - Surrounded by mountains Sports and Recreation - soccer teams Higher education Diversity efforts with small businesses Industry, commerce, and trade “crossroads” Recommended Opportunities for Connection: Winter Olympic Games Higher education Cultural exchange About: Torino is located in Northwest Italy, with a population of approximately 890,000. The city is recognized for being a major European political center. It was Italy’s first capital city in 1861 and was 5 Torino, Italy continued: home to the House of Savoy, Italy’s royal family. Even though much of its political significance and importance was lost in World War II, it became a major European crossroad for industry, commerce, and trade, and currently is one of Italy’s main industrial centers, being part of the famous “industrial triangle,” along with Milan and Genoa. Torino is well known as the home of the Shroud of Turin, the football teams Juventus F.C. and Torino F.C., the headquarters of automobile manufacturers FIAT, Lancia and Alfa Romeo, and as host of the 2006 Winter Olympics. Several International Space Station modules, such as Harmony and Columbus, were also manufactured in Torino. In 2002, Torino, Italy and Salt Lake City worked to forge an Olympic City relationship between the two cities. Conversations included the former Vice Consul, Dr. Giovanni Maschero, former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson, and former Mayor of Torino, Sergio Chiamparino, each seeing opportunities in cultural exchange with the relationship. In October of 2003, the cities established a Friendship City relationship, and in January 2007, Mayor Anderson officially signed the documents for establishment of the Sister City relationship. 6 Sister City Relationship Updates Matsumoto, Japan: Committee Members: Ross Chambless, Joe Zeidner Summary: In July 2023, we hosted a visiting delegation of 19 from Matsumoto, including Mayor Yoshino Gaun and his staff, members of the Matsumoto Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and affiliated residents. We hosted a panel discussion on climate change between the Mayors and provided a tour of the city and Great Salt Lake. Current Programming Status: SLC welcomed Matsumoto for a 65th anniversary trip which included the Mayor and Council President, along with members of their Chamber and Sister Cities board. The Delegation visit included a proclamation ceremony, a Climate Change Panel at the University of Utah, and a dinner at Squatters Brewery. Delegation was impressed by how much we have grown as a city as well as our diversity. City staff reiterates how positive responses have been from both Salt Lake City staff and delegation members. Sister wooden bowl and gifts from Matsumoto are on display in the Mayor's office Subcommittee met to discuss similarities between the cities and potential opportunities to connect. Mayor's office received a letter from Mayor Gaun saying they were happy with the visit and would like the mayor to join them in Matsumoto in 2024. Matsumoto staff received the historical map in the mail which was given during the delegation visit. A small documentary by a student at Temple University, Tokyo, Bryan Cooper, about the relationship between Matsumoto and Salt Lake City was filmed in Matsumoto. The film has not yet been published. A high school performing group is interested in visiting Matsumoto in 2025. The Salt Lake City School District was connected with Matsumoto contacts. In December 2023, an online education exchange took place between Salt Lake City School District and students in Matsumoto, Japan. A follow-up exchange is planned for January 2024. 7 Matsumoto, Japan Continued: Key Similarities with Salt Lake City: Environmental Concerns Tourism industry and outdoor recreation Nagano, Japan hosted the Winter Olympic Games in 1998. Salt Lake in 2002. Geography - both cities are near mountain ranges Interest in Tech/Robotics Want to create opportunities for their students Appreciation for craft beer Recommended Opportunities for Connection: Sustainable Tourism and Outdoor Recreation Utilizing Infrastructure of past Olympics Health Care Information exchange Japanese people culturally believe food is medicine “PenPal” exchange for students either virtually or mail Tech/Robots Tech is becoming more important to assist the elderly in Matsumoto as the population grows older. Cultural exchange About: In 2023, Salt Lake City and Matsumoto City, Nagano, Japan celebrated the 65th anniversary of their Sister Cities relationship. Matsumoto holds the distinction of being Salt Lake City’s first and oldest Sister City, with additional ties through Olympic Sister Cities. The establishment of this relationship is credited to the mutual respect and admiration between the two cities, with the contributions of Japanese citizen, Tamotsu Murayama, playing a significant role. Murayama, a Japanese newspaper correspondent from Matsumoto, visited The Utah Nippo, a Japanese newspaper agency in Utah, in 1957. Witnessing the beauty of Salt Lake City and the Wasatch Mountains evoked memories of the Japan Alps surrounding Matsumoto City. Alongside Murayama, several individuals from Salt Lake City were involved in forging this connection, including Mayors Earl J. Glade and J. Bracken Lee, University of Utah President A. Ray Olpin, Mrs. Kuniko Terasawa, Henry Kasai (the President and owner of the Utah Nippo), members of the Japanese American Citizens League (JACL), and the wider Japanese community. 8 Matsumoto, Japan Continued: The enthusiasm for international culture was reciprocated in 1957 when Murayama delivered a supportive message from Matsumoto City Mayor Tokuya Furuhata to Salt Lake City Mayor J. Braken Lee, leading to the formal declaration of the relationship in November 1958, thirteen years after the conclusion of World War II. In 2023, Matsumoto City has a population of 243,000, and it continues to be renowned for its captivating features, with one notable highlight being its historic castle. Among the four castles in Japan considered national treasures, Matsumoto Castle stands out as a remarkable symbol. This architectural marvel is accompanied by beautifully landscaped gardens, complete with a moat, encompassing 90 acres at the city’s core. Alongside the castle, Matsumoto is celebrated for various cultural and recreational attractions. These include the prestigious Saito Kinen music festival conducted by Seiji Ozawa, the renowned Suzuki Methods of Music, winter sports and games, wasabi farms, woodblock prints, buckwheat noodles, hot springs (onsen), silk culture, temari (colorful silk cord-wound handballs), and a plethora of modern and contemporary art museums. One museum in particular is the Chihiro Art Museum, founded by Chihiro Iwasaki. Ms. Iwasaki devoted her entire life for world peace through the arts, including her artistic depictions of children amidst the atomic bomb attack during World War II. 9 Sister City Relationship Updates Trujillo, Peru: Committee Members: Ricardo Becerra, Ahimara Suarez Summary: In 2023, key members of the Sister City board helped build connections with Salt Lake’s Peruvian Community, and we pursued discussions about hosting a training for firefighters. Current Programming Status: University of Utah and a Trujillo school were connected for student exchange. Subcommittee met with community member Juanita Paucar, who planned a cultural event in August. Board member Becerra helped with the process and location finding, and the event was successful. The mayor of a town in Cusco, Peru, asked for winter clothes. Board asked for a letter to be sent explaining the request and needs. No response was given. Board member Becerra connected with The Leonardo about art/artifact exchange with a director of a museum in Peru. Firefighter training/education exchange with Trujillo and Lima airport firefighters in progress. Key Similarities with Salt Lake City: Geography - desert climate near Trujillo Urban Development and Growth Tourism Water Scarcity Inland commercial and transportation center Recommended Opportunities for Connection: Environmental concerns - demand and misuse of water resources City development - affordable housing Education Cultural exchange 10 Trujillo, Peru continued: About: Founded in 1534, Trujillo is arguably one of the most beautiful cities in Peru. Located 350 miles north of Lima, Trujillo is one of the most important economical centers of Northern Peru. It serves as an inland commercial and transportation center for the surrounding farming areas. In the early 2000s, Peruvian residents of Salt Lake City, members of the Fraternidad Peruana de Utah, and locals from Trujillo gathered to discuss the establishment of a Sister City relationship between Trujillo, Peru and Salt Lake City. A meeting was also held in Trujillo with representatives from the Chamber of Commerce, the municipal government, as well as leaders from the industries of education, business, art and tourism. The Mayor of Trujillo drafted a letter, presenting this to the committee, establishing Trujillo as a Friendship City in 2005. In 2015, Trujillo officially became a Sister City with Salt Lake. 11 Sister City Relationship Updates Chernivtsi, Ukraine: Committee Members: Sheri Sorensen, John Wilson Summary: In 2023, the board’s efforts were focused on helping refugees from the conflict between Ukraine and Russia now living in Salt Lake City. A letter of solidarity one year after the war began was signed by SLC Mayor and Council, and delivered along with a gift by the World Trade Center in April/May 2023. Current Programming Status: A volunteer drive for clothes and medical supplies was sent to Chernivtsi. The Mayor and Council sent a letter of solidarity and support to Ukraine via a World Trade Center visit. Board member Sorensen helped hold a fundraising concert as well as an event for Ukrainian Independence Day to raise money for refugees. Chair Chambless connected Refugee Community Specialist Oksana Omel with the English Language Director at University of Utah. He also connected Mrs. Omel with state legislators and their staff regarding challenges for Ukrainian refugees with driver license tests. Board member Sorensen worked to provide holiday dinners for the refugees. Staff worked with board member Sorensen to brainstorm opportunities for refugees to raise money. This brainstorm led to the group establishing a booth at the Christkindelmarkt to sell Ukrainian crafts and art. Staff and board members met with an individual from Baltimore, Amy Kozak, who identified as Ukrainian-American, and received information regarding a website where U.S. citizens can fund resources for Urkanians. Amy is meeting with a number of U.S. cities that have Sister Cities ties with Ukrainian cities. She suggested the Ukrainian government-supported micro-funding, person-to-person benefactor program website eDopomoga. They discussed the need to investigate this exchange possibility further, and whether there are State Department conflicts, and whether other US Sister Cities were endorsing it. Key Similarities with Salt Lake City: Surrounded by mountain ranges - the Carpathian Mountains Higher Education Chernivtsi University and Utah Green Spaces 12 Chernivtsi, Ukraine continued: Recommended Opportunities for Connection: Environmental concern/climate change Higher education Cultural exchange About: Salt Lake City residents Lowell and Jane Turner visited Chernivtsi in the late 1980s and were deeply captivated by its charm and appeal. Inspired by their experience, the Turners approached then Salt Lake City Mayor, Palmer DePaulis, with the idea of establishing a Sister City Relationship. Recognizing the potential for cultural exchange and cooperation, Mayor DePaulis embraced the proposal. In June 1989, Chernivtsi, Ukraine was officially declared a Sister City of Salt Lake City. Chernivtsi, Ukraine, is situated in Southwestern Ukraine and stretches for seven miles along the upper Prut River in the Carpathian foothills. First documented reference to Chernivtsi dates from 1408, when it was a town in Moldavia and the chief center of the area known as Bukovina. Over the centuries, Chernivtsi was governed by several different countries: first, the Turks and then in 1774, Austria; after World War I, Romania, and in 1940, the U.S.S.R. In 1991, after the break-up of the former Soviet Union, Chernivtsi was recognized as a city in independent Ukraine and remains so today. Throughout its history, Chernivtsi has been a hub of trade, and in the early 20th century, it blossomed into an industrial center and a crucial railway junction, connecting lines to Lviv, Ternopil, Moldova, and Romania. Today, the city boasts an international airport, further facilitating its connectivity. The local industries in Chernivtsi have encompassed diverse sectors, including agriculture, woolen and cotton textile processing, light engineering, food processing, timber working, as well as clothing manufacturing and technology in recent years. However, Chernivtsi’s significance extends beyond its industrial prowess. It is renowned as a cultural and educational nucleus in western Ukraine, boasting the prestigious Chernivtsi University and the UNESCO-listed Chernivtsi Historic Center, both contributing to the city’s reputation as a vibrant center of knowledge and heritage. 13 Sister City Relationship Updates Keelung, Taiwan: Committee Members: Annie Quan, Matilyn Mortensen Summary: Salt Lake’s relationship with Keelung would not be possible without relationships between past police departments. Margaret Yee, community member and former city employee, was instrumental in nurturing the relationship for many years. In 2024, the board hopes to rebuild this relationship, learn more of the historical background, and revitalize the connection with the SLC Police Department. Current Programming Status: Connection was made with Keelung City staff – they are in the process of rebuilding their program post-pandemic and have expressed that they will likely prioritize closer relationships geographically before expanding out to the U.S. The program is being shifted to a different staff member internally and they have asked us to hold on further communication until such time as that staff member is up-to-date. A delegation from Keelung may travel to Salt Lake City in 2024 or 2025. The subcommittee met to discuss similarities between the cities and potential connections. Staff and subcommittee met with Margaret Yee for lunch. Margaret Yee has historical information/background on the relationships as well as the strong relationship between SLC and Keelung’s police department. Staff have scheduled a meeting with SLC Police Chief Brown in early 2024 to discuss the relationship with Keelung. Margaret Yee has historical images/documents that will be shared with the board to be archived. Members of the public that have relationships with Keelung reached out via email and would like to help with the board. Key Similarities with Salt Lake City: Environmental Concerns “Port” Cities - Keelung has the 7th largest port in the world Geography - surrounded by a mountain range Tech interests Outdoor Tourism 14 Keelung, Taiwan continued: Recommended Opportunities for Connection: Discussion of water conservation and drought Discussion of air quality Pros and Cons of the tourism industry on the local area Tech Lake City - Keelung’s mayor graduated from MIT Cultural exchange About: Keelung, an international trade and business center, has a population of 372,000 and is located 18 miles northeast of Taipei on the Northern Coast of Taiwan overlooking the Pacific Ocean. It has an active seaside port, supporting vital economic industries of fishing, ship building and military activities. Keelung also has many beautiful parks and ancient temples and is known to be one of the wettest cities in the world with an average of 214 days of rain a year. The Keelung Sister City Relationship with Salt Lake City was initiated in 1979 by Salt Lake City Mayor Ted Wilson. In 1981 the Police Department from both cities became affiliated as a Sister Relationship. The relationship between the Keelung and Salt Lake Sister City helps to develop municipal partnerships and provides opportunities for city officials and citizens to experience and explore other cultures, promote cultural understanding and economic development. For the duration of their relationship, the two cities have participated in an exchange of culture, art, music, business and education. Visiting delegations have participated in annual celebrations such as Days of ’47, honoring the Mormon Pioneers. 15 Sister City Relationship Updates Izhevsk, Russia: Committee Members: Olga Efimova, Matilyn Mortensen Summary: Currently, the board has no contacts within Izhevsk and this likely will continue while the conflict between Ukraine and Russia continues. The board proposed sending a letter to the people of Izhevsk as an example of peace through people. This was not approved by the board in 2023 and discussion will continue in 2024. Current Programming Status: 2021 was the last time we had a contact with the city, according to board member Olga Efimova. A nursing college in Izhevsk was interested in a health care class through the University of Utah. This has been put on pause. Key Similarities with Salt Lake City: Value Arts and Education Health Care Focus Higher education Science/tech innovation Recommended Opportunities for Connection: Future student exchanges Health care knowledge exchange Higher education About: Izhevsk is the capital of Udmurt Republic, Russia, a large industrial, cultural and scientific center with a population of 652,000. It is located in the European part of Russia between the Volga River and the Ural Mountains. The history of the partnership between Salt Lake City and Izhevsk started in 2003 as a Friendship Relationship. 16 Izhevsk, Russia continued: A joint resolution of the City Council and the Mayor of Salt Lake City approving the establishment of a “Sister City” relationship between Izhevsk, Russia and Salt Lake City, Utah was adopted in October 2011. With the help of volunteers within the organization, the Sister City relationship offers opportunities to experience cross-cultural activities including the exhibition of children’s paintings from the Izhevsk Art School. Ongoing exchanges such as these in the fields of business, culture and education, promote a mutual understanding to the benefit of citizens in both cities. Izhevsk is renowned for its great educational, intellectual and scientific research and attracts investigators from different fields held within twenty-three scientific centers. Four state universities, three private universities and ten colleges provide professional training in multiple occupational areas, such as medicine, art, law, education, engineering, science, agriculture, and etc. Izhevsk has a rich cultural life. Five theaters, four concert halls, sixteen recreational centers and clubs, fifty libraries, twelve art schools for children, six cinemas and six museums are found here. One of the greatest Russian composers Peter Tchaikovsky was born and spent his childhood near Izhevsk. Every spring different music festivals devoted to Tchaikovsky’s creative works are held. 17 18 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Sylvia Richards, Budget and Policy Analyst DATE: March 26, 2024 RE: Briefing: THE BLOCKS Year Seven Overview and Year Eight Budget and Plan ________________________________________________________________________________ ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Administration has provided a transmittal regarding THE BLOCKS (formerly known as the Cultural Core), Year Seven overview and Year Eight budget and plan. As Council Members may recall, the City and Salt Lake County formed a partnership to promote and develop arts and culture in the Cultural Core, and a twenty-year diversion of City and County sales taxes within the district was created to fund this effort. The City and County’s Interlocal Agreement for the THE BLOCKS is governed by a six-member advisory budget committee, with direct oversight from City and County staff. A public RFP process resulted in a five-year contract with ‘Downtown SLC Presents’ (promotions company) which is active through July 2027. The purpose of this briefing is to fulfill the requirement of the Interlocal Agreement which requires an annual report to the City Council. BUDGET AND POLICY ISSUES Each entity, (the City and County), contributes $300,000 annually per the Interlocal Agreement. THE BLOCKS budget committee has reviewed and approved the plans and budget for Year 7, as well as a summary of Year 8. Marketing, Programming and Promotional Efforts: The key performance indicators for THE BLOCKS focus on promotion, placemaking, programming and partnerships. Examples include the following: •Rebranded THE BLOCKS, Salt Lake’s Cultural Core to the BLOCKS Arts District with the focus to “Curate, Amplify and Create Visibility”. Worked on a rebrand to strengthen the clarity of what we do and who we are. •‘Saturday evenings at the Green Loop’: This demonstration project was held during the month of May located on 200 East between 300 and 400 South. This event included lots of trees, concerts, food trucks, beer garden, classes by the Main Library and other events. •‘Steppin on Main’: Working with the Eccles Theater, Tin Angel and Salt Lake County Arts and Culture, this event included 15 nights of free cultural activities, including 30 performers/artists. Five of the nights attracted 1700 people, or about 330 per show. Project Timeline: Briefing: March 26, 2024 Page | 2 •‘Main Street, a Fashion Show’: This first year event showcased 7 fashion designers, 7 musicians/performers and 84 models who participated in the fashion show. •‘Open Streets’: The Blocks team worked with and managed over 95 performers (artists, musicians, activators) to bring the Discobox at Exchange place, Yoga on Saturdays at Basecamp, and 2 new murals on Main Street. In addition to these nightly events, The Blocks curated an art Market with Kim Hall of Alpine Earthworks (pottery maker), to present the first ever Art Market on Main with around 25 local craft vendors. •‘Glow at Gallivan’: Part of regularly scheduled programming which included an immersive Light festival at The Gallivan Plaza. Benchmark Measurements: Visitation metrics will be measured using Placer.ai data. Downtown SLC Presents/Downtown Alliance subscribes to the Placer.ai data set which compares visitation in specific areas, time of day, and events to understand visitor trends. They will seek a collaboration with primary ticket sellers in the core to collect and publish ticket sales data. We will collect and aggregate monthly ticket sales data for venues in the cultural core in order to measure progress. This will include raw monthly ticket sales data (not performance-specific ticket sales) for venues serviced by ArtTix, 24tix and Vivint Arena. We recognize that there may be other venues (e.g. UMOCA) that could provide monthly attendance data that could be aggregated here. We will continue to track our employment of artists and specifically report the number of artists from BIPOC and marginalized communities. We will continue to report marketing engagement data from social, digital and mass media channels. As indicated by the Administration, THE BLOCKS uses Placer AI to measure total visitation trends and spikes, showcase heat maps, and where people are located and coming from outside the Cultural Core. As for defining key performance indicators, The Blocks uses the contract to outline Promotion, placemaking, programming, and partnerships to present to the Cultural Core Budget Committee. In addition to the 4 P's at each performance and program, the team counts attendance, number of performers, where those performers are coming from, with a focus on targeted marketing relating to the performance. The goal of marketing is to continuously reach outside the core to bring new audiences into the core. The Arts Council also focuses on promoting Spanish radio for every program produced. The Blocks team is working with the County to produce a dashboard to be released in the near future that will feature all county venues in Downtown Salt Lake City and the number of tickets sold/ticketed, seats unsold, and broken out by the genre of art being featured at each venue. WELCOME KATHRYN CARLISLE- KESLING $462,088 TOTAL PROGRAMMING AND MARKETING BUDGET $600,000 TOTAL BUDGET 20% OF OVERALL BUDGET TOWARDS PROMOTION AND MARKETING $170,000 AMOUNT TOWARDS CO-CREATE (8) 1,000,000 GOAL FOR SOCIAL MEDIA REACH $5,000,000 GOAL FOR EARNED MEDIA 5 GOAL TO SEED NEW PROGRAMS YEAR 7 FY24 BUDGET DOCUMENT AND GOALS KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ●PROMOTION ●PLACEMAKING ●PROGRAMMING ●PARTNERSHIPS 75 MILE RADIUS FOR REACH AND PARTNERSHIPS GREEN LOOP 200 E IN BETWEEN 300S AND 400S STEPPIN’ ON MAIN ECCLES LOBBY AND FRONT STEPS OPEN STREETS DISCOBOX AT EXCHANGE PLACE OPEN STREETS - BASECAMP SLAM BLOCK PARTY BRAZUCA BAND YOGA ON SATURDAYS SB Dance: Tarotville 223 PEOPLE IN ATTENDANCE (Compared to 170 in 2022) GLOW AT GALLIVAN GROOVEATGALLIVAN EVERY WEDNESDAY IN FEBRUARY 7:30 PM - 9:30 PM CO-CREATE SAN DIEGO IDA TRIP WOMEN IN TRAVEL SUMMIT VISIT SALT LAKE UTAH OFFICE OF TOURISM Explore The Blocks Art District on a walking tour through cosmopolitan Downtown Salt Lake City. Experience a canvas of vibrant street art, sculptures, and alleyways adorned with murals that shape the city’s visual identity. After the tour, elevate to a private rooftop happy hour at the iconic and historic Kearns Building featuring a dramatic mural, only seen by those who have visited this space that is a hidden gem. April 15, 2024 3-5pm Closing Reception at Kearns 5-6pm EXHIBITIONS ON MAIN Providing an opportunity for our community to exhibit stories and bodies of work in the Main Street Kiosks. Artwork will be selected by the internal team at The Blocks and 4 artists will get the opportunity to showcase their work for the next year. Our goal with this program is to create visibility for artists in the Downtown neighborhood. The project will showcase visual artistry and/or poetry and highlight the artist. $37,135 AMOUNT OF DOLLARS SPENT ON HIRING PERFORMERS & ARTISTS 59% PERCENTAGE OF OVERALL BUDGET (SPENT TO DATE) 51% OF MARKETING BUDGET (SPENT TO DATE) $60,000 TOWARDS THE CO-CREATE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (TO DATE) 128 ARTISTS HIRED(THIS YEAR TO DATE) 1,623,051 AMOUNT OF SOCIAL MEDIA REACH(THIS YEAR TO DATE) 56 LEGACY ARTS PROMOTIONS(THIS YEAR TO DATE) 67,700 TOTAL WEBSITE AUDIENCE(THIS YEAR TO DATE) 105+ PARTNERSHIPS CREATED FY24 YEAR TO DATE KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ●PROMOTION ●PLACEMAKING ●PROGRAMMING ●PARTNERSHIPS **as of February 22, 2024 A LOOK INTO FISCAL YEAR 25 YEAR 8 SALT LAKE FILM SOCIETY PARTNERSHIP Friday, April 26 from 5:30pm - 7:00pm Friday, May 31 from 5:30pm - 7:00pm Friday, June 28 from 5:30pm - 7:00pm Friday, July 26 from 5:30pm - 7:00pm Friday, August 30 from 5:30pm - 7:00pm EAT LOCAL FOOD FARMERS MARKET COLLABORATION LOCALLY MADE LOCALLY PLAYED STARTING JUNE 9 AND HAPPENING EVERY SECOND SATURDAY URBAN PLEIN AIR SEPTEMBER STEPPIN ON MAIN SUMMER 2024 INSERT DATES AND PERFORMERS MURAL CLEANUP (REPAINT) AND MURAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM Repaint a portion of the Edison Street Mural Cleanup and repaint a portion of the 200W underpass mural Clean up and repaint the mural on Main Street UNDER UTILIZED SPACE IN DOWNTOWN BAH: ARTS EDITION Art Organizations will have the opportunity to network with approximately 150 members of the Salt Lake Chamber, talk about their upcoming seasons and update the community on the work they do. SB Dance: Tarotville Scheduled for September 4, 2024 THE BLOCKS PRESENTS: SLAM YOUTH MUSIC FESTIVAL SEPTEMBER 7 FROM NOON - 10PM $40,000 TOWARDS MURAL CLEANUP AND MURAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM $600,000 TOTAL BUDGET 22% OF OVERALL BUDGET TOWARDS PROMOTION AND MARKETING $130,000 AMOUNT TOWARDS CO-CREATE (6) $10,000 TOWARDS UPDATING ASSET PROGRAM $7,000,000 GOAL FOR EARNED MEDIA 60+ DAYS OF ACTIVATION YEAR 8 FY25 BUDGET DOCUMENT AND GOALS KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ●PROMOTION ●PLACEMAKING ●PROGRAMMING ●PARTNERSHIPS 75 MILE RADIUS FOR REACH AND PARTNERSHIPS THANK YOU! ERIN MENDENHALL MAYOR LORENA RIFFO-JENSON DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL _______________________ Date Received: 03-01-2024 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date sent to Council: 03-01-2024 __________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: February 27,2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Lorena Riffo-Jenson, Director, Department of Economic Development SUBJECT: Cultural Core Year-7 Year to Date Executive Summary & Year-8 Plan STAFF CONTACTS: Felicia Baca, felicia.baca@slcgov.com, 385-256-5588 DOCUMENT TYPE: Information Update RECOMMENDATION: n/a BUDGET IMPACT: n/a COORDINTATION: Downtown SLC Presents (THE BLOCKS) & Salt Lake County Arts & Culture BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: At the request of the Finance Department, it was recommended to send this report in March to Council with Year 7 Recap and Year 8 Cultural Core Plans in anticipation of Salt Lake City’s budget approval process. Confirmation of the Cultural Core Budget Committee adoption will occur June 11, 2024 and subsequently be transmitted to City Council as required of the Interlocal Agreement. The annual appropriation from Salt Lake City is $300,000. Salt Lake County is on a calendar year budget and their annual appropriation of $300,000 was approved in July 2023 for January-Dec of 2024; and The Blocks will present to the County again in June of 2024 for the following year 2025 budget approval. In 2010, the City and County of Salt Lake formed a partnership to promote and develop arts and culture in the Cultural Core and established a taxing district to provide a reliable revenue source for a 20-year period. In 2011, a series of community conversations with stakeholders established foundational goals for the plan including creative placemaking - physical development of the district, and creative programming - marketing, promotions, and audience development. The City and County’s Interlocal Agreement for the Cultural Core is governed by a six-member advisory Budget Committee, with direct oversight from City and County staff. At that time, a public RFP process resulted in a 5-year contract with Downtown SLC Presents (THE BLOCKS) which expired in July 2022. In 2022, City staff engaged in another public RFP process with Salt Lake County to select another contractor to execute on this contract. Downtown SLC Presents (THE BLOCKS) was once again selected to manage this contract. The Blocks is willing to do an in-person presentation of the materials contained in this briefing. Attachments: o Cultural Core Year-7 YTD Overview & Year-8 Plan o Cultural Core Implementation Manager Contract o Cultural Core Implementation Manager Amendment WELCOME KATHRYN CARLISLE- KESLING $462,088 TOTAL PROGRAMMING AND MARKETING BUDGET $600,000 TOTAL BUDGET 20% OF OVERALL BUDGET TOWARDS PROMOTION AND MARKETING $170,000 AMOUNT TOWARDS CO-CREATE (8) 1,000,000 GOAL FOR SOCIAL MEDIA REACH $5,000,000 GOAL FOR EARNED MEDIA 5 GOAL TO SEED NEW PROGRAMS YEAR 7 FY24 BUDGET DOCUMENT AND GOALS KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ●PROMOTION ●PLACEMAKING ●PROGRAMMING ●PARTNERSHIPS 75 MILE RADIUS FOR REACH AND PARTNERSHIPS The Blocks started the year off with an operating budget of $600,000 all thank you to the investment made by Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County. The goal of the year was to hit as many key performance indicators as we possibly could which is promotion, placemaking, programming and partnerships. Throughout this presentation, you will see that we focused on building our partnerships to the max, promoting more than we ever have and continued to excel at programming the arts throughout Downtown. We continued to grow the audience by reaching out to the 75 mile radius surrounding Salt Lake City through new partnerships all to reach goals such as the 1 million for social media reach and to seed at least 5 new programs throughout the county, but ensure they happen within the geographic boundaries of The Blocks. In 2023 The Blocks worked to update its identity. We went from being The Blocks, Salt Lakes Cultural Core to building what we call The Blocks Arts District. We worked on a rebrand to strengthen the clarity of what we do and who we are. Our goal is threefold; Curate. Amplify. And Create visibility. But how do we do that? ●We Curate activations within the boundaries of The Blocks and highlight performers from a 75 mile radius around Downtown. ●We Amplify the existing arts in Downtown and celebrate the diversity and economic benefit of arts that Capitol Theater, Rose Wagner and Eccles bring to Downtown ●And last but not least, we Create Visibility for all artists and provide them with a platform to promote their own art GREEN LOOP 200 E IN BETWEEN 300S AND 400S In starting with how we began curating within The Blocks Art District, we partnered with SLC, Little City, and multiple other entities to produce the Green Loop Concept Project. ○There were 10 nights of Programming in partnership with Little City ○Where 19 Local Performers showcased their talent on a stage in the middle of 200 E between 300 S and 400 S ○1 Local Sculpture was redesigned and repurposed from NBA All Star weekend, Central, to fit at the edge of the badminton court ○In total there was approximately 4,500 people in attendance across 10 shows STEPPIN’ ON MAIN ECCLES LOBBY AND FRONT STEPS In addition to the Green Loop, the Blocks produced the first year of Steppin on Main with Eccles Theater, Tin Angel and Salt Lake County Arts and Culture. This first year event produced 15 nights of Free cultural activations on the Front steps of Eccles Theater. Including ○Approximately 30 performers/Artists showcasing their talent ○Created a culturally diverse program and provided visibility for these artists in a venue shared by national touring acts ○The Blocks programmed 5 of these nights and had approximately 1700 people in attendance and about 330 people per show ○Here is a picture showcasing the event from Academia Mis Raices de Allen Moreno on August 18. We had over 500 in attendance for this specific event and people from across the county enjoying the mariachi music To keep with the theme of seeding first year events, The Blocks helped produce Main Street, a Fashion Show intertwined with local musicians and models weaving in and out of the Eccles Theater. With approximately 900 people in attendance this event has stuck in our minds as one of the most culturally diverse and artistic events in Downtown Salt Lake City ●7 Fashion Designers participated in the showcase ●7 Musicians/ Performers performed on the stage inside Eccles Theater and to the people on Main Street ●And over 84 Models who walked in the Fashion Show OPEN STREETS DISCOBOX AT EXCHANGE PLACE As an integral part of the team that brought you Open Streets, The Blocks aligned and curated multiple social activities that kept people coming back night after night. All in all, The Blocks team worked with and managed over 95 performers (including artists, musicians, activators) to bring you events such as the Discobox at Exchange place, yoga on Saturdays at Basecamp, and 2 new murals on Main Street. In addition to these nightly events, The Blocks curated an art Market with our colleague, Kim Hall of Alpine earthworks (pottery maker), to present the first ever Art Market on Main with around 25 local craft vendors. OPEN STREETS - BASECAMP SLAM BLOCK PARTY BRAZUCA BAND YOGA ON SATURDAYS Here are a few other images showing the fun that was curated on Main Street for Open Streets. In seeding and promoting these events, The Blocks has achieved considerably more earned, [free] media over the past year. To Date, the team has seen almost $4.3 million in earned media. These features help us grow and add a spotlight to the Downtown lifestyle and culture. One of those features being the weekly “Look Ahead” put forth by The Salt Lake Tribune, shown in this image here showcasing 3 amazing legacy arts organizations performances at Capitol Theater, Utah Symphony and Ballet West between February 4th and 10th. SB Dance: Tarotville 223 PEOPLE IN ATTENDANCE (Compared to 170 in 2022) While all legacy arts are thriving through the promotion from The Blocks, we also work to create new audiences. The Blocks helped fund the amazing Tarotville by Curbside Theater for the 4th year in a row. Attendance was boosted to almost 230 people to gather on the top of the Pierpont parking Garage rooftop for a spectacle by SB Dance and Curbside Theater. This event was made possible by our friends at Vectra who allowed us to utilize the top level of their parking garage on Pierpont Ave. This event continues to create a buzz around town by meeting all the criteria of the Cultural Core Action plan to activate underutilized spaces. What better way to do this than to activate one of the many parking garages we have Downtown? The Blocks team worked to gain recognition on a National Level and participated in the Music Cities Convention in Huntsville, Alabama. This year our Program Manager participated in a panel discussion about Music Urbanism: Rethinking the Role of Music & Culture in Urban Development. She sat on a panel with representatives from DC, California, Alabama and from the Hoodoo Mural festival in Texas One takeaway from the panel was from Marqueece Harris-Dawson stating, "We need to create cultural assets on purpose to prevent pricing out culture in communities. Culture is one of those things in our society that can trump the economy" GLOW AT GALLIVAN One of those cultural assets that has been going strong for the past few years is GLOW at Gallivan. GLOW is a part of our regularly scheduled programming every year to light up the dreary months of Winter. Curated as a partnership with In-Theory Art Collective to produce an immersive Light festival at The Gallivan Plaza, in 2023, we had over 50 illuminated sculptures to light up the night and displayed for 3 months from November to March. We went big this year and hope to bring it back just as big next year. Media Reports 4,300,431 impressions 8,138 click-throughs 10% higher engagement than previous campaigns Glow at Gallivan continued to amaze us through the media. Glow alone reached 4.3 million impressions through our social media channels, about 8,100 click throughs on our website and had a 10% higher engagement than previous campaigns. One to note was through kids out and about.com which promotes kid friendly activities across the country. GROOVEATGALLIVAN EVERY WEDNESDAY IN FEBRUARY 7:30 PM - 9:30 PM The winter months can be tough to program and get people outside, however that hasn’t stopped us from programming in the cold. The Blocks brought back Groove at Gallivan to program every Wednesday night in February. We have 4 partnerships with different DJ’s Glow at Gallivan is still in action through March 1 and what better way to experience both events than on Wednesday nights after work. CO-CREATE The Co-Create Program is a new addition to The Blocks programming. Through this program, we aspire to establish a collaborative alliance between our organization and other creative teams, dedicated to bringing their creative vision to fruition right here in Salt Lake City. Our discussions will encompass a wide array of topics, including concept development, risk assessment, past successes, and the composition of our teams, all geared towards meticulously planning and executing a unique, one-of-a-kind experience in in the most effective and rewarding manner possible. ●We have 8 collaborators that are selected through a simple application process ●A Total of $170,000 of our budget is invested to date in this program ●TO DATE we have collaborated with 2 of them and are planning to put on ○The first ever youth music Festival with students from around the county in partnership with the Salt Lake Academy of Music ○An art installation called “Hidden Waters” in partnership with Seven Canyons Trust, highlighting art and water conservation. This project will also connect the Central Business District with the Folsom trail Overall, this program is an attempt to provide resources to bolster the community with new innovative ideas. If you know someone who has an idea that has never been seen in Salt Lake City, we want to help them execute their vision and bring it to life. SAN DIEGO IDA TRIP In addition to building new programs and curating events alongside our strategic Partners, The Blocks team is tasked with creating a more vibrant neighborhood and activating underutilized spaces through programmed spontaneity. In looking at other areas across the country with our team members at the DTA, we took a trip to San Diego to review a project called The Quartyard. The Quartyard has transformed vacant land into activated space, all while making it temporary. A quote by Carol Coletta featured in an article titled “Strategic Investments in parks can Spark Economic Vitality Downtown” posted by the American Planning Association states, “Some cities are rethinking their downtowns by exploring the conversion of empty office buildings to housing or hosting large events. But we need more than new housing and Taylor Swift concerts to revive downtowns. Thoughtful and strategic investments in the places we all own together — our parks, community centers, and streets — may turn out to be some of the smartest moves American cities can make.” While visiting San Diego and the Quartyard project, The Blocks is eager to try new things, create new partnerships and continue building and activating Downtown through the Arts and wink wink, looking at all vacant land to activate. WOMEN IN TRAVEL SUMMIT VISIT SALT LAKE UTAH OFFICE OF TOURISM Explore The Blocks Art District on a walking tour through cosmopolitan Downtown Salt Lake City. Experience a canvas of vibrant street art, sculptures, and alleyways adorned with murals that shape the city’s visual identity. After the tour, elevate to a private rooftop happy hour at the iconic and historic Kearns Building featuring a dramatic mural, only seen by those who have visited this space that is a hidden gem. April 15, 2024 3-5pm Closing Reception at Kearns 5-6pm Shortly after our San Diego Trip, The Blocks hosted the Women In Travel Summit alongside Visit Salt Lake and Utah Office of Tourism. We toured multiple murals in Downtown Salt Lake City, alongside their artist, with 35 women influencers from across the country. Naturally, we ended at this sneaky mural right off Main Street highlighting this influential woman’s favorite things. EXHIBITIONS ON MAIN Providing an opportunity for our community to exhibit stories and bodies of work in the Main Street Kiosks. Artwork will be selected by the internal team at The Blocks and 4 artists will get the opportunity to showcase their work for the next year. Our goal with this program is to create visibility for artists in the Downtown neighborhood. The project will showcase visual artistry and/or poetry and highlight the artist. The Blocks focuses on large and small opportunities for artists at all levels. Over the past few years, we have been contracted to promote all arts organizations through the 4 Main Street Kiosks. In the past few months, we have been reworking that process to also provide an opportunity for our community to exhibit stories and bodies of work on the lower panels of these Kiosks. Our goal with this program is to create visibility for emerging artists in the Downtown neighborhood and again create visibility for them. Artwork will be selected by the internal team at The Blocks and 4 artists will get the opportunity to showcase their work for the next year. $37,135 AMOUNT OF DOLLARS SPENT ON HIRING PERFORMERS & ARTISTS 59% PERCENTAGE OF OVERALL BUDGET (SPENT TO DATE) 51% OF MARKETING BUDGET (SPENT TO DATE) $60,000 TOWARDS THE CO-CREATE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (TO DATE) 128 ARTISTS HIRED(THIS YEAR TO DATE) 1,623,051 AMOUNT OF SOCIAL MEDIA REACH(THIS YEAR TO DATE) 56 LEGACY ARTS PROMOTIONS(THIS YEAR TO DATE) 67,700 TOTAL WEBSITE AUDIENCE(THIS YEAR TO DATE) 105+ PARTNERSHIPS CREATED FY24 YEAR TO DATE KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ●PROMOTION ●PLACEMAKING ●PROGRAMMING ●PARTNERSHIPS **as of February 22, 2024 Overall in Fiscal Year 24, The Blocks has thrived in providing promotion, placemaking, programming and partnerships. With that being said, we have a lot more to do throughout June and we are looking forward to what’s to come. With over 128 artists hired this year to date and over 105 + partnerships created, we look forward to continuing to grow and building a Downtown Arts District. **Artists Hired includes an individual artist and/or band A LOOK INTO FISCAL YEAR 25 YEAR 8 In year 8, the Blocks looks to take a similar approach to year 7 and continue focusing on marketing, promotion and programming. With the success of Fiscal Year 2024 through creating new partnerships we are looking at activating around 50 days of programming between June 2024 and October 2024. These programs and activations include: SALT LAKE FILM SOCIETY PARTNERSHIP Friday, April 26 from 5:30pm - 7:00pm Friday, May 31 from 5:30pm - 7:00pm Friday, June 28 from 5:30pm - 7:00pm Friday, July 26 from 5:30pm - 7:00pm Friday, August 30 from 5:30pm - 7:00pm EAT LOCAL FOOD Producing Locally Made Locally Played alongside our friends at the Salt Lake Film Society. In order to focus on the entire District, our goal is to bring LMLP to 2-3 different locations across Downtown and highlight 5 local artists alongside 5 different movie premieres. Come on down on any of the 5 dates above (or the last Friday of each month) and see local music, eat local food at Copper Common or Broadway Deli, and watch movies. This collaboration starts on April 26 with the lineup to be released soon! FARMERS MARKET COLLABORATION LOCALLY MADE LOCALLY PLAYED STARTING JUNE 9 AND HAPPENING EVERY SECOND SATURDAY URBAN PLEIN AIR SEPTEMBER In addition to producing Locally Made Locally Played alongside our friends at the Salt Lake Film Society, similarly to how we produced it at The Green Loop Concept project, we are looking to bring a larger stage to the Farmers Market. Every second Saturday, The Blocks team will curate LMLP at Pioneer Park. With an already large audience, we hope to draw more attraction to The Blocks programming and highlight more local musicians. While we have highlighted a lot of musical events, we are also looking forward to bring more visual artists to the Farmers Market through an Urban Plein Air event in September. 10 artists will setup easels throughout the park and paint en plein air of the surroundings. These works of art will be auctioned off at a later date at the Farmers market in which the proceeds will go towards the artist and a participating arts organization in The Blocks Arts District. STEPPIN ON MAIN SUMMER 2024 INSERT DATES AND PERFORMERS Through the success of 2023, the team that brought you Steppin on Main has decided to bring it back for another year. This year The Blocks is programming a total of 5 nights with 3 larger performances and 2 smaller musical acts. The event will start on July 12 and will provide all the Hamilton goers with an extra spice of what Downtown Salt Lake City has to offer. One event that we are particularly excited about will be on July 19 in partnership with the Mexican Consulate to bring a Mariachi Festival to the Eccles Lobby. Again this will be a Free event and will go from 7-10pm on July 19. MURAL CLEANUP (REPAINT) AND MURAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM Repaint a portion of the Edison Street Mural Cleanup and repaint a portion of the 200W underpass mural Clean up and repaint the mural on Main Street In addition to events, the Blocks is working on creating a Maintenance program to clean up and maintain a few of the murals that are seen around Downtown. Mural maintenance has been a topic of conversation over the last year and we think that this upcoming year is the year to entertain the How. We are working towards solutions to repaint a portion of the Edison Street Mural (seen here), the 200W underpass mural, as well as a mural on Main Street. UNDER UTILIZED SPACE IN DOWNTOWN Since our San Diego Trip, we have been dreaming of ways to build out some of the blighted spaces in Salt Lake. Can you imagine if all parking lots could be activated by the community? Can you imagine if demolished buildings were temporary sites for music pop-up experiences. The Blocks team is progressing with a few partners to try and make this a reality. BAH: ARTS EDITION Art Organizations will have the opportunity to network with approximately 150 members of the Salt Lake Chamber, talk about their upcoming seasons and update the community on the work they do. Art Organizations will have the opportunity to network with approximately 150 members of the Salt Lake Chamber, talk about their upcoming seasons and update the community on the work they do. We look at this as producing an “Arts Launch” to the upcoming season. This will connect donors with the arts, this will connect new audiences with arts organizations, and will most likely become a marquee event for all arts organizations to be a part of for years to come. SB Dance: Tarotville Scheduled for September 4, 2024 We will be bringing back the Curbside Theater experience for another year Don’t miss it on September 4, 2024 THE BLOCKS PRESENTS: SLAM YOUTH MUSIC FESTIVAL SEPTEMBER 7 FROM NOON - 10PM $30,000 ●A first-ever SLC Young Artists Music Festival. ●Designed to amplify the voices and promote the careers of 23 of SLC’s top emerging musical artists, ages 20 and under. ●Artists are selected by a panel of music professionals from a video audition. ●Location will be at Gallivan on September 7, 2024 $30,000 ●The “Hidden Waters” installation will celebrate water in our oasis on the edge of the desert. ●The installation will be on North Temple along City Creek. ●Prompts included would be water-based stories, Greatest Snow on Earth, Winter Olympics, Great Salt Lake, live water sound etc. ●Installation will connect The Blocks with the west side of Salt Lake City ●Timeline and Schedule for the activation is coming to you this summer/ fall 2024 $40,000 TOWARDS MURAL CLEANUP AND MURAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM $600,000 TOTAL BUDGET 22% OF OVERALL BUDGET TOWARDS PROMOTION AND MARKETING $130,000 AMOUNT TOWARDS CO-CREATE (6) $10,000 TOWARDS UPDATING ASSET PROGRAM $7,000,000 GOAL FOR EARNED MEDIA 60+ DAYS OF ACTIVATION YEAR 8 FY25 BUDGET DOCUMENT AND GOALS KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ●PROMOTION ●PLACEMAKING ●PROGRAMMING ●PARTNERSHIPS 75 MILE RADIUS FOR REACH AND PARTNERSHIPS So I leave you with this, out of all the partnerships we have created and all of the dollars spent on promotion, placemaking, and programming, The Blocks is looking to build more. We will continue building community through our Co-Create program, we will continue providing assets for non-profit organizations, and we will continue promoting the legacy arts such as Abravanel Hall, UMOCA, and The Leonardo. We will continue to grow the audience by reaching out to the 75 mile radius surrounding Salt Lake City through new partnerships, we will continue to activate underutilized spaces, and we will continue building Downtown as an Arts District. Thank you for your time. THANK YOU! Jul 13, 2022 07/13/2022 Lorena Riffo Jenson (Jul 13, 2022 11: 30 MDT) Lorena Riffo Jenson Michelle Barney (Jul 13, 2022 11: 58 MDT) Jul 13, 2022 Minutes & Records Clerk SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION – CAMP DOCUMENT ROUTING FORM CITY SIGNATURE AND ACTIVATION PROCESS Contract #: PEID #: Monitor: Contract Title:Contractor: Please complete your step and forward to the next step. STEP 1 FINANCE – Encumber Funds I certify funds are available: OR I certify that no encumbrance is required at this time and any future encumbrance will be checked against available budget in the accounting system: Cost Center Object Code Funding Source:-$ Funding Source:-$ Funding Source:-$ Funding Source:-$ Funding Source:-$ Funding Source:-$ Funding Source:-$ Funding Source:-$ Limit: $ Finance’s Signature:Date: STEP 2 CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE – Final Approval Y N Attorney:Insurance Required: Perf Bond Required: This document has been approved as to form: Paym Bond Required: Attorney’s Signature:Date: STEP 3 AUTHORIZED CITY SIGNATURE – Sign All Documents Authorized Signer:Title: STEP 4 RECORDER’S OFFICE - ACTIVATE Instructions: When activated, keep signed document, e-mail signed document(s) to: Name:Dept: Purch/Contracts Phone #: Contract Title:Contractor: CONTRACT NO. 13-1-22-3861-1 Rev. June 28, 2023/jh AMENDMENT NO. 1 CULTURAL CORE ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION MANAGER FOR THE SALT LAKE CITY OFFICE OF THE MAYOR THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 is between SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, a Utah municipal corporation (“City”), and SALT LAKE COUNTY, a body corporate and politic of the state of Utah, (“County”), also individually as “Owner” and collectively with City as (“Owners”), and DOWNTOWN SLC PRESENTS, a Utah nonprofit corporation, (“Contractor”) and is dated as of the date that the City Recorder attests the applicable City signature (which date shall be the Effective Date). RECITALS 1. City and County entered into an Interlocal Agreement (SLC contract no. 08-3-11-5050) for the sharing of revenues in a joint effort to enhance funding for the marketing, branding, development and improvement of arts and cultural activities in downtown Salt Lake City (“Cultural Core”); and 2. City, County, and Contractor are parties to that certain Agreement dated July 13, 2022, (the “Agreement”); and 3. The parties desire to amend the Agreement as specified herein. AGREEMENT In consideration of the promises and covenants hereinafter contained, the parties agree as follows: 1. EXHIBIT “B”, Section II, Budget and Expense Detail, paragraph No. 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: The annual set budget for all costs associated with providing services under the Agreement is $600,000, divided as follows: $300,000 to be contributed by City and $300,000 to be contributed by County. Additional funds may be awarded from incremental sales tax funds already collected by the Owners, subject to appropriation and approval for expenditure of funds by the Owners’ respective Councils. 2. REPRESENTATION REGARDING ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES AND FORMER CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES. Contractor represents that it has not: (1) provided an illegal gift or payoff to a City officer or employee or former City officer or employee, or his or her relative or business entity; (2) retained any person to solicit or secure this contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, or brokerage or contingent fee, other than bona fide employees or bona fide commercial selling agencies Page 2 of 3 for the purpose of securing business; (3) knowingly breached any of the ethical standards set forth in the City's conflict of interest ordinance, Chapter 2.44, Salt Lake City Code; or (4) knowingly influenced, and hereby promises that it will not knowingly influence, a City officer or employee or former City officer or employee to breach any of the ethical standards set forth in the City's conflict of interest ordinance, Chapter 2.44, Salt Lake City Code. 3. EXCEPT as modified hereby, the Agreement shall remain the same. ********************************************************************************* (Signature page follows) Page 3 of 3 The parties are signing this Amendment No. 1 as of the Effective Date. ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: City Recorder Recordation Date APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date: Sign: REVIEWED AND ADVISED AS TO FORM LEGALITY Salt Lake County District Attorney’s Office Date: Sign: Name: SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION By: Title: SALT LAKE COUNTY By: Title: DOWNTOWN SLC PRESENTS By: Title: March 26, 2024 Jorge Chamorro, Public Services Director TEMPORARY CLOSURE - 7200 W CLOSURE DETAILS Closed from April 2024 to March 2026 •Expecting some development to take place to activate the area •Early notification process not requ ired •Property owners notified •Public Safety to retain access ADJACENT LANDOWNERS Union Pacific Railroad Kennecott (Rio Tinto) Waste Management of Utah Inc. 1 2 2 3 2 1 2 3 IMPACTS OF ILLEGAL DUMPING IMPACTS OF ILLEGAL DUMPING IMPACTS OF ILLEGAL DUMPING Jorge Chamorro Public Services Department Director jorge.chamorro@slcgov.com ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff TO: Salt Lake City Council Victoria Petro, Chair Date Received: Date Sent to Council: FROM: Jorge Chamorro, Public Services Director SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance to Close a Portion of7200 West STAFF CONTACTS: Jon Larsen, Transportation Jorge Chamorro, Public Services Department Director DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Consider and adopt the attached ordinance BUDGET IMPACT: None OFFICE OF THE MAYOR March 12, 2024 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The City Council is being asked to adopt an ordinance closing a portion of 7200 West between California Ave and I-80 (see exhibit A) on, or soon after, March 15, 2024 and until March 14, 2026. In response to the increased fire danger on public and private property posed by the recurring illegal dumping activity and the costly mitigation incurred by City Departments. The ordinance states that closure will take effect upon its adoption. This portion of 7200 West runs between California Avenue, on the South end, and after the UP railroad crossing, on the North end. The road is unimproved, meaning no asphalt, concrete or curb and gutter. The area experiences frequent illegal dumping of bulky, hazardous, and large amounts of waste due to the remote location and proximity to permitted solid waste management facilities. Responding to multiple complaints received over the last year, this location has been cleared of illegally dumped waste twice in the last year, with several City Divisions and Departments involved in these efforts. The first cleanup occurred during the week of February 20'\ 2023, resulting in the removal of: 3.6 tons of tires, 15 mattresses and over 250 tons of waste, with a total cost for labor and dumping fees of $30,000. The most recent cleanup took place in the first week of December P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMA YOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 3/12/2024 3/12/2024 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 2023, when a contractor performed the work at cost to the City of $35,000. Despite that effort, waste has slowly started accumulating again. This road has been previously closed under the direction of Salt Lake City Fire Department due to hazardous conditions caused by standing ice and water. The Fire and Police Departments are supportive of this proposal. To further deter illegal dumping, potential hazards, and reduce impact of costly cleanups, the Administration is proposing to close the 7200 West between California Ave and I-80 (see exhibit A). Utah Code 72-5-105 requires that any closure may not impair the rights-of-way or easements of any property owner and the franchise rights of any public utility, and that all property owners must still have reasonable access to their property. The closure will consist of a physical barrier, swing arm gate, installed at each closure point. Keys will be provided to adjacent property owners and a Knox Box will be installed for Fire Department’s access. Union Pacific, owner of the railroad tracks within the proposed temporary closure, will retain access to their property and has provided a letter of support (see attachment 2). Rio Tinto (Kennecott), owner of multiple parcels within the proposed temporary closure, will retain access to their property and has provided a letter of support for this closure (see attachment 3). Waste Management, owner of the Mountain View Landfill with an access gate within the proposed closure has also provided a letter of support (see attachment 4). No other property owners would be impacted by this temporary closure. PUBLIC PROCESS: This temporary closure is not subject to the early notification process as per the exemption included in City Code 2.60.050C3. EXHIBITS: A. Legal Description and Map of 7200 West Closure Between California Ave (1400 S) and I-80 B. Letters of Support from Union Pacific, Rio Tinto (Kennecott) and Waste Management C. Ordinance adopting the temporary closure. 17200 WEST POWER LINE - CALIFORNIA AVE ENGINEERING DIVISION SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION PUBLIC SERVICES SURVEY DEPARTMENT DESCRIPTION ”” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” EXHIBIT "A" Rio Tinto Kennecott, 4700 Daybreak Parkway, South Jordan, Utah 84009 Rio Tinto Kennecott 4700 Daybreak Parkway South Jordan, Utah 84009 Tel: (801) 204-2000 Sent via Email 09 February 2024 Public Services Department Salt Lake City Corporation 451 South State Street, Room 135 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 RE: Temporary Closure of a Section of 7200 West To Whom It May Concern: As a representative of Kennecott Utah Copper LLC (Kennecott), owner of the parcels on both sides of the proposed road closure, I express support for the temporary road closure at 7200 West between California Ave (1400 S) and I-80 with the understanding that Kennecott will have gate access. Kennecott supports this project as a practical solution to reduce illegal dumping, encampments, and other illicit activites along the corridor. The impacts of which have spilled over onto Kennecott property. These activities are a cause for environmental and safety concerns for Kennecott’s employees, contractors, and tenants. Kennecott will remain in communication with the City project contacts during this temporary closure and will share any additional concerns if they arise. If you have questions about this letter of support, you can contact me via email at colton.norman@riotinto.com or by phone at (385) 253-0910. Sincerely, Colton Norman Principal Advisor – Land Managment Rio Tinto Kennecott UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD 650 Davis Rd Salt Lake City, UT 84119 Nathan Anderson Senior Director, Public Affairs Corporate Relations P 801-212-5415 F 402-501-2301 E nanderson@up.com March 7, 2024 RE: Temporary Closure of a section of 7200 W To Whom it May Concern: Union Pacific Railroad, owner of the rail line that is crossed by 7200West in Salt Lake City, supports the proposed road closure between California Ave (1400 S) and I-80, as long as access by railroad personnel and equipment remains open. We have been assured that gates installed will be made accessible to appropriate Union Pacific personnel. We support this project for general safety and rail efficiency reasons. Illegal dumping and potential for trespassing/encampments put our employees at risk and prevent safe access to our property. This can create delays in getting crews to and from trains which impacts safe and efficient train movement and can have ramifications to the motoring public by unnecessarily blocking crossings in the area I will remain in communication with the City’s project contacts during this temporary closure and will share with them any additional concerns if they arise. If you have questions about this letter of support, you can contact me directly. Sincerely, Nathan Anderson Senior Director, Public Affairs 1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. ________ of 2024 (Temporarily closing a portion of 7200 West Street between California Avenue and the Southerly Boundary of Tax Parcel 14-03-300-001-0000) An ordinance temporarily closing a portion of 7200 West Street between California Avenue and the Southerly Boundary of Tax Parcel 14-03-300-001-0000, pursuant to Utah Code Section 72-5-105. WHEREAS, areas along 7200 West Street north of California Avenue and adjacent to the Union Pacific rail line that is located approximately 3/4ths of a mile north of California Avenue have been used for dangerous criminal activity, including illegally dumping debris, including hazardous materials; and WHEREAS, Utah Code Subsection 72-5-105(3) allows a municipality to temporarily close a class C road to mitigate unsafe conditions after following the procedures specified under Utah Code Subsection 72-5-105(5), which requires the city to hold a public hearing on the temporary closure and provide notice to the Utah Department of Transportation and the adjacent landowners of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, the city has complied with the procedures set forth in Utah Code Subsection 72-5-105(5); and WHEREAS, the city has partnered with Salt Lake County as part of a coordinated clean up effort, which includes mitigating the unsafe conditions adjacent to the portion of 7200 West Street described herein; and WHEREAS, the abutting property owners are supportive of this temporary closure and the efforts to clean up areas adjacent to 7200 West Street; and 2 WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council finds after holding a public hearing on this matter, that there is good cause for the temporary closure of the portion of 7200 West Street described herein to mitigate the unsafe conditions caused by illegal dumping of hazardous materials and other debris; NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Temporarily Closing a City-Owned Right-of-Way. That a portion of 7200 West Street situated between California Avenue and the Southerly Boundary of Tax Parcel 14- 03-300-001-0000, and which is more particularly shown and described on Exhibit “A” attached hereto, is hereby temporarily closed as a public right-of-way pursuant to Utah Code Section 72- 5-105 for the period described in Section 2 below and is declared not presently necessary or available for use as a public right-of-way during that period. SECTION 2. Temporary Closure Period; Reopening. In accordance with the planned coordinated clean-up and criminal detection and prevention activities, the portion of 7200 West Street described herein shall be closed as a public right-of-way from the effective date of this ordinance until two years thereafter or thirty (30) days after mitigation of the unsafe conditions is completed, whichever occurs first. Upon the conclusion of the temporary closure period, the mayor shall direct that the portion of 7200 West Street described in Exhibit "A" hereto shall be reopened and all obstructions to vehicular traffic removed. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective on the date of its publication. 3 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this _______ day of ______________, 2024. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2024 Published: ______________. Ordinance temporarily closing a portion of 7200 W_v1 APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Katherine D. Pasker, Senior City Attorney March 11, 2024 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members DATE: March 19, 2024 RE:2024 Council Retreat Follow-up Priorities, Projects and Next Steps ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE With the City’s level of activity growing – both internally and externally with the engaged public – staff wanted to make sure that we have accurately captured Council Member priorities and interests, and that we have a manageable plan to move items forward. This is affected by four factors: the number of projects, amount of Council Member and staff time available, Administrative capacity, and budget. At the Council’s January Retreat, Council Members shared District priorities and interests. There was Council agreement on significant items and several items could be considered important Citywide or across multiple Districts. As a follow-up to the discussion, staff is organizing a “Tracking List” of Council Member projects to ensure that we have captured the items raised at the retreat, tracked by your liaison, funded in the budget, and requested in small group meetings. Goal of the briefing: Council Members could review the list of projects/interests raised at the Retreat to identify priorities. (See attachments.) In addition to the letter staff is drafting which will be sent to the Mayor outlining overarching budget and policy goals, are there other Council priorities that you wish to share with the Administration? Today’s Council discussion could be a first step in reviewing the Tracking Lists, and beginning to identify the true priorities so that staff can help outline a plan and align available workload to move important items forward. Currently, staff time is mostly spent on the volume of routine items, which sometimes may mean that priorities are not making enough progress. In order to ensure that priorities are actionable, this briefing could: 1. Council Members identify priorities – both individual and group 2. Define a new process to get an “Action Plan” to move those priorities ahead, to include: a. Scope of the priority that identifies the legislative tool (budget, ordinance, etc.) b. Plan to get initial peer support (for individual priorities) c. Discuss how to move the project ahead: i. With the City Attorney, if an ordinance will be needed; Page | 2 ii. With the Administration, if the project would benefit from research, coordination, budget, planning, a new program, etc.; iii. Address separation of powers components. 3. Coordinate with the Administration: a. Formally request if the Administration is interested in / supportive of collaborating on the project exploration and/or advancing the project. b. Work with the Administration on alternatives and scoping: i. Timeline & phases, such as evaluation period, formal adoption, implementation, etc. ii. Resources needed to support: additional staffing, funding, consultants, etc. 4. Based upon the Administration’s initial response, identify timeline / milestones in collaboration with the Council Member, Administration, and/or City Attorney’s Office. With those steps in place, the Staff will be better able to track the projects, make progress, identify road blocks, and report to Council Members during check-in meetings or Work Session briefings as appropriate. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Council Projects & Interests can be reflected in this visual and described by: •Origin: items come to the office based on the City’s core services, constituent requests, known community needs, or policies that the City is advancing (such as Legislative items). •Categories: the “base workload” comes from constituent requests, budget adoption, administrative transmittals, communication efforts, other routine items and basic office operations. A ‘routine’ item will grow into small/medium projects, larger projects, and priorities. The categories will overlap. •Workload: Often, the most frequent type of work (the base workload) is the category that takes up the most time. (Note: This creates conflict, because the more important project, the “priorities,” have less staff time available.) •Friendly Reminder: Not everything can be a priority. Staff often wrestles with this, and although a lot of work is accomplished, without an action plan and staff time dedicated to priorities, the more important work may not be moving ahead. Sometimes urgent items overshadow the important priorities. A significant constituent concern may take the effort of two or even three staff members to fully address an issue. Tracking Lists – As mentioned above, Council staff is working on a master list of items raised at the retreat, tracked by your liaison, funded in the budget, and requested in small group meetings. Consolidating these lists will create a central inventory, and help staff connect Council items to project the Counci is considering funding in the budget, active projects that the Administration has underway, items published on the list of Mayor’s priorities, etc. It will also help us monitor status. Page | 3 ATTACHMENTS Attached is the list of items raised during the retreat – we have kept the format based on the Council’s two conversations: •Attachment 1: Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats •Attachment 2: Projects plotted on two spectrums: amount of resources needed and legislative vs. administrative. This provided four quadrants: a. Low resources needed / legislative b. Low resources needed / administrative c. High resources needed / legislative d. High resources needed / administrative Attachment 1: SWOT Retreat Brainstorming Council Conversation re: Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats (SWOT) Listed in no particular order Strengths Healthy Fund Balance City Leadership expertise Resource Creativity - budget size, bond rating, diverse portfolio Voter support for initiatives, GO Bonds, etc. Consensus builders, reach across to each other, credibility Resources to learn / travel and connect to other resources City staff expertise Fiscally conservative and wisdom Geography Willingness to rely / learn from APA, ULCT, NLC, WFRC and build relationships Capitol City, size, issues, policy positions High trust, high respect with Admin, Mayor Most political alignment on progressive issues Passionate Council Members Diverse Council Accessibility to the Community Weaknesses Communication & Engagement on social media, effectiveness - keep improving Office space for Council staff Housing affordability - so much needed Need better early communication on projects New projects - instead need more focus on maintaining current More tools for public to get more involved / aware of all City is doing Need to communicate / coordinate with Admin on different priorities Online web info not coordinated between Council & Admin on shared topics Continue growing trust and respect with Admin, Mayor Deferred maintenance Structural deficit Volatility of city revenues (% that relies on sales tax) Capitol City, size, issues, policy positions Passionate Council Members Accessibility to Community Attachment 1: SWOT Retreat Brainstorming Opportunities Capitol City, size, issues, policy positions Website, landing page 1-source Saving Great Salt Lake, maintaining jurisdiction Budget size, resources New unused properties (upcoming school decision) Improving ability to get admin buy-in on Council limitations EPA Environmental Justice work Major sports investments, Olympics, MLB, national, international, etc. Capture money coming to the City for major investment Big changes attracting other big investments Have discipline to use all the good ideas & smart people well Threats Deferred Maintenance Structural deficit Volatility of city revenues (% that relies on sales tax) Capitol City, size, issues, policy positions New unused properties (schools?) Too many good ideas & smart people - too many projects to do them all well Public safety staffing (pay & hiring)all including social worker Fund balance level agreement Personal ego / legacy other political bodies / developers that disagree Homeless crisis Property tax increase Balance between studies and action Initiative fatigue Demand on Council time / current pay Flat sales tax Economic Civility in complicated issues Opposing demographics on issues: east / west, pedestrian, renters, ownership Find the right balance good employers: resource well & pay competitively Attachment 2: Resources Roles Legislative Low- to Mid-Level Resources / Legislative (ascending order Legis to Admin) Low-to-Mid Level Resources / Administrative (ascending order Legis to Admin) Council Policies & Procedures Policy priorities on City's Property Management resrouces Public Comment Policy Mural program Council Pay Use of City owned assets Comms / Engagement metrics & feedback Building Code amendments to protect adjacent properties RDA / Council structure Zoning simplification, process next reform steps Focus on current projects before new Fire Department & 911 Operations - morale, pay Financing & Budget priorities viewed in long term Securing public assets Prioritize small businesses & direct revenue to special services Consolidation / Next steps of homeless services / diversified teams Deeper understanding of NOFA (scheduled March 12) - Explore whether community safety teams have a next step / next phase to develop, staffing needs, etc. Great Salt Lake & Watershed Protection - infrastructure & budget - Mental Health support, stakeholders - funding needs Parental Leave policy updates - create metrics Audits - Staff & consolidation - Civilian Response Team focus, status, Train Safety - life impact, $ for education, cameras, etc.RVs micro-camping, services, set location Japan Town Street Long-term sanctioned camp / permanent location Creating Revenue for Housing & Services Affordable housing projecct for LGBTQ Seniors Constituent Communication methods / city projects / etc.Opportunities for RDA / CAN / Econ Dev to coordinate on existing projects District Info sharing meetings (Town Halls)Fleet Block Demolition Ordinance & Boarded Building fees Homelessness impacts on public safety Air Quality Trails Master Plan Studies for Community wealth building to leverage investement Water use in parks, sprinklers - improvements needing budget Develop Community Benefit for Rezones Homeless partnership roles & responsibilities I-15 Expansion - amenities, leverage opportunities, communication Eviction defense, tenant resources, Mid- to High-Level Resources / Legislative (ascending order Legis to Admin) Mid- to High-Level Resources / More Administrative (ascending order Legis to Admin) Evaluate independent revenue streams Use of Fund balance toward deferred maintenance Sustainability Projects School safety - routes, crossing guards, SROs Jordan River Trail safety Memory Grove improvement of monuments (possible State $?)Housing Thriving in Place Action items Employee health - internal goals, taking care of staff, structure, pay - competitive pay for SLC employees BallPark NEXT steps Large scale development opportunities through incentives (elimate undeveloped / underused properties) - Capitol Hill Fenced property - Main Street revitalization - opportunity with some City properties Rio Grande Public Market Home Ownership Train Box Re s o u r c e s n e e d e d Hi g h l e v e l Re s o u r c e s n e e d e d Mi d l e v e l Re s o u r c e s n e e d e d Lo w l e v e l 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: 3/13/2024 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 3/13/2024 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 3/13/2024 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 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 March 13, 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. Kristen Lavelett 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 : 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 an electronic meeting pursuant to Salt Lake City Proclamation. Appropriate notice was given of the Council's meeting as required by §52-4-202. A quorum of the Council was present at the meeting and voted by at least a two-thirds vote, as detailed in the minutes of the open meeting, to close a portion of the meeting to discuss the following: §52-4-205(l)(a) discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; §52 -4-205(1)(b) strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; §52-4-205(l)(c) strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; §52-4-205(l)(d) strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; §52-4-205(l)(e) strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) if the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; §52-4-205(1)(f) discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and §52-4-205(1)(g) investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A Closed Meeting may also be held for Attorney-Client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code §78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. Other, described as follows: The content of the closed portion of the Council meeting was restricted to a discussion of the matter(s) for which the meeting was closed. With regard to the closed meeting, the following was publicly announced and recorded, and entered on the minutes of the open meeting at which the closed meeting was approved: (a) the reason or reasons for holding the closed meeting; (b) the location where the closed meeting will be held; and (c) the vote of each member of the public body either for or against the motion to hold the closed meeting. The recording and any minutes of the closed meeting will include: (a) the date, time, and place of the meeting; (b) the names of members Present and Absent; and (c) the names of all others present except where such disclosure would infringe on the confidentiality necessary to fulfill the original purpose of closing the meeting. Pursuant to §52-4-206(6), a sworn statement is required to close a meeting under §52-4-205(1)(a) or (f), but a record by electronic recording or detailed minutes is not required; and Pursuant to §52-4-206(1), a record by electronic recording and/or detailed written minutes is required for a meeting closed under §52-4-205(1)(b),(c),(d),(e),and (g): A record was not made. A record was made by: 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. Presiding Member Date of Signature Victoria Petro March 26, 2024 Victoria Petro (Jul 25, 2024 16:05 MDT)Jul 25, 2024 3-26-24 Sworn Statement Final Audit Report 2024-07-25 Created:2024-07-25 By:STEPHANIE ELLIOTT (stephanie.elliott@slcgov.com) Status:Signed Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAA732-VQVBiszxzo0VBeHrH_6cqjlCueYy "3-26-24 Sworn Statement" History Document created by STEPHANIE ELLIOTT (stephanie.elliott@slcgov.com) 2024-07-25 - 10:03:50 PM GMT Document emailed to victoria.petro@slcgov.com for signature 2024-07-25 - 10:04:18 PM GMT Email viewed by victoria.petro@slcgov.com 2024-07-25 - 10:04:39 PM GMT Signer victoria.petro@slcgov.com entered name at signing as Victoria Petro 2024-07-25 - 10:04:59 PM GMT Document e-signed by Victoria Petro (victoria.petro@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2024-07-25 - 10:05:01 PM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed. 2024-07-25 - 10:05:01 PM GMT