11/19/2024 - Formal Meeting - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
FORMAL MEETING
November 19, 2024 Tuesday 7:00 PM
Council meetings are held in a hybrid meeting format. Hybrid meetings allow people to join online or in person at
the City & County Building. Learn more at tinyurl.com/SLCCouncilMeetings.
Council Chambers
451 South State Street, Room 315
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
SLCCouncil.com
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Victoria Petro, Chair
District 1
Chris Wharton, Vice Chair
District 3
Alejandro Puy
District 2
Eva Lopez Chavez
District 4
Darin Mano
District 5
Dan Dugan
District 6
Sarah Young
District 7
Generated: 09:39:48
Please note: Dates not identified in the FYI - Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet
determined.
WELCOME AND PUBLIC MEETING RULES
A.OPENING CEREMONY:
1.Council Member Eva Lopez Chavez will conduct the formal meeting.
2.Pledge of Allegiance.
3.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules.
4.The Council will consider adopting a joint ceremonial resolution with Mayor
Mendenhall recognizing December 1st as World AIDS Day in Salt Lake City.
B.PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Items B1 & B2 will be heard as one public hearing.
1. Grant Application: PRO Housing Grant – Fiscal Year 24 Pathways to
Removing Obstacles to Housing
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Department of Community and Neighborhoods to Housing and Urban Development. If
awarded, the grant would continue to fund five existing positions and would focus on
expanding the Community Land Trust (CLT) and Fix the Bricks (FTB) programs. The
CLT program addresses housing affordability across the City by serving low-to moderate-
income households, and the FTB program seismically retrofits homes within the City.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - n/a
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a
Staff Recommendation - Close and refer to future consent
agenda.
2. Grant Application: Community Forest Corps and Urban Forestry Fellowship
The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the
Sustainability Department to the Center for Regenerative Solutions. If awarded, the grant
would fund automated irrigation devices at Westside homes to care for existing park strip
trees. The City will partner with Utah Conservation Corps to launch and manage the
Community Forestry Corps youth employment program to accomplish this work. The
grant also includes funding for a fellowship to lead outreach and engagement regarding
tree stewardship and urban heat management.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - n/a
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a
Staff Recommendation - Close and refer to future consent
agenda.
3. Ordinance: Jordan River Fairpark District Zoning Map & Text Amendment
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would
amend the City's zoning ordinance by creating a new zoning district known as the Jordan
River Fairpark (JRF) District at approximately 1500 West North Temple and bounded by
the Jordan River, Redwood Road, North Temple, and Interstate 15. The proposal would
rezone approximately 93 acres across 32 parcels into a single zone to support the area's
redevelopment. The project is located within Council District 2. Petitioner: Snell &
Wilmer, representing Larry H. Miller Development. Petition No.:PLNPCM2024-00982.
1.Zoning Map & Text Amendment: The JRF district would allow buildings up
to 400 feet tall. No minimum lot size, setbacks, or open space requirements
are proposed, and developments would be exempt from meeting the City's
general plans.
2.Development Agreement: The proposed Development Agreement addresses
access to the Jordan River, open space, roads, and infrastructure
improvements and establishes review processes for development
applications. Under new state law, an agreement must be reached by
December 31, 2024, for expedited land use reviews related to a qualified
stadium and related uses. If no agreement is made, the JRF District will not
be subject to the City's zoning regulations.
For more information visit https://tinyurl.com/JRFDistrict.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, November 12, 2024 and Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, November 12, 2024
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, December 3, 2024
Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s).
4. Ordinance: Temporary Closure of a Portion of 1000 West Between South
Temple and Approximately 15 South 1000 West
The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would
temporarily close a segment of 1000 West between South Temple and 15 South 1000
West to mitigate unsafe conditions. State law allows the City to temporarily close certain
streets until the unsafe conditions are mitigated or up to two years, whichever is less. The
Federal Railroad Administration has suspended the Woods Cross Quiet Zone after
conducting an inspection and determining that safety systems and measures
implemented at this crossing are inadequate. Temporarily closing this portion of the road
will allow the City to make improvements to the crossing so that the Woods Cross Quiet
Zone may be restored.
For more information visit https://tinyurl.com/SLCQZ.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, November 12, 2024
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, November 12, 2024
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, November 19, 2024 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s).
C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS:
1. Ordinance: Street and Alley Vacation and Subdivision Amendment at
Brooklyn Avenue
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the Brooklyn and
Dolan subdivisions in order to vacate a portion of Brooklyn Avenue and an adjacent City-
owned alley. If approved, the section of Brooklyn Avenue would be divided and sold to the
property owners of 1005 and 1007 South 500 West according to the approved plat at fair
market value. The alley property would be sold at fair market value to the owner of 1007
South 500 West. The project is located within Council District 5. Petitioner: Jonah
Hornsby of Jodah One, LLC. Petition No.:PLNPCM2022-00068, PLNPCM2022-
00349, PLNSUB2023-00493.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, October 1, 2024
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, October 15, 2024
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, November 12, 2024 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s).
2. Ordinance: Zoning Map Amendment at 1816 South State Street
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning of the
property at approximately 1816 South State Street from BP (Business Park) to CC
(Corridor Commercial). The proposal would allow the building at this site to be leased for
additional commercial uses. The request is supported by the Central Community Master
Plan. The project is located within Council District 5. Petitioner: Tiffanie Price, property
owner. Petition No.:PLNPCM2024-00033.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, October 1, 2024
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, October 15, 2024
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, November 12, 2024 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s).
D.COMMENTS:
1.Questions to the Mayor from the City Council.
2.Comments to the City Council. (This is a one-hour time slot for the public to
comment on any City business not scheduled for a public hearing. Each person
will have two minutes to talk. General comment registration closes at 7:30 p.m.)
E.NEW BUSINESS:
NONE.
F.UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1. Resolution: Public Utilities Revenue Bonds, Series 2025
The Council will consider adopting a parameters resolution authorizing the issuance and
sale of up to $225,000,000 principal amount of Public Utilities revenue bonds, series
2025. The bond would finance a portion of water and sewer capital improvements,
funding the City Creek Water Treatment Plant and the City’s new water reclamation
facility. The Council's action includes authorizing the execution of a supplemental
indenture, a bond purchase contract, and other documents as required.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, November 12, 2024
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s).
2. Ordinance: Economic Development Loan Fund - HK Brewing Collective,
LLC.
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would approve a $250,000 loan for
HK Brewing Collective, LLC. at 307 Aspen Avenue from the Economic Development
Loan Fund (EDLF). HK Brewing Collective, LLC. offers non-alcoholic kombucha, Han’s
kombucha, and a taproom and bar experience. This loan will assist in the creation of ten
new jobs in the next year and the retention of twenty current jobs.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s).
3. Ordinance: Economic Development Loan Fund - GK Folks Foundation
The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would approve a $250,000 loan for
GK Folks Foundation at 1506 South Redwood Road from the Economic Development
Loan Fund (EDLF). GK Folks Foundation is a non-profit organization for African
immigrants and refugees that focuses on mental health awareness and educational and
entrepreneurial resources. This loan will be used to create a community events center for
the African immigrant and refugee community and assist in the creation of two new jobs
in the next year and the retention of one current job.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Staff Recommendation - Refer to motion sheet(s).
G.CONSENT:
1. Resolution: Public Utilities Revenue Bonds, Series 2025
The Council will set the date of Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 7 p.m. to accept public
comment for a parameters resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of up to
$225,000,000 principal amount of Public Utilities revenue bonds, series 2025. The bond
would finance a portion of water and sewer capital improvements, funding the City Creek
Water Treatment Plant and the City’s new water reclamation facility. The Council's action
includes authorizing the execution of a supplemental indenture, a bond purchase
contract, and other documents as required.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, November 12, 2024
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Staff Recommendation - Set date.
2. Ordinance: Budget Amendment No.2 for Fiscal Year 2024-25
The Council will set the date of Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 7 p.m. to accept public
comment and consider an ordinance amending the final budget of Salt Lake City,
including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2024-25. The proposed
amendment includes creating a new fund dedicated to the Capital City Downtown
Revitalization Zone sales tax, 12 new police officers partially funded by a Community
Oriented Policing Services or COPS program grant from the U.S. Department of Justice,
a donation from the University of Utah related to the construction of a baseball stadium
at Sunnyside Park, and funding for the City’s vehicle fleet, among other projects. The
Council will also receive a presentation about the State Transit Transportation
Investment Fund or TTIF and four capital projects receiving TTIF grants, including a
multi-use trail on 400 South to better connect Poplar Grove and Downtown, among other
projects.
For more information visit https://tinyurl.com/SLCFY25.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council
discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, December 3, 2024 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, December 10, 2024
Staff Recommendation - Set date.
H.ADJOURNMENT:
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
On or before 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 14, 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@slc.gov, 801-535-7600, or relay service
711.
JOINT RESOLUTION DECLARING
WORLD AIDS DAY 2024 IN SALT LAKE CITY
WHEREAS, according to estimates from the Joint United Nations Program on
HIV/AIDS, there are now more than 39.9 million people throughout the
world living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV); of these, 53% are
women and girls; 1.4 million are children; 1.3 million new infections
occurred among adults and children in 2023 alone; and
WHEREAS, in Utah, HIV incidence has not seen a significant decrease in new HIV
infections when other metropolitan areas have; and
WHEREAS, in Utah, the rate of new HIV diagnoses with stage 3 infections has not
decreased in the last five years; and
WHEREAS, up to 85 percent of people living with HIV in Utah reside along the Wasatch
Front; and
WHEREAS, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has found that HIV-
related stigma has a significant negative impact on people living with HIV,
increases new infections, and delays people seeking testing for HIV; and
WHEREAS, stigma, shame, and fear make people less likely to discuss their sexual health
with doctors and often lead to delays in seeking testing or treatment for
sexually transmitted infections and HIV, which can have serious long-term
health consequences; and
WHEREAS, people with HIV who take HIV medicine as prescribed maintain and keep an
undetectable viral load, can live long and healthy lives, and will not
transmit HIV to an HIV-negative partner; and
WHEREAS, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), a daily regimen of two oral antiretroviral
drugs in a single pill, has proven to be highly effective in preventing HIV
infection for individuals at high risk, reducing the risk of acquiring HIV
from sex by about 99 percent; and
WHEREAS, Salt Lake City supports the efforts of the Utah AIDS Foundation in its
mission to provide support to people living with HIV/AIDS and prevention
services for those at risk for HIV. Salt Lake City also supports the vital work
of the Salt Lake County Health Department Sexually Transmitted Disease
(STD) Clinic, which provides testing for HIV at no cost; and
WHEREAS, the elimination of stigma in Utah will lead to better physical and mental
health outcomes for people living with HIV, increased HIV disclosure,
increased HIV testing, and decreased HIV infections; and
WHEREAS, World AIDS Day was established in 1988 and is observed each year on
December 1 to provide an opportunity for individuals and communities to
take action and help educate for HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care;
and
WHEREAS, Salt Lake City has joined other cities around the world to increase
awareness, reduce stigma, provide education about HIV/AIDS, and
demonstrate compassion for those affected by HIV.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
the Salt Lake City Council and Mayor of Salt Lake City hereby recognize
December 1, 2024, as World AIDS Day in Salt Lake City and encourage all
residents to unite together in the fight against HIV/AIDS, reduce the stigma
of HIV/AIDS, and support those who are living with or have been affected
by HIV/AIDS.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
Salt Lake City is grateful for the FDA’s decision to rescind its
recommendation that blood donation centers turn away donors in the
LGBTQ community based solely on sexual history since, according to the
CDC, all blood for transfusion is tested for evidence of certain infectious
disease pathogens such as HIV.
Adopted this _____ day of November 2024.
Items B1 & B2
Page 1
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst
DATE:November 19, 2024
RE: MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING
________________________________________________________________________________
The Council will conduct a Public Hearing and may consider the following motion:
Motion 1 – Close and Refer
I move that the Council close the Public Hearing and refer Items B-1 and B-2 to a
future Consent Agenda for action.
Project Timeline:
Public Hearing: November 19, 2024
NEW GRANT APPLICATIONS
November 19, 2024 PUBLIC HEARING
City Match
Required?
Number of
FTEs
Requested
Grant Title Grant Purpose Status Annual
Grant
Total
Grant &
and FTE
Amount
Funding
Agency
Requested
By
1.No.1 New
Fellow FTE
for the
duration of
the grant.
Funding Urban
Forestry: Community
Forest Corps & Urban
Forest Fellowship
Add trees to the
Westside through the
launch & management
of Community Forestry
Corps youth
employment programs.
Partner with Utah
Conservation Corps
(UCC) for adult crew,
youth crew and 1 hourly
UCC crew member.
Needs
Public
Hearing
No.598,855 Center for
Regenerative
Solutions in
collaboration
with Utah
Conservation
Corps (UCC)
Dept. of
Sustainability
2.Yes.
$2,582,368
Source: in-
kind services
5 Existing
FTEs
PRO Housing Grant –
FY24 Pathways to
Removing Obstacles
to Housing
Funds will be used to
expand the Community
Land Trust program and
remove barriers to
affordable housing. It
will also seismically
retrofit homes within
Salt Lake City.
Needs
Public
Hearing
Fix the
Bricks is
an
annual
grant
$7,356,754
total;
$4,774,386
Federal
Share
Housing &
Urban
Development
Dept. of
Community &
Neighborhoods
The following information provided by the Administration in response to Council Staff’s questions:
A. Funding Urban Forestry: Community Forest Corps & Urban Forestry Fellowship Grant
1. Who pays for the increased water usage once the automated irrigation systems are installed, and who would
own the new systems (the adjacent property owner, the City, or a mix)?
Answer: For neighborhood street trees, water for these systems would be supplied by that adjacent private property. In
some cases, the adjacent property may be a park or municipal facility, in which case the water would be supplied by the
city.
Once the systems are installed, we expect that ownership of the components will convey to the adjacent property
owner. Just as it is implied that the adjacent property owner owns irrigation components that they place in the park
strip. For the purposes of this pilot program, the City would honor a resident’s request to remove the system, but
otherwise has no intentions of repossession of the system components.
2. How will the addresses for new trees be chosen (e.g., limited to residential or available to commercial properties
too)? Can a resident refuse the irrigation system and tree planting?
Answer: Addresses for the tree irrigation pilot program will be selected from a list of addresses where new street trees
will be (or have recently been) planted. The focus area of the grant is neighborhoods identified as “disadvantaged” by
the EPA Inflation Reduction Act Disadvantaged Communities Map (see here) The program will not have the capacity to
install these systems for every tree planted during the grant period, so this program is intended to water some newly
planted trees and evaluate the effectiveness of such a system. This program is geared toward residential neighborhood
street trees. Chapter 21A 48 of the City's Code (administered by the Planning Division) already requires trees and
automated irrigation systems adjacent for park strips adjacent to commercial properties.
Yes, residents can refuse participation in this program. The UF Division does not plant trees for people who do not want
them.
3. Will this program overlap at all with the replacement and installation of new trees on North Temple?
Answer: No. This program is not associated or overlapping with new trees for North Temple.
4. Could you please clarify what this performance metric means in the second paragraph of the grant details:
structural pruning target: 60-7-0/week?
Answer: Young trees benefit greatly from targeted pruning of limbs to promote strong and stable branching structure
(as the tree matures). Structure pruning young trees is far more efficient and results in exponentially less waste wood.
We have established a target of the grant funded crews to prune 60-70 trees/week.
5. Council Members have asked whether the Urban Forestry Division has or plans to gather data on which tree
species provide greater public benefits and best fit in certain locations (e.g., drought tolerance, shade canopy
size, roots that are less likely to damage adjacent pavement and sidewalks). Is it correct that the grant-funded
tree inventory updates would further improve this ongoing effort, or has the Division already reached
conclusions on tree species?
Answer: The Urban Forestry Division already consciously places trees in consideration of variables. Generally speaking,
the faster and larger a tree can grow the more benefits it can provide over a given time period. So the UF Division likes
to plant the largest trees (at maturity) that a given spot can accommodate. The UF Division also maintains a solid
understanding of which species present challenges (ie Hardscape Damage, low tolerance to urban conditions, high water
needs, etc) and seeks to limit their use in locations where these characteristics are particularly problematic. However,
the UF Division has to order trees 18 months prior to when they will be planted and availability of many species is
limited. So we do not have the luxury of ordering specific trees for each location. Rather we pick the most appropriate
tree for a given spot from what we have available.
Inventory updates absolutely provide valuable information that is applied to our ongoing and evolving decision-making
efforts pertaining to what species we plant (and where).
B. PRO Housing Grant - Pathways to Removing Obstacles to Housing
1. Please provide the following: (a) an update of how many homes have received seismic upgrades during 2024, (b)
how many homes are currently on the waiting list, and, (c) how many years it will take to complete the current
work for those on the waiting list?
Answer:
a. Since January of 2024 forty-five (45) houses have received seismic upgrades.
b. There are currently 1,500 homes on the Fix The Bricks (FTB) waitlist, after a review of the waitlist was completed
in August of 2024. In order to complete work for all the homes currently on the waitlist, it will likely take up to ten
years. The program is limited by the staffing capacity of the City, as well as the qualified contractors and engineers
available to work on these projects. There needs to be a significant increase in capacity for both the City and the
contractors to complete a greater number of projects annually.
2. The budget worksheet identifies $1 million for Fix the Bricks and $3 million for purchasing 10 homes valued at
approximately $300,000 each to be added to the Community Land Trust. Could you please explain how this fund split
was decided? Could the funding split be swapped to $3 million Fix the Bricks and $1 million Community Land Trust?
Answer: The funding split was determined based on the cost of acquiring additional homes for the Community Land
Trust, compared to the cost of completing the number of feasible seismic retrofit projects. The budget requested is one
that the Division can realistically spend in the timeframe of the grant. FTB projects are less expensive but require a
greater amount of staff capacity, limiting the number of projects that can realistically be completed over a given period.
The FTB program is also anticipated to receive additional grant funding through various other grant applications that the
Housing Stability Division continues to apply for, whereas the future CLT funding is less known and has fewer funding
options available.
Given that the application has already been submitted, a budget swap (or adjustment) could only be requested if funds
are awarded, and if HUD would be amenable to the request, which is not guaranteed. Although doing so would
significantly jeopardize the City’s ability to spend the funds within the grant award period, given the substantial amount
of capacity it would take to expend $3M in the FTB program.
3. Could you please share how the $2.5 million impact fees waiver was calculated?
Answer: These are fee waivers that have already been reviewed and approved through the Impact Fee Waiver
exemption allowance in City Code 18.98.060. Housing Stability tracks these waivers and uses them as match for the HUD
HOME program. The current approved fee waiver amounts exceed what is needed for the HUD HOME program match,
which is 25% annually (around $500K). As of September, the City had already approved ~$9 million in impact fee
waivers. One factor considered when calculating the $2.5 million in impact fee waivers as match to PRO Housing funding
was the number of points the application would receive. By matching PRO Housing funding by at least 50%, we are able
to get the maximum number of points available in that section of the application. Prior to determining this number, we
made sure there was sufficient impact fee waivers for the match.
a. Are these waivers for major remodels of the homes going into the Community Land Trust?
Answer: No, waivers will not be needed for the CLT homes request. These are impact fee waivers as allowed under City
Code.
b. Are the seismic retrofits subject to impact fees? Are all the retrofits limited to low- and moderate-income single-
family homes?
Answer: No, seismic retrofits are not subject to impact fees. This grant will assist homeowners under 100% AMI.
4. How would this grant promote desegregation? Are certain demographic groups being prioritized to receive these
grant funds?
One primary goal of all HUD funding is advancing racial equity, and affirmative marketing and outreach practices. This
application aligns with those goals through its alignment with Thriving in Place. The focus will be on areas of the City that
have been historically underserved, underfunded and previously redlined, those areas are typically the most diverse and
have a high population of people of color.
While we are not prioritizing specific demographic groups to receive these funds under the CLT and FTB programs, our
goal is to create greater access to these programs for historically underserved groups. The CLT properties acquired with
this funding will only be available to households at or below 100% of the Area Median Income (AMI), advertising of
these properties will be targeted to historically underserved groups, and this program will be in alignment with any
adopted CLT program policies.
5. What is the deadline for the City to spend these funds? Are there concerns with the City’s ability to meet that
deadline given the lengthy Fix the Bricks backlog and the unpredictable timing of Community Land Trust buybacks?
Answer: If awarded, the period of performance of this grant funding is 2/10/2025 through 9/30/2030. This timeframe
allows us to use the funding requested, based on the history of FTB houses we have served, and to focus our outreach to
the historically underserved areas. Housing Stability has spent significant time in 2024 cleaning up and reviewing the
current FTB waitlist. This involved reaching out to the households on the waitlist to ensure they are still interested in the
program and live in an eligible home. These efforts resulted in bringing the waitlist down from 4,000 to 1,500. This
funding will also help us to prioritize certain income-eligible households on the waitlist.
We have averaged three buybacks a year through the Home Loan/CLT program, with this funding and the grant term it
is likely we will expend the CLT requested funds on buybacks within the next five years. The Housing Stability Division
has a consistent record of being able to spend down other federal funds received.
Items B1 & B2
Page 1
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Sylvia Richards, Policy Analyst
DATE:November 19, 2024
RE: MOTION SHEET FOR PUBLIC HEARING
________________________________________________________________________________
The Council will conduct a Public Hearing and may consider the following motion:
Motion 1 – Close and Refer
I move that the Council close the Public Hearing and refer Items B-1 and B-2 to a
future Consent Agenda for action.
Project Timeline:
Public Hearing: November 19, 2024
NEW GRANT APPLICATIONS
November 19, 2024 PUBLIC HEARING
City Match
Required?
Number of
FTEs
Requested
Grant Title Grant Purpose Status Annual
Grant
Total
Grant &
and FTE
Amount
Funding
Agency
Requested
By
1.No.1 New
Fellow FTE
for the
duration of
the grant.
Funding Urban
Forestry: Community
Forest Corps & Urban
Forest Fellowship
Add trees to the
Westside through the
launch & management
of Community Forestry
Corps youth
employment programs.
Partner with Utah
Conservation Corps
(UCC) for adult crew,
youth crew and 1 hourly
UCC crew member.
Needs
Public
Hearing
No.598,855 Center for
Regenerative
Solutions in
collaboration
with Utah
Conservation
Corps (UCC)
Dept. of
Sustainability
2.Yes.
$2,582,368
Source: in-
kind services
5 Existing
FTEs
PRO Housing Grant –
FY24 Pathways to
Removing Obstacles
to Housing
Funds will be used to
expand the Community
Land Trust program and
remove barriers to
affordable housing. It
will also seismically
retrofit homes within
Salt Lake City.
Needs
Public
Hearing
Fix the
Bricks is
an
annual
grant
$7,356,754
total;
$4,774,386
Federal
Share
Housing &
Urban
Development
Dept. of
Community &
Neighborhoods
The following information provided by the Administration in response to Council Staff’s questions:
A. Funding Urban Forestry: Community Forest Corps & Urban Forestry Fellowship Grant
1. Who pays for the increased water usage once the automated irrigation systems are installed, and who would
own the new systems (the adjacent property owner, the City, or a mix)?
Answer: For neighborhood street trees, water for these systems would be supplied by that adjacent private property. In
some cases, the adjacent property may be a park or municipal facility, in which case the water would be supplied by the
city.
Once the systems are installed, we expect that ownership of the components will convey to the adjacent property
owner. Just as it is implied that the adjacent property owner owns irrigation components that they place in the park
strip. For the purposes of this pilot program, the City would honor a resident’s request to remove the system, but
otherwise has no intentions of repossession of the system components.
2. How will the addresses for new trees be chosen (e.g., limited to residential or available to commercial properties
too)? Can a resident refuse the irrigation system and tree planting?
Answer: Addresses for the tree irrigation pilot program will be selected from a list of addresses where new street trees
will be (or have recently been) planted. The focus area of the grant is neighborhoods identified as “disadvantaged” by
the EPA Inflation Reduction Act Disadvantaged Communities Map (see here) The program will not have the capacity to
install these systems for every tree planted during the grant period, so this program is intended to water some newly
planted trees and evaluate the effectiveness of such a system. This program is geared toward residential neighborhood
street trees. Chapter 21A 48 of the City's Code (administered by the Planning Division) already requires trees and
automated irrigation systems adjacent for park strips adjacent to commercial properties.
Yes, residents can refuse participation in this program. The UF Division does not plant trees for people who do not want
them.
3. Will this program overlap at all with the replacement and installation of new trees on North Temple?
Answer: No. This program is not associated or overlapping with new trees for North Temple.
4. Could you please clarify what this performance metric means in the second paragraph of the grant details:
structural pruning target: 60-7-0/week?
Answer: Young trees benefit greatly from targeted pruning of limbs to promote strong and stable branching structure
(as the tree matures). Structure pruning young trees is far more efficient and results in exponentially less waste wood.
We have established a target of the grant funded crews to prune 60-70 trees/week.
5. Council Members have asked whether the Urban Forestry Division has or plans to gather data on which tree
species provide greater public benefits and best fit in certain locations (e.g., drought tolerance, shade canopy
size, roots that are less likely to damage adjacent pavement and sidewalks). Is it correct that the grant-funded
tree inventory updates would further improve this ongoing effort, or has the Division already reached
conclusions on tree species?
Answer: The Urban Forestry Division already consciously places trees in consideration of variables. Generally speaking,
the faster and larger a tree can grow the more benefits it can provide over a given time period. So the UF Division likes
to plant the largest trees (at maturity) that a given spot can accommodate. The UF Division also maintains a solid
understanding of which species present challenges (ie Hardscape Damage, low tolerance to urban conditions, high water
needs, etc) and seeks to limit their use in locations where these characteristics are particularly problematic. However,
the UF Division has to order trees 18 months prior to when they will be planted and availability of many species is
limited. So we do not have the luxury of ordering specific trees for each location. Rather we pick the most appropriate
tree for a given spot from what we have available.
Inventory updates absolutely provide valuable information that is applied to our ongoing and evolving decision-making
efforts pertaining to what species we plant (and where).
B. PRO Housing Grant - Pathways to Removing Obstacles to Housing
1. Please provide the following: (a) an update of how many homes have received seismic upgrades during 2024, (b)
how many homes are currently on the waiting list, and, (c) how many years it will take to complete the current
work for those on the waiting list?
Answer:
a. Since January of 2024 forty-five (45) houses have received seismic upgrades.
b. There are currently 1,500 homes on the Fix The Bricks (FTB) waitlist, after a review of the waitlist was completed
in August of 2024. In order to complete work for all the homes currently on the waitlist, it will likely take up to ten
years. The program is limited by the staffing capacity of the City, as well as the qualified contractors and engineers
available to work on these projects. There needs to be a significant increase in capacity for both the City and the
contractors to complete a greater number of projects annually.
2. The budget worksheet identifies $1 million for Fix the Bricks and $3 million for purchasing 10 homes valued at
approximately $300,000 each to be added to the Community Land Trust. Could you please explain how this fund split
was decided? Could the funding split be swapped to $3 million Fix the Bricks and $1 million Community Land Trust?
Answer: The funding split was determined based on the cost of acquiring additional homes for the Community Land
Trust, compared to the cost of completing the number of feasible seismic retrofit projects. The budget requested is one
that the Division can realistically spend in the timeframe of the grant. FTB projects are less expensive but require a
greater amount of staff capacity, limiting the number of projects that can realistically be completed over a given period.
The FTB program is also anticipated to receive additional grant funding through various other grant applications that the
Housing Stability Division continues to apply for, whereas the future CLT funding is less known and has fewer funding
options available.
Given that the application has already been submitted, a budget swap (or adjustment) could only be requested if funds
are awarded, and if HUD would be amenable to the request, which is not guaranteed. Although doing so would
significantly jeopardize the City’s ability to spend the funds within the grant award period, given the substantial amount
of capacity it would take to expend $3M in the FTB program.
3. Could you please share how the $2.5 million impact fees waiver was calculated?
Answer: These are fee waivers that have already been reviewed and approved through the Impact Fee Waiver
exemption allowance in City Code 18.98.060. Housing Stability tracks these waivers and uses them as match for the HUD
HOME program. The current approved fee waiver amounts exceed what is needed for the HUD HOME program match,
which is 25% annually (around $500K). As of September, the City had already approved ~$9 million in impact fee
waivers. One factor considered when calculating the $2.5 million in impact fee waivers as match to PRO Housing funding
was the number of points the application would receive. By matching PRO Housing funding by at least 50%, we are able
to get the maximum number of points available in that section of the application. Prior to determining this number, we
made sure there was sufficient impact fee waivers for the match.
a. Are these waivers for major remodels of the homes going into the Community Land Trust?
Answer: No, waivers will not be needed for the CLT homes request. These are impact fee waivers as allowed under City
Code.
b. Are the seismic retrofits subject to impact fees? Are all the retrofits limited to low- and moderate-income single-
family homes?
Answer: No, seismic retrofits are not subject to impact fees. This grant will assist homeowners under 100% AMI.
4. How would this grant promote desegregation? Are certain demographic groups being prioritized to receive these
grant funds?
One primary goal of all HUD funding is advancing racial equity, and affirmative marketing and outreach practices. This
application aligns with those goals through its alignment with Thriving in Place. The focus will be on areas of the City that
have been historically underserved, underfunded and previously redlined, those areas are typically the most diverse and
have a high population of people of color.
While we are not prioritizing specific demographic groups to receive these funds under the CLT and FTB programs, our
goal is to create greater access to these programs for historically underserved groups. The CLT properties acquired with
this funding will only be available to households at or below 100% of the Area Median Income (AMI), advertising of
these properties will be targeted to historically underserved groups, and this program will be in alignment with any
adopted CLT program policies.
5. What is the deadline for the City to spend these funds? Are there concerns with the City’s ability to meet that
deadline given the lengthy Fix the Bricks backlog and the unpredictable timing of Community Land Trust buybacks?
Answer: If awarded, the period of performance of this grant funding is 2/10/2025 through 9/30/2030. This timeframe
allows us to use the funding requested, based on the history of FTB houses we have served, and to focus our outreach to
the historically underserved areas. Housing Stability has spent significant time in 2024 cleaning up and reviewing the
current FTB waitlist. This involved reaching out to the households on the waitlist to ensure they are still interested in the
program and live in an eligible home. These efforts resulted in bringing the waitlist down from 4,000 to 1,500. This
funding will also help us to prioritize certain income-eligible households on the waitlist.
We have averaged three buybacks a year through the Home Loan/CLT program, with this funding and the grant term it
is likely we will expend the CLT requested funds on buybacks within the next five years. The Housing Stability Division
has a consistent record of being able to spend down other federal funds received.
Item B3
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet
Policy Analyst
DATE:October 19, 2024
RE: MOTION SHEET – Jordan River Fairpark District Rezone & Text Amendment
and Development Agreement
Petition No PLNPCM2024-00982
MOTION 1
I move that the Council continue the public hearing to a future council meeting.
MOTION 2
I move the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a future council meeting
COUNCIL STAFF
REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet, Policy Analyst
DATE: November 19, 2024
RE:Jordan River Fairpark District Rezone & Text
Amendment and Development Agreement
Petition No PLNPCM2024-00982
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing 1: Nov 12, 2024
Briefing 2: Nov 19, 2024
Set Date: Nov 12, 2024
Public Hearing: Nov 19, 2024
Potential Action: TBD
WORK SESSION SUMMARY
During the work session the Council discussed the proposed zoning amendment with Planning staff and
the applicant.
The Council discussed including the following items in the development agreement that would accompany
the zoning amendments:
Housing minimums include workforce housing and family sized housing.
o Make amenities available to all residents in the project area
Workforce development / internships
Guaranteeing public access to the Jordan River / access in and out of the river
Confirm what parts of the riparian corridor applicable to the project area
Free expression & inclusivity in public plaza areas
Property swap for city owned parcel on east side of the river and the easement on the westside
Focus on local contractors participating in the development and construction of the project area
The Council directed staff to work with the applicant on the development agreement. Those discussions are
still ongoing. Staff anticipates holding a follow-up briefing on the development agreement at the December
3 work session briefing.
For the follow-up briefing on November 19, staff is seeking direction from the Council on the following
zoning related items.
Page | 2
Open Space Requirements
Recommendation: A minimum percentage of the project must be designated as open space and
accessible to the public.
Update: The applicant added that 10% of the district must be “active or passive open space,” but the
DA states no open space is required. The applicant has indicated they intend to provide up to 18%,
but details are not yet provided. Unclear if this will be accessible to the public.
o Does the Council wish to designate a minimum amount of open space in the
JRF zoning district and that it be publicly accessible?
Design Standards
Recommendation: Design standards apply to all buildings facing public streets and the Jordan
River. These should include specifications for lighting, entry features, parking garages, and limits
on building façade lengths.
Update: There has been discussion with the applicant from the start about applying these
standards. The stadium can be exempt from these design standards, but they should be applicable
to all public streets. Assuming that private streets will be dedicated at a future time, the standards
should apply to those public streets after they are dedicated.
o Does the Council wish to require design standards for only the publicly
facing streets and the Jordan River, or also include them for all the streets in
the project area.
o With the understanding that the stadium will front the Jordan River, does
Council support requiring design standards for buildings that front the
river?
o Does the Council support exempting stadium uses from the design standards?
Building Height
The most current JRF draft revised staff’s addition to clarify the FAA regulations to any building
over 60’ in height.
Staff is concerned with a potential conflict between the FAA regulations and the JRF code and
would like the prior draft language added back in. The language includes the following:
No building over ’60’ is permitted unless the FAA issues a “determination of no hazard to air
navigation” for said building.
o Does the Council support the addition of this language to the JRF ordinance?
Setback Requirement
Recommendation: A maximum setback of 15 feet is required from all streets and publicly accessible
open spaces.
Update: This condition has not been addressed. Again, this max setback wouldn’t need to apply to
the stadium. It is intended for the everyday structure to make sure buildings address the street and
site development follows best urban design practices and would reduce the likelihood of street
facing surface parking lots
o Does the Council wish to establish a maximum setback from all streets and
publicly accessible open spaces?
If yes, does the Council support exempting stadium uses from this
requirement?
Page | 3
Building Height and Walkways
Midblock Walkways: The PC added a condition that any midblock walkways associated with
additional building height shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide.
Update: The applicant updated the code to include this as an option for additional building height.
In Downtown zones, the walkway width must increase to at least 20 feet for additional height so 15
feet is the bare minimum and doesn’t necessarily reflect the context of the site.
Open Space Option: As an alternative to wider walkways, the proposed code allows for building
heights above 200 feet, but no specific square footage has been provided. For Downtown, a 500 SF
minimum is required, but due to the context of the site, a larger space would be appropriate.
Downtown development is all infill so 500 SF is reasonable.
o Does the Council wish to establish a minimum midblock walkway width for
buildings that go over 200’ in height?
If, so, does the Council support 15’ or 20’ in width?
o Does the Council support establishing a minimum open space requirement as
an option for the applicant to designate in order to go over 200’ in height.
If so, does the Council support 500 sf or would the Council like to ask
for additional recommendations from Planning staff?
Land Uses
Light manufacturing, vehicle rental and warehouses don’t meet the stated intent of the district and
open up the land to development patterns that do not support mixed-use walkable communities.
The applicant has requested a “flex space”, which is not defined in code at this time.
Staff is coordinating with the applicant on a potential definition that would work for them and the
City. At the time this memo was submitted, that language was not finalized. Staff will have the draft
ready in time for the briefing on November 19.
o Does the Council support including the proposed “flex-space” definition and
use in the zoning ordinance?
The public hearing is set for Tuesday, November 19 at 7:00pm.
The following information was provided for the November 12 work session
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the City's zoning ordinance by
creating a new zoning district known as the JRF District at approximately 1500 West North Temple and
bounded by the Jordan River, Redwood Road, North Temple, and Interstate 15. The proposal would rezone
approximately 93 acres across 32 parcels into a single zone to support the area's redevelopment.
Zoning Map & Text Amendment: The JRF district would allow buildings up to 400 feet tall, with
Design Review required for structures over 200 feet. There would be no minimum lot size, width,
or setbacks, and at least 10% of the gross development area would be dedicated to open space.
Developments would be exempt from meeting the City's general plans.
Page | 4
Development Agreement: The proposed Development Agreement addresses access to the Jordan
River, open space, roads, and infrastructure improvements and establishes review processes for
development applications. Under new state law, an agreement must be reached by December 31,
2024, for expedited land use reviews related to a qualified stadium and related uses. If no
agreement is made, the JRF District will not be subject to the City's zoning regulations.
The Planning Commission voted 7 to 1 to forward a recommendation of approval with a list of conditions
for the Council to consider. See those in the policy questions section below.
Council Staff is proposing the Council review the zoning and draft development agreement concepts during
the November 12 briefing and hold a follow-up briefing on November 19, the same day as the public
hearing.
In addition to these zoning regulations, the State statute requires the city complete the following by the end
of this year:
Amend the North Temple Redevelopment project area boundaries by removing the properties in the
Utah Fairpark Area Investment and Restoration District.
o That was completed on October 15.
Finalize a municipal services contract with the UFAIR board.
o The administration is currently working with the UFAIR board on this contract.
Vicinity Map
From Exhibit A of the
Planning Commission Staff Report
Policy Questions / Direction
Page | 5
Planning Commission Proposed Conditions for Consideration
The Council may wish to review the following list of potential conditions forwarded by the Planning
Commission and provide policy direction to staff for which items to include in the final documents,
whether the zoning amendments or the development agreement. Planning staff will be in attendance and
can provide a response to questions the Council may raise during the briefing.
1. The applicant shall continue to work with Public Utilities on the applicability of the Riparian Corridor
Overlay. Unless otherwise approved by Public Utilities, the overlay shall remain applicable.
2. Public Utilities Master Plans and Transportation Master Plans remain applicable to the JRF District.
3. The applicant shall follow mitigation measures as dictated in the Airspace Impact Study.
4. A minimum percentage of the entire project must be dedicated as open space and accessible to the
public.
5. The Commission recommends that a minimum of 10% of the total housing development be available for
rent or sale at a maximum of 80% AMI.
6. Design Standards shall apply to all buildings facing public streets and the Jordan River. The standards
shall be updated to include lighting, entry features, parking garage specifications, and limits on building
façade lengths.
7. Midblock walkways associated with additional building height shall be a minimum of 15’ wide.
8. A maximum setback of 15 feet shall be provided from all streets and publicly accessible open spaces.
9. The approved site plan created for the JRF District shall be incorporated into the North Temple
Boulevard Plan.
10. Concerns raised by the Planning Commission during the October 9, 2024, briefing shall be
addressed prior to the City Council adopting the Term Sheet associated with the
Development Agreement. This includes:
a. Automatically applying the proposed zoning district to lands that the applicant
may purchase in the future instead of going through the normal zoning
amendment process and the legality of such a provision.
b. Vacating an existing city easement as part of the agreement without a guarantee
that the easement would be replaced in kind.
c. Exempting the property from all provisions of the Riparian Corridor Overlay
instead of defining specific provisions of the Riparian Corridor Overlay that could
be modified in the agreement.
d. Exempting the proposal from all utility improvement plans that apply to the
property, which are necessary to locate, increase capacity, and fund needed future
upgrades.
e. The lack of specific public benefits that would be included in the future
development, including affordable housing or contribution to affordable housing
funds that could be used in the area, no guarantee of publicly accessible open
space.
Development Agreement
The Term Sheet, which is included in the transmittal letter (pages 21-24) is the basis for the development
agreement discussions. The key points are outlined below
In addition to the conditions proposed by the Planning Commission, Council staff has summarized a list of
items that Council Members have asked if they could be discussed as part of the development agreement.
The Council may wish to discuss these items with the applicant during the work session briefing.
Page | 6
Include workforce and family sized housing in the project area
A minimum amount of open space in the project area
o A minimum amount should be green space
Public access to the river and river frontage
Easement in/out of river in plaza area
Free expression in public areas
Proposed Term Sheet
Development of Property LHM may develop the Property consistent with
the MDA and the JRF District, and LHM shall
have the full power and exclusive control over
the Property. Nothing in the MDA obligates
LHM to develop the Property or develop
the Property in a particular order or phase.
LHM may develop the Property for all uses
allowed in the JRF District.
Jordan River Access The City is the grantee of that certain Public
Recreation Easement Agreement, recorded July
17, 2015, as Entry No. 12094108 with the Salt
Lake City Recorder that provides public a trail
and access for recreational uses.
This easement will be terminated in the MDA
and the parties will enter into a memorandum
of understanding for replacement access in
connection with the MDA.
Design Requirements The City shall not impose or enforce any design
requirements on buildings, improvements, and
structures located within the Property except as
described in the JRF District.
Open Space Developer intends to build an open space
network as depicted in the conceptual Master
Plan, which may be revised or relocated
through subdivision plats. Except as set forth in
the JRF District, the City shall not require
Developer to dedicate open space as a condition
of development application approval.
Roads LHM shall install roadways consistent with a
roadway master plan and cross-sections of
roadways depicted in the roadway master plan
to be attached to the MDA. Current conceptual
roadway plans are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
The City shall not require LHM to oversize any
roadways without providing mutually
acceptable reimbursement agreement(s) for any
system improvements to the roadways as
defined by the impact fees act. The Project
may include private roads that will be specified
on subdivision plats.
Page | 7
Culinary and Sewer Improvements LHM shall install the requisite service and
water distribution lines and similar
improvements within the Property necessary
for the City to provide culinary water and sewer
service to a particular phase of development.
The City shall not require LHM to install offsite
improvements or install infrastructure that
provides capacity outside of the Property
without providing mutually acceptable
reimbursement agreement(s) for any system
improvements, as defined by the impact fees
act.
Stormwater Improvements The City shall account for impervious surface
already in existence on private lands as
particularly detailed in the Hydrology and
Hydraulics Memo, dated July 29, 2024,
prepared by CRS Engineers. LHM shall install
stormwater improvements consistent with a
stormwater improvement plan.
The City shall not require LHM to install any
stormwater improvements to store or transmit
any offsite stormwater without providing
mutually acceptable reimbursement
agreement(s) for any system improvements, as
defined by the impact fees act.
Improvement Connections The City shall allow LHM to connect the
roadways, culinary, sewer, and stormwater
improvements to the City’s existing
infrastructure in the areas identified on the
applicable utility plans, which will be attached
to the MDA.
Installation of Improvements LHM may utilize public infrastructure districts,
or similar districts, to construct the roads,
water, sewer, and stormwater improvements
contemplated by the MDA. LHM shall construct
all improvements in compliance with the City’s
laws in effect on the MDA’s effective date.
Development Applications Pursuant to Utah Code § 11-70-206(3)(b)(ii)(A),
the City shall provide an expedited process for
the review and approval of development
applications. All development applications for
subdivisions or site plan approval shall be
approved by the City’s staff. The City shall
process all subdivision applications (even non-
residential applications) consistent with the
timing requirements described in Utah
Code §§ 10-9a-604.1 and 10-9a-604.2. The City
shall expedite the approval of all site plan
application and take action thereon within 10
business days of receiving a complete
application, and within 5 business days of
Page | 8
receiving revisions thereto after an initial
determination is made at no additional fee.
LHM may request that the City outsource the
review of any development application.
LHM will pay the actual hourly review cost
incurred by the City for such outsourced
services.
Conditional Uses The City shall promptly process conditional use
permits in accordance with State law and the
City’s laws in effect on the MDA’s effective date.
No conditional use permit application shall be
subject to more than one public hearing without
the express written consent of LHM.
Disputes If a dispute arises with respect to any
development applications, LHM and the City
shall meet and confer on the issue within 15
days a denial. LHM and the City can also
mutually agree to mediate the issue.
Annexations If LHM, or its affiliated entities, acquires
property that is located within or annexed into
the UFAIR District, the LHM may annex said
acquired property into the MDA and have the
JRF District applied to such annexed land.
Assignment and Transfer LHM may assign, transfer, or convey the entire
Property or portions thereof to a subsequent
owner and may transfer any of the rights and
obligations under the MDA in connection with
such transfer. If such transfer occurs and LHM
intends to convey its rights under the MDA
with such transfer, then LHM shall execute and
deliver a transfer acknowledgment to the City.
LHM may reserve any right to receive
reimbursement under the MDA, or separate
reimbursement agreement(s) from the City
regardless of whether LHM transfers its
remaining rights under the MDA.
Additional Information
The transmittal letter outlines the following key points of the proposed zoning ordinance.
The transmittal letter outlines the following key points of the proposed. zoning ordinance.
Page | 9
Minimum Lot Area, Width, Yard Standards
o No minimum lot areas, lot widths, or setbacks required in the JRF District.
Open Space
o The proposed code language states an open space plan will be created and will include at
least 10% of the gross development area.
Building Height
o Maximum height is 400 feet. Anything over 200 feet is required to go through the Design
Review process.
o Buildings in the D-1 and D4 zoning districts must also go through the Design Review
process for heights above 200 feet.
FAA Regulations & Airspace Impact Study
o No building over 200 feet is permitted unless the developer consults with the FAA
regarding compliance with 14 CFR Part 77.9
o Buildings over 60 feet in height must be designed to avoid electrical interference, lighting
and glare, impairing pilot visibility, and landing or maneuvering conflicts.
Land Uses
o Planning staff is still working with the applicant to update the land use table to remove uses
that are not compatible with the proposed zoning’s goals and vision. The applicant has not
submitted an update since the Planning Commission hearing on October 23, 2024.
Design Standards
o The proposed JRF District includes two sets of Design Standards:
Internal buildings and street frontages.
Structures along Redwood Road and North Temple.
o The applicant is seeking substantial design flexibility due to the site's unique
characteristics.
o Currently, the only requirements for buildings along privately owned streets are limited to
screening mechanical equipment and providing street trees, which are already mandated by
code and do not speak to site or street facing building design in any way.
o Buildings with frontage along Redwood Road and North Temple call for additional design
standards, such as ground floor activation, durable materials, and minimum glass
percentages.
o Both Planning staff and the Planning Commission recommend adding more design
standards that address street facing building façade length, lighting, entry features, and
parking garage specifications.
Signage
o The same standards as the D-1 Central Business District and D-4 Secondary Central
Business District would apply to the district.
o Includes an increased allowance within 1000 linear feet of the arena to allow the same sign
types as the new Sports Arena and Convention Center Sign Overlay.
o Include additional private directional and wayfinding signs to communicate the district’s
unique identity.
o Includes one “public assembly facility sign” as allowed by U.C.A. 72-7-504.5 and signage not visible
or directed to public rights of way will not be regulated.
Item B4
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
WWW.COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM:Nick Tarbet, Policy Analyst
DATE:November 19, 2024
RE:Road Closure: 1000 West from South Temple to approximately 15 South
Motion 1 –
I move the Council close the public hearing and defer action.
Motion 2 –
I move that the Council close the public hearing and adopt an ordinance temporarily closing a
portion of 1000 West between South Temple and approximately 15 South.
Motion 3 -
I move the Council continue the public hearing.
COUNCIL STAFF
REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Nick Tarbet, Policy Analyst
DATE: November 19, 2024
RE:Temporary Road Closure: 1000 West
from South Temple to approximately 15 South
PROJECT TIMELINE:
Briefing 1: Nov 12, 2024
Set Date: Nov 12, 2024
Public Hearing: Nov 19, 2024
Potential Action: Nov 19, 2024
NEW INFORMATION
On November 12 the Council held a work session briefing on the proposed temporary street closure. No
significant concerns or questions were raised.
The public hearing is scheduled for November 19.
The following information was provided for the November 12 briefing.
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will receive a briefing about an ordinance that would temporarily close a portion of 1000 West
between South Temple and approximately 15 South, where the street crosses four railroad lines.
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) conducted an inspection of railroad crossing within the
“Woods Cross Quiet Zone”, of which Salt Lake City is a part of, and determined numerous existing safety
systems and measures were inadequate and therefore suspended the quiet zone. This location was one of
the identified deficiencies.
Until this and other deficiencies within the “Woods Cross Quiet Zone” are brought into compliance the
sounding of horns will be implemented immediately whenever a locomotive approaches the crossings.
The city is working with the FRA and other local municipalities to bring the identified crossings into
compliance as quickly as possible.
To stay up to date on this topic please visit https://www.slc.gov/council/news/quiet-zone
Page | 3
Item C1
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE:November 19, 2024
RE: Brooklyn Avenue Street Vacation, Alley Vacation, and Subdivision Amendment
(PLNPCM2022-00068, PLNPCM2022-00349, PLNSUB2023-00493)
MOTION 1 (adopt)
I move that the Council adopt the ordinance.
MOTION 2 (reject)
I move that the Council reject the ordinance.
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:November 19, 2024
RE: Brooklyn Avenue Street Vacation, Alley Vacation, and Subdivision Amendment
(PLNPCM2022-00068, PLNPCM2022-00349, PLNSUB2023-00493)
PUBLIC HEARING UPDATE
There were no public comments at the November 12, 2024 public hearing. The Council closed the hearing
and deferred action to a future meeting.
The following information was provided for previous Council meetings. It is included
again for background purposes.
BRIEFING UPDATE
Council Members did not have any questions for staff or the applicant at the October 1, 2024 briefing.
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will be briefed about a proposal to vacate an approximately 0.61-acre portion of Brooklyn
Avenue between 500West and the West Temple viaduct in City Council District Five. The road segment is
adjacent to the petitioner’s property at 1007 South 500 West as shown in the image below. In their
application, the petitioner cited a lack of maintenance, homeless encampments, and waste dumping as
reasons for the request. They also indicated a desire to develop their adjacent properties at some point in
the future.
During review of the street vacation application, Planning staff determined a City owned alley dividing the
petitioner’s property would need to be included in the request, since vacating the section of Brooklyn
Avenue would isolate the alley right-of-way.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: October 1, 2024
Set Date: October 15, 2024
Public Hearing: November 12, 2024
Potential Action: November 19, 2024
Page | 2
In addition, a subdivision amendment is required when vacating a public right-of-way dedicated by a
subdivision. Planning staff discovered that vacating the street would require amendments to the Brooklyn
and Dolan subdivisions since the street is within both. The result is a combination of the street vacation,
alley vacation, and subdivision amendments for Council consideration. Each of these will be reviewed
separately in the additional information section below. Current area zoning is CG (General Commercial)
and the requests would not change that.
Vacating property such as a public street or alley removes the public interest in and ownership of that
right-of-way. The vacated property is then sold or transferred to private ownership. In this case, if
approved by the City Council, the street segment and alley would be sold to the adjacent property owners at
fair market value—which is determined by the Real Estate Services Division.
The Planning Commission reviewed this petition at its December 13, 2023 meeting and held a public
hearing at which one person spoke in opposition citing concern about the ability for large trucks to turn
around without using Brooklyn Avenue. The Commission voted unanimously to forward positive
recommendations for all three petitions with the following recommendations.
Before a final plat is recorded, the applicant will record a 15-foot-wide perpetual easement along
the property lines abutting the storm sewer lines along the edge of the West Temple Viaduct right
of way as directed by the Department of Public Utilities.
After Brooklyn Avenue is officially vacated, City staff will record additional necessary sections of
the easement within the vacated right of way prior to the official transfer of ownership to the
applicant.
The applicant will enter into an agreement with the City (through whatever method the City
Council deems appropriate) that, upon any development of the Brooklyn Avenue right of way, they
will install curb and gutter, streetlights, and sidewalks along the property frontages of 500 West
and Fayette Avenue according to Street Typology 8 (found in the Street and Intersection Typologies
Design Guide).
The applicant will enter into an agreement with the City (through whatever method the City
Council deems appropriate) that, upon any development of the area within the Brooklyn Avenue
right of way, they will install a turnaround that meets the fire code requirements at the time of
development.
On the Final Plat, the lot line dividing Lot 1 and Lot 2 shall be adjusted so that Lot 2 (1007 South
500 West) meets the minimum lot width requirement of 60 feet within the CG General Commercial
Zoning District.
Page | 3
Aerial image showing proposed street vacation shaded in yellow and the alley in red.
The petitioner’s properties on either side of the alley are outlined in dark green, and adjacent property in blue.
Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division
Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed street and alley closures and subdivision amendments,
determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. The Council may wish to discuss the benefits and drawbacks of vacating the street and alley.
2. Is the Council supportive of the proposed requirements recommended by the Planning Commission
to be included in a development agreement?
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Street Vacation
The subject section of Brooklyn Avenue is approximately 198 feet long at its center point, and 85 feet wide.
Planning staff reviewed historical aerial photographs and stated “…it appears the right of way has remained
unimproved and unpaved since at least 1964, when I-15 was under construction.”
Brooklyn Avenue and 500 West both end near the petitioner’s properties and have very little vehicular
traffic. It should be noted that the segment of 500 West that connects to Brooklyn Avenue is not included
in the proposed street closure and would remain a City-owned right-of-way if the Brooklyn Avenue street
segment is vacated by the Council. Additionally, a different section of 500 West connects to Fayette Avenue
and continues south under Interstate-15 as shown in the lower left corner of the image above.
The street vacation process is dictated by Section 10-9a-609.5 Utah State Code which is included at the end of
this report for reference.
Alley Vacation
Page | 5
The subject alley is approximately 110 feet long and 13.25 feet wide, or about 1,450 square feet. During
review of the proposals, Planning staff analyzed historical aerial photographs and noted that the alley
appears to have existed only on paper and has not been used since at least 1999 and has essentially been
incorporated into the adjacent lots, though it is City property.
If the segment of Brooklyn Avenue is vacated, the alley would be surrounded by the petitioner’s property
on three sides, and the West Temple viaduct on the fourth, blocking access and rendering it unusable.
Alley vacations must satisfy one of the following policy considerations: Lack of Use, Public Safety, Urban
Design, and Community Purpose. The subject alley vacation request satisfies the Lack of Use policy
consideration.
Alley vacations are outlined in Section 14.52 of Salt Lake City Code which is included at the end of this
report for reference.
Subdivision Amendment
As discussed above, a subdivision amendment is required if a public right-of-way within a subdivision is
changed or removed. The subject section of Brooklyn Avenue was created from both the Brooklyn and
Dolan Subdivisions. The north 33 feet of the street (yellow section highlighted in the image below) was
platted in the Brooklyn Subdivision, and the south 33 feet (pink highlighted section) from the Dolan
Subdivision. That leaves 21 feet in the middle (blue highlighted section) that was not created from a
subdivision. It remains part of the Big Field Survey Plat and not included in a subdivision.
Planning staff worked with the City Surveyor to determine how the middle section of the road was not
included in a subdivision but could not definitively conclude how it happened. They surmised there was an
error when one of the subdivisions was created and this section was left out.
At the time the application was submitted, Chapter 20.28 Article III of Salt Lake City Code was applicable
to subdivision amendments involving streets. It is included at the end of this report for reference.
Page | 6
Salt Lake County plat map of Brooklyn Avenue right-of-way
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
Planning staff identified six key considerations during analysis of these proposals which are found on pages
6-9 of the Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis please see
the staff report.
Consideration 1 – Conditions Requested by Other City Departments
The following departments and divisions expressed concerns with the proposals. The petitioner worked
with City staff to mitigate these concerns and the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission
satisfy them.
Public Utilities – The street is necessary to access to storm sewer facilities located on the edge of the West
Temple Viaduct. To resolve the concerns, the petitioner and Public Utilities agreed that before the final plat
is recorded vacating the street, easements will be recorded along the edge of the West Temple Viaduct.
Engineering – The Engineering Division noted that the Brooklyn Avenue and the section of 500 West it is
connected to lack basic street infrastructure. The street surface is poor, and stormwater has nowhere to go.
The petitioner met with Engineering staff and agreed to install curb and gutter, streetlights, and sidewalks
on the property frontages of 500 West and Fayette Avenue upon development of Brooklyn Avenue. This
addresses Engineering’s concerns.
Fire and Transportation – Both the Fire Department and Transportation Division noted vacating Brooklyn
Avenue would leave the abutting segment of 500 West without an area for fire trucks and other large
vehicles to turn around. Dead end streets longer than 150 feet and necessary for fire truck access are
required by State code to have a turnaround that complies with the code. (Diagrams of compliant
turnarounds are found on page 7 of the Planning Commission staff report.)
The petitioner met with City staff and agreed to install a turnaround the meets fire code requirements upon
development of Brooklyn Avenue. This satisfies concerns raised by the Fire Department and
Transportation Division.
Consideration 2 – Features of Brooklyn Avenue
The Brooklyn Avenue features discussed in this consideration are outlined in the “Subdivision
Amendment” section above.
Consideration 3 – State Code Regarding Street Vacations
Utah State Code grants cities the authority to vacate streets. The City Council must determine good cause
exists for the vacation and that the public interest or any person will not be materially injured by the
vacation. Planning staff reviewed aerial images of the area which show the street has not been maintained
for at least 60 years. It is Planning staff’s opinion vacating the street will remove a maintenance burden
from the City in exchange for selling the street segment at market rate.
Consideration 4 – Factors to Consider
As noted above, the request to vacate the subject section of Brooklyn Avenue required three different
applications – street vacation, alley vacation, and subdivision amendment. Each application has its own
applicable factors or standards.
Planning staff reviewed standards for the CG (General Commercial) zoning district, street vacation, alley
vacation, and subdivisions. These are found on pages 44-57 of the Planning Commission staff report. It is
Planning’s opinion that the requests meet or will meet all applicable conditions if the Planning
Commission’s recommendations are requirements of approval.
Consideration 5 – Master Plan Compatibility
Planning staff reviewed the proposals’ alignment with the following City plans:
Page | 7
Downtown Master Plan (2016) Note: the Ballpark Station Area Plan defers long range planning in
the Granary District (where the properties are located) to the Downtown master Plan).
Plan Salt Lake (2015)
Transportation Major Street Plan (2018)
Transportation Master Plan (1996)
Given the subject street and alley location in the center of the freeway viaduct, there is little potential for
mid-block crossings and connectivity via alleys and other pedestrian rights-of-way called for in some of the
above listed plans.
It is Planning staff’s opinion that while the proposed street and alley vacations are not specifically
supported by the plans, they are not in opposition to the goals and initiatives outlined in the plans.
Consideration 6 – Compliance with Zoning Standards
Planning found that the proposed subdivision amendment meets all zoning standards except one: the
minimum lot width in the CG district. As noted above, the petitioner’s parcel at 1007 South 500 West is
divided into two lots by the alley proposed to be vacated. The eastern lot does not meet the minimum width
required in the CG district. The Planning Commission’s recommendation to adjust the lot line dividing the
lots so the eastern lot meets the minimum will resolve this issue.
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
February 2, 2022 – Petition to vacate the south half of Brooklyn Avenue submitted.
February-April 2022 – Planning staff worked with the applicant to remedy application deficiencies,
including submittal of the alley vacation petition.
April 6, 2022 – Petition deemed complete by Planning staff.
April 13, 2022 –
o Petition circulated to relevant City departments and divisions for review.
o 45-day notice sent to community councils.
o Early notification sent to neighbors within 300 feet of the development.
o Proposal posted on the online open house webpage.
May 11, 2022 – 45-day comment period for recognized organizations ends.
July-August 2022 – Applicant indicated the property owner to the north of Brooklyn Avenue would like
to join the petition and updated the request to include the entire street right-of-way.
August 1, 2022 – Updated materials submitted by applicant.
August 23, 2022 –
o Petition circulated to relevant City departments and divisions for review.
o Planning staff sent the 45-day required notice for recognized community organizations to the
community councils.
o Neighbors within 300 feet of the development were provided early notification.
o The online open house post was updated.
October 14, 2022 – Department of Public Utilities expressed concern over the proposed vacation.
November-December 2022 – Applicant and Public Utilities negotiated proposals for new easements.
February 2, 2023 – Applicant sent draft easement proposals to Public Utilities for review.
May 8, 2023 – After working with the City Surveyor to understand how Brooklyn Avenue was originally
created, Planning staff determined that a subdivision amendment (preliminary plat) must be included
with this request.
June 22, 2023 – Applicant submitted preliminary plat application for the subdivision amendment.
October 19, 2023 – Planning staff confirmed there is no opposition from relevant City departments to
the street or alley vacation.
October-November 2023 – Planning staff report development.
November 30, 2023 –
Page | 8
o Planning Commission public hearing notice mailed.
o Planning Commission public notice posted on City and State website and Planning Division
listserv.
December 1, 2023 – Public hearing notice sign posted on the property.
December 3, 2023 – Legal notice published in Salt Lake Tribune.
December 13, 2023 – Planning Commission held a public hearing and forwarded a unanimous positive
recommendation to the City Council for the proposed amendments.
December 2023-February 2024 – Draft ordinance developed by Planning staff.
February 2024 – Draft ordinance requested from Attorney’s Office.
o Planning staff noted during this time capacity in the City Attorney’s Office was limited due to a
reduction in available personnel and a number of pressing cases taking up available staff
time.
May 4, 2024 – Draft ordinance received from Attorney’s Office.
August 1, 2023 – Transmittal received in City Council Office.
STREET CLOSURE PROCESS
The street closure process is dictated by Section 10-9a-609.5 Utah State Code which is included below for
reference.
10-9a-609.5. Petition to vacate a public street.
(1)In lieu of vacating some or all of a public street through a plat or amended plat in accordance with
Sections 10-9a-603 through 10-9a-609, a legislative body may approve a petition to vacate a public
street in accordance with this section.
(2)A petition to vacate some or all of a public street or municipal utility easement shall include:
(a)the name and address of each owner of record of land that is:
(i)adjacent to the public street or municipal utility easement between the two nearest public
street intersections; or
(3)If a petition is submitted containing a request to vacate some or all of a public street or municipal
utility easement, the legislative body shall hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 10-9a-
208 and determine whether:
(a)good cause exists for the vacation; and
(b)the public interest or any person will be materially injured by the proposed vacation.
(4)The legislative body may adopt an ordinance granting a petition to vacate some or all of a public street
or municipal utility easement if the legislative body finds that:
(a)good cause exists for the vacation; and
(b)neither the public interest nor any person will be materially injured by the vacation.
(5)If the legislative body adopts an ordinance vacating some or all of a public street or municipal utility
easement, the legislative body shall ensure that one or both of the following is recorded in the office of
the recorder of the county in which the land is located:
(a)a plat reflecting the vacation; or
(ii)accessed exclusively by or within 300 feet of the public street or municipal utility easement;
(b)proof of written notice to operators of utilities and culinary water or sanitary sewer facilities
located within the bounds of the public street or municipal utility easement sought to be vacated;
and
(c)the signature of each owner under Subsection (2)(a) who consents to the vacation.
Page | 9
(b)(i)an ordinance described in Subsection (4); and
(ii)a legal description of the public street to be vacated.
(6)The action of the legislative body vacating some or all of a public street or municipal utility easement
that has been dedicated to public use:
(a)operates to the extent to which it is vacated, upon the effective date of the recorded plat or
ordinance, as a revocation of the acceptance of and the relinquishment of the municipality's fee in
the vacated public street or municipal utility easement; and
(b)may not be construed to impair:
(i)any right-of-way or easement of any parcel or lot owner;
(ii)the rights of any public utility; or
(iii)the rights of a culinary water authority or sanitary sewer authority.
(7)(a)A municipality may submit a petition, in accordance with Subsection (2), and initiate and
complete a process to vacate some or all of a public street.
(b)If a municipality submits a petition and initiates a process under Subsection (7)(a):
(i)the legislative body shall hold a public hearing;
(ii)the petition and process may not apply to or affect a public utility easement, except to the
extent:
(A)the easement is not a protected utility easement as defined in Section 54-3-27;
(B)the easement is included within the public street; and
(C)the notice to vacate the public street also contains a notice to vacate the easement; and
(iii)a recorded ordinance to vacate a public street has the same legal effect as vacating a public
street through a recorded plat or amended plat.
(8)A legislative body may not approve a petition to vacate a public street under this section unless the
vacation identifies and preserves any easements owned by a culinary water authority and sanitary
sewer authority for existing facilities located within the public street.
ALLEY CLOSURE PROCESS
The alley closure process is dictated by Chapter 14.52 Salt Lake City Code which is included below for reference.
14.52.010: DISPOSITION OF CITY'S PROPERTY INTEREST IN ALLEYS:
The City supports the legal disposition of Salt Lake City's real property interests, in whole or in part, with
regard to City owned alleys, subject to the substantive and procedural requirements set forth herein. (Ord.
24-02 § 1, 2002)
14.52.020: POLICY CONSIDERATIONS FOR CLOSURE, VACATION OR ABANDONMENT OF
CITY OWNED ALLEYS:
The City will not consider disposing of its interest in an alley, in whole or in part, unless it receives a
petition in writing which demonstrates that the disposition satisfies at least one of the following policy
considerations:
A. Lack Of Use: The City's legal interest in the property appears of record or is reflected on an applicable
plat; however, it is evident from an on site inspection that the alley does not physically exist or has been
materially blocked in a way that renders it unusable as a public right-of-way;
B. Public Safety: The existence of the alley is substantially contributing to crime, unlawful activity,
unsafe conditions, public health problems, or blight in the surrounding area;
C. Urban Design: The continuation of the alley does not serve as a positive urban design element; or
D. Community Purpose: The petitioners are proposing to restrict the general public from use of the alley
in favor of a community use, such as a neighborhood play area or garden. (Ord. 24-02 § 1, 2002)
14.52.030: PROCESSING PETITIONS:
Page | 10
There will be three (3) phases for processing petitions to dispose of City owned alleys under this section.
Those phases include an administrative determination of completeness; a public hearing, including a
recommendation from the Planning Commission; and a public hearing before the City Council.
A. Administrative Determination Of Completeness: The City administration will determine whether or
not the petition is complete according to the following requirements:
1. The petition must bear the signatures of no less than seventy five percent (75%) of the neighbors
owning property which abuts the subject alley property;
2. The petition must identify which policy considerations discussed above support the petition;
3. The petition must affirm that written notice has been given to all owners of property located in the
block or blocks within which the subject alley property is located;
4. A signed statement that the applicant has met with and explained the proposal to the appropriate
community organization entitled to receive notice pursuant to title 2, chapter 2.60 of this Code; and
5. The appropriate City processing fee shown on the Salt Lake City consolidated fee schedule has been
paid.
B. Public Hearing And Recommendation From The Planning Commission: Upon receipt of a complete
petition, a public hearing shall be scheduled before the Planning Commission to consider the proposed
disposition of the City owned alley property. Following the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning
Commission shall make a report and recommendation to the City Council on the proposed disposition of
the subject alley property. A positive recommendation should include an analysis of the following factors:
1. The City Police Department, Fire Department, Transportation Division, and all other relevant City
departments and divisions have no reasonable objection to the proposed disposition of the property;
2. The petition meets at least one of the policy considerations stated above;
3. Granting the petition will not deny sole access or required off street parking to any property adjacent
to the alley;
4. Granting the petition will not result in any property being landlocked;
5. Granting the petition will not result in a use of the alley property which is otherwise contrary to the
policies of the City, including applicable master plans and other adopted statements of policy which
address, but which are not limited to, mid block walkways, pedestrian paths, trails, and alternative
transportation uses;
6. No opposing abutting property owner intends to build a garage requiring access from the property,
or has made application for a building permit, or if such a permit has been issued, construction has been
completed within twelve (12) months of issuance of the building permit;
7. The petition furthers the City preference for disposing of an entire alley, rather than a small segment
of it; and
8. The alley property is not necessary for actual or potential rear access to residences or for accessory
uses.
C. Public Hearing Before The City Council: Upon receipt of the report and recommendation from the
Planning Commission, the City Council will consider the proposed petition for disposition of the subject
alley property. After a public hearing to consider the matter, the City Council will make a decision on the
proposed petition based upon the factors identified above. (Ord. 22-19, 2019: Ord. 58-13, 2013: Ord. 24-11,
2011)
14.52.040: METHOD OF DISPOSITION:
If the City Council grants the petition, the City owned alley property will be disposed of as follows:
A. Low Density Residential Areas: If the alley property abuts properties which are zoned for low density
residential use, the alley will merely be vacated. For the purposes of this section, "low density residential
use" shall mean properties which are zoned for single-family, duplex or twin home residential uses.
B. High Density Residential Properties And Other Nonresidential Properties: If the alley abuts
properties which are zoned for high density residential use or other nonresidential uses, the alley will be
closed and abandoned, subject to payment to the City of the fair market value of that alley property, based
upon the value added to the abutting properties.
C. Mixed Zoning: If an alley abuts both low density residential properties and either high density
residential properties or nonresidential properties, those portions which abut the low density residential
properties shall be vacated, and the remainder shall be closed, abandoned and sold for fair market value.
(Ord. 24-02 § 1, 2002)
14.52.050: PETITION FOR REVIEW:
Page | 11
Any party aggrieved by the decision of the City Council as to the disposition of City owned alley property
may file a petition for review of that decision within thirty (30) days after the City Council's decision
becomes final, in the 3rd District Court. (Ord. 24-02 § 1, 2002)
SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT PROCESS
CHAPTER 20.28: SUBDIVISION AMENDMENTS
Staff Note: this section of City code was applicable at the time the application was submitted.
ARTICLE III. SUBDIVISION AMENDMENTS INVOLVING STREETS
20.28.100: PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZATION:
If the amendment petition involves closure, vacation (in whole or in part), alteration or amendment of any
public street, right of way, or easement, or the dedication of a private street to a public street, the
amendment petition shall be processed pursuant to the provisions of this article. (Ord. 7-14, 2014)
20.28.110: CITY INTERNAL REVIEW:
A. The planning director or designee shall transmit a copy of the preliminary plat to, and request
comments from, city departments and divisions that are part of the subdivision review process, as
determined by the planning director.
B. The division of transportation may, if the division determines that the proposed amendment
petition may have an adverse material impact on traffic, require the applicant to submit a
professionally prepared traffic impact study prior to the hearing on the application.
C. The departmental comments shall be transmitted to the petitioner. (Ord. 7-14, 2014)
20.28.120: PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING:
A. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing to consider the amendment petition and shall
provide a recommendation to the city council to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the
amendment according to the standards for preliminary plats set forth in section 20.16.100 of this
title.
B. Notice of the planning commission hearing shall be provided in accordance with noticing
requirements in chapter 20.36 of this title. (Ord. 7-14, 2014)
20.28.130: CITY COUNCIL HEARING:
A. The city council shall hold a public hearing to consider the amendment petition and shall either
approve, approve with conditions, or deny the amendment according to the standards for
preliminary plats set forth in section 20.16.100 of this title, and in the case of dedication of street
from private ownership to public ownership, according to the policies and standards found in title
14,c hapter 14.54 of this code.
B. A notice of public hearing before the Salt Lake City council shall be provided in accordance with
noticing requirements for public hearings ofc hapter 20.36 of this title. (Ord. 7-14, 2014)
20.28.140: RECORDABLE INSTRUMENT:
If the amendment petition is approved by the council, the final amended subdivision plat and such other
documents as may be required shall be executed by the planning director. The plat and documents shall be
recorded in the office of the county recorder either by the applicant or by the planning director. (Ord. 7-14,
2014)
20.28.150: APPEALS OF CITY COUNCIL DECISION:
Page | 12
Refer to chapter 20.48, "Appeals", of this title for information and regulations regarding filing an appeal of
a decision on subdivision amendments. (Ord. 7-14, 2014)
Item C2
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM:Brian Fullmer
Policy Analyst
DATE:November 19, 2024
RE: 1816 South State Street Zoning Map Amendment
PLNPCM2024-00033
MOTION 1 (adopt)
I move that the Council adopt the ordinance.
MOTION 2 (reject)
I move that the Council reject the ordinance.
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:November 19, 2024
RE: 1816 South State Street Zoning Map Amendment
PLNPCM2024-00033
PUBLIC HEARING UPDATE
There were no public comments at the November 12, 2024 public hearing. The Council closed the
hearing and deferred action to a future meeting.
The following information was provided for previous Council meetings. It is included
again for background purposes.
BRIEFING UPDATE
Council Members expressed general support for the proposed zoning map amendment, noting blighted
buildings in this area of State Street, and a belief that the current Business Park zoning is not appropriate
for the property. The property owner stated that a security company plans to lease one of the building’s two
spaces.
The Council will be briefed about a proposal to amend the zoning map for an approximately 0.54-acre
parcel at 1816 South State Street from its current BP (Business Park) to CC (Corridor Commercial) zoning
district. A 5,700 square foot building is on the site and currently used as a vocational school for tattooing
and piercing.
The petitioner is not planning to redevelop the site but indicated a desire to lease the building for
additional commercial uses such as retail sales or a restaurant which are not allowed under current BP
zoning district unless they are approved as part of a business park planned development or when located
within a principal building and operated primarily for the convenience of employees.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: October 1, 2024
Set Date: October 15, 2024
Public Hearing: November 12, 2024
Potential Action: November 19, 2024
Page | 2
This proposed zoning map amendment was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its April 24, 2024
meeting and a public hearing was held at which no one spoke. Planning staff recommended and the
Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council.
As shown in the map below, area zoning is predominately CC and BP for properties fronting State and
Main Streets. The subject parcel is adjacent to the O.C. Tanner campus to the south, and a single-story
office complex immediately to the west which are both in the BP zoning district. Properties on the south
side of Coatsville Avenue are zoned CC for commercial use, but with one exception, all are single-family
homes.
Area zoning map with the subject parcel outlined in blue.
Note: the lavender shaded PL (Public Lands) parcel is the Salt Lake County Government campus.
Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed zoning map amendments, determine if the Council supports
moving forward with the proposal.
Page | 4
POLICY QUESTION
1. The Council may wish to discuss rezoning the property to the proposed Corridor Commercial
zoning district and the potential for the property to be rezoned again in the near future with the
proposed citywide zoning consolidation. (Under the proposed zoning consolidation properties
zoned Corridor Commercial would be zoned MU-5 which has similar height and setback
requirements. A comparison of Corridor Commercial and the potential MU-5 zoning is available on
the information sheet at this link.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The Council is only being asked to consider rezoning the property. No formal site plan has been submitted
to the City nor is it within the scope of the Council’s authority to review the plans. Because zoning of a
property can outlast the life of a building, any rezoning application should be considered on the merits of
changing the zoning of that property, not simply based on a potential project.
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
Planning staff identified two key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 5-6 of the
Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the staff
report.
Consideration 1 – Compliance with General Plan Policies
Planning staff found that the proposed zoning map amendment supports initiatives in the Central
Community Master Plan (adopted in 2015, 10 years after the property was zoned BP). The plan designates
the subject property as “Community Commercial” to “provide for the close integration of moderately sized
commercial areas with adjacent residential neighborhoods.” It is Planning staff’s opinion that rezoning
the parcels to CC would be consistent with the plan’s guidance.
Consideration 2 – Community Benefit Policy
The subject zoning map amendment petition was deemed complete before the City Council adopted the
community benefit policy on March 5, 2024 so the petition is not subject to the new ordinance.
Attachment D (page 13) of the Planning Commission staff report includes a table comparing the zoning
districts. It is replicated below for convenience.
BP (Current)CC (Proposed)
Maximum Building Height 60 feet 30 feet by right, (45 feet
through design review)
Front Setback 30 feet 15 feet
No front yard setback is
required in the South State
Street Corridor Overlay district.
Corner Side Yard Setback 30 feet 15 feet
Interior Side Yard Setback 20 feet None required
Page | 5
Rear Setback 25 feet 10 feet
Minimum Lot Area 20,000 square feet 10,000 square feet
Minimum Lot Width 100 feet 75 feet
Buffering 30-foot landscape buffer
required when abutting a
residential district.
7-foot landscape buffer required
when abutting a residential
district.
Parking 1-2 off-street parking spaces
per dwelling unit required for
most housing types.
2 off-street parking spaces per
1,000 square feet required for
most commercial uses.
1-2 off-street parking spaces per
dwelling unit required for most
housing types.
2 off-street parking spaces per
1,000 square feet required for
most commercial uses.
Design Standards
Building Entrances -X
Parking Lot Lighting X X
Analysis of Standards
Attachment E (pages 16-18) of the Planning Commission staff report outlines zoning map amendment standards
that should be considered as the Council reviews this proposal. The standards and findings are summarized
below. Please see the Planning Commission staff report for additional information.
Factor Finding
Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent
with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of
the city as stated through its various adopted
planning documents.
Complies
Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the
specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance.
Complies
The extent to which a proposed map amendment will
affect adjacent properties
Complies
Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent
with the purposes and provisions of any applicable
overlay zoning districts which may impose additional
standards.
Complies
The adequacy of public facilities and services
intended to serve the subject property, including, but
not limited to, roadways, parks and recreational
Complies
Page | 6
facilities, police and fire protection, schools,
stormwater drainage systems, water supplies, and
wastewater and refuse collection.
City Department Review
During City review of the petitions, no responding departments or divisions expressed concerns with the
proposal but stated additional review, permits, and utility upgrades would be required if the property is
developed.
PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
• January 10, 2024 – Application for zoning map amendment received by Planning Division.
• February 13, 2024 – Application deemed complete.
• February 22, 2024 – Petition assigned to Planning staff.
• February 29, 2024-
o Notice sent to Ballpark Community Council. 45-day comment period for recognized
community organizations begins. The community council did not provide comments.
o Early notification sent to residents and property owners within 300 feet of the project site.
• April 11, 2024 – Public hearing notice mailed and posted on City and State websites, and Planning
Division listserv.
• April 12, 2024 – Public hearing notice posted on the property.
• April 24, 2024 – The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and held a public hearing. The
Commission voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation of approval as proposed.
• April 25, 2024-Ordinance requested from City Attorney’s Office.
• May 7, 2024-Planning received signed ordinance from the Attorney’s Office.
• June 4, 2024-Transmittal received in City Council Office.
Item F1
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Austin Kimmel
Public Policy Analyst
DATE:November 19, 2024
RE: RESOLUTION: SALT LAKE CITY PUBLIC UTILITIES REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2025
MOTION 1 – ADOPT ORDINANCE
I move that the Council adopt the Salt Lake City Public Utilities Revenue Bonds, Series 2025
parameters resolution, and refer to the consent agenda for setting the date for a public
hearing on the bond issuance for December 3, 2024.
MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT
I move that the Council not adopt the resolution, and proceed to the next agenda item.
Item F2
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Austin Kimmel
Public Policy Analyst
DATE:November 19, 2024
RE: ORDINANCE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND LOAN TO HK BREWING
COLLECTIVE, LLC, AT 370 WEST ASPEN AVENUE
MOTION 1 – ADOPT ORDINANCE
I move that the Council adopt the ordinance approving a $250,000 loan for HK Brewing
Collective, LLC from the Economic Development Loan Fund.
MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT
I move that the Council not adopt the ordinance, and proceed to the next agenda item.
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Austin Kimmel
Public Policy Analyst
DATE:November 19, 2024
RE: ORDINANCE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND LOAN TO HK BREWING
COLLECTIVE, LLC, AT 370 WEST ASPEN AVENUE
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will consider approving a loan from the City’s Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF) to a
business called HK Brewing Collective, LLC, at 370 West Aspen Avenue. HK Brewing Collective, LLC is a
business which offers non-alcoholic kombucha, through its brand Han’s Kombucha, and a bar and taproom. The
business recently signed a contract with United Natural Foods (UNFI), a national wholesale distributor of health
and specialty foods.
The City’s Economic Development Loan Committee recommends the Council approve a $250,000 loan at an
8.50% fixed interest rate over seven years. This loan will assist in the creation of 10 new jobs in the next year and
the retention of 20 existing jobs. Funds will pay for equipment purchases, hiring staff, and working capital.
The interest rate reflects the 8.50% prime rate at the time of the application (February 20, 2024) plus the
standard EDLF four percentage points. The project did qualify for a four percentage-point reduction based on
location within a priority area (State Street RDA Project Area), being owned by a socially and economically
disadvantaged individual, with low income, and sustainability (see section B below).
Council staff reminder: EDLF loans are now scheduled for a vote on the same day as the briefing, so this is
scheduled for action on the November 19 formal meeting agenda.
Goal of the briefing: Consider a potential $250,000 loan from the Economic Development Loan Fund to a
business called HK Brewing Collective, LLC.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: November 19, 2024
Public Hearing: N/A
Potential Action: November 19, 2024
Page | 3
ADDITIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A.Interest Rates. For context, the nationwide median rates for urban small business commercial and
industrial loans in the second quarter of 2024 (the most recent data available) were 7.77% for fixed-rate
loans at and 8.88% for variable rate loans, according to the most recent U.S. Federal Reserve Small Business
Lending Survey.i In the second quarter of 2022, these rates were 4.50% and 5.55% respectively. Interest
rates for EDLF loans consider an assessment of the risk level of different applicants, among other factors,
and include potential interest rate reductions. Interest rates have ranged from 7.25% for nearly all 2022
EDLF loans to an average of 9.55% in 2023 and 2024.
B.Interest Rate Reductions. The bases for potential reductions are as follows:
1.Location within a priority area: RDA Project Area; Opportunity Zone; West of I-15; or
Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP, previously known as Façade Improvement)
target area.
2.Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Individuals (SEDI)-Owned Businesses: 51%
of the business is owned by at least one SEDI individual.
3.Low Income Business Owner: Income does not exceed 80% of Salt Lake County average
median income (AMI) as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD).
4.Sustainability: Either,
a. Membership in SLC Green’s E2 Business Program; or
b. Loan proceeds will be used for the purchase of electric vehicles, electric vehicle
charging stations and infrastructure, renewable energy including but not limited to
wind and solar, heat pumps, high efficiency equipment, and/or energy efficiency.
The interest rate reductions applied to this application are detailed below:
HK Brewing Collective, LLC
8.50% prime rate
+ 4% ELDF charge
– 1% for location within a priority area
– 1% for owned by a socially and economically disadvantaged individual
– 1% for low income
– 1% for sustainability
___________________________
8.50% final interest rate
C.Program. The EDLF is administered by the Department of Economic Development, which is charged with
maintaining the corpus of the EDLF in a manner sufficient to perpetuate the program's goals. Each loan
application is pre-screened, and an underwriting analysis and economic impact statement are completed
before an application may be recommended for Loan Committee (see below) review. Information on
successful applications is transmitted to the Council to consider for final approval.
D.Available balance and amount of outstanding loans. The Department reported that the Fund’s
available balance was approximately $8,200,000 on September 30, 2024, and outstanding loans totaled
$3,932,437 on October 1.
E.EDLF Committee Membership. The Department of Economic Development lists nine members of the
EDLF Committee as follows:
City Employees Community Volunteers
Page | 4
1. Finance Director, Community and
Neighborhoods Department
2. Salt Lake City Business Advisory Board (BAB)
member
3. Representative of the Mayor’s Office 4. Banker
5. Salt Lake City employee at large 6. Community lender
7. Representative of the Division of Housing
Stability
8. Business mentor
9. Director, Department of Economic
Development
10.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. The Council may wish to have a policy discussion with the Administration about interest rates charged by
the City from this and other loan funds and whether it makes sense to reevaluate how interest rates are
determined for lenders, especially since the City typically offers loans as a lender-of-last-resort.
2. The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether the EDLF Committee considered any other unique
information about this business that would help Council Members evaluate how this application compares
to others. For example, are risk factors evaluated for each company, like outstanding loans, years in
business, etc.?
3.What outreach does the Department do to ensure a diverse pool of businesses successfully applies to the
EDLF? Are applications from diverse owners, particularly those whose businesses are located on the
Westside, offered additional support through the application process? Does EDLF staff have ideas for
improving access that would benefit from program changes or additional funding?
4. The Council may wish to request a more general update on EDLF use and processes. This could include the
number of applications, review criteria used, loan program goals, etc.
i
i Source: Small Business Lending Survey, New Small Business Lending Declines as Credit Standards Continue
to Tighten. Consulted on October 29, 2024, at https://www.kansascityfed.org/surveys/small-business-lending-
survey/new-small-business-lending-declines-as-credit-standards-continue-to-tighten/.
Item F3
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Austin Kimmel
Public Policy Analyst
DATE:November 19, 2024
RE: ORDINANCE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND LOAN TO GK FOLKS
FOUNDATION, AT 1506 SOUTH REDWOOD ROAD
MOTION 1 – ADOPT ORDINANCE
I move that the Council adopt the ordinance approving a $250,000 loan for GK Folks
Foundation from the Economic Development Loan Fund.
MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT
I move that the Council not adopt the ordinance, and proceed to the next agenda item.
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Austin Kimmel
Public Policy Analyst
DATE:November 19, 2024
RE: ORDINANCE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND LOAN TO GK FOLKS
FOUNDATION, AT 1506 SOUTH REDWOOD ROAD
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Council will consider approving a loan from the City’s Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF) to a non-
profit organization called GK Folks Foundation, which provides mental health, educational, and entrepreneurial
resources for African immigrants and refugees, at 1506 South Redwood Road. The City’s Economic
Development Loan Committee recommends the Council approve a $250,000 loan at a 9.50% fixed interest rate
over seven years. This loan will assist in the creation of two jobs in the next year and the retention of one
existing job. Additionally, funds will pay for renovation, working capital, equipment, furniture and fixtures, and
will help fund the creation of a community events center for the African immigrant and refugee community.
The interest rate reflects the 8.50% prime rate at the time of the application (March 1, 2024) plus the standard
EDLF four percentage points. The project did qualify for a three percentage-point reduction based on location
within a priority area (West of I-15), being owned by a socially and economically disadvantaged individual, and
sustainability (see section B below).
Council staff reminder: EDLF loans are now scheduled for a vote on the same day as the briefing, so this is
scheduled for action on the November 19 formal meeting agenda.
Goal of the briefing: Consider a potential $250,000 loan from the Economic Development Loan Fund to a
non-profit organization called GK Folks Foundation.
ADDITIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Item Schedule:
Briefing: November 19, 2024
Public Hearing: N/A
Potential Action: November 19, 2024
Page | 3
A.Interest Rates. For context, the nationwide median rates for urban small business commercial and
industrial loans in the second quarter of 2024 (the most recent data available) were 7.77% for fixed-rate
loans at and 8.88% for variable rate loans, according to the most recent U.S. Federal Reserve Small Business
Lending Survey.i In the second quarter of 2022, these rates were 4.50% and 5.55% respectively. Interest
rates for EDLF loans consider an assessment of the risk level of different applicants, among other factors,
and include potential interest rate reductions. Interest rates have ranged from 7.25% for nearly all 2022
EDLF loans to an average of 9.55% in 2023 and 2024.
B.Interest Rate Reductions. The bases for potential reductions are as follows:
1.Location within a priority area: RDA Project Area; Opportunity Zone; West of I-15; or
Neighborhood Business Improvement Program (NBIP, previously known as Façade Improvement)
target area.
2.Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Individuals (SEDI)-Owned Businesses: 51%
of the business is owned by at least one SEDI individual.
3.Low Income Business Owner: Income does not exceed 80% of Salt Lake County average
median income (AMI) as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD).
4.Sustainability: Either,
a) Membership in SLC Green’s E2 Business Program; or
b) Loan proceeds will be used for the purchase of electric vehicles, electric vehicle charging
stations and infrastructure, renewable energy including but not limited to wind and solar,
heat pumps, high efficiency equipment, and/or energy efficiency.
The interest rate reductions applied to this application are detailed below:
GK Folks Foundation
8.50% prime rate
+ 4% ELDF charge
– 1% for location within a priority area
– 1% for owned by a socially and economically disadvantaged individual
– 1% for sustainability
___________________________
9.50% final interest rate
C.Program. The EDLF is administered by the Department of Economic Development, which is charged with
maintaining the corpus of the EDLF in a manner sufficient to perpetuate the program's goals. Each loan
application is pre-screened, and an underwriting analysis and economic impact statement are completed
before an application may be recommended for Loan Committee (see below) review. Information on
successful applications is transmitted to the Council to consider for final approval.
D.Available balance and amount of outstanding loans. The Department reported that the Fund’s
available balance was approximately $8,200,000 on September 30, 2024, and outstanding loans totaled
$3,932,437 on October 1.
E.EDLF Committee Membership. The Department of Economic Development lists nine members of the
EDLF Committee as follows:
City Employees Community Volunteers
1. Finance Director, Community and
Neighborhoods Department
2. Salt Lake City Business Advisory Board (BAB)
member
Page | 4
3. Representative of the Mayor’s Office 4. Banker
5. Salt Lake City employee at large 6. Community lender
7. Representative of the Division of Housing
Stability
8. Business mentor
9. Director, Department of Economic
Development
10.
i
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. The Council may wish to have a policy discussion with the Administration about interest rates charged by
the City from this and other loan funds and whether it makes sense to reevaluate how interest rates are
determined for lenders, especially since the City typically offers loans as a lender-of-last-resort.
2. The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether the EDLF Committee considered any other unique
information about this business that would help Council Members evaluate how this application compares
to others. For example, are risk factors evaluated for each company, like outstanding loans, years in
business, etc.?
3.What outreach does the Department do to ensure a diverse pool of businesses successfully applies to the
EDLF? Are applications from diverse owners, particularly those whose businesses are located on the
Westside, offered additional support through the application process? Does EDLF staff have ideas for
improving access that would benefit from program changes or additional funding?
4. The Council may wish to request a more general update on EDLF use and processes. This could include the
number of applications, review criteria used, loan program goals, etc.
i Source: Small Business Lending Survey, New Small Business Lending Declines as Credit Standards Continue
to Tighten. Consulted on October 29, 2024, at https://www.kansascityfed.org/surveys/small-business-lending-
survey/new-small-business-lending-declines-as-credit-standards-continue-to-tighten/.
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
COUNCIL STAFF
REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
tinyurl.com/SLCFY25
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Ben Luedtke, Sylvia Richards
Budget and Policy Analysts
DATE: November 19, 2024
RE: Budget Amendment Number 2 of Fiscal Year (FY) 2025
Budget Amendment Number Two includes 31 proposed amendments with $54,211,296 in revenues and $73,124,104
in expenditures of which $3,477,524 is from General Fund Balance. The amendments are across seven funds with
twelve proposed general fund positions for new police officers and one position (City Prosecutor) being removed
that was previously added in Budget Amendment #1. Most expenses in this budget amendment are housekeeping
items found in section D. One of these funds will be a new fund associated with the Downtown Capital City
Revitalization Zone 0.5% sales tax. The amendments also include six new initiatives in section A and additional
housekeeping and grant related items, and one donation related item. There are also four Council-added items.
Fund Balance
If all the items are adopted as proposed, including all the Council-added items, then the General Fund Balance
would be projected at 13.9% which is $4,627,100 above the 13% minimum target.
Tracking New Ongoing General Fund Costs for the Next Annual Budget
The table of potential new ongoing General Fund costs for the FY2026 annual budget is available as Attachment 1
at the end of this document. If all the items in Budget Amendment #2 are adopted as proposed by the
Administration, then the FY2026 annual budget could have $1,704,055 of new ongoing costs. The total new
ongoing costs from Budget Amendments 1 through 2 would be $6,207,570. Note that of the total cost, $4.1 million
would be needed if the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation grant is not available for FY2026.
Straw Poll Requests
The Administration is requesting straw polls for three items:
Item A-3: FY 24-25 COPS Hiring Program Grant to allow early job advertising to help ensure recruits can
participate in the January training academy and for the Fleet Division to begin paperwork to meet the
ordering window for purchasing vehicles. There is no closing date, however, the manufacturer will stop
accepting orders once available builds are filled which is unpredictable.
Item A-4: FY 24-25 Vehicles, Equipment, and Related Police Officer Costs Not Covered by the Homeless
Shelter Cities State Mitigation Grant, a straw poll is being requested for this item to help meet the ordering
window for purchasing vehicles. There is no closing date, however, the manufacturer will stop accepting
orders once available builds are filled which is unpredictable.
Item I-2: Request to Reappropriate Funds for Reconnecting Communities Federal Grant for Local Match
($1.24 Million – Misc. Grants Fund). These funds were previously appropriated but lapsed to Fund Balance
because the contract wasn’t ready to encumber the funds. A straw poll would ensure the contract can be
finalized prior to the end of the calendar year.
Project Timeline:
1st Briefing: November 19, 2024
2nd Briefing & Public Hearing: Dec. 3, 2024
Potential Adoption Vote: December 10, 2024
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
No adjustments to the revenue budget are anticipated at this time.
Fund Balance Chart
The Administration’s chart below shows the current General Fund Balance figures. Fund balance has been updated to include
proposed changes for BA#1. Note that some Council-added items are proposed to use more from Fund Balance that shown in
the table below.
FUND BALANCE CHART
Based on those projections adjusted fund balance is projected to be at 14.29%. The additional Council-added items would result
in a Fund Balance projected to be at 13.9%.
The proposal includes nineteen initiatives for Council review.
A summary spreadsheet outlining proposed budget changes is attached. The Administration
requests this document be modified based on the decisions of the Council.
The budget opening is separated in eight different categories:
A.New Budget Items
B.Grants for Existing Staff Resources
C.Grants for New Staff Resources
D.Housekeeping Items
E.Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
F.Donations
G.Council Consent Agenda Grant Awards
I.Council Added Items
PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing
Vacancy Report (193 Vacant Positions)
The Finance Department provided a vacancy
report dated October 25, 2024 which is
summarized in the table to the right. This is a
snapshot in time of current full-time positions
that are unfilled by department. The report
found 193 vacant positions in the City. This
report excludes several types of positions if they
are grant funded, seasonal or part-time, and
some FTEs in the 911, Fire, and Police
Departments that are authorized but unfunded
to help with turnover (such as hiring entry level
positions shortly before expected retirements /
terminations). This report only reflects the
current fiscal year so covering the period of July
1 – October 25. It does not reflect positions that
have been vacant across multiple fiscal years.
During the annual budget the Council requested
that the Administration include vacancy
analyses as part of the hybrid zero-based
budgeting / program-based budgeting effort.
Impact Fee Unallocated “Available to Spend” Balances and Refund Tracking
Updated balances of impact fees are anticipated to be available later this month. There is one item (D-5) in this budget
amendment that would rescope transportation impact fees from one project to another. There are no proposed new
appropriations of impact fees at the time of publishing this staff report.
Section A: New Items
Note: to expedite the processing of this staff report, staff has included the Administration’s descriptions from the
transmittal for some of these items.
A-1: Purchase Additional City Fleet Vehicles ($3.9 Million one-time from the Fund Balance)
The Administration is requesting $3.9 million of one-time previously appropriated but unspent Fleet funding for
the purchase of vehicles as follows:
Department Current Acquire & Capital
Cost
Number Of Assets
CED $147,980.46 4
Fire $1,900,000.00 1
Police $464,625.75 5
Streets $1,381,834.61 5
Grand Total $3,894,440.82 15
If this item is approved by the Council, the Administration estimates the amount remaining in the Fleet Fund will be
$1.5 million, which is historically much lower than previous years. In response to the question as to whether Fleet has
a new policy not to maintain a fund balance, Fleet Administration indicated the following:
“ Fleet's budget is divided into two funds, Maintenance and Replacement. Internal service funds, in this case Fleet's
Maintenance Fund, should never carry a large fund balance as it is an internal operation for departments in the City.
The Fleet "new vehicle fund" (aka replacement fund) should carry a minimal fund balance.”
A-2: Enhanced Security Improvements at the Justice Court ($200,000 from General Fund Balance
then ongoing)
In August of 2024, the Justice Court Administration received a Vulnerability Assessment Report which evaluated the
Court’s security both inside and outside the Court building. The Administration is requesting $200,000 in ongoing
funding for security improvements at the Justice Court.
The Court may need to make future funding requests to implement other recommendations but may also satisfy those
needs through the Department of Public Service Safety and Security via a CIP application. This budget amendment
request addresses the primary need of the Court at this time, according to the report.
Policy Question:
Potential Efficiencies by Combining Security between City Facilities – Council Members may wish
to ask the Administration whether efficiencies could be gained by combining Justice Court security efforts
with City & County Building and Library Plaza security.
A-3: Community Oriented Policing Services or COPS Hiring Grant from the U.S. Department of
Justice for Two New Sergeants and 10 New Police Officers ($1 Million from Nondepartmental
Holding Account and $617,673 from General Fund Balance of which $689,953 is ongoing)
This item is related to item E-6 later in the staff report which is the budget step to accept the $1.5 million grant
from the DOJ. A-3 is the required local match from the City’s General Fund.
The City was awarded $1.5 million from the U.S. Department of Justice’s Community Oriented Policing Services
or COPS hiring grant. It partially funds 12 new police officer FTEs that will form two squads dedicated to the
Jordan River Trail and surrounding neighborhoods. The grant requires the City to maintain employment of the
new police officers for at least 12 months after the 36 months that the grant helps pay for. Historically, the City
has successfully applied for and received COPS hiring grants multiple times and has retained the officers beyond
the required four-years.
Over the four-year term, the grant provides $1.5 million and the General Fund will need to budget $5,480,115. The
table below breakout these estimated costs by fiscal year. When the grant term ends, $2,071,325 is the fully loaded
estimated annual cost for the General Fund to continue employing the 12 new police officer FTEs.
In the annual budget, the Council created a $1 million holding account in Nondepartmental for TBD Jordan River
trail service level improvements. The funds were intentionally left flexible to respond to different needs along the
river and adjacent trail. The Administration is proposing to use the full $1 million to help meet the required
$1,617,673 local matching funds for the COPS hiring grant. The remaining $617,673 would come from General
Fund Balance.
This item would approve ongoing costs that would be covered by the General Fund this fiscal year for:
$383,228 for the local match of salaries and benefits,
$306,725 for equipment and supplies, and
$45,720 for 12 body cameras and associated software licenses
One-time costs covered by the General Fund include:
$787,800 transfer to the Fleet Fund for new vehicles, and
$94,200 transfer to the IMS Fund for computers, software, mobile data terminals, and radios
Timing of New Jordan River Police Squads and Police Department Staffing Update
The Department reports an academy class is scheduled to begin in January. New recruits typically take 10 months
to complete the academy and field training. When the 12 new recruits complete training they will be placed in
patrol positions and a corresponding 12 experienced patrol officers will be transferred into the new Jordan River
police squads. The public could start seeing the newly created squads in October or November next year. The
Department is recommending this approach to avoid creating a shortfall in patrol staffing levels.
If this item is approved, then the total staffing of police officers would increase to 630 FTEs (not counting 20
authorized but unfunded positions to help reduce turnover fluctuations). This includes 598 police officers paid by
the General Fund, and 32 partially or fully covered by grants: 1 for the DEA Metro Narcotics Task Force, 12 from
this new COPS hiring grant, and 19 by the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation Grant.
The Departments reports 12 police officers are currently unavailable due to being on leave and 46 are in training.
STRAW POLL REQUEST: The Administration is requesting a straw poll on the $787,800 for new police vehicles
so the Fleet Division may initiate paperwork to place the order while the manufacturer is still accepting new
orders. The purchase order could not be finalized until the Council formally votes to adopt this budget item.
Vehicle manufacturer ordering windows have become less predictable in recent years. Some Council Members
have also proposed including early job advertising of the 12 new positions to help ensure the recruits can be
included in the January academy instead of waiting for the next scheduled academy in May.
Policy Question:
Short-term Resource Needs until New Squads are Deployed – The Council may wish to ask the
Administration what additional resources could help address public safety concerns along the Jordan
River trail until the new squads are deployed in October / November next year?
A-4: Vehicles, Equipment, and Related Police Officer Costs Not Covered by the Homeless Shelter
Cities State Mitigation Grant ($877,832 one-time from General Fund Balance of which $498,692 is
ongoing)
This is a follow up item from the annual budget that would shift ongoing costs from the Homeless Shelter Cities
State Mitigation to the General Fund and provide one-time funding for police officers’ vehicles, equipment, and
related costs. The Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation Grant award this year is $2,945,958 which is (-
$161,243) less than last year. Four new police officers were added this year bringing the total to 19 police officers
funded by the grant. The police officers are dedicated to the geographic area around the Geraldine E. King and
Gail Miller homeless resource centers. The grant also funds four civilian FTEs and a subaward to the Volunteers of
America or VOA. The grant would need to be approximately $4.1 million next year to fully cover the 23 FTEs,
equipment, supplies, and subaward to the VOA. The grant is subject to annual appropriations by the Legislature
and changes to the number of eligible municipalities.
Non-personnel costs related to the 19 police officers funded by the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation Grant
are proposed to shift to the General Fund. This shift better aligns eligible costs with reimbursement deadlines
under the grant. For example, the City was unable to receive all reimbursable expenses under the grant in recent
years because of difficulty aligning vehicle and equipment expenditures with the grant deadline. The smaller grant
award is also insufficient to cover the cost of FTEs and all the vehicles and equipment needed by those FTEs.
The reduced grant award created a budget shortfall for ongoing costs would be covered by the General Fund:
$273,236 for ongoing supplies and equipment, and
$225,456 for ongoing police officer salaries
One-time costs covered by the General Fund include:
$262,600 transfer to the Fleet Fund for vehicles
$72,390 for 19 body cameras and associated software licenses
$44,150 transfer to the IMS Fund for computers, software, mobile data terminals, and radios
FY 24-25 State Homeless Mitigation Grant Officer Costs ($877,832
STRAW POLL REQUEST: The Administration is requesting a straw poll on the $262,600 for new police vehicles
so the Fleet Division may initiate paperwork to place the order while the manufacturer is still accepting new
orders. The purchase order could not be finalized until the Council formally votes to adopt this budget item.
Vehicle manufacturer ordering windows have become less predictable in recent years.
A-5: Downtown Capital City Revitalization Zone 0.5% Sales Tax Budget $25,982,860 ongoing in a
new dedicated fund)
Following the action by City Council to adopt the participation agreement and project area with the City and
Smith Entertainment Group, this item is to address the anticipated 0.5% sales and use tax revenue and expense
(budget) for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2025.
It is anticipated that this action will result in approximately $25,982,860 in revenues for the remainder of the
fiscal year, resulting in expenses of $25,982,860. The annual budget estimate is approximately $56,484,479. As
the agreement and notice period become finalized, a new Fund will be established and Finance staff will ensure
adequate accounting measures to track, report and monitor the Downtown Revitalization Zone Sales Tax.
The Council voted to endorse the proposed participation agreement and project area on July 9, 2024, and
submitted notice of the Council’s endorsement to the Revitalization Zone Committee on August 30, 2024. The
Revitalization Zone Committee approved the endorsed project area and participation agreement on September 17,
2024. The City Council adopted a resolution on October 1, 2024.
Per the Participation Agreement, the Administration plans to bring to the Council in a budget opening later this
fiscal year a proposal to create the Public Benefit Account for ticket fee revenue and the 1% of sales tax revenues to
cover the City's administrative expenses.
A-6: 3200 West Complete Street Additions ($100,000 one-time from the Quarter-cent Sales Tax
for Transportation Fund Balance)
This request would fund a new opportunity to add sidewalks and bike lanes to bridge a gap in the active
transportation network, connecting to West Valley City. 3200 West is a city arterial street which crosses under the
201 Freeway. UDOT is replacing the 201 Freeway bridge over 3200 West, which presents an opportunity for
changes under the bridge -- a tricky spot for walking and bicycling due to a lack of bike lanes and disjointed
sidewalks. This project would improve sidewalks and crosswalks, as well as add bike lanes under the bridge and
through the interchange. UDOT's project is scheduled for 2025 construction.
UDOT only recently extended the opportunity for these active transportation improvements to be added to the
bridge project and has asked the local municipalities (Salt Lake City and West Valley City) to contribute toward
adding these safety improvements.
Transportation would like to consider using the County 1/4 cent Transportation fund for this request versus using
General Fund balance.
In the annual budget, the Council appropriated $2 million one-time for the Livable Streets Traffic Calming
Program from the Quarter Cent Sales Tax for Transportation Fund Balance (separate from General Fund
Balance). The Council expressed an interest to continue annual funding for that program to reach all high need
neighborhood zones. It's estimated that there's $1 million remaining unappropriated in the Quarter Cent Sales
Tax for Transportation Fund Balance but this is pending confirmation by the annual financial audit in December /
January. Alternatively, there is existing complete streets funding from CIP that is eligible to be used for this
project.
Section D: Housekeeping Items
D-1: City Hall Earthquake Repair Insurance Funds Rescope ($3,488,282 rescope in the CIP Fund)
In Fiscal Year 2023 $7,252,300 was accepted by FM Global to pre-load funds for earthquake repairs to City Hall.
Of this amount, $3,764,018.74 (pending final invoicing) was spent and $3,488,281.26 is remaining. The project is
now being closed out and under warranty. The remaining balance has been approved by the insurer to complete
multiple repairs to other facilities that have been deferred thus far. Since the earthquake damage was considered a
one ‘loss event,’ all the FM Global funding is coming from one so-called ‘bucket.’ Since the City-County Building
repairs are complete, this request is to place remaining funds in a holding account for FM Global-approved
earthquake repair expenditures. This amount could change as projects are further along. When all repair projects
are closed out, the remaining funds will be returned to FM Global. These funds are all insurance proceeds and will
not impact the General Fund.
The Administration provided the below list of City buildings with eligible expenses from damage caused by the
March 2020 earthquake. The damage to these facilities was less critical than to City Hall.
Site/Location Anticipated
Completion Date
Fire Station #8 March 2025
Fire Station #14 December 2025
Pioneer Police Precinct April 2025
Public Lands Administration
Building May 2025
Fleet Shop Building April 2025
Police Training Facility June 2025
Jordan Park Maintenance Bldg June 2025
Rose Park Golf Maintenance Shed June 2025
RAC Athletic Complex North Building June 2025
Compliance Building 212 E 600 S June 2025
234 E 600 S June 2025
Central Business District 240 E 600 S June 2025
Facilities 248 E 600 S June 2025
Justice Court Building 333 S 200 E June 2025
D-2: Fleet Encumbrance Reappropriation ($10,580,117 from Fleet Fund)
This is the Fleet encumbrance rollover for vehicles that were committed to with the funds appropriated in Fiscal
Year 2024 or earlier, but that have not been received or completed and put into service. A summary of rollover
amounts is included below. An additional small amount of prior-year funding was encumbered for software
upgrades, a purchase that was also not fully expended by year-end.
Fiscal Year 2023 Orders: $2,863,947.37
Fiscal Year 2024 Orders: $6,502,52616
Upfit costs for all listed vehicles: $1,213,643.47
Total Rollover Request: $10,580,117.00.
D-3: WITHDRAWN
D-4: Landfill Projects ($7 Million one-time in the CIP Fund)
The landfill CIP account was funded with $1.5M for various landfill projects that have been ongoing. The funds
placed in the account are applied to individual projects and then reimbursed by the County back to the General
Fund – which are considered as equal expense and revenue.
With the Council approved Environmental Engineer position, projects have been moving along at a much quicker
timeline. The now-current project module is for the "South Header and methane collection wells" - for capture of
methane gas emitting from the landfill which is then used for energy production. The construction start date has
now moved up to Spring '25. This $7M project will need funding secured before going out to bid this winter.
D-5: Additional Funding for Kensington Neighborhood Byway (103,182 of CIP funds and $42,833
of transportation impact fees both from a cancelled project)
This request is to rescope funds from the existing Appropriation for 1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestrian) and the
project for the- 1300 S Bicycle Bypass to construct a different bypass route than was originally envisioned at the
time of the original CIP application in fiscal year 2015. The original east-west bypass route was to parallel 1300
South to the north; the east-west Kensington Neighborhood Byway parallels 1300 South to the south.
The original northern route became unfeasible after a lengthy design process as UDOT declined to permit a new
bicycle/pedestrian crossing of State Street at Edith Avenue (1195 S) or Kelsey Avenue (1180 S) due to close
proximity to the 1300 South signalized intersection. A portion of the original appropriation was used to make
safety improvements to the TRAX rail crossing at Paxton Avenue, which then connects to existing bikeways on
Main St. This leaves two funding sources as outlined below, both dedicated to the 1300 South Bicycle Bypass.
The East-West Kensington Neighborhood Bypass runs parallel to 1300 South at approximately 1500 South and
will serve as a preferred bicycle route and alternative for those traveling East-West in the Ballpark neighborhood.
The other funding source, a federal grant from the Wasatch Front Regional Council, has already been rescoped to
fund the Kensington Neighborhood Byway. This request seeks to add the City's portion of the 1300 S Bicycle
Bypass to resolve a budget gap in the Kensington project, as UDOT has given its blessing for more significant
improvements at State Street and 700 East compared to the budget developed for the original Kensington funding
applications.
There is also an associated impact fee cost center tied to the original appropriation for 1300 S Bicycle Bypass
found in the 1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestrian) for $42,832.69. In consulting with the CIP Finance team, these
funds will either need to be used on a project or returned to the Street/Transportation impact fee Fund.
The Kensington Neighborhood Byway project has a current budget of $2,472,823. The additional funding
proposed in this item would increase the budget to $2,618,838. If this item is approved, then the project’s
expanded scope is expected to be fully funded.
D-6: Racial Equity in Policing Commission Recommended Trainings for the Police Department
($240,950 one-time from the Nondepartmental Public Safety Reform Holding Account)
At the time of publishing this staff report additional information was forthcoming on this item.
D-7: Prosecutor’s Office Changes since Budget Amendment #1 ($280,269 back to General Fund
Balance; removing City Prosecutor FTE; and Rescope $50,000 in the CIP Fund for Fifth Floor of
City Hall feasibility and structural study)
This item is in response to a previous item noted on Budget Amendment 1. In Budget Amendment 1 (Item A-1), it
was noted that the District Attorney's Office provided the City Attorney's Office notice of intent to termination the
interlocal agreement between the city and County. This item was to bring the function and various staff under the
City, resulting in termination of the contract effective December 31, 2024.
Following ongoing discussions, it was determined that the agreement will remain in place as is for the foreseeable
future. As a result, this item is to reverse the budgetary impacts and actions outlined in Budget Amendment 1.
It is important to note, however, that two (2) of the positions outlined in BA1 are proposed to remain as new,
ongoing FTEs. The two (2) new FTEs are outlined below:
(1) Senior City Attorney – Class 39. The anticipated cost for 8 months is $157,635.74 in FY25, or $236,452
annually and; (1) Deputy Director of Administration - City Attorney’s Office – Class 40 (New position). The
anticipated cost for 9 months is $186,547 in FY25, or $248,729 annually.
Additionally, in BA1, the administration proposed $280,000 be rescoped and transferred to the CIP Fund to lease
office space, utilities, tenant improvements, furniture, fixtures, and equipment. Following council discussion, the
amount was increased to $472,298. This action is also being reversed, however, $50,000 is to remain in the CIP
Fund to conduct a feasibility and structural study for the current City Attorney’s (department) office space.
D-8: 911 Department Reclassifying Two Positions (Budget Neutral)
The 911 Department is proposing to reclassify an existing appointed executive assistant at pay grade 26 to a merit
Business System Analyst at pay grade 28. The change is intended to increase the technical expertise within the
Department and improve collaboration with IMS.
The second reclassification is an existing appointed deputy director at pay grade 32 to a merit assistant director at
pay grade 31. There are currently four merit assistant directors in the 911 Director which would increase to five
under this proposal. The assistant directors have been described as like division directors which are typically
appointed. There would no longer be a deputy director position in the 911 Department. A job description for the
assistant director position is available as Attachment 3.
Both reclassifications would change appointed positions to merit positions. The Administration included an
update to the Appointed Pay Plan in the transmittal that would require Council approval. The net impact of the
pay grade changes is estimated to be budget neutral so no additional funding would be needed.
Policy Question:
No Deputy Director in the 911 Department – The Council may wish to discuss with the
Administration how the 911 Department would function without a deputy director, especially in stances
when the director is unavailable. Over the years, some departments have proposed removing deputy
directors and the Council approved it but later the departments returned requesting to restore the deputy director
positions. This most recently occurred with the HR department.
D-9: University of Utah Donation for Sunnyside Park Improvements ($4,200,000 one-time)
The City received a donation from the University of Utah for $4,200,000 for improvements at Sunnyside park
(See Initiative F-2). This funding has been received through the Donation fund and will be transferred to the CIP
fund to facilitate the improvements planned for Sunnyside park.
D-10: Expense Budget Transfer from Non-departmental to the Police Department and Fire
Department for Wages ($2,131,513 from Non-departmental; $1,047,521 to the Fire Department
and $1,083,992 to the Police Department)
As part of the Fiscal Year 2025 Adopted Budget, budget was captured in Non-departmental to account for the
additional budget necessary to support increased Police and Fire wages because of updated MOUs. This item is to
transfer those funds from Non-departmental to the Police and Fire Department budgets, as follows:
General Fund: $1,854,416
Funding Our Future: $277,097
Fire Department: $1,047,521
Police Department: $1,083,992
Staff note: Items E-1 through E-4 are capital projects receiving grants from the State Transit Transportation
Investment Fund or TTIF. The City Transportation Division provided a presentation about these four projects which
is available as Attachment 2.
Section E: Grants Requiring No Staff Resources
E-1: TTIF 200 South Transit Corridor Project ($1,800,000 from Misc. Grants Fund)
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $1,800,000 for
the purpose of completing the 200 South Transit Corridor project. Project Description: The 200 South Transit
Corridor Technology Upgrades will evaluate bus transit operations on 200 South between roughly 600 west and
University Street and identify strategies for improvement. The focus of the project will be on improving bus
operations through upgrades to intersection controls, which will likely include a combination of transit signal priority
(TSP), detection systems, cabinet/controller hardware, fiber optic communication, and connected vehicle (V2X)
systems. Salt Lake City has already made significant investments to rebuild the street to establish a Business Access
and Transit (BAT) lane and boarding islands; this project follows the initial roadway construction with focus on
transit operations and technology upgrades to further enhance the transit capacity and safety of the 200 South Transit
Corridor.
E-2: TTIF 400 South Multi-Use Trail ($6,356,000,000 from Misc. Grants Fund)
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $6,356,000 for
the purpose of completing the 400 South multi-use trail. UDOT and SLC are partnering to create a multi-use trail on
the south side of 400 South from 900 West to 200 West, including the viaduct bridge over the railroad tracks. The
corridor is an important east/west connector and the project aims to maintain current vehicular capacity while
establishing a safe dedicated corridor for people walking, biking and rolling. The trail will feature art to enhance the
character of the surrounding area and make traveling along the trail an enjoyable experience.
E-3: TTIF West Temple Bike Transit Connections ($1,326,000 from Misc. Grants Fund)
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $1,326,000 for the
purpose of completing the West Temple Bike Transit Connections. West Temple Bike Transit Connections-the project
will add buffered bike lanes in both directions of West Temple from Market Street to North Temple, improve
pedestrian crossings by adding medians and/or bulb outs and HAWK signals at the Market Street, Pierpont Street,
and 150 South crosswalks, and improve bus stops including bus boarding islands at a new protected intersection at
300 South.
E-4: TTIF Westpointe/Jordan Meadows Neighborhood Byway ($900,000 from Misc. Grants Fund)
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $900,00 for the
purpose of completing the Westpointe/Jordan Neighborhood Byway. The Westpointe/Jordan Meadows
Neighborhood Byway will integrate active transportation infrastructure into the local street network to create a north-
south route through the Westpointe and Jordan Meadows neighborhoods that runs west of and parallel to Redwood
Road. This project will improve bicycling and walking along this route and increase neighborhood access to the Green
Line TRAX and planned SLC Westside Transit Hub. This route will provide access to transit at several points; notably
to TRAX on the south end, along the route itself and on 700 North. Also, it will enhance connectivity to the Northwest
middle School, Westpointe Park, Escalante Elementary School and Utah State Office complex at 1950 West North
Temple.
E-5: FY24 COPS Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act ($98,786 from Misc. Grants Fund)
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability through a grant award in the amount of $98,786
for the purpose of providing wellness and mental health resources to the police department. Project Description: Salt
Lake City will receive a grant under the DOJ through the COPS Office. Salt Lake City will use FY24 LEMHWA funding
to support training for the Wellness team, peer mentoring training for Peer support team including a mobile wellness
app for employees and their families and accompanying training; and overtime for Peer Support Team to expand
services in the department.
E-6: FY 24 COPS Hiring Program ($1,500,000 from Misc. Grants Fund)
Staff note: This item is related to item A-3 earlier in the staff report which is the budget step to authorize 12 new
police officer FTEs on the staffing document and provide $1.6 million from the City's General Fund as the required
local match to the $1.5 million COPS hiring grant.
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability through a grant award in the amount of
$1,500,000 for the purpose of hiring 12 new officers. Project Description: The Police Department will hire 12 new
police officers to facilitate deployment of 12 current officers who will be assigned to newly created squads. The squads
will focus on crime reduction, community safety, and expansion of services in areas to include the City’s portion of the
Jordan River Trail, as well as City parks and other recreational areas and residential and business areas.
Section F: Donations
F-1: WITHDRAWN
F-2: University of Utah Sunnyside Donation ($4,200,000 from Donations Fund)
This budget amendment is to recognize the City receiving a donation from the University of Utah for $4,200,000 for
improvements at Sunnyside park. Per the donation agreement with the University, the University will provide $1.0
million within 30 days of the effective date of the agreement. The remaining balance will be deposited into a third-party
escrow account within 30 days of receipt of the City’s notice that it has completed its public engagement process to
determine the improvements.
Quarterly progress payments will be released to the City from the escrow based on a construction schedule mutually
agreed upon by the City and the University. Per the agreement, these funds must be used for the project determined by
the public engagement process. The City may not use these funds for deferred maintenance or repairs except as required
to accomplish new, renovated, or upgraded amenities and infrastructure. Per the agreement, the City may also use these
funds toward mitigating the loss of the softball fields currently in Sunnyside park to other City parks. The funds from this
donation will be deposited in the City’s Donations special revenue fund and transferred to a CIP fund to be used for the
Project (see Initiative D-10 for CIP Funding).
Section G: Grant Consent Agenda No. 4
G-1: Mental Health Services to First Responders ($47,556 from Misc. Grants Fund)
Funding to support a year of a comprehensive and data-driven mental health and wellness platform to enhance the
mental well-being of its first responders. A platform of this type will provide essential wellness tools for early
detection and intervention, including web-accessible peer support and a wellness resource toolkit accessible through
iOS and Android-driven applications offering clinically validated wellness sessions and learning modules specifically
tailored for first responders, their families, and retirees. This resource will provide first responders with the tools to
build resilience and maintain mental wellness. Additionally, this will cover the cost of two mental health trainings for
SLC 911 (Help is on the way for Dispatch Training and an Emotion Intelligence training for SLC 911 managers.).This
grant is provided by the Utah State Department of Public Safety. The Public Hearing was held June 11 ,2024.
G-2: Utah State Board of Education Snack Grant ($6,000 from Misc. Grants Fund)
The Division of Youth and Family Services submitted a renewal application for reimbursement to provide nutritious
snacks to Youth City participants during summer of 2024. The Public Hearing was held on July 9, 2024.
G-3: State of Utah, Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services (BEMS)
($9,642 from Misc. Grants Fund)
This is Salt Lake City's annual BEMS grant from the state. Under Utah Code Ann. 53-2d-207, BEMS is allowed to
award annual grants to emergency medical services providers from the EMS Per Capita grant funds to assist in
providing emergency medical services. The Public Hearing was held March 5,2024.
G-4: Emergency Management Performance Grant ($18,000 from Misc. Grants Fund)
This is Salt Lake City's annual BEMS grant from the state. Under Utah Code Ann. 53-2d-207, BEMS is allowed to
award annual grants to emergency medical services providers from the EMS Per Capita grant funds to assist in
providing emergency medical services. The Public Hearing was held June 11, 2024.
Section I: Council-Added Items
I-1: City Hall Physical Security Improvements Holding Account Release (
On June 26, 2024 the Administration sent a transmittal requesting the Council release $123,133 for two projects
described below. In Budget Amendment #5 of FY2023, the Council put $1 million into a CIP Fund holding account for
one-time to be determined physical security improvements to City Hall. If the Council approved releasing these funds,
then the holding account would have a remaining balance of $586,867. The Council previously approved releasing
some funds in January this year:$ $83,733 for Camera System Upgrades (hardware and software): The current
camera system in use throughout the City and City Hall, manufactured by Pelco, is outdated and its software license is
set to expire at the end of 2024.
Due to the outdated technology and expiring license, the cameras and servers they operate on require replacement.
The City will be migrating to Milestone's system for use in City Hall. Milestone has already been successfully
implemented by the SLC Police Department in the Public Safety Building. Transitioning to Milestone will ensure
enhanced security and uniformity across the City infrastructure. $39,400 is needed for Emergency Notification
System Upgrades (hardware in three buildings). Emergency Management will be transitioning from the current RAVE
emergency notification platform to Titan HST. The Emergency Management Division will cover the subscription cost;
however, there is a hardware component associated with this change that needs funding. The necessary hardware will
be initially installed at City Hall, Plaza 349, and the Public Safety Building to support this new system. This first phase
will inform future deployments of hardware at other buildings.
I-2: Request to Reappropriate Funds for Reconnecting Communities Federal Grant for Local Match
($1.24 Million – Funding Our Future’s Fund Balance)
This is a reappropriation as the local matching funds for a federal reconnecting communities grant the City was
awarded to study and recommend solutions to the east-west transportation divide created by several railroad tracks
and Interstate 15. The study has a total budget of $3.74 million. UDOT is acting as the financial administrator for the
City. The Federal Highway Administration preferred this arrangement in part because UDOT already has the systems
to regularly manage federal transportation funds and meet the compliance requirements. The funding sources are:
-$1.97 million from the federal reconnecting communities planning grant
-$1.24 million from the General Fund
-$500,000 from UTA
-$25,000 from the RDA
-$5,000 from Public Utilities
Staff has communicated to the Administration Council Member interest in submitting federal grant applications for
implementation construction funding. Those applications may need to be submitted before the study is finalized
which could be in two years. There are limited federal funding opportunities to implement the results of the study but
the largest federal grants are scheduled to only be available for two or three more years. Most of these construction
grants are authorized by the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Congressional authorization
would be needed to extend most of these grants beyond the next two or three years.
STRAW POLL: The Council could consider straw polling this item to help ensure the contract can be finalized prior to
the end of the calendar year.
Policy Question:
Request Local Matching Funds in Annual Budget for Construction Grant Applications – The
Council may wish to request that the Administration include local matching funds in the next annual budget
in anticipation of the City applying for implementation construction grants from the Federal Government.
The U.S. Department of Transportation has previously provided guidance that grant applications are more
competitive when there are local matching funds and a coalition of supporting organizations.
I-3: Ivory University House Student Housing Project ($350,000 from FOF for Year One / FOF
Housing Allocation to CAN for Years Two through Five)
Council Member Petro has requested the Council’s consideration on this item. The Ivory Foundation has approached
the City about contributing towards the Ivory University House, a student housing project they are building adjacent
to the University of Utah campus on land owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. The City does not
currently have a financing tool to facilitate the development of affordable student housing in the manner that the City
has financing tools to facilitate general affordable housing, which is why this is coming through a budget amendment
request. Additionally, while tax credit programs like LIHTC are available for income-qualified persons on an Area-
Median-Income (AMI) basis, no such tool exists to help facilitate affordable student housing. The following are
general aspects of the proposal:
-25% of the student housing would be set aside for graduates of Salt Lake City school district high schools who
qualify for the highest amount of financial aid as determined through the student’s Free Application for
Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). This would guarantee that the family of the student is need based and not just
the student. Those families would also likely qualify for many of the other affordable housing developments
that the City invests in.
-This would serve approximately 150 students per year.
-The City would allocate $350,000 per year for 5 years to the project, through the City’s Funding our Future
housing allocation for a total of $1.75 million. The initial year would come from Funding our Future fund
balance.
-The term of the deed restriction on the affordable spaces is proposed to be 30 years in exchange for the City’s
investment.
-The City would require annual reports including the number of students served.
The Administration is still working on details that could be included in a potential contract, should the Council
approve this funding. Because it would be a contractual obligation for 5 years, it would be included in Funding our
Future budget appropriations for the next 4 budget cycles and would be removed from the budget once the term of the
contract is complete.
Policy Questions:
Long-term City Strategy for Affordable Student Housing – The Council may wish to ask the
Administration if it would like to consider a longer-term strategy for the City to use its housing dollars to
facilitate affordable student housing for all of the universities and community colleges in Salt Lake City.
Council Approval of Final Terms – The Council may wish to make the funding contingent on approval of
final terms of the agreement.
I-4: PLACEHOLDER - Public Utilities Stabilization Fee Waiver for Instances of Non-use
At the time of publishing this staff report additional information was forthcoming on this item.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Council Request: Tracking New Ongoing Costs to the General Fund
2. Transit Transportation Investment Fund or TTIF presentation from the City’s Transportation Division on four
capital projects receiving TTIF funding
3. 911 Division Assistant Director Job Description
ACRONYMS
BEMS – Bureau of Emergency Medical Services
CAFR – Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
CDBG – Community Development Block Grant
CREP – Commission on Racial Equity in Policing
CIP – Capital Improvement Program
COPS – Community Oriented Policing Services
DOJ – Department of Justice
FOF – Funding Our Future
FTE – Full time Employee / Equivalent
FY – Fiscal Year
GF – General Fund
iOS – I-phone Operating Software
IMS – Information Management Services
RAVE Alert – Mobile Emergency Notification System
UDOT – Utah Department of Transportation
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Request: Tracking New Ongoing Costs to the General Fund
Council staff has provided the following list of potential new ongoing costs to the General Fund. Many of these are new
FTE’s approved during this fiscal year’s budget amendments, noting that each new FTE increases the City’s annual budget
costs if positions are added to the staffing document. Note that some items in the table below are partially or fully funded
by grants. If a grant continues to be awarded to the City in future years, then there may not be a cost to the General Fund
but grant funding is not guaranteed year-over-year.
Budget
Amendment Item
Potential Cost
to FY2026
Annual Budget
Full Time Employee
(FTEs)Notes
#1
Item A-1 Attorney’s Office
Organizational Structure
Change
$722,888
3 FTEs:
1 City Prosecutor
1 Senior City Attorney
1 Deputy Director of
Administration
City Prosecutor $178,278 for 9 months/$237,704
annually
Senior City Attorney Class 39 - $157,635.74 for 8
months/$236,454 annually
Deputy Director of Administration Class 40 -
$186,547 for 9 months or $248,730 annually.
At the time of publishing this staff report, the cost to
lease office space is unknown. The cost could be more or
less than the current budget under the soon to be
terminated interlocal agreement with the District
Attorney’s Office.
#1
Item D-8
$171,910
1 FTE:
Capital Asset Planning
Financial Analyst IV
position
Inadvertently left out of the Mayor’s Recommended
FY2025 Budget. Position would be dedicated to impact
fees compliance tracking and reporting for new state
requirements. Impact fees fully reimburse the General
Fund for the position’s cost.
$2,945,957 grant
funding*
4 FTEs:
3 Officer positions
1 Sergeant position
*Amount of grant funding needed in order to fully cover
the ongoing costs including the new FTEs.
#1
Item E-1 Homeless
Shelter Cities Mitigation
Grant FY25
Costs currently paid for
by the Homeless Shelter
Cities Mitigation Grant in
FY2024 that might be
shifting to the General
Fund in FY2025 $662,760
For ongoing costs related
to 15 existing FTEs; the
grant funds a total of 23
FTEs
$662,760 is needed for ongoing equipment for all 15
officers. The Administration is checking whether existing
budgets could absorb some of these costs.
#2
Item A-2 Enhanced
Security at Justice Court
$200,000
A security report identified an issue needing to be
addressed immediately.
Budget
Amendment Item
Potential Cost
to FY2026
Annual Budget
Full Time Employee
(FTEs)Notes
#2
Item A-3 Community
Oriented Policing Svcs or
COPS Hiring Grant from
U.S. Dept. of Justice for 2
new Sergeants & 10 new
Officers FY 24-25
$1,285,642
in FY2026
For ongoing costs related
to hiring 2 new Sergeant
FTEs and 10 new Officers
in the Police Dept.
Ongoing costs include grant salary match plus vehicles,
supplies & equipment. After the 48 month grant period
ends, the estimated annual cost to retain the 12 police
officers is $2,071,325.
#2
Item A-4 Vehicles, Equip-
ment & Related Police
Officer costs not covered
by the Homeless Shelter
Cities State Mitigation
Grant FY24-25
$498,692 is
ongoing
For ongoing costs related
to the hiring of new
officers
Ongoing costs include ongoing salary increases, supplies,
body cameras, vehicles, and computers.
#1 & #2
D-7 Prosecutor’s Office
Changes since Budget
Amendment #1
(-$280,279)
back to General
Fund Balance
1 FTE Removed
City Prosecutor FTE
removed
Reverses a portion of budgetary impacts & actions
outlined in BAM#1, Item A-1.
TOTAL $6,207,570 38 total FTEs of which
15 are New FTEs
Note that of the total cost, $4.1 million would be needed
if the Homeless Shelter Cities State Mitigation grant is
not available for FY2026
Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description
11/14/2024 16:05 Rich Hendron Congrats on railroad crossing! It is great that our railroad crossings will be up-to-date and safe. Safety is very important!
11/15/2024 8:02 Anonymous Constituent quiet zone Whatever it takes to get the quiet zone done ASAP or I will have to move. This is affecting every aspect of my life.
11/15/2024 8:46 Thomas George Massive damage to foothills landscape Mr. Wharton, I'm sure you are aware of the incredible damage that is taking place in the foothills due to RMP's pole
upgrades. I am absolutely outraged that they can cause such destruction with seemingly no oversight. What can
be done to force them to use more ecologically friendly means for this project? The damage they are causing will
scar the landscape for decades or longer, not to mention they have destroyed many parts of the brand-new trail
system taxpayers have just funded. I understand they have an easement, but they are destroying one of SLCs
greatest treasures. Thank you, Thomas George Avenues Resident
11/15/2024 9:01 Therese Huhtala Edgehill Road concerns Council Member Wharton, I live on Edgehill Road and am aware about and share my neighbors’ concerns regarding
the RMP project on our street, and how it may impact safety, drainage, traffic, parking, services (i.e., snow
removal), erosion, etc. As your constituent, I wanted to send you a quick email in case this issue comes up during
today’s meeting. I am aware that some of our concerns were already partially addressed in an email/letter sent by
Deputy Director Stewart, and I plan to follow up with more formal correspondence to the Council as needed. Thank
you for your time, Therese Huhtala
11/15/2024 9:17 Beverly Cooper Foothills Destruction **Attachment 1 - 5 pages Who is minding the Foothills now? I assume it would be Salt Lake City and Public Lands in particular. This has to
stop immediately before more of the ecosystem is destroyed. There is no way this is reclaimable. These pictures
are from the ridge above Terrace Hills.
11/15/2024 9:56 Carleton DeTar Edgehill access road Dear Mr. Swander, Mr. Knoles, Chris Wharton, and Salt Lake Public Utilities management, We are residents and
home owners of a home at the corner of Little Valley Rd and Edgehill Rd. Recently the Rocky Mountain Power (RMP)
project contractor bulldozed a very steep dirt access road from the top of the former Edgehill dead-end up to the
water tank. Our neighbors learned from the contractor that the plan is to pave it and keep it permanently as an
access road to the water tank. We are displeased with the lack of public notice of these plans to make the access
road permanent and the absence of an opportunity to comment on that plan. We are fully aware of and support the
pole replacement and are willing to accept some degree of damage to our beloved foothills, which we visit daily.
We attended the Greater Avenues Community Council meeting on November 6 where RMP presented the plan with
an emphasis on restoration, and SLC Public Utilities was there to answer questions. There was no mention of a new
permanent access road, paved or not. We were told that everything was to be restored to a natural state. We feel
we have been misled. A new access road will encourage people to treat it as a trailhead. Edgehill road is narrow,
lacks adequate parking space, and was therefore deemed unsuitable as a trailhead in the new trails master plan.
There already is an access road to the water tank from the Terrace Hills trailhead with a much more reasonable
grade. Why create a new one? Apart from attracting more parking at the top of Edgehill Rd where space is
insufficient, we are concerned that the proposed impermeable road surface will contribute significantly to flooding
from rapid snow melt or heavy rain. We have had snow melt runoff from Edgehill Road flood the Little Valley Road
sidewalk and our property. We join with our Edgehill Road neighbors in asking the city and RMP to abandon plans to
turn the temporary RMP road into a permanent access road and, instead, to restore it to a natural state after the
RMP project is complete. Thank you, Carleton DeTar
Attachment 1 - page 1
Attachment 1 - page 2
Attachment 1 - page 3
Attachment 1 - page 4
Attachment 1 - page 5
Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description
11/15/2024 16:38 Melissa Lichtenstein Water Rate & Property Tax Increases Melissa called and wanted to share her feedback about the water rate increase through the stabilization fees, as
well as the propert taxes. She mentioned that it has placed a burden on her family and that she feels the message
being sent by the City is that they aren't welcome anymore. She also feels punished for paying off her home, so that
now she is unable to qualify for any assistance programs. She shared that her water bill is $102/mo. when she only
uses $8.36 of water.
11/18/2024 15:26 Daniel Patton Jordan River Fairpark District Rezone Hello Council, my name is Daniel Patton and I am a resident of the Fairpark neighborhood. As I look over the
agenda for the November 19th meeting I just want to respond to the questions that are being asked of Council.
10% open space is incredibly low, especially with the potential of 400 ft buildings. That number should at least be
doubled, and completely accessible to the public. There should absolutely be design standards for buildings
fronting streets and the river. Prioritizing pedestrian access to the river as well as across North Temple should be a
priority. Any building height over 200' should include even greater affordable housing and open space
requirements. As with the open space the affordable housing requirement at 10% for 80% AMI is way too low for a
development this size. I'd like to see a much higher percentage, with ranges of AMI from 60-80%. Overall housing
and affordability are incredibly important for this project and for the Fairpark community. This development may be
somewhat inevitable, but we need to demand better of LHM and all developers in our community. I also agree with
maximum setbacks and minimizing parking. This should be a neighborhood and development that encourages
people to not have cars. The developer, the City, and UTA need to collaborate for a transit plan, and upgrades to the
Trax (orange line) should be a priority. Thank you for your time.
11/18/2024 16:08 Alek Konkol Jordan River Fairpark District Comments -
Transportation and Bike Facilities
Hello, My name is Alek and I am a resident of District 4. I would like to voice general support for the Fairpark
renovations, provided we plan accordingly for non-private vehicle transportation. I primarily get around town via
bike and transit as my household does not have a car and I see this plan as a huge opportunity. The Jordan River
Trail has long been neglected by the city in this region. The trail is inconsistent in its form, disconnected from other
bikeways/transit, and unmaintained. The new plan is a huge opportunity for government and private interest to
rebuild the Jordan River Trail as it should be. I am from Boise and have spent many hours along the Boise River
Greenbelt. It is leaps and bounds better than what we have in SLC. It connects communities, provides recreation
opportunities, and serves as the spine of the city. We should be aiming, with the help of the new Fairpark district, to
make our Jordan River the crown jewel of our city. I suggest that the city council make concerted efforts for the
prioritization of the Jordan River Trail through this new district. The trail needs consistent maintenance funding for
litter pickup, snow removal, maintaining the trail surface, etc. These funds should come from tax dollars generated
by the new district. The Jordan River Trail could become so much more with the help of some private partnerships.
By investing in the trail, we could jumpstart the new development with sustainable, economically beneficial
transportation options. As we have seen throughout the city, state, and nation, investing in safe bicycling corridors
pays dividends. The 9 line has done wonders for the east side, now it's time to provide the same benefit for the west
side. I hope you take my comments into consideration. Thank you. Alek Konkol
Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description
11/18/2024 16:13 Josh Stewart Power District Needs to Be Child Friendly Dear Council, This Power district zoning needs more code requirements to make it child-friendly. Nearby
elementary schools have closed recently despite over a 1000 new units of housing in the last few years. 50% of all
new housing units built in this district (including apartments) should be required to be 3+ bedrooms to be more
child friendly in a city that is rapidly losing the child demographic. 15% of the land in this district should be child-
friendly parks, green space, and play areas should be required. Neighbourhood green spaces can be key to
enhancing both mental and physical well-being. Children with ready access to nature and green spaces have
reduced levels of stress and aggression, increased ability to concentrate, improved academic performance, and
reduced risk of obesity. Tim Gill, author of Urban Playground, said, “The truth is that the vast majority of urban
planning decisions and projects take no account of their potential impact on children and make no effort to seek
children’s views .… All too often, this is down to a simple lack of respect for children’s rights or abilities,” The
former mayor of Bogotá, Enrique Peñalosa, once said: “Children are a kind of indicator species. If we can build a
successful city for children, we will have a successful city for everyone.” Please help make the Power District the
most empowering district for children and create a bright future for Salt Lake City. Sincerely, Josh Stewart Architect
and Urban Design Salt Lake City
Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description
11/19/2024 11:57 Sally Cannon Reimagining Donner Park Dear Kira, Dan and Renato, I am a resident of St Mary’s neighborhood and live just two blocks from Donner Park. I
am writing to express my concerns about the proposed changes for the park. As you may now be aware, the main
issue that our neighborhood and frequent users of the park are interested in changing about the park is the
maintenance of the park. After speaking with Kira, I understand that any additional maintenance budget has to be
requested and approved through the city council yearly. I also understand that due to significant maintenance
needs at other city parks the city does not have the manpower to provide the maintenance that Donner Park
currently requires. Given this situation, if the proposed changes are made to the park it will need more care not
less and if not given that maintenance it will become an eyesore. Garden beds will require more maintenance due
to weed growth. Also, the grassy hill where you have proposed planting flowers and shrubs is arguably the most
used area of the park. Planting shrubs and flowers will take away the place where the neighborhood children and
families play ball, have soccer practice, hold neighborhood breakfasts, sled and watch fireworks. The artwork
proposal is particularly frustrating to me for several reasons. 1- Your survey results show that only 12% of those
invested in the park were interested in having art 2- You commissioned an artist and approved a design before
showing the neighborhood the proposed idea 3- You hired an artist outside the state of Utah rather than supporting
a local artist who may be invested in Utah history 4- You have already wasted mine and my neighbor’s tax money on
something we do not want and did not ask for 5- You are not representing our neighborhood and our interests by
making decisions without our input and statistics to back up your decisions 6-The art provides one more surface to
attract graffiti 7-The art will pose a safety issue as a person could crouch behind the pieces in the dark 8- The park
is used by neighborhood children who like to run and play ball on the open grass, the art and loss of grass will take
away the actual usage of the park. As a taxpayer I would rather lose the money you have already agreed to pay the
artist and not have the art. I would ask that you imagine the city coming into your neighborhood park where your
children played and “reimage” it in a way that made it unusable for all the events and activities that your family and
neighborhood enjoyed. Hopefully, this can help you understand our neighborhood’s frustration with this proposal
(which I do hope is still a proposal). Dan, your position as a city council member is to represent the interests of your
constituents; it is tiring to continue to watch our political leaders seemingly do what they want and what appears to
be for their own benefit or rather than listening to their constituents. When Axios asked why you want to be a City
Council member you said, “To make sure our residents’ concerns and voices are heard…”. At this time I would ask
that you hear and respond to the voices of this community and rethink the “reimagining” of Donner Park. I look
forward to meeting with you this Wednesday. Best Regards, Sally Cannon
Date/Time Opened Contact Name Subject Description
11/19/2024 12:26 Bernie Hart Mayor Wilson and Gov Cox... what's next Sent to the County, Salt Lake City copied....... Katherine and Wayne, The new bond failed. What are the options?
The voters and the homeless themselves seem to have absolutely no confidence in anyone's ability to deal with the
mental health and criminal justice aspects of homelessness. The uproar created every time someone tries to
locate a new shelter of any type anywhere reflects the public's confidence in our ability to deal with the problem.
And the reality is that they are right to be concerned. Every camper has been in a number of the current systems
mental health and addiction programs. If I gathered enough detailed surveys, my guess is we would find that the
unsheltered dealing with mental health issues had been in an average of 10 programs, an additional 10 institutions
including jail, HMHI and Valley like treatment programs and the addicted had been in detox and treatment
programs at least 7 times. We might also find that the average length of stay in a shelter is more than three years
for over 50% of residents. The shelters are now their "home", and those same folks have also been in an alarming
number of "let us help you" programs. Maybe... just maybe you all should open up the conversation to those who
have had some success dealing with these issues. Isn't it time we had the discussions that may make us
uncomfortable? For the betterment of the people living on our streets, the kids who are in the system and may end
up on the street and the public, I sure hope so. Bernie Hart Understanding Us Salt Lake City, Ut
11/19/2024 16:16 Eldon Montgomery General Comment - Redwood Road Compensate Drivers $10/Day for the traffic diversion. And oh wow! The horrible impatient drivers even 45 MPH in
20 zone. Even passing on the right and left. Item #2 Convict + imprison the drug users and dealers on the Jordan
River please.
11/19/2024 16:31 Tony Guzman General Comment Attn: Mayor/ & Engineer Staff c/o Salt Lake City sidewalks, +, streets. Please take a serious look at a sidewalk
across Rice Eccles Stadium/ U of U. It needs to be replaced like a block of cement protruding above ground level. I
crossed this block on my bike at high speed-downhill!! After I went flying off my bike, and ended up in the VA
Hospital with a fractured hip and arm. Please respond, THANK YOU! Tony Guzman
11/19/2024 16:35 Jennifer Madrigal General Comment - School Closure, Plans for
Land
I'm hoping for an update on the plans for the Riley Elementary land which borders my property - we're already
seeing trash-dumping & overnight stays & I don't want to closure to negatively impact my neighborhood. I also want
to know what is going to happen to the land so that I can make my own developments to my property. I will also put
in a quick 2 cents - I support Glendale High at this location, regardless of whether it can be opened as a full-sized
school. We don't need a fancy school for our kids, we need access to a school for the development of the future
leaders of our community! XOXO Thank you!