Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/12/2024 - Meeting Materials    Board of Directors of the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY AGENDA November 12, 2024 Tuesday 2:00 PM Council Work Room 451 South State Street, Room 326 Salt Lake City, UT  84111 SLCRDA.com BOARD MEMBERS: Alejandro Puy, Chair Darin Mano, Vice Chair Victoria Petro Chris Wharton Eva Lopez Chavez Dan Dugan Sarah Young In accordance with State Statute and City Ordinance, the meeting may be held electronically.  After 5:00 p.m., please enter the City & County Building through the main east entrance. This is a discussion among RDA Board Directors and select presenters. The public is welcome to listen, unless otherwise specified as a public comment period. Items scheduled may be moved and / or discussed during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance or availability of speakers. Item start times and durations are approximate and are subject to change at the Chair’s discretion. Generated: 12:27:37 Comments:A.   1.General Comments to the Board ~ 2:00 p.m.  5 min. The RDA Board of Directors will receive public comments regarding Redevelopment Agency business in the following formats: 1.Written comments submitted to the RDA Board offices: 451 South State Street, Suite 304, P.O. Box 145476, Salt Lake City, UT. 84114-5476. 2.Comments to the RDA Board of Directors. (Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for a public Hearing, as well as on any other RDA Business. Comments are limited to two minutes.)   B.Public Hearing - individuals may speak to the Board once per public hearing topic for two minutes, however written comments are always accepted:   1.Resolution: RDA Budget Amendment No.1 for Fiscal Year 2024-25 -  - The Board will accept public comment for a resolution that would amend the final budget of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City for Fiscal Year 2024-25. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments in the Redevelopment Agency’s budget, including proposed project additions and modifications, and staffing changes. The amendment includes allocating additional funding to the State Street commercial revolving loans program for an expanded public commercial daycare facility as part of the Liberty Corner affordable multifamily development which has a separate briefing.  C.Redevelopment Agency Business - The RDA Board of Directors will receive information and/or hold discussions and/or take action on:   1.Approval of Minutes ~ 2:05 p.m.  5 min. The Board will approve the meeting minutes of August 13, 2024.  2.Resolution: RDA Budget Amendment No.1 for Fiscal Year 2024- 25 ~ 2:10 p.m.  5 min. The Board will consider adopting a resolution that would amend the final budget of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City for Fiscal Year 2024-25. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments in the Redevelopment Agency’s budget, including proposed project additions and modifications, and staffing changes. The amendment includes allocating additional funding to the State Street commercial revolving loans program for an expanded public commercial daycare facility as part of the Liberty Corner affordable multifamily development which has a separate briefing. 3.Informational: 1410 West Indiana Avenue Tier 1 Pre-Disposition Property Report ~ 2:15 p.m.  15 min. The Board will receive a briefing about plans for the disposition of the property at approximately 1410 West Indiana Avenue in the 9-Line project area. The property will be developed as a retail or mixed-use project with a minimum of 8,000 square feet of retail space facing Indiana Avenue. A restrictive covenant requires any development on the property must include commercial use(s) on the ground floor of all principal buildings. The Westside Master Plan identifies the intersection as a neighborhood node suitable for ground-floor commercial and mixed-use developments of two or three stories tall.  4.Resolution: Sugar House S-Line Parcels Property Disposition to the Utah Transit Authority ~ 2:30 p.m.  15 min. The Board will receive a briefing and consider adopting a resolution authorizing a fully discounted conveyance of two Tier 2 properties at 2211 South 900 East and 1015 East Sugarmont Drive from the RDA to the Utah Transit Authority (UTA). Both of the properties are located within the expired Sugar House project area, adjacent to the S- Line streetcar, occupied by UTA equipment, and used exclusively in the UTA’s operation of the S-Line. 5.Resolution: Rio Grande District Vision and Implementation Plan Follow-up ~ 2:45 p.m.  20 min. The Board will receive a follow-up briefing and consider a resolution adopting the Rio Grande District Vision & Implementation Plan. The two-block area is located in the Depot District Project Area between 500 to 600 West and 200 to 400 South. The RDA owns approximately eleven acres in the Rio Grande District and an additional four acres near 600 West and 100 South. The Rio Grande District is envisioned to have new and reconstructed streets, public open spaces, upgraded utilities to allow for taller building heights, a shared parking structure, and a mix of land uses supporting transit-oriented development.  6. Informational: Rio Grande District Tier 1 Pre-Disposition Report for Properties at Approximately 580 West 300 South and 346 South 500 West ~ 3:05 p.m.  20 min. The Board will receive a briefing about plans for the disposition of the property at approximately 580 West 300 South in the Depot District project area. The RDA will file a plat to consolidate the multiple parcels and subdivide the land into two development blocks that are bisected/surrounded by new right-of-ways in accordance with the draft Rio Grande District Vision & Implementation Plan. Block D is proposed to be 1.65 acres with multifamily above-neighborhood ground floor uses. Block E would be 1.03 acres with a variety of commercial uses. A third property at approximately 346 South 500 West, identified as Block C, would be 1.25 acres with an adaptive reuse of an existing warehouse and new mixed-use development. The properties are currently zoned G-MU (Gateway-Mixed Use). The RDA is preparing a petition to rezone both properties to D4 (Downtown Secondary Business District) that would allow taller building heights. 7.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director TENTATIVE  5 min. Report of the Executive Director, including a review of information items, announcements, and scheduling items. The Board of Directors may give feedback or policy input. 8.Report and Announcements from RDA Staff TENTATIVE  5 min. The Board may review Board information and announcements. The Board may give feedback on any item related to City business, including but not limited to: •Project Updates; •Staffing Updates; and •Scheduling Items.  9.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair TENTATIVE  5 min. Report of the Chair and Vice Chair.   D.Written Briefings – the following briefings are informational in nature and require no action of the Board. Additional information can be provided to the Board upon request:   1.Informational: Redevelopment Agency Semi-Annual Property Report Written Briefing  - The Board will receive a written briefing of all Tier 1 and Tier 2 properties owned by the RDA, as per the Land Disposition Policy. The November 2024 report includes the description, address, parcel ID, size, zoning, and tier category of each property. In addition, the report details approximate acquisition date, current category of disposition, interim use and proposed permanent use for each property.   E. Adjournment   Consent – the following items are listed for consideration by the Board and can be discussed individually upon request.  A motion to approve the consent agenda is approving all of the following items: NONE.   F.Tentative Closed Session The Board will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session. A closed meeting described under Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including, but not limited to:  1.discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual;  2.strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation;  3.strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property:   (i)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or   (ii)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms;  4.strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if:   (i)public discussion of the transaction would:    (A)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or    (B)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms;   (ii)the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and<   (iii)the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale  5.discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and  6.investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. G.   CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 1:00 p.m. on Friday, November 8, 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. Item B1 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 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY TO:RDA Board of Directors FROM:Ben Luedtke, Senior Analyst DATE:November 12, 2024 RE: RDA Budget Amendment #1 of Fiscal Year 2025 MOTION 1 – CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING I move that the Board close the public hearing. Staff note: A follow-up briefing is scheduled immediately after the public hearing in case Board Members have any additional questions or discussions. The Board may consider adopting the Budget Amendment during the briefing or at a future meeting. MOTION 2 – CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING I move that the Board continue the public hearing to a future date. 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 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY TO:RDA Board of Directors FROM:Ben Luedtke, Senior Analyst DATE:November 12, 2024 RE: RDA Budget Amendment #1 of Fiscal Year 2025 MOTION 1 – ADOPT I move that the Board adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2025 final budget of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City only for items as shown on the motion sheet. Staff note: The Board does not need to read the individual items below; they are provided for reference. D-1: Reallocate State Street Project Area Funds from the Commercial Assistance Reserves Program Holding Account to the Commercial Revolving Loans Program ($1,239,049 one-time for a loan to Liberty Corner Daycare) Note that the Board previously approved $4.5 million for the same development ($2.8 million from the HDLP and $1.7 million from dormant HOME funds. This additional $1.2 million would provide most of a new loan of $1.6 million for an expanded daycare. This would bring the total City investment to $6.1 million MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT I move that the Board proceed to the next agenda item. Item C5 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 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY TO:RDA Board of Directors FROM:Ben Luedtke, Senior Analyst DATE:November 12, 2024 RE: Sugar House S-Line Streetcar Properties Disposition to the Utah Transit Authority MOTION 1 – ADOPT I move that the Board adopt a resolution authorizing the disposition of the properties to the Utah Transit Authority for zero dollars. Staff note: the two properties at approximately 2211 South 900 East and 1015 East Sugarmont Drive are adjacent to the S-Line and used by UTA in the streetcar’s operations. The total area is approximately a tenth-of-an-acre. MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT I move that the Board proceed to the next agenda item. STAFF REPORT BOARD OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY TO:RDA Board Members FROM: Jennifer Bruno and Cindy Gust-Jenson DATE: November 14, 2023 RE: Update on RDA Rio Grande Vision And Implementation plan PROJECT TIMELINE: Briefing: Nov 12, 2024 Potential Action: Dec 10, 2024 ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Redevelopment Agency advanced the Draft Rio Grande District Vision and Implementation Plan to the Legislative Branch (City Council acting in their role as the Redevelopment Agency Board) at the April 2024 board meeting. Staff note: This is a separate and distinct plan from what is sometimes referred to as “The Rio Grande Plan” which recommends undergrounding several train lines in the area, although some board members are interested in referencing those opportunities in this RDA plan. The RDA Board approved funding for this planning effort in late 2022, and has been briefed on the draft plan throughout the process, although it wasn’t determined until late in the process that there is a solid legal basis for the plan to be adopted by the Legislative Branch, rather than the having the plan be considered to be a fully Administrative plan. The Board also had several areas of concern and feedback relating to the draft version of the plan and shared those in April. As such, RDA staff has forwarded a resolution and transmittal with proposed adjustments to the plan based on RDA Board input. At the conclusion of the November discussion and with more clarity on how to adjust the draft plan and resolution, a revised version of the resolution and plan could be considered for adoption at the December board meeting. The following are areas of concern and ideas raised by Board Members are addressed in the administration’s transmittal in the following ways: 1. The Board would like to take legislative action on the Plan. The City Attorney’s Office drafted a resolution included as Attachment B, which – if adopted – would endorse the RDA’s utilization of the Plan to guide the redevelopment of the RDA-owned property within its scope. Page | 2 2. There is interest in adding content to the Plan that speaks to the opportunity of burying the heavy rails that run adjacent to the District. Similar to the approach taken in Connect SLC, Staff propose adding a section to Chapter 4, Mobility Network, to highlight the Rio Grande Plan concept. Draft language is included below for the Board’s consideration. The Rio Grande Plan The Rio Grande Plan (not to be confused with this District Plan) was developed by two advocates, a local engineer and an urban designer. The vision suggests the relocation of freight and Frontrunner rails into an underground trench to open up over 100 acres for development, restore the use of an historic train station, and solve train-related east-west barriers to mobility. In February 2023, Salt Lake City was awarded nearly $2 million from the U.S. Department of Transportation to study solutions for eliminating barriers caused by transportation infrastructure, and the train box concept is one option being studied. 3. There is concern that inclusion of the Green Loop project in the Plan will prematurely bind future Councils into taking specific related actions. The Plan considers the potential Green Loop concept to explore the level of increased mobility, green space, and recreational opportunities that it could bring to the Rio Grande District, if implemented. The Green Loop is not included in the RDA’s infrastructure plans, as it is a city initiative that is currently being led by Public Lands and Transportation. Staff propose to maintain references to the Green Loop, as it is already mentioned in adopted City Master Plans such as the Downtown Master Plan and Connect SLC. Potential additional questions/edits: - Some Board members expressed an interest in a more flexible concept of a linear park rather than referencing the Green Loop specifically (which is still in design development). It is referenced specifically in 78 places throughout the document. -Role Clarity/Expectation setting: o Section 3.2.1 The Green Loop, p. 50, includes as a standard “City Coordination and Approval: The street, park and utility design shall be in coordination and reviewed by City departments.” The Board may wish to discuss with the Administration whether similar language could be added in other sections, to enhance role clarity. o The Board may wish to discuss with the Administration whether it makes sense to add language to the plan that responsibility for Green Loop programming, safety, and security is still under discussion, and considering several other City departments already have roles in those areas in other City spaces. o Section 3.2.1, p. 52, lays out a robust level of programing and indicates that “The Green Loop may include but are not limited to the following events and activities." The Board may wish to ask how this programming is anticipated to be funded, and if additional language such as “subject to appropriation” language should be added to that section address the uncertainty of future funding availability and/or responsible party. 4. There is a desire to gain a better understanding of the “Governance Framework” section of the Plan, but concern that it calls for the delegation of the Board’s authority to a separate entity. Staff propose to fully delete pages 134 – 151 of the document, which includes the bulk of Chapter 6.2 (RDA Role in Rio Grande District) and all of Chapters 6.3 (Governance Framework) and 6.4 (Next Steps). This leaves chapters in place that speak to the Page | 3 vision, site, public realm, mobility network, land use and building design, phasing plan, and appendix. To address this concern further, the resolution notes that the Plan does not (in any way) replace or override the existing authority and discretion of the Administration or Board. Potential additional questions/edits: -Technical edit needed for consistency: Section 1.6 summarizes the content of the plan, and includes the following wording in relation to Chapter 6: Implementation: “describes….RDA’s role in governing the long-term success of the district including programming, funding and staffing." The Council may wish coordinate with the Administration on amending that, based upon the removal of several components. -Implementation/Phasing/Expectations o The Board may wish to add wording to the resolution clarifying that the plan is aspirational and subject to funding availability. The Thriving in Place adoption resolution includes the following wording: “The adoption of this plan serves to identify the goals and objectives identified within the plan, all of which are subject to future budget appropriations." Could this type of language be added, in addition to the language already proposed by the Attorney’s Office? o The Board may wish to provide policy guidance about how it would like to see programming and maintenance handled. Are there specific aspects of the plan that the Board would like to see the Administration prioritize at relates to implementation? -Role Clarity and Governance – Because the Administration is proposing to eliminate the governance section, the Board may wish to provide more formal feedback relating to governance and expectations for the role the RDA and other City departments will play in this development, either in the resolution, or in the plan itself: o For example: does the Board envision current City departments such as Economic Development and Public Services performing their standard roles in City spaces? o Are there funding or staffing principles the Board would like to communicate to RDA staff as it relates to balancing with other City needs and operating efficiently? o Is the expectation that the service level in this area would be higher than the service levels outside the plan area and will the open/public space areas be managed by the City or retained by the RDA? 5. Separate from the “Governance Framework” conversations, there is support for the RDA moving forward with the timely disposition of property in the District. The RDA has transmitted to the Board a Property Pre-Disposition Report for Development Blocks D and E. It is staff’s goal to publish the corresponding RFP in early January 2025, after the holidays have concluded. 6. A straw poll was taken to allow the RDA to publish the Plan without the “Governance Framework” section, until Board concerns are addressed. Staff have largely held back on promotion or distribution of the Plan (in any form), with the exception of using it to facilitate conversations with adjacent property owners related to District infrastructure design. Staff plans to publish a comprehensive project web page that hosts the Plan once it is endorsed by the Board. The Board may wish to discuss and straw poll each of the above items to provide policy guidance for RDA staff and so that the consultant can edit the plan as needed and/or as straw polled by a majority of the Board. Page | 5 POLICY QUESTIONS The Council, in their role as the RDA Board, may consider directing staff to follow-up on a few topic areas that apply citywide, and may result in ordinance amendments or policy documents to make the process more efficient. 1.Governance in general: The Council and Board may wish to determine whether to formally establish a written policy that specifies that the Salt Lake City Legislative Body does not support the establishment of governance structures that delegate authority to outside organizations. A policy or ordinance may be necessary to avoid re-work and confusion, particularly as there may be future discussions of “public-private- partnerships.” The Council and Board have stated their position verbally on a number of occasions, but government structures that would seem to delegate Legislative and Administrative authority are periodically suggested by consultants hired by City entities to address different project realities. o It is staff’s understanding that the Legislative Body is committed to using the existing municipal government structure, as identified in State Statute, to assure continued opportunities for public input, retain transparency and continue the role of City elected officials in making budget, policy and oversight decisions. o The Council and Board may wish to confer with the Administration and City Attorney’s Office about whether there may be value in working together to prepare background information and policy guidance that could be included as reference material in the contracting process (RFP’s, etc.) to provide some basic information about the form of government and any other information that would help to standardize the experience and make the process more efficient for consultants hired by various City departments. (For example: Duplicating functions in more than one City Department is generally avoided because it typically increases overhead and increases the potential for confusion, duplication and re-work.) o In relation to delegating elected official authority, several Board Members have requested a briefing on the structure of the Gallivan Center, based upon concerns about consistency with City interests. The Board may wish to identify the most workable aspects and the areas of difficulty in the City’s participation in existing alternate structures, including the Gallivan, the Arts Council Foundation and the Eccles Theatre. 2.Legislative adoption of long-term planning documents: In working with the Administration and City Attorney’s office on this topic, staff have noted several longer- term policy conversations that would be helpful to resolve, to inform approaches on long- term planning within all City departments. The Administration has expressed a willingness to work with the Council staff to identify and evaluate potential updates to the Council’s master plan ordinance to provide greater clarity and consistency across the City. The Council has specified that there is no intent to either encroach on Administrative authority, particularly within approved budgets, or prolong the adoption of planning documents, so those items will be at the forefront of further discussions on the processing of City plans. The goal is to make processing of future plans more efficient, including the following interests areas: - Address future zoning and land use, or guide future growth and development - Require future budget appropriations or significant ordinance changes - Propose a new/different role for the City or a City Department Page | 6 - Create a new function for the City, or expand public expectations - Expand or contract the City’s role in relation to other governmental entities - Include a significant service level change - Anticipate a significant change in City policy - Anticipate the delegation of authority currently vested with elected officials - Involve significant changes in use for major City assets - Will be used as the basis for future budget requests 3.Role of the RDA within the context of the City: Solidifying a clear and concise definition of the relationship between the RDA and the City has long been a goal of the Legislative Branch. Continuing that conversation in order to establish that understanding in writing will help future conversations proceed more efficiently.