Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/21/2025 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WORK SESSION January 21, 2025 Tuesday 3:00 PM Council meetings are held in a hybrid meeting format. Hybrid meetings allow people to join online or in person at the City & County Building. Learn more at www.slc.gov/council/agendas. Council Work Room 451 South State Street, Room 326 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 SLCCouncil.com 3:00 PM Work Session Or immediately following the 2:00 PM Community Reinvestment Agency Meeting 7:00 pm Formal Meeting Room 315 (See separate agenda) Welcome and public meeting rules In accordance with State Statute and City Ordinance, the meeting may be held electronically. After 5:00 p.m., please enter the City & County Building through the main east entrance. The Work Session is a discussion among Council Members and select presenters. The public is welcome to listen. Items scheduled on the Work Session or Formal Meeting may be moved and / or discussed during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance or availability of speakers. The Website addresses listed on the agenda may not be available after the Council votes on the item. Not all agenda items will have a webpage for additional information read associated agenda paperwork. Generated: 10:08:08 Note: Dates not identified in the project timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. Item start times and durations are approximate and are subject to change. Work Session Items   1.Informational: Winter Shelter Plans Update ~ 3:15 p.m.  15 min. The Council will receive an update from the Administration on the State homeless winter shelter plans. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Recurring Briefing Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   2.Ordinance: Zoning Map Amendment at Approximately 3052 East Emigration Canyon Road ~ 3:30 p.m.  20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a proposal that would amend the zoning of the properties at approximately 3052 East Emigration Canyon from FR-2/21,780 (Foothills Residential District) to RMF-75 (High-Density Multi-Family Residential District). The proposal would increase the development potential of the site. The Planning Commission forwarded a negative recommendation. The project is located within Council District 6. Petitioner: ANA Enterprises, representing the property owner. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 21, 2025 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, February 4, 2025 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, February 18, 2025 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, March 4, 2025   3.Informational: Downtown Alliance Updates ~ 3:50 p.m.  30 min. The Council will receive a briefing from the Downtown Alliance about program updates and developments in the downtown area. The Downtown Alliance is funded by a special assessment of commercial properties downtown to pay for economic promotion activities and holiday lighting. The assessment was originally established in 1991 and has been reviewed, adjusted, and renewed every three years. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 21, 2025 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   4.Ordinance: Budget Amendment No.3 for Fiscal Year 2024- 25 ~ 4:20 p.m.  30 min. The Council will receive a briefing about Budget Amendment No. 3 for the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and modifications. The proposed amendment includes infrastructure development on the Fleet Block, several vehicles for various City operations, including a Justice Bus (mobile courtroom), and protecting the Great Salt Lake watershed, among other items. For more information visit tinyurl.com/SLCFY25. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 21, 2025 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, January 21, 2025 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, February 4, 2025 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, February 18, 2025   5.Resolution: Collective Bargaining for the Salt Lake City Public Library Board ~ 4:50 p.m.  20 min. The Council will receive a briefing about approving the collective bargaining resolution adopted by the Salt Lake City Public Library on December 16, 2024. The resolution would enable the Library to begin a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) process with a union following a vote by employees to form a union formally. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 21, 2025 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, February 4, 2025   6.Informational: Emerald Ribbon Action Plan Updates ~ 5:10 p.m.  20 min. The Council will receive an update from the Public Lands Department about the Emerald Ribbon Action Plan. This plan will guide the implementation of capital investment, operations, and maintenance along the City’s 10 miles of the Jordan River Corridor. For more information visit emeraldribbonplan.com. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 21, 2025 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   7.Informational: Green Loop Guidelines and Next Steps ~ 5:30 p.m.  30 min. The Council will receive a briefing about a request from the Administration to release $3.1 million of Capital Improvement Project (CIP) funding related to the planned Green Loop project. These funds would be used to create overall project development and public space management guidelines, create a conceptual design of the Green Loop section on 200 East from 350 South to 450 South, and design the layout for the Green Loop section on 500 West from 600 South to 900 South. For more information visit https://tinyurl.com/SLCGreenLoop. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 21, 2025 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   8.Straw Poll: Ivory University House ~ 6:00 p.m.  10 min. The Council will consider a straw poll accepting the terms of the Ivory University House. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 21, 2025 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a   9.Advice and Consent: City Recorder – Keith Reynolds ~ 6:10 p.m.  10 min. The Council will interview Keith Reynolds prior to considering appointment as the City Recorder. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, January 21, 2025 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, January 21, 2025   Standing Items   10.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair -  - Report of Chair and Vice Chair.    11.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director -  - Report of the Executive Director, including a review of Council information items and announcements. The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to City Council business, including but not limited to: •Utah Renewable Communities Update; and •Scheduling Items.    12.Tentative Closed Session -  - The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session. A closed meeting described under Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including, but not limited to: a. discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; b. strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; c. strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; d. strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; e. strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; f. discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and g. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act.    CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, January 16, 2025, 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. 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:January 21, 2025 RE: 3052 East and 3150 East Emigration Canyon Road Zoning Map Amendment PLNPCM2022-01106 The Council will be briefed about a proposal to amend the zoning map for two parcels at 3052 East and 3150 East Emigration Canyon Road in City Council District Six from their current FR-2/21,780 (Foothills Residential) zoning to RMF-75 (High/Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential). The petitioner’s stated objective is to construct a multi-family residential building with 199 units and underground parking. Current FR-2 zone only allows detached single-family dwellings with a minimum 21,780 square foot lot size. Approximately 12 homes could be built on the site under existing zoning. Combined, the currently vacant and undeveloped parcels are slightly less than 6 acres. They are located at the mouth of Emigration Canyon, east of Hogle Zoo and Rotary Glen Park. Condominium buildings and a large radio tower are located up a steep slope to the south and west of the subject site. Development farther to the south and west is comprised primarily of single-family residential. Access to the site would be from Emigration Canyon Road rather than from neighborhood streets. Planning staff and City departments and divisions have concerns with the proposed development which are discussed in Attachment F (pages 82-87 of the Planning Commission staff report) and summarized in the additional information section below. The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal at its June 26, 2024 meeting and held a public hearing at which approximately a dozen people spoke or had their comments read expressing opposition to the proposed rezone. Concerns cited include inconsistencies with City plans, the property’s location in a floodplain, potential environmental impact, the ability of Sunnyside Avenue and Emigration Canyon Road to handle additional traffic, cyclist safety, emergency egress for canyon residents, strain on the water Item Schedule: Briefing: January 21, 2025 Set Date: February 4, 2025 Public Hearing: February 18, 2025 Potential Action: March 4, 2025 Page | 2 system, and density of the proposed project. Planning staff recommended and the Commission voted unanimously to forward a negative recommendation to the Council. Goal of the briefing: Review the proposed zoning map amendments, determine if the Council supports moving forward with the proposal. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to discuss the benefits of additional housing versus challenges of developing on the subject parcels and impact to the area. 2. The Council may wish to ask the petitioner if the proposed units would be for rent or sale, and if any would be available for those earning less than area median income. Area zoning map with the subject parcels outlined in yellow. Image courtesy of Salt Lake City Planning Division ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Council is only being asked to consider rezoning the property. 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. Page | 3 City Department and Division Comments Transportation It is the Transportation Division’s opinion that the zoning map amendment is inappropriate due to sight distance issues for vehicles turning left (westbound) out of the proposed development. There is a nearby curve in the road east of the subject properties which would cause difficulty for drivers to see westbound vehicles. Transportation is working on preliminary designs for a roundabout requested by UTA at the intersection of Crestview Drive and Emigration Canyon Road. This would make it easier for buses to turn around and could provide infrastructure for public transit at the location. Fire Department The Fire Department said an access road of sufficient size to accommodate fire apparatus and include a turnaround would be required. The department reviewed a site plan for the proposed project and noted there are several issues that would need to be resolved, including a likely requirement for a fire pump to provide minimum water flow in the event of a fire. Public Utilities The Public Utilities Department has significant concerns with the proposed development for this site. They noted there is inadequate utility infrastructure with the nearest sewer main 700 feet away, which would require an extension to connect. In addition, there are concerns about working within the floodplain, compliance with the Riparian Corridor Overlay, and off-site infrastructure enhancements that would be required for a development at this location. Public Lands The Public Lands Department is evaluating a potential extension of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail between Lakeline Drive and Emigration Canyon. A preferred scenario would connect the trail to Rotary Glen Park through an easement on one of the subject parcels. It is early in the trail design process and no discussions have happened between Public Lands and the property owner about a possible easement. Public Lands is also designing an improved and expanded trailhead on the north side of Emigration Canyon across from the subject parcels. Included in the design is a new crosswalk at Crestview Drive and Emigration Canyon Road for increased safety for residents of a potential development on the site and other users of area trails. KEY CONSIDERATIONS Planning staff identified five key considerations related to the proposal which are found on pages 4-8 of the Planning Commission staff report and summarized below. For the complete analysis, please see the staff report. Consideration 1 – Existing General Plan Policies for the Area The subject parcels are within the East Bench Master Plan area. Planning staff reviewed the proposed zoning map amendment and how it meets goals and policies in the plan. The plan notes that low-density residential is appropriate in areas with sensitive natural features, and medium-density (2-3 story townhome or apartment) developments are more appropriate closer to Foothill Drive. The plan calls for new development in areas with adequate infrastructure in place including transit and Page | 5 transportation. As noted above, preliminary design work is being done for a roundabout near the proposed development, but it is unknown when the roundabout might be completed. Until that time, the nearest bus stop is approximately 1.25 miles away, on Arapeen Drive by the Post Office. It is Planning Staff’s opinion that the zoning map amendment generally does not align with goals or policy statements in the East Bench Master Plan. Consideration 2 – FR-2/21,780 (Foothills Residential) to RMF-75 (High-Density Residential Comparison) Key differences between the current FR-2 and proposed RMF-75 include building height and density, permitted land uses, as well as the purpose of each zone and where they are appropriate. A table with additional information on the two zoning districts is included later in the report. FR-2 zoning permits single detached homes with a maximum height of 28 feet and minimum lot size of 21,780 square feet. Planning staff estimates approximately 12 single-family homes could be built on the site, but constraints including the Riparian Corridor Overlay setbacks and slopes exceeding 30% would necessitate a planned development to achieve that number of units. Daycares and small group homes are also permitted uses in this zone. RMF-75 is high-density zoning with a maximum building height of 75 feet. Multi-family developments in this zone on lots larger than one acre permit one unit per 500 square feet of lot area. Planning staff estimates 335 units could conceivably be constructed on the subject site. Developments with 200 or more units would require a second fire access road. The petitioner’s current plan is to construct a development with 199 dwelling units. Permitted uses in the RMF-75 zone include multi-family residential, small congregate care facility or group home, single-family (attached or detached), and nursing care facility among others. The FR-2 purpose statement says: The purpose of the FR-2/21,780 Foothills Residential District is to promote environmentally sensitive and visually compatible development of lots not less than twenty one thousand seven hundred eighty (21,780) square feet in size, suitable for foothills locations as indicated in the applicable community Master Plan. The district is intended to minimize flooding, erosion, and other environmental hazards; to protect the natural scenic character of foothill areas by limiting development; to promote the safety and well being of present and future residents of foothill areas; to protect wildlife habitat; and to ensure the efficient expenditure of public funds. The RMF-75 purpose statement: The purpose of the RMF-75 High Density Multi-Family Residential District is to provide an environment suitable for high density multi-family dwellings. This district is appropriate in areas where the applicable Master Plan policies recommend a maximum density less than eighty five (85) dwelling units per acre. This district includes other uses that are typically found in a multi- family residential neighborhood of this density for the purpose of serving the neighborhood. Such uses are designed to be compatible with the existing scale and intensity of the neighborhood. The standards for the district are intended to provide for safe and comfortable places to live and play, promote sustainable and compatible development patterns and to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood. It is Planning staff’s opinion the proposed RMF-75 zone is not appropriate at this site. Consideration 3 – Development Constraints As discussed above, there are significant development constraints on the property. The City code Page | 6 restriction on developing or disturbance of slopes greater than 30% and a required 100-foot setback from Emigration Creek’s high-water line limit the buildable area of the site to approximately 40,000 square feet, or 15% of the total 262,780 square feet of the property. Planning staff stated, “Navigating these challenges is conceivable, but accommodating the proposed density is likely to impose significant impacts on the site.” Consideration 4 – Traffic Study and Impacts The Transportation Division requested the applicant conduct a traffic study for the site which is included in Attachment B (pages 17-73 of the Planning Commission staff report) to assess potential impact a development and increased density would have in the area. After reviewing the study, the Transportation Division determined an additional acceleration lane for left turns (westbound) out of the site would be necessary. This is due to a curve in the road discussed above that would make it difficult for drivers coming down the canyon to see vehicles exiting the proposed development. Planning noted it is conceivable the challenges adding an acceleration lane to the road could be overcome, but there is no guarantee the lane would receive necessary approvals. Planning recommends an additional traffic study if the Council considers approving the rezone petition. Additional analysis would determine if the reported traffic volumes were typical given that the study was conducted during a non-peak season and day. Consideration 5 –Public Opinion and Neighborhood Concerns The Planning Division received significant public input and concern about the proposed zoning map amendment. Nearly all the comments Planning received are in opposition to the rezone, citing concerns like those expressed at the Planning Commission public hearing discussed above. Comments received by Planning up to the June 26, 2024 Planning Commission meeting are included in Attachment G (pages 88- 321) of the Planning Commission staff report. Attachment D (pages 77-78) of the Planning Commission staff report includes a table comparing the zoning districts. A portion of the table is replicated here for convenience. Please see the report for the complete table. FR-2 (Current)RMF-75 (Proposed) Building Height 28 feet.75 feet. Setbacks Front: Average of block face or a minimum of 20 feet. Interior side yard: 20 feet. Corner side yard: 20 feet or average of block face. Rear: 40 feet. Front: 25 feet, except for single- family attached or detached is 15 feet. Interior side yard: 15 feet, except single-family attached or detached is 4 feet. Corner side yard: 25 feet, except single-family attached or Page | 7 detached is 15 feet. Rear yard: 25% of lot depth but need not exceed 30 feet. Lot Minimums 21,780 square feet.Single-family detached: 2,000 square feet. Single-family attached and twin-home: 1,500 square feet. Two-family: 3,000 square feet. Lot Width 100 feet.16-100 feet depending on use. Building Coverage 25%60% Analysis of Standards Attachment E (pages 79-81) 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. Does not comply Whether a proposed map amendment furthers the specific purpose statements of the zoning ordinance. Does not comply The extent to which a proposed map amendment will affect adjacent properties Partially complies Whether a proposed map amendment is consistent with the purposes and provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. Does not comply The adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including, but not limited to, roadways, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection, schools, stormwater drainage systems, water supplies, and wastewater and refuse collection. Does not comply PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Page | 8 • December 15, 2022 – Assigned to Krissy Gilmore, Senior Planner. • December 16, 2022 – o Early engagement notice emailed to East Bench Community Council. o Mailed notice sent to property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the property. o Proposed zoning amendment posted to the Planning Division’s webpage as an online open house. • January 4, 2023 – Mailed notice resent to property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the property due to an error on the original mailing. • January 18, 2023 – Applicant presented to the East Bench Community Council. • June 26, 2024 – Planning Commission public hearing. The Commission voted 5:0 to forward a negative recommendation to the City Council. • June 28, 2024 – Ordinance requested from the Attorney’s Office. • July 16, 2024 – Ordinance received from City Attorney’s Office. • August 13, 2024 – Transmittal received in City Council Office. Page | 1 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY25 TO:Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke, Kira Luke, Austin Kimmel, Sylvia Richards, and Allison Rowland Budget and Policy Analysts DATE: January 21, 2025 RE: Budget Amendment Number 3 of Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 Budget Amendment Number Three includes 20 proposed amendments with $21,891,545 in revenues and $21,881,787 in expenditures of which $3,809,861 would come from General Fund Balance. The amendments are across six funds with two new full time employee positions proposed for IMS. Most expenses in this budget amendment are housekeeping items found in section D. The amendments also include three new initiatives in section A and additional housekeeping and grant related items, and one donation-related item. There is one Council-added item at the end of this staff report in section I. Fund Balance As confirmed by the auditors as part of the annual comprehensive financial report, updated fund balance numbers are summarized in the table on page three of this staff report. Assuming all items are adopted as proposed in this budget amendment, the General Fund Balance is estimated to be 21.37% which is $40,257,199 above the 13% minimum target. Fund Balance typically increases after the annual comprehensive financial report. This can be caused by unspent appropriations for operations lapsing to Fund Balance and revenues coming in higher than budget. While the increased General Fund Balance is positive for the City’s fiscal position, it’s important to note that the annual budget has used an escalating amount of one-time General Fund Balance revenues to fill the annual budget structural deficit. The chart below was provided by the Finance Department to show how much General Fund Balance was used in the past seven fiscal years. Note the City’s current fiscal year is FY2025 so the FY2026 column is only for discussion purposes to show the impact of the trend continuing. The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration policy goals for the use of General Fund Balance in the next annual budget such as whether reducing the reliance on one-time funding to fill the structural deficit. Project Timeline: 1st Briefing: January 21, 2025 2nd Briefing (if needed) & Public Hearing: Feb. 4, 2025 Potential Adoption Vote: February 18, 2025 Page | 2 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 #3 are adopted as proposed by the Administration, then the FY2026 annual budget would need an additional $173,484 to cover new ongoing costs. The total new ongoing costs from Budget Amendments 1 through 3 would be $6,381,054. 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 A-2: Request for 1 Full-time Cybersecurity Engineer I The Administration is requesting a straw poll from the Council on the Cybersecurity Engineer I FTE. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The chart below presents General Fund Projected Revenues for FY 2025. Based on revenue data across the first part of the fiscal year, it is projected that revenues will be realized at approximately $4.5 million beyond the FY 2025 Adopted Budget. Page | 3 UPDATED Fund Balance Chart The chart below shows fund balance numbers updated after the Administration’s transmittal. The City’s annual comprehensive financial audit is progressing. The auditors have completed the Fund Balance portion which is summarized in the chart below. Page | 4 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 opening budget 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 Impact Fee Unallocated “Available to Spend” Balances and Refund Tracking The table below is current as of November 8, 2024. Impact fees must be encumbered or spent within six years of the City receiving them. Expired impact fees must be returned to the entity who paid them with interest over the intervening six years. Type Unallocated Cash “Available to Spend”Next Refund Trigger Date $ Expiring in FY2027 Fire $437,203 More than two years away - Parks $3,931,722 August 2026 $6,893,768 Police $1,515,483 More than two years away - Transportation $2,857,175 August 2026 $2,691,888 Note: Encumbrances are an administrative function when impact fees are held under a contract Note: to expedite the processing of this staff report, staff has included the Administration’s descriptions from the transmittal for some of these items. Section A: New Items A-1: Rescope Vacancy Savings in Public Lands for Vehicles, Equipment and Events ($285,800 one- time rescope of which $188,700 goes to the Fleet Fund) The Administration is requesting the reallocation of $285,800 from Public Lands personal services budget from attrition and vacancy savings generated from full-time positions through the first six months of the fiscal year. It is proposed that the funds be used for capital equipment purchases and an increase in contracted operations costs as follows: 1.16-foot-Wide Area Mower $138,500 – The transmittal indicates 36% of the department’s large area mowers are between 10-17 years old and need to be replaced; however, Fleet does not plan to replace them at this time because of lack of funding. They bought two mowers last year and would like to stagger future purchases to build a more dependable equipment pool. 2.Utility Task Vehicle (UTV) $23,000 – During a routine patrol along the northern section of the Jordan River Parkway, a newer member of the Park Ranger team drove a UTV to a portion of the trail that was too narrow for a u-turn. In attempting to make a “k’”turn, the UTV ended up in the river. Although standard recovery procedures were followed, the UTV was damaged beyond repair and needs to be replaced. Policy Question: The Council may wish to ask whether the park rangers will be provided additional training on UTV’s. 3.Two Wide Area Mower Trailers $27,200 – This is a request for two large trailers needed to transport the mowers from Public Lands to various locations throughout the City. Page | 5 The Administration is requesting an additional amount of $97,100 from personnel to operations for the following items: 4.July Drone Shows $50,000 – This is a request to increase the number of drones from 150 to 300 to be more in line with what other cities are providing. This increase would allow the city to enhance its productions and keep Salt Lake City’s shows at Liberty Park and Jordan Park competitive. 5.Restroom Septic Tank Pumping – This is a $30,000 request for septic tank pumping at Washington Park in Parley’s Canyon. Invoices from the contractor were delayed such that the city is paying 2024 invoices in 2025. The increase in park reservations resulted in additional use and additional gallons needing to be pumped. 6.Flatbed Electric Cart – This is a request to use $17,100 from personal services to operations to purchase a flatbed electric cart used for landscaping and tree watering. An existing electric cart was stolen from the Jordan Park greenhouse and damaged beyond repair. A-2: Request for Two New IMS Positions; 1 Full-time Cybersecurity Engineer I Position and transitioning one Part-time Graphic Design Position to a Full-Time position ($85,242 from IMS Fund Balance then ongoing) The Information Management Services (IMS) Department is requesting funding and support for two positions: a cybersecurity engineer, and the conversion of an existing part time graphic design position to full time. The funding request is for a partial year of the cybersecurity position, with an ongoing annual cost estimate of $173,483.60, which would be funded from the citywide allocations to IMS in FY26. The department has requested a straw poll for the cybersecurity position. Funding for the graphic design position is expected to be absorbed by eliminating other part time positions, requiring no additional allocation in the FY25 budget. Staff has requested further information on what positions will be eliminated, as well as any negative impacts if the position was not added until the FY26 budget. That information will be provided to the Council as it becomes available. In recent budgets, the City has moved towards consolidating citywide media and engagement positions in the IMS Media and Engagement team, which continues to see an increasing workload demand. Based on the Budget Amendment #2 vacancy report, IMS currently has only one vacant FTE position, with $7,906 of vacancy savings available. A-3: Withdrawn Prior to Transmittal A-4: Fleet Block Infrastructure Development and Anticipated 1-Acre Property Sale ($3.9 million one-time from the Surplus Land Fund to CIP) This request would transfer $3,900,000 from the Surplus Property Account to a CIP account for constructing public infrastructure in the Fleet Block. The transfer is linked to the anticipated sale of about a 1-acre parcel, which is expected to be ~$3,900,000. $1,370,916 will remain in the Surplus Property Account, and the property sale proceeds will backfill once the sale closes. The sale of the subject property includes requirements for new housing, including family-sized units and affordable at 80% AMI, as well as commercial space for non-profits and local businesses. Once the funding is available in the CIP account, the administration expects the funds to cover the design and construction of midblock streets that will bisect the block. The administration anticipates the funds will cover the midblock streets and will be designed within the allocated funding. Additional infrastructure beyond what these funds provide will be requirements for the developer partners selected in the upcoming RFQ. Policy Question: - The Council may wish to ask the administration to expand on how it anticipates the sale of the subject property and the stated requirements align with its overall vision of the Fleet Block. Section D: Housekeeping Items D-1: Withdrawn Prior to Transmittal Page | 6 D-2: Salt Lake City Athletic Complex ($220,412 one-time rescope from CIP) $220,412 is being requested for upgrades to the Salt Lake City Sports Complex at 645 S. Guardsman Way. The funding is left over from the recent roof replacement, which was completed under budget. Amounts requested are the City's 50% share of the need, per the cost-sharing agreement with Salt Lake County. - $79,128 is requested for upgrading the ice control system, which maintains the ice temperature and consistency, and gives remote monitoring alerts. - $47,565 is requested for an ammonia viper drive, which is a component of the refrigeration system that minimizes power spikes and improves efficiency. The existing component is 14 years old, exceeding the typical life expectancy of 10-12 years, and is failing. - $72,977 is requested to upgrade the controls that include an ammonia detection system that failed inspection. In 2024, after the failed inspection, the County decided to replace the controls. - The remaining funding (approximately $20,743) is proposed for studying and designing a remedy for a groundwater filtration issue in the facility, which is causing a persistent leak, water damage, and corrosion in utility spaces. D-3: Rescope Road Marking Maintenance Funds to Purchase a Utility Task Vehicle for Bike Lane Snow Plowing ($35,000 rescope one-time to the Fleet Fund) The Public Services Department is requesting to reallocate $35,000 from their road marking budget to the Fleet Fund for a new Utility Task Vehicle (UTV) for snow removal in protected bike lanes (PBLs). The department anticipates no reduction in the road marking service levels. PBLs are priority level one in the City's snow removal plan, and considered a previously underfunded asset. The UTV would also be used in the off seasons by the Traffic Markings and Signs maintenance crew. Staff Note: Items D-4 through D-7 are follow up housekeeping items. The Council received a presentation from the Transportation Division and approved the grant funding in Budget Amendment #2. The four items below would transfer the funding to the CIP fund for construction and ensure the funding does not lapse to Fund Balance at the end of fiscal year. D-4: TTIF 200 South Transit Corridor Project ($1,800,000 one-time to CIP Fund) This amendment will transfer budget from the Misc. Grants fund to the appropriate CIP fund in the amount of $1,800,000 for the purpose of completing the 200 South Transit Corridor project. 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. D-5: TTIF 400 South Multi Use Trail ($6,356,000 one-time to CIP Fund) This budget amendment is to move grant funding approved in BA #2 in the amount of $6,356,000 to the appropriate CIP fund for the purpose of completing the 400 South multi use trail. UDOT and Salt Lake City 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. D-6: TTIF West Temple Bike Transit Connections ($1,326,000 one-time to CIP Fund) This budget amendment will transfer grants funds approved in budget amendment #2 in the amount of $1,326,000 to the appropriate CIP fund for the purpose of completing the West Temple Bike Transit Connections. West Temple Bike Transit Connections will add physically separated bike lanes, improve pedestrian crossings and narrow pedestrian crossing distances with a mix of curb extensions and refuge islands. D-7: TTIF Westpointe/Jordan Meadows Neighborhood Byway ($900,000 one-time to CIP Fund This budget amendment is to move the grant award approved in budget amendment #2 in the amount of $900,00 to the appropriate CIP fund for the purpose of completing the Westpointe/Jordan Neighborhood Byway. Page | 7 D-8: Compliance Vehicle Replacement from Compliance Division’s Operational budget ($35,000 one-time to the Fleet Fund) In September of 2024, a City employee was involved in an accident while driving one of the Compliance vehicles which led to the total loss of the vehicle. Police officers were unable to determine who was at fault. Since the accident, the division has been using one of the City’s loaner cars from Fleet. The Administration is requesting funding to replace the vehicle using funding from the Compliance Division’s budget to help maintain enforcement efficiency and capabilities. D-9: TTIF Bicycle Lanes Capitol Hill ($406,102 one-time in the CIP Fund) This request would transfer $406,102 from the UDOT grant award associated with E-2: TTIF Bicycle Lanes Capitol Hill to the appropriate CIP fund to repave Main Street from North Temple to 300 North with buffered or protected bike lanes in both directions. Note: the administrative transmittal states the project would repave Main Street from South Temple to 300 North, but staff has since clarified that it should instead list North Temple. The administration is also exploring a future project to work with UDOT to add protected bike lanes on Columbus Street from 300 North to the existing bike lanes on Victory Road. It is not yet fully designed, but the project will likely remove travel lane(s) in either direction to provide enough space for cyclists. This portion of Main Street currently has four travel lanes (two lanes in both directions), and all roadways north of 300 North have one lane in each direction. The bicycle lanes are expected to provide a preferrable alternative to biking on State Street. Policy Question: - The Council may wish to ask the administration to elaborate on its preferred street typology on this portion of Main Street and ask whether it could lead to increased traffic on State Street or any of the other surrounding neighborhood streets leading towards and from Capitol Hill. - The Council may wish to ask how this project fits into the Capital Hill Livable Streets traffic calming project and potential impacts to State Street and other surrounding neighborhood streets. D-10: Streets Impact Fee Excess Capacity Reimbursement to the General Fund ($3,904,861 one- time from the CIP Fund to the General Fund) This is a request for Excess Capacity Reimbursement to be paid out of Streets Impact Fees to the General Fund in the amount of $3,904,861. It would also transfer these funds to streets impact fees to change the funding source of existing CIP project appropriations from streets impact funded to General Fund funded CIP Projects. These changes will allow the City to comply with the Impact Fee Act, the Impact Fee Facilities Plan, and to more efficiently utilize restrictive funding sources. The result of the eligibility of these funds has also resulted in the need to pay Streets Impact Fees interest of ~ $50,218 from Streets Impact Fee Funds. This item helps the City avoid refunding impact fees. D-11: Budget Amendment No. 1 Item I-6 Reversal: Consultant Services to Assist with City Prosecutor's Office Transition ($95,000 one-time back to General Fund Balance) This amendment is to reverse a Council added amendment item from budget amendment number one that funded $95,000 for consulting services to help with the Salt Lake City Prosecutor’s Office’s transition from working with the County Prosecutor’s Office to an independent office arrangement. Since the City’s Prosecutor’s Office is no longer moving from the County offices, the funding is no longer needed. Section E: Grants Requiring No Staff Resources E-1: Great Salt Lake Watershed Property Acquisition ($2,226,195 one-time grant award) This budget amendment recognizes the City's funding availability from the Great Salt Lake Watershed Enhancement Trust in the amount of $2,226,195 for a land purchase. If successfully acquired, the property will be preserved and restored for wetland conservation purposes as part of a broader Great Salt Lake Shoreline Preservation initiative. The City is negotiating the purchase and, per the agreement with the Great Salt Lake Watershed Enhancement Trust, has two years to contract. The City will not receive the grant award until it is under contract with the landowner. Staff notes: - The transmittal document incorrectly lists the National Audubon Society as the grantor. The grant is an award pursuant to the state-appropriated Great Salt Lake Watershed Enhancement Trust. - The transmittal also states Salt Lake City will be the ultimate land manager of the property, but the administration has shared this has not yet been determined. E-2: TTIF Bicycle Lanes Capitol Hill ($406,102 one-time Misc. Grant Fund) Page | 8 Staff note: this item is associated with item D-9: TTIF Bicycle Lanes Capitol Hill. Please refer to D-9 for additional information. This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability UDOT grant award in the amount of $406,102 to repave Main Street from North Temple to 300 North with buffered or protected bike lanes in both directions. Note: the administrative transmittal states the project would repave Main Street from South Temple to 300 North, but staff has since clarified that it should instead name North Temple. The administration is also exploring a future project to work UDOT to add bike lanes on Columbus Street from 300 North to the existing bike lanes on Victory Road. Section F: Donations F-1: Donation to Create a Justice Bus as a Mobile Courtroom ($63,675 one-time in Donation Fund) The Utah Bar Foundation has awarded the Justice Court a donation in the amount of $63,674 to specifically purchase and outfit a transit cargo bus as a Justice bus. This donation will enhance and expand the Justice Court’s previous request for a van, which purchase was on hold, pending the Council’s approval of using the donation towards the Justice bus concept. (The Council previously approved $62,000 for the Justice Court van.) The Utah Bar Foundation introduced Ohio’s Justice bus concept to the Justice Court. The City’s Justice Court reached out to those running the program, visited their bus earlier this year and obtained the van specifications. According to the transmittal, the Justice bus would serve as a mobile justice court and resource center, providing the space, layout and equipment needed to better serve individuals residing at the resource centers, as well as provide support for outreach events coordinated by the Mayor’s Office. The total cost for the purchase and the outfitting of the Justice bus is $125,675. Policy Question: The Council may wish to ask for additional details. Section G: Grant Consent Agenda No. 4 G-1: Know Your Neighbor Grant Extension ($100,00 – Misc. Grant Fund) This is an extension of an existing grant that will provide an additional award of $100,000 for a Volunteer Coordinator in the Salt Lake City Mayor’s Office. The Know Your Neighbor grant was awarded to Salt Lake City in October of 2022 by the Department of Workforce Services. The original award was $100,000 to pay for the salaries and benefits of a volunteer coordinator for one year. Each year since the original award date, the grant has been extended and Salt Lake City has been given an additional $100,000 for the same purpose. This consent agenda item is to accept the extension for FY25 for $100,000 to continue to pay for the salary and benefits of the Volunteer Coordinator housed in the Equity Office in the Mayor's office. The original Public Hearing was held October 18, 2022. G-2: Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update from Defense Grant Funding ($239,050 – Misc. Grant Fund) This is a subaward, awarded and administered by the Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands. The Salt Lake City Fire Department (SLCFD) will update its 2017 Community Wildfire Protection Plan(CWPP) using lessons learned from recent events, national and local, to develop a comprehensive mitigation strategy that expands the scope of the plan to include hazards and areas within the city that should be defined as a part of the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI.)The current plan was developed with the accepted priorities and strategies in 2017. Since that time multiple wildfires around the country have challenged the traditional definition and understanding of the WUI. SLCFD will update its CWPP to identify and prioritize hazards WUI threats and hazards across the entire city. The updated CWPP is the first step in creating a more comprehensive and inclusive wildland fire mitigation plan that will help determine both short and long-term mitigation priorities and protective strategies to establish mitigation goals for existing and anticipated hazards and long-term goals to address hazards resulting from population growth and climate change. Section I: Council-Added Items I-1: Accelerating Treatments for Diseased Sycamore Trees ($150,000 one-time from General Fund Balance) Council Member Dugan has requested this item to accelerate the pace of implementing treatments for diseased sycamore trees. The Urban Forestry Division is using $100,000 from the tree maintenance budget to explore multiple types of treatments with different chemicals and application methods (e.g., spraying, injections, others). This funding would be used for the treatments found to be most effective. Some sycamore trees are fighting a fungal disease called anthracnose, bug infestations, and/or mildew. Sycamore trees can live for a few hundred years. Some of the sick trees are over a century old and large enough to provide multiple public benefits. There are an estimated 4,600 sycamore trees in the city. Precisely how many of those trees are sick is unknown. Further testing and assessments would be needed to determine the extent of the problem, treatment options, and costs. Residents have reported diseased trees in Liberty Park, the Avenues, Sugar House, and Yalecrest. This item is being proposed in Budget Amendment #3 because some treatments are most effective when applied before the spring growing season. Policy questions: Page | 9 One-time vs Ongoing Costs – The Council may wish to ask the Administration whether diseased sycamore trees could need ongoing funding for treatments? ATTACHMENTS 1. (None) ACRONYMS AMI – Area median income BAT – Business Access Transit CAFR – Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CIP – Capital Improvement Program CWPD – Community Wildfire Protection Plan FOF – Funding Our Future FTE – Full time Employee / Equivalent FY – Fiscal Year GF – General Fund IMS – Information Management Services RFQ – Request for Qualifications TTIF – Transit Transportation Investment Fund UDOT – Utah Department of Transportation UTV – Utah Task Vehicle WUI – Wildland Urban Interface Page | 10 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. Page | 11 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. #3 A-2 IMS – Add 1 full-time Cybersecurity Engineer and convert 1 part-time Graphic Designer into full-time using funds from the elimination of additional part-time positions. $173,484 ongoing for Cybersecurity Engineer position Adds 1 Cybersecurity Engineer Position Adds .50 Graphic Design position TOTAL $6,381,054 39 total FTEs of which 16 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 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:January 21, 2025 RE: RESOLUTION: COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FOR THE SALT LAKE CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Salt Lake City Public Library is seeking the Council's review and approval of a labor resolution for the purposes of creating a structure and process for collective bargaining with eligible Library employees. The Library’s board of directors approved this resolution during its December 2024 meeting. The Council’s consideration of the labor resolution is one of several steps in the collective bargaining process and establishes the process for employees to file a petition to form a union. If this resolution is approved by the Council, the Library’s employees could begin their petition to form a union. Following this step, Library employees vote on whether to form a union. If over half (50.1% or more) of the eligible employees vote to form a union, the Library Board recognizes the union, and the Library and union representatives can begin negotiating a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). The CBA will outline items such as employee wages and benefits, among other things. Once the CBA is agreed upon and approved by the Library Board, then it will also come to the Council for review and approval. Certain terms of the CBA would come into effect subject to the Council appropriating necessary funding, which is ultimately approved in the City’s annual budget deliberation process. Goal of the briefing: to learn about a collective bargaining resolution that would provide a process that could authorize the Salt Lake City Public Library to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement with eligible Library employees. KEY POINTS The Council’s role in the Library budget process is unique to other City enterprise funds. The Library Board sets the policy for Library operations. The Council is tasked with reviewing and approving the overall budget and setting the Library’s tax rate. The American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) has expressed an interest in representing eligible Library employees. Item Schedule: Briefing: January 21, 2025 Public Hearing: n/a Potential Adoption Vote: February 4, 2025 Page | 2 While AFSCME also represents employees in other Salt Lake City departments, AFSCME would represent library employees as a separate bargaining unit because the Library is structured as separate from General Fund departments and enterprise funds. It’s important to note that the Library’s compensation and benefits are also separate from the City’s. In previous correspondence with staff, the Library estimates about a 12-18-month period which would include the petition process, union certification vote, and (if the vote is successful) entering into collective bargaining. This tentative timeline indicates a CBA and funding requests to implement it could come to the Council as part of the FY2027 annual budget (April/May 2026). Under this resolution, part-time employees would be eligible for union representation. This is unique compared to the City’s labor resolutions because nearly half of Library employees are part-time. However, under the proposed resolution voting eligibility on union formation is limited to employees who have maintained continuous employment with the Library for six months or more, regardless of their full-time or part-time status. Like the City’s labor resolutions, Library employees holding supervisory and management positions are ineligible to vote and join the union under the proposed resolution. If the union vote fails to meet the 50.1% threshold, a new petition to unionize cannot be filed for another 12 months from the unsuccessful election. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Library staff is unique compared to the City. For example, the percentage of part-time employees at the Library is significantly greater. Given that, the Council may wish to ask the Library representatives what considerations they reviewed in deciding to pursue the union options. 2. The Council may wish to ask about how the collective bargaining and negotiating process will work leading up to annual budget discussions, and how that will be the same or different from the City’s collective bargaining negotiations. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION I. Section 8.G, copied from the administrative transmittal –this section may be of interest to the Council in the event of failed negotiations. (g) If the City Council fails to appropriate the funds required to implement a proposed collective bargaining agreement or wage schedule, the Library Board shall, following good faith negotiations with the Certified Employee Organization, adopt a one-year compensation plan or wage schedule for the affected employees and/or adopt a one-year extension of the existing collective bargaining agreement, and shall present the same to the City Council pursuant to the City Council budget process. After good faith negotiations, the Library shall retain final authority regarding the terms and content of any one-year compensation plan or wage schedule adopted under this paragraph for presentation to the City Council. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Allison Rowland Senior Budget & Policy Analyst DATE:January 21, 2025 RE: INFORMATIONAL: EMERALD RIBBON ACTION PLAN UPDATES ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Administration has updated its draft Emerald Ribbon Action Plan, which is designed to guide capital investment, operations, and maintenance along the Jordan River Corridor. The Department of Public Lands (DPL) plans to begin the first phase of improvements this year, drawing on $9.0 million allocated to the project in the 2022 Parks General Obligation (GO) Bond and $1.3 million in CIP and impact fees. Preliminary estimates for Phase One reach over $16.6 million in today’s dollars (see Section E below). Once the construction is complete, estimates for ongoing costs—operations and maintenance, including programming—which the Department believes would be partially covered by partnerships, would rise from about $1 million per year to between $7 million and $10.5 million (see Sections F and H below). The transmittal from the Administration also includes a detailed Operations and Maintenance Plan. The Council is working with the Attorney’s Office to determine which aspects of the Plan are appropriate for the Council to formally adopt. The Emerald Ribbon Action Plan sets out a detailed and ambitious 10-year program to transform 772 acres along the Jordan River into an urban attraction and a major City asset. It is designed to address a broad set of objectives along the 10-mile corridor, including capital improvements, new programming, and improved river management techniques. The Plan sets out three sets of proposals: - Policy and planning recommendations; - A prioritized and phased list for improvements along the River; and - An operational transition plan towards a more naturalized corridor. Item Schedule: Briefing: January 21, 2025 Public Hearing: n/a Potential Action: n/a Page | 2 Based on an extensive process of resident engagement, implementation of the draft Plan would result in two major shifts in the City’s relationship with the Jordan River. They would result in a restored river that “more closely reflects its natural origins as a winding series of wetlands,” and a significant increase in spending for programming and activation of the corridor. This would be combined with the proposed capital investment in the new parks, trails, and natural lands to deliver both a significant increase in the amount of open space readily available to residents on Salt Lake City’s Westside neighborhoods, and a means to ensure that these areas remain safer and healthier for everyone. The Council reviewed a previous version of this plan on September 17, 2024. An Existing Conditions Report for the Emerald Ribbon Action Plan was completed in December 2023. This report helped form the basis for the public engagement efforts, which were supported by the Emerald Ribbon Plan website. DPL intends to send a final version of the plan to the Council for potential adoption later this year. Goal of the briefing: Review and discuss the full draft of the Emerald Ribbon Action Plan. ADDITIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION A.Background. The Emerald Ribbon area runs approximately 10 miles along the length of the Jordan River within Salt Lake City, from the Regional Athletic Complex (RAC) to 2100 South. Combined with a 150-foot buffer from the river, it totals 772 acres of natural areas, parks, and golf, plus the RAC. The plan notes that across these neighborhoods, the average level of social vulnerability (a measure that includes income, race, lack of vehicle access, and housing instability) is higher than Salt Lake City’s as a whole (page 16). The Jordan River serves as a key open space for residents of the City’s Westside. Public engagement undertaken for this Plan (see below) revealed that lack of safety and cleanliness were the most common themes mentioned when residents described their perceptions of the corridor. Significant recent City investments have helped improve this situation to some extent. DPL notes that the Park Rangers team, created in 2023, “has already become a key component of trail experience, offering aid, orientation, and a sense of safety.” In addition, in 2023, the Council funded six additional positions in the Department, and four landscape architects were shifted to Public Lands from the Public Services Department. The changes help significantly expand DPL’s ability to restore and care of the corridor’s natural ecology. Public engagement carried out by the Department and its consultant team began in August 2023 and lasted a full year. It included stakeholder and community focus groups, public open houses, a youth workshop, and online surveys. By 2024, the Department had worked with over 1,000 Westside residents, organizations, and river-users more broadly, to help ensure the plan meets the priorities of the communities it will serve. Through this work, the Department identified the priorities elaborated on in the Plan: “The key takeaways from this round of engagement were that people want to prioritize care for nature, would love to see an enhanced trail system, want to encourage activation in a thoughtful and sustainable way, and think that safety is a top concern.” Plans that contributed to Emerald Ribbon Action Plan include: - “Reimagine Nature” Public Lands Master Plan (2022) - Blueprint Jordan River Refresh (2022) - Public Lands Comprehensive Needs Assessment (2019) - Westside Master Plan (2014) - Jordan River Commission Best Practices for Riverfront Communities (2013) - Salt Lake County Jordan River Trail Master Plan (2008) Page | 3 - Blueprint Jordan River (2008) B.Plan Overview. The goals and framework for the draft Emerald Ribbon Action Plan were developed from the guiding principles identified in public engagement stages. The Department used these to organize the recommendations in the current version of the Plan, which uses a multi-pronged approach to implementation and outlines the proposed implementation pathways and timelines based on technical considerations. An overarching goal is to more than double the restored and managed natural areas on the corridor, from 14% to at least 30%, or approximately 228 acres. Work towards this goal will begin with the restoration projects identified in Phase One and will continue over the next 10 or more years. The Department also acknowledges the public’s increasing concern with safety on the Jordan River Corridor, along with concerns about under-maintained amenities, and poor water quality. The Plan recognizes that these problems must be overcome for the Emerald Ribbon to succeed as a thriving ecological and cultural place in Salt Lake City. 1.Vision Statement. “The Emerald Ribbon envisions a future Jordan River corridor that is a ribbon of nature through Salt Lake City, a community crossroads, and the heart of the Westside. It is a model of care for people, wildlife, and ecosystems.” 2.Values and Guiding Principles. Four values were identified based on the results of the year- long community engagement process: Nature, Culture, Connectivity, and Care. These were developed into the Plan’s five guiding principles, which are designed to help evaluate progress in implementation and ensure that the eventual results match the community’s overall vision. These principles are: a. Celebrate the rich ecological and cultural diversity of the corridor b. Connect the corridor to adjacent roads, trails, and waterways. c. Cultivate collective care of the corridor. d. Restore and enhance the river ecosystem as a peaceful refuge. e. Create a safe and vibrant destination. 3.Goals, Strategies and Actions. Each of the five guiding principles is associated with a set of more concrete goals, strategies, and actions for the Department to undertake over the coming years. These range from capital improvements to new programming to improved management techniques. Each specific strategy can be viewed relative to the others in terms of cost, organizational complexity, potential project duration, and community impact. (See pages 109-16 of the draft Plan.) 4.Key Locations. Along with determining the overall structure of the plan, conceptual designs were created for five key locations along the corridor: a. Rose Park Nature Area, b. Cottonwood Park, c. Fairpark Urban Core, d. Modesto Park/Bend in the River, and e. Glendale Oxbow. These areas were identified in the earlier iteration of the plan based on their potential for becoming desirable and functional spaces for both nature and community. The Action Plan identifies initial work that can be done on each of these sites and lays out a general timeline for completion within 10 years. (See also Section C and D below.) Page | 5 C.Timeline. The Department has developed the following broad timeline for the project. 2025 2026 and 2027 2028 to 2035 - Groundwork and planning for implementation of transformational projects - Implementation of Phase 1 priorities - Complete bond priorities and move on to the remaining transformational projects - Additional research on some strategies - Transformation of manicured spaces to natural lands - Pursue the more difficult long- term strategies - Begin pilot program - Begin Phase 1 Bond Priorities - Short-term opportunities - Evolve the new framework for care in a restored and activated corridor The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration the feasibility of this timeline, given the scope of this project, along with the large number of Department projects planned for the coming years. o What are the potential costs of an accelerated timeline? And the benefits? o Are there ways to incorporate “just-in-case” scenarios or phasing in case parts of the project are held up unexpectedly? o Would the Council like to request that DPL provide a comprehensive progress update on the Emerald Ribbon Plan at certain intervals (perhaps every two or three years)? D.Conceptual Plans for Five “Transformational Projects.” More detailed conceptual plans were developed for five sites in the Emerald Ribbon (see pages 114-156 of the Plan). These “transformational projects” were chosen to reflect the variety of experiences possible along the Jordan River corridor. Some of the proposed high priority projects will be completed at each of these sites in the next three to five years using 2022 GO Bond funding, but the long-term completion of these designs would depend on future availability of funding. The high-priority projects, along with their estimated costs, are provided in Sections D and C. Brief descriptions of each proposed project and their proposed prioritization follow. 1.Develop a New Wildlife Area at Glendale Oxbow. The Plan states that this area, located between the future Glendale Park and 2100 South holds significant potential for riparian, wetland, and upland restoration. The proposed project also includes improvements designed to make the area a gateway to the Emerald Ribbon, including a new trailhead with parking, which would be located on 2100 South and reached via a bridge over the Surplus Canal. On the west side of the river, a new trail would be added along with natural landscaping and new trees. One issue that will need to be resolved is that the area proposed for parking is owned by the Golf Enterprise Fund. The Department plans to work with the Golf Division to explore options, including potentially buying the area to incorporate into DPL properties. A second issue to be resolved is that private commercial and industrial operations encroach on public lands and infringe on the required buffers for the Jordan River on the east side of the river. DPL noted that staff works with Salt Lake County Flood Control, the Army Corps of Engineers, and Page | 6 2. other public and private land managers to meet riparian protection and floodplain requirements. In addition, “Encroachments by private property owners onto public land within and throughout the Jordan River corridor is a pervasive issue. The City’s capacity to proactively resolve these conflicts is low. Often, and this would be the case with a potential Glendale Oxbow project, they are resolved immediately before or during the process of designing and constructing an active, funded project.” More broadly, the Department aims to mitigate illegal activities throughout the corridor with increased activation, partnerships for care, and education efforts. DPL believes that in the Glendale Oxbow area, increasing the natural habitat and wetland will naturally make the area less desirable for camping. For other undesirable and potentially illegal land uses, the Department intends to coordinate with other public safety-focused departments and entities to ensure their responses are appropriate. 3.Reimagine Modesto Park and Bend in the River. The Emerald Ribbon Action Plan notes several existing problems in this area, which covers both sides of the river between Fremont Avenue and Illinois Avenue. Primary concerns are related to safety and outdated amenities, with an uninviting and inaccessible south park edge along Modesto Avenue, and an under-programmed outdoor classroom (the Urban Treehouse) to the north. The proposal is to redesign the parks, building on the area along Fremont Ave, which serves as an entrance to the park, and is “a cherished community space.” The trailhead on Fremont Avenue would be renovated with amenities added along the trail, including a new boat ramp. On the Modesto side, a new ‘community porch’ would be created with shaded seating, a lawn, cooking areas, a nature playground, and art installations. The wetland area would also be restored. 4.Center Nature and Activate Public Space in Fairpark. The segment of the Jordan River between Fisher Mansion and Cottonwood Park runs through the highly industrial area between North Temple and 200 South, which is crossed by major railroads and the TRAX Green. Public engagement indicated a preference for more active uses and public spaces, with hubs for community events, water recreation, and nature education. In the short term, undesirable activity restricts the use of the Gadsby Trailhead as a gateway to the Jordan River corridor and the Fisher Mansion remains fenced off from the river and offers no trailside amenities. The plan focuses on providing safe and comfortable connections for trail users, businesses, and future residents, but for now, no capital improvement projects would take place in Phase One (see section --, below). In later phases, the trail connection to the new Folsom Trail would be completed, to opening up the Jordan River Trail and Fisher Mansion to other trail users. The other critical priority is to complete the missing segment of trail which is located north of North Temple Street, which suffers from safety, visibility, and quality issues. 5.Bring New Life to Cottonwood Park. This park, at approximately 300 to 50o North, would be the most transformed among the five transformative projects, featuring an upgraded trailhead with artwork, signage, new restrooms, and a boat ramp; realigned trails and new nature walkways; and a ‘community porch’ on the southern edge, where recreation amenities would be concentrated. The plan also recommends “Improving connectivity, visibility, and engagement [to] significantly enhance the park’s usability and safety, creating a more cohesive and welcoming space for the community.” Over the longer run, the Plan proposes relocating the levee further from the river to improve visual and physical connection to the water, providing more space for the river to flood. Page | 7 6.Develop a New Nature Park near Rose Park Golf Course. The Plan proposes a transformation of parts of the Rose Park Golf Course area, but no design or construction is proposed in as part of Phase One. DPL is in discussions about eventually transforming the driving range into a publicly accessible park and nature area. This could be undertaken when a levee along the western bank, which does not meet current regulations, is upgraded to meet higher flood levels and stricter standards. In addition, as in Cottonwood Park, there is potential to create more “room for the river” by relocating portions of the levee and developing wetlands. The first step would be a feasibility study for relocating the levee, which would include evaluating design and construction to meet regulations, estimating costs, and creating a timeline and risk management. E.Phase One & Bond Funding Priorities. Phase One of the Emerald Ribbon Action Plan is designed to result in a geographically-balanced distribution of funds among the neighborhoods along the river. The idea is to ensure that the community sees investment throughout the river corridor, beyond the transformational project sites. The Plan includes Phase 1 estimates for both capital and ongoing O&M costs. These are based on costs at comparable parks around the country, and they are necessarily broad and subject to change at this stage. The estimates do, however, provide the general scale of the levels of investment required to enact this phase of the Plan. Soft costs such as design fees, permitting costs, contingencies and escalation are included in these budget numbers. For full methodology of cost modeling, see pages 102-103 of the Plan. The Phase One priorities are intended to be completed within the next three to five years, beginning in 2025. So far, the Council has allocated $9 million for capital improvements for the Emerald Ribbon project from the General Obligation (GO) bond that was approved by City voters in November 2022. The Department plans to supplement this amount with $1.5 million in CIP which the Council has approved for this purpose. This funding would cover most of priorities identified for Phase One, but DPL notes that about $5 million of additional funding would be necessary to achieve the vision set out in the Plan. The Plan also alludes to additional funding sources that are currently underutilized or unavailable to the Department and suggests that these could be explored as implementation gets underway. Policy Question: The Council may wish to ask about how DPL plans to explore additional funding sources. For example, does the Department have the staff resources available to work on this, or would consultants be hired? 1.Phase 1 Transformational Projects. Of the five transformational projects discussed in section D above, three are identified as the highest priorities for Phase One funding: Cottonwood Park, Modesto Park and Bend in the River, and Glendale Oxbow. These multi-faceted projects would include improvements to recreation amenities, ecological restoration, and trail connections. The Plan states: “Projects were prioritized by area of highest need in the community, greatest opportunity in regards to natural restoration potential, and to lay the foundation for the ongoing implementation of the goals of this plan. The projects were also prioritized to ensure a balanced distribution of investment in regards to geography and project type (between highly activated parks, natural lands, and trail and safety). They are structured to ensure that they are feasible and will, coupled with effective ongoing management and thoughtful programming, make a tangible difference in the lives of residents within Phase One.” Page | 8 Estimated Capital Costs for the Phase 1 Transformational Projects Park Restoration Trails & Greenway Total Wildlife Area at Glendale Oxbow $689,275 $1,417,496 $192,462 $2,299,233 Modesto Park and Bend in the River $3,636,519 $391,896 $0 $4,028,415 Center Nature and Activate Public Space in Fairpark $1,449,854 $0 $1,700,077 $3,149,931 Bring New Life to Cottonwood Park: $5,347,822 $836,601 $962,308 $7,146,731 Develop a New Nature Park near Rose Park Golf Course $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $11,123,470 $2,645,993 $2,854,847 $16,624,310 2.Phase One Corridor-Wide Safety and Connectivity Projects. These would mediate confusing and unsafe aspects of the Jordan River Parkway Trail, specifically at major three trail intersections: North Temple; 1700 South; and 900 South. Funding would also be directed to an overall way-finding and interpretive plan for the corridor. The Department proposes to fund these with $1.5 million from the GO Bond. Phase 1 Corridor-Wide Trail & Safety Projects Bond Funding Wayfinding Redesign $700,000 North Temple Street Intersection and Trail $700,000 1700 South Trail Intersection $50,000 900 South Trail Intersection $50,000 Total $1,500,000 3.Phase One Corridor-Wide Ecological Restoration Projects. Eight locations have been identified for ecological restoration. These projects would add a total of eight acres of restored natural lands and Department proposes to fund these with $1 million from the GO Bond. Phase 1 Corridor-Wide Restoration/ Natural Lands Projects Page | 9 Bond Funding Peace Labyrinth Open Space $150,000 900 South River Park $200,000 500 South Riparian $150,000 Alzheimers Park $100,000 Riverside Park $200,000 Cornell Street Lift Station $125,000 Fairpark/North Temple area $50,000 Folsom Trail Connection $25,000 Total $1,000,000 F.Phase One Ongoing Operations and Maintenance. The O&M cost estimates used methodology similar to the capital cost estimates, based on similar land uses in other cities. In practice, the total would depend on the level of programming, which is why the annual operating budget is a range of $7 million to $10 million. This would be a significant increase over the current spending on the corridor, which is about $1 million per year. The Department expects that a significant share of this amount would come from external partners (see Section H, below). Note: The O&M Plan (below) states that 2 additional full-time rangers would need to be dedicated to the corridor within two years, and 8 additional FTES would be needed to manage natural areas in the corridor within 3 years. PHASE ONE PRIORITIES - O&M Size Proposed Funding Range (Annual) Highly Activated Spaces/Parks (includes operations, programming, maintenance, and labor.)60-70 acres $3,500,000 $5,000,000 Natural Lands (includes monitoring and ongoing management)260-280 acres $2,500,000 $3,500,000 Trails & Safety (includes the assessment and maintenance of trail and greenway areas adjacent to the trail throughout the corridor)50-60 acres $1,000,000 $2,000,000 Total $7,000,000 $10,500,000 G.The Operations and Management Plan. The transmittal includes an Operations and Management (O&M) Plan developed to guide Public Lands staff in creating consistent and standardized practices across the corridor. It provides detailed guidance for restoring degraded aspects of the river and establishes standards for recommended plant communities, along with day-to-day and seasonal practices for different spaces, and setting a long-term target for care. The O&M Plan includes research on ideal staffing ratios, which were determined to be roughly 1 FTE per 20 acres. The Department proposes to aim for this level of staffing for the Jordan River Corridor over the next 10 years, as the proposed new capital projects come online. This would translate to adding 14 FTEs to manage the full 282 acres of natural area on the corridor. Additional maintenance funding (equipment, vehicles, etc.) would be needed to support the specialized care needed for native planting areas. Page | 10 H.Partnerships and Governance. The Emerald Ribbon Action Plan alludes to the need for additional work to identify ways to distribute both the financial responsibility and management of the Jordan River Corridor. It states, “It is rare today to see successful urban river corridors improved, managed, and operated purely by public entities,” (page 106). Specific examples are provided on the following page of the High Line Canal in Denver; Buffalo Bayou in Houston; and Joe Louis Greenway, Detroit. In each case, a dedicated external organization—and in some cases, more than one—supports the programming, fundraising, management and operations, or community outreach. Governance structures to help to bridge the public sector’s gap in capacities, raise funding, and ability to enliven the corridor with activation include public- private partnerships, conservancy models, and ‘Friends of’ groups. In short, “An evolution of the governance model on the Emerald Ribbon is an important precursor to meeting the community’s demands in regards to improved maintenance and management practices. Investment in the long-term care of the corridor (and public communication about those investments) must go hand in hand with new capital improvements,” (page 159). Policy Question: The Council may wish to ask about how DPL plans to explore partnerships and governance models for the Jordan River Corridor. For example, does the Department have the staff resources available to work on this, or would consultants be hired? Policy Question: The Council may wish to ask what role the Jordan River Commission may have in this governance structure. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. The Council may wish to discuss with the Attorney’ Office and the Administration the options for weighing the attractive amenities and services listed in this plan (and others like it) against other City budget obligations, including adopting a balanced annual budget. Questions might include: a. To what extent does an “action plan” for City spending constitute binding promises to constituents? Does the Council want to include language in the plan to indicate that any proposed projects are subject to future budget availability? b. How would the Council formally adopting this plan affect the prioritization of financial resources with other City needs? c. Is there a risk that performance metrics and project calendars intended to track City progress on a given capital project could be interpreted as binding funding commitments for the Council? CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Allison Rowland Budget & Policy Analyst DATE:January 21, 2025 RE: INFORMATIONAL: GREEN LOOP GUIDELINES AND NEXT STEPS ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Administration has requested the release of $3,140,000 in fiscal year 2024 Capital Improvement Project (CIP) funds related to the planned Green Loop project. These funds would be used for the following: 1. For the Administration to produce guidelines in conjunction with the Council on Green Loop project development and public space management; 2. To advance conceptual planning for the 200 East section of the Green Loop in conjunction with the Library Square visioning process, and develop construction documents for the “Civic Campus” section of the Green Loop, on 200 East from 350 South to 450 South; and 3. Concept Design (30%) documents for the planned Green Loop section on 500 West from North Temple to 900 South. The Council may wish to take a straw poll on whether to release the funding contingency so that the Administration may use these funds as proposed. See item A on page 2 for the contingency language adopted by the Council. Goal of the briefing: Consider releasing $3.1 million of Capital Improvement Project (CIP) funding related to the planned Green Loop project. ADDITIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION Item Schedule: Briefing: January 21, 2025 Public Hearing: n/a Potential Action: n/a Page | 3 A.Council Contingency. In conjunction with adoption of the FY25 CIP budget in August of 2024, the Council adopted the following contingency: The FY2025 CIP Budget Contingency for Green Loop Funding includes a public space management plan for the three blocks of 500 West. The public space management plan will address site amenities, programming opportunities, public safety, and neighborhood context for those three blocks. This management plan will provide the framework for future projects along the Green Loop and Downtown. Policy Question: Given the roadmap presented by the Administration, is the Council comfortable releasing the contingency" B.Proposed Distribution of Contingency Funds. The Administration proposes to use the $3.1 million in CIP funding for the following items (see Attachment C1 for additional information). To produce guidelines in conjunction with the Council on Green Loop project development and public space management $314,000 To advance conceptual planning for the 200 East section of the Green Loop in conjunction with the Library Square visioning process, and develop construction documents for the “Civic Campus” section of the Green Loop, on 200 East from 350 South to 450 South; and $1,570,000 Concept Design (30%) documents for the planned Green Loop section on 500 West from North Temple to 900 South. $628,000 Contingency $628,000 TOTAL $3,140,000 C.Green Loop Background. The full Green Loop concept is outlined in the 2022 Public Lands Master Plan, Reimagine Nature, in the section “Downtown Comes Alive.” The Green Loop would use locations in and along Downtown’s wide streets to create a new 5.3-mile linear park with up to 54 acres of new green space. It would feature trees, places for outdoor seating, and a multi-use recreational trail. By integrating large and small green areas and plazas into a public, outdoor network, it would provide the City’s growing Downtown and Central communities—which currently have the least access to parks and trails of any City neighborhoods and where future growth is expected to be the highest—new access to green spaces. In addition, the integration of street trees and “green” stormwater management techniques would also provide environmental benefits to the City as a whole. The project goals, as outlined in the Administration’s November 26, 2024, transmittal are the following: 1. Develop a dense downtown urban forest; 2. Serve as an active transportation corridor; 3. Improve water quality through stormwater management; 4. Create inviting social spaces that provide a variety of amenities and attractions; and Page | 4 5. Create public front yards and gardens within the Downtown that support the needs of all users. D.Updates. Last year, the Administration hired a consultant for two aspects of the overall Green Loop project: 6.Schematic Designs. Schematic design and a cost estimate for the 200 East Civic Campus was combined with a vision for the entire 5.3-mile linear Green Loop project, which laid out potential routing, benefits, impacts, and estimated costs. 7.Needs Analysis. This included discussion of potential models for operations and maintenance; identification of gaps and redundancies in the current and potential City roles for the Green Loop (like management, funding, security, and programming; and a block-by-block needs analysis for the full concept). E.Ongoing work. The Administration continues to explore a variety of funding strategies for both capital and operations for the Green Loop. Examples include public-private partnerships; exploring the potential of a Special Assessment Area or Business Improvement District; bonding; federal and local grants; and philanthropic opportunities. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. Are there specific elements of the proposed Project Development Guidelines that the Council wishes to discuss and identify in advance as priorities for the Administration? 2. Before additional project planning is undertaken, would the Council like to have a more extensive policy discussion with the Administration on the funding strategies for the full Green Loop project? 3. Council Members have expressed two related capacity concerns about the Department of Public Lands. Would the Council like to discuss these concerns with the Administration? a. There is already a large number of major parks and open lands projects currently underway (see Attachment C2. Public Lands Major Capital Projects Update)? b. There were problems last year with timely maintenance in parks and other green spaces, stemming in part from difficulties finding sufficient numbers of maintenance employees. ATTACHMENTS Attachment C1. Proposed Distribution of Green Loop Contingency Funds. Attachment C2. Public Lands Major Capital Projects Update. Ivory University House Rent Stipend for Salt Lake City Students – Proposed Terms The City shall provide $1.75 million in funding, disbursed in five annual installments of $350,000, to the University of Utah on behalf of Ivory University House to issue housing stipends to students to rent a bedroom/unit in Ivory University House. Alternatively, the City shall provide funding to Ivory University House with a requirement that Ivory University House allocate the funding to the University of Utah for the same purpose. The City’s obligation to disburse the annual installments are contingent upon Ivory University House providing Council a written annual report and otherwise not being in default under the agreement. The funding shall be issued by the University of Utah to students that meet all the following criteria, the Student Eligibility Requirements: Students classified by the University and through the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) process as “high need.” An example of a “high need” student is one that is determined eligible for a Pell Grant. Only the University of Utah has access to this information, not Ivory University House. Students that have a parent(s) or guardian(s) that have a permanent, primary residence in the City. Housing stipends shall be structured with the following terms and conditions: The housing stipend shall cover 60% of the standard monthly/annual rental rate for the applicable unit type at Ivory University House. The following table illustrates the 60% housing stipend based on Ivory Unity House’s 2024 rental rates: 2024 Standard Rate 60% Stipend - Per Student Net Rent - Per StudentUnit Type Monthly Annual Monthly Annual Monthly Annual Studio - A unit $1,510 $18,120 $906 $10,872 $604 $7,248 Studio - B unit $1,365 $16,380 $819 $9,828 $546 $6,552 Bedroom - 3-bedroom unit $1,040 $12,480 $624 $7,488 $416 $4,992 Stipends shall be provided to as many students per year that meet the Student Eligibility Requirements until the City’s funding is fully expended. For illustrative purposes, if the 60% stipend were provided to 18 students per year, averaged across unit type, the City’s funding would be expended in approximately 10 years, and would serve a total of 180 students with a 12-month lease. Annual Annual x 10 Years Unit Type Students Served Total Stipend Allocations Years Students Served Total Stipend Allocations Studio - A unit 6 $65,232 10 60 $652,320 Studio - B unit 6 $58,968 10 60 $589,680 Bedroom - 3-bedroom unit 6 $44,928 10 60 $449,280 Total 18 $169,128 180 $1,691,280 Note: For illustrative purposes only. Funding may be disbursed faster or slower and at different rates depending on the unit type mix and rate at which students qualify for a housing stipend. Funding is intended to make on-campus housing affordable to Salt Lake City students that would not otherwise afford on-campus housing. Accordingly, these students must receive adequate stipends and/or scholarships to make living on campus viable. As such, Ivory University House shall structure scholarships to further assist students that meet the Student Eligibility Requirements to further incentivize on-campus housing, living costs, and tuition for Salt Lake City students most in need. Ivory University House shall fully expend the City’s funding within 18 years from the date of the funding agreement. Unspent funding shall be returned to the City. Reporting on the number of students receiving a rent stipend and related details shall be remitted by Ivory University House to Salt Lake City annually by June 30th of each year, with the reporting period being the preceding calendar year. City Council Announcements January 21, 2025 For your information: A. Utah Renewable Communities – Update As a reminder, Council Member Dan Dugan serves on the Utah Renewable Communities Board. He will share an update about Utah Renewable Communities efforts and next steps, including items that may impact future City budgets.