Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
02/15/2011 - Work Session - Minutes
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2011 The City Council met in Work Session on Tuesday, February 15, 2011, at 3 : 00 p.m. in Room 326, City Council Office, City County Building, 451 South State Street . In Attendance: Council Members Carlton Christensen, Stan Penfold, Soren Simonsen, JT Martin, Luke Garrott, Jill Remington Love and Van Turner. Also In Attendance: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; David Hart, FAIA, Vice President/Regional Manager of MOCA Systems; Maureen Riley, Airport Executive Director; Jay Bingham, Airport Finance and Accounting Director; Russell Weeks, Council Policy Analyst; Emy Maloutas, Open Space Lands Program Manager; Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director; Wilford Sommerkorn, Planning Director; Lisa Watts-Baskin, Attorney; Edwin Rutan, City Attorney; Karen Halladay, Council Policy Analyst; Gina Chamness, Budget Director; Gordon Hoskins, Chief Financial Officer; Jennifer Bruno, City Council Deputy Director; David Everitt, Mayor' s Chief of Staff; Tim Harpst, Transportation Director; Bill Haight, Chief Information Officer; Lynn Pace, Deputy City Attorney; and Beverly Jones, Deputy City Recorder. Councilmember Love presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 3 : 12 p.m. AGENDA ITEMS #1. 3 : 12 : 52 PM REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING A REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. See File M 11-5 for announcements . #2 . 3 : 18 : 11 PM RECEIVE AN UPDATE FROM DAVID HART, FAIA, VICE PRESIDENT/REGIONAL MANAGER OF MOCA SYSTEMS, REGARDING PLANS FOR THE CITY' S NEW PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES, INCLUDING A PREVIEW OF A PROPOSAL THAT IS PENDING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO REZONE THE PROJECT SITE. David Hart briefed the Council from a power point presentation and the attached handouts. #3 . 3 :37 : 05 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ENACT A FEE ON CARS RENTED AT THE SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. THE FEE WOULD FUND RELOCATING CAR RENTAL FACILITIES AND BUILDING AND MAINTAINING NEW CAR RENTAL FACILITIES AT THE AIRPORT IN THE FUTURE. (AMENDING CHAPTER 16, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 16. 12 . 195 TO ARTICLE I OF TITLE 16, TO CREATE AND ESTABLISH A 11 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2011 CUSTOMER FACILITY CHARGE AT AIRPORT CAR RENTAL FACILITIES; AND AMENDING SECTION 16. 12 .200, PERTAINING TO FUNDS; DISPOSITION AND ACCOUNTING, TO INCLUDE THE FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE CUSTOMER FACILITY CHARGE. (RELATED PROVISIONS OF TITLE 16 MAY ALSO BE AMENDED AS PART OF THE PETITION) View Attachments Maureen Riley, Jay Bingham and Russell Weeks briefed the Council from the attached handouts . Councilmember Love said it would be helpful if fees were incorporated into the budget annually. #4. 3:49:28 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING OPEN LANDS PROGRAM FUNDING AND A COMMUNITY EFFORT TO RAISE FUNDS FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK TO BE LOCATED AT 1560 EAST ATKIN AVENUE (2828 SOUTH) . (IMPERIAL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK) View Attachments Emy Maloutas briefed the Council from the attached handouts . Cindy Gust-Jenson said all funds from the Open Space account had been appropriated. Councilmember Love said she felt a dollar amount would be helpful . Ms . Maloutas said the Open Space Board would give the Council a recommendation when they had reviewed the full application. #5. 4 : 02 :30 PM RECEIVE AN UPDATE FROM THE ADMINISTRATION REGARDING THE MAYOR' S SUSTAINABLE CITY CODE INITIATIVE. THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROJECT IS TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT-RELATED REGULATIONS THAT SUPPORT WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOODS; REDUCE, REUSE OR RECYCLE WASTE PRODUCTS; DEVELOP CONVENIENT PUBLIC TRANSIT AND NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION CHOICES; AND PROMOTE MORE EFFICIENT USE OF LIMITED NATURAL RESOURCES. View Attachments Cheri Coffey and Wilf Sommerkorn briefed the Council from a power point presentation and the attached handouts . Councilmember Love asked if Council was comfortable with the expanded definition of Community Gardens to include the sale of produce and community events but not animals . She said staff would get back to Councilmember Garrott concerning animals . Council Members were in favor. Councilmember Love said the next issue was to expand the size of farm stands on private property. Council Members were in favor. Councilmember Love said the next issue was to revise standards for farm stands in public right-of-way. Councilmember Garrott said people wanted to combine a farm stand with a community garden. He said if community gardens were located on public property then there could not be a farm stand. Ms . Coffey said community gardens could sell food they grew. She said if people grew fruits and vegetables in their yard they could sell those. She said a farm stand was different. She said it was mainly allowed in more intensive residential and commercial zones. 11 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2011 Councilmember Love said the next issue was pesticides. She said staff' s opinion was that it was not necessary to regulate pesticides . All Council Members were in favor. She said the next issue was chicken coops . She said coops were excessively limited by lot coverage requirements . She said the ordinance did not include a maximum limit for chicken coops . All Council Members were in favor. Councilmember Love said a public hearing needed to be scheduled. She said it was important to engage open land and environmental groups on the issues of wind towers and open space . Councilmember Garrott said there were good summaries on the issues and the media could get those out . Councilmember Christensen said he felt a video would also be good media. Ms. Coffey said a video of their presentation would be put on Planning' s website. She said they would do a specific video for accessory dwelling units because that was the one that interested the community. Councilmember Christensen said the video could include pictures and maps. Councilmember Love said she liked the visual idea because people could see what a community garden, a farm stand or a wind tower was. #6. 5:19:44 PM CONTINUE THEIR REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF THE CITY' S CONFLICT OF INTEREST ORDINANCE (ETHICS) . THE ORDINANCE GOVERNS HOW EMPLOYEES, ELECTED OFFICIALS AND VOLUNTEERS HANDLE CITY BUSINESS. View Attachments Lisa Watts-Baskin, Ed Rutan and Karen Halladay briefed the Council from the attached handouts . Councilmember Love said the current ordinance limited the Legal Defense Fund contribution to $2500 . All Council Members were in favor. She asked if they wanted a limit on the Leadership Expense Fund. Councilmember Christensen said he felt the limits should coincide with campaign limits . He said currently it was $7500 for Mayor and $1500 for Councilmember. All Council Members were in favor. Councilmember Love said Item 2 was the necessity to disclose the cost of food or meals if more than $50. Ms . Watts-Baskin said this issue had not been changed. Councilmember Love said this was a clarification. She said Council Members could have a meal over $50 if it was in conjunction with work duties . All Council Members were in favor. Councilmember Love said Item 3 was Clause in Contracts. Mr. Rutan said a requirement that people the City contract with sign a clause stating they did not bribe the City to get the contract . He said this would waive the requirement when it was not needed. All Council Members were in favor. 11 - 3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2011 Councilmember Love said Item 4 was Procedure for Complaint Investigation. Ms. Watts-Baskin said under the Municipal Government Act if there was an alleged violation of Conflict of Interest it went to the Mayor. She said this would address the separation of powers issue . All Council Members were in favor. Councilmember Love said Item 5 was a more detailed definition of Conflict of Interest. She asked if Council was comfortable with no definition. All Council Members were in favor. Councilmember Love said the Conflict of Interest ordinance would be forwarded to the formal agenda for a public hearing. #7 . 5:35:14 PM RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP BRIEFING REGARDING BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 3 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-11. View Attachments Gina Chamness, Gordon Hoskins, Jennifer Bruno, David Everitt and Tim Harpst briefed the Council from the attached handouts . Ms . Bruno said Item A-3, the dog fence at Rotary Glen Park had been pulled by the Administration. She said Item A-4, the Streetcar Manager position, Council had asked about the option to have the Redevelopment Agency fund part of the position. She said the Council had met as the Board of the RDA and decided 50% could be allocated to RDA. Ms . Bruno said Item A-6, bike share pilot program, the Administration had provided more detail about start-up costs, financial exposure, etc . She asked if the Council wanted to approve funding now or wait for the fiscal year budget. Councilmember Christensen said he was comfortable with $25, 000 with the understanding the Administration came back to the Council with the sponsorship money or with the cost in the context of the budget . All Council Members were in favor of moving ahead with the item. Ms . Bruno said Item A-11 was the Small Neighborhood Business petition for $55, 000 . She said $40, 000 of the money had been spent but had not been encumbered at the end of the year. She said those funds needed to be reallocated from fund balance. She said the $15, 000 difference would be used towards the public process and development of a small business resource guide. All Council Members were in favor. Ms. Bruno said Item A-15, Barnes Bank Bond Budget Adjustment, Council had expressed concern about priorities and the exact needs of office space. She said given the information from the Administration this item warranted its own briefing. She said the Council could authorize the budget amendment, put it in an account and have a full briefing on space needs of the City. #8. 5:47 :11 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING FROM BILL HAIGHT, INFORMATION 11 - 4 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2011 MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR, REGARDING THE CONSIDERATION OF AGENDA MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE. Bill Haight briefed the Council . #9. 9: 14:32 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE LIST OF LEGISLATIVE ISSUES FOR THE 2011 STATE LEGISLATIVE SESSION. Lynn Pace briefed the Council . #10. 5: 54 : 50 PM INTERVIEW CONNIE LINARDAKIS PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HER APPOINTMENT TO THE CITIZEN'S COMPENSATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE. Councilmember Love said Ms. Linardakis' s name would be forwarded to the Consent Agenda for formal approval . #11. 6 : 06 :46 PM INTERVIEW STEPHEN JAMES PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION. Councilmember Love said Mr. James' name would be forwarded to the Consent Agenda for formal approval . #12 . 6 :00: 13 PM INTERVIEW MICHAEL CLARA PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY ADVISORY BOARD. Councilmember Love said Mr. Clara' s name would be forwarded to the Consent Agenda for formal approval . #13 . DISCUSS PRIORITIES FOR 2011 AS A FOLLOW-UP TO THEIR RETREAT. This item was not held. #15. 9 :36:36 PM THE COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO CLOSED SESSION, IN KEEPING WITH UTAH CODE § 52-4-204, FOR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES: a) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205 (1) (b) ; b) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE OR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY (INCLUDING ANY FORM OF WATER RIGHT OR WATER SHARES) WHEN PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSACTION WOULD DISCLOSE THE APPRAISAL OR ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR PREVENT THE CITY FROM COMPLETING THE TRANSACTION ON THE BEST POSSIBLE TERMS PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205 (1) (d) ; c) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR REASONABLY IMMINENT LITIGATION PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205 (1) (c) ; d) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY 11 - 5 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2011 (INCLUDING ANY FORM OF WATER RIGHT OR WATER SHARES) IF (1) PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSACTION WOULD DISCLOSE THE APPRAISAL OR ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR PREVENT THE CITY FROM COMPLETING THE TRANSACTION ON THE BEST POSSIBLE TERMS, (2) THE CITY PREVIOUSLY GAVE NOTICE THAT THE PROPERTY WOULD BE OFFERED FOR SALE, AND (3) THE TERMS OF THE SALE ARE PUBLICLY DISCLOSED BEFORE THE CITY APPROVES THE SALE; e) FOR ATTORNEY-CLIENT MATTERS THAT ARE PRIVILEGED PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 78B-1-137, AND f) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS DEPLOYMENT OF SECURITY PERSONNEL, DEVICES OR SYSTEMS PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE SECTION 52-4-205 (1) (f) . Councilmember Penfold moved and Councilmember Garrott seconded to enter into Closed Session. A roll call vote was taken, which motion carried, Council Members Christensen, Turner, Penfold, Martin, Sorensen, Garrott and Love voted aye. The meeting adjourned at 9 : 37 p.m. COUN L IR -11.4 /7 ,:;ia..1* Y RECORDS This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held February 15, 2011 . bj 11 - 6 Identified Objectives of the City Council's Ethics Project (Council Staff Memo dated October 5, 2010) Original Objective/Question Status-Recommendation Should housekeeping or non-substantive changes and Completed modifications be made to the current ordinance? (For example, Executive Employee would be deleted and Municipal Employee would be added to the definitions, thus eliminating the distinction between "executive"employees from other employees. Outside Legal Counsel suggested using consistent and defined terminology throughout the ordinance. An example would be to define and use governmental actions throughout the ordinance instead of official actions.) Should the Conflict of Interest ordinance be limited to Completed- Professional interest included, financial interest conflicts or should the Conflict of but not personal interest Interest ordinance also encompass personal and professional interests? Should there be remedies or options besides recusal Completed-Financial conflict of interest- when a potential conflict of interest exists? For publically disclose, disqualify and recusal financial conflict of interest? For personal conflict?For from participation and voting. Professional professional conflict? conflict of interest- publically disclose,but may/may not need to disqualify. Should the definition of relative be updated to be Completed - Definition is updated. consistent with City code? Should options to clarify if/when it is appropriate to Completed-Travel,lodging,and food accept gifts or hospitality at outside meetings suggested expenses in connection with official City by Outside Legal Counsel be considered and changed business furnished by the sponsor of a public in the current ordinance? event, appearance,ceremony,or other activity are an exception to prohibited gifts (2.44.090) Note: In addition to the above objectives,other project work included: a summary of case law, a thorough review of the current ordinance to identify other necessary changes, legislative history review,and a review of City Attorney opinions. • -� .� 'ry. Nob*Nee fil^1,.a.yW • $' ',mind en Nee \ .. ,4,e '." Sat MS ��'•2- 111.011 teeth Ool bee War %. ': j; 15 orres • IA1t Mee -7.•: -. - 11AI15 AND ACCOSs ! e' _ - le" Ott Sena1mi al.I mles }, �'' e 1' h* q -//�� Wet lred(On feral 1.3 miles •, "'I _ • //_ „l.xrVM lemm7•iendwh 0,4 miles +,I I r g!1 , oM Oil hd 0.2 miles e'c ts* W. "St' : / .t4 . 1 A'E• to i _.r _ il AtAMA1:lA1Eer AIM •�•' — . enmelLen 15wen t i•v.•tie . U. Y • t: •_►. - AiheSewre4x 40 aces ede�. ..: 1 e-. - _ A• • 7. rr ,+ ' r� ttit 3 1.176•k a `e• s ^q •t !--f - % 1 akeMereeee eel AOe Am Il acres • ... •0.8miles :. .i w'+ ' t(tr.r�...` "r' =•M e,;A �;, - - - - -r•• Off-Leash Trail-open to all users and allows for dogs to be off leash on BMX Area-designated area for BMX use t the trail Natural Area-moderately maintained to minimize resource degradation es On-Leash Trail-open to all users and requires dogs be on a leash on the Protection Area-Maintained to enhance natural systems including 1 A trail habitat and natural hydrologic function 1°j I l, •fl°ji No Dog Trail-open to users other than those with dogs Restoration and Buffer Area-maintained to restore,enhance and (11'....f T Off-leash Dog Area-designated area for off-leash play buffer critical natural systems including water resources and habitat Comprehensive Use Plan Map 02.15.2011 UEDAWIAECOM( 1C.13+`\ ,,mmAe Parley's Historic Nature Park Comprehensive Use and Management Plan 13 '�,.�ry,L-�"r- - - ,- Li p . ` I r i. USE WAS ;ix ON-Lech Dal Area I3amt , • IMA Area lam MOILS AND ACCESS x '- -ON Set Ned 1.1 miles ' e{ r, % OnAech lied 0.1 mass . rj=l.. rIK. +j --,1,7 j•.. 400000. . 1'' _. y p� r r lOntna.nl 1.3 miles - . . s �Ne Doc Ned 0.6 miles emiliq • . .'.r .'. ®Mapi Inhere ' �, gr.; w k� t 1. 0 Item tremor 4 . /1 * , MANAGE/WO WAS ,--h •.• -u 7— "Al 4':r c T : A ''�. • • - •;r t - ‘ ...•t _ t NollMee 6acres f ,/ �•T - Prelates kW 39 arrasst lipIeYMeYrM lse d Dab Iams i..�! • � 1 . f ...ry.e ;li . , ` I A '� _ '� ,4 ._ hIIViCN 1 0.8 mlles I- , - .. s .i. Off-Leash Trail-open to all users and allows for dogs to be off leash on BMX Area-designated area for BMX use r the trail Natural Area-moderately maintained to minimize resource degradation 4"(�, <.` On-Leash Trail-open to all users and requires dogs be on a leash on the Protection Area-Maintained to enhance natural systems including to•`\: !�', t trail habitat and natural hydrologic function 1°e (!'!-I no, No Dog Trail-open to users other than those with dogs Restoration and Buffer Area-actively restored,maintained and �,J T,•! Off-leash Dog Area-designated area for off-leash play monitored to improve and buffer critical natural systems Interim Use Plan Map :�_EOAN IAECOM MGB+A o,e 14 Parley's Historic Nature Park Comprehensive Use and Management Plan 4 • Brief Review of Public Safety Building Design — Update • Industry Comparisons • Zoning and Plan Approvals • Construction Update z.. % _ rya ._ . ,_ . cii,, , ._.... ._,_ r,.. .......:;;.... ....)i _.,.. ":!!'lir- .-..-----:-..7 ' - c - - 14" .. k IIM vt ._ r---..--, ,.,-.---", , _,7!a:thilatio, - . .-- v , — a. Agenda Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ®§vs . Site Plan Development -, _ _ , • s 5 �lie ipco 1 .‘\:1: .•,,,:‘N.\ I 1 ....-4-IP _ . __.\1r•i-k•1I.:4132ria. I i3!--i-i-.,:„040•.,44.1 11_'4.N;-„."i.nk..•., hi..:p.... 3) sl _ _ toi i Ip•i. .-..-i-..,2.—,'.'-4.1 t-iira• - I ❑ + . 4. 21 • ''t 411. i ----* 11/ al ' 6 4 q 1 —1 —F... 411 . '' Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ®MsvOC s 0 North West Elevation i . ...-0, 4 .... r : ,...,,---.... .......--,.....-- -.......-._,_ , . . ......._„............ .....„ ...„, ,, , V• , , .\ 1 • \:, 1 \\t' • / I' 1 I ,o' , • ,a i i...\ • I . "1 - * _ • ,, . Arr , a:, , . • : :-. ,= 7. r,, , i 1 a.__ MA •••' 001 .... ... ( ---....--,,, ...., . —.1ar....../•••; i onimilb. . r .. -. ''-;'.-`• _....a...S.-... . "..'."...1 i 18 i 11001111.1... / i .t= ...•, . .• t'-....'-.7- - ,i... • f l ORM !,.c,,',•,•".;tfrIP'e- ----- --Tr. r-:qv, • , I NIIIIMINNirrr '','4 f 4141,"'72 - . 1 11‘."' . I I MINNS i 4 ;# , i 01 idi I F 1 / 1 /WID/1"—r ' i '---f e 4. ., .., /I Ill , ' 4 ' :1 4 I.I t 14, + , —_ Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings on ryssA Industry Comparisons Comparing construction projects of similar size, Okland Construction was asked to evaluate: 1/ Envelope System as a Percent of Total Cost ✓ Glass Cladding Area Compared to Project Area Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings Mil sys�nns C) • NuSkin Innovations Center , . _ ...„,. . . . .,_,.. ,. . ,,,- I _ --, ■_, oar woe 'Lis, .. - 4 a.----"" 0.11•11A*1 jiiiirer -.11Pd , . +." i ' --�_ c fp. Approximate Total Cost: $64,000,000 Envelope as Percent of Total Cost: 15% Project Area: 173,478 Glass Cladding Area Compared to Project Area: 35% Envelope Cost: $9,757,400 Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ®MOCA srsns • Utah County Convention Center N%4 41•N --" Approximate Total Cost: $40,000,000 Envelope as Percent of Total Cost: 17% Project Area: 144,000 Glass Cladding Area Compared to Project Area: 32% Envelope Cost: $6,673,090 Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ®MOCA. sysrenns University Neuropsychiatric Institute . _ 1 1 1 1 1 14;q1 i ; 1 E 1 Avis! Approximate Total Cost: $35,000,000 Envelope as Percent of Total Cost: 14% Project Area: 120,029 Glass Cladding Area Compared to Project Area: 13% Envelope Cost: $4,801,041 Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ®MsnsOCA_ sv • I • Public Safety Building .. . - .10?..., .,_ • iiiiie,fri . .../ - ,.. .,- .,... it- --,---„----_-__:.--_,_:,..... ..._ _ .,.. ..........___, .„.. ..„...,... -ir, , -ram- _ r.,. �` 4111.k / /. ifillP i.A. . II ; ; , , :, �1b �._ a l L_�r. ;4�., r �R II t I af.d i I ir r t Approximate Total Cost: $77,290,000 Envelope as Percent of Total Cost: 10% Prject Area: 172,000 Glass Cladding Area Compared to Project Area: 25% Envelope Cost: $7,644,362 Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ®MOCA sysns. Envelope System Cost Comparison Project Project Project Envelope Envelope Glass Approximate Area Cost as Percent Cladding Total Cost of Total Area Cost Compared to Project Area Salt Lake City Public Safety $ 77,290,000 172,000 $ 7,644,362 10% 25% Salt Lake City Public Safety $ 77,290,000 172,000 $ 5,254,895 7% 25% Building(without premiums to GLASS for Net Zero and Ballistics) • Utah County Convention Center $ 40,000,000 144,000 $ 6,673,090 17% 32% Nu Skin Innovations Center $ 64,000,000 173,478. $ 9,757,400 15% 35% University Neuropsychiatric $ 35,000,000 120,029. $ 4,801,041 14% 13% Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ®NEMs. Zoning and Plan Approvals PL-2 Zoning Approval Process • Application Submitted - Complete • Planning Commission - February 23rd • City Council — March 22nd Subdivision Approval Process • Application Submitted - February 21st • Preliminary Approval — April 18th • Final Approval — May 6th Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings (aNso ns' • Zoning and Plan Approval Planned Development Approval • Application Submitted — February 14th • City Planning Approval — May 6th Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ® f, Construction Update _ . _ - r BUILDING DEMOLITION SCHEDULE �, "Demolition is averaged at two weeks per stntcttue starting on Feb 14 i M vr f• �.} „, i AIIIP MacCall Parking Garage , IiiMetropolis Bldg 1 III MacCall Bldg i: t N 4 D NAI Bldg f z � f W • RI II AmericanTitle m .: i I: 3 . , t t PROJECT BOUNDARIES iJ Construction Fence Erected—Feb 14 I B © Construction Fence Erected—early March 1 2 UTILITIES&TRENCHING • 'Dates are approximate.Utility connections are tentative and will be scheduled by the utility companies.City will ffA D provide a 5 day notice of any power outages. C © Utility Trenching—Feb 14—Feb 18. IP CI Utility Trenching—late March CONSTRUCTION MILESTONES •' Official Groundbreaking—May 2011 Final Completion—March 2013 Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings (CI MOCA sysTEMs. o e Construction Budget Development Approach Feb. 22 - Three independent estimates Mar. 15 - Budget resolution workshop Results ✓ Higher level of certainty in final number ✓ Better overall understanding of scope Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings MOCA. SYSTEMS . , 0 ,• Construction Budget November 2010 Update Sift Mom Oeserykion Ceranneen CM Dente1111. 0 ,.T MG s ONDITIONs 30040 31 EARTHWORK 120 pm el II RIX I'M S. Damn= P•111111.Illnwfure ": Construction Budget O MASONRY KW. METALS V THERMAL 0 MOISTURE PROTECTION 711020MI 04 OPENI.S O MOPS = Summary SPECIALTIES 4161 11 EOLMMENT 10.00 14 couvEye‘G sysTEms '.'" Budget $77, 290,000 0 FIRE SUPPRF SSION 33000 22 PI PROING 0000 23 REAM,VENTILATING A/JR CON01110101,IOTA,-, 334 00 O III.Tall Al SSO 00 TS ELEC TRICAL SAFE TV a SI GRIT V .000 31 I 010.010 I ATERIOR NM WI MI NTS ''''. Demolition $ 490,000 *WM Immure 111,1141,010 IS0 1170,00,130nts 03 COW RI TE """ Parking Structure $15,945,090 OS MEIALs VI THERMAL a MOISTURE PROTECTION 000 SPEC 141 TIES = Site Improvements $ 6,288,589 12 THRIUSIIINGS 22 pl oldesio II.10 31 EARTHWORK = Public Safety Bldg. $43,385,000 32 EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS MOMS Rood 0030.0/11 HO f sal = General Services $ 2,948,000 33 UTSITIES IR TRANSPORTA I 1011 0.0110 WATER FOUNTAIN GAMS General Req. $ 2,300,000 Wm Ingemmems Onninsi VOA*tiara.* WON Onnlind Vail*04~ Publk Seery Olds """ Contingency $ 5,385,501 ., 1 00 RE TE 2.000/00 04 MASOHRI MM. OS MEIAI s 10800 04 WOOD.PL•STIC 3 A COMPOSITES 0000 Or THERMAL A MOISTURE PROTECTION 00000 " OPENINGS """. Total $77,192,180 Se r.PS.E‘ EIPAP110 Pil = Under $ 97,820 13 SPECIAL CORSTRUC 0. IMMO 14 CONVEY.EQUIPMENT NUN 21 FIRE SuPPRESSIox 0000. 22 PLUMBING OWN O MT FRP AL /.016.1.0 pubis Mott WE 43,3014410 Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings rtn MOCA ',NJ SYSTEMS' _ n Refinements and Bid Results • Reduction of approximately 5,000 Square Feet of the building. • Excellent Bid results in : — Hazardous material abetment — Demolition Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ®MSa et Current PSB Budget • Consulting Fees $ 11,315,385 • Construction Costs $ 76, 125,050 • Owner Costs $ 27, 149,534 • Contingencies and Fees $ 10,407,505 • Total $124,997,474 Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ®MOCK SYSTEM 0 Design Schedule Key Dates • Detailed Design — November 25, 2010 to February 22, 2011 • Detailed Estimate Workshop — March 15, 2011 — Presentation of Final Design — Ten. March 22 — 30, 2011 • Construction Bid Packages — Demolition begins — February 14 -18 , 2011 — Excavation begins — May 9-13, 2011 — Foundation and Parking begins — July 18 -20, 2011 — Base Building begins — November 4 - 6, 2011 • Completion Scheduled for March 31, 2013 Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ®MOB e • Questions -: • k / E / .�s1- A , , / / _� \� ;.` ,�L per_ Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings ®M ems' MOCASALT LAKE CITY PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING SYSTEMS- MEMORANDUM Date: 2 February 2011 To: PSB Steering Committee, Casey Stewart,Wilf Sommerkorn, Lisa Shaffer From: Chad Jones CC: David Hart, Mike Stransky,Valerie Nagasawa Re: Public Safety Building Zoning RESOLUTION Through meetings with City Planning&Zoning, the following have been resolved as the direction for the Public Safety Building • City planning will present a proposed zone of PL-2 to the planning commission on February 23rd for the Public Safety Building.This will then go to the City Council for final approval on March 22,2011 (tentative) • City planning will present a proposed amendment to PL& PL-2 zoning requirements to the planning commission on February 23`d.This amendment will allow communication towers for public safety use at an unlimited height.This will then go to the City Council for final approval on March 22,2011 (tentative) • MOCA will fill out and file a subdivision application to combine all existing lots into one, describe the property line to the north, abandon interior property lines no longer required, and preserve existing property lines on the west, south, and east of the property. • GSBS will fill out and file a planned development application to apply for required variances under the existing property lines and PL-2 zone. SCHEDULE IMPACTS GSBS is directed to design to a PL-2 zone and follow the existing property lines. Design and construction will not be delayed as long as each of the dates and approvals listed in this memo are achieved. MOCA Systems Page 1 The final excavation bid package is scheduled for delivery March 25, 2011. City permitting is then scheduled to issue the excavation permit by May 16, 2011. It is known that a permit cannot be issued without approval of: 1) Zoning approval, 2) Subdivision approval, 3) Planned development variance approval. 1) ZONING APPROVAL-Planning is scheduled to present to the planning commission on February 23,2011. If approved,it then needs to be pushed to have briefed by the City Council on March 8`h. A hearing could then be set for March 22"d. The City Council can then be asked to vote that night if the majority approves. To push the the City Council, City Planning MUST write the ordinance PRIOR to the planning commission meeting so that it can be passed to the City Council immediately upon approval by the planning commission to avoid delays. 2) SUBDIVISION APPROVAL - It is anticipated that planning will require two months to review and provide preliminary approval. It is then distributed to the necessary City Officials for final approval which is estimated to take three weeks. MOCA will submit the subdivision plat and application NLT February 21, 2011.We then anticipate preliminary approval by April 18, 2011 and final approval by May 6,2011. There will be no delays IF these deadlines are met and City Permitting is allowed to accept plans and conduct their review with the assumption that the subdivision will be approved. 3) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL—It is anticipated that the planned development process could take as long as three months. GSBS will submit the application NLT February 11, 2011 to allow three months for review with a approval provided by City Planning NLT May 6, 2011.There will be no delays IF these deadlines are met and City Permitting is allowed to accept plans and conduct their review with the assumption that proposed variances will be approved. MOCA Systems Page 2 MEMORANDUM DATE: February 10,2011 TO: City Council Members FROM: Russell Weeks RE: Proposed Amendment to Salt Lake City Code Pertaining to Adding a New Revenue Source CC: Cindy Gust-Jenson,David Everitt,Ed Rutan,Maureen Riley,Randy Berg,Jay Bingham,Marco Kunz,Neil Lindberg,Jennifer Bruno,Gina Chamness,Joseph Moratalla,Kay Christensen This memorandum pertains to a proposed amendment to Salt Lake City Code Chapter 16 that would create a fee paid by people who rent vehicles at the Salt Lake City International Airport.The fee would be used to relocate airport car rental facilities from their current location to a location at the south end of the airport.The fee also would be used to help pay for expanded areas to park rental cars and vehicle fueling and washing areas for car rental companies in a new covered parking garage when it is built. The City Council is scheduled to receive a briefing from Department of Airport officials at the Council's work session February 15. OPTIONS • Adopt the proposed ordinance. • Do not adopt the proposed ordinance. • Amend the proposed ordinance. POTENTIAL MOTIONS City Council staff will prepare motions after the February 15 briefmg. ISSUES/QUESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION If the City Council adopts the proposed ordinance,it would enact a"customer facility charge"of no more than$5 per day for a maximum of 12 days for one year after the effective date of the ordinance. Under the proposed ordinance,after the first year the Department of Airports executive director would determine the amount of the customer facility charge and the method of calculating it.The proposed ordinance would cap the amount charged at$10 per day. The policy question before the City Council is whether the Department of Airports should determine the amount of the customer facility charge after the first year,or whether the City Council in its capacity as the City's financial steward should determine the amount by ordinance. 1 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION As the transmittal from the Administration indicates, more than 85 airports nationally charge a customer facility charge to help build and maintain car rental facilities that serve airline passengers. Charges at 16 large hub airports average$2.50 to$5 per day, according to the transmittal. An analysis by a Department of Airports consultant suggests that the department should initially charge a$4 per day fee for a maximum of 12 days per contract. After the initial period,the rate could be increased or decreased as needed for construction or when debt service payments should begin, according to the transmittal. The Department of Airports is at a point in its preparations to develop a new parking garage and terminals where existing car rental facilities need to move to the south end of the International Airport. In addition, when a new parking garage is built it will include a first level that holds 1,200 parking spaces for rental cars—400 more spaces than at the current garage—and facilities next to the garage to wash and fuel returned vehicles, according to the transmittal. It should be noted that people who rent vehicles in Salt Lake City pay 6.85 percent of vehicle rental costs in state and municipal sales taxes.They also pay an additional,9.5 percent of vehicle rental costs in what is termed tourism taxes,according to the State Tax Commission Internet site.The combination adds 16.35 percent to a total rental bill. Salt Lake City Convention&Visitors Bureau President Scott Beck said the state and local taxes and fees on rental vehicles places Salt Lake City in about the middle of the spectrum of vehicle rental taxes and fees nationally. RECEI vle Ciii.iiiiis OUNCIL oFr;iCl= Salt Lake City Department of Airports RECEIVEED CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL JAN 0 6 2011 I gob,. lt aloe Date Received:Sapt ���� t It Mayor Davit veritt, of of Staff Date sent to Council: o l ( 1 I z-a t 1 • TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: December 24,2010 JT Martin,Chair FROM: Maureen Riley, Director, Department of Airports w „ (801) 575-2408 SUBJECT: Proposed Revisions to City Code Chapter 16—Airport and Addition of Section 16.12.195 , —Customer Facility Charge STAFF CONTACT: Jay Bingham,(801)-575-2916 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinances RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that City Council approve changes to City Code Chapter 16 to provide for the assessment,collection,and disposition of Customer Facility Charges(CFC)on rental car(RAC) contracts to pay for rental car facility improvements and related transportation costs at the Airport. BUDGET IMPACT: Financial impacts are forecast to be cost and revenue neutral. The CFC is a pass-through charge that is collected from rental car agencies and used to pay for rental car facility improvements and other related costs. Page 1 of 3 Phone 801-575-2400 I Fax 801-575-2679 I P.O. Box 145550,Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 I slcairport.com Amok BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: A preliminary phase of the Terminal Redevelopment Program(TRP)requires the relocation of existing rental car maintenance facilities to the south end of the Airport,whereas existing maintenance facilities are located adjacent to the parking garage. This will provide space for temporary roads and access to the TRP construction site. Additionally,plans for a new parking garage include a first level that is devoted to approximately 1200 ready-return spaces for rental cars. This is a 400-space increase over ready-return spaces in the existing parking garage. Plans also include a quick turn facility(QTA)adjacent to the new parking garage for fueling and washing of vehicles. Estimated costs for the parking garage and RAC facilities at Salt Lake City International Airport are between$200-300 million. The CFC is recognized by both the airport and rental car industries as a revenue source to fund the construction and improvement of RAC facilities. To date,over 85 domestic airports collect a CFC for this purpose. Most CFC programs use a transaction-day basis for assessing the fee,with a not-to-exceed amount per transaction day. CFC programs are limited to funding RAC facilities. These costs include the traditional base facilities, environmental initiatives,certain tenant finishes,and major equipment,such as busses and fueling and wash facilities. Also,the CFC can be used for a pro rata share of joint use capital costs,such as ready- return spaces in a garage, roadways,and signage. The CFC can also be used to pay common costs of a shuttle bus operation for rental car customers. However,transportation costs associated with bussing are often recognized as a separate transportation charge on the RAC contract. CFCs are expended on a pay-as-you-go basis or for the payment of debt service associated with RAC facilities. The collection authority generally is flexible,to allow for matching of the fee with the current expense. For example,CFCs often are initially collected at a lower rate to pre-fund large construction projects,and then are increased as bonds are issued and debt is amortized. Later,the CFC may be decreased as debt is repaid,and thereafter adjusted for renewal and replacement costs. The CFC charge at 16 other large hub airports averages from$2.50 to$5.00 per day. An analysis prepared by LeighFisher, Inc.(formerly Jacobs Consultancy)suggests SLC should charge an initial daily fee of$4.00 for a maximum of 12 days per contract. This rate could be increased or decreased as needed for construction or when debt service payments begin. Commencement of collection would begin in Spring 201 I. Authorized uses would include I)capital costs of a new RAC facility, including a pro rata share of common infrastructure such as roadways, ready return and QTA areas,as well as reserves for renewal and replacement capital costs;2)transportation costs and other direct costs associated with interim operations during construction phasing and relocation of RAC operations;and 3)base infrastructure to future leased areas for service centers, including site prep. The CFC will not be used for ongoing individual RAC operational costs or operation and maintenance expenses related to the RAC facility. The financing plan for the RAC facility will be completed after final design,and based on costs of the preferred facility alternative and construction schedule. Upon complete payment of costs related to the initial authorized uses,CFC collections can be directed to new uses related to the RAC program,or can be terminated. A meeting with representatives of the rental car companies was held on December 9,20I0, where Airport staff presented a proposed plan for redevelopment of the RAC facilities. All rental car companies operating at the Airport either attended the meeting or participated by phone. Representatives from Avis, Budget,and Hertz all verbally expressed support for the CFC program and for pre-collection of CFCs, in advance of final design. Page 2 of 3 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2010 (Amending Title 16 to include a customer facility charge (CFC) and provide for the disposition and accounting of funds collected as a result of the CFC) An ordinance amending Chapter 16, Salt Lake City Code, by adding a new section, 16.12.195, to Article I of Title 16 to create and establish a customer facility charge; and amending section 16.12.200, pertaining to funds; disposition and accounting, to include the funds received from the customer facility charge. WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation (city) owns and operates the Salt Lake City International Airport through its Department of Airports; and WHEREAS, the city enters into concession and lease contracts with on-airport rental car companies that serve airline passengers at the airport; and WHEREAS, the city has the authority to establish fees and charges for the use of services and facilities by rental car companies and customers at the airport; and WHEREAS, the CFC is to be used for the purpose of paying for the city's costs associated with all facilities used for rental car concessions or for any rental car related purpose deemed appropriate by the city, including without limitation, payment or reimbursement of city's costs associated with construction of rental car facilities, and related transportation facilities and equipment, payment of debt service on obligations of the city for the cost of such facilities and equipment, the creation of reasonable reserves, or for such other rental car related purpose as the city determines; and Page 1 of 4 WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the city and the public to impose a CFC on transactions for the rental of a vehicle from all on-airport rental car companies; and to require such rental car companies to collect and remit CFC funds to the city for the purposes specified in the ordinance; and WHEREAS, after a hearing before the City Council, the City Council has determined that the following ordinance is in the best interest of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah as follows: SECTION 1. That Chapter 16, Salt Lake City Code, be and the same hereby is, amended to add Section 16.12.195, to read as follows: 16.12.195: CUSTOMER FACILITY CHARGE: A. There is hereby imposed a Customer Facility Charge (CFC) on each transaction day, up to and including a maximum of 12 days per contract, for the rental of a vehicle from an on-airport rental car company(Airport Rental Car Company). B. The Executive Director of the Salt Lake City Department of Airports or designee is authorized to implement and administer the CFC program on behalf of the city, through concession and/or lease contracts or other means, including without limitation, the rules and regulations of the airport. The CFC charges may be pre- collected for future use, as specified in 16.12.200. C. The CFC shall not exceed $ 5.00 per transaction day during the first year following the effective date. Thereafter, the method of calculating the CFC and the amount of such CFC shall be determined by the Executive Director of the Salt Lake City Department of Airports on behalf of the city. However, the CFC shall not exceed $10.00 per transaction day. City may at any time and for any reason, change the amount of the CFC or discontinue it upon written notice to any affected Airport Rental Car Company. D. The Airport Rental Car Company shall collect the CFC and shall hold the CFC in trust for the benefit of the city. The CFC at all times shall be property of the city and the Airport Rental Car Company shall have no ownership or property interest in the CFC. The Airport Rental Car Company shall segregate, separately account for and .. Page 2 of 4 disclose all CFC's as trust funds in its financial statements, and shall maintain adequate records that account for all CFC's charged and collected. E. Airport Rental Car Companies shall list the CFC separately on its customer invoice, describing it as a "Customer Facility Charge." F. The Airport Rental Car Company shall remit directly to the Salt Lake City Department of Airports on a monthly basis all CFC's that were collected or should have been collected from its airport customers. The CFC's shall be received no later than the last day of the month following the month in which the CFC's were collected. G. The Airport Rental Car Company shall submit to the Salt Lake City Department of Airports on a monthly basis a transaction report, which includes transaction days, a summary of daily business transactions in connection with the airport, an accounting of all fees charged to airport customers in connection with such transactions, and such other information as required by city in form and substance satisfactory to the Salt Lake City Department of Airports. SECTION 2. That Chapter 16.12.200, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to Funds; Disposition and Accounting related to the Salt Lake City Department of Airports, be and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 16.12.200: FUNDS; DISPOSITION AND ACCOUNTING: A. All funds received from fuel, taxes, rentals, concessions, customer facility charges, or any other source by the airport shall be placed in the airport enterprise funds and kept separate and apart from all other city funds. The collection, accounting, and expenditure of all airport funds shall be in accordance with existing fiscal policy of the city. B. Funds received from customer facility charges shall be used for paying the city's capital costs for construction and improvement of rental car facilities at the airport, including costs that support environmental sustainability; paying a pro rata share of city's costs for joint-use infrastructure, such as roadways, ready-return and quick- turnaround areas allocable to rental car usage; building reserves for renewal and replacement capital costs; paying common costs of a shuttle bus operation for rental car customers; funding transportation costs and other costs associated with interim operations during construction phasing and relocation of rental car operations; paying the city's costs for infrastructure for future lease areas for service center, including site prep; funding debt service associated with rental car facilities; or funding city's costs for such other rental car related purpose as the city determines. Page 3 of 4 SECTION 3. This ordinance takes effect upon first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of , 2011. CHAIRPERSON CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. Amok MAYOR CITY RECORDER APPROVER)AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Date (SEAL) °'�$' �- By.. Bill No. of 2010 Published: Page 4 of 4 71. =�= Status Update (n t.i.. ; ; q..i.7t2yi ilf.: Sustainable Planning Division Community&Economic Development Department City Code Initiative To: Council members From: Wilf Sommerkorn, Planning Director Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director Date: February 11, 2011 CC: Mayor Ralph Becker; David Everitt; Chief of Staff; Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Director of City Council; Frank Gray, Community and Economic Development Director;; Mary De La Mare-Schaefer, Community& Economic Development Department Deputy Director; Wilf Sommerkom, Planning Director; Vicki Bennett, Sustainability Division Director Helen Langan, Senior Advisor; Chris Duerksen, Clarion Associates; Joyce Allgaier, Clarion Associates;file Re: Status and list of Issues relating to Sustainability City Code Initiative Attached please find a status document of the various topics included in the Sustainable City Code Initiative project. The purpose of the information is to provide a status of where in the process each topic is and to identify what issues there are for each topic. The Planning Division would like to keep the City Council members informed on the status of the project and ensure you are aware of the issues we are encountering and addressing as we move through the public input process for the various amendments to the City Code. Staff has worked very closely with Clarion Associates and the Sustainability Division to move forward with this project. Staff has also taken the time needed to obtain feedback from City departments, interested parties and actual practitioners to address conflicts and ensure that the regulations will support what the practitioners are already doing, (such as meeting with Wasatch Community Gardens to hear how they operate and receive their specific feedback on the proposed ordinance). We have assigned various planners in our office to work on each of the various topics. Those assignments have been made based on expertise of the planners. 1 February 15, 2011 At this time, we have received draft language from Clarion for the topics identified by the City Council and Mayor to address. In some instances, as noted in the attachment, it has been decided by the Administration that it is more feasible to address the topics in a way other than through regulation. We are currently working to obtain public input from the general public, City advisory boards, special interest groups and stakeholders through the months of February through April. We anticipate that the Planning Commission will have held public hearings on most of the reaming topics by the end of May 2011. As the Planning Commission makes recommendations, we will forward those topics to the City Council through the regular transmittal process. In association with the Sustainable City Code Initiative, the Planning Division has created a document titled Vision for a Green City; Salt Lake City's Sustainable City Code Initiative, which illustrates how the Sustainable City Code Initiative implements the Mayor's Blueprint for a Green City. The purpose of this document is to help illustrate how each specific draft ordinance fits in with the larger vision. We appreciate the City Council allocating time for us to update you on this important project. Thank You 2 February 15, 2011 Sustainability City Code Initiative Project Status Report- February 15, 2011 Bundle 1. 1. Transit Oriented/Mixed Use Development -Planners;Nick Norris,Nick Britton, Doug Dansie, Ana Valdemoros Transit Oriented/Mixed Use Development is a type of development/design that creates compact,walkable, mixed-use communities close to transit stations. They bring housing, jobs, and services together in such a way that makes it safe and convenient to travel by foot,bicycle, and transit as well as by car and can create lively neighborhood activity centers. This type of development can significantly reduce the use of automobiles and associated greenhouse gases from burning of fossil fuels. The adopted regulations promote uses that support transit and discourage auto-oriented uses. The regulations allow for an increased number of housing units around transit stops. The regulations also ensure compatibility of new development with surrounding residential areas through enhanced design features such as requiring stepping back upper floors of buildings on the side that abuts a lower height residential structure. The regulations require the creation of pedestrian-oriented, walkable environments that accommodate a variety of circulation options(rail,bicycles, walking). Status of TOD/Mixed Use Topic: ➢ The City Council adopted this ordinance on August 11, 2010. 2. Urban Agriculture Planners: Ray Milliner and Casey Stewart Urban agriculture contributes nutritious and fresh food to communities through local food production. The ability to produce and distribute food throughout local neighborhoods is important as the demand for nutritional, good-tasting food continues to grow throughout the country. Many people however, do not have access to land for food production so removing City regulatory barriers and strategically zoning lands for this purpose is important. a. Community Gardens Revise current zoning regulations relating to community gardens and allow as a permitted use in more zoning districts. b. Urban Agriculture(community support agriculture,urban farms, seasonal farm stands); Create a definition for urban agriculture and provide regulations to support these types of uses within the City. 1 c. Accessory Structures relating to Urban Agriculture: Create definitions for greenhouses, hoop houses and cold frames and modify current accessory structure regulations to allow these types of structures. Status of Urban Agriculture Topic: ➢ October 27,2010. Planning Commission voted to forward favorable recommendation. ➢ City Council Briefing held February 1, 2011 Response to City Council Questions: The City Council discussed the proposed ordinance at its February 1, 2011 City Council Work Session. The questions raised by the City Council members and the Planning Division responses are listed below. 1. Revise qualifying provisions to allow only one demolition of a single family dwelling per farm. a. Response: Staff has inserted provisions stating that only one demolition is allowed to make room for a community garden. 2. Expand the definition of Community Garden to include animals, community events and sales of produce. a. Response: Staff has expanded the definition of community garden to include community events and the sale of produce. Staff did not include allowing the raising of animals at a community garden as they are addressed in the animal , section of the City Code Chapter 8. In addition, staff is of the opinion that it may be problematic to raise animals in a community garden, which does not have constant staffing or surveillance. 3. Expand size allowed of farm stands on private property. a. Response: Staff has expanded the maximum size allowed from 100 square feet to 150 square feet. 4. Revise standards for farm stands in public right-of-way. a. Response: Staff has revised the standard for farm stands to state that they must be on private property and not in the public right-of-way. 5. Is there a need to preclude spraying with pesticides in greenhouses in a residential area? a. Response: Pesticide use is allowed in private gardens. The greenhouses will be limited in size by the coverage limits so they will not be very large, thereby resulting in very small amounts of pesticide use. Staff is of the opinion that it is not necessary to regulate this. Hazardous materials are regulated through other means. 6. Is the lot coverage requirement liberal enough? a, 2 a. Response: It is the Planning Staffs understanding that the City Council Staff would determine this through the public hearing process with the City Council. 7. Are chicken coops excessively limited by lot coverage requirements relating to accessory structures? a. Response: City Code Chapter 8 Animals does not include a maximum limit for chicken coop size. In addition,the proposed amendments for accessory structures remove coops from the normal accessory structure limits of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Renewable Energy Planners: Ray Milliner and Casey Stewart The proposal is to amend current City regulations to make it easier to use renewable energy systems such as solar and wind. The Topics include: a. Amend existing accessory use/structure provisions to allow renewable energy facilities including wind and solar. The regulations also identify where solar panels are most appropriate to be located on a lot in an historic district with a process that is quicker to get through where the solar panels are located in a manner that is less visible and attached appropriately so as not to damage an historic structure. b. Allow solar arrays and large wind generating facilities as principal uses in non- residential districts such as manufacturing and the Airport. The regulations would include regulations which would ensure they are compatible with their surroundings including such things as limits on height,noise, lighting, etc. Status of Renewable Energy Topic: ➢ October 27,2010. Planning Commission voted to forward favorable recommendation. ➢ February 1, 2011 City Council held briefmg. Response to City Council Questions: The City Council discussed the proposed ordinance at its February 1,2011 City Council Work Session. The questions raised by the City Council members and the Planning Division responses are listed below. 1. Would a wind tower have to be located in a way to ensure it does not hit other utility lines in the event it tips over? Response: Yes. In residential areas,the maximum height of the wind tower is based on the width of the lot. Since wind towers need to be high enough to effectively capture the wind,there are probably not a lot of residential areas where wind turbines would be feasible. Having said that, if it was feasible to be placed on a specific lot in a residential area, the placement would have to ensure that it would not hit any other utility lines if it were to fall over. It would also have to meet structural stability requirements to help ensure it would not fall over. 3 Large wind turbines would have to ensure that any associated utility lines are placed underground. 2. What role does the Airport have in reviewing large wind turbines to ensure they do not conflict with airport operations? Response: Any project within an Airport related zones including areas on and adjacent to an airport would be reviewed by the Airport prior to the approval of the wind turbine. All of these types of facilities would also have to meet Federal Aviation Authority(FAA)regulations as well. 4. Accessory Dwelling Units. Planner; Michael Maloy. An Accessory Dwelling Unit(ADU)sometimes referred to as a"mother-in law apartment" is a residential unit located on the same lot as a single-family dwelling unit, either inside the home(such as a basement unit), an addition to the home(such as a rear addition) or detached from the home(such as in a cottage in the back yard or over a garage) Status of Accessory Dwelling Units Topic: 1. Initial public feedback was negative(December 2009). 2. Public Focus Group convened in July 2010 to identify issues and review ideas. Mainly Affordable Housing Advocates attended the meeting. Sugar House and Fairpark Chairs are supportive. Phil Carroll from Avenues said he did not think Avenues would be supportive. 3. September 2, 2010 Mayor's Breakfast meeting with Community Council chairs to provide information and receive initial feedback. 4. September 16,2010 Salt Lake City Network meeting to present information and receive feedback. 5. Posted as a topic on Open City Hall to gather public input in September 2010 (to date have received 30 comments). 6. October 21, 2010 Public Forum held. Only six people attended. Some for and some against the idea. 7. November 10, 2010. Planning Commission briefmg. 8. January 5, 2011. Presented information to the Utah Housing Coalition 9. January 16, 2011. Received revised ordinance from Clarion. 10. Public Input meetings in February and March including the Housing Advisory and Appeals Board and the Housing Trust Fund Board. Issues: 1. How do you enforce owner occupancy? Even if it is on the deed, how do you prove someone lives there? The owner will say they do. The neighbor will say they do not. The Enforcement Division of the City has concerns. Planning Staff is currently recommending using language similar to the Provo City's Accessory Apartment ordinance which is very specific on how to document owner occupancy. The Provo ordinance has been upheld by the Utah Supreme Court. 4 2. How to deal with parking? The current ordinance requires one parking stall per ADU. Is this enough? Should there be a method to waive the requirement if the ADU is near a fixed transit stop or close to a major bus route? In what configuration should the parking be? Is tandem parking acceptable (parking one car behind the other)? Can on-street parking be counted toward the required parking in order to decrease the need to remove landscaping from the rear yard? 3. It is important to require a license for these types of units to ensure the units meet minimum standards, are well maintained and ensure any issues are resolved quickly. Will these regulations help address issues relating to current units not recognized as legal by the City? How does the proposed licensing requirement relate to legalizing existing units? 4. Should there be design guidelines for detached accessory dwelling units? Currently design standards relating to materials,roof pitch etc., are only applied to historic districts. 5. Should there be a pilot program such as limiting the number of permits for a given year or only allowing ADUs in certain geographic areas during the pilot program? 6. Should ADUs only be allowed where we want more density like near fixed transit stops or near major bus routes that are not likely to change? 7. Would ADUs compete too heavily with rental units located in older structures or historic houses? 8. Planning Staff has tried to obtain as much public input as possible. Some community council chairs have stated their memberships are opposed to the proposals; others say their memberships are supportive. We have not heard from most of the community council chairs although most have seen the presentation more than once. We have heard from perhaps six community council chairs (Avenues, East Central, East Liberty Park, Liberty Wells,Fairpark and Sugar House.) The input from the community councils as well as from various housing organizations and the Open City Hall comments are mixed between those in favor and those opposed. 5. Solar Oriented Lots and Connectivity-Revising Subdivision/Site Development Ordinance Planner; Casey Stewart Two of the topics posed by Clarion for the Sustainable City Code Initiative include the requirement for Solar Oriented Lots and Connectivity. Solar Oriented Lots are lots and houses that are situated to take advantage of solar access so homes have more natural light and the installation of solar systems is more effective. Connectivity addresses requirements that ensure a development includes safe,efficient and logical connections so people are able to access destination points such as commercial areas, schools,parks, etc,by foot or bike or other means of travel besides a private automobile. The Subdivision and Site Development ordinances are the most logical place for these types of regulations to be located. The City's current Subdivision and Site Development ordinances are very outdated, do not include current State law requirements, are redundant 5 and the regulations are not clear. The Planning Staff is in the process of rewriting these ordinances and will include the sustainability provisions in the rewrite. Status of Subdivision/Site Development Ordinance Rewrite: ➢ The Planning Staff is currently rewriting the Subdivision Ordinance. The appropriate sustainability concepts will be inserted into the draft. (Tentative Planning Commission work session in May 2011) Issues: 1. In existing neighborhoods, requiring solar oriented lots may not be compatible with the existing development pattern. 2. In the built area of the City,this requirement may make it less economically feasible for infill development to occur because it may result in fewer lots 3. Rather than requiring solar oriented lots and homes in existing parts of the built City, we may want to encourage them by providing incentives such as modified yard requirements if a percentage of the lots are solar oriented. 4. Solar Oriented Lots,may be less walkable(wider more shallow lots, rather than narrow width, deeper lots), and more likely to have attached garages near the front of the house. Attached garages on the front of the house may conflict with compatible infill issues. 5. It may be most appropriate to require these types of developments in the Northwest Quadrant if the City Council decides that development should occur in that portion of the City. 6. The original connectivy draft ordinance included a rather complicated equation related to connectivity. The City Administration is currently working to codify all of the design requirements that each specific discipline(such as Transportation, Engineering, Building)requires. Staff is proposing to use these types of professional best practice standards from the various City disciplines,rather than the complicated equation for connectivity. 6. Solar Ready Buildings, evaluate for redevelopment and infill options A solar-ready residential dwelling is a home that is equipped with upgraded plumbing, electric, roofing, and other systems to accommodate future installation and use of a solar energy system, such as solar panels on the roof or a home that provides either solar hot- water heating or solar electric power. The regulation would require all new single- and twin-family dwellings to be "solar- ready. Issues: 1. This is a Building Code issue. The State's Uniform Building Code Commission would have to agree to the proposed changes. This Commission gives a recommendation to a State Legislative Oversight Committee. Knowing the clout of the Home Builders Association at the State Level, the Administration has decided not to proceed with the proposed regulations at this time. 6 Status of Solar Ready Building Topic: ➢ A brochure has been created by Planning Intern to encourage Solar Ready Buildings. It has been posted on various City websites and copies are available for distribution at the Building Permit's Counter ➢ The Planning Director and Building Official will speak with Legislative liaison to determine if there is a legislator who would be willing to sponsor a bill to allow cities to require this. ➢ Staff will also review the appropriateness of developing incentives to encourage these types of developments (such as allow for extra density,) as part of changes to other parts of ordinance(such as subdivision,planned development regulations, etc.) Bundle 2 7. Tree Protection- Planner; Doug Dansie Tree protection includes regulations that will encourage the preservation of mature, desirable trees (specimen trees) during development of new buildings (except for houses and duplexes). The ordinance allows for modifications to regulations relating to where a building sits on a property in an effort to save the trees. The regulations also require that if a specimen tree has to be removed for development then more trees have to be planted on the lot. It also includes specific regulations of how to ensure that a tree remaining on a lot is not damaged during construction in a way that would shorten the life of the tree. Status: ➢ November 10,2010 Planning Commission voted to transmit a favorable recommendation to the City Council. ➢ On January 18, 2011 the City Council held a work session on this topic. The Planning Staff is working with the Public Utilities Department and Urban Forester to address issues raised at the Council Briefing. 8. Water-Efficient Landscaping- Planner; Doug Dansie The purpose of these regulations is to expand existing water-conserving landscaping regulations. The proposed regulations include requiring a minimum percentage of landscape materials that must be drought-tolerant and require that plants that have similar water needs are grouped together. The regulations also add more specific standards regarding irrigation system design and efficiency,to ensure that irrigation systems work efficiently and do not spray onto hardscaped areas. Although not related to Water Efficient Landscaping, an urban garden issue was included in this petition to allow vegetables over 24 inches high in the front yard. The issue is included in this petition because all of the regulations are within the Landscaping chapter of the Zoning Ordinance. 7 Status: > November 10,2010 Planning Commission voted to transmit a favorable recommendation to the City Council. > On January 18, 2011 the City Council held a work session on this topic. The Planning Staff is working with the Public Utilities Department and Urban Forester to address issues raised at the Council Briefmg. ➢ The Public Utilities Staff is working to finalize the draft irrigation and plant information by the end of March 2011. The City Council will be notified when this information is ready for review. 9. Rain Water Harvesting Rain water harvesting is the collection and storage of rain water, in rain barrels or in an underground cistern to be used to water the landscaping of a yard. Status: ➢ The Planning Division, in discussion with the Public Utilities Department is not recommending that these regulations move forward because they are already covered by State law. Issues: 1. State Law limits above ground containers to two 100 gallon barrels which is similar in size to the Yard Waste cans (which are 90 gallons). This law was passed a few Amook years ago. 2. Prior to the new State law,the City was able to allocate some of its water holdings to allow citizens to collect amounts of water over the limits allowed by the State. However,the City has an agreement with the State Engineer that allows this "extra" amount of water to be used for LEED certified buildings only. 3. Instead of this type of regulation posed by the City, the Public Utilities' Staff will create a brochure to inform citizens of all the ways they can decrease water consumption, including the use of rain barrels or cisterns. This should be completed in the Spring of 2011. 4. Public Utilities and the Sustainability Division have also put a link on their websites to the State Water Rights webpage which includes the regulations on catching rain water. 10. Recycling and Waste Management-Planner; Ana Valdemoros The purpose of the Recycling and Waste Reduction regulations is to encourage recycling. Recycling helps preserve natural resources for future generations; better manage and extend the life of the land fill, (including reducing green house gases- especially methane) and reducing the need for raw materials. The proposed regulations require new development to add recycling dumpsters in buildings or on lots in order to encourage recycling. It also allows existing development to eliminate some required parking stalls or common areas in order to make room for recycling drop off facilities. In addition,the regulations would require that new single-family and two family 4.040* developments with 30 or more units include centralized collection stations for recycling, waste and other common facilities(such as mail boxes). The regulations would also require new construction and demolition sites to separate the construction materials to make it simpler for reuse and recycling. Status: ➢ January 16, 2011. Received public draft from Clarion. ➢ Public Input scheduled for February and March 2011 ➢ Planning Commission public hearing tentatively scheduled for March 23, 2011. Issues: 1. One of the regulations would require centralized collection stations in subdivisions with 30 or more units. Other residential areas of the City have curbside recycling and trash pick-up. Although new development oftentimes has these types of centralized facilities, it would be different than how the City currently collects trash and recycling. Is that an issue? 2. The centralized collection station is more of a suburban development model than an urban development model. If we are trying to create a compact,walkable communities, do we want to follow a suburban type of model? 3. The centralized collection areas may become eye-sores unless they are properly maintained. Will these areas be a draw for people to search through recycling bins to collect goods for money? Will they become undesirable areas in neighborhoods? 4. If the City allows some required parking or common space to be removed in order to accommodate a recycling dumpster,would it create a negative impact on abutting property owners where cars would be parked on the streets or required buffering in the form of landscaping is eliminated? 5. Is there a market for all of the recycled materials? 6. What incentives are there for businesses to recycle? Businesses have to pay for hauling recycling and waste. This is a cost to a business. 11. Open Space Dedication Requirements. Planner; Everett Joyce The purpose of the proposed regulations is to ensure adequate amounts of open space are developed as the number of dwelling units in the City increases. The draft ordinance would require new development to either dedicate land for public open space or pay an amount to the City in lieu of the dedication. Furthermore, it would decrease the required amount of dedicated land if the private development included private open space on site for the use of its residents. In addition, it would also provide an open space credit for those developments which allow a public easement to access open space through the development. Status: 9 This topic is on hold awaiting the outcome of the Impact Fee Study currently underway as part of the Capital Improvement Plan project. Issues: 1. The City already has an exaction in the form of an impact fee for open space. The current impact fee study will determine whether the impact fees are adequate or should be increased. The proposed"exaction"that the draft ordinance requires in essence would be another impact fee for the same thing which the State Law prohibits. 2. The proposed offset amount of reduced fees (for affordable housing) as proposed in the draft ordinance would need to be paid by the City to meet the State's impact fee requirements. 3. State Law also states that a City can only charge an exaction or impact fee that would ensure the existing level of service for parks/open space. In other words, the impact fee could not create a level of service that is higher than what currently exists. The City can look at adopting a policy of a higher level of service. The higher level of service can be achieved through development of City funded projects (through taxes or bonds, etc). Once that higher level of service is established, then the impact fee rate could be increased and charged to the new development to meet that new higher level of service. 4. The amount of usable on-site open space required for private development could also be increased through the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to ensure adequate on-site usable open space for tenants. However,this type of requirement may be a disincentive for new development of housing. 5. If a developer is given a credit or a reduced impact fee for providing access to open space/trails from the development,how do you enforce it if in the future, access is not maintained? How would you reinstate the higher impact fee after construction? Bundle 3 12.Lighting Standards. Planner-Michaela Oktay One of the major sources of consumption of electricity is outdoor lighting. Two thirds of energy used in the United States is for electricity. PacifiCorp(Rocky Mountain Power) generates 93%of its electricity from coal powered plants. The proposed regulations only relate to private property outdoor lighting (not public street lighting) and the regulations do not apply to single-family or two family dwellings. The purpose of the regulations is to afford adequate lighting for safety,personal security, nighttime enjoyment and commerce; while decreasing energy consumption, controlling light pollution of the nighttime sky and minimizing the effects of misdirected light and glare. The regulations are aimed at reducing over-lighting of properties by setting a maximum amount of lighting (in the form of lumens)that can be used where the property owner determines is most appropriate; requiring light shielding to ensure protection of the night sky and reduction of glare and shine onto other properties and, requiring automatic shut off or reduction of lighting after hours. 10 Status of Lighting Standards Topic: > Staff is in the process of gathering input from local practitioners. Comments have been sent to Clarion and we are now awaiting a revised draft. Issues: 1. The concepts and regulations of the draft ordinance submitted by the consultants are groundbreaking. The proposed regulations are drafted after a model ordinance by the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America(IESNA) and International Dark Sky Association(IDSA). The lighting regulations use a system of measuring lighting that is new to the industry(BUG-Backlight,Uplight and Glare). No other municipality in the country has adopted the extensive regulations of the proposed ordinance. Staff has gathered input from the local professionals to determine whether they know of these new approaches to measuring lighting to ensure that the practitioners can understand the ordinance. So far,the local practitioners have not been familiar with the rating system and some have even suggested the institute is not going forward with it. 2. Is there another way to accomplish the same goals, without using the BUG system to ensure the ease of understanding the ordinance by staff and practitioners? 3. The goals of the regulations will only work if specific types of lighting fixtures and light globes are installed. This will require more time of Permitting Staff and Building Inspectors to ensure the multiple fixtures drawn on a plan meet the regulations and that what is on the plan is actually installed. It may require additional staff to ensure implementation of this ordinance. 13. Transportation Demand Management and Parking-Planner;Nick Britton The purpose of the proposed regulations is to encourage other means of traveling to where one wants to go other than a private automobile, in order to decrease air pollution and the cost of building roads and parking lots. The regulations are also aimed at decreasing traffic congestion during peak periods of travel times and encouraging bicycling, walking and other non-motorized methods of movement which helps improve public health. The proposed regulations would relate to all types of development except single-family and two family dwellings. The regulations include requiring bike facilities (such as lockers, showers and bike racks for all new development); parking maximums that are 125% of the parking minimums to reduce putting too much parking on a site; and requiring that large developments which generate a lot of traffic take measures to decrease the vehicles trips to the location by 25%. Those methods can take many forms such as giving employees bus passes, allowing telecommuting, encouraging car pooling,building on-site day care, etc. Status of Transportation Demand Management Topic: 11 D. Received draft from Clarion on January 7, 2011. ➢ Public Input scheduled for February and March 2011 ➢ Planning Commission public hearing tentatively scheduled for May 2011 Issues: 1. Should these be incentives rather than regulations? a. Should these types of requirements be used as a recruitment tool when the City is offering incentives for a business to locate here rather than make all development include it them? b. Should these regulations only be required where the development is near a fixed transit stop? c. Should the regulations be tied into economic development and RDA incentives? 2. Should retail be exempt from these regulations? The city will lose retail development if there is a maximum parking requirement. 3. Requirements for lockers will increase maintenance,utility and insurance costs. 4. Will these types of regulations discourage development in the City? 5. The regulations are developer based but the Transportation Demand Management factors are employer based. A lot of development of office types of buildings is speculative and the regulations are based on the number of occupants. In other words, the developer would have to guess who is eventually going to occupy the building and include facilities to accommodate that. However,building occupations change. How do you know how many people are going to occupy a building? Awik 14. Housing Diversity Housing diversity is a means of requiring developers to include multiple housing types (single family detached,townhomes, apartments, etc.)within a residential development. Housing diversity promotes housing choices for the entire community, for different groups and income levels. It allows people to stay in the same neighborhood as their housing needs change over their lifetimes. It promotes a more diverse community. Status of Housing Diversity Topic: ➢ January 5, 2011 Presented information to the Utah Housing Coalition ➢ January 16, 2011 Received public draft from consultants. D. Public Input scheduled for February and March 2011 ➢ Planning Commission public hearing tentatively scheduled for April 13,2011 Issues: 1. The provisions call for a mix of housing types on residential developments over 20 acres. This type of development is probably only going to occur in the Northwest Quadrant if the decision is made by the City Council to allow residential development in that area. The preferred option for zoning identified in the draft Northwest Quadrant Master Plan is a planned community zoning approach. Through this approach the analysis of what densities, housing types, and locations would be determined at that time. In light of that, should we require the housing diversity regulation now? 12 2. Housing Diversity in multifamily developments of 20 units or more would require a percentage of the units to have different numbers of bedroom and the units would have to differ in overall size. The proposal is to exempt workforce and affordable housing developments. This would result in only market rate apartments having to meet this regulation. Should the market decide what number of bedrooms per unit is appropriate to fit the demand or should it be dictated by the regulation? 3. Many families who rent housing in the Salt Lake market rent houses rather than stay in apartments. In light of this, is there a reason to require a mix of bedrooms per unit? 4. Developers are used to making each unit the same size for construction efficiency. Should we require a difference in unit size? 5. Should these requirements be incentives rather than regulations? Would it be better to provide a density bonus if a developer incorporates a variety of unit sizes and bedroom mixes or units that are affordable or accessible? 15.Wildfire/Urban Interface The purpose of this topics is to ensure that those homes that are built in the foothills adjacent to open space areas which are usually more prone to and susceptible to wildfires are constructed and maintained in a way to decrease the chance of damage by wildfire. The types of regulations that would be instituted would include things like requirements for building separation, regulations on outside storage and limits to landscaping. Status of Wildfire/Urban Interface Topic: ➢ We are not looking at developing these types of regulations at this time. Issues: 1. Will the proposed changes conflict with already adopted Appendices to the International Fire Code that address these issues? 2. The current Foothill zoning ordinance regulations already require fire suppression to minimize wildfire damage and create defensible space. Many of the existing structures in this area were built to these standards. 3. There are few remaining vacant lots where these new regulations would be applicable. 4. Zoning regulations in general, are not retroactive and therefore, very few lots would be subject to these new regulations. 5. Most violations relating to maintaining defensible space would be identified after a fire because the City's enforcement is not proactive but rather complaint driven. 6. The Fire Marshall would prefer to institute an annual education / information program to alert property owners along the Urban Interface the importance of maintaining defensible space so homes are not as susceptible to wildfires. The Fire Department is planning to initiate that program this spring. These types of programs are limited to funding allocations. 13 • � og .k. . 0 ��toe ,E, seen g. �•��, - \\ I I i! ��S e • -. .: -.. ., •II M : , • 416 so f in II•' .�� L._.. -I.`I ) ,• Id. • 5 go \U] `1y 2 �,, I 4/ ,�0% 0 ■� s %qb•- CV .IE 1. 0 L a) 0 - U CO CZ › . o V °' • U ' Cr as (i) > 0c� U 112 Salt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative Page 2 Introduction-Blueprint for a Green City Salt Lake City residents deserve a city to match the spectacular scenery.A green city is a place that uses energy efficiently. It reduces,reuses and recycles its waste.It works to keep its air and water clean.A green city protects its open spaces as .1 f ecological and recreational treasures.It offers its residents healthy and efficient transportation and housing choices. By doing these things,a city becomes green:it becomes a highly desirable place to live,work,play,raise a family and own a business.A green city is a place where people want to be because the quality of life is high.As a result,a green city is eco- nomically stable and less vulnerable to the ups and downs of national and global forces,such as the prices of Imported fos- - 4 MI fuels.over which city residents have little control. - Salt Lake City can be one of America's leading green cities.In fact•Salt Lake City has the potential to be the greenest city in wet America. To improve Salt Lake City's green credentials,we must: • Reduce air pollution from sources both within the City and,with the cooperation of other cities:counties and the state,outside It. • Use energy efficiently and from clean,renewable sources. • Develop convenient public transit and non-motorized transportation choices for residents and visitors that link open (j t spaces,residential neighborhoods,downtown and suburban cities. �r/ - • Preserve,improve and expand the network of open space and greenbelts throughout the City. Mayor italph Becker • Establish neighborhood centers for commercial and governmental services that foster walkable neighborhoods,reducing vehicular traffic and thus air pollu- tion. Salt Lake City's Sustainable City Code Initiative is one way to implement this vision. This project is a ground-breaking initiative to incorporate sustainability provi- sions into the City's development codes(Zoning,Subdivision and Site Development ordinances). The revised codes will contribute to making Salt Lake City one of the most sustainable communities in the country. The Sustainable City Code Initiative Implements the Mayor's Blueprint for a Green City In many ways. This Vision document Indicates how the project will help Im- plement the vision for a green city. i . a 0 Sglt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative11111/11/ 1. Embrace public transit,cycling,walking and alternative energy vehicles By giving people easy and efficient options for moving around the City,we can reduce the amount oif emissions that are put into the air in the first place.Transporta- tion choices affect our daily lives,from how quickly we get to work or back home again,to traffic congestion,to where there are convenient bus and light rail stops, to the safety of bike lanes,to how we get around town or from one town to the next,to how clean our air Is.These choices also can directly affect business and com- merce entitles,and even the amount of exercise we get in a day. The following points are things to consider: • We need to provide transportation choices for Salt Lake City residents(automobiles,light rail,buses,improved and safer bicycle lanes,enlarged and safer pe- destrian-friendly zones)to promote livability and to reduce congestion,reduce air pollution,and reduce the use of fossil fuels. •Salt Lake City should be enhanced as a regional and state hub by emphasizing mobility into and out of the City and accessibility to a variety of transportation choices within the City. • The walking environment should be enhanced so that residents can leave cars behind as often as possible or park In one convenient place to access many desti- nations on foot. A. ConnectivityliK- It Connectivity is the connections within and between developments. The proposed con- "el,.Jr: • nectivity regulations are geared to ensuring that there are ample options for pedestri- w`•� ans,bicycles,and vehicles to reach destinations within a development,around a devel- I opment and between developments. Increased mobility options can reduce vehicle - mf miles traveled(VMTs)and thus greenhouse gas emissions,and promote healthy life- _ lit �.) ' styles by encouraging walking and bicycling. L .- �. •o.._ .. The proposed regulations require: _ 41 • Street and sidewalk connections between activity centers such as neighborhood �.- commercial nodes,schools,and parks. - — • Internal access between adjacent non-residential uses to avoid unnecessary drive- _ . . �. ways which disrupts pedestrian movement. - .•� • Sidewalks on both sides of the streets. _ - 'Aim,. • Access to entrances of non-residential uses to public sidewalks,to transit areas,to ---- park and ride lots,to parks and trails,to schools,community centers,libraries. - • = places of worship and other similar activity centers. • Midblock walkways on large blocks • Designation of pedestrian access through parking areas to building entrances • Safe and convenient bike routes. Crosswalk with pedestrian flags on South Temple Salt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative Page 4 1. Embrace public transit, cycling,walking and alternative energy vehicles (continued) B. Transit Oriented Development Regulations Transit Oriented Development(TOD)integrates land use and transit to help create compact.walkable mixed-use communities close to transit stations. It brings people, jobs,and services together in such a way that makes it safe and convenient to travel by foot,bicycle.and transit as well as by car. In addition,Transit Oriented Develop- ment can create lively neighborhood activity centers. Salt Lake City has a great opportunity to promote sustainable development in concert . ' with Its growing transit system. There is growing evidence that mixed-use.transit- r oriented developments can significantly reduce the use of automobiles and associ- ated greenhouse gases from burning of fossil fuels. The specific regulations of the new Transit Station Area Zones adopted by the City r Council in August 2010 Include: c' • Encouraging mixed-use moderate and high-density,economically viable devel- opments within walking distance of transit stations to increase transit ridership and reduce use of automobiles and associated reduce greenhouse gas emis- sions. •, ip 11 • Promoting transit-supportive uses that are high pedestrian generators that dl- 7ii rectly promote greater transit ridership and opportunities for multi-purpose trips while discouraging auto-oriented uses. •Creating a pedestrian-friendly environment to encourage walking,bicycling.and • + healthier lifestyles. ii ,,,,,,`,, •Creating attractive,lively,and safe places for living,working,shopping,learning, and recreating. 2 b 1Will • Providing a range of housing options for people of different Income levels and at different stages of life. • • Encouraging developments that are connected with surrounding neighborhoods i immum •• and compatible in terms of uses,scale,and other aspects. • Incorporating engaging,high-quality public spaces such as small parks and pla- - __ tr zas as organizing features and gathering places for residents and surrounding -- _....... neighborhoods. Mixed use development and transit stop on 2nd South A • 0 Salt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative Page 5 , 2. Plant a tree, save a life - .,ate Trees absorb carbon dioxide,the chief greenhouse gas,and produce oxy- gen.They also prevent erosion and water runoff,and they cool the air by r - producing moisture and providing shade.That keeps people and buildings _ r' naturally cool,reducing our need for energy-consuming alrconditioning.A ;,t,.^ continuous tree canopy helps reduce smog by reducing the amount of - s heat radiating off roads,parking lots and roofs.In the winter,trees lower r , I Ili, our heating costs by blocking winter wind. Trees provide key environ- it 2 A • 1 .. I I i I r I mental benefits that increase community sustainablilty such as: - - ' •Absorb greenhouse gases.The U.S.Department of Energy finds a 30- • ll year old hardwood tree can sequester the equivalent of 136 pounds 1 •- i- a °1;,1 kI� of carbon dioxide annually. ill ,It-•Reduce the amount of energy used and costs associated with Indoor _ _ ,. cooling and heating by 3040%, •Reduce ground-level ozone concentrations by reducing air tempera- • _ s — tures biologically, ' -' •Provide buffers that can reduce highway noise by 50%, •Reduce topsoil erosion,slow down water runoff,and act as pollution Tree shaded sidewalk on South Temple filters,and •Shade lawns that can reduce the demand on Irrigation water require- A. Tree Protection ments by 20% While the City already has tree protection measures in place to protect trees in pub- lic places and on publicly-owned lands,Salt Lake City's regulations are not strong enough in protecting trees on private property. The proposed regulations specifically address the protection of specimen trees on private property as new development occurs. Specimen trees are those trees that In general add to the quality of life of the Salt Lake City community and the environ- ment by virtue of their size,quality,and species. The proposed regulations: • Protect specimen trees on private property when new development occurs. •Include options for protection of specimen trees,such as modifications in zon- ing setbacks in order to build around the tree,or • Require additional and larger trees to be planted beyond the minimum require- ment if the specimen tree cannot be preserved. Salt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative 3. Make our buildings more energy efficient and use renewable energy resources. Most buildings in Salt Lake City consume energy inefficiently because they are older structures that do not have the most efficient mechanical systems,nor have they been retrofitted to minimize energy loss or to take advantage of passive solar design principles. The increased use of renewable resources could help mitigate the negative effects of air pollution and the use of costly,imported fossil fuels that are ultimately a finite resource and that contribute to global warming. A. Renewable Energy The proposed regulations address three distinct Issues: • Require all new single-and twin-family dwellings to be"solar-ready,"that Is.be equipped for the future use of solar power for electric power or hot water heat- ing. •Provide that all new major subdivisions be laid out to require a minimum percentage of the lots have optimal solar orientation for the Installation of solar sys- tems. • Permit solar and small-scale wind energy systems as accessory structures In certain zone districts subject to compatibility and safety standards. Also.permit solar arrays and large wind generating systems as principal uses(e.g.,a ground-mounted solar array and large wind generating systems In appropriate zoning districts.).again subject to standards. The proposed regulations include: • Providing a priority hierarchy for location of solar collectors in historic districts. The installation of the panels would be more flexible where the panels are least visible from the street and the placement does the least damage to the historic structure. • Allow for small wind energy facilities where height is based on the size of the lot. • Allow Large Wind Generating Systems In appropriate zoning districts with criteria to address impacts. • Allow Solar Arrays as a principal use in appropriate zoning districts. • Require a percentage of Solar Oriented buildings in new large subdivisions. • Require solar ready buildings in new residential development. 11111111111 i 111 I II a . Xt Rooftop s lation at the Gateway In Salt Lake City Photo Credit dekaMike@Flickr � � i 0 0 Salt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative 4. Promote Recycling and Minimize Construction Waste ell Recycling and waste reduction means fewer materials enter the landfill, thereby extending Its life and also reducing emissions of methane,a land- fill and greenhouse gas. For Salt Lake City,reducing waste will result in Reduce Recycle more efficient trash collection services,long term cost savings,and ex- �` i•_._ 'j'-• , tended landfill life. �, w _ _ • - 4Ina sustainable community,waste Is considered as a resource to be used .a and reused,not a problem to be disposed of. Communities,not Just build- ilt - ings or the operations of homes and businesses.should be designed to `-'''' - minimize and manage solid waste. A comprehensive solid waste man- . agement program should incorporate: • Reduction of the amount of waste produced, A. Recycling and Waste Reduction •Reuse of waste materials where possible,and •Recycling of wastes. Salt Lake City has made great strides with its recycling programs by implementing Preventing waste at the source, through strategic purchasing by busi- private contractor service for approximately 7,300 residential homes per day/5 days nesses and citizens,can decrease the consumption of raw materials and a week,variable refuse rates based on container size,and municipally funded corn- energy during manufacturing,transportation,and disposal.Public aware- posting and waste operations. ness to this basic tenet of recycling,along with the basic platform within the City to allow for more recycling,reuse,and waste reduction will be The proposed regulations include: key in moving Salt Lake City forward on this front. • Requiring recycling station areas in non-residential and mixed use buildings(the size of the facility is based on the size of the building)and in multi-family Bevel- • 1 opments(the size of the area is based on the number of units.) • Requiring centralized neighborhood recycling and composting stations in new residential developments including built in kitchen recycling centers. t, ,, - ;._we"' .r'�, • Requiring existing development to meet the new standards as upgrades of a . ;,l it certain percentage are made. 4;411 s�t , •Allowing the conversion of parking or common space in existing developments 1 14 in order to retrofit for recycling areas(convert up to 3-6 stalls based on specific �`Al kali 4SI criteria. ,''1 1, M+ ^ • Requiring construction waste management plans and encouraging deconstruc- t tion plans and recycling/reuse staging areas as part of the issuance of a demo- 1 1 - , lition permit. • Requiring that for all demolition applications for multifamily,low density resi- dential with 20+ units and non-residential development to include a plan to ';A‘ % -n separate waste types. Salt Lake City yard waste bins Credit:Sall Lake Trbune Salt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative Page • 5. Preserve and acquire open space 41N- • Without a Big Picture plan for preserving and acquiring our precious open spaces, our green spaces will"suffer death by a thousand cuts"as they are slowly nibbled • away.A long-range plan for both retaining our current open spaces and for acquiring additional ones Is critical to our health and quality of life from both a recreational and an ecological standpoint . t - V'2 • F • A. Open Space Dedication Requirements 1414r MIK Salt Lake City has a history of public parks dating back to the dedication of the first major public park in the City:Liberty Park in 1882.Well-located near the City's buss- -- - _ ness core close to workers and residents alike.Liberty Park stands as a shining ex- ample of public open space that serves a multitude of uses-passive,active,and urban green space.Today,the City's park system includes 71 parks of a variety of sizes and uses,totaling 172 acres.According to the Salt Lake City Parks and Rec- reation Recovery Plan,these parks provide a ratio of 1.24 acres to every 1000 rest- Liberty Perk In Salt Lake City dents. In addition,Salt Lake City is blessed with access to the multiple-use public lands of the U.S.Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management that provide numerous recreational options within close proximity to the City.These are coveted lands and continued access to them is important not only to Salt Lake City citizens and the thousands of recreationalists that visit the Wasatch Front every year,but to the economy of the City as well. But access to public lands and trails can be challenged by new developments,cutting off historic public access-an issue Salt Lake City understands. Future growth in the City's west/northwest region and in the foothills will place more pressure on existing open space and increase demand for more parks,open space,and potentially cut access to public lands.Moreover,desired redevelopment of higher density and mixed use complexes in established parts of the City will create demand and the need for a variety of new open space and recreational opportunities. To address community sustainability related to the provision of parks,open space,and access,the proposed regulations would require major new residential devel- opments to provide open space and parks as a condition of approval. This will help position the City so that If new development Is addressing the demands of growth,the City will not see increased pressure on its existing open space and park resources,taxpayer money will not be spent on new growth but rather on other desirable lands to add to its system,and developments will have parks and open space in close proximity to serve its residents. Proposed Regulations Include: • Requiring new residential developments to dedicate land for parks and open space in proportion to the demand generated by the residents of the project • Allowing up to 25%of the public land dedication requirement to be provided as private open space set aside for exclusive use of residents of the development: • Tailoring open space dedication standards for infill development by allowing alternatives to traditional parks and open space such as courtyards,plazas,green roofs,and community garden space.and • Preserving access to public lands through the use of incentives. 0 0 0 Salt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative Page 9 6. Use Water Wisely Water supplies will be stretched even further In the region over - - the next several decades.We have tremendous untapped oppor- tunities for wastewater recycling and reuse(to irrigate parks, golf courses,etc.)and for the channeling and reuse of storm wa- - �• ter runoff. In addition, Innovative urban water conservation • strategies must be developed that will sharply reduce our house- _ h t- hold water use. This ordinance will build on the Clty's past ef- •aP"7n� "'► "" forts to decrease water use and attain the ambitious water- consumption reduction goals In the water master plan thereby . s 1} reducing impacts on aquifers and riparian habitat while at the _ same time greatly reducing energy consumption. ' 'k. • t- • A. Water Efficient Landscaping Water efficient landscaped yard in Salt Lake City Because landscape irrigation is one of the biggest water users,many communities have adopted landscaping standards in their zon- ing regulations to address water conservation.The proposed regulations would replace and expand on the City's existing water con- serving regulations relating to landscaping and water conservation.The proposed regulations take a three-pronged approach to water conservation by: 1. Requiring plants to be installed according to watering needs(hydrazones)so that plants that have similar water needs are lo- cated together. 2. Establishing overall landscaping water budgets for non-residential and multi-family developments that penalize users that ex- ceed the water budget by requiring irrigation audits and increased water rates under the City's current water rate structure. 3. Adding more specific standards regarding irrigation system design and efficiency. Importantly,the new regulations would apply primarily to new commercial,industrial,institutional,multi-family,and common areas of large single-family subdivisions(10+lots). They would not apply to landscaping In existing developments or to most low-density residential developments. Salt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative 'age r 7. Improve Air Quality Air quality Is an overriding concern.To improve our air quality,we need to work within the context of federal and state law.There Is no single solution to this difficult problem.It will take a concerted effort from all of the municipalities in the valley and region to bring about positive changes.Our continued economic prosperity is dependent upon having a city and region with clean and healthy air. Salt Lake City must take the lead and serve as a model in comprehensively reducing the amount of pollutants that are put into the air.Among other things,this means: •Making it easy and convenient for residents to walk,bike or take transit throughout the City. •Finding ways to ensure that housing in the City(near where most people work)Is affordable so that driving is less necessary •Having zoning laws that carefully permit commercial and public centers In neighborhoods that complement residential areas •Providing Incentives to builders,homeowners,and business owners to retrofit their structures so that they use fuels efficiently and/or use renewable and clean- A. Urban Agriculture e5, • ,U .� , ♦'• . irk Local food production can save energy through diminished transport ‘1: .4 - • needs and reduced reliance on mechanical equipment associated . , • with large scale agriculture. Urban farms, community gardens and farm stands located near where people live and work allows people to + ( . access locally grown produce without relying on private automobiles. i '� �- which in turn decrease green house gas. Additionally.urban farmers vi••` ' . �s and residents benefit as the local economy Is enhanced and social A 1� Iy 1 �-". _ <•L• impacts strengthen neighborhoods.Studies have shown that commu- *i,a,,� `A'' u� - , � nity gardening Increases community pride.property values,and per- 'S� zt��,•,•4 " * a"'r i q • - F-, --- - `; sonal physical health,while reducing crime and blighted lands. <.,. • st y, .�,'�_ _- - w The proposed regulations ' +• 'ry. ,.La }.,} , ` •Allow accessorystructures relating to urban agriculture with di-mensional and locational requirements in appropriate "'-r ' - q zoning dis- ti<.t!?...�, f,� l>.I , r - _ tricts Including residential h` t `-- - �' •Allow urban farm uses for food cultivation allowed In more zoning -_'T- '"w-- ~ t .; districts including residential and commercial. E• p y.�e°`"(, ,• , •Allow residents to grow,distribute and sell produce from residen- , r�• « Fesr SY ' t!�t r tial zoning districts with qualifying provisions to mitigate impacts. l y d ya:,;yri. •Allow community gardens in more zoning districts and allow the ••+ .. ; -ie - sale of food grown on site. , : - /- �s'r --'SF v ','�, tr •Allow Seasonal Farm stands in more zoning districts but limit the - - - •- sale to locally grown produce. A community garden In Salt Lake City Credit:WFRC 0 • • , Salt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative Page 11 7. Improve Air Quality (continued) B.Transportation Demand Management Transportation Demand Management(TDM)refers to a variety of strategies that can be used by a city to influence travel decisions by residents and employees and thereby reduce vehicle miles traveled(VMT),alter driving from peak to off-peak peri- ods,and shift use of automobiles to alternative modes.Reducing the use of automo- biles is a key to reducing greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate ,�„�„�,,,,..< ..•^ change and also to control air pollution that affects public health. In the United States transportation accounts for fully 33%of CO2 emissions(the primary green- , • Y ' house gas),and that percent is growing according to recent studies. Moreover,de- y, spite technological advances,VMT are expected to increase nationwide and in Utah. Throughout the Intermountain West,sprawling growth patterns has lead to poor In ye - tegration between land use and transportation. Between 1990 and 2007.the state '} ._ of Utah experienced a 47%increase In population,but at the same time VMT in- creased 71%. Proposed Regulations include: Bike parking at the Salt Lake City Main Library Credit:davidsilver© • Requiring bike parking with at least 50%of outdoor bike parking to be covered and to be located close to the main entrance. • Requiring bike lockers and showers on site for companies with 100 or more employees. • Ensuring car pool parking gets a preferential location. • Requiring minimum and maximum parking requirements for high density residential,In the Downtown area and In Transit Oriented Development projects. • Decreasing the parking requirement for development which includes more than 10 units,and where at least 20%of the units are affordable,senior or assisted living. •A maximum parking requirement with a conditional use out for certain types of land uses. •Allowing credit for on-street parking In all zones with criteria to mitigate impacts and where the on-street parking is located along the frontage adjacent to the use. • Requiring lease and sale prices of commercial and residential space to be listed separate from lease sale space of associate parking for the use. •Continuing to allow shared parking. • Requiring TDM measures for uses that are proposed to have more than 2500 Vehicle Miles Traveled per day,have 500 employees or students or have 100 units or more. Examples of the measures Include + Facilities and Improvements(such as bike facilities,transit stops.onsite business centers.etc.) Parking Management(such as reserved parking for alter- native fuel vehicles,electric charge stations,etc.)and Alternative Modes of Circulation(such as transit passes,shared bike fleet,shared car fleet,flex work strategies,etc.) Salt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative 8. Housing Diversity A key aspect of a sustainable community is that people have the opportu- A. Accessory Dwelling Units nity to live In housing that is located In close proximity to work.schools. services.and community activity centers,that is affordable,and that pro- Accessory dwelling units(ADUs)have become an Important component of the hous- vides grange of choices in terms of types(single family,multi-family, Ing stock in many communities-both large and small-in the United States.By pro- etc.).As Salt Lake City continues to grow and demographics change,the viding housing on existing lots in developed neighborhoods.ADUs are a form of land demand for a sustainable housing stock will also continue to grow.Land use that makes good use of land and existing public infrastructure investment.ADUs, prices are rising in the Wasatch Region and land availability is decreasing when located near employment and retail centers,help increase use of mobility alter- so the challenge to develop work force housing will heighten.While the natives leading to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and energy(fuel)use. city is well positioned with numerous programs,the land use regulatory Additionally.the changing face of the American public and its housing needs supports strategies available to the city can make important contributions to build- the inclusion of ADUs as a housing alternative. More people are aging,are"empty ing a sustainable housing stock. nesters",and desire to down-size.In addition,the work force continues to be Some of the land use regulatory approaches that may support Salt Lake chal- lenged to find affordable housing and ADUs can help address that demand. City's goals Include: The proposed regulations include: • Removing barriers for constructing accessory dwelling units and •Allowing where single-family dwellings are allowed or where single-family dwell- "granny flats." ings exist. • Allowing more flexibility for various building types(town homes.tlu- • Limiting the size of ADU:The proposal is to limit the size of an Accessory Dwelling piexes,studios) Unit to ensure it Is subordinate to the principal structure.The regulation would • Reducing large minimum lot size requirements in some residential limit the size to 50%of the square footage of the principal structure or 650 square zone districts.Allow smaller(<5,000)square foot lots and smaller lot feet;whichever is greater. splits for affordable housing. • Requiring Owner Occupancy:Require either the principal unit or the ADU to be oc- • Offering expedited review/permitting processes for affordable hous- cupied by the owner of the lot.The idea is that if an owner is on site.they are more ing development. likely to ensure tenants are not causing problems(such as noise,etc.)and will en- • Allowing mixed use developments by-right in appropriate locations sure the property is maintained. near public transportation facilities. • Limiting ADUs to one ADU per lot. • Providing density bonuses for developments including all or part af- • Requiring ADUs to be registered/licensed with City. fordable housing. • Requiring one parking stall per ADU.As written,parking would be required but the Transportation Division could modify the requirement(such as allow Tandem Park- ing or no Parking)where certain factors are evident(such as where there is avail- able on-street parking,it is within Ya mile of a Trax Station,it is within walking dis- tance to a Business District area.etc.) •Allowing home occupations(such as an office) in an ADU,but not conditional home occupations(such as music lessons or hair styling)where person would vat ,. come to house. I P - • Requiring the ADU to meet height,setback and building coverage for the principal structure regulations of the zoning district. •,� • Requiring the entrances for an ADUs to the back or side of the property.This is to � enforce the subordinate nature of the unit. Fr pie of an ADU/garage Credit Peterson Architects 0 0 0 . Salt Lake City Vision for a Green City:Sustainable City Code Initiative Page 13 9. Lighting To set forth lighting standards for outdoor uses that serve to create a safe and comfort- able nighttime environment,while protecting the public's ability to view the night sky. These lighting standards are designed to ensure personal safety and prevent motor ] L • vehicle and pedestrian conflicts by reducing the negative effects of glare.light pollution •+-,.,=- and light trespass. ° Fossil fuels—coal,oil,and natural gas—currently provide more than 85%of all the en- r r� ergy consumed in the United States. Nearly two-thirds of this is used to produce elec- ---- tricity. Energy generation from these fossil fuels is the single largest contributor to ,. greenhouse gas emissions. The vast majority of Salt Lake City's energy comes from '• Rocky Mountain Power(PaciflCorp)which generates 93%of its electricity from coal- t _ powered plants. Salt Lake City's consumption of electricity has grown steadily over the *Iry past 40 years due to the city's growth and development. Nationally.U.S.residential per , I household energy consumption has increased 39%since 1970 reflecting the trend to- ward larger homes and a greater variety of lighting,electronics,and appliances. Re- cently,home energy use has been trending downwards,an encouraging sign. r ' ,•"1r One of the major sources of consumption of electricity is outdoor lighting. Lighting was estimated to consume about 11%of the total electrical demand in the residential sec- Full cutoff fixtures,which direct light downward,can reduce light tor In 2007. Large commercial establishments like shopping centers use huge amounts pollution Credit:Holophene of electricity to light parking lots and other outdoor areas. Many communities throughout the West have adopted very strong controls on outdoor lighting in their development codes to reduce potential adverse impacts on surrounding properties,to preserve the dark western sky,and to reduce energy consumption. The proposed regulations Include modern comprehensive lighting regulations that reduce over-lighting of sites,address hours of lighting,and other energy and dark-sky saving provisions.. The purposes of the proposed lighting regulations include: • Ensuring outdoor lighting that Is adequate for safety and convenience:in scale with the activity to be illuminated and its surroundings;directed to the surface or activity to be illuminated:and designed to clearly render people and objects visible and contribute to a pleasant nighttime environment. • Providing safety and personal security as well as convenience and utility in areas of public use or traverse,for uses where there is outdoor public activity during hours of darkness; • Controlling glare and excessive brightness to improve visual performance,allow better visibility with relatively less light,and protect residents from nuisance and discomfort: • Controlling trespass light onto neighboring properties to protect Inhabitants from the consequences of stray light shining in Inhabitants'eyes or onto neighbor- ing properties; • Resulting In cost and energy savings to establishments by carefully directing light at the surface area or activity to be illuminated,using only the amount of light necessary;and • Controlling light pollution to minimize the negative effects of misdirected light and recapture views to the night sky. • Urban Agriculture Background Urban agriculture contributes nutritious and fresh food to communities through local food production. The ability to produce and distribute food throughout local neighborhoods is important as the demand for nutritional, good-tasting food continues to grow throughout the country. It is important that healthy food be available to individuals and families in all neighborhoods, regardless of economic situation and location, in a community. Many people however,do not have access to land for food production so removing regulatory barriers and strategically zoning public and private lands for this purpose is important. While healthy food production is perhaps the most important aspect of urban agriculture,other benefits abound as well. Sustainable farming (whether rural, suburban, or urban) and food production contribute to the beauty of the landscape while at the same time playing a role in strengthening environmental management practices within cities. Local food production can save energy through diminished transport needs and reduced reliance on mechanical equipment associated with large scale agriculture.Additionally,urban farmers and residents benefit as the local economy is enhanced and social impacts strengthen neighborhoods. Studies have shown that community gardening increases community pride, property values, and personal physical health,while reducing crime and blighted lands. Purpose Statement The purposes of the urban agriculture provisions are to: 1. Ensure that food production opportunities are planned for and implemented in appropriate areas in the city through the zoning code; 2. Provide for a healthy,fresh,and diverse local food source for Salt Lake City residents; 3. Enhance community health through the production,consumption,and/or sale of locally grown food and the physical practice of gardening; 4. Save energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions through community-based and local food production that minimizes long-distance food transportation; 5. Improve the security of the food supply in Salt Lake City; 6. Provide opportunities for community education in gardening and food production and hands-on involvement for citizens; 7. Provide increased opportunities for local jobs; 8. Promote sustainable agricultural practices that ensure longevity of agricultural working lands and ecosystems and that protect against potential adverse impacts of urban agriculture;and 9. Encourage and allow for higher yields through best practices gardening,including water conservation,composting and organic soil enhancement,and natural pest control. 1 • Definitions The following are definitions for Uses that would support Urban Agriculture Goals "Community garden" means an area of land managed and maintained by an individual or group to grow and harvest food F crops and/or non-food,ornamental crops,such as flowers,for personal or group use, consumption, donation, or sale. 's Community gardens may be divided into separate plots for cultivation by one or more individuals, may be fanned collectively by members of a group, may include common areas maintained and used by group members, and may include composting areas. Community gardens may be located on private property lots(vacant or developed)and on public lands and right of ways as designated by the city. "Community supported agriculture (CSA)" is form of food production and distribution whereby a group of individuals pledges support to a farm operation thereby providing capital to the fanner and sharing the risks and benefits of food production.Typically,members or"share- holders" (individuals, businesses, restaurants) of the CSA pledge in advance to cover the anticipated costs of the farm operation and in return, receive shares in the farm's bounty throughout the growing season.Distribution of food may be by delivery or pick-up. �rx11W111 AMES& "Seasonal farm stands" means a sales table or kiosk of locally grown food crops and/or non-food, ornamental crops,such as flowers,that is located at the site of a community garden or private garden and operates during the time of year coinciding with the growing season. Ass • Definitions The following are definitions for Accessory Structures that support Urban Agriculture goals. "Coldframe" means an unheated outdoor structure consisting of a wooden or concrete frame and a top of glass or clear plastic,used for protecting seedlings and plants from the cold. Greenhouse" means a temporary or permanent structure made of r".•, 4 01I! l glass,plastic,or fiberglass in which plants are cultivated. • Hoophouse" means a temporary or permanent structure made of y. ' \' piping or other material covered with translucent plastic, / constructed in a"half-round"or"hoop"shape,for the purposes of 1, growing plants. • 3 • Renewable Energy Systems Background The proposal is to amend applicable sections of the City's Development Codes(Zoning Ordinance,Site Development Ordinance,Subdivision Ordinance)in order to require various types of alternative energy systems in new development.The Topics include: 1. Provide that all new major subdivisions be laid out so that a minimum percentage of the lots have optimal solar orientation for the efficient use of solar energy collection systems. 2. Permit solar and small-scale wind energy systems as an accessory use in certain zoning districts,subject to compatibility and safety standards. Also,permit such systems as primary uses(e.g.,a ground-mounted solar array in an industrial park),again subject to standards. Purposes The purposes of these provisions relating to alternative energy systems are to: a. Promote the use of wind,solar,and other alternative energy systems; © b. Enable Salt Lake City to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as established by the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement,of which the city is a signatory. c. Provide opportunities for homeowners to save fuel costs; d. Ensure that land in Salt Lake City is subdivided so that single-family residential structures can be oriented to maximize solar access; a. Encourage orientation of single-family dwellings on solar-oriented lots to take maximum advantage of solar access; f. Lay out streets in the development to support solar access; g. Ensure that site elements do not excessively shade potential solar system locations; h. Preserve access to wind for small wind energy systems;and i. Ensure that alternative energy systems are safe and compatible with surrounding developments. C Small Wind Energy System • Definition A"small wind energy system"shall mean a wind energy conversion system consisting of a wind turbine, a tower, and associated control or conversion electronics that has a rated capacity of ' 1 not more than 100 kilowatts (kW) and that is . intended to primarily reduce on-site consumption of utility power. Credit Megan Treacay;Ecogeek.org Solar Array Definition 11111111 • CO "solar array"shall mean a free-standing,ground-mounted solar collection system consisting of a linked series of photovoltaic modules, the primary purpose of which is to provide for the collection, inversion, storage, and distribution of solar energy for electricity generation,space heating,space cooling,or water heating. Solar arrays are a principal use on the property. Solar Collection System Definition A"solar collection system" shall mean a roof-mounted or wall-mounted panel or other solar energy device, the primary purpose of which is to provide for the collection, inversion, storage, and distribution of solar energy for • electricity generation,space heating,space cooling,or water heating. Backwoods Nome Magazine;Jeffrey rago P.E., 4 Accessory Dwelling Units — Fact Sheet Definition ',..4'%411F An Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) is a • `'- t residential unit that is located on the same lot as a single-family dwelling unit, either internal to a single family dwelling,attached to a single family unit (such as in an addition) or in a detached t' structure(such as in a garage or separate accessory structure). The Accessory Dwelling Unit must be i +? a complete housekeeping unit with a shared or — - separate entrance, kitchen, sleeping area, closet - - space,and bathroom facilities. ADU within existing structure Background Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) have become an important component of the housing stock in many communities-both large and small—in the United States. By providing housing on existing lots in developed neighborhoods,ADUs are a form of land use that makes good use of land and public infrastructure investment. Accessory Dwelling • Units, when located near employment and retail centers, help increase use of circulation alternatives (such as walking, cycling, mass transit) leading to a reduction in green house gas emissions and energy(fuel)use. Additionally,the ADU in standalone structure changing face of the American public and its housing needs supports the inclusion of ADUs as a housing alternative. More people are aging, are • � .. "' "empty nesters", and desire to down-size. In addition,the work force continues to be challenged to find affordable housing and ADUs can help address that demand. ADU above garage 1109 Sustainability Code Amendment Project-ADUs Page 1 September 2010 Purpose Statement 0 The purposes of the proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit regulations are to: 1. Create new housing units while respecting the look and scale of single-family dwelling development; 2. Increase the housing stock of existing neighborhoods in a manner that is less intense than alternatives; 3. Allow more efficient use of existing housing stock, public infrastructure, and the embodied energy contained within existing structures; 4. Provide a mix of housing that responds to changing family needs and smaller households; 5. Offer a means for residents,particularly seniors,single parents,and families with grown children,to remain in their homes and neighborhoods,and obtain extra income,security, companionship,and services; 6. Promote a broader range of accessible and more affordable housing; 7. Provide opportunity for workforce housing in developed and new neighborhoods,close to places of work, thus reducing greenhouse gas emissions and reducing fossil fuel consumption through less car commuting; 8. Support transit-oriented development and reduce auto usage by increasing density near transit stops;and 9. Support the economic viability of historic properties and the city's historic preservation goals by allowing accessory residential uses in historic structures. V General Concepts Regulations to ensure mitigation of negative impacts are: 1. Limit Size of ADU: Proposal is to limit the size of an Accessory Dwelling Unit to ensure it is subordinate to the principal structure. The regulation would limit the size to 50%of the square footage of the principal structure or 650 square feet;whichever is less. 2. Require Owner Occupancy: Require either the principal unit or the ADU to be occupied by the owner of the lot. The idea is that if an owner is on site,they are more likely to ensure tenants are not causing problems(such as noise,etc.)and will ensure the property is maintained. 3. Limit ADUs to one ADU per lot. 4. Require ADUs to be registered/licensed with City. 5. Parking — one stall per ADU. As written, parking would be required but the Transportation Division could modify the requirement(such as allow Tandem Parking or no Parking)where certain factors are evident(such as there is available on-street parking, it is within'A mile of a TRAX Station,it is within walking distance to a Business District area,etc.). 6. Home occupations (such as an office) allowed in an ADU, but conditional home occupations(such as music lessons or hair styling)where person would come to house would not be allowed in the ADU. 7. Must meet height,setback and building coverage for the principal structure regulations of the zoning district. Sustalnability Code Amendment Project-ADUs Paget September 2010 • 8. Entrances for an ADU must be to the back or side of the property. This is to enforce the subordinate nature of the unit. General Questions The following questions have been identified during staff review of the proposed regulation: 1. Where to Allow? In what zoning districts should Accessory Dwelling Units be allowed? a. Should they only be allowed in single-family zoning districts? i. Could they be allowed in local historic districts to help off-set cost of preservation(incentive)? ii. Could they be allowed near Light Rail Transit Stations or within walking distance of a business area? iii. Could they be allowed on multi-family zoned properties, with single- family homes,where the lot is too small to allow anything but a single family unit? iv. Should they only be allowed on single-family residential lots where the size of the lot meets a minimum square footage? v. Are there certain neighborhoods where a"pilot program"could be started to gauge demand/impacts? 2. Design Guidelines Should there be design guidelines for detached ADUs?© a. Such as exterior materials, roof pitch, window patterns, etc to ensure compatibility with house design. b. We currently do not have these types of design standards within the City except within designated local historic districts. Sustainabflity Code Amendment Project-ADUs Page 3 September 2010 . • - TREE PROTECTION Je.C. BACKGROUND In order to supplement the provisions of the Salt Lake City Urban Forestry Ordinance, a new section is proposed to be added to the Salt Lake City Zoning Code specifically addressing the protection of specimen trees on private property. • The approach taken in this section is to protect defined specimen trees on private property with the requirements and standards coming into play at the time someone is proposing development; • The review for such protection would occur at the time of application of a building permit, site development permit,subdivision and other relevant development applications; • The provisions also include options for protection of trees or mitigation if it is impracticable or undesirable to keep a tree on site. PURPOSE © • Enhance the quality of life in the city and protect public health and safety; • Preserve and enhance the visual and aesthetic qualities of the city; • Enhance public and private property for greater enjoyment and usability due to the shade,cooling,and the aesthetic beauty afforded by trees; • Protect and improve the real estate values of the city; • Preserve and enhance air and water quality; • Reduce noise,glare,dust,and heat,and moderate climate,including urban heat island effects; • Increase slope stability, and control erosion and sediment run-off into streams and waterways; • Protect the natural habitat and ecosystems of the city; • Conserve energy by reducing heating and cooling costs; • Preserve the function of mature trees to absorb greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide. • APPLICABILITY General • The standards in this section would apply to new development in the city unless exempted(see below). Proposed Regulations The Planning Director would have the authority to modify setbacks and lot coverage regulations when it is necessary to preserve specimen trees. Additional trees will be required for the new development if specimen trees cannot be preserved. Other Regulations The Salt Lake City Urban Forester will still have the authority over the protection of trees located on public property owned by the city and in rights of way. Exemptions The following specimen tree removal activities would be exempted upon confirmation and approval by the city urban forester: • The removal of dead,damaged,or naturally fallen trees; • The removal of trees in such a condition that they pose a threat to structures or natural features on the site,on adjoining properties,or in the public right of way; • The removal of diseased trees posing a threat to adjacent trees; • The selective and limited removal of trees necessary to obtain clear visibility at driveways or intersections; • The removal of trees associated with development at the Salt Lake City Airport only as necessary to provide safe operations; • Construction of a single-or twin-family residence not part of a proposed new subdivision; • Removal of trees on an existing legal lot when not associated with new development. RESPONSIBILITY AND MAINTENANCE During development, the owner or developer shall be responsible for the erection of barriers necessary to protect any existing or installed specimen tree from damage during and after construction. My new trees used to replace specimen trees shall be maintained in a healthy condition and cared for pursuant to the standards of the City Forester. If in the opinion of the city, replacement trees show signs of decline or mortality within the first two years of planting, they shall be replaced by the developer. A SPECIMEN TREE means a . structurally sound mature tree,native a or introduced,that is characteristic of the species; whose contributions to carbon sequestration, shade ' footprint, soil permeability, and aesthetics is high; and whose ° -,,y' %r.—vo absence from the landscape would I .::- . significantly alter the site's Credlts:bigtreesnurwry.corn appearance,character or history. WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPING Q C ,,. BACKGROUND The proposal is to replace and expand the existing regulations found in the City's Development Codes (Zoning Ordinance and Site Development Ordinance) relating to landscaping and water conservation. The approaches include: • Specifying a minimum percentage of landscape materials that must be drought-tolerant and O require that hydrozones1 be established in landscaping plans so that plants that have similar water needs are grouped together; • Adding more specific standards regarding irrigation system design and efficiency,including 1 an inspection of the irrigation system to ensure it waters efficiently prior to allowing occupancy in new development. Ir PURPOSES • Promote the values and benefits of landscapes while recognizing the need to use water • resources as efficiently as possible and reducing water use to the lowest practical amount; i t G • Establish procedures and standards for the design,installation,and maintenance of water- efficient landscapes and landscape irrigation systems throughout Salt Lake City; • • Recognize the need for tailored requirements for special landscapes such as those associated with historic sites and public facilities such as parks. • Implement the 2009 Water Conservation Master Plan; • Contribute to the attainment of other city sustainability goals such as energy conservation. ,�. Credits:prolandmod.corn • A portion of the landscaped area having plants with similar water needs. A hydrozone may be irrigated or non-irrigated. APPLICABILITY New Development Al new development as specified below requiring approval by the city would need to comply with the provisions of this ordinance. Residential • Large subdivisions with 10 or more lots'; • Multi-family residential3; • Planned unit developments that include residential units; • Single-family and twin-family homes on lots greater than'A acre. Non-Residential • Industrial • Commercial • Institutional(including public facilities) Existing Development The new regulations would be required for existing development that is expanding to a point that it is required to meet current codes. Exemptions • New single-family and twin-family homes on lots''A acre or less unless part of a subdivision with 10 or more lots; • Treasured landscapes4; • Plant collections as part of botanical gardens and arboretums open to the public; • Community gardens and edible plant gardens; • Active recreational areas in schools,parks,playgrounds,sports fields,and golf courses; • Cemeteries; • Ecological restoration projects that do not require a permanent irrigation system. , ,t Credits:mynewsletterbuilder.com 2 Common and public areas only,not individual single-family Ids unless greater than%acre. 'Three units or more. °Landscapes associated with designated historic structures and sites,public gardens,and other notable sites and institutions as determined by the city. Recycling and Waste Reduction ;" , Sustainability City Code Initiative Frequently Asked Questions What is Recycling and Waste Reduction? Recycling and Waste Reduction is a system of regulations and policies that attempt to influence new and existing residential, mixed use and commercial developments to add recycling service areas or stations for the purpose of decreasing the amount of materials that enter the landfill,thereby extending its life and also reducing emissions of methane,a landfill and greenhouse gas. Effective Recycling and Waste Reduction strategies thus will result in more efficient trash collection services,long term cost savings, and extended land fill life while improving public health and promoting sustainable development. Purposes 1. Preserve natural resources for future generations; 2. Help Salt Lake City better manage and extend the life of its land fill by encouraging recycling and waste • reduction practices that will reduce the amount of materials entering the landfill; 3. Minimize the impact of waste on the natural environment by reducing pollutants,greenhouse gases (notably,methane),and chemicals; 4. Reduce the need for raw materials by creating the"civic infrastructure"for buying and utilizing recycled materials and products; 5. Reduce energy consumption by recycling materials instead of using raw materials for new products, which uses more energy. 6. Reduce personal financial expenditure in the economy through the availability of cheaper recycled products;and 7. Reduce municipal expenditures and save taxpayer dollars through more efficient and reduced refuse collection services. What are the regulations and how are they applied? There are 5 different Recycling and Waste Reduction regulations that will apply to certain developments either new or an expansion of an existing development. The appropriate City staff members will review the plans to ensure the Recycling and Waste Reduction regulations are met.Please see the regulations and applicability table on the next page: O 1 IIINIIMIIIMINII REGULATION APPLICABILITY S 1. Require the designation of a certain amount of New development, redevelopment, and space and the installation of recycling service remodels/expansions of non-residential and mixed- facilities (storage receptacles, staging, separation, use development when site plans are required in the etc.) within commercial, business, and mixed use multi-family, mixed-use, downtown, institutional, and developments in order to efficiently accommodate commercial zone districts. (Not applicable to recycling activity and allow for easy pick-up industrial uses or districts, and the Airport District.) servicing. New residential development including single- 2. Require centralized neighborhood recycling and family, multi-family, and residential components in composting stations to be installed in new mixed-use developments and subdivisions in all residential developments. residential or mixed-use districts. 3. In existing developments, allow for the conversion Existing multi-family residential, mixed-use, and of parking or other common space, under certain commercial developments that do not currently meet conditions, in order to promote the retrofit of the the recycling collection facility requirements of the site for recycling facilities. code. 4. Require construction waste management plans as All multi-family development, subdivision a part of development applications and, developments of over 20 single-family homes/lots, 5. Encourage deconstruction plans and and new non-residential development, recycling/reuse staging areas as part of the redevelopment and remodels/expansions. AllIII issuance of a demolition permit. above-referenced development and/or demolition Applicability permit applications shall include a construction waste management plan. If you have any questions regarding Recycling and Waste Reduction Regulations or the proposal before the city, please contact Ana Valdemoros at ana.valdemoros@slcgov.com or at (801) 535- 7236. III © Transportation Demand Management 4' Frequently Asked Questions ry What is Transportation Demand Management(TDM)? TDM is a system of regulations and policies that attempt to influence residents'and employees'travel decisions for the purpose of decreasing vehicle miles traveled,reducing traffic volume during peak periods, and varying travel modes. Effective TDM strategies thus reduce pollution,congestion and infrastructure costs while improving public health and promoting sustainable development. Definitions. Vehicle miles traveled is defined as the number of miles someone drives in a private vehicle. The trip could be a � - r , commute to work,a visit to the doctor,or a trip to the store. IkT T I I !t Peak periods are the times during the day when traffic volume on streets is the heaviest;generally,these times are the morning and afternoon rush hours. A travel mode is the type of transportation someone uses;a personal vehicle,a bicycle,the bus,commuter or light rail,and walking are all modes of travel. • Finally,when we talk about vehicle trips,we mean any trips in a private vehicle,regardless of the number of people in the car. For instance,if you and three co-workers each drive to and from work separately,that's eight total trips(four trips to work,four trips back). However,if the four of you decide to carpool,the number of vehicle trips is reduced to two. What types of TDM strategies are there?What are some examples? There are a number of strategies that can be implemented. Generally,these TDM strategies break down into three types: 1. Parking management:Strategies intended to reduce parking demand,encourage carpooling or other - multiple-occupancy travel options,or use available parking in a more efficient manner.Examples include r fewer required parking stalls,placing maximums on the number of parking stalls a new development can build,continuing to allow shared parking between multiple businesses or developments,and valet parking. 2. Trip reduction:Strategies intended to decrease the number of times people must drive or shift those driving trips to off-peak hours.Trip reduction strategies include telecommuting,alternative work schedules,and carpooling and vanpooling. 3. Alternative modes:Strategies intended to encourage the use of travel modes other than personal vehicles. Examples of this type of strategy include carpooling,incentivizing use of public transportation,and commuter facilities for transit riders and bicyclists. How will these regulations be applied? • Salt Lake City's TDM proposals focus on development options for future developers,retailers,employers, and institutions. This ordinance would only apply to new development or an expansion of an existing development. All new development proposals would be reviewed by appropriate city staff members to ensure the plans meets the TDM regulations. Some of the proposed regulations will impact all types of development:reduced parking requirements, parking maximums,and provision of certain bicycle facilities. Developments will also have the opportunity to meet their parking requirements through other programs such as shared parking or valet parking. Other regulations will only impact large developments: residential projects with more than 100 units;employers or institutions that will employ or enroll more than 500 - I• employees or students,respectively;or any developments that are projected to generate more than 2,500 vehicle trips per I i 1 I,1111 day(as measured by a traffic engineer). Salt Lake City will require these developers,property managers or employers to - provide additional measures to reduce the number of vehicle ` trips they generate. They will get to pick and choose from a ' 1.41 variety of strategies and they must demonstrate to the city that their TDM strategies will result in a least a 25 percent reduction in vehicle trips. As an example,say there is a company relocating to Salt Lake City and they plan to construct a new • building. This company is predicting that it will be fully staffed with 750 employees. In addition to required provisions,such as bicycle parking and facilities(showers,lockers,etc.),the developer will have to select from a variety of TDM tools so they can meet that 25 percent reduction in vehicle trips. The new employer provides a covered bus stop on site and provides only 75%of the maximum parking allowed on site. Additionally,parking spaces that are closest to the entrance of the building are reserved for carpools and vanpools only. The employer also opts to institute telecommuting for some of its employees and provides all of their employees with free bus/train passes. As they submit their building plans,they will want to hire a traffic engineer to complete a study of their selected TDM strategies which shows that they will be reducing the number of vehicle trips by at least 25 percent. This study will then be submitted to Salt Lake City and reviewed by the Transportation Division. What does this mean for residents and employees of the city? You may not notice changes right away because the new rules would only apply to new developments or major expansions to existing developments. Over time,however,more employers,institutions and other developments will be built that provide improved facilities for bicyclists,public transit users,and carpoolers. You will also see less parking,as parking requirements will be reduced. More employers will provide incentives for their employees to ride FrontRunner,TRAX,buses,or carpools. Overall,the number of vehicle miles traveled will decrease,which means fewer cars on the road. Fewer cars on the road means less traffic,air pollution,and costs for Salt Lake City and its residents. If you have any questions regarding Transportation Demand Management or the proposal before the city, please contact Nick Britton at nick.britton@slcgov.com or at(801)535-6107. • -Code Outdoor s su:rainahijity • "�' " ' :lmendment l_14 - Lighting Background Outdoor lighting regulations are being adopted by communities as an important component of sustainability. Light pollution impacts us all in several ways,by wasting billions of dollars annually in the United States,wasting large amounts of valuable natural resources through oil and coal use,harming nocturnal wildlife habitats,and preventing enjoyment of the night sky. Salt Lake City has some general language in the ordinance speaking to shielding light and limiting glare but the new proposed regulations are aimed to further protect our star- filled sky,promote energy efficiency and conservation,ensure outdoor lighting reduction after hours,and stop light spill onto neighboring properties. Purpose The purposes of the proposed Outdoor Lighting regulations are to: 1. Provide lighting adequate for safety,personal security and convenience; 2. Permit reasonable use of outdoor lighting for nighttime enjoyment and commerce; 3. Conserve energy and cut down on greenhouse gas emissions; 4. Reduce air pollution by reducing fossil fuel use for electricity generation; 5. Control light pollution of the nighttime sky; 6. Minimize the effects of misdirected light and glare; 7. Support properly directed light to the surface or activity intended;and 8. Promote lighting designed to clearly light people and objects for safety and security purposes. Proposed Regulations -e Require all new developments to have a maximum amount of lighting allowed per site. Set a maximum amount of lighting for basic lighting on a site including parking lot, lighting at doors and sensitive security areas. -e- Provide general Outdoor Lighting standards for all uses to ensure lighting is directed appropriately,shielded and glare reduced. Use a simple lighting calculation establishing a maximum amount of lighting allowed depending on how many parking spaces or how much hardscape is on a lot. 6 Address parking lot lighting to limit overlighting,ensure pedestrian safety and protect • adjacent residential properties from excessive glare and light trespass. -es Require lighting controls such as auto shut-off switching and lighting reduction devices for after hours use. • Outdoor 0 �� T l� (-l4 II I General Questions How strictly should lighting be regulated? eg ry r E, Should specific hours of illumination be defined? How can careful crafting of regulations balance both safety and sustainability? �' • - - Should single-family residential uses be 4110 exempt from the regulations? • - Which types of development tend to waste more energy and/or cause frequent light trespass nuisance? - • - Is the lighting maximum calculation too restrictive? Is it too general to meet the -�..�.�•• needs of individual uses? <_r Are the proposed regulations clear and easy to understand? Can they be easily applied by a small business owner? -- - - Questions/Comments If you have any questions or comments please contact Michaela Oktay at 535-6003 or inftWO Jr michaela.oktay@slcgov.com. Written comments 1 can be submitted via email or mailed to: K Salt Lake City Planning Division, 451 South State N ('� Street Rm 406, PO Box 145480, • is/ ' © Housing Diversity .� 'tip Sustainability City Code Initiative �*»....• Frequently Asked Questions What is Housing Diversity? Housing diversity means providing multiple housing types(single family detached,townhomes,apartments,etc.) within a community. Housing diversity promotes housing choices for the entire community,for different groups and income levels. Purpose The purposes of housing diversity regulations include: Ami • Promote the health,safety and welfare of the citizens of Salt Lake City through the implementation of the goals and objectives of city housing plans; ; • Promote a more diverse community through the provision of a variety of housing types within individual developments; w • Encourage a more widespread distribution of housing options • throughout the community; • Encourage"community oriented" multi-family developments that incorporate a variety of unit sizes and bedroom mixes; • Encourage the provision of affordable housing through incentives to the private sector;and, • Increase home ownership opportunities within the City. OProposed Changes The proposed regulations would promote a diversity of housing types(such as townhomes,apartments,single- family detached)and housing size(such as the number of bedrooms and unit sizes within multi-family developments)within a single residential development. The regulations also address affordable housing by providing development incentives. New residential development, redevelopment and residential components of mixed-use developments,for sale or rental,would have to meet the following standards: • 20—39 Acre Subdivisions- Developments that are 20-39 acres in size would have at least two housing types (such as single-family detached housing and town homes). • 40+Acre Subdivisions- Developments that are more than 40 acres in size must have at least three housing types. • Multi-family Developments(20 units+)- To provide a mix of size and bedroom choices within the development,all multi-family developments with 20 units or more would have to have one of the following: o At least 50%of the units must vary in size from the other units by at least 250 square feet,or o No more than 50%of the units can have the same number of bedrooms. — — = Affordable Housing To promote housing diversity,Salt Lake City would provide incentives to residential developers to provide affordable housing • within their developments. Incentives could include a density bonus. • Questions? How will this affect my current development? These proposed regulations would only affect new projects. Projects that are completed or in the process of completion would not be affected by these proposed regulations. What if I don't want to provide affordable housing within my development? The proposed regulations would not require developers to include affordable housing within their developments, but development would not qualify for the new incentives unless they include at least 10%affordable housing units within the development. Why do I have to include different types of housing stock in my new development? Providing various types of housing choices within a development will create a more diverse community and will support the City's ongoing sustainability efforts. Providing different housing types would create a denser community and produce a more walkable community. How will these changes affect my neighborhood? These new regulations would only affect new developments or • redevelopments. If you decide to renovate your home,you will not be affected by these changes. Your neighborhood would not see any changes unless a new development comes in that is 20 acres or more or is a 20 unit 1 or more multi-family development. How is housing diversity related to sustainability? Owner occupied single-family detached housing is not the right choice for everyone. By providing a mix of housing types,a community can meet the needs of many different groups and reduce sprawl. - Should there be incentives for other types of desirable housing choices? The proposed regulations currently only provide incentives for affordable housing. Salt Lake City will examine if incentives should be given for things such as accessible units and other important housing types. If you have any questions regarding Housing Diversity or the proposal before the city, please contact Elizabeth Reining at elizabeth.reining@slcgov.com or at(801)535-6313. MEMORANDUM DATE: FEBRUARY 10,2011 SUBJECT: Ethics • Conflict of Interest Ordinance- Chapter 2.44 STAFF REPORT BY: KAREN HALLADAY,BUDGET AND POLICY ANALYST AFFECTED COUNCIL DISTRICTS: ALL At the January 18,2011 work session,Council Members provided direction on the proposed changes to the City's Conflict of Interest ordinance,referred to as the Ethics project. Changes were made to the ordinance draft based on the Council's direction and additional research by Outside Legal Counsel and City Staff. Changes are reflected in the legislative copy of the included ordinance. • Outside Legal Counsel has listed the following items for additional Council discussion and direction: 1. Dollar limits on the Legal Defense Fund and Leadership Expense Fund(See 2.44.090(H)(3)and 2.44.090(I)-pages 10 and 11) a. The current ordinance limits a legal defense fund contribution to$2,500. b. The current ordinance does not indicate a dollar limit for contributions into the Leadership Expense Fund. 2. Necessity to disclose the cost of food or meals if more than$50(See 2.44.230-page 18). 3. New section-CLAUSE IN CONTRACTS-City Attorney suggestion (See 2.44.190(B)- - page 17). 4. New section-PROCEDURE FOR COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION-Council Attorney suggestion(See 2.44.290-page 19). 5. Determine whether a more detailed definition of conflict of interest should be inserted as a definition. [Draft — February 10, 2011 11 :00 a.m.] Underline means amended (new) language Brackets and strikethrough means deleted (removed) language] Chapter 2.44 CONFLICT OF INTEREST 2.44.010: PURPOSE: The purpose of this chapter is to prevent improper influence, avoid the appearance of impropriety, and prohibit public [of#icials] servants from receiving unjust financial gain from public service. It also seeks to increase public confidence by assuring that [o fcial] governmental actions are taken [ ] ethically and in compliance with all applicable procedures. It is the objective of this chapter to promote these goals by establishing ethical standards of conduct for all officers and employees of the city, including volunteers. 2.44.020: DEFINITIONS: For the purposes of this chapter, unless otherwise apparent from the context, certain words and phrases used in this chapter are defined as follows: ASSIST: To act, or offer or agree to act, in such a way as to help, represent, aid, advise, furnish information to, or otherwise provide assistance to a person or business entity, believing that such action is of help, aid, advice, or assistance to such person or business entity and done with the intent to so assist such person or business entity. BLIND TRUST: An independently managed trust in which the public servant- beneficiary or volunteer public servant-beneficiary has no management rights and in which the public servant-beneficiary or volunteer public [service] servant-beneficiary is not given notice of alterations in, or other dispositions of, the property subject to the trust. BUSINESS ENTITY: A sole proprietorship, partnership, association, joint venture, corporation, limited liability company, firm, trust, foundation, or other organization or entity used in carrying on a business. CITY REGULATED BUSINESS ENTITY: Any business entity for which the city issues a license or regulates pursuant to any city ordinance[; or [that the city regulates] statute. COMPENSATION: Anything of economic value, however designated, [that] which is paid, loaned, granted, given, donated, or transferred to any person or business entity by anyone other than the city for or in consideration of personal services, materials, property, or any other consideration whatsoever, [and-includes] including any forbearance. 1 COMPLAINT: Any complaint filed against any public servant or volunteer public servant which charqes that person with a violation of chapter 2.44. CORRUPTLY: Any act done [Done] with wrongful intent and for the purpose of obtaining or receiving any [aer-senal,] financial[;] or professional benefit or detriment resulting from some act or omission of a public servant or volunteer public servant that is inconsistent with the proper performance of his or her public duties. ECONOMIC BENEFIT TANTAMOUNT TO A GIFT: Includes: A. [a-)]any loan at an interest rate that is substantially lower than the commercial rate then currently prevalent for similar loans, [end] or B. [ ] compensation received for private services rendered at a rate substantially exceeding the fair market value of the services. ELECTED OFFICER: Any person [holding] elected or appointed to hold the office of mayor or city council member. • the-GitA FINANCIAL INTEREST: A. [A] To possess a substantial interest, or B. [Holding] To hold a position in a business entity [such as] including an officer, Al director, trustee, partner, or employee[, or tho like,] or to hold[ing] any position of „ management in a business entity. GIFT: Any gratuity, favor, discount, entertainment, hospitality, loan, forbearance, economic benefit tantamount to a gift, or other item having monetary value, unless consideration of equal or greater value is received. The term does not include a parking pass or free parking: a) for a parking lot if the parking lot is owned by the city; or b) for a parking lot that is not owned by the city, when used for official city business. The term includes gifts of services, training, transportation, lodging, and meals, whether provided in-kind, by purchase of a ticket, payment in advance, or reimbursement after the expense has been incurred. The term "gift" is subject to the following: A. Gifts To Relatives Or Others, Attributable To Elected Officer Or [Execrative] Municipal Employee: A gift to a relative of an elected officer or [executive] municipal employee, or a gift to any other individual based on that individual's relationship with the elected officer or [executive] municipal employee, shall be considered a gift to the elected officer or [executive] municipal employee, if: 1) given with the knowledge and acquiescence of the elected officer or [executive] municipal employee, and 2) the elected officer or [executive] municipal employee knows, or with the exercise of reasonable care should know, that it was given because of the official position of the elected officer or [ems ctee] municipal employee. B. Food Or Refreshment Provided To Dependents: If food or refreshment is provided at the same time and place to both a public servant or volunteer public 2 servant and the spouse or dependent thereof, only the food or refreshment provided to the public servant or volunteer public servant shall be treated as a gift for purposes of this chapter. GOVERNMENTAL ACTION: Any official action on the part of the city, including, but not limited to: A. Any decision, determination, finding, ruling, or order; B. Any grant, payment, award, license, contract, subcontract, transaction, decision, sanction, or approval, or the denial thereof, or the failure to act in respect thereto; [and] or C. Any legislative, administrative, appointive or discretionary act of any public servant or volunteer public servant[;and] or D. Any public appearance, event, or ceremony required of an elected official that is related to official city business. GRANT OF HOSPITALITY OR GESTURE OF FRIENDSHIP: Anv [Includes] grant[+n ] of lodging, food, or travel expenses, including [and] the grant[+ng] of gifts and remembrances such as birthday, holiday, or anniversary presents, given on the basis of personal friendship. LEADERSHIP EXPENSE FUND: Any fund of money established to pay expenses of an elected officer incurred or to be incurred in connection with [the-ear-ring-en-by] the elected officer's [of his or her] official duties, including[, i ,] expenditures for: {a)] A. [the} travel, lodging, food, or entertainment of a spouse, adult designee or other personal companion of the elected officer, [when] if accompanying the elected officer on travel involving official city business; [la)] B. [the giving of] flowers, [holiday or- greeting] cards, or remembrances for funerals, holidays or similar events; or [s)] C. charitable or eleemosynary gifts or activities clearly [identified] disclosed by the elected officer. LEGAL DEFENSE FUND: Any fund of money established to pay legal expenses of an elected officer which arise in connection with: [a)] A. the elected officer's candidacy for or election to city office [in-the-city]; [b}] B. the elected officer's official duties or position in the city; [e)1 C. a threatened or actual criminal prosecution of the elected officer; or [d)] D. a civil action bearing on the elected officer's reputation or fitness for office. In no event shall monies in a legal defense fund be spent for a matter that is primarily personal in nature. MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEE: Any person who is not an elected or appointed officer who is employed by the city as an employee on a full or part-time basis, at-will or merit. OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT: Any employment, activity, or enterprise for compensation, including self-employment, performed by a public servant apart from his or her official assigned duties [ ] for the city. PROFESSIONAL INTEREST: Any interest which: A. results in a direct or immediate professional benefit or detriment to a public servant; or B. creates a fiduciary duty with 3 '" ' respect to a professional interest and is distinguishable from the professional benefit or detriment to the public generally or the public servant's profession, occupation, or association generally. Professional interest provisions do not apply to a public servant's relative. PUBLIC BODY: Any branch, system, department, division, institution, agency, commission, board, bureau, tribunal, entity, or other unit of government or any quasi- governmental unit of the city. PUBLIC SERVANT: Any elected officer, any [exese] municipal employee, or any other person in a position of employment with the city, whether or not such person is compensated for his or her services, but does not include any volunteer public servant. REGULATED: [ ] Subiect to the city's regulatory licensing, permitting, or approval procedures. RELATIVE: Any spouse, child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, parent- in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, nephew, niece, aunt, uncle, or first cousin of a public servant or of the spouse of such public servant or volunteer public servant, including any step-relationship. Any adult designee is considered to be a relative for purposes of this chapter, including the extended familial relationships provided herein. , , , • SELL: The act to [Signing] skin a bid, proposal, or contract; [negotiating] negotiate a contract; [sentacting] contact any public servant or volunteer public servant for the purpose of obtaining, negotiating, or discussing changes in specifications, price, cost allowances, or other terms of a contract; [settling] settle disputes concerning performance of a contract; or engage in any other lawful liaison [activity] with a view toward the ultimate consummation of a sale [although] even if the actual contract therefor is subsequently negotiated by another person. SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST: The ownership, either legally or equitably, by a public servant or volunteer public servant, or his or her spouse or minor child[], of at least ten percent (10%) of the outstanding shares of a corporation or a ten percent (10%) interest in any other business entity. TRANSACTION: Any deal, contract, agreement, arrangement, undertaking, or other matter, including[, ' ,] any permit approval, lease, franchise, sale, or purchase. VOLUNTEER PUBLIC SERVANT: Any appointed person, other than an elected officer, serving on a special, regular, or full time committee, commission, authority, agency, or , ak board of the city, who is not paid a salary or an hourly wage by the city for his or her services thereon. 4 WAIVER: Any act to grant a waiver of any provision of this chapter which exempts any public servant, including any elected officer, municipal employee, city attorney or volunteer public servant pursuant to Section 2.44.180. 2.44.030: DISCLOSURE AND DISQUALIFICATION: A. [Whenever] If the performance of a public servant[] or volunteer public servants] [ ] constitutes any governmental action on any matter involving the public servant's or volunteer public servant's financial[;] or professional[ personal] interest[e]s and it is reasonably foreseeable that the decision will have an individualized material effect on such interest, distinguishable from its effect on the public generally, the public servant or volunteer public servant shall publicly disclose such matter: 1. to the city council[;]i in the case of the Inlayer] mayor's disclosure; 2. to the mayor and the city council, in the case of the city council member's disclosure; or 3. in all other cases,, to the mayor and to the members of the public body, if any, of which the public servant or volunteer public servant is a member. B. The disclosure shall be made in the manner prescribed in section 2.44.050 of this chapter and shall identify the nature and extent of such interests. C. The public servant or volunteer public servant who has a financial interest shall disqualify himself or herself from participating in any deliberation as well as from voting on such matter. The public servant or volunteer public servant who has only a professional interest need not disqualify himself or herself. D. The disclosure statement shall be entered in the minutes of the meeting of the public body. 2.44.040: PROHIBITED ACTS DESIGNATED: A. A public servant or volunteer public servant may not: 1. Unless otherwise allowed by law, disclose confidential information acquired by reason of the public servant's or volunteer public servant's official position or in the course of official duties or use such information in order to: a) substantially further the public servant's or volunteer public servant's [personal,] financial[T] or professional interest or the [personal financial[;] or professional interest of others; or b) secure special privileges or exemptions for the public servant or volunteer public servant or others. 2. Corruptly use or attempt to use the public servant's or volunteer public servant's official position to: a) further substantially the public servant's or volunteer public servant's [personal,] financial[T] or professional interest or the [personal,] financial[;] or professional interest of others; or b) secure special privileges[, treatment, or-exemptions] for the public servant or volunteer public servant or others. 5 B. A public servant may not have a financial[T] or professional interest in an entity that is doing business with the city department in which the public servant is employed. A volunteer public servant may not have a financial[,] or professional interest in an entity that is doing business with the city department or division to whom the city committee, commission, authority, agency, or board of which the volunteer public servant is a member primarily provides direct assistance or direction. For purposes of this subsection, the city department of a member of the city council shall be deemed to be the city council office, and the city department of the mayor shall be deemed to be all city departments. ] C. The following may not apply for or receive a loan or grant of money from the city: any elected officer, any relative of any elected officer, or any business entity in which any elected officer has a substantial interest. 2.44.050: DISCLOSURE OF SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST: A. Disclosure To City: [Every] Any public servant or volunteer public servant who is also an officer, director, agent, [er}employer, or employee of any business entity, or the owner of a substantial interest in any business entity, including[, ,] any business entity subject to city regulation, shall disclose[, ,] any such position or employment and the nature and value of such position or employment as provided herein. B. Time Of Disclosure: Any [Fib] public servant [and] or volunteer public servant[s] shall make [ ] the disclosure within thirty (30) days: 1. after being appointed or elected or otherwise commencing [their] employment or public service[;]1 and 2. [again] during January of each year if such public servant's or volunteer public servant's position in the business entity has changed or if the value of such public servant's or volunteer public servant's interest in the entity has materially increased since the last disclosure. [Such] The disclosure shall be made in a sworn written statement in a form prescribed by the city and shall be filed with the mayor, or, in the case of disclosure by the mayor or by the city council staff, with the city council. Unless otherwise provided by the law, the statements are public records and shall be made available for inspection by members of the city council and the public upon request. C. Value Of Interest: Unless otherwise required by law, where the value of an interest is required to be disclosed pursuant to this section, it shall be sufficient to report whether the value is less than fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00) or [ ] is fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00)or more. [ ] This section does not apply to instances where the value of the interest does not exceed 6 two thousand dollars ($2,000.00). Life insurance policies and annuities are not included in this disclosure requirement and shall not be considered in determining the value of any such interest. 2.44.060: OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT: A. Incompatible Employment: No public servant or volunteer public servant shall engage in any outside employment that is inconsistent, incompatible, or in conflict with[ cal-# ,] his or her duties as a public servant or volunteer public servant, or with the duties, functions, or responsibilities of the city. Such prohibited outside employment includes, but is not limited to, employment: 1. Involving the use for private gain or advantage of his or her city working time or city facilities, equipment, or supplies, except as permitted under section 2.44.180 of this chapter; 2. Involving the receipt or acceptance by the public servant or volunteer public servant of any compensation from anyone, other than the city, for the performance of an act that the public servant or volunteer public servant would be required or expected to perform in the regular course of his or her city employment or as part of his or her duties as a public servant or volunteer public servant; 3. Involving the performance of an act that may later be subject, directly or indirectly, to the control, inspection, review, audit, or enforcement of the public servant or another public servant of the city, [ , ,] such outside employment may only be engaged in after procedures have been adopted by the public servant's assigned department Re-which- ] to ensure that all work done by the public servant is subject to direct review by the public servant's immediate supervisor; or 4. Involving such time demands as would render such public servant's performance of public duties demonstrably less efficient. 5. Subsections A3 and A4 of this section shall not apply to volunteer public servants. B. Applicability: This section shall not apply to part time employees or [and] seasonal employees of the city. Members of the city council are not part time employees for purposes of this section. C. Disclosure: Before engaging in any outside employment that is permissible under this chapter: 1. Any [Elected] elected officer[s] shall disclose such outside employment as provided in section 2.44.050 of this chapter; 2. Any staff[Staff] of the city council shall disclose such outside employment to the chair[pefsea] of the city council; 3. Any [ ] department head of the city shall disclose such outside employment to the mayor; and 4. [Alt] Any other public servant[s] shall disclose such outside employment to his or her [their] department head. 7 D. Outside employment shall not be denied unless it is in violation of the provisions of subsection A of this section. No public servant shall have the power to deny an elected officer his or her right to outside employment which is not prohibited under subsection A of this section. [9] E. Department Rules And Regulations: Anv department head [ earls] shall adopt rules and regulations for [their] his or her department regarding outside employment, including the denial thereof, [that] to clarify the application of this chapter to the unique operations of that department, if such rules or regulations are consistent with the intent of this chapter and no less stringent. [€] F. Advisory Opinion: If a public servant's outside employment is denied under subsection [O] E of this section, the public servant may seek an advisory opinion from the city attorney regarding the matter. The city attorney shall issue such an opinion [ ], but the city attorney shall not have the power to overrule the discretionary decision of the person who denied the consent. [€] G. Certain Travel, Lodging, And Food Expenses And Cash Honoraria Are To Be Considered Outside Employment And Not Gifts: Any payment for travel, food, lodging, or entertainment expenses, or reimbursement therefor, or any other compensation or cash honorarium, made to a public servant in connection with a public event, appearance, or ceremony unrelated to official city business or not furnished by the .0104 sponsor of such public event, appearance, or ceremony, shall be considered outside employment under this section, and not a gift under section 2.44.080 of this chapter. This subsection shall apply to volunteer public servants, but only to the extent of requiring them to disclose such outside employment to their department head. [G] H. Reports To Mayor: Within fifteen (15) working days following each February 1, May 1, August 1 and November 1, each department that has issued a denial of outside employment to a public servant shall file with the mayor copies of all such denials given during the previous yearly quarter. 2.44.070: TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING THE CITY: A. Disclosure Required: No public servant or volunteer public servant shall receive or agree to receive compensation from anyone other than the city for assisting any person or business entity in any transaction involving the city, unless he or she shall file a sworn written statement giving the information required by this section and disclose that information in an open meeting to the members of the affected body, if any, of which he or she is a member. Said disclosure shall be made in writing prior to the discussion on the matter and include the following information: 1. The name and address of the public servant or volunteer public servant involved; 2. The name and address of the person or business entity being or to be so 4060. assisted; and 8 3. A brief description of the transaction as to which service is rendered or is to be rendered and of the nature of the service performed or to be performed. This section shall not be construed to allow actions which are otherwise prohibited by city ordinances or state law. B. Time And Location Of Disclosure Filing: The statement required to be filed by this section shall be filed within ten (10) days before the date of any agreement between the public servant or volunteer public servant and the person or business entity to be assisted or the public servant's or volunteer public servant's receipt of compensation, whichever time is earlier: 1)with the city recorder; 2)with the affected body of which the public servant or volunteer public servant is a member; 3) in the case of disclosure by the mayor, with the chair-Baer-soft] of the city council; and 4) in the case of disclosure by a city council member, with the mayor. C. Disclosure Is Public Record: The statement shall be deemed public information and shall be available for examination by the public. 2.44.080: ACCEPTING OR MAKING GIFTS PROHIBITED: A. In General: No public servant or volunteer public servant shall knowingly receive, accept, take, seek, or solicit, directly or indirectly, for himself or herself or another, a gift that the public servant or volunteer public servant knows, or with the exercise of reasonable care should know: 1)would influence the recipient to depart from the faithful and impartial discharge of his or her public duties; or 2) is primarily for the purpose of rewarding the public servant or volunteer public servant for [o ficial] governmental action taken or not taken. B. No Solicitation Of Gifts For Personal Matters: Except for gifts described as exceptions in section 2.44.090 of this chapter, no public servant shall seek or solicit, or receive, directly or indirectly, any gift for the purpose of addressing or dealing with personal matters or other matters not involving official city business. 2.44.090: GIFT PROHIBITION EXCEPTIONS: Except as otherwise provided in this section, section 2.44.080 of this chapter does not prohibit accepting: A. Campaign Contributions: A political campaign contribution covered or regulated by chapter 2.46 of this title. B. Gifts From Relatives: A bona fide gift from a relative, not given in violation of section 2.44.080 of this chapter, provided it is not given in exchange for, as consideration for, or as a reward for the recipient taking or refraining from taking any official city action, past, present, or future. C. Grants Of Hospitality; Gestures Of Friendship: An occasional grant of hospitality or gesture of friendship, not given in violation of section 2.44.080 of this chapter, if 9 provided to an individual on the basis of personal friendship, and if it is from a friend A"'"' who has not, does not and has no immediate plans to do business with the city or be regulated by it, either individually or through a business entity in which the giver or a relative of the giver has more than a ten percent (10%) interest. D. De Minimis Nonpecuniary Gifts: An occasional nonpecuniary gift.having a value of less than fifty dollars ($50.00), or any other amount provided in [the-eerrocpern prevision of] the [ Municipal Officers' and Employees' Ethics Act, title 10, chapter 3, part 13, of the Utah code, or any successor section. E. De Minimis Remembrances; Items Of Nominal Value: Any occasional noncash remembrance, not given in violation of section 2.44.080 of this chapter, with a value [under] less than one hundred dollars ($100.00), given for use by, or shared by the recipient of the gift with, the entire office or working group of which the recipient is a member; a plaque, trophy, or other item that is substantially commemorative in nature; or an item of nominal value, such as a greeting card, baseball cap, or T-shirt. F. Travel, Lodging, And Food Expenses Incurred In Connection With Official [dies] City Business: Reasonable expenses for food, travel, lodging, and scheduled entertainment of a public servant or volunteer public servant incurred in connection with public events, appearances, [er] ceremonies, or other activities related to official city business, not given in violation of section 2.44.080 of this chapter, if furnished by the sponsor of such public event, appearance, [of] ceremony, or other activity. G. Death Transfers: Subject to section 2.44.100 of this chapter, bequests, inheritances, and other transfers at death. H. Legal Defense Fund[sl: [ , any-eentr-ibutien-te-a-legal-Elefense-fundas-previded-belewq Any contribution to a legal defense fund which is not violative of section 2.44.080 of this chapter. 1. [An] Any elected officer may establish a legal defense fund. Any such legal defense fund shall be a trust, administered and accounted for by an independent trustee of the elected officer's choosing. {An] The elected officer may not solicit or receive contributions for legal defense fund purposes until such a trust has been created. The elected officer shall be solely responsible for raising funds for and directing the trustee to make expenditures from such fund, consistent with the provisions of this chapter. 2. In no event shall [an]any elected officer simultaneously maintain more than one legal defense fund. Annually, the elected officer shall file a disclosure with the city recorder which provides an accountinq and identities of contributors consistent with title 52, chapter 5, part 2 of Utah code. 3. The trustee shall not accept more than [ dollars [($2,500.00)] ( ) in contributions to a legal defense fund from any one individual or organization. The trustee shall not accept, in the „o ,, aggregate, more than fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) in contributions to a legal defense fund. No person shall make a contribution to a legal defense fund in the name 10 of another person or make a contribution with another person's funds in his or her own name, and no elected officer shall knowingly accept any such contribution. 4. During such time as any monies remain in a legal defense fund, the beneficiary of such fund shall comply with the reporting requirements of title [63] 52 chapter [96] 5 of the Utah code, or any successor sections. 5. Within ninety (90) days after determining that there are no related legal proceedings threatened or pending against him or her,. [ ,] for which such funds would be eligible for use, the beneficiary thereof shall notify the trustee, in writing, of such determination. Such determination and notification may occur before or after the beneficiary leaves elective office with the city. Within ninety (90) days after receipt of such notification, the trustee shall, as directed by the beneficiary in such notification, or, if the beneficiary does not so direct, in the trustee's sole discretion, either: a) return such monies to the donors thereof on a pro rata basis; b) transfer such monies to the general fund of the city; or c) donate such monies to a tax exempt charity. 6. In no event shall monies in a legal defense fund be transferred to a campaign finance fund of any person. 7. On or before the next January 5 after the distribution of monies described in subsection H5 of this section, the elected officer shall file the report required by section [63-96-103] 52-5-201 of the Utah code, or any successor section, and shall file a copy of such report with the city recorder.] I. Leadership Expense Funds: [ [If-net- Any contribution to a legal defense fund which is not violative of section 2.44.080 of this chapter. 1. [An] Any elected officer may establish a legal defense fund. Any such leadership expense fund shall be a trust, administered and accounted for by an independent trustee of the elected officer's choosing. {An] The elected officer may not solicit or receive contributions for leadership expense fund purposes until such a trust has been created. The elected officer shall be solely responsible for raising funds for and directing the trustee to make expenditures from such fund, consistent with the provisions of this chapter. 2. [While] In no event shall any elected officer simultaneously maintain more than one leadership expense fund. If any monies are in a leadership expense fund, the beneficiary of such fund shall comply with the reporting requirements of title [63] 52, chapter [96] 5 of the Utah code, or any successor sections [ ]. Annually, the elected officer shall file a disclosure with the city recorder which provides an accounting and identities of contributors consistent with title 52, chapter 5, part 2 of Utah code. 3. Within [ ] ninety (90) days after the beneficiary of a leadership expense fund leaves elective office with the city, the trustee shall distribute any monies remaining in such fund by either: a) returning such monies to the donors thereof on a pro rata basis; b) transferring such monies to the general fund of the city; or c) donating such monies to a tax exempt charity. The beneficiary of such a fund may, by providing written notice to the trustee within ninety (90) days after leaving 11 elective office with the city, direct the trustee as to which of such distribution methods to use. In the event that the beneficiary does not so direct the trustee, the trustee shall, in its sole discretion, select the method of and make such distribution. 4. In no event shall monies in a leadership expense fund be transferred to a campaign finance fund of any person. 5. On or before the next January 5 after the distribution of monies described in subsection [I3}3 of this section, the elected officer shall file the report required by section [63-96-103] 52-5-201 of the Utah code, or any successor section, and shall file a copy of such report with the city recorder.] [J] H. Determinations Of Nonapplicability: Any gift for which a determination of nonapplicability is made pursuant to subsection 2.44.180B of this chapter. 2.44.100: GIFTS IN ANOTHER'S NAME PROHIBITED: No person shall make, for the direct benefit of an elected officer or [executive] municipal employee, a gift in the name of another person or a gift with another person's funds in his or her own name, or a gift made on behalf of another person. No elected officer or [executive] municipal employee shall knowingly receive, accept, take, seek, or solicit, directly or indirectly, for his or her direct benefit, any such gift. 2.44.110. RESERVED. [2. 4.110: RECUSAL: 0 ] 2.44.120: REJECTION AND RETURN OF GIFTS; RECORDS: A. Perishable Gifts: With respect to gifts not receivable under subsection 2.44.090E of this chapter, when it is not practicable to return a tangible item because it is perishable or cannot practicably be returned, the item may, at the discretion of the recipient, be given to an appropriate charity or destroyed. B. Records Of Rejected, Destroyed Or Donated Gifts: No reporting is required for rejected or returned gifts or for gifts donated to charity. However, written documentation of such acts shall be maintained by the recipient of the gift for five (5) years and shall be made available for inspection as a public document upon written request. 2.44.130: PUBLIC CONTRACTS; PROCUREMENT: 12 A. Conflict Of Interest: 1. Conflict Of Interest Generally: No public servant or volunteer public servant shall participate directly or indirectly in making, recommending, preparing, or performing a discretionary function with respect to any contract with the city, including, without limitation, a procurement contract, when the public servant or volunteer public servant has actual knowledge that: a. The public servant or volunteer public servant or a relative of the public servant or volunteer public servant has a financial interest pertaining to such contract; b. The public servant or volunteer public servant or a relative of the public servant or volunteer public servant has a financial interest in a business entity that has a financial interest pertaining to such contract; or c. Any other person or business entity with whom the public servant or volunteer public servant or any relative of the public servant or volunteer public servant is negotiating or has an arrangement concerning prospective employment is involved in such contract. 2. Financial Interest In A Blind Trust: A public servant or volunteer public servant or any relative of the public servant or volunteer public servant who holds a financial interest in a blind trust and its corpus shall not be deemed to have a conflict of interest with regard to matters pertaining to that financial interest as defined herein, provided that disclosure of the existence of the blind trust has been made affirmatively in writing to the: a) city council, in the case of the mayor; b) mayor, in the case of city council members and department heads; or c) applicable department head, in the case of any other public servant or volunteer public servant. {3] 2. Bidding And Procurement: a. [An] Any elected officer, and any business entity in which such elected officer has a financial interest, may not submit a bid or proposal regarding, or renew the term of, a contract within the official responsibility of that elected officer. A member of a city board, commission, committee, authority, or agency, and any business entity in which such member has a financial interest, may not submit a bid or proposal regarding, or renew the term of, a contract within the official responsibility of that board, commission, committee, authority, or agency. b. Any public servant or volunteer public servant who serves on a city procurement committee must cease to serve on such committee if he or she has, or within the past year had, a financial interest in an entity that submits a bid or proposal that will be evaluated by that committee. c. No public servant or volunteer public servant who serves on a city procurement committee may, during the two (2) years immediately following the date the related contract is awarded by the city, seek or accept employment or remuneration of any kind from a person or entity that submitted a bid or proposal that was evaluated by that committee. {411. Discovery Of Actual Or Potential Conflict Of Interest; Disqualification And Waiver: Upon discovery of an actual or potential conflict of interest, [a] any public servant or volunteer public servant shall promptly file a written statement of disqualification and shall withdraw from further participation in the transaction or matter involved. The public servant or volunteer public servant may, at the same time, apply to 13 the city attorney for an advisory opinion as to what further participation, if any, the "" public servant or volunteer public servant may have in the transaction or matter. B. Public Servant Or Volunteer Public Servant Disclosure Requirements: 1. Disclosure Of Benefit Received From Contract: Any public servant or volunteer public servant who has or obtains any benefit from any city contract with a business entity in which the public servant or volunteer public servant has a financial or professional interest, shall report such benefit to the: a) city council, in the case of the mayor; b) mayor, in the case of city council members and department heads; or c) applicable department head, in the case of any other public servant or volunteer public servant, within thirty (30) days after the public servant or volunteer public servant has actual or constructive knowledge of a benefit received or to be received. However, this subsection shall not apply to a contract with a business entity in which the public servant's or volunteer public servant's interest in the business entity has been placed in a disclosed blind trust. Disclosure pursuant to this subsection shall not exonerate any public servant or volunteer public servant from any violation of this chapter. 2. Failure To Disclose Benefit Received: Any public servant or volunteer public servant who knows or should have known of such benefit, and fails to report such benefit as provided in subsection B1 of this section, is in breach of the ethical standards of this chapter. C. Gifts And Payoffs Related To Procurement: 1. Gifts: It shall be illegal for any person to offer, give, or agree to give to any public servant or volunteer public servant or former public servant or former volunteer public servant, or for any public servant or volunteer public servant or former public servant or former volunteer public servant to solicit, demand, accept, or agree to accept from another person, a gift or an offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a procurement requirement or a purchase request, action to influence the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering of advice, investigation, auditing, request for ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to any procurement requirement or a contract or subcontract, or to any solicitation or proposal therefore. 2. Payoffs: It shall be illegal for any payment, gift, or offer of employment to be made by or on behalf of a subcontractor under a contract to the prime contractor or a higher tier subcontractor or any person associated therewith, as an inducement for the award of a subcontract or order. This prohibition applies whether a payment, gift, or offer is made before or after the award of a city contract or order. D. Prohibition Against Contingent Fees: It shall be illegal for a person to be retained, or to retain a person, to solicit or secure a city contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, or brokerage or contingent fee, except for retention of bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial selling agencies for the purpose of securing business. 2.44.140: EMPLOYMENT OF CURRENT AND FORMER PUBLIC 14 SERVANTS: A. Contemporaneous Employment Prohibited: Except as provided in section 2.44.180 of this chapter, no public servant or volunteer public servant shall participate directly or indirectly on behalf of the city in the procurement or contracting process with respect to a city contract while such public servant or volunteer public servant is the agent or employee of any other party to such contract or any other person who has a financial interest in such contract. B. Restriction On Former Public Servants Regarding Their Former Duties: 1. Permanent Disqualification Of Former Public Servant Personally Involved In A Particular Matter: No former public servant shall knowingly act as a principal or as an agent for anyone other than the city in connection with any of the following matters in which the city is a party or has a direct interest: a) a judicial or other proceeding, application, request for a ruling, or other determination; b) a contract; c) a claim; or d) a charge or controversy; in which the public servant participated personally and substantially through decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, rendering of advice, investigation, or otherwise while a public servant. 2. One Year Restriction Regarding Matters In Which A Former Public Servant Was Officially Responsible: With respect to matters that were within a former public servant's official responsibility while he or she was a public servant, but in which such public servant did not participate personally or substantially, the restrictions set forth in subsection A of this section shall apply, but only for a period of one year after cessation of the former public servant's official responsibility. C. Disqualification Of Business Entity In Which A Public Servant Or Volunteer Public Servant Has A Financial Interest: No business entity in which a public servant or volunteer public servant has a financial interest shall knowingly act as a principal or as an agent for anyone other than the city in connection with any of the following matters in which the city is a party or has a direct interest: 1) a judicial or other proceeding, application, request for a ruling, or other determination; 2) a contract; 3) a claim; or 4) a charge or controversy; in which the public servant or volunteer public servant participates personally and substantially through decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, the rendering of advice, investigation, or otherwise. D. Selling To The City After Termination Of Employment Is Prohibited: No former public servant, unless the former public servant's last annual salary did not exceed thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.00), shall engage in selling or attempting to sell supplies, services, or construction to the city for one year following the date his or her employment by the city ceased. The foregoing sentence shall not apply to sales or attempted sales pursuant to a contract awarded through an open and public bidding process. This subsection is not intended to preclude a former public servant from accepting employment with private industry solely because the former public servant's employer is a contractor with the city, nor shall a former public servant be precluded from serving as a consultant to the city. 15 2.44.150: NEGOTIATING EMPLOYMENT: AN* [A] Any public servant or volunteer public servant shall not perform his or her official duties with respect to [city] governmental action that involves a person or business entity which has a financial interest in such [eity]governmental action while the public servant or volunteer public servant is negotiating prospective employment with such person or business entity. 2.44.160: COERCION OF BUSINESS OR CONTRIBUTIONS: No public servant shall in any manner intimidate or coerce a public servant or volunteer public servant subordinate to him or her to do business with him or her or to make any financial contribution. 2.44.170: ACQUIRING INTEREST IN A BUSINESS ENTITY: No public servant or volunteer public servant shall acquire [aft] any interest in a business entity at a time when such public servant or volunteer public servant believes or has reason to believe, based on information not available to the general public, that such business entity will be substantially and directly affected by any contract, transaction, zoning decision, or other[official]governmental action of the city. 2.44.180: WAIVERS; DETERMINATIONS OF NONAPPLICABILITY: A. Except with respect to the restrictions on gifts in section 2.44.080 of this chapter, the city council, in the case of the mayor; the mayor, in the case of city council members; the mayor and the chairperson of the city council, jointly, in the case of the city attorney; and the city attorney, in the case of any other public servants or volunteer public servants, may grant a waiver from the provisions of this chapter upon making a written determination that: 1. The public servant or volunteer public servant will be able to perform his or her official functions without actual bias or favoritism; and 2. The granting of the waiver will not be detrimental to the interests of the city. B. A determination of nonapplicability of the restrictions on gifts in section 2.44.080 of this chapter may be given by the mayor, in the case of the city council; by the city council, in the case of the mayor; by the mayor and the chairperson of the city council, jointly, in the case of the city attorney; or by the city attorney, in the case of any other public servant or volunteer public servant. A determination of nonapplicability shall be in writing and shall be given only upon a determination that: 1. The gift was not given with the intent to influence [official] governmental action; 2. There exists no substantial likelihood that the gift will influence [official] governmental action; and 3. The giving of the determination of nonapplicability will not be detrimental to the interests of the city. C. Any [such] determination of nonapplicability under this section shall include a 16 description of the gift, its estimated value, and the reasons justifying its [being and] receipt which shall be filed as a public document with the city recorder. 2.44.190: CLAUSE IN CONTRACTS: A. In every contract, bid, proposal, or other offer involving the city made by a nongovernmental entity, such nongovernmental entity shall make the following representation: REPRESENTATION REGARDING ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES AND FORMER CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES The bidder, offeror, or contractor represents that it has not: (1) provided an illegal gift or payoff to a city officer or employee or former city officer or employee, or his or her relative or business entity; (2) retained any person to solicit or secure this contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, or brokerage or contingent fee, other than bona fide employees or bona fide commercial selling agencies for the purpose of securing business; (3) knowingly breached any of the ethical standards set forth in the city's conflict of interest ordinance, Chapter 2.44, Salt Lake City Code; or(4) knowingly influenced, and hereby promises that it will not knowingly influence, a city officer or employee or former city officer or employee to breach any of the ethical standards set forth in the city's conflict of interest ordinance, Chapter 2.44[, Salt Lako City Codo]. B. The city attorney may waive the representation requirement as provided in this section for certain contracts, bids, proposals or other offers upon a written determination that it is in the best interest of the city to waive the representation requirement. 2.44.200: INDUCEMENT TO VIOLATE PROHIBITED: No person shall induce or seek to induce any public servant or volunteer public servant to violate any of the provisions of this chapter. 2.44.210: ADVISORY POWERS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: A. Request For Advisory Opinion By Public Servants Or Volunteer Public Servants: Any public servant or volunteer public servant may request of the city attorney an advisory opinion concerning the application to him or her of the provisions of this chapter. The city attorney shall accept and process these advisory opinion requests in accordance with the procedures set forth in this section. B. Advisory Opinion Upon City Attorney's Own Initiative: The city attorney on his or her own authority may render advisory opinions whenever he or she deems it in the public interest. C. Time For Decision; Public Review: As soon as practicable, but not later than thirty (30) days after he or she receives a request for an advisory opinion, the city attorney 17 shall render a written opinion to the person who requested the opinion, and shall Aft provide a copy of the opinion to the mayor and the city council. All advisory opinions shall be available for public review, but may be in such form and with such deletions as may be necessary to prevent the disclosure of the identity of the persons involved or to protect personal privacy interests. 2.44.220: JUSTIFIABLE RELIANCE: Any advisory opinion rendered by the city attorney, until amended or revoked by the city attorney, shall be a defense in any action brought under this chapter and shall be binding on the city in any subsequent proceedings concerning the person who requested the opinion and who acted in good faith reliance upon it, unless material facts were omitted or misstated by the person requesting the opinion. 2.44.230: TRAVEL, LODGING OR ENTERTAINMENT EXPENSES; REPORTING: If someone other than the city pays for travel, lodging, or entertainment expenses of an elected official incurred in connection with official city business, such elected official shall, within {ton (10)] thirty (30) business days after such expenses are incurred, file with the city recorder a public report detailing the amount and nature of such expenses and the name of the person or entity that paid for such expenses. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an elected official shall not be required to file a public report pursuant to this section detailing the cost of food or meals provided to the elected official. 2.44.240: SANCTIONS: A. Persons Who Are Not Public Servants Or Volunteer Public Servants: The city may impose any one or more of the following sanctions on a person who is not a public servant or a volunteer public servant for violations of the ethical standards in this chapter: 1. Written warnings or reprimands; 2. Termination of contracts; or 3. Debarment or suspension from contracting with the city. B. Right Of The City To Debar Or Suspend: Debarment or suspension may be imposed by the city for violations of the ethical standards of this chapter, provided that such action may not be taken without the concurrence of the city attorney. C. Due Process: All procedures under this section shall be in accordance with due process requirements, including, but not limited to, a right to notice and an opportunity for a hearing prior to imposition of any termination, debarment, or suspension from being a contractor or subcontractor under a city contract. D. Recovery Of Value Transferred Or Received In Breach Of Ethical Standards: 1. General Provisions: The value of anything transferred or received in violation „, of the ethical standards of this chapter by a public servant, volunteer public servant, or other person may be recovered from both the public servant or volunteer public servant 18 and the other person through judicial action. 2. Recovery Of Payoffs By The City: Upon a showing that a subcontractor made a payoff to a prime contractor or a higher tier subcontractor in connection with the award of subcontract or order thereunder, the amount of the payoff will be recoverable by the city hereunder from the recipient. In addition, that amount may also be recovered from the subcontractor making such payoff. Recovery from one offending party shall not preclude recovery from any other offending [parties] party. 2.44.250: APPEALS: Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a public servant under the career or civil service system who is found to have violated any of the provisions of this chapter and has had discipline imposed, may have such discipline reviewed in accordance with and as provided by law regarding such systems. 2.44.260: VOIDABLE TRANSACTION: Any contract or transaction that was the subject of governmental action by the city and that involved the violation of a provision of this chapter is voidable at the option of the city. 2.44.270: VIOLATION; PENALTY: In addition to any penalty provided herein, any person who knowingly and intentionally violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor and may be dismissed from employment or removed from office[;] as provided by law. 2.44.280: MISDEMEANOR TO KNOWINGLY FILE FALSE COMPLAINT: Any person who files a complaint against a public servant or volunteer public servant pursuant to this chapter, knowing that such complaint is frivolous, malicious, false, or otherwise without merit, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. 2.44.290: PROCEDURE FOR COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION: Any complaint alleging a violation of Chapter 2.44 and filed against a public servant or volunteer public servant shall be filed with the mayor. The mayor shall investigate the complaint and refer the matter to the city attorney who may prosecute the violations consistent with section 10-3-928 of Utah code. If the city attorney in his professional iudgment has a conflict of interest, he or she shall refer the matter to the county attorney, district attorney or Office of the Attorney General who may prosecute the alleged violation. 19 • SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT BUDGET AMENDMENT #3 — FISCAL YEAR 2010-11 DATE: February 15, 2011 SUBJECT: Budget Amendment #3 - Follow-up Briefing STAFF REPORT BY: Sylvia Richards, Lehua Weaver, Karen Halladay and Jennifer Bruno CC: David Everitt, Gina Chamness, Gordon Hoskins, Frank Gray, LuAnn Clark, Chief Chris Burbank, Chief Kurt Cook, Rick Graham, Kay Christensen, Shannon Ashby, and Sherrie Collins Follow-up Information A-3: Dog park fence at Rotary Glen Park - The Administration has pulled this item from the Budget Amendment. A-4: Streetcar Manager Position-At the Council's Work Session the Council discussed the option for the RDA to fund part of this position. The RDA board discussed this at their February 8, 2011 meeting, and concluded that the RDA could pay for half of the position ($26,250 in the current fiscal year, and$63,100 annually). While the position would still be housed in Community and Economic Development, the board concluded that the Director of the RDA and Director of CED should work together to ensure the position is accomplishing the goals of both CED and the RDA project areas. A-6: Bike Share Pilot Program : $25,000-At the Council's January briefing, some questions were raised about the City's financial exposure if progressing with a Bike Sharing program. Below is clarification of the proposal, and some additional information about funding. Program Structure: During the Pilot Program, the City proposes to set up nine bike stations using 80 bikes (this is updated from the original transmittal). The concept is to lease bikes from a bike vendor during the Pilot Program. An option to purchase will also be requested to maximize options. Revenue is generated from daily, monthly, or annual memberships and rental fees for time used after the first half hour. The total costs estimated by the Administration is $500,000 for the Pilot Program- this includes start-up, capital costs, and operate the first year. The current budget amendment request of$25,000 would be `seed' money toward the Pilot Program cost. The balance would be raised through sponsorships. During the Expanded Program, the City estimates that a full program would require 500 bikes for effective coverage and availability. The bikes from the Pilot Program and the additional bikes would be purchased. The cost for expanding is dependent on the number of bikes and kiosks added, and management / operating experience during the Pilot Program. General Notes regarding program structure: Manufacturers or vendors generally do not operate sharing programs as independent retailers. The common structure calls for a local entity to provide management. Page 1 Budget/ Financing: Start-up/Capital Costs-approximately$400,000 for the Pilot Program start-up and capital costs.When broken out per bike,costs range from$3,500 to$4,500.This cost is a fully loaded cost that covers the bike(with gears,and able to carry heavier loads), kiosks,electronic tracking equipment,and communication/payment systems. Ongoing operating costs-The Administration estimates that the operating costs in the first year of the Pilot Program would be roughly$100,000.This includes administration, marketing,maintenance costs and some shuttling of bikes to make sure availability is optimized.The Council should note that this amount is assuming maintenance on new bikes.The amount as bikes age and more bikes are added to the system in an expanded rollout would increase. Total Pilot Program Cost-All included,the first year of the Pilot Program is estimated to cost$500,000. Sponsorships-The Administration is initialing securing sponsorships for the Pilot Program.The intention is for the sponsorships to continue to the Expanded Program, and contribute toward ongoing operating costs. City's Role-Although a newer industry,the template for Bike Sharing Programs appears to be considerable public involvement in capital costs,program management, etc.The Administration has initiated discussions with the Downtown Alliance,but no formal agreement has been committed. Financial exposure: - Availability of sponsorships for the Pilot Program.The updated estimate for the cost of the Pilot Program is$500,000.(The transmittal originally estimated $100,000.)The Administration is not requesting more than the original$25,000 `seed'money at this time,and will pursue sponsorships to cover the$475,000 gap. - The operating costs for the first year of the Pilot Program are fairly conservative and based on operation and maintenance of new bikes. The Council may wish to clarify whether if the$500,000 does not cover all costs in the first year, would the City need to fund the deficit.It is likely that whichever agency assumes management responsibility would also assume funding liability. - Information is not yet available on the full costs of an Expanded Program.This is partially because in order get costs for an Expanded Program,the City needs to explore the Pilot Program,and partially because Bike sharing systems are relatively new in the United States and comparative data is not widely available. The Pilot Program will provide additional information relating to the operating costs,estimate user-fee revenue,availability of sponsorships,and overall viability of a Bike Sharing program for Salt Lake City.The Administration has confirmed that the City would not be obligated to expand the program once the Pilot phase is completed. Options to limit the City's exposure: o The Council could opt to limit the City's exposure by setting a limit to the City's contribution,and/or require that an outside entity manage the program and assume related financial liability. Page 2 o The Council could require that the full $475,000 in sponsorships is received prior to awarding a management contract or bike lease agreement. o The Council could make the City's contribution contingent upon increasing the first year estimates for higher operating costs, and raising necessary sponsorships. o The Council could request that (or make funding contingent on whether) the RFP solicits a vendor who is willing to provide a short-term bike lease for the Pilot Program. However, the Administration reports that leasing may not be less expensive than purchasing the bikes, which is why they propose to solicit bids for both lease and purchase options. . o The Council may wish to request more detailed financial documents and/or a business model prior to any further requests for City funding. o The Council may wish to ask what the Administration's proposal will be on how to proceed if sponsorships are not available. Options for the Council may include reducing the number of bikes available in the Pilot Program, or exploring cheaper options to structure the program or equip the bikes. Additional Questions for Consideration: • The Council may wish to ask whether there are other management / "ownership" options available through other local organizations interested in promoting cycling availability and alternative methods of transportation. • Additionally, the Council may wish to further discuss the advantages / liabilities of the City leading the program. • The Council may wish to discuss the timing of launching this program. The Council and Administration may agree that this is a valuable program to provide to Salt Lake City residents; however, the Council may wish to consider this in the context of the full budget in order to weigh the potential financial exposure of the Pilot Program (seed money plus higher-than-expected Operating Costs) with the other core City services and positions that have been cut in recent budget years. A-10: Impact Fee waivers - At the Council's Work Session some Council Members were interested to know the recent history of impact fee waivers. It is likely that the reason FY 2011 is so high is because no units were processed in time for the FY 2010 budget year. The following chart details the last few years (and number of affordable housing units built): Year Amount # of housing units FY 2006 $ 115,700 130 FY 2007 $ 152,190 171 FY 2008 $ 22,100 17 FY 2009 $ 7,340 5 FY2010 $ 0 0 FY 2011 $ 429,809 349 A-11: Small Neighborhood Business Petition:$55,000 At the January budget amendment briefing,the Council asked for further clarification on the funding history of this item.The Administration has provided the following information. Last fiscal year,the Council set aside$75,000 in the Non-Departmental budget for the Planning Division's work on the small neighborhood business project.$40,000 of the funding went toward the survey and consultant.The bill for the consultant was not received until this year,but the funding was accidentally not encumbered and dropped to fund balance at the end of last fiscal year.This item also requests an additional$15,000 for use toward the development and public process involved with a Small Business Resource Guide. This total budget amendment request is$55,000. (Of the original$75,000 allocation, $10,000 will be left in fund balance,and$10,000 was directed by the Council to be used by the Economic Development staff for the five$2,000 grants for Small Neighborhood Districts. That process was completed at the end of last fiscal year.) A-15:Barnes Bank Bond Budget Adjustment -At this time,the Council may choose to allocate the funds to an account reserved for to-be-determined remodeling projects on City buildings.The Administration will be prepared to have a more complete discussion about the priorities for projects in March.The Council and Administration will need to move forward quickly on project decisions,because the bond money needs to be substantially spent by February of 2012. The following report was provided for the Council's Work Session discussion on January 18, 2011. It is provided again for reference. Budget Amendment Number Three contains 33 proposed adjustments,as suggested by the Administration. The amendment recommends using fund balance for ten initiatives for a decrease to fund balance of$1,015,031. Of this amount,the Administration anticipates that$254,260 will be reimbursed back to the City. The Council requests a current-year revenue forecast with each budget amendment. The Administration's forecast shows a deficit of approximately$1 million due to property tax judgments settled last year and a decrease in parking ticket issuance and revenue. Sales tax revenue is stable. The decline is due to a decrease in municipal energy taxes. Franchise taxes are lower than anticipated due to a decrease in revenue received from telecommunication companies. The number of commercial and residential permits is higher as compared to last year;however,the value of the permits is significantly lower. Parking meter revenue is higher than anticipated based on the bagging of meters for the downtown area,including the City Creek project. This budget amendment includes the addition of 4 general fund positions,and 1.5 grant-funded positions. From a policy perspective the Council generally avoids adding positions mid-year. The need for these positions may be an indicator that the budget cuts made over the past two years are not allowing the City to continue operating at the desired level. In an effort to make the review of the budget openings more expedient,the Administration has attempted to categorize budget opening items as follows: Page 4 A. "New" - those items that are new issues. B. "Grant requiring existing staff resources" -- those grants that will require the City's existing staff to complete a specific project. (Employees involved with these projects may have less time to focus on other projects within the scope of their work.) C. "Grant requiring additional staff resources" - those grants that provide additional staff positions and require a City match. These generally have policy implications because they may add a new service or create an expectation that the City will fund the position after the grant has expired. D. "Housekeeping" -- those items classified by the Administration as strictly accounting actions that do not have policy implications. E. "Grants requiring No New Staff Resources" - those grants that provide funding for costs that are not associated with positions. F. "Donation" -- those items that are donations that require Council appropriation to be used, are consistent with previous Council discussions, or do not have policy implications. G. "Council Consent Agenda- Grant Awards" -These items have been previously approved on the Council's Consent Agenda. H. "Follow-up on Previously Approved Items" - those items that were approved in a previous budget amendment but require some additional adjustments. I. "Council Added" - items which have been added by the City Council. MATTERS AT ISSUE The Administration classified the following as: New Items: A-1: Request to expand driving range at Rose Park Golf Course ($425,000- Source: Golf Enterprise Fund) In September of 2010, the Salt Lake City Golf Fund sold 3.01 acres of Rose Park Golf Course land for the Guadalupe Center Education program. The sales proceeds less associated sales costs were $422,782. The Golf Fund plans to use the sales proceeds to expand the driving range. With the addition of the recent property purchase mentioned above, the Rose Park Course would be able to expand the course's driving range. The proposed expansion would extend the driving range to 350 yards and provide a practice tee approximately 125 yards wide by 50 yards deep. This budget amendment would establish the revenue budget of$425,000 for the Guadalupe Center Education Program sales proceeds. In addition, this amendment also establishes the expenditure budget of$425,000 to be used for the Rose Park Golf Course improvements of$422,782 and to cover sales costs of$2,218. ►Does the Council wish to ask the Administration about the status of the property re-zone-from R-1- 7000 (Single Family Residential) to Open Space? Related Information In the Fall of 2009, the Council approved a budget amendment for $800,000. This is a subsidy of the Golf Fund with the General Fund's Surplus Land Account. With the funds the Golf Fund was able to purchase 2.64 acres adjacent to the Page 5 Rose Park Golf Course driving range. The property purchases of$695,380 were finalized during the summer of 2010.The final purchase price,including associated costs,was $104,620 less than anticipated. According to the Administration,the excess budget will be returned to the Surplus Land Account. A-2: Request to establish budgets for cost of utilities at Sorenson Center($104,260- Source:fund balance of the City's General Fund -- to be reimbursed by Salt Lake County) The Council will recall that Salt Lake County took over the operation and management of the Sorenson Center last year, and that the City still owns the property. The Administration indicates that the Sorenson Center site is included in the City's energy performance contract. As a result, the City tracks the utility costs (including water, electricity and gas) and bills Salt Lake County for the cost of utilities and the associated debt service the City incurs during the energy performance contract lease. The County benefits from the lower utility costs while the City benefits from new equipment on its property. This request will create expense and revenue budgets to cover initial payment of utility costs and reimbursement from the County. A-3: Request for dog park fence at Rotary Glen Park($14,000-Source:fund balance of the City's General Fund) The Administration has requested that this item be held open for a later date and not be addressed at this time. The Administration will come back with additional information. A-4: Request for New FTE-Street Cars Project Manager position-to manage Streetcar projects($52,500 for 6 months;$126,500 annually-Source:fund balance of the City's General Fund) The Administration is requesting to add a Street Cars Project Manager position in Community and Economic Development,to manage the Sugar House Streetcar project, including coordinating with various City departments and outside entities,and to manage potential future street car projects. Salt Lake City received a$26 million federal grant for the Sugar House line. Design and construction for the line is expected to be on a rapid schedule(18 months)and current staffing levels do not allow for a full-time streetcar project manager,nor have they allowed for a full-time staff person to identify and finalize gap funding for the line. The Administration is proposing to add this position to the overall staffing document,because the City will be pursuing additional streetcar lines Downtown. Note:Funding is not yet secure for additional streetcar lines,although the Administration indicates that it will continue to pursue federal funds. The Council may wish to ask the Administration to further define the responsibilities of this position -will the position handle planning/zoning issues adjacent to the line,design and engineering of the line only,or will it have an instrumental role in funding and partnership opportunities. A-5: Request to fund costs of outside counsel associated with Regional Athletic Complex/Jordan River litigation($25,000-Source:fund balance of the City's General Fund) The Administration is requesting additional funds to secure outside assistance in handling the various lawsuits that the Jordan River Restoration Network(JRRN)has pending against the City. There are various lawsuits that are currently in progress, and the JRRN has indicated publicly it will pursue additional lawsuits. The lawsuits have been handled so far by the Attorney's Office, but the slow progress of the current lawsuits, and potential for future lawsuits has made it necessary for the Attorney's Office to secure supplemental resources. Page 6 A-6: Request to fund Bike Share Pilot Program($25,000-Source:fund balance of the City's General Fund) The Administration has requested$25,000 towards the creation of an approximately $100,000 bike sharing pilot program which will make 40-50 bikes available to rent in the downtown area. If approved these funds would be used to match private sponsor donations. According to Transportation,the bikes will have multiple gears and the capacity to carry an additional fifty pounds of weight in the front basket. Users would pay with a key card or credit card at a solar-powered kiosk and return the bike after use to the same, or a different kiosk. Kiosks and bikes would be leased by the City from a bike sharing vendor during the pilot program. Kiosk locations would be determined by the vendor,the Transportation Division and the Downtown Alliance. The Administration indicates the cost to rent a bike will depend on usage. Some bike sharing programs offer a thirty minute to one hour grace period in which the users are not charged. After the grace period,rental costs are determined by a sliding scale based on the amount of time the bike is rented. An annual rental fee might range from$75 to$100,with monthly and daily rental rates also available. As indicated in the transmittal,user fees typically fund a portion of operating costs,while the investment of bikes and kiosks is typically made using public dollars. The Council may wish to note that some public funding may be necessary to support operation costs. Depending on demand and use of the pilot program,the Administration indicates that expanded sponsorships,advertising and grants may be pursued to fund the future purchase of bikes. The transmittal indicates a tentative`build-out'for bike sharing in the future of approximately 500 bikes at$3,500 to$4,500 per bike for a total cost of$2 million. Assuming user fees defray a portion of costs,annual operating costs are approximately$1,000 per bike,with a total cost of$500,000 for the program. Questions for Consideration: o The Council may wish to ask about other sponsorship contacts or grants the Administration may be pursuing. o The Council may wish to ask about the day-to-day management of the program, asset maintenance,and budget tracking. o The Council may wish to ask about the timeline for the program-if the initial funding is approved,what is the projected timeframe to have bikes ready to rent, and what is the anticipated length of the pilot program? A-7: Request for New FTE-Civil Enforcement Secretary-to assist with new duties of Civil Enforcement (1.0 FTE; $27,000 for 6 months; $54,000 annually - Source: fund balance of the City's General Fund) The Administration is requesting a new FTE for a secretary position to support the Civil Enforcement Unit (CE, formerly known as Zoning Enforcement). The new position would replace a secretary position eliminated during the retirement incentive a few years ago, to support the increasing workload in Civil Enforcement. The Administration indicates that in addition to the continuing zoning enforcement duties, additional responsibilities have been assigned to CE, including enforcement of sidewalk artists, the Farmer's Market & entertainers, and sidewalk snow removal. This group will also be responsible for enforcement of the Good Landlord program. Page 7 According to the Administration, to support CE, the secretary performs letter drafting; preparation of notices, certificates, liens, deficiency lists; HAAB minutes and notices; hearings; as well as assisting with Planning and HAND support as needed.(Although under Building Services organizationally, the staff is still physically located next to Planning and HAND staff.) The number of support staff has been reduced over the past few years from three secretary positions to one. When CE (then HAZE) was organizationally under the Planning Division, there were three secretaries for HAZE, that shared some support for Planning needs.When HAZE was transferred to the Building Services Division, one of the secretary positions was transferred to stay in Planning. Of the remaining two HAZE secretaries, one opted to retire when the City offered the retirement incentive during the 2009-10 fiscal year.This left one secretary to support the CE functions. Typically,the Council has questioned adding new positions mid-year rather than evaluating additions in the context of the annual budget.The Administration has indicated that over the past two years they have employed a temporary secretary to meet the support needs of CE. The Council may wish to ask whether the temporary position could continue to meet the needs until annual budget discussions. The Council might also inquire about whether some incoming complaint phone calls could be handled by an automated system. The Administration may have considered this option and have a recommendation on whether it would provide necessary assistance. A-8: Request for additional funds for Expedited Plan Review Outsourcing Services ($150,000-Source:fund balance of the General Fund) This budget item would allocate an additional$150,000 to the Building Services budget for the cost of the outsourcing expedited plan review. When the Council and Administration decided to move forward with providing an option for expedited plan review services,it was determined that those expedited plans would be sent to an outside firm for review. The Council may recall that it was difficult to formulate an estimate of the cost associated with the outside service,because the number of applicants was unknown.According to the Administration,approximately three percent of the plans submitted for review are expedited. The Administration reports that up to October 22,2010,there have been 14 plan reviews this fiscal year.For those expedited reviews,the City paid fees of$36,196 to the outside firm.In addition to those 14 already processed,there are another 10 pending. (Update: through December,$70,000 has been spent on outsourcing expedited plan review.) For each expedited review sent to an outside firm,the City charges double the standard in- house fee.The Administration has estimated that for the expedited reviews submitted through December,$110,000 has been received in double fee revenue from the petitioner. However,with the general fund structure,those revenues are not received directly into the Business Services budget. For the Council's reference,the current Turn Around Time(TAT)for plan review is between three and four weeks.Also,as a reminder,plans for LEED certified projects are also expedited without a double-fee as an incentive for seeking LEED certification. If the Council elects to allow expedited plans for other policy reasons it is likely that the funding need will --s increase. Page 8 A-9: Request to allocate CDBG funds for construction of Community Learning Center adjacent to Mtn. View Elementary School ($233,732 - Source: CDBG Fund) In the FY2010 budget process, the Council approved a $233,732 request by the Salt Lake City School District to fund a Community Learning Center adjacent to Mountain View Elementary school. At the time there were a number of questions relating to total cost of the project, location of the project, and fundraising ability, so the Council elected to place the funds in a holding account, subject to future appropriation, pending the School District's response to the Council's various questions. The School District has met with various Council Members over the last few months to answer these questions. This budget amendment request would release these funds. The School District indicates that these funds will be used for project pre-design. The School District has submitted an application for the FY 2012 CDBG process for $500,000. The project is estimated to cost $3.1 million, and the School District would like to begin construction in the Summer of 2011. The funding sources are as follows: Salt Lake City CDBG - FY 2011 $ 233,732 Salt Lake City CDBG - FY 2012 $ 500,000 (request pending) Salt Lake City School District $ 200,000 Salt Lake Education Foundation $ 2,200,000 • (state and national grants) Total Sources $ 3,133,732 If the Council approves the FY 2012 CDBG request, the City's total contribution will be $733,732. Because these funds are from the federal CDBG program, there are various requirements that the project must follow. The project must follow the Davis Bacon wage schedule (for design as well). The Administration is confirming with the school district if the current estimates includes this wage assumption. Also, HUD states that the City cannot have more than 50% of the total CDBG grant award for that year listed as "pending" in the financial system. Because the total request from the school district would make up a larger portion of the City's total grant award than other projects, the City would need to require the school district to spend these funds in one year. A-10: Request for Impact Fee Waivers ($429,809 - Source:fund balance of the General Fund) The City's Impact Fee ordinance states that a 100 percent waiver shall be granted for low- income housing (rental or non rental). Low-income is defined in the ordinance as housing for which the payment does not exceed 30% of the annual income of a family that is at 80% of Area Median Income (AMI), as determined by HUD. State Impact Fee statute requires that any "waived" Impact Fees must still be paid by the municipality into the appropriate Impact Fee fund. Therefore the City general fund must reimburse the Impact Fee fund for these waivers. The following projects received waivers: Salt Lake City Housing and Neighborhood Development- 5 single family $ 7,575 homes (1019 North Colorado St., 1259 West Gillespie Ave, 1011 South 1400 West, 553 South 1000 West, 1019 South 1400 West). Housing Authority of Salt Lake City-Taylor Springs Apartments(1812 S. $ 143,925 West Temple). Young Women's Christian Association (YWCA) Crisis Shelter (325 South 300 $ 72,750 Fnst) Road Home - Palmer Court (999 south Main St) $ 205,589 Total Exemptions (to be reimbursed by general fund) $ 429,809 Page 9 A-i l: Request for reallocate funds for Small Neighborhood Business Petition ($55,000-Source:fund balance of the General Fund) The Administration has performed foundation work to set up the Small Business Resource Guide including: inventory of businesses located within neighborhood districts,conducted a survey,and document preparation for public input. Of the$75,000 initially budgeted for the project,$10,000 has been used.The$65,000 dropped to fund balance at the end of 2009-10. In order to complete the remainder of the project,the Administration estimates that $55,000 will be needed and is requesting that be reallocated to the CED budget. The next steps include noticing affected property owners,two public processes,and publication of the Salt Lake City Small Business Guide. A-12: Request for three New FTE's associated with the Public Services Department Reorganization($132,462 for 6 months;$317,910 annually-Source:fund balance of the General Fund) The Administration is proposing organizational changes to the Public Services Department, which includes ten(10)divisions,two(2)Enterprise Funds-the Refuse and Golf Funds, and one(1)Internal Service Fund-Fleet. The reorganization involves 1)elimination of the Deputy Director position,2)creating four divisions,and 3)adding two new positions in the department. In addition to flattening the organizational structure,the departmental changes will distribute administrative and day-to-day duties,program oversight,and management to four(4)newly created Division Directors. Three existing department employees will become Division Directors. The fourth one,the Operations Division,is a newly created division that will require recruiting and hiring of an employee to fill this position. The following table presents additional detail about the proposed reorganization: Division Employee Grade FY 2011 Future Additional Information Impact -Partial Year Year Annual Cost Cost (Note:This assumes Feb 1 hire date.) 1 FTE- 31 $41,562 $99,750 This position,as proposed, Special will work for the Director. Projects Duties include,but are not Analyst limited to managing and coordinating:large scale projects;new initiatives, public policy issues,inter- governmental relations, and public relations. In addition,this position will serve as a liaison with other City departments. This position will also work on several projects currently in the development and implementation stage. Page 10 Administrative Services Existing 35 $0 $0 This division would Division: Policy department include some functions development, Strategic employee currently performed in the Planning, Program will become Office of the Director. In Performance, Contracts, the addition, this Division Technology, Safety, Division would be responsible for Emergency Management Director. the Gallivan Center and Event Planning. operations and other event planning functions. According to the Administration, the personnel services budget from the elimination of the Deputy Director position will be used for the Administrative Services Division Director. Finance and Accounting Existing 35 $0 $0 Division: Budget, department accounting, fiscal employee analysis, revenue will become projections, purchasing, the payroll, auditing, fund Division allocation, risk Director. management, grants, and forecasting. 1 FTE- 26 $29,015 $69,632 This position, as proposed, Financial would support the daily Reporting demands of managing Accountant financial records and systems within the Public Services Department, which has an annual budget of$75 million. Operations Division: 1 FTE- 37 $61,885 $148,528 The Operations Division is Facilities, Compliance, Operations a new division. An YouthCity, Golf, Park and Division employee will have to be Public Lands, Director recruited and hired. Streets/Concrete and Fleet. Sustainability- Existing 35 $0 $0 Sanitation is a new Environment Services department responsibility for this Division: Sustainability, employee division. energy, environment will become management and the compliance, recycling, Division outreach, and sanitation. Director. Total $132,462 '$317,910 This budget amendment would establish an expenditure budget of$132,462 for FY 2011 for the partial year cost of adding three (3) FTEs in the Public Services Department. According to information provided by the Administration, the future annual cost for the reorganization is $317,910. The funding for this budget amendment would come from the City's General Fund - Fund Balance. Page 11 O.Does the Council wish to ask the Administration if additional technology could assist the Department in their r, service,organizational,management,and oversight roles?This is suggested in addition to any staffing changes approved,rather than in lieu of. A-13: Requested Changes to City's Appointed Positions(fiscal impact is discussed in more detail in Item A-12) Pending the Council's action on item A-12,the chart for appointed positions will change. The following positions will be deleted-Public Services Deputy Director(Grade 39),Capital Asset Management Director(Grade 39),Sustainability Environment Division Director(Grade 35),Fleet Division Manager(Grade 33). The following positions will be added-Labor Relations Director/Senior City Attorney(Grade 39),Operations Division Director,Public Services(Grade 37),Finance and Accounting Division Director,Public Services(Grade 35), Sustainability/Environment Division Director,Public Services(Grade 35),Administrative Service Division Director,Public Services(Grade 35),Fleet Management Program Director, Public Services(Grade 33),Parks and Public Lands Program Director(Grade 33),Special Projects Analyst(Grade 31). Costs associated with these changes are detailed in item A-12. Additional Changes-Due to the Council Staff equity/compensations issues that have previously been recognized by the Council and were funded in the FY 2011 budget process,a reorganization of certain positions on the pay grade chart is also part of this budget amendment(see attached chart). Some changes within the office have been made,and some will need to be addressed over a two year period as funds are available. Staff will present further options as a part of the FY 2012 budget. Attachment A is the rationale used by the 2010 Council Chair,Vice Chair and Director. A-14: Request to establish cost centers for North Temple Boulevard Improvements ($8,017,200-Source:CAP Fund) The Administration is requesting the Council approve this budget item to recognize various revenue and expenditure sources relating to the North Temple Boulevard project. The chart below summarizes sources and uses,based on the most current cost estimates. Note that the current cost estimate of$22.5 million is significantly lower than the original cost estimate of approximately$30 million. The net effect is that the City can complete the project with a lower sales tax bond than originally expected($3 million instead of the originally anticipated$10 million). Cost reductions came from a favorable bidding climate, as well as a slight reduction in scope for some elements. Scope reduction includes not funding certain improvements west of Redwood Road,such as street lights,pedestrian lights,and landscaping. Other scope reductions are in the process of being confirmed by Council staff and will be made available on Tuesday. The budget authorization includes a final sales tax bond amount of$3 million. Staff estimates the debt service on this amount is approximately$250,000 per year(assuming a 20 year bond). Final debt service payments will be determined at the time of sale. 11.0. Page 12 liming Sources Alliance Fund $ 10,000,000 _ FY 2010 CIP Budget $ 2,884,000 FY 2010 Non-Departmental Budget $ 150,000 FY 2010 Class C $ 375,000 Property Owner Assessment(East of Redwood Rap $ 1181.800_ _. State contribution in lieu of property assessment $ 386,200 Alliance Fund increase as a result of decision to only partially embed track on Airport $ 781,496 State Contribution per HB XXX $ 3,500,000 12.5%UTA portion of new street light system $ 261,000 City Saks Tax Bond-Pending Counc8Approval $ 3,0O0,OOO Total Funding as of 2/9/2010 22,519,496 11111 Casts Final Cost Original Estimate UTA Conceptual Urban Design Process $ 300,000 Conceptual and final boulevard contract design cost $ 2,280,384 Saving in conceptual and final design $ (261,238) _ Design Consultant(Ron Straka&Marilee Utter) _ $ _ 224,000 $ 15O,000 Business Impact Mitigation budget $ _ 120 000 L__. 15O,000 Concrete paved track,600 W.to 2200 W. $ 4,040,759 ; 6,400,000 Coloring of concrete for the embedded track and all other colored concrete elements on the boulevard and viaduct $ 1,006,913 $ 820,000 Betterment of Jordan River Bridge(enhancements and deck) $ 297,684 ; 375,000 Painted bike path $ 100,000 $ 2010,000 Raised medians curbs $ 40,501 $ .225,000 Enhanced bus shelters _ $ 300,000 ; 300,000 Enhanced station platforms-indudes patterned concrete $ 335,238 $ 3O5,000 Patterned concrete at station platforms $ - $ 95,000 Enhanced OCS poles $ 310,024 $ 195,000 OCS poles reflective element $ 52,845 $ 250,000 Multi-modal Pathway-includes following four items $ 4,205,428 $ 1,960,000 Corner Treatments $ - $ 317,0010 1-215 Underpass Enhancement $ _ - ___-___... 265,O00 1-15 Underpass Enhancement $ - $ 265,0100 Redwood Road crosswalks and corner treatments $ - $ 130,000 Enhanced parkstrip landscaping-includes following two items $ 3,315,685 ; 3,958,000 Enhanced North Temple medians $ - $ 445,090 1-80 Corridor landscaping $ - $ 95,000 Credit for eliminating landscaping and boulevard elements between Redwood Road and I215 $ (750387) Street furnishings $ 50,000 $ 185,000 Neighborhood identification place markers $ 118,224 $ 16O,007 Street and pedestrian scale lighting for the boulevard and viaduct $ 1,842,800 $ 9,873,499 Station bollard lighting $ - ; 75,000 Enhanced crosswalks(other than Redwood Road) $ 891,486 $ 136,000 Public Art at Station _ $ _ 250,000 $ 300,000 Rcyde signals $ 38,645 $ 100000 Right of Way/Acquisition Issues $ 2,775,541 $ 1,96O,000 Power Use burial $ 2,490,307 $ 3,5OO,000 Solar Panels $ 500,000 ; 5O0,O00 Jordan River Parkway enhancements $ 283,037 ; 900)000 _Modification to overhaul power system for high load vehicle clearer)! $ 135,500 $ -200OIA7_ root savings pei interlocal agreement in allowing tUTA to mill and structurally overlay instead of a complete reconstruction of the North Temple pavements. $ (3,088,529) $ (107,000) Earned Contractor design completion incentive $ (42,750) t1TA Program Management Fee $ 457,399 Oty Engineering Construction Management Costs $ 200,000 Total Revised Costs $ 22,519,496 $ 29,432499 Page 13 A-15: Request for Barnes Bank Bond Budget Adjustment(54,737,381-Source: Barnes Bank Bond Funds) Several years ago when the Council and Administration decided to purchase the Barnes Bank Building at the corner of 400 South and 300 East,a bond was issued to cover the purchase of the building and the estimated necessary upgrades for occupancy.The City will no longer pursue use of the Barnes Bank Building due to a higher cost for renovations,and to current designs and vision for the Public Safety Building. Use of the bond money is allowed toward other needed City-owned building improvements and remodeling.The amount available is$4.7 million in bond money,plus$37,381 in interest earned since the bond issuance. The Council may wish to schedule this topic for a separate and more thorough briefing due to the number of options to consider.The only step that is currently necessary is that the bond funds be allocated toward improvement and remodeling of a building for use as City offices.The Council could allocate the funds in a general account for that purpose and then hold the conversation for specific project review and approval at a later date. Having said that,the Administration provided some information about possible uses of the money. Facilities Services and the Engineering Division compiled a list of potential projects and estimated costs totaling$13,561,816.The Mayor has provided a recommendation on projects,totaling$5,621,682,as follows: • $3,473,000 To be spent at Plaza 349 on: o spatial reconfigurations of floors 1,4,and 6 o upgrades to the mechanical,electrical and plumbing systems throughout the entire Plaza 349 building • $2,148,682 To be spent at the City&County Building on: o remodeling of the north end of the 5th floor, o new office space would accommodate approximately 44 additional employees. • TOTAL of $5,621,682 o This is$884,301 over the available bond and interest money. o The Administration intends to include the rest in a CIP application. One of the items on the list is to repair and maintain the stone on the outside of the City& County building,which a few Council Members have inquired about.The estimate for this project would be$1.6 million. There are other systems maintenance,upgrades,and structural projects to existing building space on the list as well. Questions for Consideration: o The Council may wish to review the complete list of proposed projects with the Administration to discuss more of the details and reasoning for the Mayor's recommendations. o The Council may wish to weigh the options between building out additional office space or maintaining existing office and building needs. o The Council may wish to ask about the need for additional office space,and how the recommended improvements will address the needs of the City. Page 14 • o The Council may wish to ask whether a comprehensive space needs audit has been completed. o The Council may also wish to ask how the recommended projects will facilitate the One Stop shop, customer access, and the parking issues previously identified as a problem for customers. o The Council may wish to ask whether funding these recommended projects with the bond money would free up money in the CIP account for 2011-12 or 10-year CIP Plan projects. o The Council may also wish to ask whether there are other projects on the CIP 10- year plan that could be considered. o The Council may wish to have the Administration return with a full briefing on the potential future uses of the Barnes Bank Building site. A-16: Request for revenue and expenditure budget authority to implement electronic booting program($257,250 - revenue neutral) The Administration is requesting both a revenue and expenditure budget be established to implement the recently-approved electronic booting program with Paylock. Paylock and Salt Lake City entered into a contract in December 2010, whereby the City will collect the fee established by ordinance ($147.00) and pass the payment along to Paylock. The Administration classified the following as: Grants Requiring Existing Staff Resources B-1: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs- Cold Cases Grant($389,200 - Source: Grant Fund) According to paperwork submitted by the Administration, there are 100 violent crime/homicide cold cases that remain unsolved by the Salt Lake City Police Department. In an effort to solve and adjudicate these older cases, the Police Department will use grant funds received from the US Department of Justice, Solving Cold Cases with DNA program. These funds have the potential to return DNA test results within sixteen (16) days. With the current backlog of cases it can take up to 180 days, depending on the nature of the case. Grant funds will be used as follows during the 10/1/2010 to 3/31/2012 grant period: Page 15 Purpose Amount Additional Information Sorenson Forensics LLC- $147,200 •Cold case biological evidence will be analyzed by Case Consultation Contract Sorenson Forensics,a private entity,to determine which cold cases are suitable for further DNA testing. Sorenson Forensics will advise on whether cases needing further analysis and testing should be assigned to the State Crime Lab (SCL)or to themselves. According to the Administration's paperwork,Sorenson Forensics can provide a wide range of DNA testing. In addition,their turn-around time for testing is 16 days. •Sorenson Forensics will provide training and workshops for SLCPD personnel,including sworn law enforcement,civilian crime lab technicians, and analysts from the SCL. Utah Bureau of Forensic $103,000 •DNA test kits(1000)will be purchased for 24 Services(State Crime Lab)- cold cases that have been screened and assigned DNA test kits and Professional to the SCL. Services •According to the Police Department,the SCL workload queue for cold cases can be over six months. In order to mediate some of the backlog currently being experienced,the Police Department proposes to use grant funds to pay SCL analysts for DNA testing during off hours. Travel $60,000 Travel budget for detectives needing to travel outside the state to interview witnesses. Training $9,000 Homicide/Cold Case Training for 4 detectives. Overtime $70,000 Overtime paid for 6 detectives and 1 Sergeant when the regular workload does not allow time to work on cold cases d _their re: lar shift work. This budget request establishes the revenue and expenditure budgets for this grant. B-2:State of Utah,Dept.of Public Safety,Division of Homeland Security 2010 Urban Area Security Initiative Grant(UASI)Program Grant($730,000-Source:Grant Fund) The 2010 Homeland Security Grant under the Urban Area Security Initiative(UASI)is intended to continue local law enforcement efforts in planning and preparing for events, such as,natural disasters or terrorist attacks. Details of how the$730,000 grant funds are proposed to be used are included along with related item C-2. , This budget amendment establishes the revenue and expenditure budgets of$730,000 for the UASI grant. Page 16 The Administration classified the following as: Grants Requiring Additional Staff Resources C-1: Request for part-time employee - U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women - Community Defined Solutions to Violence Against Women Program Grant ($399,077- Source: Grant Fund) The Police Department received a $399,077 continuation grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women. This grant falls under their FY 2010 Community Defined Solutions to Violence Against Women Program. This grant project addresses working with partners from the community to improve the quality and quantity of services available to victims of domestic violence at the Salt Lake Area Family Justice Center (SLAFJC). Partners/Stakeholders include the SLC Prosecutors Office, SLC Police Department, Young Women's Christian Association (YWCA) of SLC, Legal Aid Society of SLC, Utah Department of Workforce Services, Utah Third District Court, SL Legal Defenders Office, SL County Criminal Justice Services, SL County Sheriff's Office, Utah Division of Child and Family Services, and Gonzalez &Tran-Layton, LLC, a SLC law firm. The SLAFJC, currently located at the Lolie Eccles Center, coordinates the community's response to domestic violence in the Salt Lake area. The following information is how the grant funds will be used: Purpose Amount Additional Information YWCA-Management Contract, $269,587 The contract includes office space for the including office location, grant program, grant program management, program management, meals, meals, utilities, and telephone. utilities, and telephone. YWCA - National Family Justice $25,000 The contract is for the up-coming Center Alliance- Strategic transition and expansion of the SLAFJC. Planning IIIIII': . YWCA - Foreign and Sign $10,920 Language Interpreters for clients SLCPD-Detective Overtime SLCPD- Part-time Vict $35,000 The labor cost is to pay detectives who serve warrants on violations of protective orders. im $42,000 This request is for a part-time employee. Advocate (co-located at the The paperwork submitted by the SLAFJC) Administration, indicates that the position would be eliminated at the end of the grant. The paperwork also indicates this grant has the potential to be continued. Travel $15,570 This travel budget allows SLAFJC stakeholders to attend technical assistance and grant management training. Office Supplies $1,000 Total $399,077 This budget amendment reimbursements the grant holding account for $150,000, which had been approved earlier in FY 2011 on the Council's consent agenda. In addition, the remaining budget of$249,077 will be established. Page 17 C-2:Request for one FTE-State of Utah,Dept.of Public Safety,Division of Homeland Security, Urban Area Security Initiative Grant(UASI)Program Grant ($2,170,078-Source:Grant Fund) The 2010 Homeland Security Grant under the Urban Area Security Initiative(UASI)was awarded to allow for the purchase of equipment and materials needed in planning and preparing for events,such as,natural disasters or terrorist attacks. The following table presents how the UASI grant funds for both UASI budget amendment items,B-2 and B-3, will be used. (Note: Although item C-2 includes a new position,it is for a Training and Exercise Coordinator,and not the Infrastructure Protection Specialist which was discussed during the last budget opening. According to the Administration,the Training and Exercise Coordinator position will be funded by this grant for three years,unless other grant funding is secured. The addition of this position may be of less concern to the Council,since funding for a full three years has been identified and no grant amendment will be needed to accomplish this proposal.) The acronym ACIP is not commonly used,but it is listed below. The Asynchronous Critical Infrastructure Program is a program developed in Utah that is designed to facilitate the evaluation of risk. It helps standardize the evaluation of risks. It is particularly specific and increases the likelihood that various users are able to come to the same types of conclusions when evaluating risk. Grant- Agency or Item Amount Additional Information Budget Department Amendment Receiving Item Funding B-2 Salt Lake City- Data Fusion/Synthesis, $480,000 System allows collection of data Emergency Crime Database Software from various intelligence sources. Management This data can then be accessed System-Urban and used for further analysis and Area Security study. Initiative (SLC-EMS-UASI) B-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI( Asynchronous Critical $250,000 This tool facilitates gathering of Infrastructure Program data,including critical (ACIP) infrastructure from various sources. Local police,fire,and communities provide data to be included in a centralized database. Subtotal of Item B-2 $730,000 C-2 State of Utah $30,000 The State of Utah will use their funds to purchase a trailer that could be used to care for the needs of animals during a natural disaster or other event. The Community Animal Response trailer will be the responsibility of the State. C-2 Valley Emergency $122,000 The Valley Emergency Communication Communication Center will use Center(VECC) their funds for a Voice Over Internet Protocol system. C-2 Salt Lake County $167,360 Salt Lake County will use their funds to acquire interoperable communication tools,including a go kit,which allows the communication tools to be _ transferred from one location to another. Page 18 C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) New Position- 1 FTE-Full- $286,448 This position would be time Training and Exercise responsible to coordinate Coordinator includes salary trainings and exercise and benefits for 3 years. development for UASI. In (Note: This position is not addition, the Coordinator would related to the ensure that all Salt Lake Urban Infrastructure Protection Area(SLUA)jurisdictions Specialist FTE that had participate in on-going training been requested during the and exercises provided by federal previous budget and state agencies. The grant amendment.) funds this position for the three year grant period. According to the Administration, the position would be eliminated if this grant funding does not continue. C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) Training, Travel, and $13,552 Supplies C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) Contract with BDR $309,977 Develop a SLUA training and exercise program that includes and ensures that all jurisdictions in the SLUA meet a minimum standard of training and exercise. C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) Public Outreach $20,000 Develop and produce DVD's for distribution to the community. Individuals, families, businesses and community organizations would be encouraged to: 1) participate in available training, 2) learn about available training opportunities, and 3) support on- going community preparedness activities and opportunities. C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) Contract-Capacity $151,382 The funds would be used to Development develop program protocols, including identifying and assessing various risks, such as, economic, hazard, and the potential of disasters. C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) 10 Channel Intelligence $750,000 Backup system to the City's Repeater Truck existing fixed repeater sites. C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) Training for Mayors and $319,359 Councils and Purchase of Remaining Equipment for two MITS trucks Subtotal-Item C-2 $2,170,078 Total-Items B-2 and C-2 $2,900,078 This budget amendment establishes the revenue budget of$2,170,078, the expenditure budget of$2,024,541 and reimburses the grant holding account for $145,537, which had been previously approved on the Council's consent agenda. The Administration classified the following as: Housekeeping D-1: Public Utilities Storm Water Carryover ($168,000) and Two New Projects ($1.035,000)for a Total of$1,203,000(Source: Storm Water Fund) This amount represents the amount requested to be carried over for storm water fund capital projects, specifically the storm water line on 4000 West and 700 South, and two new projects related to the City's other street improvement projects: 500 South to 700 South from the Surplus Canal to Gladiola (current SAA before the Council on January 11) in the amount of$650,000, and 1700 East Yalecrest Avenue in the amount of$385,000. Page 19 Since the fiscal year ends on June 30th of each year in the middle of a normal summer construction period, it is common for funding to be split between budget years. This is a normal practice of carrying over funding for construction projects which are in progress.On June 30, 2010, unexpended appropriations lapsed in accordance with State law. The Administration is requesting that the Council bring forward, or "carryover" the appropriations for existing construction projects in progress of$168,000. The Council already processed one carryover for the Storm Water Fund in Budget Amendment No.2 for some of the larger carryover projects. D-2:Public Utilities Water Carryover($1,755,900)and One New Project($650,000)for a Total of$2,405,900(Source:Water Fund) This amount represents the amount requested to be carried over for water fund capital projects, specifically water line projects that were under construction since last fiscal year, plus a new project related to the City's other street improvement projects: 500 South to 700 South from the Surplus Canal to Gladiola(current SAA before the Council on January 11) in the amount of$650,000. Since the fiscal year ends on June 30th of each year in the middle of a normal summer construction period, it is common for funding to be split between budget years. This is a normal practice of carrying over funding for construction projects which are in progress.On June 30, 2010, unexpended appropriations lapsed in accordance with State law. The Administration is requesting that the Council bring forward, or "carryover" the appropriations for existing construction projects in progress of$1,755,900. D-3:Public Utilities Sewer Carryover($4,127,200) This amount represents the amount requested to be carried over for sewer fund capital projects and for sewer line and sewer treatment projects that have been under construction since last fiscal year. Since the fiscal year ends on June 30th of each year in the middle of a normal summer construction period, it is common for funding to be split between budget years. This is a - normal practice of carrying over funding for construction projects which are in progress.On June 30, 2010, unexpended appropriations lapsed in accordance with State law. The Administration is requesting that the Council bring forward, or "carryover" the appropriations for existing construction projects in progress of$4,127,200. The Council already processed one carryover for the Sewer Fund in Budget Amendment No. 2 for two of the major carryover projects such as the 1800 North Sewer Trunk Line and the Sewer Treatment Plant Digester Roof Replacement projects. D-4: Request for increase to Grant Holding Account($1,000,000) The Administration is requesting the Council increase the grant holding account(currently $1 million),by another million,bringing it to$2 million. This would allow the Administration greater flexibility to spend grant funds more immediately once awarded. In the past 6 months the City has received over$6 million in grant funds. Sometimes the award is made at a time not around a regularly-scheduled budget amendment. The Council may wish to discuss only increasing the grand holding account for grants with no staffing impact and/or no match required. D-5:Request for increase to Donations Fund Holding Account($58,899.16) The Administration utilizes a"master budget"for donation receipts and related interest Page 20 earned. This allows the Administration to have the necessary appropriation so that as donations or interest income are received,they can have quick access to the funds.The budget is generally kept at$100,000 and restored as donations come in and the appropriation is spent down. In Budget Amendment#2 for FY 2010,the Council replenished the$100,000 allocation for interest on existing and new donations. The appropriation has already been allocated to individual funds. The Administration requests an appropriation of$58,899.16 to replace donations already used. Attached to item D-5 in the transmittal is a list of the current donation amounts and projects. D-6:Grants Carryover Adjustments(-$78,411) The Administration normally requests a carryover for grants that have been started but were not completed by the end of the fiscal year.This step was processed in Budget Amendment No.2,however the Administration reports that since then some adjustments were made to grant expenditures for the 2009-10 fiscal year.The adjustments require that grant account funds be corrected and reduced.This is a decrease to the budget. The Administration classified the following as: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources E-1:U.S.Dept.of Justice,Office of Justice Programs,Paul Coverdell Forensic Science Improvement Grant($106,000-Source:Grant Fund) The Salt Lake City Police Department received a grant under the FY 2010 Paul Coverdell Forensic Science Improvement Program. Funds awarded are to be used to improve the quality and timeliness of forensic science and medical examiner services and/or to eliminate the backlogs experienced in forensic labs. Forensic evidence analysis includes testing related to controlled substances,firearms,pathology,latent prints,toxicology,and trace evidence. The Police Department proposes to use the grant funds as follows: Purpose Amount Additional Information Equipment/Training $23,200 Crime-lite-Portable equipment used primarily by forensic investigators to detect evidence from crime scenes. Equipment/Training $62,000 DCS 4-Workstation for recording and enhancement of latent fingerprints. Equipment/Training $20,800 SICAR 6-A system that uses a coding technique to characterize shoe prints and tire treads. This forms the basis for the database search and match operations.The process,which takes no longer than a minute or two,enables the operator to create a coded description of a pattern. This budget request establishes the revenue and expenditure budgets for this grant. Page 21 E-2: U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, Community Challenge Planning and Dept. of Transportation TIGER II Planning Grants- TRAX Line Area Plans and Sustainable Zoning($22,620-Source:Grant Fund) The City received a $22,620 Grant from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under the TIGER II Planning Grants program, to develop station area plans and specific zoning codes for the three existing light rail stations along the 400 South portion of the University TRAX line (Library Station, Trolley Square Station, 900 East Station). The goal of the plans would be to identify redevelopment opportunities, promote construction of affordable housing, and re-write the zoning to accomplish these goals. The plans will be developed through a public outreach and community visioning process. The grant requires a 20%match,which the City will provide with the dedication of existing staff resources. The expected timeline for the project is 24 months. The Council may wish to ask the Administration for more detail about the Community Visioning process. E-3: U.S.Dept. of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women-Salt Lake Elder Abuse Project Grant($400,000-Source: Grant Fund) The Police Department has received a grant to fund programs for victims of elder abuse, in collaboration with other local and state agencies. The funds provide training, response systems, and enhanced delivery of services to older adult female victims of abuse.The grant will be divided into the following: o $164,739 Utah Adult Protective Services to hire a caseworker to investigate reported incidents,and provide services and support o 129,890 Support outreach and services o 86,841 Salt Lake County DA Office for a part-time victim advocate and counselor o 18,530 Travel and training costs for various agency employees,judges, police department personnel The majority of this grant was previously approved on the Council's consent agenda. This budget item would receive the balance of the grant funds, and replenish the City's grant holding account. The Administration classified the following as: - Donations F-1: Rio Tinto Donation-City's Climate Showcase Communities($10,000-Grant Fund) In Budget Amendment No.2 of 2009-10,the City set the budget for a grant program to implement a Sustainable Transportation for a Sustainable Future program.The STSF program is a partnership with the County,Salt Lake Solutions,UDOT,Utah Clean Cities Coalition and Rio Tinto. This budget item accepts the$10,000 donation from Rio Tinto as their portion to meet the grant match requirement. The program,as a reminder,is a social messaging outreach/education program that will encourage behavioral changes throughout the County to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution through fewer driven miles. In addition to funding travel,grant monitoring,conferences,surveys,and other contracts,$214,055 of the grant is funding a program manager position over three-years. Page 22 The Administration classified the following as: Council Consent Agenda-Grant Awards already approved by Council action G•1: Utah Dept.of Health,Bureau of Emergency Medical Services and Preparedness Grant($30,109- Source:Grant Fund) G-2: Office of National Drug Control,Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Agency Grant ($65,354-Source: Grant Fund) G-3: U.S.Dept.of Health&Human Services,Drug Free Communities Support Grant($125,000- Source:Grant Fund) G-4: Utah Quality Growth Commission,Jordan River Riverview Open Space Land Acquisition($167,000 -Source: Grant Fund) *This item was previously funded by the grant holding account. This request will reimburse the grant holding account. The Administration classified the following as: Follow-up on Previously Approved Items NONE Council Added Items Approving CDBG funds for Council Budget- In the FY 2011 CDBG Budget process the Council conditionally approved$91,709 in CDBG funds to use in the Council Office budget,similar to administrative funds approved for the Attorney's Office, Mayor's Office,Housing and Neighborhood Development,and Finance. The Council at the time wanted to wait for a Budget Amendment to finalize the approval of these funds. This action would allow these funds to be used for staff as it relates to community outreach and the CDBG process,in CDBG-eligible census tracks. Staff will work with the Administration to ensure that these funds will be used for eligible expenses only. Page 23 0 Citizen's Compensation Advisory Committee Appointment: Connie Linardakis INTRODUCTION: Council Member Carlton Christensen is recommending that Connie Linardakis be appointed to the Citizen's Compensation Advisory Committee. If appointed, Ms. Linardakis would serve a term extending through August 31, 2013. APPLICANT INFORMATION: Ms. Linardakis is the Executive Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer for Zions Bancorporation. In this role, she oversees all aspects of the human resources function for the 12,000 employees of Zions Bancorporation. Ms. Linardakis serves on the board of the David Eccles School of Business, University of Utah. She is a member of the advisory board for Health and Wellness and Plateau Learning and Performance Management System. She also served on the boards of the Children's Museum of Utah and the Boston chapter of International Association of Corporate & Professional Retention. RESPONSE DEADLINE: If you have any objection to this appointment, please let Amber know by Tuesday, February 8, 2011. CURRENT COMPOSITION OF CITIZEN'S COMPENSATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE: The Citizen's Compensation Advisory Committee is to have three members appointed by the Mayor and three by the City Council; one is appointed by the other six appointed members. Representation should be from a broad cross-section of occupational, professional, employee and management interests, including persons from academia, business, community councils and organized labor, and persons with compensation expertise. Committee members are not required to be City residents but have traditionally been either residents or work within Salt Lake City. Current members are: Lourdes Rodriguez Cooke, Mayor Appointee; Debbie Cragun, Mayor Appointee; Kerma Jones, Mayor Appointee; Allen Miller, Council Appointee; Cori Petersen, Council Appointee and John Campbell, Committee Appointee; CITIZEN'S COMPENSATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE: The Citizen's Compensation Advisory Committee evaluates and makes recommendations to the Mayor and City Council regarding compensation levels for the city's elected officials and employees. p Historic Landmark Commission Board Appointment: Stephen James INTRODUCTION: Mayor Becker is recommending Stephen James be appointed to the Historic Landmark Commission, if appointed he will fill a vacancy on the board and serve the term through July 14, 2013. APPLICANT INFORMATION: Stephen James resides in Salt Lake City, District Three and is currently employed by Rio Tinto/Kennecott Land as a Manager of Planning and Neighborhood Design. Mr. James is interested in the evolution of the City in a manner that does not destroy the beauty of historic neighborhoods and finding ways to adapt the old to make it relevant to today' s market. RESPONSE DEADLINE: If you have any objection to this appointment, please let Amber know by Wednesday, January 12, 2011. CURRENT BOARD COMPOSITION: According to City ordinance, the Historic Landmark Commission "shall consist of not less than nine or more than fifteen voting members." In part, the Salt Lake City Code states that each voting member "shall be a resident of the City interested in preservation and knowledgeable about the heritage of the City." City code also requires members be selected to provide representation from the following groups of experts and interested parties: (a) a licensed architect representing the American Institute of Architects; (b) a member representing the Utah Historical Society; (c) a member representing the Utah Heritage Foundation; (d) six citizens at large; and (e) a member representing each historic district in the City. Current members of the Historic Landmark Commission include Sheleigh Harding, Central City; Warren Lloyd, American Institute of Architects; Anne Oliver, Avenues; Polly Hart, Capitol Hill; Arla Funk, Utah State Historical Society; Earle Bevins III, South Temple; J. Creed Haymond, University; Dave Richards, Utah Heritage Foundation and Bill Davis, at large. HLC STRUCTURE: The mission of the Historic Landmark Commission is to preserve buildings of historic and architectural significance, encourage proper development in areas adjacent to historic districts, safeguard the City's heritage by protecting landmarks, protect and enhance the attraction of the City's historic landmarks for tourists and visitors, and increase public awareness of historic preservation. • • APPLICATION Salt Lake City Boards&,Commissions •• OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 451 S.STATE STREET,ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY,UT 84111 NOTE: PLEASE ATTACH YOUR RESUME. Name: STEPHEN D JAMES Home 1070 2ND AVENUE Address: Street SALT LAKE CITY B41 O3 DISTRICT 3 City Zip Council District Phone: El 1 363-6864 80 1-204-2764 80 1-209-1 673 SDJAMES@MAC.COM Home Work Cellular# E-Mail Address Occupation: ARCHITECTURE - URBAN DESIGN - PLANNING - DEVELOPMENT Committee(s),Board(s),Commission(s)or Authority in which you are interested: HI_.ORIC LANDIFIARK COMMISSION Reason for your interest in this particular committee/board/commission or authority: MY I IN THIS COMMITTEE LIE.IN GUIDING THE EVCILUTION OF THIS CMANNER THAT DOES NOT DESTROY THE BEAUTY OF OUR HISTORIC NEIGMSORMOODU.PRESERVATION O WHEN CITIZENS VALUE THEIR HERITAGE. AS WE FINDING WAVE TO ADAPT THE OLD TO MAKE IT RELEVANT TO TODAY'S MARKET AND DEVELOP TOOLS THAT HELP THE LAY PERSON SEE WHAT THE CRITICAL PATTERNS ARE,CITIZENS WILL HAVE CONFIDENCE TO INVEST IN AND RRRRRR vE THEIR PROPERTIES.ALTHOUGH I AM CURRENTLY IN THE BUSINESS OF DEVELOPINS NEw, MPA .SIKEA LK AND TRANSIT ORIENTED COMMUNITIES.I HAVE LEARNED TO VALUE AND DRAW FROM THE CONTEXT ESTABLISHED MY SALTLAKE CITY'S REMAINING HIS- TORIC FABRIC.MANY LOCAL NEIGHSORMOODS ARE MODELS FOR A RETURN TO A SIMPLER LIFE•ONE IS THAT IS LESS RUSHED AND AUTO DEPENDENT AND PERHAPS MORE IN-TUNE WITH THE ZEITGEIST OF THE CITY. AS WE EVOLVE AND ADAPT SALT LAKE TO BECOME COMPETITIVE IN THE MARKET PLACE.PRUDENCE AND CARE NOT TO OVERLOOK THE ASPECTS OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT THAT SUPPORT HEALTHY,SAFE ANO SUSTAINABLE BEHAV- IORS AS WELL A HEIGHTENED SENSE OF OUR CIVIC REBPONSISILITIES IS CRITICAL. Are you currently serving on any other City committees? If so,which committee(s)/board(s)/commission(s)/authority? No Have you had previous contact with the committee/board/commission/authority for which you are making application? No If so,when,and the circumstances? I HAVE HAD CONTACT WITH WARREN LLOYD, THE CHAIR OF THE HLC, THROUGH THE AIA'S CL IITTEE ON HOUSING, AND PROFESSIONAL PURSUITS. (OVER) Community Service/Activities (past and present): AIA COMMITTEE ON HOUSING BSA CHARTER ❑RGANIZATION REP Professional Activities: 200E RALPH RAPSON TRAVELING STUDY FELLOWSHIP 2009 ULI INNOVATIONS CONFERENCE PARTICIPANT 2009 ULI GERALD HINES COMPETITION JUDGE 2010 BOOK - MADE SPACES - ENDURING PLACES i Civic/Professional Organization Memberships: URBAN LAND INSTITUTE AMERICAN INSTITURE OF ARCHITECTS CONGRESS FOR NEW URBANISM Ethnic Group (to assure fair and equal representation—answer optional): Other Pertinent Information: SEE RESUME Please list three references and phone numbers: 1) PETER CALTHORPE 510-548-6800 2) ERIC OSTH AIA 412-263-5200 3) STEPHEN MECHAM 80 1 -232-4274 DATE: 24 SEPT, 2010 SIGNATURE 01/00 BOARDS & COMMISSIONS CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 41) This statement is to be filed by all applicants for positions on regular or special committees, boards, authorities, and commissions of Salt Lake City. I� S T E P H E N D J A M E S (Name),being first duly sworn,certify that I am applying to serve on the HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION (List Board or Commission) and that the following statements of my financial interests are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. A. EMPLOYMENT Section 2.44.050, Salt Lake City Code, requires that every person holding any position with Salt Lake City Corporation who is also an officer, director, or employee of any other (non-city) business entity disclose such position and the nature of such position or employment. A"business entity" means a sole proprietorship,partnership, association,joint venture, corporation, firm,trust, foundation, or other organization or entity used in carrying on a business. The following questions refer to your primary non-city job: i. Are you presently employed? X Yes No If you answered "yes" to the above question, please list each of your employment interests: a. The name of the business.entity: RIO TINTO / KENNECOTT LAND b. The address of the business entity: 4700 DAYBREAK PARKWAY, S JORDAN, UT B4095 c. The principal activity engaged in by the business entity: DEVELOPMENT MANAGER- COMMUNITY PLANNING & NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN d. Your job title in the business entity: e. The length of time employed by the business entity: a YEARS If you answered"no" to the above question, please state if you are retired, unemployed, etc: C B. BUSINESS INTERESTS Section z.44.o50,Salt Lake City Code,requires_that all substantial interests-you may.have in any(non-city)business entity be disclosed. Please fill out only if separate from the above employment information,unless self-employed. 1. Do you engage in a business in which you are the sole proprietor(owner)?_Yes x No 2. Do you,your spouse or your children own stock in any corporation which,when considered in any combination,comprises ten percent(to%) ownership of the outstanding shares of said corporation? Yes X No 3. Do you,your spouse,or your children have any interests in any limited partnerships or other business entity which,when considered in any combination,exceeds a ten percent(zo%%) interest in such business? Yes X No 4. Do you own any interest in any business for which Salt Lake City issues a business license,i.e.,a restaurant,an apartment building with three or more units,tavern,etc.? Yes X No 5. If you answered"yes"to question 4,does the business entity have a Salt Lake City Business License? Yes No If you have answered"yes"to any of the above questions,please state for each business interest: a. Name of the business: b. Address of the business: c. The principal activity engaged in by the business: d. The nature of your interest in the business: e. The length of time associated with the business: f. If you answered"yes"to question 4 above,state whether the value of your interest is: Under$25,000 Over$z5,000 (attach additional sheets if necessary) I certify that no conflicts of interest exist or that all conflicts have been disclosed in writing on this statement. Dated this )09 day of j'ep kooti t" ,zo /o . (Si natu of Applicant or Board Member) STATE OF UTAH ) :ss COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) Subscribed and sworn to(or affirmed)before me by e Pt 7;okrC n this (App nt or Board Member 1— day of t.-co.=` ...- ,zo NOTARY PUBLIC i ri,4 Richard Baese ./70. � 581757 (Notary Pu .c,residing in Salt Lake County,Utah My Commission Expires 03/16/2014 70) STATE OF UTAH (Th. co ict o interest isclosure statement only. Additional disclosures or restrictions may apply if your financial,business,or professional activities conflict with your city responsibilities.) • STEPHEN JAMES 1070 Second Avenue Salt Lake Cry,UT 84103 T:801-363-6864 C 801-209-1673 E:sdjartesarrwccom Profile My professional interests have evolved from making beautiful buildings to beautiful cities.I have learned that the program and function of the space between the architecture is as vital to the creation of vibrant cities as the function of the structures themselves.In an era of specialization and institutional self interest melding the focus of architecture,urban design,and governance,while teaming with institutions and business interests enables us to create physical and civic environments that are beautiful inspiring full of energy,and economically verdant My objective is to make places that people are proud to lire in,places that create civic awareness that raise expectations for the etwh nrnents in which we function I desire is to associate with,lead and support organizations with visions that align with these objectives. Experience PROJECT DESIGNER,HAMMEL GREEN&ABRAHAMSON.MINNEAPOLIS,MN 1997-2001 • Programming and design service for museums,performing arts center and other significant tint structures in Connecticut Washington D.C.,George,Texat Oklahoma,Iowa,Minnesota,and Alaska. • Lead research and development team in the introduction of computer aided manufacturing nrettn,Js and O rapid prototyping for building design,modeling,and construction.Computer models were developed for structural engineers and used to set construction work points and create CNC routed concrete formwork • Lead and mentored 3D design group. • Presented digital processes at International conference. DIRECTOR OF DESIGN,DESIGNW EST ARCHITECTURE,SALT LAKE CITY,Lin 2001-2003 v • Designed commercial and civic projects and reviewed wording drawings. • Elevated level of design firm-wide by increasing design-centric dialog and raising performance expectations. • Mentored architects in design thinking methodology • Redesigned firm branding and marketing materials MANAGER OF DESIGN REVIEW,KENNECOTT LAND.SOUTH JORDAN.UT 2003-2004 • Designed and managed the construction of the Daybreak Pavilion,an information center built to LEED standards. • Established the design review and product development systems and processes that transformed and continues to evolve the local production builder market • Performed design review and production oversight of all built architectural work at the Daybreak community. • Developed amenity concepts and managed architect's and landscapers implementation of the work MANAGER OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DESIGN.SOL/TH JORD.AN.UT 2005-PRESENT • Developed and irpfemented cross disciplinary planning process that integrates the work of planners, architects,landward..architects and civil engineers and bridges a previously existing gap between land planning residential product development and builder implementation. • Directs master planing efforts which includes land use,planning urban design,transportation and open space frameworks.Reviews opportunities and constraints both internal and external to the planning areas and recommends courses of action. • Leads the creative team of planning and design consultants that translates market research data into village scaled mixed use neighborhoods and districts as well as the development of open space,parks and amenity concepts. • • Designed the process for and manages the development of design guidelines and pattern books that set and document the development vision. • Manages an internal staff of 4 and oversees their work in implementing the community vision. • Introduced and implemented visitability standards. • Represented western developers issues regarding LEED ND at the USGBC Green Building Council Forum in Washington DC. • Set up a studio collaboration between Daybreak builders and the University of Utah architecture students to study prototypical housing.The purpose of the studio was to establish relationships between local builders and architects as well as introducing students to the realities of production home building. • Developed aesthetic standards for the Mountain View Corridor Education UNIVERSITY OF UTAN,1996-BS.ARCNRFCfURAL STUDIES • Magna Cum Laude • Phi Kappa Phi Honor Society • Gold Key Honor Society UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 1998-MARCH • Phi Kappa Phi Awards&Recognition • Ralph Rapson Traveling Study Fellowship 2009-Greece,Italy,Croatia Spain.France,Germany Denmark, Netherlands • UU Gerald Hines Competition Judge-2009 • 3 AIA MN Honor Awards • Thesis Prize for Distinguished Project •Joint Study Award of Distinction • Best of Show student exhibit UofM • Top 10 Cottage Community 2006-Cottage Living • No.06 Best selling community n the country Charles Lesser Publications • MADE SPACES-Enduring Places-Ralph Rapson Traveling Study Fellowship 2010 • ACADIA QUARTERLY,199 Vo.I No.1 pp 18-19 • ARQUITECTURA DIGITAL,Vol.3 No.9 March 2001 •ARCHITECTURE,VoL88 No.9 pp.100-105 •ARCHITECTURE,Vol 89 No.8 pp.38-39 • WORKS,Fall 1998 Vo&1 No.2 pg 36 • ARCHITECTURE MN,Vol.33 No.2 MarlApr 07 pp 42-45 Conference&Panels • ULI Spring Meeting 2006,Salt Lake City UT-Sustainable Community Development • CNU 2006,Providence RI-Patterbooks:Tools for Managing Design Outcomes • PCBC 2007,San Francisco,CA-Lessons in Localizing a Master Plan • UTAH HERITAGE FOUNDATION 2007,Salt Lake City UT Modeling Community Development on TraditionalNeighbortaods. • UU INNOVATORS CONFERENCE 2008,Scottsdale,AZ-Models for Future Sustainable Development • CNU 2013 Planing Committee. • PechaKucha SLC 01 Presenter-Creating Context 2 • Skills MANAGEMENT/DESIGN • Problem solving/Methods Development • Objective Analysis • Critical Thinking • Consensus Building TECHNICAL • 2D/3D CAD-CAD/CAM-Rapid Prototyping • Building Assembly • Traditional Architectural Methods • Illustration • Photography • Full suite of design software. • 41) 3 ' Housing Authority Advisory Board Appointment: Michael Clara INTRODUCTION: Mayor Becker is recommending Michael Clara a resident of District Two, to } be appointed to the Housing Authority Advisory Board. If appointed Mr. Clara will serve a term through October 1, 2015 and will be filling a vacancy on the board. APPLICANT INFORMATION: Michael Clara is employed as a Transit Planner for the Utah Transit Authority. Mr. Clara has served on the Poplar Grove Community Council, Utah Hispanic Legislative Task Force, and the former Community Development Advisory Committee. Mr. Clara is interested in serving on the board to ensure representation of Salt Lake City's Westside community. RESPONSE DEADLINE: If you have any objections to this appointment, please let Amber know by Monday, January 17, 2011. CURRENT COMPOSITION OF HOUSING AUTHORITY ADVISORY BOARD: Housing Authority commissioners are not required to reside within Salt Lake City. Current commissioners include: Chairman David Mansell, Utah Homes; Commissioner George "Buzz" Welch, University of Utah; Commissioner Philip Bernal, SL County Department of Public Works; Commissioner Valda Tarbet, Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency and Commissioner Jennifer Bruno, Salt Lake City Council Office. BOARD STRUCTURE: The Housing Authority is created and governed in accordance with Utah law. Recently, the Housing Authority by-laws changed. It may now be comprised of seven rather than five commissioners who are appointed to serve five-year terms. The mission of the Housing Authority is to provide low-income housing to Salt Lake City. The Housing Authority can purchase, lease and improve real property; establish and revise rents in its housing projects; and identify unsafe, unsanitary or overcrowded housing within its area of operation. MEMORANDUM To: City Council Members From: Cindy Gust-Jenson,Executive Director Date: February 15, 2011 RE: Council Established Priority: Council Oversight&Internal Controls Staff will be prepared to review the Council Oversight&Internal Controls priority item at Tuesday's Council meeting if time allows. There are several possibilities for the Council to pursue formalizing your oversight role with various City functions,and at the same time,process some necessary , amendments to the City Code to: • Assure that City and Taxpayer resources are spent wisely,protected properly,and managed in the best way possible; • Improve Council oversight role and support improvements to various internal control processes through budget appropriations or ordinance amendments; • Pursue changes and carry out oversight responsibilities in the most transparent way possible; and • Achieve budget and resource savings through approved changes(although initial research and implementation would have an upfront cost). Projects could include,but are not limited to: 1. Reporting Requirements 2. Consolidation of fee schedule 3. Streamline business license revocation,process 4. Financial Management System a. Payroll b. Internal Controls c. Reporting 5. Contract management 6. RFP process 7. Automation of Systems(agenda,noticing) The City Council Office team members are: Karen Halladay(Lead),Jennifer Bruno,Sylvia Richards, Quin Card, and Lehua Weaver. Council Priority Items ("Umbrellas") Items confirmed at the Jan.2011 retreat. V 0 • Council Communication Efforts: Council Website in progress;Council interviews for Channel 17;Weeklies; aE weekly Council meeting reports; G to 41 W vzt • Public Engagement: Increased contact with community and stakeholders through mailing lists and listsery emails CI) Ittl O to provide notifications/updates on topics,requests for comment,notification of meeting times,etc. 4 0 • Street Cars / Trolleys: Planning,budgeting,staffing in progress •>. • Bicycle & Transportation projects: Sri . Traffic Calming - including speed limits, stop signs, pedestrian safety: policy discussion held with k Administration,further discussion needed on next steps and action items A 0 • Sidewalk snow removal: COMPLETE 1 • Electric vehicles: Council staff prepared to draft revisions to the Administration's proposal in order to complete x % the intent of the Council's Legislative Action p.m • Ground Transportation: NEARLY COMPLETE • Concrete / Sidewalk standards:Council staff working with Administration on audit scope Printed Feb.3,2011 Project updates as of January 20,2011 MEMORANDUM DATE: February 10, 2011 TO: Council Members SUBJECT: Resolution—supporting a community effort to raise funds for a neighborhood park located at 1560 East Atkin Avenue (2828 South) - Imperial Neighborhood Park AFFECTED COUNCIL DISTRICTS: If the resolution adopted the park project would affect Council District 7 ADMINISTRATIVE DEPT. Public Services Department,Operations Division AND CONTACT PERSON: Emy Maloutas, Open Space Lands Manager COUNCIL PROCESS:This item is scheduled on the February 15,2011 Council agenda for a briefing and under New Business at which point the Council can consider adopting the resolution or deferring action to a future meeting. If approved,no further action will be required by the City Council. A. The proposed resolution would recognize City support for a community effort to raise funds for a neighborhood park to be located at 1560 East Atkin Avenue(2828 South). This would be contingent upon obtaining private funds from other sources and the City accepting responsibility for maintenance and ownership of the park. B. The Open Space Lands Advisory Board would review a completed application when the community has a funding proposal and a willing seller and provide a recommendation to the Mayor and Council. C. The Administration's paperwork notes the following key points: 1. This action would help facilitate the community's continued efforts to negotiate a purchase agreement with the property owner, finalize an application for Open Space funding and secure additional private funds. The Open Space Lands Board has reviewed a pre-application for funding of this project and recommended the City support the community's efforts to acquire the property. 2. The Imperial Neighborhood Park community group has submitted a Capital Improvements Program (CIF) application for additional funding to acquire the property. In addition,there have been numerous fund raising activities and public meetings. 3. The Sugar House Master Plan(2005)and the draft Open Space Acquisition Strategy Plan identify this area in Council District 7 as underserved by parks and open space. (Please see attached map for details.) cc: David Everitt,Bianca Shreeve,Karen Hale,Lisa Harrison-Smith,Art Raymond,Holly Hilton,Ed Rutan,Lynn Pace,Boyd Ferguson,Jeff Niermeyer,Tom Ward,Rick Graham,Vicki Bennett,Emy Maloutas,City Council Liaisons,Mayors Liaisons File Location: Public Services Dept.,Operations Division,Open Space funding,Imperial Neighborhood Park,land acquisition 1560 East Atkin Avenue(2828 South) .,, -=. C ..1."77..- t; i C i P-,,,,,.. iN.-P .4 i3 Iv ! 7: X ". 1-, ,.. d 4. c ,.. .,..: ,.. _ ,r. Te".R: ,....-'7 444 WIN .. .D .L."' °P \1.,...V.:$.7 p.- Z.) 4 (4g— , - .',t, . :;' --''' . ..,X, ' - t . -- - -, - 4),,,: - .., .::44-1- ,-‘'• - . -,i_ „.--- ,_ , • •.,.%. .,- ";,.=,,r1 • '1111.. lik. i • '- 4- '---• i--:-.4 . 1., -1 ., . - 44.6ei, ; a A li• if , r. • , '01 V. . ,6,• - - ,.., - • :,..% . "- "T.-1 • -.,.,,. gi.. 4.• . _ .. • ,. . -- • ' . - „a,"- .- ---- . I .. 9, * •, ' - , a • ip '''• le '<..; 1 i . . ,, . , ^ , , : • ..'t t • epo_ 1 • I ' . , . -- ,A — } rr .iMir ei . t 4, , ' jr,,,, , ... ,.. , ,. . - 44 4.•-' , 1 1 , . 'il.V. :- .4. , - - - I i ' ii. .' .1:4 ..i., '1 'toe,'-0.„?, '' '' ' 1 - I! •-•':°.•if ' z 'f. , V . 1 A , -at 4§ ,%, ',.',• :, , 'Z-cf „, ,t ., , ,.. . .. •., : I, .. e,.5 1 -, , ir-- -, :,• ,,,..,, el, ,..,.. ',,,o,„.• j r .• * •••,, .,..;,- .., ,..,•,.‘,2 • d A .1 .. ,'. ; .ii" .. '•- .1.. . . ' '1'. ,..... ..4; ..r..;., 4, .. d , .. . ., • - , !', -.• ' ' ZY-- - ..........— ,..„.,- , ' e...4.' I . ,,-...if • --,:. ,•,,..-:,,.-. .... ..,_,. 0,7 i.• ,, - r 1 I.• &:,i111,,, .„.• ... ,., ._. ;.,_., ,... . ... '44;iiL ':'• • ,„..:.,' . • . -..,.- ._ lif„ ...•••- ,•., •••,,,‘ - ... --r, 6'Y' 1 , -:., ••• •'Fr A: ... 1474., . .-b: . ---,.- 7. . ,3 ,y.: .-,-T-= •i g'L-c. '" '. ' ' .1 L3. 6' ..:-1,-, 1.,.:',. ',* q ,,.-14-1- !. i- ig3 0 IP --'— u fZ ..'g? - .J', . t---! '',, Ay" k- 1 '' 11011*-10 ''---.01 . ge• • RECEIVED FEB 0 3 2011 SCANNED TO a4t.tre.� SCANNE BY.SLC COUNCIL OP Pic,, C RICH GRAHAM r i.� r u 1.0 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTORS OFFICE JAN 2 8 2011 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ay Date Received: Davi eritt, ief of Staff Date sent to Council: 0 2 OS/ LOl TO: Jill Remington-Love,Chair DATE: January 28,2011 Salt Lake City Council FROM: Rick Graham 535-7774 Public Services Director SUBJECT: Resolution showing support for Imperial Neighborhood Park STAFF CONTACT: Emy Maloutas 972-7804 Open Space Lands Program Manager DOCUMENT TYPE: Resolution RECOMMENDATION: Consider adopting resolution BUDGET IMPACT: NA BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:Salt Lake City's Open Space Lands Program is part-way through the review process for the funding request application for the Imperial Neighborhood Park Project.Community members submitted a pre-application for the 0.86 acre parcel of land located at 1560 East Atkin Avenue(2828 South). Residents in the area would like to see this recently vacated property purchased for the development of a neighborhood park.The area is identified as underserved by parks and open space in the in the Sugar House Master Plan(2005)and the draft Open Space Acquisition Strategy Plan. The Open Space Lands Advisory Board(OSLAB)recommends that Mayor and City Council support this community effort by committing to ownership and maintenance should the community be able to secure a willing seller and leverage funds for the purchase.In light of the continued fundraising efforts for the proposed park,OSLAB encourages the property owner's consideration of a bargain sale and/or the donation of the site for the proposed park. The Imperial Neighborhood Park group has submitted a CIP Application for acquisition funding for the park site. PUBLIC PROCESS:There have been numerous public meetings as well as fund raising events.OSLAB is prepared to receive and review a completed full application when the community has a funding proposal and a willing seller. At that point the Board will make a recommendation to the Administration and City Council •relative to the use of bond funds for the project. ATTACHMENTS:Resolution 51 aSUTdHt STATE ,ROOM 1313,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 841 1 1-3 1 04 MAILING ADDRESS: PO BOX 145469,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 3141 14-6469 TELEPHONE:B01-535.7775 FAX:1301.536-T963 RESOLUTION NO. 2011 O (Expressing Support of a Community Driven Land Acquisition to Develop a Neighborhood Park) A resolution expressing the support of the Salt Lake City Council for a community driven land acquisition to develop a neighborhood park. WHEREAS,parks are of critical importance to Salt Lake City and the greater Salt Lake City metropolitan area;and WHEREAS,the City has had a long standing interest in acquiring and preserving parks; and WHEREAS,the City is aware of the possibility of acquiring approximately 0.86 acres of property located at Fillmore Street and Atkin Avenue in the Wilford neighborhood;and WHEREAS,in March 2009 the City hosted a community meeting for this project and Oover 60 residents attended in support of this project;and WHEREAS,it has been proposed that the City support acquisition of the property for a proposed neighborhood park called Imperial Neighborhood Park;and WHEREAS,the community proposes to develop the property for community enjoyment and recreation;and WHEREAS,in February 2010 the City's Open Space Lands Advisory Board recommended that this project move to full application to be reviewed through the Open Space Lands Program process;and WHEREAS,in January 2011,in anticipation of a full application,the City's Open Space Lands Advisory Board recommended that the City Council support the community effort to acquire this property;and IC WHEREAS,the City Council agrees that it would be appropriate for the City to accept Ofuture maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the park;and WHEREAS,the City Council finds that this Resolution is in the best interest of the City; NOW,THEREFORE,be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,as follows: 1. The City Council hereby expresses its support for the proposed Imperial Neighborhood Park project and the City's accepting of future maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the park. 2. The City Council hereby expresses its support for the acquisition of the 0.86 acres located at Filmore Street and Atkin Avenue from the current property owners,contingent upon obtaining private funds from other open space partners. 3. The City Council encourages the administration to continue to pursue this project, Oand to pursue the availability of private funds to be used for this project. 4. The City Council also expresses its support and expectation that the administration will continue its current efforts to raise additional private funds for the project with other partners. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,this day of 2011. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorneys Office HB ATfY-N16340-vl-Resolution_supportingland_acquisition_for_a neighborhood_park.DOC Date I-t f By P. .: aw rt #• owl. NYC B is'; . GLLYDEAN' LECLERC. .. i • ' I. ,S. N N15. '" of ' \NILSON,SUS''T �i- N I.<S • L"."4 0+' x'. �"• R DI pAI;L A;> J. 1116;' • p r.? it‘,., , , ....., At -..-14%,,,. • RRACLOUG , R ,�, Y M�1 r,: +t r` �; , �'- at . LCH,LINDA ' � FRAM RY 6 ATKIN rF Wilford �'....:x _ � � ` , r Neighborhood • NONFLOS Fi`: I AL Park 1 ON,MA R,., & ,,,k _; LEY,«HR `TOPHER S INN it `4 if.. t ` • `i La •sib • _ 0.86 Acres `_ el ill . f. y NI• . INSTON S' iX `�Y �.. t -��. • . Irbi ^a: to r DROS ERT ANA D;Tr a MAV,MARL F. • , • -• f4UNt,GILBERT' •� Mr. " r ARDS, ,1;,_STINE( ,li FRE . ,'?' .• MO H., fvS\� y'`: I JAM E1 '. i ate' , , 7c ir •,1 t y� ,.,, 's;f I..,(-•-vY .►i1 G. !r • �i'; 'NEAU,RY JESSICA;]71 F '� _` .► ! •.,,,,,,/,1 ett - i; :X i�. , a .LJIsfE MAN _ . .&KIMB ' ,, 3• - ` ,rt. .,.,"4�� V�...,, :' 1 _ '. -4 _ Wilford NP EN,'SC(1,&&VVEfRj NNA; MA " • ' • •AI t UARE ;'I `1 © SLC.Parcels !LIAliji �LA Y ;51" •+ l _ 4 ,H. 1 SLC Streets ` I WITZEL,KURT R& BETH K;i' �,±• ,.D, LINE F. RYAN' 1 '°y' o 75 L 0 i4.. .• y• 0,TONY_11L4_-1.7 1 _ •.IT Feet RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT of the Community Covenant Program WHEREAS, members of the Armed Forces and their families make great sacrifices every day,whether serving at home or abroad or through membership in the reserve or active duty;and WHEREAS, service members often leave their homes and families as they are deployed;and WHEREAS, the strength of service members comes from the strength of their families;and WHEREAS, the strength of service member families is supported by the strength of the community, including the support of employers,educators,civic and business leaders,government agencies and residents;and WHEREAS, the Community Covenant Program is an initiative created in 2008 by the United States Army to encourage cities and towns across the country to formally commit their support to service members of all branches and their families. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED The Salt Lake City Council and Mayor Ralph Becker affirm their mutual confidence in the Library Board,the adopted three-year strategic plan,and the Librarian's efforts to implement the strategic plan. The City Council and Mayor acknowledge the immense responsibility the Library Board —all volunteer citizens—has undertaken to provide direction and guidance to the Librarian in the operation of one of Salt Lake City's most prominent and respected public benefits. The City Council and Mayor also recognize that the Public Library System's employees are essential to the high level of service we aim to provide Salt Lake City residents. The City Council and Mayor acknowledge the efforts of all the Public Library System's employees to maintain the Library's high standards within the local,national,and international communities. Ralph Becker Jill Remington Love,District Five Salt Lake City Mayor Salt Lake City Council Member,Chair Stan Penfold,District Three Carlton Christensen,District One Salt Lake City Council Member,Vice Chair Salt Lake City Council Member Van Turner,District Two Luke Garrott,District Four Salt Lake City Council Member Salt Lake City Council Member JT Martin,District Six Soren D.Simonsen,District Seven Salt Lake City Council Member Salt Lake City Council Member