Loading...
07/11/1989 - Minutes PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, July 11, 1989, at 4:00 p.m. in Suite 325, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Councilmembers were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Sydney Fonnesbeck Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting. Craig Peterson, Director of zoning be changed to a "C-3A" Community and Economic Develop- instead of "C-3" . He said the "C- ment, said that the issues sur- 3A" classification required larg- rounding the Clark Financial er landscaping setbacks and pro- proposal for the Sugarhouse devel- hibited open storage. He said the opment fell into two areas: land Shopko store had requested permis- use and financial incentives. He sion to put in a garden store said that petitions in both areas which was not allowed under the should be able to stand on their "C-3A" classification and added own merits in the decision making that the Planning Commission was process. He said that the presen- open to amending the "C3-A" re- tations at the public hearing strictions to allow for a center. would go in the following order: Bill Wright of Planning and Zoning Mr. Peterson said many of the would present the Planning Commis- issues concerning the project had sion' s decision and recommenda- been resolved but that five main tions; Clark Financial would issues remained. (See attachment respond and present its proposal; #1 ) Mr. Peterson handed out a public comment would be next; then summary of the issues and reviewed the administration would present them with the Council. its position. Councilmember Kirk asked if Bill Wright, Deputy Director the proposed street went through of Planning and Zoning, reviewed an existing building and Mr. the basics of the Clark Develop- Wright said that four routes had ment proposal and the site bound- been considered for a through aries. He said that a rezoning street and the proposed route was was being requested for the area preferred by the Planning Commis- between Highland Drive and Inter- sion. He said the decision was state 80, and 1300 East and 2100 based on traffic studies that South, from "R-2" and "C-1" to a showed a high possibility of "C-3" classification. Mr. Wright intersection failure if the Shopko said the proposal fit the traffic was sent through existing Sugarhouse Master Plan for land intersections without additional but that the Clark project would east west streets. Jim McGuire, change the phasing of development Clark Financial, said the develop- in the area. He said the Planning ers did not believe the addition- Commission recommended approval of al cross street was needed and the project based on Master Plan that the loss of an existing facts but recommended that the building and related retail space, 89-184 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 as well as the cost of construc- able and they didn't want to tie tion was not a viable trade off. the developer' s two projects He said increased and improved together, but that the Shopko signalization around the project project should stand on its own. site would solve the traffic flow Mr. McGuire said the project could problem, save money and preserve not support a loan and needed the the existing space. money as a grant. Mr. Peterson said his department was not saying Mr. Peterson then outlined the no to using the money but wanted issues relating to financial to keep it as a loan. incentives for the Clark project saying that the developers had Larry Failner, Director of requested tax increment financing, Purchasing and Property Manage- an Urban Development Action Grant ment, said the city should not (UDAG) , street and alley vacations vacate streets in commercial areas and sales tax incentives. Mr. but close and sell them at fair McGuire said that due to cost market value according to Res- savings in site design and other olution 80 of 1975. He said the areas the request for sales tax policy stated that the city could incentives was being formally not give up its interest in a withdrawn. major street but could lease it. He said the city was allowed to Mr. Peterson said that al- sell minor streets and alleys at though Clark Financial was not fair market value with all money requesting sales tax incentives paid up front. Councilmember the incentives should be looked at Horrocks asked what the desig- as a future incentive tool. nation between a major and a minor Rosemary Davis, Director of Capi- street was and Mr. Failner said tal Planning, said Clark Financial the city attorney would have to had requested that a total of research that. Councilmember $900, 000 in UDAG money be given, Hardman asked if the market value over 12 years, as a grant instead was fixed for all streets and Mr. of as a loan, as is usually the Failner said that it fluctuated case. She said the department was with location as did all real making a strong recommendation not property. to give a grant but to keep the past projects paying into the Councilmember Hardman asked revolving loan fund and appropri- if the current policy was a change ate the UDAG money according to from a city practice or if the current loan practice. policy formalized an informal policy. Mayor DePaulis said that Councilmember Godfrey said he before the resolution passed, the felt strongly that the UDAG money city vacated streets in commercial should be a loan and the develop- areas. Councilmember Fonnesbeck er' s old UDAG debt should not be said the city was sued over that forgiven. Councilmember Bittner practice and lost, which prompted said if the old debt was forgiven the resolution. Mr. Peterson the City would be giving the said if the Council was interested developers the land under the in changing the policy to allow original loan as well as the new for commercial vacations, strict land. criteria would need to be estab- lished to define precisely the Mr. Peterson said the UDAG intent of the policy change. fund currently had $410, 000 avail- Mayor DePaulis said criteria for 89-185 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIO UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 determining market value would part of the road deeded to a third have to be outlined. party to bring the neighborhood into the decision loop when the Ms. Gust-Jenson reviewed the city considered any extension of agenda with the Council saying llth Avenue. that the Sailor of the Year award would be presented during the Mr. Wright said the area opening ceremonies. She said that above the development was zoned item F3, the contract with the "P-1" which discouraged develop- Firefighter's Union, had been ment, and Mr. McCandless said that pulled from the agenda because the most of the land fit -the 40 per- firefighter representative had centage rule that blocked develop- been out of town and all of the ment as well. Councilmember parties involved had not yet Horrocks asked if the city could signed the contract. She said force a developer to landscape the that item F7 had been changed hill where the roads were cut, and through an addendum, changing the Mr. Wright said the existing laws figure on the revenue bonds from did that and the developers were $8,000,000 to $8, 800,000. beginning to design the roads to minimize cuts into the hill. Ms. Gust-Jenson said that Janice Jardine of Planning and Ms. Gust-Jenson asked the Zoning would be in the meeting to Council for dates to hold the answer questions about the Banj Council retreat, saying that the Investment petition for an alley policy called for two retreats per closure. year but didn't outline when they should be. Mr. Wright and Allen McCandless of Planning and Zoning reviewed Petition 400-713 submit- ted by First Charter Development. Councilmember Fonnesbeck said the neighborhood thought the project involved a land swap with the city in conjunction with the rezoning. Mr. Wright said he didn't remember that as part of the agreement but he would research it. He said the rezoning could be approved contin- gent on approval of the PUD or on approval of the street routing if the Council had concerns about the road design. Councilmember Fonnesbeck said she supported the project, as did the neighborhood, but that they were concerned that the development was another part of the extension of an llth Avenue highway. Councilmember Horrocks said he had received calls ex- pressing the same concern. Councilmember Fonnesbeck said the neighborhood council wanted a 89-186 110 •tachment #1 Regarding Petition 400-731, the administration recommends the approval of the rezoning to Commercial "C-3A" subject to the following: 1. The proposed development shall be processed as a Commercial Planned Unit Development, and obtain approval from both the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment. 2. The rezoning of the properties shall only become effective once the building permits are in order and ready to be issued. 3. That the Planning Commission be requested to hold an informal hearing to_recommend a six_month_moratorium on_commercial development within the area along Parley's Creek that is master planned for Residential Mixed Use and the mixed use area north of Parley's Creek. During this time, the planning commission, property owners, and business community will develop a proper zoning district to regulate new development assuring residential opportunities. 4. The petitioner provide a public open space element for pedestrian and bicycle circulation connecting Fairmont Park/ Elizabeth Sherman Parkway/ Sugarhouse Park/ 1200 East/ Parley's Creek. The open space connecting element shall consist of a space not less than 8 feet wide and contain elements of pedestrian amenities such as trees, benches, lights, etc. designed in a theme consistent with the Sugar House Beautification Project. 5. Construction of Wilmington Avenue similar as designed in Alternative 1 of the "Parking and Circulation Study". The design speed is recommended to be lowered to 25 mph. The City should participate with the costs of these improvements. Various options for the construction and funding should be explored with the administration. 89-186-A PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIO UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in regular session on Tuesday, July 11, 1989, at 6:00 p.m. in Room 315, Council Chambers, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Sydney Fonnesbeck Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, City Attorney, Kathryn Marshall, City Recorder, and LaNita Brown, Deputy Recorder, were present. Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting and Councilmember Kirk conducted the meeting. OPENING CEREMONIES CONSENT AGENDA #1. The invocation was given Councilmember Godfrey moved by Police Chaplain Father Kaiser. and Councilmember Bittner seconded to approve the consent agenda, #2. The Council led the which motion carried, all members Pledge of Allegiance. voted aye. #3. Councilmember Godfrey #1. RE: Setting a date for a moved and Councilmember Hardman public hearing to be held Tuesday, seconded to approve the minutes of August 1, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. , to the Salt Lake City Council for the obtain public comment concerning a regular meetings held Tuesday, proposed ordinance implementing June 13, 1989, and Thursday, June revisions in the Off-Street Park- 15, 1989, which motion carried, ing Policy. all members voted aye. (0 89-28) (M 89-1) #2. RE: Setting a date for a #4. The Council and Mayor non-advertised public hearing to presented a resolution congratu- be held Tuesday, August 1, 1989, lating Mark Henry on being chosen at 6:20 p.m. , to obtain comment as the U.S.S. Salt Lake City concerning Petition 400-723 sub- Sailor of the Year. Councilmember mitted by Avis Rent-A-Car re- Bittner read the resolution. questing that the city allow a longer time for relocatable office Councilmember Godfrey moved buildings so that they may be used and Councilmember Hardman seconded during the actual construction to approve Resolution 93 of 1989, phase of a commercial project. congratulating Mr. Henry, which (P 89-217) motion carried, all members voted aye. #3. RE: Adopting Resolution (R 89-1) 88 of 1989 authorizing the execu- tion of an interlocal agreement with the Utah State Motor Vehicle Enforcement Division allowing the State Motor Vehicle Division to 89-187 PROCEL INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITT, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 use the International Airport' s ACTION: Without objection firing range. this item was referred to the (C 89-355) Planning Commission. (P 89-231) #4. RE: Adopting Resolution 89 of 1989 authorizing the execu- #2. RE: An ordinance to tion of an interlocal agreement rezone the area between Redwood with the Federal Aviation Adminis- Road/Surplus Canal and approxi- tration, Civil Aviation Security mately 3000 West and Indiana Field Office allowing members of Avenue to 2100 South from "M-3" to the FAA' s Security Field Office to "M1-A" and "C-2" classifications. use the International Airport' s firing range. ACTION: Without objection (C 89-357) this item was referred to the Planning Commission. #5. RE: Adopting Resolution (P 89-232) 90 of 1989 authorizing the execu- tion of an interlocal agreement #3. RE: An ordinance to with the State of Utah, Motor rezone property between 700 West Carrier Section Department of and 1-15 and 1300 South and 1700 Commerce allowing state motor South from "M-1" to "M1-A" classi- carrier peace officers to use the fication. International Airport' s firing range. ACTION: Without objection (C 89-356) this item was referred to the Planning Commission. #6. RE: Setting a date for a (P 89-233) public hearing to be held Tuesday, July 18, 1989, at 7:00 p.m. to #4. RE: An ordinance to obtain comment concerning the rezone property between 700 West submission of an application to and 1-15 and 700 South and 1300 the U.S. Department of Housing and South from "M-2" to "M1-A" classi- Urban Development for an Urban fication. Development Action Grant to sup- port establishment of a district ACTION: Without objection energy facility that may supply this item was referred to the heating, cooling, and electrical Planning Commission. energy to the new Jazz Arena and (P 89-234) other buildings in the downtown area. #5. RE: An ordinance to (T 89-15) rezone the area between the Jordan River and 700 West and 900 South and California Avenue from "R-4" NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS and "R-2" to "R-1" classification. #1. RE: An ordinance to ACTION: Without objection rezone the property located be- this item was referred to the tween North Temple and 600 North Planning Commission. and 700 West and the Jordan River (P 89-235) from "R-2" and "B-3" to "R-1" classification. 89-188 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITT, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), #1. RE: An ordinance amend- Local 1004, for the city' s 200 ing Section 2.52.010 of the Salt series employees. Lake City Code, as last amended by Bill No. 35 of 1989, relating to ACTION: Councilmember God- compensation of Salt Lake City frey moved and Councilmember Hard- Corporation officers and employ- man seconded to adopt Ordinance ees, including statutory officers. 38 of 1989, which motion carried, all members voted aye. ACTION: Councilmember God- (C 89-308) frey moved and Councilmember Hard- man seconded to adopt Ordinance 41 #5. RE: An ordinance approv- of 1989, which motion carried, all ing a memorandum of understanding members voted aye. between the city and the American (0 89-20) Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), #2. RE: An ordinance approv- Local 1004, for the city' s 100 ing a memorandum of understanding series employees. between thee city and the Salt Lake City Police Association. ACTION: Councilmember God- frey moved and Councilmember Hard- ACTION: Councilmember God- man seconded to adopt Ordinance 39 frey moved and Councilmember Hard- of 1989, which motion carried, all man seconded to adopt Ordinance members voted aye. 40 of 1989, which motion carried, (C 89-307) all members voted aye. (C 89-310) #6. RE: A resolution condi- tionally accepting a bid for #3. RE: An ordinance approv- construction work and subject to ing a memorandum of understanding approval of the city engineer, between the city and the Interna- authorizing execution of a con- tional Association of struction contract with the certi- Firefighters, Local 1645. fied low-bidder for construction of improvements of the California ACTION: Without objection Avenue Special Improvement Dis- this item was pulled from the trict No. 38-808 providing for agenda. construction of designated widths of roadway pavement, concrete curb NOTE: Mayor DePaulis ex- and gutter, turn lanes, asphalt plained that this item was pulled shoulders, street drainage facili- because they had not been able to ties, water distribution lines and sign the contract yet because Mr. laterals, sewer collection lines Quick, Firefighters Union presi- and laterals, traffic signaliza- dent, was out of town. He said tion, paving of intersections, they would be signing it on Friday turnarounds, intersections and to meet payroll needs, and the median improvements, and all other ordinance would be approved at miscellaneous work necessary to next week' s meeting. complete the improvement; for (C 89-309) issuance of interim warrants and for the addition of the interest #4. RE: An ordinance approv- thereon to assessable costs. ing a memorandum of understanding between the city and the American 89-189 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITE, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 ACTION: Councilmember God- motion carried, all members voted frey moved and Councilmember Bitt- aye. ner seconded to adopt Resolution 91 of 1989, which motion carried, DISCUSSION: Janice Jardine, all members voted aye. Planning and Zoning, said the petition was a request for closure NOTE: Six bids were re- of the northern half of Jefferson ceived for the project. They were Street which was between 700 and as follows: Western Quality, 800 South, and West Temple and 200 $917, 171. 10; Geneva Rock Products, West. She said the closure would $920, 286.34; Workman Construction, allow for a Ford auto dealership $942, 742. 15; McNeil Construction, which would move from its present $913, 514.44; Harper Excavating, location at 600 South. She said $874, 161. 79; and CraCar Construc- it was a portion of the Rick tion, $939, 763. Harper was the Warner Auto Mall concept now being apparent low bidder. developed. She said all city (Q 89-2) departments had reviewed the petition and recommended approval #7. RE: A resolution autho- with the following conditions: rizing the execution of a fifth that the city close and sell at supplemental indenture for the fair market value the northern $8,800,000 Salt Lake City, Utah portion of Jefferson Street with Industrial Development Revenue the stipulation that the four-inch Bonds, Landmark Hotel-Airport watermain and two-inch private Holiday Inn project, series 1986. water line be terminated and removed; and that driveway access ACTION: Councilmember Hor- or a turnaround area be provided rocks moved and Councilmember for emergency vehicles. She said Bittner seconded to adopt Resolu- there was a question as to the tion 92 of 1989, which motion city' s interest in the property carried, all members voted aye. because Atlas maps did not indi- (Q 86-18) cate city ownership, but Sidwell maps indicated that it was city property. PUBLIC HEARINGS (P 88-260) #1 RE: A public hearing at #2 RE: A public hearing at 6:20 p.m. to obtain comment con- 6:30 p.m. to obtain comment con- cerning Petition 400-596 submitted cerning Petition 400-713 submitted by Banj Investment requesting that by First Charter Development the city close the alley located requesting that the city rezone at approximately 750 South 25 approximately 35 acres located West; and consider adopting an below the University of Utah's "U" ordinance relating thereto. from "R-1" to "R-lA" classifica- tion; and consider adopting an ACTION: Councilmember Stoler ordinance relating thereto. moved and Councilmember Godfrey seconded to close the public ACTION: Councilmember Stoler hearing, which motion carried, all moved and Councilmember Godfrey members voted aye. seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all Councilmember Godfrey moved members voted aye. and Councilmember Hardman seconded to adopt a draft ordinance, which 89-190 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITx, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 Councilmember Fonnesbeck mov- Councilmember Fonnesbeck said ed and Councilmember Godfrey the cul-de-sacs appeared to be too seconded to approve the petition long and asked if the same re- contingent upon approval of the strictions applied to them, and planned unit development and Mr. McCandless said they were approval of the final access road, private streets. Councilmember which motion carried, all members Fonnesbeck asked if the low densi- voted aye. ty development of .8 units per acre was based upon final approv- DISCUSSION: Allen McCand- al. She also asked what would less, Planning and Zoning, indi- happen if they rezoned the -area- to cated the proposed subdivision on "R-1A" and the developer decided a map and said the request for to sell it, would they then be change in zoning was to accom- able to build more units per acre. modate a single family planned Mr. McCandless said the subdivi- unit development- subdivision sion had not been approved and allowing private roads. He said nothing else had been submitted so that according to the avenues he would recommend that the zoning master plan update it was recom- be approved contingent upon ap- mended that the character of the proval of the PUD. neighborhood be retained, that there should be no excessive Brent Beesley, First Charter heights, and that development Development, stood to answer any should be low density. He said questions the Council might have. there continued to be some dis- Councilmember Fonnesbeck said she agreement among Avenues residents had heard that there was some kind regarding the development of llth of agreement between Mr. Beesley Avenue to facilitate local traffic and someone in the neighborhood between the upper avenues and the regarding the deeding of a small university. He said even though portion of property at the end of the Planning Commission accepted a a cul-de-sac. Mr. Beesley said concept of the eastward extension, someone had approached him about no definite decisions had been donating a one-foot strip of made. property, then he had not heard any more about it. He said he Mr. McCandless said the would be willing to do so if it northeast corner of the project would help. Mr. Beesley said that contained the University of when the Planning Commission Utah' s "U" and it and the buffer addressed this issue they made area around it should not be their approval contingent upon the included in the rezoning. He said fact that it would be developed as the subdivision could be built a low density project and he had without disturbing major 40% no intention of developing it slopes. He said the staff recom- beyond the configuration shown and mended that the zoning be changed if the approval was contingent to "R-lA" , that the zoning be upon that, it would be appropri- conditioned upon the final approv- ate. al and recording of a PUD subdivi- sion, that zoning remain "R-1" DeeDee Corradini, 1600 Toma- until the subdivision was approved hawk Drive, said she had original- for recording, and that the zoning ly felt that the property should change be conditioned upon the not be developed but since it was project being approved as a single going to be developed she felt family detached development. this was the best way. She said 89-191 PROCE. INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI , UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 she had followed the llth Avenue He said that if llth Avenue was issue very closely and was con- extended it would run into a lot vinced that this development did of 40% slopes that would require a not affect the decision on that specific action by the Council to extension. She said she support- amend the existing hillside pres- ed the rezoning because it was ervation ordinance. Councilmember consistent with what should happen Fonnesbeck said if the ordinance there. was approved tonight she felt it should be based on approval of the Carl Dursteller, Virginia PUD and a final access road. She Street, said he supported the also asked if Mr. Beesley would rezoning but was concerned with agree to meet further with the the additional traffic at the neighborhood council to discuss intersection of llth Avenue and the llth Avenue problem. Mr. Virginia Street. He said if a Beesley said he would agree to stop sign were put in, cars tray- that. eling up the hill in the winter (P 89-137) would lose the momentum they needed to make it up the hill. #3 RE: A public hearing at 6:40 p.m. to obtain comment con- Councilmember Fonnesbeck cerning Petition 400-731 submitted asked Mr. Beesley if he had an by Clark Development requesting answer to the question regarding that the city rezone property access through the park on previ- located between Simpson Avenue and ously federally owned property. 1-80 and between Highland Drive Mr. Beesley said his engineers and and 1300 East from residential "R- the parks department had worked 2" and commercial "C-1" to a out a road that would wind up commercial "C-3" classification. through the park and smooth out the cut that was currently there. ACTION: Councilmember God- He said it would provide access to frey moved and Councilmember Sto- two additional parking lots going ler seconded to close the public east, and there would be a turn- hearing, which motion carried, all around near the top of the proper- members voted aye. ty with a gate that would allow pedestrian and bicycle traffic Councilmember Stoler moved through the property to the foot- and Councilmember Horrocks second- hills. He said they would grant ed to approve the rezoning to a an easement to the public for this Commercial "C-3A" subject to the access, and they had already sent following conditions: to Denver for this approval. 1. The development be processed Councilmember Fonnesbeck as a commercial PUD and obtain asked what alternatives there approval from the Planning Commis- would be if Denver refused the sion and the Board of Adjustment granting of this easement. Mr. as expeditiously as possible Beesley said they could build within the requirements of the another road through a right-of- law; way but it would impact the people who lived along the boundary line 2. The rezoning of the proper- and would be a disadvantage. ties shall only become effective Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked Mr. once the first building permit is Beesley for suggestions to solve in order and ready to be issued; the llth Avenue extension problem. 89-192 PROCIIIINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE C110, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 3. The Planning Commission be Councilmember Stoler moved and requested to hold an informal Councilmember Horrocks seconded to hearing to recommend a six month adopt the following legislative moratorium on commercial develop- intents relating to the develop- ment within the area along Par- ment: ley' s Creek that is master planned for Residential Mixed Use and the 1. The development be processed mixed use area north of Parley' s as a commercial PUD as expedi- Creek. During this time, the tiously as possible within the Planning Commission, property legal time limits established; owners, and business community will develop a proper zoning 2. The Planning Commission be district to regulate new develop- requested to hold an informal ment of possible residential hearing to recommend a six month opportunities; moratorium on commercial develop- ment within the area along Par- 4. The petitioner would provide ley' s Creek, and that possible a public open space element for opportunities for residential pedestrian and bicycle circulation development be reviewed; connecting Fairmont Park, Eliza- beth Sherman Parkway, Sugarhouse 3. The petitioner provide a Park, 1200 East, and Parley' s public open space element for Creek. The open space connecting pedestrian and bicycle circulation element should consist of a space connecting Fairmont Park, Eliza- not less than eight feet wide and beth Sherman Parkway, Sugarhouse contain elements of pedestrian Park, 1200 East, and Parley's amenities such as trees, benches, Creek. The open space connecting lights, etc. designed in a theme element should consist of a space consistent with the Sugarhouse not less than 8 feet wide and Beautification Project. (This contain elements of pedestrian motion was later withdrawn. ) amenities such as trees, benches, lights, etc. designed in a theme Councilmember Godfrey moved consistent with the Sugar House and Councilmember Fonnesbeck Beautification Project; and seconded, to amend Condition #3 of Councilmember Stoler' s motion 4. The Wilmington Avenue traf- (above) to read the same as the fic issue not be tied to the PUD language in the Planning Commis- approval. sion' s recommendations (Page 5 #4 ) , which motion failed, all Councilmember Hardman moved members voted nay except Coun- and Councilmember Bittner seconded cilmembers Godfrey and Fonnesbeck to amend Councilmember Stoler's who voted aye. motion that the Planning Commis- sion not consider Issue #10 on Councilmember Stoler moved Page 6 of the Planning Commis- and Councilmember Bittner seconded sion' s July 10th recommendations to rezone the property to C-3A relating to the traffic flow on with the rezoning to become effec- Wilmington Avenue as part of their tive upon the issuance of the site criteria or conditions of approval development permit for the Shopko for the PUD, but that Clark Finan- project, which motion carried, all cial continue to negotiate with members voted aye. the administration on this issue, which motion carried, all members voted aye. 89-193 PROCAINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIO UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 The Council then voted upon 1. Amend the phasing schedule Councilmember Stoler' s motion, of the redevelopment plan to allow which motion carried, all members development of Phase III to pro- voted aye. ceed by recognizing the Shopko project as a market opportunity to DISCUSSION: Bill Wright, provide a 'community level' retail Planning and Zoning, said the shopping opportunity for the Planning Commission felt that now Sugarhouse Business District south was the time to do more detailed of Simpson Avenue; planning to implement a residen- tial component in the Sugarhouse 2. The proposed development business district, especially should be processed as a Commer- along the Parley' s Creek area. He cial Planned Unit Development with said they had also examined the approval from both the Planning financial viability of the Rede- Commission and the Board of Ad- velopment Agency (RDA) as a fi- justment; nancing tool and felt that it might not solve all of the plan- 3. Rezoning of the properties ning issues that needed to be should only become effective once addressed. He said they found the the planning director had certi- proposed development to be compli- fied to the Mayor that all condi- mentary with both the downtown and tions of approval were met and Sugarhouse master plan. He said building permits were in order and they felt that the Sugarhouse ready to be issued; and center must be developed as a whole project, that the Shopko 4. The City Council should development would not perform place a six month moratorium on unless the Simpson Avenue strip commercial development within the center was renovated and the area along Parley' s Creek that was additional space was developed master planned for residential simultaneously. He said they felt host mixed use and the mixed use it needed to be developed through area north of Parley' s Creek. a commercial planned unit develop- During this time, the city, prop- ment for those reasons, to ensure erty owners and the business that the project was developed in community would develop a proper its entirety, and for other zoning district to regulate new technical issues regarding development assuring residential building permits. He said they opportunities; and the city would favored an east west collector develop a public financing strat- street to ensure circulation of egy to clean up and improve Par- additional traffic, and they also ley' s Creek Corridor with ameni- felt a need to connect Fairmont ties to support a residential and Sugarhouse Parks through an development. open space pedestrian "promenade" . Mr. Wright said the Site Design Conditions (based upon Planning Commission recommended review of the submitted site plan approval of the rezoning to at the July 6th Planning Commis- commercial "C-3A" and the closure sion meeting) of public streets and alleys subject to the following 1. Orient the Shopko building conditions: to the north with loading docks on the south along the freeway. Master Plan Conditions Orient the north end of building "J" to align with the promenade 89-194 PROCARINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI , UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 between buildings "K" and "L" and 9. Provide for the mitigation parallel with Highland Drive; of adverse impacts of the Shopko building height and the impact on 2. Provide additional landscap- the back of all new buildings on ing along the freeway to screen Highland Drive through landscap- the loading docks; ing, terracing and adjusting the Shopko building pad to the east 3. Design the 1300 East entry and south; across from I-80 with deceleration lane and design depth and width 10. Construct Wilmington Avenue that meets UDOT and city transpor- as designed in Alternative 1 of tation standards. Design both the "Parking and Circulation Highland Drive and 1300 East Study" . The design speed was entrances as gateways enhanced recommended to be lowered to 25 with landscaping features; mph. Explore the option to phase the regrading of Wilmington with 4. Provide a 24-foot aisle the development of Pad "A" . The width for internal circulation city should participate with the connecting 1300 East with Highland costs of these improvements with Drive aligned with Simpson Ave- property tax increment financing, nue/I-80 off ramp; the revenue generated from the sale of city owned property and 5. Provide a 24-foot aisle possibly a loan from the UDAG width which connects Wilmington repayment account; Avenue with the center of the Shopko site. Alignment with 1200 11. Clark Financial Corporation East is preferred; should exchange property for the 1200 East street dedication for 6. Landscape all parking lots city owned property south of to a standard of 18 square feet Simpson Avenue. The exchange per parking stall and one tree per should be value for value; and six parking stalls; 12. The developer should donate 7. Final project landscape plan any/all viable housing structures must be approved by the planning for relocation to other sites. No director; interior demolition or salvage rights should be retained by the 8. Provide a public open space owner unless the city determined element for pedestrian and bicycle that relocation was not viable. circulation connecting Fairmont Park, Elizabeth Sherman Parkway, John Schumann, chairman of Sugarhouse Park, 1200 East, and the Planning Commission, said they Parley' s Creek. The open space had held four special meetings to connecting element should consist consider and review the Shopko of a space not less than 8-feet development and they felt it would wide and contain elements of be an important development in the pedestrian amenities such as Sugarhouse area. trees, benches, lights, etc. designed in a theme consistent Councilmember Stoler, on with the Sugarhouse Beautification behalf of the Council, thanked Mr. Project. These elements would Schumann and the Planning Commis- need final approval by the plan- sion for all the time and work ning director; they had put forth in regards to the development. 89-195 PROCMINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITz, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 Jim McGuire, Clark Develop- worked out but they were committed ment, also thanked the Planning to do that and get the project off Commission for all the work put the ground. He introduced the forth in reviewing the project. following people who spoke in He displayed and made reference to favor of the development: the original site plan and indi- cated that there had been changes Diana Smoot, Sugarhouse made to it. He then displayed the Community Council, said she had current site plan and said he felt seen deterioration of the it was very much improved with the Sugarhouse area and it was dis- changes they had made. He said 10 heartening to those who lived years ago Clark had been before there and loved the area. She the City Commission ready to said she had many letters from proceed with development in Sugarhouse residents on file. She Sugarhouse and due to the impact said Sugarhouse had been ignored it would have on the downtown for too long and it was time for area, they were not given the positive changes, and that what necessary approvals to proceed happened in Sugarhouse affected with the project. He said he everyone in the city. hoped the present opportunity was not lost, as the Shopko project Merrill Riggs, Sugarhouse would be relocated elsewhere in Chamber of Commerce President, the city. He said the Sugarhouse said the chamber was concerned location had many advantages over about Sugarhouse and they support- the alternate location. He said ed the rezoning issue. He said the development would present a they recognized that the design significant beginning to the needed some changes but they felt revitalization of the Sugarhouse it was a great opportunity for Business District and provide the Sugarhouse and would help the additional retail traffic needed. business district. He said they He said the development would felt it would have very little create 500 new jobs in the area negative impact and they were and the annual sales would be $40 unanimously in support of the million dollars which represented project. $2. 5 million dollars in sales tax revenue and $250, 000 of tax reve- Margot Kadesch, Westminster nue for the city. College, said the College was concerned about what happened to Mr. McGuire said he felt the Sugarhouse and they felt the project would be the catalyst for project would provide opportu- further development in the nities for students and the devel- Sugarhouse area and he had been opment would be a real boon to the overwhelmed by the community college. support they had received for the project. He said they hoped to Steven Richards, Granite bring a 10-plex theater into the Furniture, said he had watched project, as well as two national Sugarhouse become the top area in restaurants, Red Lobster and Olive the west, noted throughout the Garden, and the only issues re- U.S. for it' s ' Sugar Days' and maining to be resolved were site 'Turkey Days' . He said they had plan and economic issues. He said received many calls asking "how in addition they would be adding they did it" . He said he was now 30 new retail shops. Mr. McGuire watching it go downhill. He said said there were a few issues to be Granite had sold most of their 89-196 PROCDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE COIL UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 property to help out other busi- Site Design Conditions, Item nesses and if the project didn't #1, regarding the orientation of go through they would have to the Shopko building to the north convert their business into a and the north end of building "J" distribution center. to align with the promenade be- tween buildings "K" and "L" . Mr. Ray Petterson, Sugarhouse McGuire said they had been able to businessman, said he had surveyed achieve part of that condition by most of the retailers in the area orienting the Shopko building to and every one of them were for the the north which put the loading development saying it would build - docks- on the- south. - traffic substantially in the area. He asked the Council to look at a Item #5, regarding a 24-foot ten year tax abatement as this was aisle width to connect Wilmington not unusual for such a project. Avenue with the center of the Shopko site. Mr. McGuire said it Dick North, Deseret Indus- would cut out the middle of Build- tries, said there were very few ing "K" (Osco Drug) amounting to businesses left in Sugarhouse and about 6, 000 square feet of retail he was anxious for new businesses space valued at almost $500,000. and the positive changes these He said they also saw significant would bring the area. He said vehicle/pedestrian conflict and they had held a ' sidewalk promo- interference with the cross-shop- tion' during the past week and had ping potential. He said there received very little participation were other alternatives they were from the public so they would willing to explore regarding this welcome the development. item. Mr. McGuire read a letter Item #6, regarding one tree from Jac Chappuis, First Inter- for every six parking stalls. Mr. state Bank, expressing his concern McGuire said they had provided for over the Shopko development and one tree for every 7.3 parking that it was a 'make or break' stalls and felt this was a reason- opportunity for the Sugarhouse able compromise. core and its surrounding resi- dents. Item #9, regarding mitigation of adverse impacts of the Shopko Mr. McGuire said Clark was building. Mr. McGuire said they generally in agreement with the had finalized their negotiations Planning Commission' s recommenda- with Shopko in the last two days tions but they had concerns in the and the plan they now had was the following areas: only one Shopko would allow. Item #2 of the Master Plan Item #10, regarding the Conditions, regarding the develop- connection of Sugarmont and ment being processed as a Commer- Wilmington Avenues. He said the cial PUD with approvals from both road recommended by the Planning the Planning Commission and the Commission would go through one of Board of Adjustment. He said their buildings. He said the their concern was one of timing building was approximately 32, 000 since Shopko' s scheduled opening square feet and they anticipated date was October 1990 it left very $320, 000 per year rent from it. little time for delay with negoti- He said the value of the building ations; after improvements would be $3.2 89-197 PROCE.NGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 million, the pad would remain at and letters per day requesting the northwest intersection at a that they open a Red Lobster cost of $350,000, and costs asso- restaurant and they would be ciated with Wilmington Avenue were ready to open in May 1990. $2. 7 million, with a total impact of $5 million, and because of this The following persons spoke in they were not in favor with Item favor of the rezoning: #10. Lloyd Seigendorf, 1998 S 1400 E Item #11, regarding exchange John Thorup, 1679 E 2700 S of properties. Mr. McGuire said Mark Fetzer, 2473 Hartford St there were different ownerships Craig Sutton, 2486 Glenmore St involved as the existing strip Jess Ferre, 1215 Parkway center was owned by two limited Ray Free, 2188 Highland Drive partnerships, of which Clark David Broadbent, 1866 Logan Ave Financial was one. He said the C. Beuhner, 2514 Elizabeth St property to the south was owned Stan Smoot, 2592 Elizabeth St, by Spence Clark and was being Marilyn Beuhner, 2568 Elizabeth developed by Clark Development. Ken Eltinge, 2505 Wilmington Av He said for them to go to the Mike Muir, Fairmont Bowl, other developers and ask them to Sharon Copenza, 1823 Stratford exchange property in order to A. E. Anderson, 2582 Elizabeth facilitate development of Shopko Frank Maylett, 1252 Driggs Av would not be in the other property Willis Dorman-Ligh, 634 E 700 S owners best economic interests Jim McPherson, 454 10th Ave and they would not approve it. He Brent Newton, 4320 S 4190 W said in addition, another lot was Janet Holford, 1262 E Parkway owned by Hygiea Partnership and it would have the same consequence. Those who spoke in favor of the rezoning all expressed the Item #12, regarding donating need for revitalization in the housing for relocation. Mr. Sugarhouse, stating that home McGuire said they were in concur- values had decreased and undesir- rence with this but were not able able businesses such as bars were to pay costs of relocation. He relocating there. They welcomed a said they needed the relocation to new shopping area and the added be accomplished by September 1st. jobs it would mean for students and older persons. Councilmember Hardman asked Mr. McGuire when Shopko would need Mr. Seigendorf was also to break ground, and Mr. McGuire concerned about the reforestation said they needed to have founda- of Sugarhouse to maintain its tions in place this winter so they special character. could begin construction next spring. He said they wanted to Mr. Eltinge, suggested that open in October 1990. He said the Council propose a joint ven- Shopko wanted a pad by November ture between the RDA and Clark as 15th so Clark must begin construc- he felt they would get better tion by August 15th. financing for the project and it would give a better return for Mr. McGuire introduced Lou their investment. Brown of General Mills who repre- sented Red Lobster. Mr. Brown Mr. Anderson said he realized said he received about 50 calls there would be problems with 89-198 JOI,k PROCEOINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CI UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 parking and traffic but felt they Mr. Schumann said Clark had could be resolved. He said Mayor agreed to a majority of the is- Davis of South Salt Lake had sues with modifications, but they offered property in order to get were concerned with Item #2 of the Shopko to locate there but he felt Master Plan Conditions because of it was important that Shopko the critical time element in using locate in Sugarhouse. a PUD. He said it normally took six months to process and would Ms. Dorman-Ligh said she have to be condensed to two. He would like to see equity for the said the alignment of Shopko had Central City community as well, been changed to the north to since they had the same problems. accommodate Item #1 of the Site Design Conditions. He said re- Mr. McPherson questioned why garding Item #5 for a 24-foot money already allocated for demo- aisle way, they needed something lition of houses couldn't also be that worked with the site plan. used for moving the houses. He said there would be no problems with Item #6 regarding landscaping The following people spoke and parking but regarding Item against the rezoning: #10, some alignment of Wilmington Avenue was critical to the project Rawlins Young. 2135 S 1900 E as they anticipated 32,000 cars a Hermoine Jex, SLACC day to the site. He said regard- ing Item #12, Clark kept bringing Mr. Young suggested that no up the fact that there were dif- decision be made at the present, ferent partnerships but they were as they needed to better under- not formed by the Council nor the stand what would happen to Parkway Planning Commission and the other and Wilmington Avenues if other partnerships had already been streets weren't developed. He exchanging properties within questioned what would happen to themselves to make the site viable other businesses and asked what and he felt it was a problem they the public benefits were. Coun- needed to work with. He said cilmember Kirk said they would be Items #5 and #10 were the most addressing those issues next week. critical. Ms. Jex said she was con- Councilmember Fonnesbeck cerned about the "C-1" zoning. She asked if they could work out the said she had heard that the Clark final few items with Clark, and group wanted to put a 10-foot high Mr. Schumann said he felt they sign on a building and she didn't could. think the city would want that. She said that according to the Councilmember Hardman, asked urban tree policy they would need if the discussions with Clark a 100-foot depth strip to plant would be limited to the 12 items trees in order to have an attrac- and what would happen if they tive entrance to the city coming reached a stalemate where neither from Parleys Canyon. She said side was willing to give. Mr. they would need an "R-6" zone for Schumann said they would only be condominiums, and she was also discussing the 12 items and they concerned about a traffic light would do everything they could to being placed at the freeway en- reach the August 15th deadline. trance near Stringham Avenue that would create a backup of cars 89-199 PROCIRINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIO, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 Councilmember Fonnesbeck said ment, said his department recom- the Council still had issues to mended approval of the rezoning to deal with and maybe they could be Commercial "C-3A" subject to the working these problems out simul- following: taneously. 1. ) That the development be Councilmember Horrocks asked processed as a commercial PUD with how much of the 32,000 cars antic- approvals to be obtained from the ipated per day was new traffic and Planning Commission and the Board Steve Meyer, Transportation, said of Adjustment; that when the developer' s consult- ant conducted the traffic impact 2. The rezoning should only study they had used 1984 traffic become effective once the build- counts. Councilmember Stoler said ing permits were in order and there must be a miscalculation ready to be issued; because he figured it to be 10 million trips into the Sugarhouse 3. The Planning Commission section. would be requested to hold an informal hearing to recommend a Councilmember Bittner said six month moratorium on commercial the city had not spent the time development within the area along and money when it was needed to Parley' s Creek that was master put Sugarmont Street through and planned for residential mixed use, she didn't think the developer and the mixed use area north of should have to fund this when it Parley' s Creek. During this time, should have been the city' s re- the Planning Commission, property sponsibility. Councilmember Kirk owners and business community asked if they would be able to would develop a proper zoning compromise on this issue and Mr. district to regulate new develop- Schumann said yes. ment assuring residential opportu- nities; Mr. McGuire said that al- though the development would be 4. The petitioner would provide increasing traffic, many of the a public open space element for trips mentioned earlier were trips pedestrian and bicycle circulation that were already taking place on connecting Fairmont Park, site or going past the site to Elizebeth Sherman Parkway, shopping opportunities outside of Sugarhouse Park, 1200 East, and Sugarhouse. He said the Wilming- Parley' s Creek. The open space ton Avenue issue was the only one connecting element should consist they had concerns with and he felt of a space not less than eight they had reached an impasse. He feet wide and contain elements of said he didn' t know of a solution. pedestrian amenities such as trees, benches, lights, etc. Councilmember Stoler asked if designed in a theme consistent there might be other alternatives with the Sugarhouse Beautification for a roadway with regards to the Project; and McIntyre easements, and Mr. McGuire said that it would isolate 5. Construction of Wilmington the theater from the rest of the Avenue should be similar to the development. design in Alternative 1 of the "Parking and Circulation Study" . Craig Peterson, Director of The design speed was recommended Community and Economic Develop- to be lowered to 25 mph. The city 89-200 PROCE INGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITE, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 should participate with the costs Council, and Mr. Peterson said he of these improvements. Various was not certain, but on rezoning options for the construction and requests if the 30 day provision funding should be explored with did not occur the Council could the administration, act on the matter without a recom- mendation. Mr. Peterson said he felt they had come a long way in the Councilmember Fonnesbeck in- reviewing process and they felt dicated concern about the 20-30% comfortable with the rezoning. He subsidy amount requested of the said they were willing to explore city yet they were at an impasse all options in regards to the with solving the traffic problem. Wilmington Avenue issue and that She also asked Mr. Peterson what by phasing development it allowed he meant by stating that he was them to resolve some of the other willing to do everything possible issues. He said he didn't antici- to get the project through; that pate any problems with the Board if it meant they were going to of Adjustment. accept the financial package it was not what she had heard him say Councilmember Bittner said earlier. she was concerned about the possi- bility of the administration Mr. Peterson said they needed holding the project hostage after to divide the issue as they were the Council gave its approval, if dealing with the land use issue they made it contingent upon the which was a rezoning request and first building permit being issued whether the Council should enact and the Wilmington Avenue issue. that request. He said that was separate from the subsidy issue Mr. Peterson said that in the and they would deal with the past they had always enclosed a subsidy issue next week. protection that the rezoning did not occur until the financing was Councilmember Fonnesbeck said in place, the building permit was that any time the Council had in place, and the project was given a subsidy they had more going forward. He said it was to input in the project, but now she avoid any type of land speculation was hearing, "how dare they ask based on people coming forth with for changes" . Mr. Peterson said proposals that may not be built. that the rezoning was a master He said they would do everything plan issue and subsidies were a possible to ensure that the development decision. project was completed. He said he was committing that they would not The Council discussed the use Wilmington Avenue as a means issue of when the rezoning would of holding hostage the construc- become effective. They talked tion of Shopko. He said however, about making the zoning change they did want the traffic problem effective as of the date of issu- solved. ance of Shopko's site plan permit or building permit. The Council Councilmember Stoler asked if discussed the impact this could there was an ordinance in effect have upon other businesses in this that stated that if the Planning development wishing to get the Commission did not resolve an second and subsequent building issue over a development within 30 permits. days it would revert to the City 89-201 PROCIINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CIS, UTAH TUESDAY, JULY 11, 1989 Council Members also dis- cussed their desire to establish criteria for the approval of the PUD. Roger Cutler, city attorney, pointed out that the city had an ordinance dealing with the estab- lishment and approval of commer- cial PUDs. He recommended that the Council express any concerns regarding the PUD through legisla- tive intent statements. The Council discussed attach- ing legislative intents as condi- tions to the rezoning in order to resolve various concerns about the development. Craig Peterson suggested that the Council approve the rezoning subject to the crite- ria he outlined previously. Mr. Wright indicated that Planning' s intent was that the construction of Shopko would trigger the rezoning of the resi- dential properties. Mayor DePaulis said the administration would work to solve the problems associated with this project. Mr. Cutler said the legislative in- tents would define for the admin- istration where the Council wanted this project to go. The Council discussed the administration' s recommendations then recessed briefly to develop their motions. (P 89-176) The meeting ad 'o rned at 11:40 p.m. A Ili _c pd Ai COUNCI' vCHAIRPE-So ,'' , ' 47 or/ ."--/21.44040420e._ C T R' •o -DER 89-202 Ca lendatz -J011 2Li SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGL.,,DA ' _ izet - k,U. tle �Ily ? CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER CITY & COUNTY BUILDING, 315 - '(CP1iC. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET Tuesday, July 11, 1989 I )11 ) 6:00 P.M. learin — I j / _j�+' - Corn M. OvaA. BRIEFING SESSION: 4:00 - 5:55 P.M. , -' • :"""�•n . 325. 1. Report of the Executive Director. GU IL ate_ cRop -MIA 2. Representatives of the Department of Finance . . - •-partmen . . i .. and Economic Development will brief the City Council on a proposed development by Clark pevelopment Corporation. I. I rri-ID S for of peace. Mork ff n2y B. OPENING CEREMONIES: 1. Invocation. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Approval of the Minutes. 4. The City Council and Mayor will present a resolution congratulating Mark Htnry on being chosen as the U.S.S. Salt Lake City Sai'lorl of the Year . C. COMMENTS: - "V(tee JUM 1. Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. 2. Citizen Comments to the Council. D. CONSENT: 1. Off-Street Parking Policy. Set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, August 1, 1989, at 6: 3C P.M. , to obtain public comment concerning a proposed ordinance implementinc_: revisions in the Off-Street Parking Policy nn (O 89-28) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date. 2. Petition No. 400-723 - Avis Rent-a-Car. Set a date for a non-advertised public hearing to be held Tuesday, August 1 1989, at 6: 20 P.M. , to obtain public comment concerning Petition No. 400-72 submitted by Avis Rent-a-Car requesting Salt Lake City allow a longer time for relocatable office buildings so that they may be used during the actual construction phase of a commercial pr ect. � (P 89-217) i1,UQ h�j ri,G L /lQ fut-LeS• Oak) kez 6kv , �� CvE c� (1 -e. Afffiktued cvw (o(apvney STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date. 3. Interlocal Cooperation Agreement - Utah Motor Vehicle Division. Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the execution of an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Utah State Motor Vehicle Enforcement Division allowing the State Mptor Vehicle Divisic to use the International Airport's firing range. - (1) /10 Choii e (C 89-355) UT) (too tee V stevileit STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. 4. Interlocal Cooperation Agreement - FAA Civil Security,Office. Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the execution of an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Federal Aviation Administration, Civil Aviation Security Field Office allowing members of the FAA's Security Field Office to use the City's International Airport firing range. (C 89-357) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. 5. Interlocal Cooperation Agreement - Utah State Dept. of Commerce. Consider adopting a resolution authorizing the execution of an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the State of Utah, Motor Carrier Section Department of Commerce allowing state motor carrier peace officers to use the City's International Airport firing range (C 89-356) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. 6. Jazz Arena UDAG Application. Set a date for a public hearing to be held Tuesday, July 18, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. , to obtain public comment concerning the submission of an application to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for an Urban Development Action Grant to support the establishment of a district energy facility that may supply heating, cooling, and electrical energy to the ne Jazz Arena and other buildings in the downtowil area. (T89-} ) - I��a-hon C(rkn e 04- (Yl �+ lVwh rte Coa/u4) ,4 ) - f Flo Ci'f t. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set date. ! E. NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS_ 7 / Um,G?old 1. Legislative Action: Council Member Bittner. Consider adopting an ordinance to rezone the property located between Nortr. Temple and 600 North and 700 West and the Jordan River from "R-2" and "B-3" to "R-1" classification. (P89 - 231) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Refer to Planning Commission 2. Legislative Action: Council Member Horrocks. Consider adopting an ordinance to rezone the area between Redwood Road/Surplus Canal and approximately 3000 West and Indiana Avenue to 2100 South Streets from "M-3" to "Mi-A" and "C-2" classifications. (P89 - 232) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Refer to Planning Commission 3. Legislative Action: Council Member Horrocks. Consider adopting an ordinance to rezone property between 700 West and I-1S and 1300 South and 1700 South Streets from "M-1" to "M1-A" classification. (P89 - 233) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Refer tL Planning Commission 4. Legislative Action: Council Member Horrocks. Consider adopting an ordinance to rezone property between 700 West and I-15 and 700 South and 1300 South Streets from "M-2" to "M-1A" classification. (P89 - 234) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Refer to Planning Commission 5. Legislative Action: Council Member Horrocks. Consider adopting an ordinance to rezone the area between the Jordan River and 700 West and 900 South and California Avenue from "R-4" and "R-2" to "R 1" classification. (P89 - 235) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Refer to Planning Commission F. UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS: 1. Compensation Plan Consider adopting an ordinance amending Section 2.52.010 of the Salt Lake City Code, as last amended by Bill No. 35 of 1989 relating to compensation of Salt Lake City Corporation officers and employees, including statutory officers. (0 89-20) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. 2. Memorandum of Understanding, Salt Lake City Police Association. Consider adopting an ordinance approving a Memorandum of Understanding between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Salt Lake City Police Association. (C 89-310) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. „,,A T)\ -(14°Al° Ow- (111 ) Memorandum of Understanding, International Firefighters Association - 1645. L- iao a� G c Consider adopting an ordinance approving a Memorandum of Understanding t f between Salt Lake City Corporation and the International Association of V(1 % Firefighters, Local 1645. (C 89-309) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. 4. Memorandum of Understanding - AFSCME - 200 Series. Consider adopting an ordinance approving a Memorandum of Understanding between Salt Lake City Corporation and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004 for Salt Lake City"s 200 Series Employees. (C 89-308) STAFF dECOMMENDATION: Adopt. 5. Compensation Plan _ 100 Series Employees` Consider adopting an ordinance approving a Memorandum of Understanding between Salt Lake City Corporation and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004 for Salt Lake City Corporation's 100 Series Employees. (C 89-307) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. c •hn5 , 6. Special Improvement District 38_808: California Avenue al ..Mam., r\ Consider adopting a resolution conditionally accepting a bid for construction work and, subject to approval of the City Engineer, authorizing execution of a construction contract with the Certified Low-Bidder for construction of improvements of Salt Lake City, California Avenue Special Improvement District No. 38-808 providing for construction of designated widths of roadway pavement, concrete curb and gutter, turn lanes, asphalt shoulders, street drainage facilities, water distribution lines and laterals, sewer collection lines and laterals, traffic signalization, paving of intersections, turnarounds, intersections and median improvements, and all other miscellaneous work necessary to complete the improvement; for issuance of interim warrants and for the addition of the interest thereon to assessable costs. (Q89-2) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. li:ustrial Development Revenue Bond: Airport Holiday Inn ��M J I\� sider adopting a resolution authorizing the execution of a fifth plemental indenture for the $8,000,000 Salt Lake City, Utah Industrial Al \? elopment Revenue Bonds (Landmark Hotel-Airport Holiday Inn Project) '`" ies 1986. 6 - 18) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. G. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Petition No. 400-596 - Banj Investment. 6: 20 P.M Obtain public comment concerning Petition No. 400-596 submitted by Banj Investment requesting Sal 'Lake City close the alley located at approximately 750 South 7 West; and consider adopting an ordinance relating thereto— pail-pail- of 41 lOcrner- cord alewa1 4 A (P 88-260) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Close Hearing and Adopt. 2. Petition No. 400-713 -- First Charter Development Corporatio 6:30 P.M. AIL(i/l'tUb.� Obtain public comment concerning Petition No. 400-713 submitted by First Charter Development Corporation requesting Salt Lake City to rezone approximately 35 acres located below the University of Utah's "U" from "R-1" to "R-1A" classification; and consider adot_,cing an ordinance relating thereto. k (� (P 89-137) c� , � \� V). p� STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Close Hearing and opt. o� 3. Petition No. 400-731 - Clark Development.6:40 P.M. au( ' / f Obtain public comment concerning Petition No. 400-731 submitted by Clark Development requesting the City rezone property located between Simpson Avenue and Interstate 80 and between Highland Drive and 1300 East Street from Residential "R-2" and Commercial "C-1" to a Commercial "C-3" classification. (P 89-176) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Close Hearing. H. ADJOURNMENT. ** FINAL ACTION MAY BE TAKEN AM)/OR ORDINANCES ADOPTED CONCERNING ANY ITEM ON THIS AGED DATED: Jul 7, 1989 BY: ER STATE OF UTAH ) COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) ss. On the 7th day of July, 1989, I personally delivered a copy of the foregoing notic to the Mayor and City Council and posted copies of the same in conspicuous view, a the following times and locations within City and County Building, 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. At 5:00 P.M. in the City Recorder's Office, Room 415; and 2. At 5:00 P.M. in the Newsroom, Room 343. AlOr 411147.4 CITY ' Coals Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7th day of July, 11 . a Public residing in the Stat of Utah My C tai264•oR-Ex ,� �K.j_,� a Public I LYNDArt o DOMINO _ 4 W114°'� IM .sa c tv Utth 84 tt I � pry Coiday mmu,i s aim State of Utah APPROVAL: E C IVE D RECTOR PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met as the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, June 13, 1989, at 5:00 p.m. in Room 325, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Sydney Fonnesbeck Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting. Cindy Gust-Jenson distributed a been made. She said that the copy of the agenda addendum con- list of legislative intents was cerning using 14th Year Community still the same except for the Development Block Grant monies to addition of one intent. fund the transportation of plants for CDBG eligible areas. Council Ms. Gust-Jenson said the Coun- Member Stoler informed the Council cil would have to meet on Thurs- that a greenhouse operation was day, June 15, 1989, to correct a going out of business in Cali- mistake in the water and sewer fornia and a member of a Salt Lake rate ordinance notice if the community council, who had a Council wanted to include a rebate contact at the business, suggested program. She said the Council that Salt Lake might want to could give tentative approval in acquire the plants instead of the Council meeting on June 13, letting them be destroyed. So, he but would have to ratify it on said, the Capital Planning staff June 15. She reviewed the motions brought the idea before the Coun- regarding various scenarios in- cil. volving the water and sewer rates and said that Jim Lewis of Public Ms. Gust-Jenson said that since Utilities would be in the meeting the original offer was made, many to answer questions. of the plants had been sold to other greenhouses and the staff Ms. Gust-Jenson reviewed the was no longer sure that the idea agenda saying that the staff was still feasible. Council recommendations for the items Members asked about the type and remained the same as printed. She quality of plants being offered said that Jeff Brimhall, financial and the cost for storing and advisor from Ehrlich Bober, would planting. . Ms. Gust-Jenson said it be available to answer questions would take additional staff work about the Special Improvement to determine if the City would District bonds, and that Buzz benefit from the plants and sug- Hunt, City Treasurer, would be gested that the Council could available to answer question approve the expenditure contingent concerning the Tax Anticipation on staff review. Revenue bonds. Ms. Gust-Jenson then distri- Council Chair Stoler said Ms. buted and reviewed the proposed Gust-Jenson approached him about motions saying that the new ver- closing the office Friday, June sion had the dollar values insert- 16, 1989, to allow the staff a day ed and some technical changes had off to recover from the budget. There were no objections. 89-162 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in regular session on Tuesday, June 13, 1989, at 6:00 p.m. in Room 315, City Council Chambers, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Wayne Horrocks Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Sydney Fonnesbeck Mayor Palmer DePaulis, Roger Cutler, City Attorney, Kathryn Marshall, City Recorder, and Lynda Domino, Chief Deputy City Recorder, were present. Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting and Councilmember Godfrey conducted the meeting. OPENING CEREMONIES Central Business Improvement District Board of Directors. #1. The invocation was given (I 89-11) by Police Chaplain Ferdinand Johnson. #2. RE: Setting a date for a public hearing for Tuesday, July #2. The Council led the 11, 1989, at 6:40 p.m. to obtain Pledge of Allegiance. public comment concerning Petition No. 400-731 submitted by Clark #3. Councilmember Kirk moved Development requesting that Salt and Councilmember Hardman seconded Lake City rezone property located to approve the minutes of the Salt between Simpson Avenue and Inter- Lake City Council for the regular state 80 and between Highland meetings held Tuesday, June 6, Drive and 1300 East Street from 1989, and Thursday, June 8, 1989, Residential "R-2" and Commercial which motion carried, all members "C-1" to a Commercial "C-3" clas- voted aye. sification. (M 89-1) (P 89-176) #3. RE: Setting a date for a COMMENTS public hearing for Tuesday, July 18, 1989, at 6:50 p.m. to obtain There were no comments to the public comment concerning Petition Mayor or Council. No. 400-732 submitted by Clark Development requesting that Salt Lake City vacate public streets CONSENT AGENDA and alleys in the area located between Simpson Avenue and Inter- Councilmember Bittner moved state 80 and between Highland and Councilmember Kirk seconded to Drive and 1300 East Street. approve the consent agenda, which (P 89-177) motion carried, all members voted aye. #4. RE: Setting a date for a public hearing for Tuesday, July #1. RE: Approving the ap- 18, 1989, at 6:20 p.m. to obtain pointment of James Stewart to the public comment concerning Petition 89-163 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 No. 400-668 submitted by Club ACTION: Without objection DejaVu requesting that Salt Lake Councilmember Godfrey pulled this City change the license ordinance item from the agenda. concerning location restrictions for Class B Private Clubs. DISCUSSION: Councilmember (P 89-173) Stoler explained that Ken Eltinge, Sugar House Community Council and #5. RE: Setting a date for initiator of this project, had a public hearing for Tuesday, July contacted the business in Cali- 18, 1989, at 6:30 p.m. to obtain fornia that had the plants and public comment concerning Petition discovered that the plants were No. 400-710 submitted by Thelma useless for Salt Lake City. He and Gilbert Iker requesting that said Mr. Eltinge asked him to Salt Lake City rezone a portion of thank the Council, Mayor and City their property at 1307 South 900 Staff for their time and effort West form Residential "R-2" to a regarding this idea but said at Business "B-3" classification. this point it would be a waste of (P 89-174) money to transport the plants to Salt Lake. #6. RE: Setting a date for (T 89-12) a public hearing to be held Tues- day, July 18, 1989, at 6:40 p.m. to obtain public comment concern- UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS ing Petition No. 400-669 submitted by William and Mary Ann DeNiro #1. RE: A resolution autho- requesting that Salt Lake City rizing the issuance and providing rezone property located at 360-366 for the sale of Salt Lake City South 900 West from a Residential $650,000 Special Assessment Bonds, "R-6" to a Business "B-3" classi- Series 1989, Concrete Replacement fication. Special Improvement District No. (P 89-175) 40-R-13 (Non-Contiguous Streets) providing for the pricing and terms of the bonds, prescribing NEW COUNCIL BUSINESS the form of bonds, the maturity and denomination of said bonds; #1. RE: An ordinance amending providing for the continuance of Title 12, Chapter 44, Section 210, a guaranty fund; authorizing and Subparagraph A, of the Salt Lake approving the form of a bond City Code, 1988, relating to stop purchase agreement and the offi- intersections and re-lettering cial statement, and related mat- subsequent subparagraphs. ters. ACTION: Without objection ACTION: Councilmember Kirk Councilmember Godfrey referred moved and Councilmember Hardman this to the consent agenda. seconded to adopt Resolution 84 of (0 89-27) 1989, which motion carried, all members voted aye. #2. RE: A motion reducing (Q 87-3) the 14th Year Community Develop- ment Block Grant fund contingency #2. RE: A resolution autho- by $7, 500 to $13, 785 and allo- rizing the issuance and providing cating $7, 500 to fund the trans- for the sale of Salt Lake City portation of plants for CDBG eli- $144,000 Special Assessment Bonds, gible areas. Series 1989, Concrete Special 89-164 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 Improvement District No. 40-R-16 es; and related matters. (Avenues Cross Drain Project) providing for the pricing and ACTION: Councilmember Kirk terms of the bonds, prescribing moved and Councilmember Bittner the form of bonds, the maturity seconded to adopt Resolution 87 of and denomination of said bonds; 1989, which motion carried, all providing for the continuance of a members voted aye. guaranty fund; authorizing and approving the form of a bond DISCUSSION: Jeff Brimhall, purchase agreement and the offi- Ehrlich-Bober, said they received cial statement, and related mat- 12 bids which were very competa- ters. tive. He said the winning bidder was Morgan Stanley and the net ACTION: Councilmember Kirk effective interest rate was 5.84%, moved and Councilmember Bittner which was very good. seconded to adopt Resolution 85 of (Q 89-4) 1989, which motion carried, all members voted aye. #5. RE: An ordinance amend- (Q 88-2) ing Sections 17 . 16. 670 and 17.72. - 030 of the Salt Lake City Code #3. RE: A resolution autho- relating to water and sewer rates. rizing the issuance and providing for the sale of Salt Lake City ACTION: Councilmember Bittner $280, 000 Special Assessment Bonds, moved and Councilmember Hardman Series 1989, 900 West Curb and seconded to adopt Ordinance 33 of Gutter Extension Special Improve- 1989, amending Section 17. 16. 670, ment District No. 38-757 providing 17. 16. 680 and 17.72.030, to re- for the pricing and terms of the flect an increase in city water bonds, prescribing the form of rates to 43C for city residents bonds, the maturity and denomina- and 64C for non-city residents tion of said bonds; providing for offset by a decrease in sewer the continuance of a guaranty rates to 800, and increasing the fund; authorizing and approving minimum charge to $6.45, which the form of a bond purchase agree- motion carried, all members voted ment and the official statement, aye, except Councilmembers Fonnes- and related matters. beck and Godfrey who voted nay. ACTION: Councilmember Kirk Councilmember Hardman moved moved and Councilmember Bittner and Councilmember Bittner sec- seconded to adopt Resolution 86 of onded to adopt Ordinance 33 of 1989, which motion carried, all 1989 amending Sections 17. 16. 670, members voted aye. 17 . 16. 680 and 17 .72.030 of the (Q 87-2) Salt Lake City Code to reflect an increase in city water rates #4. RE: A resolution autho- offset by a decrease in sewer rizing the issuance and confirming rates as proposed by the Depart- the sale of the $17, 500,000 Tax ment of Public Utilities, and and Revenue Anticipation Notes, establishing a low-income abate- Series 1989, of Salt Lake City; ment program, which motion car- providing for covenants to estab- ried, all members voted aye except lish and maintain the excludabil- Councilmember Kirk who voted nay. ity of interest on the notes from (This motion required ratification gross income of the holders there- on Thursday, June 15, 1989. ) of for federal income tax purpos- 89-165 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 DISCUSSION: Jim Lewis, public abatement would see a net decrease utilities, outlined several op- of $3.00 per year. He said either tions. He said the Mayor' s pro- the Mayor' s proposal or the second posal increased the minimum by or third options he outlined would $1 .00 and the usage by 40; the generate the same amount of mon- second option was to increase the ey - $2, 000, 000 for capital im- minimum by 750 and the usage rate provements; the abatement would by 50; the third option was to decrease this amount by $30, 254. increase the minimum by 500 and the usage by 60. Councilmember Godfrey said with the usage rate increase it He said the Mayor' s proposal seemed that if some users ' rates would basically increase the would be lower then the other rate annual water bill for a small users would subsidize them. Mr. residential unit by $12.00 and Lewis said this would shift the decrease the sewer bill by $4.80 burden from the small users to the resulting in a total net increase heavy users and would change from of $7. 20 per year. He said the a fixed monthly minimum rate to a average residential bill would variable rate based on seasonal increase about $19.04 per year fluctuations. minus a $5.40 sewer decrease which would be a total of $13. 64 more Councilmember Hardman asked per year. He said the second who was typically the small user. option would realize a $9.00 Mr. Lewis said the small user was increase in the water rate with a one or two people in a small home $4. 80 decrease in sewer which with a small yard. An average would be $4. 20 more per year, and residential user would be someone the last option would increase the with a larger yard who used over water by $6 . 00 per year with a the minimum. $4. 80 sewer decrease for a total increase of $1. 20 per year. Councilmember Bittner said she was concerned about the senior He said if the Council in- citizens who did not qualify or cluded an abatement program, were not eligible for the abate- qualifying owners would realize an ment program. She said a lot of additional 600 per month decrease those people were in small homes or $7. 20 per year. Councilmember with one or two people so the Fonnesbeck asked what the impact second option would bring the of this would be on the budget and sewer rate decrease and the water Mr. Lewis said it would cause a rate increase closer together and decrease of $30, 254. they would not see a big change on their water bill. Councilmember Godfrey re- ferred to the options Mr. Lewis Councilmember Horrocks asked outlined and asked if they already how much money was in the capital included the abatement. Mr. Lewis improvement budget. Mr. Lewis said they did not and added that said they currently budgeted if the Council included the abate- $5, 000, 000 for next year, with ment program with the second and $2, 000, 000 realized from the rate third options he outlined, the increase. He said $1, 500, 000 was annual bill would be reduced by an for watershed land purchase which additional $7. 20; so under the would decrease the capital im- second option, the small residen- provement budget to $3, 500, 000. tial user who qualified for the 89-166 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 In reference to the rate those senior citizens who quali- changing from fixed to variable, fied. He said currently they Mayor DePaulis asked what effect could take advantage of the abate- this would have. Mr. Lewis said ment for the garbage collection during a very dry year with enough fee and he thought their should be water to supply, the department a program available for utilities could generate more money; during since they were a basic necessity. a very wet year they would gen- erate a lot less. He said if they Councilmember Godfrey asked had a dry year and not enough if with the abatement some people water to sell, they wouldn't gen- would pay less than they were erate as much money. Council- presently. Mr. Lewis said that member Bittner pointed out that people who qualified for the this variable income was only a abatement program could realize a small portion of their revenue. $3.00 per year decrease in their combined water and sewer bill. The Mayor asked if under the (0 89-16) sewer decrease the big water users would benefit the most. Mr. Lewis #6. RE: An ordinance enact- said they would get a large share ing Section 15. 16.070 of the Salt of the rate reduction since the Lake City Code providing for sewer rate was based on sewer admission fees to Tracy Aviary. usage during the winter months and the large users paid a large ACTION: Councilmember Hor- share. rocks moved and Councilmember Hardman seconded to adopt Ordi- Councilmember Kirk asked Mr. nance 34 of 1989 charging $.75 Lewis if they had considered the for persons 6 to 12 years and variable rate. Mr. Lewis said $1.25 for persons 13 to 64 years, their board considered it and which motion carried, all members recommended the Mayor' s proposal. voted aye except Councilmember Bittner who voted nay. Councilmember Bittner indi- cated the variable rate would be Councilmember Hardman moved more equitable since the big water and Councilmember Horrocks sec- users would pay more for water but onded to increase the parks de- would benefit more from the sewer partment aviary fund by $30, 000 to decrease. Mr. Lewis said this was reflect an increase in aviary possible although each user was entrance fees to fund the security different and it was hard to draw contract at the aviary, which a good comparison. motion carried, all members voted aye. In regards to adopting the abatement program, Roger Cutler, DISCUSSION: Mayor DePaulis city attorney, said there was a said the fees would address the question as to whether or not this security guard issue. was adequately noticed on the agenda so he said this would have Councilmember Hardman said to be renoticed and ratified at a the $30, 000 to fund the security subsequent meeting. contract would come from the fees to be charged. Councilmember Hardman said he thought it was important to pro- Councilmember Bittner asked vide an abatement program for what would happen if the city didn' t get $30,000 in fees. 89-167 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 Councilmember Hardman said the #10. RE: An ordinance city had projected getting $133, - amending Section 2. 52. 115 of the 000. Mrs. Bittner said the fees Salt Lake City Code relating to were also going to be used to pay compensation and benefits for Salt for other projects in addition to Lake City Corporation 400 Series the security guard. Mayor Employees. DePaulis said the security guard would have a higher priority. ACTION: Councilmember Fon- (0 89-17) nesbeck moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to table this to #7. RE: An ordinance amend- July 11, 1989, which motion car- ing Section 2. 52.010 of the Salt ried, all members voted aye. Lake City Code, as last amended by (0 89-21 ) Bill No. 44 of 1988 relating to compensation of Salt Lake City #11. RE: A resolution Corporation officers and employ- approving a Memorandum of Under- ees, including statutory officers. standing between Salt Lake City Corporation and the American ACTION: Councilmember Kirk Federation of State, County and moved and Councilmember Fonnesbeck Municipal Employees, Local 1004 seconded to adopt Ordinance 35 of for Salt Lake City's 200 Series 1989, which motion carried, all employees. members voted aye. (0 89-20) ACTION: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Bittner #8. RE: A resolution ap- seconded to table this to July 11, proving a Memorandum of Under- 1989, which motion carried, all standing between Salt Lake City members voted aye. Corporation and the Salt Lake City (C 89-308) Police Association. #12. RE: A resolution ACTION: Councilmember Kirk approving a Memorandum of Under- moved and Councilmember Fonnesbeck standing between Salt Lake City seconded to table this to July 11, Corporation and the American 1989, which motion carried, all Federation of State, County and members voted aye. Municipal Employees, Local 1004 (C 89-310) for Salt Lake City Corporation' s 100 Series employees. #9. RE: A resolution ap- proving a Memorandum of Under- ACTION: Councilmember Kirk standing between Salt Lake City moved and Councilmember Bittner Corporation and the International seconded to table this to July 11, Association of Firefighters, Local 1989, which motion carried, all 1645. members voted aye. (C 89-307) ACTION: Councilmember Hard- man moved and Councilmember Kirk #13. RE: An ordinance seconded to table this to July 11, adopting final budgets of Salt 1989, pending ratification of the Lake City, Utah, including the contract by the union membership, library fund budget, for the which motion carried, all members fiscal year beginning July 1, voted aye. 1989, and ending June 30, 1990. (C 89-309) 89-168 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 ACTION: REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS onded to increase general fund revenue fund projections by an ad- Enterprise Funds ditional $30, 000 to reflect an in- crease in Tracy Aviary entrance Councilmember Hardman moved fees, which motion carried, all and Councilmember Fonnesbeck sec- members voted aye. onded to decrease water utility fund projected revenues by $30, 254 Councilmember Kirk moved and to reflect the implementation of a Councilmember Fonnesbeck seconded low-income abatement program, to increase general fund revenue which motion carried, all members projections by an additional voted aye. $30,000 to reflect a reimbursement by the state for election costs, General Fund which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Hardman seconded to EXPENDITURE ADJUSTMENTS adjust the general fund revenues to reflect current projections as Enterprise Funds follows: Increase the projected property tax revenue by $294, 172 Councilmember Kirk moved and and decrease projected franchise Councilmember Bittner seconded to tax collections by $120, 640, which decrease the airport fund contri- motion carried, all members voted butions to employee health insur- aye. ance premiums by $31, 800, which motion carried, all members voted Councilmember Kirk moved and aye. Councilmember Hardman seconded to increase general fund revenue pro- Councilmember Kirk moved and jections by $100, 000 to reflect a Councilmember Hardman seconded to transfer from the central fire increase the airport fund admini- dispatch fund balance, which mo- strative service charges paid to tion carried, all members voted the general fund by $19, 657, which aye. motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Bittner seconded to Councilmember Kirk moved and increase general fund revenue pro- Councilmember Hardman seconded to jections by an additional $47, 600 increase the airport fund contin- to reflect a transfer from the gency by $12, 143, which motion worker' s compensation fund bal- carried, all members voted aye. ance, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Refuse Collection Fund Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Bittner seconded to Councilmember Hardman seconded to increase general fund revenue pro- decrease the refuse collection jections by an additional $63, 844 fund contribution to employee reflecting the repayment of the health insurance premiums by PEHP deficit, which motion car- $2, 668, which motion carried, all ried, all members voted aye. members voted aye. Councilmember Hardman moved Councilmember Kirk moved and and Councilmember Fonnesbeck sec- Councilmember Fonnesbeck seconded 89-169 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 to increase the refuse collection Public Utilities fund administrative service charg- es paid to the general fund by Councilmember Kirk moved and $1, 569, which motion carried, all Councilmember Horrocks seconded to members voted aye. decrease the water utility con- tribution to employee health Councilmember Kirk moved and insurance premiums by $35, 376, Councilmember Bittner seconded to which motion carried, all members increase the refuse collection voted aye. fund contingency by $1, 099, which motion carried, all members voted Councilmember Kirk moved and aye. Councilmember Horrocks seconded to increase the water utility admin- Golf Course Fund istrative service charges paid to the general fund by $20, 709, which Councilmember Hardman moved motion carried, all members voted and Councilmember Kirk seconded to aye. decrease the golf course fund contribution to employee health Councilmember Kirk moved and insurance premiums by $4, 212, Councilmember Horrocks seconded to which motion carried, all members increase the water utility fund voted aye. contingency by $14, 667, which motion carried, all members voted Councilmember Hardman moved aye. and Councilmember Fonnesbeck seconded to increase the golf Councilmember Kirk moved and course fund administrative service Councilmember Hardman seconded to charges paid to the general fund decrease the sewer utility contri- by $2,454, which motion carried, bution to employee health insur- all members voted aye. ance premiums by $15, 084, which motion carried, all members voted Councilmember Hardman moved aye. and Councilmember Kirk seconded to increase the golf course fund Councilmember Kirk moved and contingency by $1, 758, which Councilmember Hardman seconded to motion carried, all members voted increase the sewer utility fund aye. administrative service charges paid to the general fund by Councilmember Kirk moved and $8, 831, which motion carried, all Councilmember Hardman seconded to members voted aye. transfer $20, 726 from the golf course fund personal services to Councilmember Kirk moved and contingency and eliminate 2.08 FTE Councilmember Hardman seconded to reflecting the elimination of .35 increase the sewer utility fund FTE seasonal golf marshal and 1.73 contingency by $6, 253, which FTE golf seasonal grounds keepers, motion carried, all members voted which motion failed, Council- aye. members Bittner, Horrocks, Fonnes- beck, Stoler voted nay and Coun- Councilmember Hardman moved cilmembers Hardman, Godfrey, and and Councilmember Bittner seconded Kirk voted aye. to decrease the water utility capital improvement fund budget by $30, 254 reflecting a decrease in revenues as a result of the low- 89-170 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 income abatement program, which members voted aye, except Council- motion carried, all members voted member Fonnesbeck who was absent aye except Councilmember Fonnes- for the vote. beck who was absent for the vote. Councilmember Kirk moved and GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENTS Councilmember Horrocks seconded to decrease the fleet maintenance in- Across the Board ternal service fund charge for employee health insurance premiums Councilmember Kirk moved and by $9,304, which motion carried, Councilmember Hittner seconded to all members voted aye except increase the general fund budget Councilmember Fonnesbeck who was by $386, 525 to reflect changes in absent for the vote. personal services, which motion carried, all members voted aye Councilmember Kirk moved and except Councilmember Fonnesbeck Councilmember Hardman seconded to who was absent for the vote. increase the fleet maintenance internal service fund administra- Councilmember Kirk moved and tive service charge paid to the Councilmember Horrocks seconded to general fund by $5, 453, which decrease risk management premiums motion carried, all members voted paid by all funds by a total of aye. $9,397 to be applied department by department as follows: Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Hittner seconded to Finance - $ 696 increase the fleet maintenance in- Police - 2, 898 ternal service fund contingency by Public Works - 1, 536 $3, 851, which motion carried, all Parks and Recreation - 967 members voted aye. Community/Economic Development - 421 Councilmember Kirk moved and Administrative Services - 390 Councilmember Horrocks seconded to Mayor - 86 decrease the information manage- Fire Department - 2, 091 ment services internal service Attorney' s Office - 115 fund charge for employee health Human Resource Management 120 insurance premiums by $6,048, Council Office - 77 which motion carried, all members voted aye. $9, 397 Councilmember Kirk moved and which motion carried, all members Councilmember Horrocks seconded to voted aye except Councilmember increase the information manage- Fonnesbeck who was absent for the ment services internal service vote. fund administrative service charge paid to the general fund by Administrative Services $3, 533, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Hardman seconded to Councilmember Kirk moved and appropriate $5, 179 from infor- Councilmember Hardman seconded to mation management services inter- increase the information manage- nal service fund balance to re- ment services internal service flect changes in personal ser- vices, which motion carried, all 89-171 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 fund contingency by $2, 515, which seconded to decrease the govern- motion carried, all members voted mental immunity internal service aye. fund charge for employee health insurance premiums by $320, which Councilmember Fonnesbeck motion carried, all members voted moved and Councilmember Kirk aye. seconded to increase the fleet management internal service fund Councilmember Fonnesbeck appropriation of fund balance by moved and Councilmember Kirk $55, 000, which motion carried, all seconded to increase the govern- members voted aye. mental immunity internal service fund administrative service charg- Councilmember Fonnesbeck es paid to the general fund by moved and Councilmember Kirk $186, which motion carried, all seconded to decrease fleet manage- members voted aye. ment internal service fund reve- nues from the general fund by Councilmember Fonnesbeck $155,000, which motion carried, moved and Councilmember Horrocks all members voted aye. seconded to increase the govern- mental immunity internal service Councilmember Fonnesbeck fund contingency by $134, which moved and Councilmember Kirk sec- motion carried, all members voted onded that the administrative ser- aye. vices election budget be increased by $30, 000 to cover the costs of a City Council statewide referendum, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Fonnesbeck moved and Councilmember Kirk sec- Councilmember Fonnesbeck onded to decrease the city council moved and Councilmember Horrocks office budget by $1, 512 to reflect seconded to decrease the admini- a correction of Council Member strative services, office of the salaries, which motion carried, director, by $101,427 to reflect all members voted aye. the elimination of two FTEs as a result of consolidation of the Community and Economic Development departments of administrative ser- vices and human resource manage- Councilmember Fonnesbeck ment, which motion carried, all moved and Councilmember Hardman members voted aye. seconded to increase the general fund transfers to the demolition Councilmember Fonnesbeck special revenue fund by $5,000 to moved and Councilmember Kirk meet existing needs, which motion seconded to decrease the admini- carried, all members voted aye. strative services, fleet replace- ment fund, by $100,000 to be a net Finance reduction accommodating offsetting increased maintenance costs, which Councilmember Fonnesbeck motion carried, all members voted moved and Councilmember Bittner aye. seconded to reduce the finance department budget by $27, 540 to Attorney's Office eliminate funding for land rentals which was budgeted under the parks Councilmember Fonnesbeck department CIP fund, which motion moved and Councilmember Kirk carried, all members voted aye. 89-172 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, NNE 13, 1989 Councilmember Fonnesbeck Human Resource Management moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to reduce the finance Councilmember Fonnesbeck department budget by $2, 610 to moved and Councilmember Kirk eliminate funding for employee seconded to decrease the risk parking which was budgeted under management internal service fund support services, which motion charges for employee health in- carried, all members voted aye. surance premiums by $1, 140, which motion carried, all members voted Councilmember Bittner moved aye. and Councilmember Kirk seconded that the finance department budget Councilmember Fonnesbeck be reduced by $36, 900 eliminating moved and Councilmember Kirk sec- funding for one internal auditor onded to increase the risk manage- but that the FTE not be reduced, ment internal service fund admini- which motion carried, all members strative service fee charges paid voted aye except Councilmember to the general fund by $665, which Fonnesbeck who voted nay. motion carried, all members voted aye. Fire Department Councilmember Fonnesbeck Councilmember Fonnesbeck moved and Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Kirk sec- seconded to reduce the risk man- onded to decrease the E911 dis- agement internal service fund patch special revenue fund charges payment to PEHP by $242, 000 and for employee health insurance reduce insurance premium revenues premiums by $1, 344, which motion by $242, 000, which motion carried, carried, all members voted aye. all members voted aye. Councilmember Fonnesbeck Councilmember Fonnesbeck moved and Councilmember Bittner moved and Councilmember Kirk sec- seconded to increase the E911 dis- onded to reduce the risk manage- patch special revenue fund admini- ment internal service fund contri- strative service fee charges paid bution to fund balance by $191, - to the general fund by $789, which 599, which motion carried, all motion carried, all members voted members voted aye. aye. Councilmember Fonnesbeck Councilmember Fonnesbeck moved and Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Kirk sec- seconded to appropriate $47, 600 of onded to increase the E911 dis- worker' s compensation fund balance patch special revenue fund contin- to transfers to the general fund, gency by $555, which motion car- which motion carried, all members ried, all members voted aye. voted aye. Councilmember Fonnesbeck Councilmember Hardman moved moved and Councilmember Kirk and Councilmember Bittner seconded seconded to appropriate $100, 000 to decrease the risk management of central fire dispatch fund internal service fund by $20, 000 balance to transfers to the gen- to reflect the elimination of the eral fund, which motion carried, Section 89 consulting fees, which all members voted aye. motion carried, all members voted aye except Councilmember Fonnes- beck who voted nay. 89-173 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 Parks and Recreation that the capital improvement pro- gram, Main Street drainage im- Councilmember Hardman moved provement project, between South and Councilmember Horrocks second Temple and 300 South be increased to decrease the parks department by $20,000 to be funded from personal services by $10, 603 Redevelopment Agency tax increment reflecting a delay in hiring of funds, which motion carried, all the recreation manager for three members voted aye. months, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Hardman seconded Public Works that the capital improvement pro- gram, Fire Station #10 construc- Councilmember Hardman moved tion project, be reduced by $450, - and Councilmember Kirk seconded to 000; with the funds transferred to increase the public works depart- CIP contingency and designated for ment budget by $277, 586 for the Sunnyside Recreation Center, which restoration of the neighborhood motion carried, all members voted trash pickup, which motion car- aye. ried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Hardman moved Councilmember Hardman seconded and Councilmember Bittner seconded that the capital improvement pro- to decrease the public works de- gram, Sunnyside Recreation Center partment travel/training budget by project, be decreased by $100, 000; $3, 109, which motion carried, all with the funds transferred to CIP members voted aye. contingency and designated for Sunnyside Recreation Center, which Capital Improvement Program motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Horrocks seconded Councilmember Kirk moved and that the capital improvement pro- Councilmember Fonnesbeck seconded gram budget be increased by $430, - that the capital improvement pro- 000 for the California Avenue gram contingency be increased by project to reflect an increase in $63, 532 and designated for the property owner assessments, which Sunnyside Recreation Center engi- motion carried, all members voted neering fees. No vote was taken aye. because Councilmember Hardman made a substitute motion. Councilmember Kirk moved and Councilmember Bittner seconded Councilmember Hardman moved that the capital improvement pro- and Councilmember Bittner seconded gram, central business district to make a substitute motion, which beautification projects, be in- motion carried, Councilmembers creased by $420, 000 to be funded Bittner, Horrocks, Hardman and $210, 000 from Redevelopment Agency Stoler voted aye, and Council- tax increment funds and $210, 000 members Fonnesbeck, Godfrey and from property owner assessments, Kirk voted nay. which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Hardman moved and Councilmember Bittner seconded Councilmember Kirk moved and to increase the governmental im- Councilmember Horrocks seconded munity internal service fund 89-174 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 contingency by $63, 532, which Miscellaneous motion carried, Councilmembers Bittner, Horrocks, Hardman and Councilmember Stoler moved Stoler voted aye, and Council- and Councilmember Hardman seconded members Fonnesbeck, Godfrey and to increase general fund transfers Kirk voted nay. to the governmental immunity fund by $63, 532, which motion carried, Councilmember Hardman moved Councilmembers Bittner, Horrocks, and Councilmember Horrocks sec- Hardman and Stoler voted aye, and onded that the capital improvement Councilmembers Fonnesbeck, Godfrey program, Fire Station #10 con- and Kirk voted nay. struction project, be decreased by $70, 000; with the funds trans- Councilmember Stoler moved ferred to CIP contingency and des- and Councilmember Hardman seconded ignated as Sunnyside Recreation to decrease the general fund Center engineering fees, which contingency by $9, 569, which motion carried, Councilmembers motion carried, all members voted Bittner, Horrocks, Hardman and aye except Councilmember Stoler voted aye, and Council- Fonnesbeck who voted nay. members Fonnesbeck, Godfrey and Kirk voted nay. Adopting Budget Non-Departmental Councilmember Stoler moved and Councilmember Bittner seconded Councilmember Kirk moved and to approve the 1989-90 general Councilmember Hardman seconded to fund budget totaling $82, 682, 395 decrease transfers to the fleet and all other budgets as presented maintenance internal service fund by the Mayor and altered by Coun- by $155, 000, which motion carried, cil motion; and adopt Ordinance 36 all members voted aye. of 1989 adopting budgets of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the Councilmember Kirk moved and library fund budget totaling Councilmember Hardman seconded to $6, 039,425, for the fiscal year increase the municipal affairs beginning July 1, 1989, and ending budget by $10, 000 to reflect an June 30, 1990, which motion car- increase in Utah League of Cities ried, all members voted aye. and Towns dues, which motion carried, all members voted aye. DISCUSSION: Golf Course Fund: Councilmember Kirk said she Councilmember Kirk moved and understood that by eliminating .35 Councilmember Hardman seconded to FTE seasonal golf marshal the city increase transfers to the demo- would still have one seasonal golf lition fund by $5, 000, which marshal. John Gust, director of motion carried, all members voted parks, said yes. Lee King, Coun- aye. cil Staff, said during the budget discussions, the Council through Library their straw polls elimi-nated one golf course marshal and two Councilmember Bittner moved grounds keepers. He said the and Councilmember Horrocks sec- Council's intent during discus- onded to increase the library fund sions was that the remaining golf contingency by $35, 630, which course marshal would ride in one motion carried, all members voted of the existing golf carts pending aye. 89-175 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 a study to determine whether or shal. Mayor DePaulis said he not the program would be viable. agreed with Councilmember Stoler to keep the positions funded. Councilmember Stoler asked the Council to reconsider elimi- Capital Improvement Program: nating the grounds keepers since Councilmember Bittner asked if the the perimeters of city golf cours- $50,000 for Riverside Park was in es looked unkempt. He said he place. Mayor DePaulis said he had thought it was shortsighted to not signed the requisition form that keep the perimeters of the golf would place the $50, 000 into the course looking nice, especially at CIP for that project. the airport. Councilmember Kirk asked Councilmember Bittner said Councilmember Hardman for clari- one thing the golfers talked about fication of his motion to increase was the need for marshals and had the governmental immunity internal suggested that one was not enough. service fund contingency by $63, - She said the golfers seemed to be 532 as a substitute for her motion willing to pay the costs. Coun- to increase the capital improve- cilmember Kirk said she spent ment program contingency by $63, - three hours with golfers and it 532 to be designated for the seemed to her that they wanted Sunnyside Recreation Center engi- additional services but didn' t neering fees. Councilmember want fee increases. Councilmember Hardman said he proposed that the Fonnesbeck said moving the $20, 726 $70,000 engineering fees for did not impact the fees because Sunnyside come from the Fire the Council was moving it into Station #10 project. He explained contingency. that in the Mayor' s budget last year, the Mayor proposed $500,000 In response to golf course for governmental immunity but appearance, Mr. Gust said that ended up borrowing $200, 000 from from tee to green that city had the fund to make up a deficit. He the finest golf courses and had said at that time the Council proposed to do landscaping on the discussed moving surplus funds exteriors. He said it would be into the governmental immunity beneficial for a minimal cost to fund. keep the grounds keepers. He said they would only be on payroll from Councilmember Kirk said she April 1 through October 1 and was also concerned about the said the positions were strictly governmental immunity fund but seasonal and would only be used said if they took $70, 000 from the for landscaping. He also said the fire station they would have that public wanted the marshals. much more to make up next year. She was concerned because the Councilmember Hardman asked Council was already taking 2/3 of if there would be $20, 000 left for the funding for Fire Station #10. one golf marshal. Councilmember Stoler said if the Council didn't Councilmember Bittner said moved and $20, 726 to contingency the Council ' s commitment to the the city would have two marshals Sunnyside Recreation Center was and two grounds keepers. Mr. King $700,000 not $770, 000. She was said moving the funds would elimi- concerned about appropriating an nate one marshal and two grounds additional $70, 000 and said she keepers and would leave one mar- thought there were too many hidden 89-176 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 costs with the recreation center. Godfrey asked if this rate was higher or lower than the current Roger Cutler, city attorney, rate. Buzz Hunt, city treasurer, said the governmental immunity said the new rate would be lower fund was operating at a close than the current rate and said level but wanted the Council to people would see a . 5% tax de- understand that once funds were crease. appropriated to governmental im- munity it was an encumbered ac- Councilmember Hardman asked count and the Council couldn't why there would be a tax decrease. take the money out for general Mr. Hunt explained that the city fund purposes. was limited to a certified tax rate, which was the tax rate the Councilmember Kirk was con- city could impose to generate the cerned that the people who worked same amount of revenue this year on the fire station committee as last year excluding new growth. would wonder about the city' s He said during the current fiscal commitment to the project. year, the city experienced an Councilmember Hardman said his increase in their collection rate commitment was as strong as it had so this year they didn't have to ever been. set such a high tax rate to gener- ate the same amount of revenue. Councilmember Hardman asked (0 89-23) if the entire $70,000 would be used for Sunnyside Recreation #15. RE: Legislative intents Center engineering fees. Cindy relating to the Fiscal Year 1989- Gust-Jenson said $56,000 would be 90 budgets. for salaries and the remainder would be used for inspection and ACTION: Councilmember Bittner testing so the total cost would be moved and Councilmember Horrocks $70, 000. seconded to adopt an intent of the (B 89-5) City Council that the administra- tion formalize a coordinated plan #14. RE: An ordinance de- for the joint economic development termining the rate of tax levy and of the Northwest Quadrant and the levying taxes upon all real and airport. That plan should define personal property within Salt Lake the role of the airport in the City, Utah, made taxable by law process, address needed improve- for the fiscal year commencing ments in the Northwest Quadrant July 1, 1989, and ending June 30, and should accommodate the exten- 1990. sion of California Avenue all the way to 5600 West, with the eventu- ACTION: Councilmember Stoler al goal of connecting into the moved and Councilmember Bittner West Valley Highway, which motion seconded to adopt Ordinance 37 of carried, all members voted aye. 1989 establishing the tax rate for the general fund at .004360 and Councilmember Hardman moved the library fund at .000867 for and Councilmember Kirk seconded to the fiscal year beginning July 1, adopt an intent of the City Coun- 1989, and ending June 30, 1990, cil that the administration con- which motion carried, all members duct a vehicle utilization study voted aye. to determine if the number of vehicles in each department is DISCUSSION: Councilmember fully justified, which motion 89-177 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 carried, all members voted aye. with funding to come from the Council ' s auditing budget, which Councilmember Horrocks moved motion carried, all members voted and Councilmember Kirk seconded to aye. adopt an intent of the City Coun- cil that the administration work Councilmember Bittner moved with the Sugar House Park Authori- and Councilmember Hardman seconded ty to increase the public usage of to adopt an intent of the City the park through promotion of Council that the administration additional outdoor events. It is develop a policy discouraging the also the Council ' s intent that hiring of personnel on a contrac- maintenance costs be reviewed to tual basis beyond an 11 month ensure that funds budgeted for the period, which motion carried, all Sugar House Park Authority are members voted aye except Council- used in the most efficient manner, members Fonnesbeck and Godfrey who which motion carried, all members voted nay. voted aye. Councilmember Bittner moved Councilmember Horrocks moved and Councilmember Horrocks second- and Councilmember Bittner seconded ed to adopt an intent of the City to adopt an intent of the City Council that the administration Council that the parks department review with the Salt Lake City study the policy of charging Board of Education the process for sports leagues for maintenance of approving requests for school baseball and soccer fields, with crossing guards, which motion approval of the Council prior to carried, all members voted aye. the implementation of the policy, which motion carried, all members Councilmember Stoler moved voted aye. and Councilmember Hardman seconded to adopt an intent of the City Councilmember Horrocks moved Council that the administration and Councilmember Kirk seconded to review the school crossing guard adopt an intent of the City Coun- program with regard to salaries cil that the administration begin and benefits and report to the negotiations with Salt Lake County Council, which motion carried, all to effectuate reimbursement for members voted aye. city property owners paying prop- erty taxes for emergency medical Councilmember Kirk moved and services to the county while Councilmember Hardman seconded to receiving the same service from adopt an intent of the City Coun- the city. It is the further cil that the administration in- intent of the City Council that clude in the Fiscal Year 1990-91 the fire department complete a capital improvements budget fund- study of the feasibility of estab- ing for the completion of the lishing user fees for paramedic construction of Fire Station #10, services, which motion carried, which motion carried, all members all members voted aye. voted aye. Councilmember Horrocks moved Councilmember Hardman moved and Councilmember Kirk seconded to and Councilmember Bittner seconded adopt an intent of the City Coun- to adopt an intent of the City cil that a study be conducted to Council that any slippage from evaluate the fire department ' s prior year CDBG projects which consolidated dispatch operations, becomes available during 1989-90 89-178 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 be applied towards the Community Council asked the Administration Development Corporation and that to negotiate with the school capital planning report at least district to share the costs. He semiannually on the availability said they were not interested in of slippage, which motion carried, sharing the costs and said the all members voted aye. trend across the country was for municipalities to pay for school Councilmember Hardman moved guards. He said this new intent and Councilmember Stoler seconded was different in that the Council to adopt an intent of the City was asking the Administration to Council that the administration review the process of determining evaluate the potential cost sav- where school crossing guards would ings of privitizing the neighbor- go. hood trash pickup program while maintaining the current level of Councilmember Fonnesbeck service, which motion carried, all asked if this intent was suggest- members voted aye. ing that the board get involved where they now were not. Mr. Councilmember Hardman moved Zuhl said the school district and Councilmember Bittner seconded maintained that this was a public to adopt an intent of the City safety issue and not an education- Council that a quarterly report of al issue. Councilmember the status of the legislative Fonnesbeck asked about the benefit intent statements be provided by of involving the school board. the administration, which motion carried, all members voted aye. Councilmember Godfrey asked if currently criteria were used to DISCUSSION: In reference to determine where crossing guards the Council intent discouraging should be allocated. Council- hiring personnel on a contractual member Stoler said yes but there basis beyond 11 months, was also pressure applied if the Councilmember Bittner said it traffic situation changed and a would not be convenient and easy street suddenly became busy. for departments to justify an additional FTE and she wanted the Councilmember Bittner said Council to keep the prerogative to her concern was that there was no review FTEs. review process. She wanted the administration to talk to the Regarding the intent to Board of Education so standards review the process for approving and criteria could be developed. school crossing guards, Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked why Councilmember Bittner said that the city should approach the the Board of Education requested board. Councilmember Bittner school guards at locations and she suggested that a policy be devel- wasn't aware of any review pro- oped jointly since this was a cess. Councilmember Stoler said school-generated problem. the board wasn' t involved in the process since the requests came Mayor DePaulis said regard- through the schools via the PTA. less of the criteria, it was difficult to tell a group of Councilmember Godfrey asked parents they couldn't have a if the Council approved a similar crossing guard. Councilmember intent last year. Mike Zuhl, Hardman said involving the school Chief of Staff, said last year the board would make them aware of the 89-179 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1989 number of requests the city re- ceived and perhaps they could help minimize the impact. Councilmember Fonnesbeck suggested that the city could achieve this by only accepting requests through the school board. Mayor DePaulis thought the school board could help control the program if they were involved. (B 89-5) The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAIR CITY RECORDER 89-180 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, JUNE 15, 1989 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in regular session on Thursday, June 15, 1989, at 4:00 p.m. in Room 325, City County Building, 451 South State Street. The following Council Members were present: Florence Bittner Alan Hardman Roselyn Kirk Sydney Fonnesbeck Tom Godfrey Willie Stoler Councilmember Horrocks was absent. Mayor Palmer DePaulis and Roger Cutler, City Attorney, were absent. Lynda Domino, Chief Deputy City Recorder, was present. Council Chair Stoler presided at the meeting. UNFINISHED COUNCIL BUSINESS rate increase by $.06. LeRoy Hooton, public util- #1. RE: A motion ratifying ities director, said the increase the adoption of an ordinance would affect the big users, such amending Section 17 . 16 . 670, 17. - as hotels, car washes and indus- 16. 680, and 17 .72. 030 of the Salt tries, more than it would affect Lake City Code to reflect an residential users. increase in city water rates to $.43 for city residents and $. 64 Mr. Lewis said water bills for non-city residents offset by a fluctuated drastically throughout decrease in sewer rates to $. 80; the year so people needed to increasing the minimum charge to compare the percentage of the $6.45; and establishing a low- increase to their annual bill. He income abatement program at $. 60 then outlined two water and sewer per household per month. rate comparison charts, and out- lined a table comparing rates. He ACTION: Councilmember Hard- reaffirmed that the increase would man moved and Councilmember affect large users more than Bittner seconded to ratify the residential users and also said adoption of Ordinance 33 of 1989, that those with a higher sewer which motion carried, all members usage would realize a larger present voted aye except Council- benefit from the sewer decrease. member Fonnesbeck who voted nay. He said he hadn't found any cus- tomer that would realize more than DISCUSSION: Councilmember a 13% increase. Hardman asked if the ordinance which the Council adopted June 13 Councilmember Hardman asked increased the county' s usage rate. about a sewer rate decrease for Jim Lewis, public utilities, said the county. Mr. Lewis said that the county' s rate was increase by Salt Lake City did not serve the $.02. He said the utilities county sewer needs. department originally proposed that the city minimum increase by Councilmember Kirk asked if $1.00 and the usage rate increase someone in the public utilities by $.04, and that the county department would be available to increase by $1. 00 and the usage answer customer questions. Mr. 89-181 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, JUNE 15, 1989 Lewis said they were training to determine a typical large user their customer service representa- since people were so different. tives to answer questions and He said that some people were very calculate bills. frugal and conserved water and others watered their yards and Councilmember Stoler asked gardens regardless of the cost. how much lower the cost was for the county using Salt Lake City Mr. Hooton said his depart- water than it would be if those ment was very conscious about users received water through other keeping water affordable and said districts. Mr. Hooton said the it was like a balancing act to cost of Salt Lake City water was keep the rates low yet still gen- still lower than the Salt Lake erate enough revenue to maintain County Conservancy District and the infrastructure. He said the Sandy. He said users of Salt Lake change which the Council adopted City water also didn' t have to pay on June 13, would be a lower cost the taxes they would otherwise pay to the average residential user to the Salt Lake County Conser- than his department' s original vancy District. proposal. He reiterated that the hotels and industries would be Councilmember Stoler asked affected the most by the increase. how close this new increase would bring the cost of city water to Councilmember Bittner ex- that of the Salt Lake County Con- pressed her concern about people servancy District. Mr. Lewis said on a low, fixed income for whom a the rates would be almost the same few dollars would make a big with the increase and Mr. Hooton difference. She said the busi- reminded the Council that city nesses could pass the increase water would still cost county through to their customers. She users less since they wouldn't pointed out too that Salt Lake have to pay the tax to the county City was starting to realize an conservancy district. older population. Councilmember Godfrey asked Mr. Hooton said that for both about franchise tax and Mr. Lewis water and sewer costs, Salt Lake said that city users only paid City had the lowest rates of franchise tax. anyone in the county. In compari- son to other areas, such as Las Councilmember Kirk said she Vegas, Phoenix or San Diego, he was concerned that the big users said those cities not only had would stop watering their yards so much higher rates but also had they wouldn't go beyond the mini- water shortages. He said Salt mum use rate. She said constitu- Lake City had been responsible ents had told her they would stop over the years in providing water watering if they were going to be service at economical rates. penalized. She was concerned about those people on a fixed income Mr. Lewis asked the Council that didn' t qualify for the abate- Members to encourage people to ment but still had a large yard to call the customer service repre- water. sentatives in the public utilities department. Councilmember Stoler asked for a definition of a large user. Councilmember Godfrey asked Mr. Hooton said it was difficult how the capital improvement pro- 89-182 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, JUNE 15, 1989 gram would be jeopardized because revenue would be variable instead of fixed. Mr. Hooton said a variable rate was more of a risk and Mr. Lewis also pointed out that during a dry summer with a large supply of water, the city could generate more revenue. He said their fixed rate generated only 40% of their revenue and their costs were 80% fixed so the variable rate wouldn' t make a big difference. (0 89-16) The meeting adjourned at 4:40 p.m. COUNCIL CHAIR CITY RECORDER 89-183 :A .._�.. _ I CITY CORPO.RA1110_ .e55u1uf rn A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WHEREAS, The U.S.S. Salt Lake City and the other Los Angeles class submarines perform a critical role in the defense of our nation and its sea lanes; and WHEREAS, The officers and crew of the U.S.S. Salt Lake City make significant sacrifices for their country with their hard work and with the long months they spend at sea away from their families and friends; r and WHEREAS, Each year Salt Lake City recognizes an outstanding sailor from the U.S.S. Salt Lake City to build a personal relationship between the crew and the City; and .=i WHEREAS, First Class Petty Officer Mark Henry was selected for this award by his Commander, Thomas Fargo. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Salt Lake City Council and Mayor Palmer DePaulis that we hereby congratulate First Class Petty Officer Mark Henry for being named "Sailor of the Year" and that we heartily welcome him and his wife Shirley to our City. DATED this 11th day of July, 1939. _ Mayor Palmer A. DePaulis W. M. "Willie" Stoler, Chair hlorence B. Bittner L. Wayne Horrocks Sydney R. Fonnesbeck Alan G. Hardman Roselyn N. Kirk Tom Godfrey a = 41 SALE' .Na %Mr GtRPO:° Ai1ION CRAIG E. PETERSON .,`.al T' L DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 TO: Salt Lake City Council June 20, 1989 RE: Revision of Off-Street Parking Policy Recommendation: That the City Council hold a public hearing to discuss revising the Off-Street Parking Policy on August 1, 1989 at-6:30 p.m. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Background and Discussion: The purpose of the new Off-Street Parking Policy is to modernize the parking lot layout dimensions and provide better guidance in parking lot design. The appropriate City Departments and the Planning Commission have reviewed and recommend approval of the new policy. Legislative Documents: The City Attorney's Office has prepared the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Submitted by: CRAIG El P1J1''ERSC DirectoL lf/ F 4' x E'er] +1 .1 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Amending various sections of Title 21 dealing with off-street parking) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF TITLE 21 DEALING WITH OFF-STREET PARKING. WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, after public hearings before its own body and before the Planning Commission, finds that the City' s off-street parking policy should be modified to allow greater flexibility and that the following amendments achieve that purpose. NOW, THEREFORE, Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That Section 21.04.365 be amended to read as follows: 21.04.365 Parking space. "Parking space" means a space within or on a building lot or parking lot designed for the parking or storage of one automobile[ . For the purposeo of this title, the area required—to ht s-q-rare feet] , together with adequate ingress and egress drives. The dimensions of the parking shall meet the Off-Street Parking Policy of the City Transportation Division as approved by the City Planning Director and the City Planning and Zoning Commission. SECTION 2 . That Section 21 . 50.080 be amended to read as follows: 21.50.080 Off-street parking. In the R-D district, off-street parking shall be provided on a ratio of one[ nine foot by twenty foot] parking space, together with adequate ingress and egress, on an approved, paved parking area for every two hundred square feet of gross building area, or a ratio of one space for each employee and one for each company car. SECTION 3. That Section 21 . 84.010 be amended to read as follows: 21.84.010 General requirements - Enlarged uses. A. There shall be provided at the time of the erection of any main building or structure, minimum hard surfaced off-street parking space with adequate provisions for ingress and egress by standard-sized automobiles as hereinafter provided. 1 . Parking area and geometric design shall conform to the Off-Street Parking Policy which has been approved by the City Transportation Engineer, City Planning Director and City Planning and Zoning Commission. Copies of the Off-Street Parking Policy shall be available in the Planning Division' s Permits and Zoning Review Office and the City Transportation Division Office. SECTION 4. That Section 21 . 84.030 be amended to read as follows: 21.84.030 Number of spaces - Specific uses. For a new building or structure, or for the enlargement or increase in capacity, floor area or guestrooms of an existing main building or structure, there shall be at least one permanently maintained parking space [of not less than—ene -2- hundfed and feet] either on the same lot with the main building or not more than five hundred feet therefrom, as follows: A. * * * B. * * * C. * * * D. * * * E. * * * F. * * * G. * * * H. * * * I . * * * J. * * * K. * * * L. * * * M. * * * N. * * * SECTION 5. That Section 21 . 84.050 be amended to read as follows: 21.84.050 Handicapped parking spaces. A. For a new building or structure, or for the enlargement or increase in capacity, floor area, or rooms of an existing main building or structure, or whenever an existing parking lot is redesigned pursuant to the adopted Off-Street Parking Policy, there shall be created and maintained parking spaces reserved for handicapped parking as those individuals and vehicles are identified and described in Sections 41-1-49 . 8 and -3- 41-1-49 . 9, Utah Code Annotated, in the following number: Regular Required Parking Handicapped Spaces 0 - 12 0 13 - 50 1 51 - 100 2 101 - 200 3 201 - 400 4 For every additional one hundred parking stalls otherwise required (or portion of one hundred) above four hundred required stalls, one additional handicapped parking stall is required. B. * * * SECTION 6. That Section 21 . 86 . 040 be amended• to read as follows: 21.86.040 Driveways. Driveways must not exceed thirty feet in width in residential and commercial zones, forty feet in width in industrial zones, measured at the point where they cross the sidewalk; adjacent driveways must be separated by an island at least twelve feet in width; and driveways must be at least ten feet from the property line of any intersecting street. SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER -4- ALLEN C. JOHNSON MEMBERS, PLANNING DIRECTOR RALPH BECKER SANDRA MARLER - I CINDY CROMER SALT A =45 C�CT p � RP �® 6�0 >1!,�]Tr THOMAS A. ELLISON SECRETARY ®v i ly e "' LAVONE LIDDLE-GAMONAL Ex-OFFICIO MEMBERS: DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RICHARD J. HOWA MAYOR OF SALT LAKE CITY Planning and Zoning Commission RALPH P. NEILSON CITY ENGINEER 324 SOUTH STATE STREET. ROOM 200 GEORGE NICOLATUS CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 JOHN M. SCHUMANN CITY BUILDING OFFICIAL F. KEITH STEPAN 535-7757 PETER VANALSTYNE June 5 , 1989 KATHY WACKER Mr . Craig Peterson , Director Development Services Room 218 City & County Bldg Salt Lake City , UT 84111 RE : Revision of Off-Street Parking Policy Dear Craig : Revision of the city ' s Off-Street Parking Policy was discussed on the April 27 , 1989 Planning Commission meeting . The Planning Commission has recommended adoption of the new Off-Street Parking Policy and with the assistance of the City Attorney they recommend ordinance changes to the City Council that would effectuate this new policy. The Planning Commission motion was ratified on their May 11 , 1989 meeting . The purpose of the new Off-Street Parking Policy is to modernize the parking lot layout dimensions and provide better guidance in parking lot design. Enclosed are copies of the staff report and minutes of the Planning Commission meeting . Within the staff report is a discussion of ordinance changes recommended for modification . If you have any questions, please contact either myself or Everett L. Joyce. Sincerely, .v=iECEI'V EL Allen C. Joh' son, AICP iUN � Planning Di ector attachments C;77- U MEN T SERV9CES ACJ : ELJ cc : John Schuman, Planning Commission Chairman Bruce Baird, City Attorney Steve Meyer , City Traffic Engineer file Staff Report to the Planning Commission regarding Policy for Off-Street Parking Design and Layout OVERVIEW Present off-street parking design guidelines were established in March of 1974. The purpose of the proposed off-street parking policy is to modernize the parking lot layout dimensions and provide better guidance in parking lot design. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS Please read the attached staff report from the City Transportation Engineer for background and analysis information. This report includes the proposed off-street parking policy and recommended ordinance changes with regard to off-street parking. RECOMMENDATION The planning staff has reviewed with the City Transportation Engineering staff the proposed changes to off-street parking design standards. The staff supports updating the city's parking design standard. With incorporation of the identified changes the planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the proposed off-street parking policy. It is also recommended that the Planning Commission forward to the City Council the updated policy and recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance changes necessary to bring the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance into concurrence with the new off-street parking policy standards. April 1989 ELJ DEVELOPMENT OF THE SALT LAKE CITY OFF-STREET PARKING POLICY J3ackground The current Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance defines a parking space as "a space within or on a building lot or parking lot designed for the parking or storage of one automobile. For the purposes of this title, the area required to park one automobile is an area of one hundred and eighty square feet, together with adequate ingress and egress drives" (21.04.360). This leaves a lot to the imagination in regard to the total parking lot design. In addition, the gradual reduction in automobiles dimensions makes a 180 square foot (typically 9'x 20') stall more than adequate. The purpose of this new off-street parking policy is to modernize the parking lot dimensions and give better guidance in parking lot design. Design Automobile The first step in parking design is the determination of a design vehicle. An 85th percentile vehicle is used based on a vehicle population of 60% standard size cars and 40% compact size cars. This means that the design values will accomodate 85% of the vehicle population. It is impractical to design for the largest vehicle (100th percentile vehicle) because of the increased cost for the larger dimensions or for the average vehicle (50th percentile vehicle) because this design would be inadequate for half of the population. The 85th percentile value is commonly used in transportation design. Standard size design vehicle dimensions are 6'7"x 18'4", about the size of a 1983 Buick station wagon. The design vehicle dimensions for a small vehicle are 5'7"x 14'8", about the size of a 1983 Chevrolet Citation. For the 60% standard/40% compact vehicle population, the vehicle dimensions are 6'3"x 17'0", the size of a 1983 Chysler New Yorker. These are the design vehicle dimensions upon which the Salt Lake City policy is based. Stall Size Stall width is based on the design vehicle width and door opening clearances. For the 60% standard/40% compact vehicle population, the minimum stall width is 8'3". This width takes into account the fact that large vehicles will not normally park next to each other. This allows the large vehicle parked next to a smaller vehicle to share door opening space and maneuvering room into the stall. When a stall is placed next to a wall or column, an additional foot of width shall be added to account for the loss of shared door opening space and loss of maneuvering room into the stall. Handicap stalls shall be 13 feet wide. Development of the Salt Lake Off-Street Parking Policy 2 The stall length has been determined by the length of the design vehicle plus 6" to account for the tendency of parkers not to pull tight to a wall or curb. 17'6" is the minimum stall length allowed by Salt Lake City. Parking stalls shall be painted to a length equal to 80% of the vehicle projection in order to encourage drivers to pull up further into the stall. Module Dimensions The parking module is the clear width provided for the parking of vehicles and an adequate access aisle. In most cases, the module contains two rows of parking with an aisle between. The dimensions of the module should allow for both passage through the lot and turning into a stall in one movement. To allow for flexibility in the design of parking modules, a level of service approach is used to fit modules within varying structural dimensions. A level of service "A" would allow very easy access of all vehicles into stalls in one movement. Level of service "E" would require almost all vehicles to make at least two movements to manuever into a stall. A level of service"B" is used in the Salt Lake City policy. The allowable stall widths range from a minimum of 8'3" to 9'0". For every inch that the stall width increases, the module width may be reduced by three inches and the level of service maintained. Surface lots without wheel stops shall add one foot of additional aisle width because of the difficulty in keeping vehicles aligned, especially in snow conditions. Aisle width reductions The values calculated for aisle width reductions are based on the rotation of the design vehicle to the desired angle rather than the rotation of the stall dimensions. These are the result of reduced vehicle projection into the aisle. Interlock reductions are created where adjacent modules; set at the same angle and not separated by walls or columns,places the bumper of vehicles in adjacent rows next to each other. Overhang reductions occur where the module (measured from curb face to curb face) allows for the April 4, 1989 Development of the Salt Lake u..y Off-Street Parking Policy 3 front of the vehicle to overhang the curb. The curb must be six inches or less in height to allow the vehicle to overhang it. Parking Lot Circulation Maneuverability around the end of the aisles (aisle cross-overs) is dependent on the minimum acceptable turning radii of the vehicle. For one-way traffic, the minimum inside radius is 12 feet and the minimum outside radius is 25 feet. For two-way traffic, the minimum inside radius is 12 feet and the minimum outside radius is 36 feet. If perimeter parking is provided, then the cross-over aisle dimension shall be the greater of that required for access to the stall or that required for turning. Driveways Driveway width is determined by the zoning of the property. Driveway location and the number of driveways shall meet Transportation Division policy and be approved by the Transportation Division. In general, the number of driveways should be kept to a minimum and the driveways should be located as far from adjacent intersections as possible. Acknowledgement The off-street policy was developed with the assistance of the following individuals and documents: Donald R. Monahan, P.E., Principal, Parking Dynamics, Denver Colorado. "The Level of Service Approach to Parking Design", Mary S. Smith, P.E., Walker Parking Consultants and Restoration Engineers, Parking Magazine,March-April 1987. "Parking Standards", Mary S. Smith, P.E., Walker Parking Consultants and Restoration Engineers, Parking Magazine, July-August 1985. Off-street parking standards of the city of Denver, Colorado. "Recommended Guidelines for Parking Geometrics",National Parking Association. April 4, 1989 ;,e calyx, of the Division of Transportation 1 w �" cpoLi Salt Lake City Public Works Dept. Section F 1 .5 _,RS= 'fro, :st.• Timothy P. arpst,PE-Transp [ion Engineer Date `. OFF—STREET PARKING page 1 of 2 Approval: PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIRMAN DATE OFF-STREET PARKING All off-street parking designs shall conform to the accompanying dimensions chart and be approved by the Transportation Engineer or his/her designee. Parking angles between 0° and 45° or between 75° and 90° are not allowed. Other angles between 45° and 75° are allowed and the dimensions for those angles not shown shall be determined through interpolation. Use of a public alley as aisle access to individual parking spaces is prohibited in residential zones and where zoning requires landscaped rear or buffer yards. Approval of the Planning and Zoning Division is required in all other areas. If a public alley is used as the aisle or access to adjoining parking spaces, the spaces or projection must be lengthened as necessary to provide a total alley or aisle width of 20 feet for 0° (parallel) through 75° angle parking and 23 feet for 90° angle parking. This requirement shall apply to all new uses and developments except single unit dwellings and duplexes. Handicap stalls shall be a minimum of 13 feet wide. The minimum number of handicap stalls required is determined in ordinance 21.84.050, Handicapped Parking Spaces. Maneuverability around the end of the aisles (aisle cross-overs) is dependent on the minimum acceptable turning radii of the vehicle. For one-way traffic, the minimum inside radius is 12 feet and the minimum outside radius is 25 feet. For two-way traffic, the minimum inside radius is 12 feet and the minimum outside radius is 36 feet. If perimeter parking is provided, then the cross-over aisle dimension shall be the greater of that required for access to the stall or that required for turning. Parking stalls adjacent to columns or side walls shall be one foot wider than the standard dimensions to accomodate door opening clearance and vehicle maneuverability. Stalls shall be striped to 80% of the vehicle projection to encourage pulling further into the stall. One foot of aisle width shall be added to lots without curb stops. Substandard stalls shall not be allowed in new uses or developments even when they are not needed to meet parking requirements. Designated compact car stalls shall not be allowed. The dimensions given in the policy are for a 'one size fits all' design. Parking lots should make provisions for the secure parking of bicycles. Driveway widths shall meet the criteria of the city zoning ordinance and city site development ordinance. The Transportation Division will review and approve the number and location of driveways. In general, the number of driveways shall be kept to a minimum and the distance from adjacent intersections maximized. (1ly of the Division of Transportation �rs c� Salt Lake City Public Works Dept. Section F1 .5 ,: • _ . • ,_o,�^fltE tiF`` Timothy P. Harpst,PE-Transportation Engineer Date OFF-STREET PARKING page2of 2 -4Wall to Wall Module Parking Stall Vehicle Aisle Wall to Wall Interlock Overhang Vehicle Aisle Vehicle Angle I Width Protection Width Module Width Reduction Allowance 4 /0' I '4 '4 II" Width Projection 0 22'0" 8'03" 12'08" 29'02" 0'00" 2'00' Parking 45 8'03" 16'10" 14'11" 48'07" 2'03' 2'00" Angle 50 8'03" 1705" 1506' I 50'04" 2'00" 2'00" 55 8'03" 17'11" 16'02" 52'00" 1'10' 201' 60 8'03" 18'03" 16'10" 53'04" 1'07" 2'02" 65 8'03" 18'06" 17'09" 54'09" 1'04" 2'03" 70 8'03" 18'07" 18'07" 55'09" 1'01" 2'04" 75 8'03" 18'06" 20'01" 5701" 0'10" 2'05" 90 803" 1706" 24'10" 59'10" 0'00' 2'06" Y/ 0 22'00" 806" 11'11" 28'11" 0'00" 2'00" 45 8'06" 16'10" 14'02" 4710" 2'03" 2'00" 50 8'06" 17'05" 14'09" 49'07" 2'00' 2100' Stall 55 8'06" 1711" 15'05" 51'03' 1'10' 2'01" Width 60 8'06" 18'03" 16'01" 52'07" 1'0T 2'02" 65 1 8106' 18'06" 17'00" 5400" 1'04" 2'03" 70 8.06' 18'0T 17'10" 55'00" 1'01" 2'04' —0- Overhang Allowance 75 8'06" 18'06' 19'04" 5604" 0'10" 2'05" 90 806" 17'06" 24'01" 59'01" 0'00" 206" 1 0 22'00" 8'09" I 10'08" 28'02" 0'00' 2'00" 45 8"09" 16'10" 13'05" 4701' 2'03' 2'00" 50 8"09" 17'05" 1400' 48'10" I 2'00' 2'00" 55 8"09" I 1711" 14'08" 5006" IF: ' 2'01" 60 8"09" 18'03" 15'04" 51'10" 2'05" 90 8"09" 17106" 23'04" 1 58104" 1 0'00' 2'06' Minimum Inside 0 22'00" 9.00" 9'05" 2705" 0'00" 2'00" Aisle cross-over 45 9'00" 16'10" 12'06" L 4604" 2'03" 2'00" radius 50 9'00" 17'05" 13'03" 48'01" 2'00" 2'00" 55 I 9'00" I 17'11" 13'I1" 49'09" 1'10" 2'01" 60 I 9'00" 18'03" 14'07' 51'01" I 1'07 2'02" Minimum Outside 65 9'00' 1806" 15'06" 52'06" i 1'04" 2'03" Aisle cross-over 70 9'00" 18'07" 1604" 53'06" 1'01" 2'04" radius 75 9'00" 18'06" I 1710" 54'10" 0'10" 2'05" -4--Wall to wall module 90 9'00" 1 17'06' ( 22'07" 5707" 0'00" 2'06" \1111/.. .. . r. Interlock module 4 _., 4\i---- _ CD 4' It Stall Width )0,4 Stall Width Al Q —I .1.. .1.. A • Interlock Reduction End of—Ow • Aisle Vehicle— Projection y PC MINJIES April 27, 1989 Page 18 issues. He added that the Planning Commission can recommend that the ordinance amendment be approved, that the ordinance amendment be denied, or ar informal hearing can be scheduled. Mr. Johnson said that when the Planning Commission forwards it recommendation, the City Council would have to hold a public hearing on this matter. Mr. Willie Littig, an HLC member and the Chair of the Avenues Community Council stated that the Avenues and the Capital Hill area have the highest density of historic homes anywhere west of the Mississippi River, and therefore, the density on the committee from this area is justified. He added that the volunteerism is also higher in the avenues area for community council activities than in other areas. Mr. Littig said he is concerned that if they are limited to certain numbers of committee members from each district, the message being sent to the community will discourage the high rate of interest they experience in this area. Mr. Howa said his concern is that people in other areas may not be getting the opportunity to serve. Mr. Littig stated that there were current vacancies and no one was beating down the door to get on the committee from any of the districts. Mr. Ulrich pointed out that the majority of the case load before the HLC is also from District 3 which justifies the density of the representation. Councilmember Hardman requested that everyone look beyond the present ordinance and take the necessary measures to insure fair representation from other areas as other historic districts come into being. Mr. Howa moved to hear the matter in the format of an informal hearing. Ms. Cromer seconded the motion; all voted "Aye." The motion passes. • Discuss Parking Standards/Geometrics Mr. Steve Meyer from the Transportation Division was present for this discussion. Mr. Johnson stated that the Planning Staff's plan is for space conservation. He stated that a copy of the Off-Street Parking Policy statement had been sent out in the last packets for review. A copy is filed with the minutes. The present parking standard as per the Zoning Ordinance for one automobile is an area of one hundred and eighty square feet, together with adequate ingress and egress drives. The purpose of the new off-street parking policy is to modernize the parking lot dimensions and give better guidance in parking lot design. Mr. Schumann said he was concerned that automobiles seem to be getting larger. Mr. Meyer explained that if the stall size is reduced in width, the aisle space will be increased for maneuverability. Mr. Meyer added that going to the overall dimensions rather than single stall dimensions give developers more flexibility in designing parking lots. He added that design values accommodate 85% of the vehicle population. Stall width is based on the design vehicle width and door opening clearances. Mr. Meyer stated that handicapped • PC MINUTES April 27, 1989 Page 19 stalls will remain 13 feet wide and stalls next to columns and walls will have an additional foot of width due to lack of shared door opening space. Mr. Howa expressed his concern about a developer presenting a design the Planning Commission feels will not work, and asked if they would have any control over these situations. Mr. Johnson said the ordinance states that "No parking lot or parking area shall be constructed without first obtaining a permit authorizing such construction. No permit shall be issued without firs securing the recommendations of the City Transportation Engineer and the Cit\ Planning Commission and no permit shall be issued until the applicant has complied with the provisions of this chapter." Mr. Johnson stated that if the Planning Commission does not like what the developer is presenting, they do not have to approve it. Mr. Howa moved to recommend the adoption of the Off-Street Parking Policy and, with the aid of the City Attorney, Mr. Bruce Baird, recommend an ordinance change to City Council. Ms. Cromer seconded the motion; all voted "Aye." ThE motion passes. Discuss Planning Commission Appointments This agenda item was tabled for another meeting. Discuss Taverns in the C-4 Zoning District Mr. Schumann stated that Mr. Mike Martin had recently appeared before the City Council and discussed the problem of Class C taverns in the C-4 zone. The City Council has requested that the Planning Commission examine this issue and make a recommendation to them on this matter. Mr. Johnson stated that if the idea is to eliminate Class C taverns in the C-4 zone, the simplest approach would be to draft an ordinance to that effect. The area covered would be from 165 feet west of West Temple to 165 east of 200 East, and from 165 south of 400 South to North Temple. Ms. Cromer asked what would happen to the existing taverns in this area if the ordinance is rewritten. Mr. Johnson said they would become nonconforming uocz if the Zoning Ordinance is changed but the licensing ordinance is not. Mr. Johnson added that if the licensing ordinance is also changed, once the current tenant relinquishes its license, no other tavern can occupy the site since the license ordinance does not allow for nonconforming nrr'. Mr. Schumann stated that the police had been called more than 500 times to handle disorderly conduct at two of the Class C taverns in the C-4 zone within the past year. Mr. Wright pointed out that one of the issues needing to be addressed is where these taverns will relocate if they are not allowed in the C-4 zone. Mr. Wright further stated that Mr. Bruce Baird, the City Attorney will look at the 3. rs\ arA�rITY( ORPO°'eLtI'Ot CRAIG E. PETERSON `py � -,1 '`,, DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE 535-7777 TO: Salt Lake City Council June 20, 1989 Re: Petition No. 400-723 Submitted by Avis Rent-A-Car Recommendation: That the City Council hold a non advertised hearing on August 1, at 6:20 to discuss the proposed ordinance pertaining to relocatable office buildings. The petition 400-723 was submitted by Avis Rent-A-Car requesting Salt Lake City to allow a longer time for relocatable offices building so that they may be used during the actual construction phase of a commercial project. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion and Background: The appropriate City Departments have reviewed this request and agree that the 365 day limitation does place unnecessary restrictions on businesses that are maintaining operations during the construction of a new building. They recommend that the following be added to the current ordinance: 1. Permits for the relocatable building should not be issued until after permits for the new construction are issued. 2. The relocatable building shall be removed within 30 days of issuance of the temporary Certificate of Occupancy. 3. Fees shall be the same as for the 365 day permit 4. The relocatable building shall not be occupied for residential use. Legislative Documents: The City Attorney's office has prepared the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Submitted by: ', CRAIG E.1P Director' „ , , , 1,1 7 :4 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Amending Chapter 18 . 84 dealing with relocatable office buildings pursuant to Petition No. 400-723-89 ) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18. 84 DEALING WITH RELOCATABLE OFFICE BUILDINGS PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. 400-723-89 . WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, finds that amendments need to be made to Chapter 18 . 84 dealing with relocatable office buildings to consider those situations in which a business wishes to use a relocatable office building for a period greater than one year due to the construction of a new building; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes the following amendments to be appropriate to provide for such situations. NOW, THEREFORE, Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That Chapter 18. 84 be amended to read as follows: 18.84.010 Relocatable office building defined. * * * 18.84.020 Permit - Required for installation. A. * * * B. Further, it is unlawful to use, maintain or occupy a temporary relocatable office building for a period longer than that provided for in either Section 18. 84.050 or 18. 84. 100, or to use, maintain or occupy on a permanent basis a relocatable office building that does not conform to the provisions of Section 18 . 84.060, or successor sections. 18.84.030 Permit - Bond required. * * * 18.84.040 Permit - Issuance prerequisites. * * * 18.84.050 Temporary use time limits - Extensions. * * * 18.84.060 Permanent use - Permits and conditions. * * * 18.84.070 Permit - Fees. * * * 18.84.080 Inspection requirements - Additional fees. * * * 18.84.090 Installation at site. * * * 18.84. 100 Construction continuation use. Where the relocatable office building is proposed to allow the continuation or commencement of business operations during the actual construction of a permanent structure for the business, the permit for use of the relocatable office building may run for the actual length of construction subject to the following conditions: a. The permit for the relocatable office building shall not be issued until after the permit for the new construction is issued. b. The permit for the relocatable office building shall expire contemporaneous with the expiration of the construction permit or any extensions thereto. c. The relocatable office building shall be removed, and its site shall be landscaped or otherwise finished in conformance with the terms of the construction building permit, within thirty days of issuance of the temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the newly constructed building. -2- d. The relocatable office building shall not be occupied or used on any basis as a residence. SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor ' s Action: Approved Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER BRB:pp -3- ALLEN C. JOHNSON SA ! ®ta v :kr' aiR1 MEMBERS: PLANNING DIRECTOR NANCY K. PACE. CHAIP, iAN BRENT B. WILDE DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ROBERT LEWIS DORBoard of Ad'ustment on ZoningPETER VANTH ALSTYNE GEORGINA DUFOUR 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 200 I. J. WAGNER SECRETARY SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 ALTERNATES 535-7757 FAUN O. HANSEN W. KENT MONEY June 7 , 1989 Craig Peterson, Director Couununity & Economic Development Salt Lake City Corporation 451 South State Salt Lake City, Ut 84111 Dear Craig : Returned herewith is Petition No. 400-723 by Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc . requesting Salt Lake City to amend the ordinance pertaining to relocatable office buildings to include a provision to allow a longer time through the actual construction phase of a commercial project. We agree that the 365 day limitation does place unnecessary restrictions on businesses that are desirous of maintaining operations during the process of constructing a new building. We hereby respectfully recommend that the city amend this ordinance to include a provision or exception for an extended time frame for relocatable buildings that are intended to accommodate businesses during the construction phase of new buildings. The following conditions should be incorporated into the ordinance amendment: -Permits for the relocatable building should not be issued until after permits for the new construction are issued. -The relocatable building shall be removed within 30 days of issuance of the temporary Certificate of Occupancy. -Fees shall be the same as for the 365 day permit. -The relocatable building shall not be occupied by a residential use . This amendment should not result in any administrative problems and it will be a positive step in furthering our efforts to accommodate economic development. Since this regulation is in the Building and Construction Section of the City Ordinances, we will not refer it to the Planning Commission for approval. We should send this directly to the City Attorney for ordinance preparation and on to the Mayor and City Council for the adoption process. Please call if you have questions. Sincerer', 4 an Direr r, Building and Housing ..d Allen ohnson Directo ning and Zoning vAKE • BOARD Elaine B.Weis, Chair r.ti'yy4y;t y�, , ti PALMER A. DEPAULIS, Mayor :.:urtis E.Ackerlind,Jr. • J.Alan Blodgett • Don A.Mackey I`' • LOUIS E. MILLER Eddie P. Mayne • Joseph Rosenblatt . Director of Airports Patrick A. Shea • Thomas K.Welch April 17, 1989 RECEIVEr The Honorable Mayor Palmer A. DePaulis APR 2 4 1989 Salt Lake City Corporation 324 South State Street, 5th Floor MAYOR'$ O FH;L Salt Lake City, UT 84111 near Mayor DePaulis: As you are aware, the Airport Authority has initiated processes for funding and constructing a multi-level parking structure. When completed, the ground level of this structure will house the Allmon L's r'ar rental concessionaires. These concessionaires are currently located in the long-term parking area at the ail orL. Because certain of these concessionaires have experienced additional space requirements in their existing facilities, the local managers have in the past received conditional usP permits from the City to erect relocatable office buildings on Airport property. Under current City Code, these permits are one year in duration and nonrenewable. Because the parking structure is not anticipated to be completed until early 1992, the auto rental agencies have need to maintain these relocatable offirns until such time as we relocate the concessionaires into the parking structure itself. I am enclosing a request fran Frank Jones, City Manger for Avis, that City rrdc be amended to accommodate a longer permit time when a commercial project is undertaken. I fully support this request for the reasons I have outlined in this letter and would accordingly respectfully request that appropriate processes be initiated for this modification of City code. If I can provide additional information or clarification, please do not hesitate to call me. S' , 's E. Miller Enclosure cc: file w/ enclosure Salt Lake City Airport Authority• AMF Box 22084, Salt Lake City, Utah 84122•(801)575-2400•Telefax:(801)575-2679 VENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC. / AMF BOX 22186, SALT LAKE CITY, li''AH 84122 / (801) 539-1117 AVIS 4PR 1 1989 April 11 , 1989 Mayor Palmer DePaulis City of Salt Lake 324 South State Street Salt Lake City , utah 84111 Dear Mayor DePaulis , Pursuant to my letter dated February 27 , 1989 , requesting variance to the local ordinance regarding conditional use permits , I hereby rescind such request for variance . By copy of this letter to Louis Miller, Airport Director , I am requesting his support for the city to amend its ordinance per- taining to relocatable office buildings , to include a provision that would enable a longer time period during the planning of and actual construction phase of a commercial project . I commend Brent Wild of your staff , who has been most cooperative in pursuit of this matter . Thank you for your attention to this request . Sincerely , YY.anik Jones City Manager FJ/nlm cc : Roger Evans , City of Salt Lake Louis Miller , Airport Director, Salt Lake City Merrill Nelson, City of Salt Lake Ron Robertson , Avis ENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC, AMF BOX 22186, SALT LAKE CITY, U. 84122 / (8011 539-1117- AV/5 I , -,--... . -,. ,,F,„v„ April 11 , 1989 APR 1 5 1989 MI4YOR'S OFPNi[;k. Mayor Palmer DePaulis City of Salt Lake 324 South State Street Salt Lake City, utah 84111 Dear Mayor DePaulis , Pursuant to my letter dated February 27 , 1989, requesting variance to the local ordinance regarding conditional use permits , I hereby rescind such request for variance . By copy of this letter to Louis Miller , Airport Director, I am requesting his support for the city to amend its ordinance per- taining to relocatable office buildings , to include a provision that would enable a longer time period during the planning of and actual construction phase of a commercial project . I commend Brent Wild of your staff, who has been most cooperative in pursuit of this matter . Thank you for your attention to this request . Sincerely , Ik----- F"ran'k Jones City Manager FS/nlu u cc : Roger Evans , City of Salt Lake Louis Miller , Airport Director , Salt Lake City Merrill Nelson , City of Salt Lake Ron Robertson, Avis LAKE 2, BOARD Elaine B.Weis, Chair fi ' PALMER A. DEPAULIS, Mayor `L,) . Curtis E.Ackerlind,Jr. • J.Alan Blodgett • Don A.Mackey 7• L LOUIS E. MILLER Eddie P. Mayne • Joseph Rosenblatt • Director of Airports Patrick A. Shea • Thomas K. Welch ,- Odt AU �O May 31, 1989 Mr. Willie Stoler, Chairman and Sal t Lake City Council City & County Building 451 South State, Roan 304 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Dear Chairman Stoler and Council Members: Subject: Intprlocal Agreement for the Use of Firing Range at Salt Lake City International Airport between Sal t Lake City Corporation and the Utah Nbtor Vehicle Enforcement Division. Ficm l Impact: None. Discussion: City will allow the Utah Motor Vehicle Enforcement Division to use the airport firing range in accordance with Airport Authority rules and regulations for such use, for a period of three (3) years. In consideration for such use, the Utah Motor Vehicle Enforcement Division agrees to indemnify City against any arr3 all losses, damages, claims, liabilities, and causes of action of every kind or character, as well as costs, including attorney's fees, connected therewith and the expenses of investigation thereof, hammed upon or arising out of their police or other certified personnel's Ilse of the firing range. Recamerxlation: It is respectfully requested that you approve an interlreal agreenent for uP.F. of the firing range by the Utah Motor Vehicle Enforcement Division personnel. Respectfully submitted, Louis E. Miller Salt Lake City Airport Authority•AMF Box 22084, Salt Lake City, Utah 84122 0(801) 575-2400•Telefax: (801)575-2679 RESOLUTION NO. OF 1989 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND UTAH STATE MOTOR VEHICLE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION WHEREAS, Title 11, Chapter 13, U.C.A. , 1953, as amended, allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the attached agreement has been prepared to accomplish said purposes; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. It does hereby approve the attached agreement generally described as follows: Allows State Motor Vehicle Enforcement Division to use the International Airport' s firing range. 2. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation and to act in accordance with its terms . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER RLM:rc INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR USE OF FIRING RANGE AT SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT THIS AGREEMENT is made and executed this day of , by and between SALT LAKE CITY QORPORATION, a municipal corpora-tion of tie State of Utah, hereinafter "City", and the UTAH M.V. ENFORCEMENT DIVISION , heater "Permittee". W I T N E S S E T H : WHEREAS, tie City has constructed an through its Airport.Authority is operating a firing range at its International Airport; and WHEREAS, Permittee desires to obtain the use of said firing ng range for its police or other certified peace officers. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the parties agree as follows: 1. City agrees to allow Permittee's police to utilize i ze the City's airport firing ng range in accordance with rules and regulations as established by the Airport Authority and upon a schedule and for* such fees as may be set and determined by the City's Director of Airports. 2. In consideration for such use, Permittee agrees to indemnify, save harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents and employees frog and against any and all 1 cr-sPs, damages, claims, liabilities, and catLeeS of action • of every kind or character, as well as all costs, including attorney's fees, connected therewith and the expenses of investigation thereof, based upon or arising out of Permittee's police or other certified peace officers' use of said firing range. 3. The term of this Agreement shall be for a period for three (3) years. However, either party may terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to the other party. 4. This Agreement cannot be assigned by Permitbee witlaut the prior written consent of City. 5. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties pertinent to the Permittee's use of the City's firing range oat the City's International Airport, and it cannot be amended or altered except through a wri L leu instrument which is signed by both parties. IN WITNESS ESSS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this Agreement to be effective as of the day and year first above written. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION BY MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER (PERMITihr,) / ' BY • � �.��- 7� Atr u.Sr: N ,, STATE OF UrAH ) : ss. County of Salt Lake) On the day of , 198 , personally nally appeared before me PAINER A. DEPAULIS and KATHRYN MARSHALL, the signers of the foregoing instrument, who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are the Mayor and City ems, respectively, of SALT LAKE CITY QORF RATION, a municipal corporation of the State of Utah, and said persons acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the same. NOTARY PUBLIC, residing in My Cawdssion Expires: Salt Lake County, Utah vAKF BOARD Elaine B. Weis, Chair PALMER A. DEPAULIS, Mayor D ,:';:: >' Curtis E.Ackerlind,Jr. • J.Alan Blodgett • Don A.Mackey 3,j $� /� LOUIS E. MILLER Eddie P. Mayne • Joseph Rosenblatt Director of Airports Ck- Patrick A. Shea • Thomas K. Welch 0 v„'"°0 May 31, 1989 Mr. Willie Stoler, Chairman and Salt Lake City Council City & County Building 451 South State, Roan 304 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Dear Chairman Stoler and Council Members: Subject: Intcrlrral Agreement for the Use of Firing Range at Salt Lake City International Airport between Salt Lake City Corpurdtion and the Federal Aviation AdninibLLaticn, Civil Aviation Security Field Office. Fiscal Impact: Nome. Discussion: City will allow the Federal Aviation AdninisLidtion, Civil Aviation Security Field Office to uF4a the airport firing range in accordance with Airport Authority rules and regulations for such use, for a period of throe (3) years. In consideration for such use, the Federal Aviation AdminisLrdtion, Civil Aviation Security Field Office agrees to indemnify City against any and all losses, damages, claims, liabilities, and causes of action of every kind or character, as well as costs, including attorney's feps, connected therewith and the expenses of investigation thereof, based upon or arising out of their police or other certified personnel.'s use of the firing range. Recommendation: It is respectfully requested that you approve an int-erlmal agreement for 11RP of the firing range by the Federal Aviation Administration, Civil Aviation Security Field Office personnel. Respectfully submitted, Louis E. Miller Salt Lake City Airport Authority • AMF Box 22084, Salt Lake City, Utah 84122•(801)575-2400 •Telefax: (801) 575-2679 RESOLUTION NO. OF 1989 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY FIELD OFFICE WHEREAS, Title 11, Chapter 13, U.C.A. , 1953, as amended, allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the attached agreement has been prepared to accomplish said purposes; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. It does hereby approve the attached agreement generally described as follows: Allows members of the FAA' s Security Field Office to use the City' s International Airport firing range. 2. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation and to act in accordance with its terms. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this V& day of , 1989 . SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER RLM:rc INTERUXALACTMIVENT FOR USE OF FIRING RANGE . AT SALT LAKE CITY INITIONAL AIRPORT THIS AGREEMENT is made and executed this 24 day of March, 1989 , by and between SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, a municipal corporation of the State of Utah, hereinafter "City", and Civil Aviation Security Field Office, Post of Duty, Salt Lake City Utyh, Federal Aviation Administration , hereinafter "Permit tee' . W I T N E S S E T H : WHEREAS, the City has constructed an through its Airport Authority is operating a firing range at its Intexnaticnal Airport; and WHEREAS, Permittee desires to obtain the use of said firing range for its -police or other certified peace officers. • NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the.pr ni mac, .the parties agree as follows: 1. City agrees to allow Permittee's police to utilize the City's • airport firing g range in a000rdanoa with rules and regulations as established by the Airport Authority and upon.a sdhedule and for such fees as may be set and determined by the City's Director of Airports. 2. In consideration for sixth use, Permittee agrees to indemnify, save • harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents and employees fran and . against .any and all losses, damages, claims, liabilities, and tames of action of every kind or Character, as well as all costs, including attorney's fees, connected therewith and the expenses of investigation thereof, based upon or arising out of Pernittee's police or other certified peace officers' use of said firing range. 3. The term of this Agreement shall be for a period for three (3) years. However, either party may terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to the other party. 4. This Agreement cannot be assigned by Permittee without the prior written consent of City. 5. This Agreement-constitutes the entire agrreenent between the parties pertinent to the Permittee's.use of the City's firing range oat the City's International Airport, and it cannot be amended or altered except through a written instrument which is signed by both parties. . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this Agreement to be effective as of the day and year first above written. : SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION BY MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER (PERMITrrt. A'rr1Sr: Charles . An.hony Manager, ivi Wtion Security Field Office AseeeteAL/ �xev, 8l3-4liR -d /7161.,,L lr, 19s;,'9 STATE OF UTAH ) : ss. County of Salt Lake) On the day of• , 198 , p r cr,a i y appeared before me PALMER A. DEPAULIS and KATHRYN NULL, the signers of the foregoing instrument, who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are the Mayor and City Recorder, respectively, of SALT LAKE CITY COEtPORNITO1, a municipal oarparatian of the State of Utah, and said persons a cr 1edged to me that said corporation executed the same. NOTARY PUBLIC, residing in My Ccoodssion Expires: Salt Lake County, Utah vAKF •yr � BOARD Elaine B. Weis, Chair .4;.4 PALMER A. DEPAULIS, Mayor > : ->- Curtis E.Ackerlind Jr. • J.Alan Blodgett • Don A. Mackey = LOUIS E. MILLER rf Eddie P. Mayne • Joseph Rosenblatt `>a;. ✓yt,% p ' Director of Airports - n- Patrick A. Shea • Thomas K. Welch O 1rAUA'C' May 31, 1989 Mr. Willie Stoler, Chairman and Salt Lake City Council City & County Building 451 South State, Roan 304 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Dar Chairman Stoler and Council Matters: Subject: Intprlma l Agr oment for the Use of Firing Range at Salt Lake City International Airport between Salt Lake City Corporation and the State of Utah, Motor Carrier Section, Department of Camerae (Public Utilities). Fiscal Impact: None. Di fission: City will allow the State of Utah, Motor Carrier Section, Department of Comeroe (Public Utilities) to iisP the airport firing range in accordance with Airport Authority rules and regulations for such urn, for a period of three (3) years. In consideration for such uqe, the State of Utah, Motor Carrier Section, Department of Cammerce (Public Utilities) agrees to indemnify City against any and all losses, damages, claims, liabilities, and cancer of action of every kind or character, as well as costs, including attorney's feec, connected therewith and the expenses of investigation thereof, based upon or arising out of their police or other certified personrel's use of the firing range. Recammendation: It is respectfully requested that you approve an interlocal agreement for iire of the firing range by the State of Utah, Motor Carrier Section, Department of Caru erce (Public Utilties) personnel. Respectfully submitted, Louis E. Miller Salt Lake City Airport Authority 0 AMF Box 22084, Salt Lake City, Utah 84122 •(801) 575-2400 6 Telefax: (801)575-2679 RESOLUTION NO. OF 1989 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND STATE OF UTAH, MOTOR CARRIER SECTION DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE WHEREAS, Title 11, Chapter 13, U.C.A. , 1953, as amended, allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the attached agreement has been prepared to accomplish said purposes; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. It does hereby approve the attached agreement generally described as follows: Allows state motor carrier peace officers to use the City' s International Airport firing range. 2. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation and to act in accordance with its terms. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER RLM:rc APPROVED AS 1 FOF tvt Salt Lake City At}or'3''s Otfic. IN ERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR MP' OF FIRING RANGE AT SALT LAKE CITY INTEfTIONAL AIRPORT THIS AGREEMENT is made and executed this day of , by and between SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, a municipal aarporation of the State of Utah, hereinafter "City", and S+ali 64 till-u I t?f yr 5 th o 'ii "Permittee". cpt oi t7�rnrnerc� �c.�l ►c, WI ti'iCS W I T N E S S E T H : WHEREAS, the City has constructed an through its Airport Authority is operating a firing range at its International Airport; and WHEREAS, Pernittee desires to obtain the use of said firing range for its police or other certified peace officers. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the pre rises, the parties agree as follows: 1. City agrees to allow.Permittee's police to utilize the City's airport firing range in accordance with rules and regulations as established by the Airport Authority and upon a schedule and for such fees as may be set and determined by the City's Director of Airports. 2. In consideration for such use, Permittee agrees to indemnify, save harmless and cifend the City, its officers, agents and employees from and against any and all loss, damages, claims, liabilities, and causes of action of every kind or character, as well as ail costs, including attorney's fps, connected therewith and the expenses of investigation thereof, based upon or arising out of Permittee's police or other certified peace officers' use of said firing range. 3. The term of this Agreement shall be for a period for three (3) years. However, either party may terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days prior wriLt.ezi notice to the other party. 4. This Agreement cannot be assigned by Permittee without the prior wri t-Lea consent of City. 5. This Agreement constitutes. the. entire agreement between the parties -.pertinent to the Pennittee's use of the City's firing range oat the City's International Airport, and it coot be amended or altered except through a wriLLL1 instrument which is signed by both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this Agreement to be effective as of the day and year first above written. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION BY MAYOR • A'rri�iT: CITY RECORDER (PEI'rrr.) / BY 1iG1G4-�vi A'rrJST: TERESA S WHITNEY 1 t Sa= t6a East 300 Bouth ill L' ' of.1 STATE OF UTAH ) ss. County of Salt Lake) On the day of , 198 , personally appeared before me PAI 2 A. DEPAULSS and KATHRYN MARSHALL, the signers of the foregoing instrument, who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are the Mayor and City Recorder, respectively, of SALT LAKE CITY CCiRPORATION, a municipal corporation of the State of Utah, and said persons adalawlec3ged to me that said corporation executxd the same. NOTARY PUBLIC, residing in My Caimission Expires: Salt Lake County, Utah 1—)K DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ROSEMARY DAVIS Capital Planning and Programming DIRECTOR CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING 451 SOUH STATE STREET, SUITE 404 SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 535-7902 DATE: July 5, 1989 TO: Willie Stoler, Chairperson Salt Lake City Council FROM: Rosemary Davis, Director SUBJECT: Jazz Arena UDAG Application RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that a public hearing be set for Tuesday, July 18, 1989 to receive comment regarding the submission of an application to the U.S . Department of Housing and Urban Development for an Urban Development Action Grant to support the establishment of a district energy facility that may supply heating, cooling, and electrical energy to the new Jazz Arena and other buildings in the downtown area. After the public hearing, we further recommend that a resolution be adopted authorizing the Mayor to sign and transmit the necessary UDAG application documents . AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: No commitment of City funding is required. DISCUSSION: To contribute the financial success of the new Jazz Basketball Arena, it is proposed that the City seek a UDAG for approximately 3 million dollars to construct an off-site energy support facility. This facility would produce hot water or steam, and chilled water as the primary heating and cooling loads for the arena . The energy support site may also include an electrical substation required for the arena. The same energy support facility could also serve other nearby buildings . Both the Salt Palace and the Center Theater may be interested in obtaining chilled water from a central plant. In addition, the State anticipates the Union Pacific building will have significant cooling needs as that building is renovated for public use. Since this is the final UDAG round, and competition for funding is expected to be keen, a project with a large community impact will do better than a single purpose proposal . It is anticipated that Utah Power and Light Co. will be a major participant in this project and that the City will coordinate the infusion of public funding into the project to make it feasible. The application must be submitted to Denver HUD by July 31, 1989 . Preliminary funding selection will be announce at the beginning of October. Sincer y, LL____ /EoseBnary Davis Director RD/RMB<ap>9075 -004 APPLICATION FOR -- -______._, OMB Approval No.01e8 7.DATE SUBMITTED Applicant idonhlier FEDERAL ASSISTANCE July 31, 1989 I. TYPE OF SUDM1SStOtt —�e 3.DAVE rIECEIVED BY STATE State Application identifier Applrca(ion Pnaapplrcalion Ea Construction 0 Construction 4.DATE RECEIVED DY FEDERAL AGENCY Federal ldenhher ❑ Non-Construction ❑ Non-Construction S. APPLICANT INFORMATION _ Legal Name. — — Organizational Unrt: City Government Salt Lake City Corporation Capital Planning Division Address(give city. county. state. and zip code) Name and telephone number of the person to be contacted on matters involving this application (give area code) 451 South State Street Rosemary Davis, Director Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Capital Planning Division (801) 535-7902 � S. EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER(EIN): 7. TYPE OF APPLICANT:(enter appropriate letter in box) Ej A. Slate H Independent School Dist. 8 7 6 0 0 0 2 7 _ 9 B County I.' State Controlled Institution of Higher Learning S. TYPE OF APPLICATION C. Municipal - J Private University • D. Township K. Indian Tribe a Now 0 Continuation 0 Revision E. Interstate ' L. Individual F Intermunicipal M Profit Organization If Revision,enter appropriate letters)in box(es): ❑ ❑ G Special District N.Other(Specify) A Increase Award B Decrease Award C Increase Duration D. Decrease Duration Other(specrly): I. NAME OF FEDERAL AGENCY: Housing and Urban Development I0. CATALOG 0°rEOEIIAL DOMESTIC I 11. DESCRIPTIVE T1T1-E OF APPLICANT'S PROJECT: i ASSISTANCE NUMBER 1 4 a 2 2 1 - Energy support facility T1TLE. Urban Development Action Grant (see attachment., t2. AREAS AFFECTED BY PROJECT(cities, counties. states. etc.): Salt Lake City, Utah T 13. PROPOSED PROJECT: 14. CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS OF: Start Date Ending Date a. Applicant b Protect Oct. 1981 Oct. 1990 Utah 2nd Utah 2nd IS.ESTIMATED FUNDING: IS.IS APPLICATION SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12172 PROCESS? a Federal S .ao a. YES THIS PREAPPUCATION/APPLICAT1ON WAS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372 PROCESS FOR REVIEW ON b Applicant 3 .Qfl DATE c State $ .00 b NO ❑ PROGRAM IS NOT COVERED BY E O. 12372 d Local $ .00 OR PROGRAM HAS NOT BEEN SELECTED BY STATE FOR REVIEW e Other S s .00 I Program Income S .00 17. IS THE APPLICANT DELINQUENT ON ANY FEDERAL DEBT? 0 Yes If 'Yes.-attach an explanation ❑ No g TOTAL $ .00 II. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.ALL DATA IN THIS APPLICATION PREAPPLICATION ARE TRUE ANO CORRECT.THE DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DULY AUTHORIZED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICANT WILL COMPLY WITH THE ATTACHED ASSURANCES IF THE ASSISTANCE IS AWARDED , Typed Name of Authorized Representative f b Title . c Telephone number Palmer A. DePaulis Mayor (801) 35-77Q4 d Signature of Authorized Representative e Date Signed Previous Editions Not Usable 1Pp• _ Standard Formt7vOM z24B L.,rc.,i 0EEaV� Aa i0188; RESOLUTION NO. OF 1989 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN APPLICATION FOR A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND THE U. S . DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, Title 11, Chapter 13 , Utah Code Annotated, 1953, as amended, allows public entities to enter into cooperative agreements to provide joint undertakings and services; and WHEREAS, the attached agreement has been prepared to accomplish said purposes; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah; 1 . It does hereby approve the attached application generally described as follows, including such modifications thereto as may be determined necessary to comply with all applicable statutes, rules or regulations : AN APPLICATION FOR AN URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACTION GRANT (UDAG) UNDER 24 CFR PART 570, BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND THE U.S . DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT. 2 . Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah is hereby authorized to execute said application and subsequent agreements to establish the program within the local jurisdiction, including such modifications thereto as may be determined necessary to comply with all applicable statutes, rules or regulations, on behalf of Salt Lake City Corporation and to act in accordance with its terms. Passed by the City Council of Salt lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL CHAIRPERSON ATTEST CITY RECORDER / LEGISLATIVE ACTION ACTION PROPOSED BY: Council Member Florence Bittner PROPOSED ACTION: Rezone the property located between North Temple and 600 North and 700 West and the Jordan River from "R-2" and "B-3" to "R-1" classification. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Northwest Community Council unanimously voted on April 5, 1989, at request this rezoning. The rezoning is in compliance with the Northwest Neighborhood Master Plan as a neighborhood strengthening measure. REFERRED TO: Department of Development Services for scheduling on the Planning Commission agenda. LEGISLATIVE ACTION ACTION PROPOSED BY: Council Member L. Wayne Horrocks PROPOSED ACTION: Rezone area between Redwood Road/Surplus Canal and approximately 3000 West. and Indiana Avenue to 2100 South Streets from "M-3" to "M-1A" and "C-2" classifications. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: These rezoning actions are necessary to implement the Westside Community Master Plan goals and to'update the Plan for both uses and design standards for new development. • REFERRED TO: Department of Development Services for scheduling on the Planning Commission agenda. LEGISLATIVE ACTION P3"') • ACTION PROPOSED BY: Council Member L. Wayne Horrocks PROPOSED ACTION: Rezone property located between 700 West and I-15 and 1300 South and 1700 South Streets from "M-1" to "M-lA" classification. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The rezoning of this area is necessary to implement the Westside Community Master Plan goals and to update the Plan for both uses and design standards for new development. REFERRED TO: Department of Development Services for scheduling on the Planning Commission agenda. LEGISLATIVE ACTION g/ ACTION PROPOSED BY: Council Member L. Wayne Horrocks PROPOSED ACTION: Rezone property located between 700 West and I-15 and 700 South and 1300 South Streets from "M-2" to "M-lA" classification. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The rezoning of this area is necessary to implement the Westside Community Master Plan goals and to update the Plan for both uses and design standards for new development. - REFERRED TO: Department of Development Services for scheduling on the Planning Commission agenda. EE5-7 LEGISLATIVE ACTION • ACTION PROPOSED BY: Council Member L. Wayne Horrocks . - PROPOSED ACTION: Rezone area located between the Jordan River and 700 West and. 900 South to California Avenue from "R-4" ,and "R-2" to "R-1" classification. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This rezoning is a necessary step in the implementation .of the Westside Community Master Plan goals and to update the plan for new development. REFERRED TO: Department of Development Services for scheduling on the Planning Commission agenda. f sAig Ian KAREN SUZUKI-HASHIMOTO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 PALMER DEPAULIS SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 MAYOR PROGRAM ADMINISTRATORS: (801 535-7844 PATRICIA CAMPBELL. C.C.P. FRANK FRASER JANE ERICKSON. A.R.M. July 7, 1989 TO: W.M. "Willie" Stoler, Chairperson Salt Lake City Council FROM: Karen Suzuki-Hashimot4511. Director Department of Human Resource Management RE: Amendment to the Compensation Plan for 300 Series and Executive Employees. On June 13, 1989, the City Council adopted a Compensation Plan for 300 Series and Executive employees. Subsequently, the City has signed memoranda of understanding with its 100 Series, 200 Series and 500 Series employees and anticipates executing a Memorandum of Understanding with its 400 Series employees. In order to maintain some consistency of benefits provided to employees covered by the Compensation Plan and the negotiated collective bargaining agreements, it is necessary to amend the 300 Series and Executive Compensation Plan. Accordingly, the attached amended Compensation Plan for 300 Series and Executive City employees and the ordinance adopting the same is attached for your consideration. The attached amended Compensation Plan is in legislative form for your convenience. The substantive changes to the Compensation Plan are as follows: 1. A snowfighter bonus of $125 will be paid to 300 Series employees who received premium pay as snowfighters Salt Lake City Council July , 1999 Page -2- during fiscal year 1988-89. This benefit is consistent with the negotiated Memorandum of Understanding for 100 Series employees. 2. The uniform allowance for 300 Series Fire Department employees of the Combat Division has been changed to reflect the negotiated provision in the Memorandum of Understanding for 400 Series employees. The amendment provides that Fire Department managerial employees of the Combat Division shall be provided uniforms pursuant to department policy No. 122. The specified amount of $200 for payment of a uniform allowance has been eliminated. 3. The vacation schedule for 300 Series employees in the Combat Division of the Fire Department has been changed to reflect the negotiated provision in the 400 Series contract. 4. Military leave for annual encampment has been changed for 300 Series employees of the Police and Fire Departments to reflect negotiated provisions of the negotiated collective bargaining agreements. Prior to the change, employees would receive the difference in pay between their regular rate of pay and the base pay received while on duty at annual encampment. The amendment provides that the employees would receive full pay for their time at the annual encampment. All other eligible employees would still receive the difference in pay between their regular rate of pay and the base pay received while on duty at annual encampment. 5. An injury leave provision has been added for the benefit of 300 Series employees of the Police and Fire Department to reflect the terms of the negotiated collective bargaining agreements. 6. The Executive pay class has added the position of Deputy Director-Human Resources and Administrative Services. 7. The pension schedule (Appendix "C" ) has been amended to reflect the noncontributory retirement system for public safety employees subject to the City Council ' s adoption of an ordinance. The amended Compensation Plan shall be deemed effective commencing July 1, 1989 . FMN:cc SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Salt Lake City Corporation Employee Compensation Plan) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2. 52.010 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE, AS LAST AMENDED BY BILL NO. 35 OF 1989 RELATING TO COMPENSATION OF SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That Section 2. 52.010 of the Salt Lake City Code, as last amended by Bill No. 35 of 1989, be, and is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 2. 52.010. Compensation Program Adopted. A. The Compensation Administration Program for Salt Lake City Corporation (the "City" ) Employees, dated July 11 , 1989, is hereby adopted as the official compensation plan for said employees (hereinafter referred to as the "Plan" ) . Three copies of said Plan or any amendment thereto shall be maintained in the City Recorder ' s office for public inspection. The provisions of said Plan shall be effective under the terms thereof commencing July 1, 1989, except as they may be amended by the City Council or upon approval of Memoranda of Understanding between the City and recognized Employee Bargaining units. B. The Plan herein adopted and any amendment or modification thereto shall not apply to officers or employees whose employment terminated prior to publication of the ordinance codified in this chapter or to the adoption of any amendment or modification to the Plan. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall be deemed effective on July 1, 1989 . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s Action: Approved Vetoed MAYOR ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lane City Attorneys Office CITY RECORDER _ Date FMN:cc i3-2- COMPENSATION PLAN FOR SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION EMPLOYEES I . EFFECTIVE DATE The provisions of this plan shall be effective, commencing July 1 , 1989 except as it has been or may be amended from time to time by the City Council, by ordinance, or upon approval of Memoranda of Understanding between the City and recognized employee bargaining units pursuant to the Third Amended Labor Bargaining Resolution passed by the City Council on April 10 , 1984 . II . ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES Eligible employees may be appointed, classified, and advanced under rules and regulations promulgated by the Mayor , within budget limi- tations established by the City Council. All elected officers and employees shall be eligible for and subject to the City compensa- tion plan with the following limiting provisions: A. Part-time, Seasonal , Contract and Hourly Employees Part-time, seasonal, and contract employees shall not be entitled to the employment benefits in this plan. B. Adult School Crossing Guards Adult school crossing guards shall be eligible only for the insurance benefits contained in the plan. C. Volunteer Personnel and Personnel Appointed to Serve Without Pay Volunteer personnel and personnel appointed to serve without pay shall not be covered by the provisions of this plan. D. Members of Boards and Commissions Members of boards and commissions shall be subject to appli- cable sections of state statutes and city ordinances . Unless otherwise stated , members of boards and commissions shall not be covered by the provisions of this plan. E. Employees covered under the Memoranda of Understanding Employees covered under the memoranda of understanding between Salt Lake City and a recognized employee bargaining unit, shall be subject to the applicable terms of their memoranda . Unless otherwise specifically stated, said employee shall not be covered by the provisions of this plan. cIELAI .6,, /Lid) 40-3 5. -I l-di6 °' ?a(4 16 2 O 9 Compensation Plan: Page 2 F. Employees Covered by Separate Ordinance Employees covered by separate City Ordinances which may include employees in recognized employee bargaining units who have not entered into any memoranda of understanding shall not be covered by the provisions of this plan. III . WAGES AND SALARIES A. Executive Employees Eligible executive employees shall be paid within ranges under the schedule attached hereto as Appendix A. B. Professional/Managerial Employees Professional and managerial employees not otherwise provided for in the compensation program of the City shall be paid monthly salaries specified in the schedule attached hereto as Appendix B. During the term of this plan, employees shall be eligible for a merit increase on their anniversary date in accordance with the salary schedule provided in Appendix B. C. Elected Officials The annual compensation of elected officials shall be as follows: Mayor $50 , 000 Council Members 10 , 000 D. Adult School Crossing Guards Adult school guards employed by the City to assist school children in crossing streets shall receive compensation of $335 . 00 per month or $3 . 35 per hour for relief guards . E. Forms of Compensation The foregoing shall not restrict the Mayor from distributing appropriated monies to employees of the City in the form of retirement contributions; making lump sum incentive payments to employees within per annum pay limitations; or classifying and advancing eligible employees under rules and regulations promulgated by the Mayor . Compensation Plan: Page 3 IV. SENIORITY, PAY PREMIUMS , DIFFERENTIALS AND ALLOWANCES For purposes of this compensation plan "seniority" shall be defined as an employee ' s uninterrupted, regularly scheduled full time salaried employment with the City. An employee' s earned seniority shall not be lost because of absence due to illness, authorized leaves of absence, or temporary layoffs not to exceed two years. In addition to compensation provided under Section III , eligible employees of the City shall receive the following benefits: A. Longevity Pay 1 . All City Executives and sworn Executive and Professional employees in the Police and Fire departments shall not be eligible for longevity benefits, unless authorized by order of the Mayor . The longevity benefit for these employees has been previously included within base pay. 2. All other eligible employees of the City who have completed six ( 6) consecutive full years of employment with the City, shall receive a monthly longevity benefit in the sum of $50 . 00 per month. Said benefit shall be $75 . 00 per month for employees who have completed ten ( 10) consecutive full years of employment with the City. Said benefit shall be $100 . 00 per month for employees who have completed sixteen (16) full years of employment with the City. The computa- tion of longevity pay shall be based on the most recent date the person became a full time salaried employee. B. Overtime Compensation Eligible employees who are authorized and required by their supervisors to perform City work on an overtime basis shall be compensated by pay or compensatory time off under rates and procedures established by administrative order . The decision to award pay or compensatory time off shall be at the absolute discretion of the City subject to the limitations of the FLSA. In no case shall overtime compensation exceed the rate of 1- 1/2 times an employee ' s regular hourly rate of pay. C. Certification Incentive Pay The Mayor may adopt programs to promote employee education and training, provided that all compensation incentives under such programs are authorized within appropriate budget limitations established by the City Council . Compensation Plan: Page 4 D. Other Allowances 1. Business Expenses The Mayor shall adopt rules and regulations for the authorization of employee advancement or reimbursement for actual expenses reasonably incurred in the performance of City business. Advancement or reimbursement shall be approved only for expenses documented and authorized in advance within budget limitations established by the City Council. 2 . Automobiles The Mayor may authorize under City policy an eligible em- ployee to utilize a City vehicle on a take-home basis, and may, as a condition of receipt, require eligible employees to reimburse the City for a portion of the take-home ve- hicle cost. All other officers and employees who are authorized to use and who do use privately-owned automobiles for official City business shall be reimbursed for the operation ex- penses of said automobiles at a rate established by City policy. A car allowance may be paid to department heads and other eligible employees at a rate not to exceed $300 per month. Such payment shall be in lieu of any mileage allowance. The City shall provide, within budget limitations , for all persons who have not been assigned a parking place or are not provided parking, a $12. 00 a month parking allowance. This shall be paid in $6 . 00 amounts on two biweekly paychecks each month. 3 . Uniform Allowances Eligible employees shall be provided the following monthly uniform allowances when required to wear uniforms in the execution of their du,. ies . Field Supervisor (Parking Enforcement) $40 . 00 Non-sworn police merit level employees $40 . 00 Sworn crime lab and evidence room technicians $50 . 00 Compensation Plan: Page 5 Uniform allowances are provided on the condition that eli- gible employees maintain their uniforms in reasonably good, clean, neat and pressed condition. Uniforms shall have proper identification and insignias and shall not be, frayed or unsightly. Uniforms shall be in full compliance with applicable department regulations . Failure to maintain apparel in accordance with the above shall be grounds for disciplinary action, including forfeiture of uniform allowances provided hereunder . Fire Department managerial employees of the combat division shall be provided uniforms pursuant to department policy #122. Uniform Allowance for Police managerial personnel is included in base pay. 4 . Call-Back, . Stand-By and Meal Compensation Eligible employees shall receive call-back, stand- by and meal compensation pursuant to Salt Lake City Corporation Policy No. 4 . 01 . 800 . 5 . Snowfighter bonus Full-time employees who received premium pay as "snowfighters" during the 1988-89 winter season shall be paid a one-time bonus in the amount of $125 . 00 payable on or before August 1, 1989 for work performed during FY 1988- 89. Those full-time employees who received snowfighter pay for less than five (5) months will be paid on a pro-rated basis. To qualify for this bonus, employees must be full- time City employees on the date the bonus is paid. V. LEAVES OF ABSENCE Eligible employees shall receive leaves of absence as provided in this section. The Mayor shall provide by order , rule and regula- tion, the specific terms and conditions upon which such leaves are to be made available to eligible employees. Compensation Plan: Page 6 A. Holidays The following days shall be recognized and observed as holidays for all eligible employees . All such employees shall receive their regular rate of pay for each of the following unworked holidays. Part-time and seasonal employees shall not be entitled to holiday benefits: 1 . The first day of January, called New Year ' s Day. 2 . The third Monday of January, the anniversary of the birth of Martin Luther King. 3 . The third Monday in February, observed as Presidents Day. 4 . The last Monday of May, called Memorial Day. 5 . The fourth day of July, called Independence Day. 6 . The twenty-fourth day of July, called Pioneer Day. 7. The first Monday in September , known as Labor Day. * 8 . The second Monday of October , known as Columbus Day. 9 . The eleventh day of November , known as Veteran' s Day. 10 . The fourth Thursday in November , known as Thanksgiving Day. 11 . The twenty-fifth day of December , called Christmas. 12 . One personal holiday shall be taken upon request of the employee at the discretion of the supervisor . When any holiday listed above falls on Sunday, the following business day shall be considered a holiday. When any holiday listed above falls on a Saturday, the preceding business day shall be considered a holiday. In addition to the above, any day may be designated as a holiday by proclamation of the Mayor and/or City Council . No employee shall receive in excess of one day of holiday pay for a single holiday. All employees must work or be on autho- rized leave their last scheduled working hours before and the next scheduled working day following the holiday to qualify for holiday pay. Compensation Plan: Page 7 * Columbus Day may be celebrated within 45 days following the date of its actual occurrence as specified in Section A above; provided, however , that an eligible employee may celebrate said Columbus Day on a day other than specified if a written request is approved in writing by the employee' s supervisor , who shall have the sole and absolute discretion to approve any such request. Provided however, in lieu of days off for the above holidays, combat Fire managerial employees shall be granted six (6) on duty 24-hour shifts off per year to be taken at such times as approved by the Fire Chief. B. Vacations Eligible employees shall be entitled to receive their regular salaries during vacation periods earned and taken in accordance with the provisions of this Article V. B. The election to accrue vacation pursuant either to the former vacation schedule (paragraph 4) or the vacation scheduled outlined in paragraph 3 is a one time election and cannot be changed by the employee at a later date. 1 . Except as provided in Article V. B. 2 herein, employees shall accrue vacation under the schedule in paragraph 3 of Article V. B; provided that no person shall be entitled to any vacation unless such person has successfully completed their initial probationary period. 2. Employees who became full time salaried employees before June 30, 1986 , and who have elected to continue using the former vacation schedule shall accrue vacation under the schedule in paragraph 4 of this Article V. B. 3 . Completed Years Days of Vacation Hours Accrued [Shifts of Consecutive Per Year Per Biweekly pet yedL City Service Pay Period combat File employees 0 to completion of 1 year 5 1 . 54 Beg. of 2nd yr . to completion of 3rd yr . 10 3 . 08 4 to 6 12 3 . 69 6 7 to 9 15 4 . 62 7 . 5 10 to 12 18 5 . 54 4 13 to 15 20 6 . 15 10 16 to 19 22 6 . 77 11 20 or more 25 7 . 69 12 . 5] Compensation Plan: Page 8 3 . For managerial employees in the combat division of the Fire Department, the following schedule shall apply: Completed Years Shifts of Consecutive per year City Service for combat Fire employees 0 to completion of 1 year 2. 5 Beg. of 2nd yr . to completion of 3rd yr . 5 4 to 6 6 7 to 9 7. 5 10 to 12 9 13 to 14 10 15 to 19 11 20 or more 12 4 . For employees electing the former vacation schedule, they shall earn a vacation period of 3 . 69 hours per biweekly pay period from the date of full-time salaried employment; (6 on- duty shifts per calendar year of employment for combat fire employees) ; provided further , that no person shall be entitled to any vacation unless such person has successfully completed their probationary period of full-time salaried employment with the City. Eligible employees who have completed nine (9) consecutive full years of employment with the City shall earn a vacation equal to 5 . 23 hours per biweekly pay period; (8 . 5 on-duty shifts per calendar year of employment for combat fire employees) . Eligible employees who have completed fourteen (14 ) con- secutive years with the City shall earn a vacation equal to 6 . 77 hours per biweekly pay period; (11 on-duty shifts per full calendar year of employment for combat fire employees) . Combat fire employees shall accumulate vacation leave on an annual basis and shall he eligible to use such leave, commencing in the calendar year followiny accrual . Notwithstanding the above, Department Heads shall be eligible for twenty days vacation on January first of each of the first fourteen years of employment with the City and twenty-five days each January first thereafter . Compensation Plan: Page 9 Eligible employees may accumulate vacations, ( including both accrued vacation and sick-leave conversion time) , according to the length of their full-time, consecutive years of employment with the City up to the following maximum limits : After 6 months Up to 25 days After 9 years Up to 30 days After 14 years Up to 35 days Department Heads Up to 40 days Any vacation accrued beyond said maximums shall be deemed forfeited unless utilized prior to the end of the calendar year in which the maximum has been accrued. Every employee whose employment is terminated by resignation or otherwise shall be entitled to be paid for : 1 . All earned vacation time accrued , unused, and unforfeited as of the date of termination; and 2 . In cases of permanent separation the City will compensate employees for unused compensatory time off . However , the provisions of Article V. 4 . notwithstanding, no employee shall be entitled to any termination benefit or pay- ment for any vacation time which has not been vested, accrued, unforfeited and unused , and shall not be entitled to any payment or termination benefit: 1 . If an employee has not completed six (6) months of full- time employment with the City; or 2 . If the resigning employee fails to give at least ten (10) days prior written notice to the employee ' s department head of the contemplated resignation. The City may purchase up to, but not exceeding two ( 2) weeks of earned and accrued v in,i I inn ! i n�c� , In gab i c- 11 an e i nibl n omp I oy<cc, is entitled . Subject to the Mayor ' s approval , the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management may establish by rules and regulations, the terms and conditions under which such purchases are to be permitted. Compensation Plan: Page 10 C . Sick Leave Sick leave shall be provided for eligible employees only, as insurance against loss of income when an employee is unable to perform assigned duties because of illness or injury. The Mayor may establish rules and regulations for the correlation of sick leave and worker ' s compensation benefits. Employees covered by this plan shall be entitled to fifteen ( 15) days (120 hours) sick leave (7. 5 on-duty shifts for eligible combat fire managerial employees) on January first of each calendar year or upon completion of their probationary period. The foregoing notwithstanding, no employee is entitled to sick leave until successfully completing the initial probationary period. Authorized and unused sick leave may be accumulated from year to year subject to limitations of this plan. Any eligible employee who has accumulated thirty (30) sick leave days (240 hours) , or 15 shifts for eligible combat fire managerial employees, may choose to convert a portion of the yearly sick leave grant from any given year to vacation under the following schedule: For Employees Working Eight Hour Shifts Number of Sick Number of Sick Leave Hours Used Leave Hours During Previous Eligible for Calendar Year Conversion 0 40 8 32 16 24 24 16 32 8 40 0 Compensation Plan: Page 11 For Employees Working Ten Hour Shifts Number of Sick Number of Sick Leave Hours Used Leave Hours During Previous Eligible for Calendar Year Conversion 0 40 10 32 20 24 30 16 40 8 50 0 For Employees Working Twelve Hour Shifts Number of Sick Number of Sick Leave Hours Used Leave Hours During Previous Eligible for Calendar Year Conversion 0 40 12 32 24 24 36 16 48 8 60 0 For Combat Fire Managerial Employees : Number of Sick Number of Sick Leave Shifts Used Leave Shifts Available During Previous for Conversion Calendar Year No shifts 2-1/2 shifts 1 shift 2 shifts 2 shifts 1-1/2 shifts 3 shifts 1 shift 4 shifts 1/2 shift 5 or more shifts ts No sh irLs Compensation Plan: Page 12 Any election by an employee to convert any sick leave to vaca- tion time must be made by notifying the Department of Human Resource Management, in writing, on or before January 31 of each year ; otherwise, no conversion will be allowed for that calendar year and such conversion privilege shall be deemed waived for that calendar year . In no event shall sick-leave days be converted for other than the current year ' s sick-leave allocation. Any sick-leave days properly converted to vacation benefits as above described, shall be deemed to be taken prior to any other days of vacation time to which the employee is entitled . Conversion days shall be construed as used prior to vacation days otherwise accrued by an employee. Authorized and unused sick leave may be accumulated from year to year . Employees who have accrued at least ten days (80 hours) sick leave may be allowed to use no more than sixteen hours of accrued sick leave per calendar year for their own doctors and/or dentists appointments. This leave must be taken in one hour time blocks and may only be used upon prior approval of the employee ' s supervisor . D. Hospitalization Leave In addition to the sick leave authorized hereunder , each eli- gible employee of the City shall be entitled to thirty ( 30) days hospitalization leave (except for combat managerial employees of the fire department who shall be entitled to 15 duty shifts off for hospitalization leave) each calendar year , provided that such leave may be taken only if , and during the period that, such employee is actually confined to a hospital , acute care facility or other free standing out patient surgical facility as adopted under rules and regulations prescribed by the Mayor . Hospital leave shall not accumulate from year to year . No employee of the City shall be entitled to receive hospitali- zation leave benefits (or illness, injuries , or disability re- sulting from accidents arising out of or in the course of em- ployment for an employer other than the City. Compensation Plan : Page 13 Each employee who takes authorized sick leave or authorized hospitalization leave shall continue to receive their regular salary during absence from work for the periods set forth in Article V. D. The Mayor may establish rules and regulations which extend hospitalization leave to circumstances where an employee re- ceives medical treatment on an outpatient basis, in lieu of hospital confinement. E. Light Duty The department shall if practical , allow an employee a light duty position while recovering from a temporary disability. F. Funeral Leave 1 . Time off with pay will be granted to an eligible employee who suffers the loss of a wife, husband, child, mother , father , brother , sister , father-in-law, mother-in-law, grandfather , grandmother , grandchild, or stepchild. In the event of death in any of these instances, the employee will be paid their regular base pay for scheduled work time from time of death through the day of the funeral , not to exceed five (5) consecutive days. Eligible employees will be permitted one additional day of funeral leave on the day following the funeral if such funeral is held more than 150 miles distance from Salt Lake City and if the day following the funeral is a regular work shift. Satisfactory proof of such death, together with the date thereof , the date and location of the funeral, and the date of burial, must be furnished by the employee to their supervisor . 2 . In the event of death of relatives other than those enumerated in Article V. E. 1. an eligible employee will be paid for time off from scheduled working hours while attending the funeral services for such person, not to exceed eight hours . 3 . In the event of death of friends, an eligible employee may be granted Limo n( F wi t horrt. rya,, while aLLend i ng the rtrnoral services for such persons , not to exceed four (4) hours subject to the approval of their immediate supervisor . 4 . In the event the death of any member of the immediate fami- ly as set forth in Article V. F. 1 . occurs while an eligible employee is on vacation, their vacation will be extended by the amount of time authorized as funeral leave under said Article. Compensation Plan : Page 14 5 . The provisions of this article shall not be applicable to employees who are on leave of absence other than vacation leave. G. Military - Entry Into Service Eligible employees of the City who enlist or are called or in- ducted into and enter active service in the State militia or any branch of the Federal military, naval , air , or marine ser- vice shall be entitled to absent himself or herself without pay as required by State and Federal law. H. Military - Annual Encampment Managerial employees of the Police and Fire Departments who are or shall become members of the Organized Reserve of the United States Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard and Marines or any unit of the Utah National Guard, shall be allowed [the dif leLence in pay beLweeri LheiL LeyulaL LaLe of pay and Llie babe full pay for all time not in excess of ten ( 10) consecutive working days per year spent on duty, at annual encampment in connection with the reserve training and instruction of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines of the United States . This leave shall be in addition to annual vacation leave with pay. All other eligible employees under this plan shall be allowed the difference in pay between their regular rate of pay and the base pay received while on duty at annual encampment for all time not in excess of ten ( 10) consecutive working days per year . I . Leave for Jury Duty Eligible employees shall be entitled to receive and retain statutory juror ' s fees paid for jury service in the District and Federal Courts whose jurisdictions include Salt Lake County subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth. No reduction in an employee ' s salary shall be made for absence from work re- sulting from such jury service . On those days that an employee is required Lo ropnri. [ot j pry Cori/ l ne and is Lherea C l or excused from such service during his or her regular working hours from the City, he or she shall forthwith return to and carry on his or her regular City employment. Failure to so return to work shall result in the forfeiture of that day' s pay by such employee. J. Dependent Leave A Leave of absence may be requested by any employee covered by this Compensation Plan for the following reasons : Compensation Plan: Page 15 a . Becoming a parent through birth or adoption of a child or children. b. Due to the hospitalization of a dependent. The following provisions apply to the use of dependent leave: a . Dependent leave may be granted leave with pay on a straight time basis for a period not to exceed five consecutive days from the date a dependent commences residence with an employee or from the date of birth of the dependent or from the date the dependent becomes hospitalized; provided the child is a minor child and is permanently placed with the employee. However , marriage to a spouse with a child or children shall not be grounds for leave granted under Article V. J. even if adoption is then or subsequently considered and no leave shall be permitted for a child in the custody of an employee ' s spouse prior to the marriage of that spouse by the employee. b. The employee has accumulated and available unused sick leave. Under no circumstances shall the employee be entitled to use as dependent leave more than five consecutive working days in a calendar year . c. The employee gives notice to his/her supervisor as soon as possible under the circumstances . d. The employee provides , upon request of supervisor , certification of birth or evidence of a child placement for adoption to his/her supervisor within five days following termination of such leave. A letter may be requested from the treating physician in the event of hospitalization of dependent within five days following termination of dependent leave used for this purpose. e. An employee' s sick leave shall be reduced by the number of hours taken by an employee as dependent leave under this section. K. Injury Leave The City shall establish rules and procedures for administration of an injury leave program for managerial. employees of the Police Department and Fire Department Combat Division employees under the following qualifications and restrictions: Compensation Plan: Page 16 1 . The disability must have resulted from a documented injury arising out of the discharge of official duties and/or while exercising some form of necessary job related activity as determined by the City ( i . e. , law enforcement, fire fighting, medical services, etc. ) . 2. The employee must be unable to return to work due to the injury as verified by a licensed physician acceptable to the City; 3 . The leave benefit must not exceed the value of the employee ' s net salary during the period of absence due to the injury, less all amounts paid or credited to the employee as worker ' s compensation, social security, long term disability, or retirement benefits, or any form of governmental relief whatsoever; 4 . The aggregate value of benefits provided to employees under this injury leave program shall not exceed the total of $5 , 000 per employee; unless approved in writing by the Mayor for extraordinary reasons or circumstances; and 5 . The City' s Risk Manager shall be principally responsible for the review of injury leave claims, provided that appeals from the decision of the Risk Manager may be reviewed by the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management who may make recommendations to the Mayor for final decision. 6 . If an employee is eligible for worker ' s compensation as provided by law; and is not receiving injury leave pursuant to this provision said employee may elect in writing to the Director of Human Resource Management to use accumulated sick leave and authorized vacation time to supplement the employee ' s worker ' s compensation not to exceed the employee ' s regular salary. L. [K. IAdditional Leaves of Absence Additional leaves of absence may be granted an eligible em- ployee at the discretion of the department head. Compensation Plan : Page 17 VI . INSURANCE A. Group Insurance Eligible employees of the City may participate in the City' s group insurance plan in conformity with and under the terms of an insurance plan adopted by the Mayor covering such employees . Retired City employees, and other persons may also be permitted to participate in the plan under terms and conditions set forth by the Mayor . The Mayor shall cause the specific provisions of the group plan offered by the City to be detailed and made available to the employees. The City may deduct from each payroll all monies necessary to fund employee shares of insurance coverage and make all payments necessary to fund the plan within budget limitations established by the City Council . All employees eligible to participate in the group insurance plan shall be enrolled unless waivers are executed by employees desiring exemption, in form and manner and at such times as the Mayor may direct . B. Worker ' s Compensation In addition to the foregoing, the Mayor may provide for worker ' s compensation coverage to the employees under applicable provisions of state statute, and other service related disability plans compensating employees of the City who are permanently and totally disabled while in the discharge of their official duties as defined by the City' s Long Term Disability Programs. C. Disability Compensation Any eligible employee who is permanently and totally disabled as defined by the City' s long term disability program ( income protection plan) shall be entitled to disability compensation pursuant to said program. Employees in the Police Department will be covered by the Public Safety Long Term Disability Program. The City, at it ' s own expense, shall have the right and opportunity to examine the person of any employee when and as often as may reasonably be required during employment with the City and during the pendency of a disability hereunder . No employee refusing such examination shall be eligible for the benefits provided by this paragraph. Refusal to submit to treatment for disabilities shall be grounds for termination of compensation specified hereunder . Compensation Plan : Page 18 When an injury for which compensation is payable under this paragraph shall be caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another employee of the City or person not in such employment , the City may require an employee claiming compensation hereunder as a condition of receipt of such compensation, to assign to the City any action for damage against such third person such injured employee may have. VII . SEPARATION FROM SERVICE A. Social Security Adopted. Exception. Salt Lake City hereby adopts the provisions of the Federal Social Security system and applies and extends all of the benefits of the old age and survivor ' s insurance of the Social Security Act to eligible employees; provided, however , that officers and employees in the classified Civil Service of Salt Lake City in the Fire and Police Departments shall be exempted from such adoption, unless determined otherwise by the Mayor or unless required by State or Federal Law. B. Retirement Programs The City hereby adopts the Utah Retirement Board System for providing retirement pensions to eligible employees. The City may permit or require the participation of eligible employees in it ' s retirement program(s) under terms and conditions established by the Mayor (see Appendix C) . Such programs may include: 1 . The Utah Public Safety Retirement System 2. The Utah Fireman' s Retirement System 3 . The Utah State Retirement System 4 . Deferred Compensation Program 5 . Retirement Incentive Programs The City may deduct from wages and salaries due eligible employees covered by this section, the payroll deductions determined by the Mayor to be necessary to fund employee contributions to such programs . (See Appendix C. ) C. Sick Leave Pay at Retirement At retirement an employee (or his or her estate, where death follows retirement but precedes payment) shall be eligible to receive a retirement benefit as stipulated in Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 6 of 1989 . Persons who retire under the eligibility requirements of the Utah State Retirement Systems and are not eligible under the above referenced Ordinance will be paid in cash at their then current pay scale, a sum equal to their daily rate of pay for 25 percent ( 25%) of the accumulated Compensation Plan: Page 19 sick leave days reserved for the benefit of said employee at the date of his or her retirement. In lieu of the above, employee may elect to convert sick leave privilege to hospital and surgical coverage. 50% of the sick leave hours available at retirement may be converted to a dollar allowance at the time of retirement . The sick leave hours converted to a dollar allowance shall be subject to any state and federal income and social security tax withholding required by law. An employee' s available dollar allowance determines the number of months of medical and surgical coverage which may be purchased. If insurance costs go up due to group experience, the number of months of coverage will decrease. Such sick leave retirement benefit shall also be available to executive level employees who have not retired from employment with the City when employment has been terminated by death or resignation (provided that in the case of death, benefits shall be payable to the employee ' s survivor) occurring after the date the employee has become eligible for full service retirement from the City. This provision shall not act to reinstate an employee with sick leave benefits which were in any respect lost, used, or forfeited prior to the effective date of this plan. D. LAYOFFS Whenever it is necessary to reduce the number of employees performing an activity or function defined by the Mayor or his/her designee within a City department because of lack of work or lack of funds, the City shall minimize layoffs by readjustment of per- sonnel through reassignment of duty in other departments. 1 . Whenever layoffs are necessary, emergency, temporary, probationary and hourly employees performing essentially the same duties as the aforesaid work activity or functions being reduced shall be laid off first. Compensation Plan : Page 20 2 . Full-time salaried employees shall be the last to be laid off in inverse order of the length of service of employees in the same job classification performing the same job functions and duties . 3 . Full-time salaried employees designated for layoff or actually laid off shall move into a vacant equal or lower classified job position, wherever situated in the City, for which the employee is qualified. Vacant means the Department of Human Resource Management has received a request to fill a position. Equal or lower classified means that the maximum salary for the vacant position shall be less than or equal to the maximum salary for the position being laid off. Said employee, within the City department in which the layoff occurs, may also bump less senior , full-time salaried , temporary or probationary personnel (in a job position and function previously and actually held by said laid off employee) for a position said employee is currently qualified and able to perform as determined by the Department of Human Resource Management. 4 . Employees who have been laid-off shall have rights for a one year period to placement in any vacant job which is at an equal or lower classification where they meet minimum qualifications . They shall not be subject to any further examination. Minimum qualifications on laid off job positions shall remain unchanged for the same one year period not restricting changes for bonafide business and operational purposes. 5 . Employees who have been laid off in accordance with the above shall have the right to pre-bid on positions in the 100 and 200 series for a period of two years . They may also bid with the same preference as City employees for 300 series positions for the same two year period. 6 . Eligible employees subject to layoff because of lack of work or lack of funds shall be eligible for reimbursement of 50% of their accumulated unused sick leave hours. 7 . Persons in appointed positions are not eligible for layoff benel i Ls as ! hey are cenH c.ir,red al ‘r i i t c'mp Loyer s and serve at the pleasure of the Mayor . EXECUTIVE PAY CLASS APPENDIX A 001 City Attorney $4320 - $6480 Director - Airports $4320 - $6480 002 Chief of Police $4056 - $6084 Director - Public Utilities $4056 - $6084 Director - Public Works $4056 - $6084 Fire Chief $4056 - $6084 003 Chief of Staff $3800 - $5700 Finance Director $3800 - $5700 Director - Development Services $3800 - $5700 Executive Director City Council $3800 - $5700 Director - Parks $3800 - $5700 Director - Human Resource Management & Admin. Serv. $3800 - $5700 004 Deputy Director Engineering & Maintenance $3456 - $5184 Major - Police $3456 - $5184 Executive Director - Housing Authority $3456 - $5184 Superintendent - Waste Water $3456 - $5184 Deputy Fire Chief $3456 - $5184 Director - Redevelopment $3456 - $5184 Deputy Director - Airport Operations $3456 - $5184 Superintendent - Water $3456 - $5184 Deputy City Attorney $3456 - $5184 Planning & Zoning Division Manager $3456 - $5184 Management Information Systems MA-n-ag-e Director $3456 - $5184 Deputy Director - Airport Finance & Administration $3456 - $5184 005 Building & Housing Division Manager $3324 - $4836 City Prosecutor $3324 - $4836 Chief Engineer - Public Utilities $3324 - $4836 City Engineer $3324 - $4836 Superintendent of Streets & Sanitation $3324 - $4836 006 Transportation Engineer $3024 - $4536 Executive Assistant to the Mayor $3024 - $4536 Executive Assistant - Policy Development $3024 - $4536 Deputy Director - Parks $3024 - $4536 Chief Finance & Accounting Officer $3024 - $4536 Financial Manager $3024 - $4536 City Treasurer $3024 - $4536 Capital Planning & Programming Director $3024 - $4536 Auditing & Reporting Manager $3024 - $4536 Fleet Services Manager $3024 - $4536 Deputy Director - Human Resources & Admin. Serv. $3024 - $4536 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Approving the Memorandum of Understanding between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Salt Lake Police Association representing the 500 Series Employees) AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND THE SALT LAKE POLICE ASSOCIATION REPRESENTING THE 500 SERIES EMPLOYEES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . PURPOSE. Section 9(c) of the Salt Lake City Third Amended Labor Bargaining Resolution dated April 10, 1984, provides that no collective bargaining memorandum of understanding shall be effective until the legislative body of Salt Lake City Corporation approves said memorandum - of understanding, enacts implementing legislation and appropriates all required funds. A Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Salt Lake Police Association representing the 500 Series employees, has been signed by the Mayor and authorized representatives of the Salt Lake Police Association on June 30, 1989 . A copy of the Memorandum of Understanding is attached hereto. The City Council has appropriated necessary funds requited to implement the provisions of the attached Memorandum of Understanding for fiscal year 1989-90. The provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding are effective for fiscal years 1989-90 and 1990-91 subject to the availability of funds, appropriations by the City Council and City Council approval for fiscal year 1990-91 . Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby evidences its approval of the attached Memorandum of Understanding. SECTION 2. APPROVAL. The attached Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Salt Lake Police Association is hereby approved. SECTION 3 . AUTHORIZATION. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to act in accordance with the terms and conditions of the attached Memorandum of Understanding. SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be deemed effective on July 1, 1989. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: Sl:i Lak: C:y it• _ .O•: :,G CITY RECORDER Dade By -2- Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s Action: Approved Vetoed MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER FMN:cc -3- I APPROVED JUN 3 0 1989 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING CITY RECORDER THIS MEMOR DUM OF UNDERSTANDING is made and executed this . O f4'- of Ui1L , 1989, by and between SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, hereinafter referred to as the "CITY" , and The SALT LAKE POLICE ASSOCIATION, hereinafter referred to as the "ASSOCIATION" , WITNESSET H: WHEREAS, the CITY has endorsed the practices and procedures of collective bargaining specified in its collective-bargaining resolution of November 16, 1977, as amended on April 10, 1984, hereinafter referred to as "RESOLUTION", as a fair and orderly way of conducting its relations with its Police Officers insofar as such practices and procedures are appropriate to the functions and obligations of the CITY and to retain the right effectively to operate in a responsible and efficient manner, consistent with the paramount interests of the CITY; and WHEREAS, the parties recognize that this Memorandum of Understanding, hereinafter referred to as the "MEMORANDUM" , is not intended to modify any of the discretionary authority vested in the body of law developed thereunder or under its ordinances or the Resolution; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the parties to this agreement to negotiate, where not otherwise mandated by Statute or Ordinance, for the salary structure, benefits and employment conditions of the Police Officers classified by the City as "500" Series Police Officers, hereinafter referred to as the "UNIT" , to prevent interruptions to work and interference with the efficient operation of the CITY, and to provide an orderly and prompt method for handling and processing grievances and WHEREAS, the collective bargaining process has, over the years, generated various forms of compensation yielding the total compensation package described in this Memorandum. At times, increased allowances in benefits have been provided rather than increased salary. In full settlement of all wage and contractual issues, the parties agree with the terms and conditions of the following MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING effective July 1, 1989 through June 30, 1991 . NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto declare their mutual understandings as follows: ARTICLE I. PRODUCTIVITY AND CONSTRUCTION OF MEMORANDUM Delivery of municipal services in the most efficient, pro- ductive and courteous manner is of paramount importance to the CITY and the ASSOCIATION. Such achievement is recognized to be a mutual obligation of both parties within their respective roles and responsibilities. All provisions of this MEMORANDUM shall be construed in compliance with such obligation and shall not abrogate in any respect provisions of the Resolution, applicable Civil Service laws, rules and regulations, police department rules, regulations and orders, or the Salt Lake City Code. All questions of apparent conflict between resolutions, ordinances, rules, regulations, orders and this MEMORANDUM or of interpretation of this MEMORANDUM shall be resolved by the City, in consultation with the Association. ARTICLE II . RECOGNITION The CITY recognizes the ASSOCIATION as the exclusive bargaining agent pursuant to the Resolution for the purpose of negotiating salaries, wages, hours and other conditions of employment for Police Officers in the UNIT as defined by the CITY. These rights of the Police Officers ' bargaining agent shall remain in effect until decertification of the ASSOCIATION or until repeal or amendment of the Resolution. ARTICLE III . RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS A. MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVES, CITY EMPLOYER RIGHTS ( 1 ) It is the exclusive right of the CITY to determine the mission of each of its constituent departments, boards and commissions, consistent with the provisions of this MEMORANDUM and to set standards of service to be offered to the public, and to exercise exclusive control and discretion over its organization and operation by the lawfully constituted officers thereof. ( 2) It is the exclusive right of the CITY to: (a) Hire and direct its Police Officers; -2- (b) Determine position of employment and establish classifications therefor; (c) Take disciplinary action for proper cause; subject to appropriate review. (d) Relieve its Police Officers from duty because of lack of work or other legitimate reasons, subject to appropriate review hereunder; (e) Determine the method, means and personnel by which the CITY' s operations are to be conducted, including but not limited to contracting out to the private sector or other agencies of government any operations, services, labor or any other job performed by or for the CITY; provided, however, that the exercise of such rights does not preclude Police Officers or representatives from conferring or raising grievances about the practical consequences such decisions on these matters may have on wages, hours, or other terms and conditions of employment in an expeditious and appropriate manner. ( f) Take whatever actions as may be necessary to carry out its responsibilities in situations of an emergency. (3 ) The ASSOCIATION recognizes the CITY' s right under the Resolution to establish and/or revise performance standards or norms notwithstanding the existence of prior performance levels, norms or standards. Such standards, developed by usual work measurement procedures, may be used to determine acceptable performance levels, prepare work schedules and to measure the performance of each Police Officer or group of Police Officers. Police Officers who work at less than acceptable levels of performance may be subject to disciplinary measures in accordance with performance standards established by the CITY. (4 ) Training in an approved training course may be required of each Police Officer by the CITY. Required training may, at the CITY' s discretion, be on the Police Officer' s own time. Compensation for off-duty training shall be limited to a straight-time computation unless required by the Fair Labor Standards Act, shall extend only to hours actually spent in approved and required -3- training courses and shall not include time spent for travel in conjunction with such required training. B. POLICE OFFICER RIGHTS ( 1) CITY Police Officers shall have the right to form, join and participate in the activities of Police Officer organizations of their own choosing for the purpose of representation on all matters of Police Officer relations. No Police Officer shall be discriminated against because of affiliation or membership with the ASSOCIATION. (2) Police Officers of the CITY shall also have the right to refuse to join or participate in any activity of any Police Officer organization and shall have the right to represent themselves individually in their employment relations with the CITY. No Police Officer shall be discriminated against because of his or her refusal to affiliate with the ASSOCIATION or because of membership or affiliation with another labor organization. (3) A CITY Police Officer shall have the right to refrain from any and all activities with reference to Police Officer organization and shall be free from any and all restraint or coercion in the exercise of the right to refrain from joining, participating, assisting, supporting or in any other way contributing to the operation of the ASSOCIATION. No Police Officer shall be inter- fered with, intimidated, restrained, coerced or discriminated against because of the exercise of any of these rights. (4) The parties agree that they will continue to work cooperatively to assure that all Police Officers have equal-employment opportunities and that no one is discriminated against because of race, color, national origin, sex, religion or age as specified in the CITY' s current affirmative action plan. Further, no Police Officer shall be discriminated against because of political affiliation, marital status or handicap to the extent particular Police Officers are protected under Federal or State law or contract. -4- ( 5) Nothing in this MEMORANDUM shall preclude any Police Officer: (a) Regardless of membership or non-membership in the ASSOCIATION, from bringing matters of personal concern to the attention of the _ appropriate officials in accordance with applicable law, regulations or established policy; (b) From acting on his or her behalf in choosing an attorney or agent in a grievance or judicial action; or (c) Who is or is not an eligible member of the ASSOCIATION from having and enjoying, without discrimination, all employment rights and benefits granted by the CITY. The foregoing notwithstanding, if the subject matter of such Police Officer discussions and a decision by the City thereon would effect an interpretation or change in this MEMORANDUM, the ASSOCIATION shall have the right to be heard before final action is taken by the CITY. C. ASSOCIATION RIGHTS ( 1) The ASSOCIATION shall have the right to present its views to the CITY either orally or in writing. (2 ) A representative of the ASSOCIATION shall, at a Police Officer' s request, be given the opportunity to be present for hearings in processing a Police Officer' s grievance as per the department' s grievance procedure. (3 ) The opportunity of the ASSOCIATIONS's representative to be present does not apply to informal discussions of personal problems between a Police Officer and his or her immediate supervisor. (4) The ASSOCIATION accepts the responsibility for, and agrees to represent in good faith, the interests of all Police Officers in the UNIT without discrimination and without regard to membership in the ASSOCIATION. ( 5 ) The CITY agrees to recognize the officers and duly designated representatives of the ASSOCIATION. -5- The ASSOCIATION agrees to keep the CITY advised, in writing, of its officers and stewards. The number of ASSOCIATION stewards shall be the number reasonably required, as determined by consultation, to assure that each Police Officer in the UNIT shall have access to an ASSOCIATION steward; provided, however, in no event shall there be more than sixteen ( 16) such stewards. The names of the ASSOCIATION stewards will be posted by the ASSOCIATION on appropriate bulletin boards in the work location. ( 6) The duly designated ASSOCIATION stewards shall, upon proper notification to their immediate supervisors be allowed a reasonable opportunity, during working hours, for the purpose of investigating and adjusting grievances, but in no event shall such activity exceed two hours per week, unless otherwise approved by the Chief of Police. (7) It is agreed that internal ASSOCIATION business such as soliciting membership, collecting dues, electing officers, membership meetings, and posting and distributing literature will be conducted during the non-duty hours of the Police Officers with the sole exception of the following: (a) Stewards shall be allowed a reasonable period during working hours to attend ASSOCIATION meetings or to participate in other ASSOCIATION business as necessary up to a maximum period of two hours per month, unless otherwise approved by the Chief of Police; provided however, that in all such cases, Police Officers involved will coordinate said time off with their direct supervisor; and further provided that no more than two stewards may be released from duty in any one division at one time. (b) Police Officers designated as official delegates to ASSOCIATION conferences and conventions shall be allowed time off with pay for the purpose of attending such conferences and conventions which time off shall not exceed the total of 72 working hours per year for the aggregate of all such Police Officers, unless otherwise approved by the Chief of Police. In all such cases, the -6- Police Officers involved will obtain prior permission from their immediate supervisors at the earliest opportunity to do so. (8) The CITY agrees to deduct bi-weekly on a 24 pay period basis, ASSOCIATION membership dues from the pay of -those Police Officers who individually request in writing that such deductions be made. The CITY further agrees to cease deduction of such fees upon written request by the Police Officer. ( 9 ) The CITY agrees to designate space not less than twenty-four (24) inches wide and fifteen ( 15) inches long in convenient view in each division and similar space in the squad room of each support division, (e.g. , detective, narcotics, traffic) . Said space shall be available to the ASSOCIATION for posting notices. No materials which defame or degrade any individual or group, or are found to be obscene or unprofessional shall be posted. Police Officers may not post personal notices in any other areas without the express permission of the Chief of Police or his designee. Notices posted on space allotted to the ASSOCIATION may include: (a) Notices of ASSOCIATION recreational and social affairs; (b) Notices of ASSOCIATION elections; (c) Notices of ASSOCIATION appointments and results of ASSOCIATION elections; (d) Notices of ASSOCIATION meetings and agenda; (e) Notices concerning bona fide ASSOCIATION activities such as cooperatives, credit unions and unemployment compensation information; and/or, ( f) Other notices concerning ASSOCIATION affairs. There shall be no other general distribution, solicitations or posting by Police Officers of pamphlets, advertising or political matter, or any kind of literature or solicitations upon CITY property other than as herein -7- provided. Nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit distribution of appropriate ASSOCIATION publications or notices as defined herein above to members of the bargaining UNIT on said boards or in the Police Officer's distribution box. ARTICLE IV. WAGES A. WAGE SCHEDULE ( 1 ) Effective July 1, 1989 and ending June 30, 1991, Police Officers in the UNIT shall be paid biweekly in accordance with the wage schedule set forth in Appendix "A" of this MEMORANDUM attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. ( 2) Salaries and Hourly Reimbursements: All full- time Police Officers shall be paid monthly salaries. Part-time and seasonal Police Officers shall be paid on an hourly basis. No Police Officer on an hourly basis shall receive in excess of the minimum rate of pay for a similar job under the wage structure applicable to full-time salaried Police Officers. (3) For purposes of the salary schedule, it is understood by the parties that all Unit Police Officers have an anniversary date relating to their actual date of hire. Anniversary dates should reflect uninterrupted years of service. Police Officers who take voluntary leave of absence shall have the leave deducted from their "years of service" . ARTICLE V. HOURS OF SERVICE AND OVERTIME A. HOURS OF SERVICE ( 1) Overtime shall be as defined by the Fair Labor Standards Act. In order for the Police Officer to receive overtime compensation, the Police Officer must have prior approval from the appropriate supervisor. Police Officers electing to perform overtime which has not been authorized shall not be compensated for said work. This clause shall -8- not be construed to limit or prevent the CITY from changing or establishing work shifts as the need arises or to guarantee Police Officers forty (40) hours work per week. ( 2) Such Police Officers as designated by the Police Chief shall report to their shift Sergeant completely prepared for duty at least 15 minutes prior to the beginning of their designated shift for the purpose of roll call and briefing without additional compensation. (3) A reasonable effort will be made to allow each Police Officer a fifteen minute rest period during each consecutive four (4) hour working period which time shall be included within the work shift; provided, however, there shall be no additional compensation paid to Police Officers electing or required to forego such rest period. (4) A reasonable effort will be made to provide each Police Officer a 30 minute lunch period during each work shift; however, said lunch period shall be scheduled in accordance with operational needs of the department by the shift supervisor. There shall be no additional compensation to Police Officers who forego such periods. B. OVERTIME COMPENSATION ( 1) Police Officers required to perform overtime work shall be compensated by pay at one and one-half the applicable hourly rate. The Police Officer may request compensatory time off in lieu of pay for overtime, and such compensatory time may be allowed subject to approval of the Division Commander; provided, however, the determination of whether to award pay or compensatory time off to Police Officers who perform overtime while working in the Special Investigations Division ( SID) (as defined by departmental policy) , shall be at the discretion of the CITY, except, however, that said Police Officers may indicate a preference for the form of overtime payment contingent upon approval by the Chief of Police, scheduling requirements, and availability of funds. Provided however, an Police Officer shall not accrue more than 240 hours of compensatory time (or 160 hours of actual overtime worked) for hours worked after April 15, 1986. Any UNIT Police -9- Officer, who after April 15, 1986, has accrued 240 hours of compensatory time off, shall, for additional overtime hours worked be paid overtime compensation (in cash) at time and one-half of the Police Officer' s regular rate of pay. ( 2) When time off from employment is allowed as compensation for overtime, such time off shall be granted within sixty ( 60) days from the date overtime work was performed, or upon express approval of a division head, during a period not to exceed twelve ( 12 ) months from the performance of overtime work. C. COMPENSATION FOR COURT APPEARANCE ( 1 ) A full-time Police Officer shall be entitled to receive compensation for a criminal court appearance made during his or her off-duty hours as a witness subpoenaed by the City or the State of Utah as follows: (a) Felony and class "A" misdemeanor cases: four (4 ) hours of hourly base pay. (b) All other misdemeanor and traffic cases, including juvenile court and drivers license cases: three (3 ) hours of hourly base pay. ( 2) Compensation shall be provided by authority of this section only if: ( a) The time of the required appearance is noted on the subpoena and initialed by the prosecuting attorney. (b) The specified time of appearance is not within one ( 1 ) hour of commencement or completion of a duty shift, or the witness is required to appear during a duty shift and is released from appearance more than one ( 1 ) hour after completion of that shift, in which case the witness' s release time must be noted and signed on the subpoena by the prosecuting attorney. (c) A copy of the witness ' s subpoena complying herewith shall have been delivered to the witness' s supervisor within seven ( 7 ) days following the court appearance. -10- (3) Compensation shall be provided hereunder for no more than two ( 2) appearances per day. A second appearance shall be compensable only if it is specified to occur: (a) More than four _(4) hours after commencement of a witness's appearance in a felony -or Class "A" misdemeanor case; or (b) More than three (3) hours after any other ap- pearance compensable hereunder. (4) The prosecuting attorney shall have the right and the duty to refuse to initial the subpoena of any witness who through tardiness, absence or neglect fails to appear in compliance with the terms of the subpoena. Any Police Officer failing to appear in com- pliance with the terms of a formal notice or subpoena shall be subject to disciplinary action. D. OVERTIME ADMINISTRATION The administration of any necessary overtime work is solely a function of management. E. CALLBACK Police Officers who have been released from normally scheduled work and standby periods who have been directed to return to work by an appropriate division head or designated representative without advance notice or scheduling shall receive a minimum of two ( 2) hours compensation on such occasions as they actually report to work. F. FLSA If any provision of this MEMORANDUM conflicts with the Fair Labor Standards Act (as amended) and the regulations promulgated thereto (hereinafter referred to as the "Act" ) , the Act shall govern and only the terms in conflict with the Act shall be deemed void. Except for the provisions deemed void as stated herein, the MEMORANDUM shall remain in full force and effect. G. SENIORITY Departmental seniority as a sworn officer will be the criterion for bidding on shifts, days off and specific -11- districts when a conflict does not exist with departmental policy or operating efficiency. ARTICLE VI. HOLIDAYS A. HOLIDAYS SPECIFIED The following days shall be recognized and observed as holiday for all full-time, salaried Police Officers. Part-time and seasonal Police Officers shall not be entitled to holiday benefits. All such Police Officers shall receive their regular rate of pay for each of the following unworked holidays not to exceed an equivalent of 8 hours per holiday ( 96 hours per calendar year) . ( 1 ) The first day of January, called New Year' s Day; (2) The 3rd Monday of January, observed as Human Rights Day; (3) The third Monday of February, observed as Presidents Day; (4) The last Monday of May, called Memorial Day; ( 5) The fourth day of July, called Independence Day; ( 6 ) The twenty-fourth day of July, called Pioneer Day; ( 7) The first Monday in September, known as Labor Day; (8) The second Monday of October, known as Columbus Day; (9 ) The eleventh day of November, known as Veteran' s Day; ( 10) The fourth Thursday in November, known as Thanksgiving Day; and ( 11 ) The twenty-fifth day of December, called Christmas. ( 12 ) One personal holiday can be taken upon request of the Police Officer at the discretion of the supervisor. Police Officers are eligible for this holiday only after satisfactorily completing their initial probationary period. -12- B. ALTERNATIVE AND ADDITIONAL HOLIDAYS When any holiday listed above falls on Sunday, the fol- lowing business day shall be considered a holiday. When any holiday listed above falls on Saturday, the preceding business day shall be considered a holiday. In addition to the above, any day may be designated as a holiday by proclamation of the Mayor and/or City Council. C. HOLIDAY WORK Full-time, salaried Police Officers required to work on a day designated for celebration of a holiday hereunder shall, in addition to their holiday pay, receive pay at their regular rates, compensatory time off on a straight-time basis, or, when hours worked plus designated holidays exceed 40 hours in a single work week, overtime compensation shall be computed and granted in accordance with the provisions of Section B of Article V. D. HOLIDAY PAY LIMITATION Police Officers must work or be on authorized leave their last scheduled working hours before and the next scheduled working day following the holiday to qualify for holiday compensation. Police Officers terminating the day before or after a holiday shall not be compensated hereunder. ARTICLE VII. VACATIONS A. VACATIONS AUTHORIZED Full-time, salaried Police Officers shall be entitled to receive their regular salaries during vacation periods earned and taken in accordance with the provisions of this Article. Part-time and seasonal Police Officers shall not be entitled to any vacation or termination benefits. B. VACATION SCHEDULE 1 . VACATIONS FOR FIRST NINE ( 9 ) YEARS OF FULL- TIME EMPLOYMENT Every full-time Police Officer shall earn a vacation period of 3. 69 hours per biweekly pay -13- period from the date of full-time employment; provided, further, that no person shall be entitled to any vacation, unless such person has completed six (6) months of full-time employment with the CITY. 2. VACATION DURING TENTH ( 10TH) YEAR OF FULL TIME EMPLOYMENT Every full-time Police Officer who has completed nine (9 ) cumulative full years of employment in accordance with the Seniority Article of this MEMORANDUM with the CITY shall earn a vacation equal to 5.23 hours per biweekly pay period from the date of their tenth ( 10th) anniversary date of cumulative employment. 3 . VACATION DURING FIFTEENTH YEAR OF EMPLOYMENT Every person who has completed fourteen ( 14) cumulative years in accordance with the Seniority Article of this MEMORANDUM with the CITY shall earn a vacation equal to 6.77 hours per biweekly pay period from the date of their fifteenth ( 15th) anniversary date of cumulative employment. C. RULES FOR TAKING VACATION ( 1 ) All vacations are to be taken as directed by the head of each Division at such time as it would be most advantageous to the efficient operations of that Division. However, in the assignment of vacation periods: (a) The Police Officers with the most uninterrupted seniority as a sworn officer with the department shall be given first consideration for requested vacation periods prior to March 15. Requests made thereafter shall be approved on a first-come first- served basis; and (b) Annual vacation requests prior to March 15 will be requested in blocks of 5 or more working days (40 hours ) . (c) Vacation periods may be divided into two or more separate periods as are deemed necessary by the Division head or as requested by the Police Officer and approved by the Division head. -14- ( 2) Police Officers may accumulate vacation ( including both earned vacation and sick leave conversion time) , according to the length of their full-time cumulative years of employment with the CITY up to the following maximum limits: (a ) After 6 months - up to 200 hours; (b) After 9 years - up to 240 hours; (c) After 14 years - up to 280 hours. Any vacation earned or accrued beyond said maximum shall be deemed forfeited unless utilized prior to the end of the calendar year in which such maximum has been accrued. On petition of the Police Officer, the Chief of Police may allow a Police Officer to accumulate vacation earned in excess of the maximum limits provided in this subparagraph (2 ) , if the Chief determines that the Police Officer was unable to use vacation due to circumstances beyond the Police Officer' s control. (3 ) Except upon termination as provided in Section D, or purchase as provided in Section E, no Police Officer shall be entitled to be paid for vacation earned but not taken. D. VACATION AND TERMINATION BENEFITS UPON TERMINATION ( 1 ) Every Police Officer whose employment is terminated by resignation or otherwise shall be entitled to be paid for: (a) All earned vacation time accrued, unused, unforfeited and lawfully forwarded from previous years, plus (b) A termination benefit consisting of all vacation accrued, unforfeited and unused for the year of employment during which the termination shall occur. ( 2) However, the foregoing provisions of subsection VII D( 1 ) notwithstanding, no Police Officer shall be entitled to any termination benefit or payment for any vacation time which has not been vested, accrued, unforfeited and unused and shall not be entitled to any payment or termination benefit: -15- ( a) Until a Police Officer has completed six ( 6) months of full-time employment with the CITY; or (b) If any resigning Police Officer fails to give at least ten ( 10) working days prior written notice to his or her Division head of his or her contemplated resignation. E. CASH PAYMENT OF EARNED VACATION TIME IN LIEU OF USE ( 1 ) The Mayor may purchase up to, but not exceeding, 80 hours of earned and accrued vacation time, to which a Police Officer is entitled as authorized in this article, with the consent of said Police Officer and upon the favorable written recommendation of the Police Officer' s Division head. (2) Said purchase of accrued vacation time may be authorized, in the sole, exclusive and absolute discretion of the Mayor when, in his or her judgment, it is demonstrated that: (a) Vacation time is accrued and earned in accordance with this Memorandum; (b) The cash payment in lieu of vacation time use will not interfere with a Police Officer performance or create an unreasonable hardship on said Police Officer or Police Officer' s family; (c) There is a demonstrated need for the CITY to retain the services of the Police Officer for the said vacation time; (d) There are sufficient monies in the departmental budget to pay for the vacation time as certified by the City's Finance Director without disturbing or interfering with the delivery of CITY services; and (e) The Police Officer consents voluntarily to the cash payment in lieu of time off from his or her regular work schedule. The foregoing notwithstanding, under no circum- stances may the CITY purchase more than 80 hours of said earned but unused vacation time from a single Police Officer. -16- (3 ) The amount to be paid for any such purchase of vacation time as provided herein shall be based on the wage or salary rate of the said Police Officer at the date of approval by the CITY. However, under no circumstances shall any overtime compensation be paid, computed or accrued by virtue of the CITY authorizing a Police Officer to work a vacation period and receive cash payment therefor in lieu of use. (4) The CITY will extend a diligent effort to provide every Police Officer his or her earned annual vacation and shall, through appropriate management efforts, seek to minimize the recommendations for cash payments in lieu of vacation use. Any vacation purchase by the CITY shall be considered to be an extraordinary circumstance and not a fringe benefit of the Police Officer. ARTICLE VIII . SICK LEAVE AND HOSPITALIZATION BENEFIT A. SICK LEAVE POLICY AND PROCEDURES ( 1 ) Sick leave shall be provided for all full-time salaried Police Officers only, as insurance against loss of income when a Police Officer is unable to perform assigned duties because of illness or injury. (2) Each full-time, salaried Police Officer in the UNIT shall be entitled to 96 hours of sick leave each calendar year. Sick leave will be granted in a lump sum during the first month of each calendar year. Sick leave will be granted on this basis if, for the prior year, the UNIT' s average sick leave does not exceed the City's average sick leave. If the UNIT average sick leave exceeds the City' s average, then each full-time, salaried Police Officer in the UNIT shall earn 8 hours of sick leave for each full month during any given year. Police Officers who have used less than the City average as computed on December 31 of each year shall be awarded an additional 24 sick leave hours as of January 1, of the year after. (3) No Police Officer of the CITY shall be entitled to the foregoing sick leave until such person has -17- completed six ( 6) months of continuous employment with the CITY. ( 4) Police Officers absent from work on account of illness or injury shall report intended absence to their Division head or supervisor as soon as practical, but no later than fifteen ( 15) minutes after commencement of the Police Officer's duty shift unless justified by emergency circumstances. ( 5) Sick leave in excess of 16 hours for any one illness shall be documented by a written certification from a health department nurse or a licensed practicing and attending physician, that during the period of leave, the absent officer or Police Officer was prevented by illness from discharging the duties required by his or her office or position of employment. Such certifi- cation shall also be required of any Police Officer claiming sick leave benefits for an absence not reported in compliance with subsection (4) hereof or at such other times at which verification is requested by a supervisor-or department head. ( 6) The following disciplinary action shall be deemed mandatory for abuse or neglect of sick leave privileges or procedures, except where the Police Officer demonstrates justifiable excuse to the department head: (a) For failure to timely report absence from work as required in subsection (4) of this section, a minimum of four hours suspension without pay. (b) For all other abuses of sick leave privileges, a minimum automatic 40 hour suspension without pay, together with such further disciplinary measures, including suspension or dismissal, as may be deemed appropriate by the Chief of Police. B. ACCUMULATION OF SICK LEAVE Authorized and unused sick leave may be accumulated from year to year. -18- C. OVERTIME COMPENSATION Scheduled work days for which a Police Officer is absent due to illness and on sick leave as provided for hereunder, shall be construed as normal work days for the purposes of computing such Police Officer's overtime compensation under Article V of this MEMORANDUM. D. SICK LEAVE CONVERSION TO VACATION TIME Any Police Officer who has accumulated to his credit 240 sick leave hours may choose to convert a portion of the yearly sick-leave grant for any given year to vaca- tion under and subject to the following provisions: No. of sick leave No. of sick leave hours used during hours available for previous calendar year conversion 0 40 8 32 16 24 24 - 16 32 8 40 0 E. SICK LEAVE CREDIT FORWARD The balance of the sick-leave hours not converted to vacation as permitted above, less the number of hours used during that calendar year as sick leave hours, shall be carried forward as accumulated sick leave. F. NOTIFICATION OF ELECTION Any election by a Police Officer to convert any sick leave to vacation time must be made by notifying the Department of Human Resource Management of the CITY, in writing, on or before January 31 of each year; otherwise, no conversion will be allowed for that calendar year and such conversion privilege shall be deemed waived for that calendar year. In no event shall sick leave be converted for other than the immediately preceding year' s sick leave allocation. G. PRESUMPTION OF USE Any sick leave hours properly converted to vacation benefits as above described, shall be deemed to be taken prior to any other hour of vacation time to which -19- the Police Officer is entitled; provided, however, that in no event shall any sick leave hours converted to vacation be entitled to any pay or compensation upon a Police Officer' s termination. Any sick leave hours converted to vacation remaining unused at the date of termination or retirement shall be forfeited by the Police Officer. H. RETIREMENT BENEFITS In addition to the sick leave conversion privilege to vacation days above described, at retirement, a Police Officer or the Police Officer's estate where death follows retirement but precedes payment, shall be eligible to a retirement benefit as stipulated in Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 6 of 1989. Police Officers who retire under the eligibility requirements of the Utah State Retirement system and are not eligible under the above referenced order shall be paid in cash, at their then current pay scale, a sum equal to their daily rate of pay for 25 percent (25%) of the accumulated sick leave days reserved for the benefit of said Police Officers at the date of their retirement or 50 days of full pay (whichever is less) . In lieu of the above, Police Officer may elect to convert the sick leave conversion privilege to hospital and surgical coverage. 50% of the sick leave hours available at retirement may be converted to a dollar allowance at the time of retirement. The sick leave hours converted to a dollar allowance shall be subject to any state and federal income and social security tax withholding required by law. A Police Officer' s available dollar allowance determines the number of months of medical and surgical coverage which may be purchased. If insurance costs go up due to group experience, the number of months of coverage will decrease. I . HOSPITALIZATION In addition to the sick leave authorized hereunder, each full-time Police Officer shall be entitled to 240 hours of hospitalization leave each calendar year, provided that such leave may be taken only if, and during the period that, such Police Officer is actually confined to a hospital, or using an outpatient or other acceptable facility with the approval of the Department of Human Resource Management. Police Officers requesting such leave shall comply with the CITY' s cost containment policy as set forth by the City Department of Human Resource Management. -20- J. UNAUTHORIZED SICK LEAVE AND HOSPITAL BENEFITS A Police Officer shall be entitled to receive sick leave or hospitalization leave-benefits for illness, injuries or disability resulting from accidents arising out of or in the course of his or her employment for an employer other than the CITY. Provided, however, that as a condition of granting such leave, the CITY may require that it be subrogated to the Police Officer' s rights of recovery against any person or organization associated with such injury. The CITY shall have the exclusive right to decide whether to require subrogation and/or seek recovery; provided, however, that full recovery by and reimbursement to the CITY of all medical and leave costs, shall have the effect of re-vesting with the Police Officer all sick leave and hospitalization leave entitlements exhausted as a result of such injury. K. REGULAR SALARY TO BE CONTINUED Each Police Officer who takes authorized sick leave or authorized hospitalization leave shall continue to receive his or her regular salary during his or her absence from work for the periods set forth in this Article VIII. L. DISABILITY COMPENSATION Full time Police Officers shall receive disability compensation pursuant to the Utah Public Employee' s Disability Act Sections 49-9-101 et seq. of the Utah Code Annotated as interpreted by the Utah State Retirement Board. M. PART-TIME AND SEASONAL POLICE OFFICERS EXCLUDED All part-time and seasonal Police Officers are excluded from the operation of this Article and shall not be entitled to any sick leave or hospitalization leave with pay. N. INJURY LEAVE The CITY shall establish rules and procedures for administration of an injury leave program ( supplemental to regular sick leave benefits) for Police Officers, under the following qualifications and restrictions: -21- 1 . The disability must have resulted from a documented injury arising out of the discharge of official police duties and/or while exercising some form of necessary law enforcement authority as determined by the Chief of Police. 2. The Police Officer must be unable to return to work due to the injury as verified by a licensed physician acceptable to the CITY; 3. The leave benefit must not exceed the value of the Police Officer' s net salary during the period of absence due to the injury, less all amounts paid or credited to the Police Officer as worker' s compensation, social security, long term disability, or retirement benefits, or any form of governmental relief whatsoever; 4. The aggregate value of benefits provided to Police Officers under this injury leave program shall not exceed the total of $5000, unless approved in writing by the Mayor for extraordinary reasons or circumstances; and 5. The City's Risk Manager shall be principally responsible for the review of injury leave claims, provided that appeals from the decision of the Risk Manager may be reviewed by the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management who may make recommendations to the Mayor for final decision. 6. If a Police Officer is eligible for worker' s compensation as provided by law; and is not receiving injury leave pursuant to this provision said Police Officer may elect in writing to the Director of Human Resource Management to use accumulated sick leave and authorized vacation time to supplement the Police Officer' s worker' s compensation not to exceed the employee' s regular salary. ARTICLE IX LEAVES OF ABSENCE A. FUNERAL LEAVE ( 1 ) Time off with pay will be granted a full-time salaried Police Officer who suffers the loss of a wife, husband, child, stepchild, mother, father, -22- stepmother, stepfather, sister, brother, father- in-law, mother-in-law, grandchild, grandfather, or grandmother. In the event of death in any of these instances, the Police Officer will be paid the regular base pay for scheduled work time from the time of death through the day of the funeral. Police Officers will be permitted one additional day of funeral leave, on the day following the funeral, if the funeral or burial is held more than 150 miles distant from Salt Lake City and if the day following the funeral is a normal working day. Satisfactory proof of such death, together with the date thereof and the date and location of the funeral and burial, must be furnished by the Police Officer to his or her Division head. ( 2) In the event of death of relatives other than those enumerated in subsection 1, a Police Officer will be paid for time off from scheduled working hours while attending the funeral services for such person, not to exceed eight ( 8) hours. (3) In the event of death of friends, a Police Officer may be granted time off without pay while attending the funeral services for such persons, not to exceed four (4) hours, subject to the approval of his or her immediate supervisor. ( 4) Time off under this paragraph shall not be included as time worked in the computation of overtime pay. ( 5) In the event the death of any member of the immediate family as set forth in subsection 1 occurs while a Police Officer is on vacation, his or her vacation will be extended by the amount of time authorized as funeral leave under said paragraph. ( 6) The provisions of this paragraph shall not be applicable to Police Officers who are on leave of absence. B. LEAVE OF ABSENCE OF POLICE OFFICERS WHO ENTER MILITARY SERVICE Every Police Officer of the City who enlists or is called or inducted into and enters active service in the Utah State National Guard or any branch of the federal military, naval or marine service shall be entitled to absent himself/herself from his or her -23- duties and service from the City without pay as required by state and federal law. C. LEAVE WHILE ON ANNUAL ENCAMPMENT All Police Officers who are or shall become members of the organized reserves of the United States Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines or any unit of the Utah National Guard shall be allowed full pay for all time not in excess of fifteen ( 15) consecutive calendar days per year spent on duty at summer camp in connection with the reserve training and instruction requirements of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines of the United States. This leave shall be in addition to annual vacation leave with pay. D. LEAVE FOR JURY DUTY All full-time salaried Police Officers shall be entitled to receive and retain statutory juror' s fees paid for jury service in the District and Federal Courts whose jurisdictions include Salt Lake County subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth. No reduction in a Police Officer' s salary shall be made for absence from work resulting from such jury service. On those days that a Police Officer is required to report for jury service and is thereafter excused from such service during his or her regular working hours for the CITY, he or she shall forthwith return to and carry on his or her regular CITY employment. Failure to so return to work shall result in the forfeiture of that day' s pay by such Police Officer. E. PARENTAL LEAVE A leave of absence may be requested by any Police Officer for the following reasons: a. Becoming a parent through birth or adoption of newly born children. b. Due to the inpatient hospitalization of a dependent child. The following provisions apply to the use of parental leave: a. Parental leave may be granted one time during a calendar year with pay on a straight time basis for a period not to exceed 40 consecutive hours commencing either (a) from the date of birth of -24- the child or (b) from the date the child commences residence with the Police Officer or (c) becomes hospitalized in an inpatient facility. b. The Police Officer has accumulated and has available unused sick leave. Under no - circumstances shall the Police Officer be entitled to use as parental leave more than 40 consecutive hours per calendar year. c. The Police Officer gives notice to his or her supervisor as soon as possible under the circumstances. d. The Police Officer provides, upon request by a supervisor, certification of birth or evidence of a child placement for adoption to his or her supervisor within five ( 5) calendar days following termination of such leave. A letter may be requested from the treating physician in the event of hospitalization of a dependent child within five ( 5 ) calendar days following termination of parental leave used for this purpose. e. A Police Officer's sick leave shall be reduced by the number of hours taken by a Police Officer as parental leave under this section. F. ADDITIONAL LEAVES OF ABSENCE Police Officers shall be eligible for additional leaves of absence, without compensation for reasonable purposes at the discretion of the CITY. ARTICLE X. MERIT INCREASES Police Officers who are hired into full-time positions shall become eligible for merit increases beginning with the first pay period after completion of one year' s continuous employment and shall be eligible for future merit increases on that anniversary date in accordance with the salary schedule provided under Article IV. Merit increases will be paid to Police Officers in accordance with the wage scale and the terms set forth in Appendix "A" and Article IV. All merit increases shall be conditioned upon the eligible Police Officer' s adequate length of service and satisfactory -25- performance of job requirements as specified in the Police Officer's current Performance Rating Report or comparable supervisory report. ARTICLE XI . EDUCATIONAL INCENTIVE PAY, UNIFORM, AUTOMOBILE AND TRAVEL ALLOWANCES A. EDUCATIONAL INCENTIVE PAY In addition to the salaries herein provided: ( 1 ) Full-time Police Officers who have completed all required basic training courses and probationary periods, shall be entitled to the following monthly allowances according to the educational degree held by such officers: (a) Doctorate $100.00 per month (b) Masters 75.00 per month (c) Bachelors 50.00 per month (d) Associate 35.00 per month A Police Officer shall be eligible for incentive pay hereunder following submission of his or her diploma evidencing completion of degree require- ments at a fully accredited college or university to the Chief of Police. The foregoing notwithstanding, no Police Officer shall be entitled to compensation under this subsection for an educational degree which qualifies the Police Officer for his or her position of employment; or for any degree which is not specifically related to the Police Officer' s actual employment duties as determined by the CITY upon recommendation of the Chief of Police. For the purposes of this subsection, degrees in the following shall be presumed to be job related: Business Pharmacy Health Public Administration Law Social and Behavioral Science Medicine -26- Social Work Nursing B. UNIFORM ALLOWANCE The City will pay to the Police Officers a uniform allowance pursuant to Salt Lake City Police Department Policy No. 3-09-01 .01 . C. AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCE Police Officers who are authorized to use and who do use privately-owned automobiles for official CITY business shall be reimbursed for their operation expenses of said automobiles at the rate of twenty one ( $.21 ) cents per mile for each mile actually traveled in official CITY business. Before payment is made to any Police Officer pursuant to the terms of this subsection, the use of the automobile must be authorized and the mileage traveled must be verified by the head of the Division involved. D. TRAVEL ALLOWANCE Police Officers of the CITY, when required to travel overnight away from home on official CITY business shall be entitled to the following expenses: ( 1 ) Meals. A per diem meal allowance not to exceed $32 for each full day or a majority thereof during which the Police Officer is absent from the CITY. If actual costs exceed this amount, the actual amount will be reimbursed 'only upon presentation of proper documentation. ( 2 ) Lodging. Actual cost of lodging outside the CITY not to exceed $35 per day unless approved in advance by the Office of the Mayor. (3) Travel. Actual cost to include taxi, bus, airlines train or automobile. Where alterna- tive forms of travel are available such as personal automobile versus an airline, the CITY will reimburse the lesser amount unless an alternative amount is approved in advance by the Office of the Mayor. (4) Within seven calendar days from the Police Officer's return, each such Police Officer -27- must complete and submit to the City' s Finance Director a travel statement for settlement. The Finance Director shall determine all costs attributed to the city- related business for which money was advanced and/or reimbursement is requested. Such travel settlement shall require receipts for the following: (a) Airline travel; (b) Cost of lodging; (c) Receipts for individual meals exceeding $32 per day where reimbursement is requested in excess of per diem. (d) A registration receipt where a convention or conference has been attended. 1 It is the CITY' s intention that the travel reimbursement policy herein-established is to reimburse the Police Officer actual out-of- pocket costs and expenses while attending to CITY business. ARTICLE XII . INSURANCE 1 . The CITY will make available, life, accidental death, and dismemberment, dental, and health insurance to all Police Officers covered under this MEMORANDUM, upon the terms and conditions as may be from time to time determined by the CITY. 2. The ratio which the City will contribute to the employee' s insurance during the term of this memorandum shall remain constant. A premium payment shall be deducted biweekly consistent with the pay periods. 3. The city will make available an Employee Assistance Program which will provide counseling by an outside confidential firm which includes drug abuse, alcoholism, and marriage counseling. -28- ARTICLE XIII. PENSION PLAN CONTRIBUTION A. From the effective date of this Memorandum to March 31 1990, the City agrees to pay to the Utah State - Retirement Fund for all current Police Officers the employer' s share required by the Public Safety Retirement Act, Sections 49-4-103 et seq. of the Utah Code Annotated and the percent of the Police Officer' s share that the City is paying on the date of execution of this Memorandum. B. For Police Officers who do not elect to participate in the Public Safety Non-Contributory Retirement System as described in subparagraphs C and D herein, the City agrees to pay to the Utah State Retirement Fund the employer's share as required by the Public Safety Requirement Act and the percent of said Police Officer' s share the City is paying on the date of execution of this Memorandum. The Police Officer' s share described in this paragraph B paid by the City shall not change unless mandated by Utah law. C. The City agrees to participate in the Utah State Public Safety Non-Contributory Retirement System as defined in Sections 49-4a-101 et seq. of the Utah Code Annotated (Supp. 1989 ) . The City will adopt a resolution or ordinance on or before December 31, 1989 applying for coverage pursuant to Section 49-4a-204 of the Utah Code Annotated (Supp. 1989 ) . D. Police Officers who elect to participate in the Public Safety Non-Contributory Retirement System must make an election on or after (not before) April 1, 1990. The election shall be a one time election. Police Officers shall waive their right to participate in the Public Safety Non-Contributory Retirement System prior to April 1, 1990. For Police Officers electing to participate in the non-contributory system, the City may require the Police Officers to provide individual written waivers stating that they will not elect to participate in the Public Safety Non-Contributory Retirement System before April 1, 1990. Police Officers who elect to participate in the Public Safety Non-Contributory Retirement System shall be governed by the terms and conditions of Sections 49-4a-101 et seq. of the Utah Code Annotated. E. All Police Officers hired after January 1, 1990 shall participate in the Public Safety Non-Contributory Retirement System. -29- ARTICLE XIV. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE All grievances shall be handled as per the Police Department Policy and Procedures Manual, Civil Service Rules and Regulations and applicable City policies and procedures. The grievance procedure and any subsequent revisions to that procedure adopted by the Police Department as part of the Police Manual shall be developed by the Administration of the Department with representation from the Police Association. Final determination of the grievance procedure shall be subject to the approval of the Chief of Police. ARTICLE XV. PERSONNEL FILES An officer shall, upon reasonable notice, be provided access to the officer's individual internal affairs or personnel file under the following guidelines: 1 . Access to internal affairs files shall be in accordance with the provisions stated in the Police Department ' s Policy Manual. 2. Access to the employee' s personnel file shall be in accordance with the provisions in the Salt Lake City Corporation Policies and Procedures Manual. A document adverse to the police officer's employment may not be entered in his/her personnel files (which excludes the internal affairs files) without the police officer having first read and signed the document. The entry may be made, if after reading the document, the officer refuses to sign it. The officer' s refusal to sign shall be noted in the document. An officer has ten ( 10) working days within which to file a written response to any adverse document entered in his/her personnel file. The written response shall be attached to and accompany the adverse document. -30- ARTICLE XVI . LAYOFFS Whenever it is necessary to reduce the number of Police Officers in the City Police Department because of lack of work or lack of funds, the City shall first lay off temporary and probationary Police Officers in the Police Department. If further layoffs are necessitated, Police Officers shall be laid off in inverse order of length of service with the City as a Police Officer and rehired according to seniority. ARTICLE XVII . TERM OF AGREEMENT This MEMORANDUM shall be effective commencing July 1, 1989 and ending June 30, 1991, with the following exceptions: A. It is understood by the parties hereto that certain provisions of this agreement cannot be implemented by the CITY except upon public notice and hearing and compliance with various statutory and legal requirements. All financial commitments by the CITY shall be subject to the availability of funds approved by the City Council and the limitations on future budget commitments provided under State Constitution and Statute. B. The parties hereto may, by mutual written consent, agree to an amendment to this MEMORANDUM. C. It is understood that all wage and merit increases specified in this Memorandum are subject to availability of funds appropriated by the City Council and the limitations defined in Article XVII A. D. It is understood by the City and the Association that if the City Council, in its adoption of the City' s final budget for fiscal year 1990-91, does not appropriate monies to fund a merit increase for fiscal year 1990-91, this Memorandum shall be reopened in ten ( 10) days after adoption of the 1990-91 final budget. -31- ARTICLE XVIII . LIMITATION ON PROVISIONS The provisions hereof shall become effective only to the extent that they are capable of implementation within the appropriate and established income level of the CITY, and shall not act to impose directly or indirectly any new tax structure or infringe upon the prerogatives of the City Council to make or refrain from making an appropriation. It is expressly understood that this MEMORANDUM may not and cannot bind succeeding council members. ARTICLE XIX. STRIKES AND WORK STOPPAGES Continuous and uninterrupted service by the CITY and its Police Officers to the citizens, and orderly collective bargaining relations between the CITY and its Police Officers being essential considerations of this MEMORANDUM, the Association agrees on behalf of itself and its members, individually and collectively, that none of the following acts shall be engaged in or in any way approved of or encouraged by the Association or its members: ( 1 ) A concerted failure to report for duty; (2) A concerted absence of Police Officers from their positions; (3) A concerted stoppage of work; (4) A concerted submission of resignations; ( 5) A concerted absence, in whole or in part, by any group of Police Officers from the full, faithful and proper performance of their duties of employment for the purposes of inducing, influencing, condoning or coercing a change in the terms and conditions of employment, including sick calls, sick-outs, slowdowns or any other concerted interference with services provided by the CITY; or ( 6) The collective concerted withholding of services or the performance of duties by any person pending the signing of contracts, including those persons who are customarily employed on a yearly contract basis. In the event of a violation of this article by the Association and/or the Police -32- Officers, the CITY may, in addition to other remedies, discipline such Police Officers up to and including discharge. Police Officers shall not be entitled to any benefits or wages whatsoever while they are engaged in a strike, work stoppage or other interruption of work as specified herein or otherwise. ARTICLE XX. WAIVER CLAUSE Except as provided for in Article XVII hereof, the CITY and the Association expressly waive and relinquish the right, and each agrees that the other shall not be obligated during the term of this MEMORANDUM, to bargain collectively with respect to any subject or matter whether referred to or covered in this MEMORANDUM or not specifically referred to or covered in this MEMORANDUM, even though each subject or matter may not have been within the knowledge or contemplation of either or both the CITY and the Association at the time they negotiated or executed this MEMORANDUM and even though such subjects or matter were proposed and later withdrawn. ARTICLE XXI. LIMITATION It is understood by the parties that the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding shall not he binding upon the parties, either in whole or in part, until the CITY shall: ( 1 ) Act by majority vote of its governing body to approve said Memorandum of Understanding; ( 2 ) Enact ordinances, resolutions, or take other action required to implement said Memorandum of Understanding by general legislation; (3) Act to appropriate necessary funds required to implement the full provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding which requires funding for each year of its existence. The provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding relating to conditions and compensation after fiscal year 1989-90 are expressly subject to subsequent evaluation and approval by the City Council and to the availability of -33- funds and the exclusive right of the City Council to appropriate said funds. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have fixed their hands and seals the day and year first above written. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION NOSZI/N '=apy ,/,144,44 /I 142/fw-j- • ./iAl q YOR ATTEST: r ; ,,. •«�it .�.Ei[ =�"- APPROVED •', . ,SUN 30 1989 p, 1 NA 01..�.�,�%// � CI R i,) -DER Gill RECORDER SALT LAKE POLICE ASSOCIATION By G P Member SLPA Negotiating Committee Member SLPA Negotiating Committee 4aikv6 dc2,L -34- STATE OF UTAH ) County of Salt Lake) On the ceO,4j day of (,cam_ , 1989, personally appeared before m PALMER DePAULIS and KATHRYN MARSHALL, who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are the MAYOR and CITY RECORDER, respectively, of SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, and said persons acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the same. . -- Nottslyy Public :,:-_-` ,,^ tAN(TA Li.BAOwN• Ci &Count�(B�d 6 % �tl1 �QSaltLSK9Cdyt�mn84 11 �', fComr.ni lonExPir8S� efe--et(-17 , Apti130 1991 E State o�Utah N RY UBLIC, residing in Salt Lake County, Utah My Commission Expires: -35- STATE OF UTAH ) : ss. County of Salt Lake) On the 30-.P► day of Ca44-2- 1989, personally appeared before me 11/Id P. (;ve.e, w ( a.&n11hJ b di-ru Ica: , d ' FJdhy K • t_dy-6v\ of SALT LAKE POLICE ASSOCIATION, that the T for going instrument was signed in behalf of said association by authority of a resolution of its board of directors; and said person acknowledged to me that said association executed the same. tslorffy LANITA G.BROWN riy l &County ttah 841ng 1 t City. a �i S��t'Wfit` .t hely Commission Expires tp, 1 30 3p 1�J91 mtedUmh 11 •RY PUB C, residing in - ----Salt Lake County, Utah My Commission Expires: -36- APPENDIX A COMPLETED PAY GRADE AMOUNT YEARS OF SERVICE 501 1529 0 - 1 502 1654 1 - 2 503 1779 2 - 3 504 1904 3 - 4 505 2029 4 - 5 506 2154 5 - 6 507 2279 6 - 7 508 2319 7 - 8 509 2359 8 - 9 510 2399 9 - 10 511 2439 10 - 11 512 2479 11 - 12 513 2519 12 - 13 514 2559 13 - 14 515 2599 14 - 15 516 2639 15 - 16 517 2679 16 + a . Police Officers will be moved onto this pay scale on July 1st, 1989 , based on years of service. b. Police Officers eligible for merit increases as defined in Article IV and Article X, will move up the scale one pay grade on their anniversary date in fiscal year 1989/90 . c. Police Officers eligible as defined in (b) above will move up the scale one additional pay grade on their anniversary date in fiscal year 1990/91. APPENDIX B GROUP INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1989 - 1990 Medical Dental City Employee City Employee Share Share Share Share P.E.H.P Traditional Single 39.89 16.77 5.60 1.98 Couple 82.21 34.64 11.37 4.00 Family 109.76 46.24 14.87 5.23 P.E.H.P. Preferred Single 39.89 14.02 5.60 1.98 Couple 82.21 28.89 11.37 4.00 Family 109.76 38.57 14.87 5.23 Healthwise Single 39.27 13.81 4.89 1.73 Couple 80.01 28.12 9.83 3.46 Family 107.92 37.92 16.69 5.87 F.H.P. Single 36.37 12.78 6.33 2.23 Couple 80.86 28.41 13.07 4.60 Family 114.32 40.18 18.22 6.41 The following benefits are included with your Medical and Dental coverage regardless of your health insurance carrier . Employee City Share Share * Disability Income .47 1.36 * Basic Life for You .03 per $1000 .11 per $1000 * Basic Life for Your Family .11 .30 * Accidental Death & Dismemberment .07 .22 /z-k. SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Approving the Memorandum of Understanding between Salt Lake City Corporation and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004 representing the 200 Series Employees) AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1004 REPRESENTING THE 200 SERIES EMPLOYEES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. PURPOSE. Section 9(c) of the Salt Lake City Third Amended Labor Bargaining Resolution dated April 10, 1984, provides that no collective bargaining memorandum of understanding shall be effective until the legislative body of Salt Lake City Corporation approves said memorandum of understanding, enacts implementing legislation and appropriates all required funds. A Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 1004 representing the 200 Series employees, has been signed by the Mayor and authorized representatives of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 1004 on June 30, 1989 . A copy of the Memorandum of Understanding is attached hereto. The City Council has appropriated necessary funds required to implement the provisions of the attached Memorandum of Understanding for fiscal year 1989-90. The provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding are effective for fiscal years 1989-90 and 1990-91 subject to a reopener provision, availability of funds, appropriations by the City Council and City Council approval for fiscal year 1990-91 . Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby evidences its approval of the attached Memorandum of Understanding. SECTION 2. APPROVAL. The attached Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 1004 is hereby approved. SECTION 3. AUTHORIZATION. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to act in accordance with the terms and conditions of the attached Memorandum of Understanding. SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be deemed effective on July 1, 1989 . Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . CHAIRPERSON APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt l�e City Ai�ey's Office Date By-2- ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s Action: Approved Vetoed MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER FMN:cc _ l -1- l MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING THIS MEMORAND OF UNDERSTANDING, entered into this .3(9 day of ttA _ , 1989 , by SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, hereinafter referred to as the "CITY" , and the AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES; affiliated with AFSCME International AFL-CIO, hereinafter referred to as the "UNION, " WITNESSET H: WHEREAS, the CITY has endorsed the practices and procedures of collective bargaining specified in its collective bargaining resolution of November 16, 1977, as amended on April 10, 1984, hereinafter referred to as the "RESOLUTION" , as a fair and orderly way of conducting its relations with its employees insofar as such practices and procedures are appropriate to the functions and obligations of the CITY and to retain the right effectively to operate in a responsible and efficient manner, consistent with the paramount interests of the CITY; and - WHEREAS, the parties recognize that this Memorandum of Understanding, hereinafter referred to as "MEMORANDUM" , is not intended to modify any of the discretionary authority vested in the CITY by the Constitution and Statutes of the State of Utah, the body of law developed thereunder or under its ordinance or Collective Bargaining Resolutions; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the parties to this agreement to negotiate, where not otherwise mandated by statute or ordinance, for the salary structure, fringe benefits and employment conditions of the employees represented by the UNION according to the resolution, consisting of employees classified by the City as "200" Series, hereinafter referred to as "UNIT" , to prevent interruptions to work and promote the efficient operation of the CITY, and to provide an orderly and prompt method of handling and processing grievances. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto declare their mutual understandings as follows: ARTICLE I . PRODUCTIVITY AND CONSTRUCTION OF MEMORANDUM Delivery of municipal services in the most efficient, productive and courteous manner is of paramount importance to the CITY and the UNION. Such achievement is recognized to be a mutual obligation of both parties within their respective roles and responsibilities. All provisions of this MEMORANDUM shall be construed in compliance with such obligation and shall not abrogate in any respect provisions of the CITY' s Collective Bargaining Resolution or the Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah. All questions of interpretation of this MEMORANDUM shall be resolved according to Article XXIII of this memorandum. ARTICLE II . RECOGNITION The CITY recognizes the UNION as the exclusive bargaining agent pursuant to the CITY's Collective Bargaining Resolution for the purpose of negotiating salaries, wages, hours and other conditions of employment for employees in the UNIT. These rights of the employees ' bargaining agent shall remain in effect subject to the terms and conditions of the Resolution. ARTICLE III . MANAGEMENT RIGHTS The City retains the exclusive rights to manage all phases of its operations and to direct its work force except as specifically modified, curtailed, delegated, or relinquished under the terms of this MEMORANDUM. ARTICLE IV. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS A. CITY employees shall have the right to join and participate in the activities of the Union of their own choosing for the purpose of representation on all matters of employee relations or to refuse to join or participate in such activities and shall have the right to represent themselves individually in their employment relations with the CITY. Employees shall be free from any and all restraint or coercion in the exercise of their rights and shall not be discriminated against, because of membership or non-membership or activity or non-activity with the UNION. B. Both parties to this MEMORANDUM agree to assure equal employment opportunity to all employees and applicants for employment and to prohibit any employment practice which discriminates against any employee or applicant for employment with respect to compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of an individual ' s race, color, religion, national origin, marital status, eligibility for military service, sex, age (as provided by Law) or mental or physical handicap, to the full extent required by law. It is further agreed that representatives of both parties shall comply with this provision in the administration of this MEMORANDUM. C. If the subject matter of discussions with an employee and a decision by the CITY thereon would effect an interpretation or change in this MEMORANDUM, the UNION shall have the right to be heard before final action is taken by the CITY. D. The CITY shall make available to the UNION for ' - distribution one ( 1) copy of this MEMORANDUM for each employee in the UNIT, in design and form determined by the CITY. The CITY agrees to consult with the UNION on mode of distribution of such copies. E. The rights specified in this Article shall be in addition to grievance rights granted under Article XXIV of the MEMORANDUM, relating to the presence of stewards and other persons in disciplinary proceedings. ARTICLE V. UNION RIGHTS A. The UNION shall have the right to present its views to the CITY either orally or in writing. A representative of the UNION shall, at an employee' s request, be given the opportunity to be present for hearings in processing an employee's grievance under the CITY' s grievance procedure. The UNION accepts the responsibility for, and agrees to represent in good faith, the interests of all employees in the UNIT without discrimination and without regard to membership in the UNION. B. The CITY agrees to recognize the officers and duly designated representatives of the UNION. The UNION agrees to keep the CITY advised, in writing, of its -3- officers and stewards. The number of UNION stewards shall be the number reasonably required, as determined by consultation, to assure that each employee in the UNIT shall have access to a UNION steward; the duly designated UNION stewards shall, upon proper notification to their immediate supervisors and receipt of permission from such supervisors, be allowed a reasonable opportunity, during working hours, for the purpose of investigation, adjustment, and/or representing employees in grievances; provided that the CITY may require that no more than one steward shall be allowed such privileges, during working hours, for any one incident, regardless of the number of employees involved. Such permission shall not be unreasonably denied. The agreed upon number of stewards shall be distributed as follows: Police Records 1, Dispatch 2, Animal Control/Parking Enforcement 1, Finance 1, Public Utilities 9, Fleet 1, Public Works 5, City Hall 1, Courts 1, Airport 6, Parks 4. The UNION shall identify the representatives on July 1 of each calendar year to the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management. Any changes shall be reported as soon as is practical. It is the intent of this Agreement to limit the total number of stewards representing both 100 and 200 series employees to 32 stewards. C. It is agreed that internal UNION business such as soliciting membership, collecting dues, electing officers, membership meetings, and posting and distributing literature shall be conducted during the non-duty hours of the employees with the exception of the following: 1 . One UNION representative from each department shall, upon receipt of permission from such employee' s immediate supervisor, be allowed a reasonable period during working hours, to attend UNION meetings or to participate in other UNION business as necessary, up to a maximum period of two hours per month, unless otherwise approved by the Department Head. 2. Employees designated as official delegates to UNION conferences and conventions shall be allowed time off with pay for the purpose of attending such conferences and conventions not to exceed fifteen ( 15) working days per calendar year. 3. This does not preclude the business representative from delivering Union material to the designated bulletin board when it does not interfere with normal work routine. -4- The UNION shall provide the CITY 15 days ' notice of all conferences and conventions; and, in all cases, the employees shall obtain prior permission from their immediate supervisors at the earliest opportunity. Such permission shall not be unreasonably denied. D. The business representative may provide written information about the UNION to coincide with other new employee written materials, to be distributed during new employee orientation. E. The CITY agrees to deduct twice a month, UNION membership dues and other fees designated by the UNION from the pay of each employee who individually requests in writing that such deductions be made. The CITY further agrees to cease deduction of such fees upon written request by the UNION. The CITY shall provide to the UNION a list of membership additions and deletions and current addresses, telephone numbers, and original dates of hire when available as computed by the CITY' s payroll department. Such information shall be provided upon the UNION' s request semiannually with ten days advance notice. F. The CITY agrees to designate space not less than four ( 4 ) feet wide and three (3 ) feet long in convenient view as determined by the CITY at the Water Department Complex at the Public Works Department Complex at the Salt Lake City International Airport, the Parks Department Complex, at the Salt Lake City Cemetery shops, Fleet Management shops, Water Reclamation Plant, Parking Enforcement Office, the City and County Building, Office of Human Resource Management, and the Police and Fire Department Administration Building. Said space shall be available to the UNION for posting notices bearing the written approval of the UNION and shall be restricted to non-partisan and ethical matters. They may include: notices of UNION recreational and social affairs; notices of UNION elections; notices of UNION appointments and results of UNION elections; notice of UNION meetings and agenda; notices concerning bona fide UNION activities such as cooperatives, credit unions and unemployment compensation information; and/or other notices. The Labor Management Committee shall make recommendations to the Mayor regarding placement of -5- additional bulletin boards which shall be maintained by the UNION for the purpose of UNION posters, according to the criteria of this article. There shall be no other general distribution, solicitations or posting of pamphlets, advertising or political matter, notices, or any kind of literature or solicitations upon CITY property other than as herein provided. Nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit distribution of appropriate UNION publications or notices as defined hereinabove to members of the bargaining UNIT and as described in Article V C(3 ) . ARTICLE VI. WAGE SCHEDULE Salaries for full-time and probationary employees in the Unit shall be paid according to the salary schedule set forth in Appendix "A" effective to midnight June 30, 1990. From July 1, 1989 to June 30 1990, employees shall be eligible for a merit increase on their anniversary date in accordance with the salary schedule provided in this Article VI , subject to reopening as defined in Article XXX for fiscal year 1990-91 . All full-time salaried employees shall be paid monthly salaries. Part-time and seasonal employees shall be paid on an hourly basis. No employee paid on an hourly basis shall receive in excess of the starting rate of pay for similar job duties under the wage structure for employees newly hired as a full-time salaried employee. ARTICLE VII . WAGE/SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL In addition to the wage rates referred to under Article VIII, the CITY shall pay an hourly premium of 40G to full- time salaried employees who work a regularly scheduled swing shift (starting hours between 12:00 Noon and 8: 59 p.m. ) and 40G to employees who work a regularly scheduled night shift (starting hours between 9:00 p.m. and 5: 59 a.m. ) , or the relief shift in the Salt Lake City Police Department (consisting of 2 night shifts, 2 swing shifts, and 1 day shift, all within an employee' s regularly scheduled work week) . Shift differential premiums shall be used in the computation of overtime pay under Article IX of this MEMORANDUM; however, such premium shall not be used to compute compensation for any premium pay or minimum hourly guarantees. -6- Unit employees shall be entitled to a continuation of shift differential pay for holiday or vacation periods in which they are absent. There shall be no shift differential pay allowed in conjunction with sick leave benefits. The aforementioned conditions shall apply to persons working both regular and ten ( 10) or twelve ( 12) hour shifts. Provided however, that any employee otherwise qualified for the allowance, who is absent from normal scheduled work more than 80 hours in a month, shall be ineligible to receive the allowance for that month. Vacation and compensatory time shall not be considered as absent work days for purposes of determining eligibility for the allowance described in this Article VIII. ARTICLE VIII . HOURS OF SERVICE AND OVERTIME A. HOURS OF WORK Forty hours shall constitute a normal work week, except for work incentive programs approved by the CITY, provided however, only work in excess of 40 hours per week shall be considered as overtime work. Overtime work is to be discouraged. In case of emergency or whenever public interest demands, an employee may be required to perform overtime work by a department head. For the purposes of this article, a shift change shall mean a change from one permanent shift (day shift, swing shift, graveyard shift ) to another shift . An emergency shall be defined as an act of God, i.e. , earthquakes, floods and tornados or any other circumstance as may be declared by the Mayor, Department Head or the Salt Lake Emergency Management Plan. This clause shall not be construed to limit or prevent the CITY from changing or establishing work shifts as the need arises or to guarantee employees forty hours work per week. The City with the concurrence of the UNION has adopted variable 40 hour work week schedules including 8 hour, 10 hour, and 12 hour shifts. It is the intent of the CITY to give 10 working days notice of any work schedule and shift changes to all affected employees. -7- In the event such notice is not given to affected employees, the CITY will provide call back pay for each working day less than the required 10 working day notice. Such call back pay shall not be paid in emergencies. Notice of a shift change shall be given by the City orally and in writing to employees affected in accordance with the terms of Article VIII . B. REST PERIODS Employees shall be entitled to a fifteen-minute rest period or coffee break during each consecutive four (4 ) hour working period, which time shall be included within the work shift, except where extraordinary circumstances render such break impracticable. Effort shall be made to provide such breaks near the middle of each four (4 ) hour work period; provided, however, there shall be no additional compensation paid to employees electing or required to forego such rest period. C. MEAL PERIODS All employees shall be granted to, but not to exceed, a 60 minute lunch period during each work shift; provided, however, said lunch period shall be scheduled in accordance with operational needs of the department by the shift supervisor. No employee shall be compensated for such periods unless the employee is required by the supervisor to be on the work site, and is required to perform any work during such time, then such employee shall be paid for the work. If, in lieu of payment, the employee wishes to end the work shift early by the same number of minutes worked into the lunch break employee may elect to do so with the consent of the supervisor. D. CLEANUP PERIOD Employees shall be granted a personal cleanup period prior to the end of each work shift. The duration of such period shall be as determined to be hygienically necessary by an employee's immediate supervisor, not to exceed a maximum of fifteen ( 15 ) minutes per duty shift, exclusive of shutdown and travel times, unless a longer period has first been authorized by the immediate supervisor based upon extraordinary need and circumstances. -8- E. OVERTIME COMPENSATION 1. Employees required to perform overtime work shall be compensated either by pay at one and one-half the applicable hourly rate, or an allowance of time off from employment with pay on the basis of 1 . 5 hours off for each hour- of overtime worked. The determination of whether to award pay or compensatory time off shall be the absolute discretion of the CITY, except, however, that employees may indicate a preference for the form of overtime payment, contingent upon approval by the department head, scheduling requirements and availability of funds. Provided, however that if an employee accrues more than 240 hours of compensatory time, the City shall pay for any overtime worked in excess of the 240 hours. Employees are allowed to accumulate and maintain 40 hours minimum of compensatory time if such is allowed as compensation for overtime. Overtime work shall be distributed among qualified employees on the following basis: (a) A reasonable attempt shall be made to offer overtime work to qualified employees on a rotation basis, first to the employee with the least amount of overtime hours worked or offered for the month, and so on until the overtime work has been accepted or until all employees contacted have declined such work so that at the completion of the calendar year all employees ' overtime hours are reasonably equal. In cases where 2 or more employees have an equal number of overtime hours as set forth above, seniority shall govern. Hours of overtime work offered but declined by an employee shall be computed as time worked for purposes of determining overtime eligibility under this paragraph; however, nothing in this section shall require payment for overtime hours not worked. (b) If no qualified employee accepts overtime work under the foregoing provisions, overtime assignments shall be made by the CITY by first attempting to contact the qualified employee with the least City seniority, (except for unit employees in the Police and Fire departments, where rank seniority shall -9- govern) and thereafter to the next least senior qualified employee, and so on, until all overtime work assignments have been made. For an employee to refuse an overtime assignment under this paragraph could be grounds for disciplinary action. When time off from employment is allowed as compensation for overtime, such time off shall be granted within twelve ( 12 ) months from the performance of overtime work. (c) A department head may set by policy the amount of compensatory time hours an employee may accumulate at any one time. This maximum accumulation shall be based on departmental needs, budget contraints and consideration for the employee' s best interests. Provided however that if an employee accumulates more than 240 hours compensatory time, the City shall pay for any overtime worked in excess of the 240 hours. 2. An employee may be required to work on holidays designated hereunder and shall be granted straight time pay for holidays so worked. Such employees, however, may designate an alternate day to celebrate a worked holiday, provided the day designated is within on calendar year following the holiday worked, and a written request is approved in writing by the employees ' supervisor, who shall have the sole and absolute discretion to approve any such request. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties, holiday work selections shall be made by departmental seniority. All paid time shall be defined as time worked for purposes of overtime computation; provided, however, that pay premiums or unworked hourly guarantees shall be excluded from such computation. 3. An employee who, with supervisory approval, works two ( 2 ) or more additional hours to their regular duty shift shall be paid four dollars and fifty cents ( $4. 50) as reimbursement for meals. Thereafter, employee( s ) shall receive four dollars and fifty cents ($4. 50 ) for each additional consecutive four (4) hours of work. Attempts to avoid the intent of this paragraph will be discouraged. -10- 4. An employee shall be entitled to receive compensation for a criminal or civil court appearance made during his or her off-duty hours as a witness subpoenaed by Salt Lake City or the State of Utah as follows: a. Felony and class "A" misdemeanor cases: four ( 4) hours of hourly base pay. b. All other misdemeanor, traffic and other cases, including juvenile court and drivers license cases and all civil cases: Three ( 3) hours of hourly base pay. Compensation shall be provided by authority of this section only if: a. The time of the required appearance and of the witness' s release is noted on the subpoena and initialed by the prosecuting or City Attorney. b. The specified time of appearance is not within one ( 1 ) hour of commencement or completion of a duty shift, or the witness is required to appear during a duty shift and is released from appearance more than one ( 1 ) hour after completion of that shift. c. A copy of the witness' s subpoena complying herewith shall have been delivered to the witness' s supervisor within seven ( 7 ) days following the court appearance. Compensation shall be provided hereunder for no more than two ( 2 ) appearances per day. A second appearance shall be compensable only if it is specified to occur: a. More than four ( 4) hours after commencement of a witness 's appearance in a felony case; or b. More than three (3 ) hours after any other appearance compensable hereunder. The prosecuting or City Attorney shall have the right and the duty to refuse to initial the subpoena of any witness who through tardiness, absence or neglect fails to appear in compliance -11- with the terms of the subpoena. Any employee failing to appear in compliance with the terms of a formal notice or subpoena shall be subject to disciplinary action. F. AVAILABILITY FOR WORK Any employee failing to remain available for work as required or to report to work in suitable condition to perform job functions, shall be subject to disciplinary action and forfeiture of applicable compensation; provided, however, that employees directed to return to work on callback status shall not be disciplined if they, as early as possible, inform the supervisor of any incapacity to perform the work directed. Any employee determined as unfit at the time of report to callback duty shall not receive any compensation otherwise due him or her. G. INCLEMENT WEATHER Employees reporting to work on normal scheduled working days shall be guaranteed 3 hours regular pay at their straight time rate when management directs no work be undertaken and they are requested to return home. If any work is performed, employee shall be guaranteed 8 hours straight time. H. STANDBY PAY Employees may be required by an appropriate department head or designated representative to keep themselves available for City service during otherwise off-duty hours and leave word where they can be reached for an immediate call to service. Employee( s ) required to stand by as described in this Article VIII to respond to emergency situations shall receive two hours straight time pay per each 24-hour day they are on the limited standby status. In addition thereto, each such Employee shall be guaranteed a minimum four ( 4) hours work or straight-time pay therefor on such occasions as they actually report to work while on the limited standby status. Provided, however, that employees in the Department of Public Utilities and the Airport exclusively shall receive 2 hours of straight time pay per each 12 hour period they are on limited standby. Employees receiving snowfighter allowance pursuant to Article X shall not be affected by the additional standby allowance provided herein. Employees shall receive an additional two ( 2) hours straight time pay for each occasion called to work, during the 24-hour -12- limited stand by period, after the first occasion when the four hours is guaranteed. I. CALLBACK PAY Employees who have been released from normally scheduled work and standby periods and who return to - work upon direction of an appropriate department head or designated representative, without advance notice or scheduling, shall receive a premium of three (3 ) hours straight-time pay and shall be guaranteed a minimum four ( 4) hours work or straight-time pay therefor. This Article X shall not be construed as a shift change as described under Article VIII. ARTICLE IX. HOLIDAYS A. HOLIDAYS SPECIFIED The following days shall be recognized and observed as holidays for all full-time, salaried employees and all such employees shall receive their regular rate of pay for each of the following unworked holidays. Employees working 10-hour or 12-hour shifts shall be allowed the following days without reimbursement to the City. (Part-time and seasonal employees shall not be entitled to holiday benefits) : 1 . The first day of January, called New Year' s Day; 2. The third Monday of January observed as the anniversary of the birth of Martin Luther King, Jr. , also known as Human Rights Day. 3. The third Monday of February, observed as Presidents Day. 4. The last Monday of May, called Memorial Day; 5. The fourth day of July, called Independence Day; 6. The twenty-fourth day of July, called Pioneer Day; 7. The first Monday in September, known as Labor Day; 8. The second Monday of October, known as Columbus Day; -13- 9. The eleventh day of November, known as Veterans ' Day; 10. The fourth Thursday in November, known as Thanksgiving Day; and 11. The twenty-fifth day of December, called Christmas. 12. One personal holiday can be taken upon request of the employee at the discretion of the department head. Employees shall accrue and be granted this holiday only after satisfactorily completing their initial probationary period. Approval or disapproval of the holiday shall be given no later than five ( 5) working days after employee' s request. B. ALTERNATIVE AND ADDITIONAL HOLIDAYS When any holiday listed above falls on Sunday, the following business day shall be considered a holiday. When any holiday listed above falls on Saturday, the preceding business day shall be considered a holiday. In addition to the above, any day may be designated as a holiday by proclamation of the Mayor and/or the City Council. C. HOLIDAY WORK Full-time, salaried employees required to work because of special assignment or regularly scheduled shift on a day designated for celebration of a holiday hereunder shall, in addition to their holiday pay, receive pay at their regular rates or compensatory time off on a straight-time basis; provided, however, that when hours worked plus designated holiday hours exceed 40 hours in a single work week, overtime compensation shall be granted an employee in addition to his or her holiday pay. For purpose of this section, hours worked shall be construed as paid time as defined under the overtime section of this MEMORANDUM. D. HOLIDAY PAY LIMITATION No employee shall receive in excess of one day of holiday pay for a single holiday. All employees must work or be on authorized leave their last scheduled working hours before the next scheduled working day following the holiday to qualify for holiday pay. -14- E. COLUMBUS DAY EXCEPTION Columbus Day may be celebrated within 45 days following the date of its actual occurrence as specified in Section A above; provided, however, that an employee may celebrate said Columbus Day on a day other than -specified if a written request is approved in writing by the employee' s supervisor, who shall have the sole and absolute discretion to approve any such request. ARTICLE X. VACATIONS A. VACATIONS AUTHORIZED Full-time, salaried employees shall be entitled to receive their regular salaries during vacation periods earned and taken in accordance with the provisions of this Article. Part-time and seasonal-` employees shall not be entitled to any vacation, termination or other benefits provided herein. Every full-time salaried employee shall earn a vacation period monthly from the date employee becomes a full- time salaried employee; provided further, that no person shall be entitled to any vacation unless such person shall successfully complete his or her initial probationary period of full-time salaried employment with the City. B. VACATION SCHEDULE 1 . Except as provided in Article X B ( 2 ) , employees shall accrue vacation under the schedule in paragraph 3 of this section; provided that no person shall be entitled to any vacation unless such person has successfully completed their initial probationary period. 2. Employees who become full time salaried employees before June 30, 1986 and who have elected to continue using the former vacation schedule shall accrue vacation as outlined in paragraph C of this section. The election to accrue vacation pursuant either to the former vacation schedule (paragraph 4 ) or the vacation schedule outlined in paragraph 3 is a one time election and cannot be changed by the employee at a later date. -15- 3 . Completed Years Hours of Hours Accrued of Consecutive Vacation Per Year Per Biweekly City Service Pay Period 0 to completion of year 1 40 1 . 54 Beginning of year 2 to completion of year 3 80 3.08 Beginning of year 4 to completion of year 6 96 3. 69 Beginning of year 7 to completion of year 9 120 4. 62 Beginning of year 10 to completion of year 12 144 5. 54 Beginning of year 13 to completion of year 15 160 6. 15 Beginning of year 16 to completion of year 19 176 6.77 Beginning of year 20 or more 200 7. 69 C. FORMER VACATION SCHEDULE Completed Years Hours of Vacation Hours Accrued of Consecutive Per Year Per Biweekly City Service Pay Period 0 to 9 96 3. 69 10 to 14 136 5.23 15 or more 176 6.77 D. RULES FOR TAKING VACATION ( 1) Employees with the greatest City seniority shall be given the first consideration for requested vacation periods. Supervisors shall respond to vacation requests by granting or denying each request as soon as possible or at least within ten ( 10) working days. Employees shall submit requests for vacation for the calendar year during the period commencing January 1 and ending January 31 of each year. Employees shall be granted vacation on a City seniority basis. The departments shall post the vacation schedule for the calendar year by March 1 of each year. Requests for January vacation shall be submitted in November of the previous calendar year. (2) Employees called back to work during a vacation period shall be compensated for the time worked at time and one-half. An Employee shall not be paid vacation compensation during the callback however, -16- the employee shall be allowed to reschedule the remaining vacation not used. (3 ) Employees may accumulate vacations according to the length of their full-time, cumulative active- duty employment with the CITY up to the follow-ing maximum limits: (a) After 6 months - up to 200 hours (b) After 9 years - up to 240 hours (c) After 14 years - up to 280 hours Any vacation earned or accrued beyond said maximum shall be deemed forfeited unless utilized prior to the end of the calendar year in which such maximum has been accrued. ( 4) Except upon termination as provided in Section E, or purchase as provided in Section F, no employee shall be entitled to be paid for vacation earned but not taken. E. BENEFITS UPON TERMINATION 1 . Every employee whose employment is terminated by resignation or otherwise, shall be entitled to be paid for: (a) All earned vacation time accrued, unused, unforfeited and lawfully forwarded from previous years, plus; (b) A termination benefit consisting of all vacation accrued, unforfeited and unused for the year of employment during which the termination shall occur. (c) In cases of permanent separation, the CITY shall use its best efforts to compensate employees for unused compensatory time off, within thirty (30) days from the date of termination. (d) Employees subject to layoff because of lack of work or lack of funds shall be eligible for reimbursement of 50% of their accumulated unused sick leave hours. 2. An employee resigning from the CITY and giving less than ten ( 10) working days ' notice shall be eligible for reimbursement for all but up to two days of their accrued, unused vacation pay. -17- All full-time salaried employees shall not be eligible to use accrued vacation until the successful completion of their initial probationary period. F. CASH PAYMENT OF EARNED VACATION TIME IN LIEU OF USE 1. The CITY may purchase up to, but not exceeding, 80 hours of earned and accrued vacation time, to which an employee is entitled as authorized in this article, with the consent of said employee and upon favorable written recommendation of the employee' s department head. 2. Said purchase of accrued vacation time may be authorized, in the sole, exclusive and absolute discretion of the CITY, when, in its judgment, it is demonstrated that: (a) Vacation time is accrued and earned in accordance with this agreement; (b) The cash payment in lieu of vacation time use shall not interfere with an employee' s performance or create an unreasonable hardship on said employee; (c) There is a demonstrated need for the CITY to retain the services of the employee for the said vacation time; (d) There are sufficient monies in the departmental budget to pay for the vacation time as certified by the City Finance Director or designee, without disturbing or interfering with the delivery of CITY services; and (e) The employee consents voluntarily to the cash payment in lieu of time off from his or her regular work schedule. The foregoing, notwithstanding, under no circumstances may the CITY purchase more than 80 hours of said earned but unused vacation time from a single employee during any twelve month period. 3. The amount to be paid for any such purchase of vacation time as provided herein shall be based on the wage or salary rate of the said employee at the date of approval by the CITY. However, under no circumstances shall any overtime compensation -18- be paid, computed or accrued by virtue of the CITY authorizing an employee to work a vacation period and receive cash payment therefor in lieu of use. 4. The CITY and its departments shall extend a diligent effort to provide every employee his or her earned annual vacation and shall, through appropriate management efforts, seek to minimize the recommendations for cash payments in lieu of vacation use. Any vacation purchased by the CITY shall be considered to be an extraordinary circumstance and not a fringe benefit of the employee. ARTICLE XI . SICK LEAVE AND HOSPITALIZATION BENEFITS A. SICK LEAVE POLICY AND PROCEDURES 1 . Sick leave shall be provided for all full-time salaried employees only, as insurance against loss of income when an employee is unable to perform assigned duties because of illness or injury. Maternity leave shall be treated as any other disability. 2. Each full-time, salaried employee shall be entitled to 120 hours of sick leave each calendar year, after successful completion of their initial probationary period. Sick leave shall be granted in a lump sum 120 hours during the first month of each calendar year. Employees who separate from the CITY for any reason prior to the end of the 12th month of the calendar year shall have sick leave for the period prorated back to the CITY on an hourly basis per month as follows. January 120 hours February 110 hours March 100 hours April 90 hours May 80 hours June 70 hours July 60 hours August 50 hours September 40 hours October 30 hours -19- November 20 hours December 10 hours 3. Employees absent from work on account of illness or injury shall report intended absence to their department head or supervisor when possible before commencement- of their duty shift as soon as practical, but in no event later than fifteen ( 15 ) minutes before commencement of such shift unless justified by extraordinary circumstances. 4. An employee requesting sick leave in excess of two consecutive days or who is above the City average for sick leave useage may be required by his or her immediate supervisor to provide documentation by a written certification from a licensed practicing and attending physician, that during the period of leave, the absent employee was pre- vented by illness from discharging the duties required by his or her office or position of employment. Such certification shall be required of any employee claiming sick leave benefits not reported in compliance with subsection 3 or when a supervisor or department head has probable cause to believe an abuse of sick leave has occurred. 5. Disciplinary action shall be deemed mandatory for abuse of sick leave privileges or procedures, except where the employee demonstrates justifiable excuse. 6. Employees who have accrued at least ( 80 hours) sick leave may be allowed to use no more than 16 hours of accrued sick leave per calendar year for their physician' s and dentist' s appointments. This leave may be used only upon prior approval of the employee' s immediate supervisor. This leave must be taken in minimum one-hour time periods. The CITY reserves the right to require written verification of actual attendance for the time claimed by the employee pursuant to this paragraph. B. ACCUMULATION OF SICK LEAVE Authorized and unused sick leave may be accumulated from year to year subject to limitations of Section G of this article. -20- C. SICK LEAVE CONVERSION TO VACATION TIME Any employee who has accumulated to his credit two hundred forty (240) sick leave hours may choose to convert a portion of the yearly sick leave grant for any given year to vacation hours according to the following schedule: No. Hours Sick Leave Used No. Hours to Convert O 40 8 32 16 24 24 16 32 8 40 0 For employees working 10 hour shifts No. Hours Sick No. Hours to Leave Used Convert O 40 10 32 20 24 30 16 40 8 50 0 For employees working 12 hour shifts No. Hours Sick No. Hours to Leave Used Convert O 40 12 32 24 24 36 16 48 8 60 0 D. SICK LEAVE CREDIT FORWARD The balance of the sick leave hours not converted to vacation days as permitted above, less the number of hours used during that calendar year as sick leave shall be carried forward as accumulated sick leave hours. -21- E. NOTIFICATION OF CONVERSION ELECTION Any election by an employee to convert any sick leave to vacation time must be made by notifying the Department of Human Resource Management, in writing, on or before January 31 of each year; the City shall make available to employees information regarding sick leave use for the previous year and forms to request conversion; otherwise, no conversion shall be allowed for that calendar year and such conversion privilege shall be deemed waived for that calendar year. In no event shall sick leave hours be converted for other than the immediately preceding year' s sick leave allocation. F. PRESUMPTION OF USE Any sick leave properly converted to vacation benefits as above described, shall be deemed to be taken prior to any other days of vacation time to which the employee is entitled; provided, however, that in no event shall any sick leave converted to vacation days be entitled to any pay or compensation upon an employee' s termination. Any sick leave converted to vacation remaining unused at the date of termination or retirement shall be forfeited by the employee; however, for purposes of this section, conversion hours shall be construed as used prior to vacation otherwise accrued by an employee. G. SICK LEAVE BENEFITS UPON RETIREMENT In addition to the sick leave conversion privilege to vacation days above described, at retirement an employee (or his estate, where death follows retirement but precedes payment) shall be eligible to receive a retirement benefit as stipulated in Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 6 of 1989. Persons who retire under the eligibility requirements of the Utah State Retirement System and are not eligible under the above referenced order will be paid in cash at their then current pay scale, a sum equal to their daily rate of pay for 25 percent (25%) of the accumulated sick leave days reserved for the benefit of said employees at the date of his or her retirement. In lieu of the above, employee may elect to convert sick leave privilege to hospital and surgical coverage. 50% of the sick leave hours available at retirement may be converted to a dollar allowance at the time of retirement. The sick leave hours converted to a dollar -22- allowance shall be subject to any state and federal income and social security tax withholding required by law. An employee' s available dollar allowance determines the number of months of medical and surgical coverage may be purchased. If insurance costs go up due to group experience, the number of months of- coverage will decrease. H. HOSPITALIZATION In addition to the sick leave authorized hereunder, each full-time, salaried employee shall be entitled to thirty (30) 8 hour calendar days hospitalization leave each calendar year, provided that such leave may be taken only if, and during the period that, such employee is actually confined to an acute care hospital or other free standing outpatient surgical facility. No accumulation of hospital leave shall be allowed. I . UNAUTHORIZED SICK LEAVE AND HOSPITAL BENEFITS No employee shall be entitled to receive sick leave or authorized hospitalization benefits as a result of injuries, or disability resulting from accidents arising out of or in the course of his or her employment for an employer other than the CITY. J. REGULAR SALARY TO BE CONTINUED Each employee who takes authorized sick leave or authorized hospitalization leave shall continue to receive his or her regular salary during his or her absence from work for the periods set forth in this article. K. LIGHT DUTY PROVISION The CITY may if practical, allow an employee a light duty position while recovering from a temporary disability. ARTICLE XII . DISABILITY COMPENSATION 1. If an employee of the CITY becomes entitled to receive worker' s compensation as a result of suffering a CITY service-connected injury or illness, such employee shall be paid worker's compensation as provided by law; provided, however, that the employee may elect to use, during such disability, their accumulated sick leave -23- credit and vacation time, such part of their wage or salary as shall, when added to their worker' s compensation payments, equal to their regular wage or salary; and provided further, that satisfactory evidence of such election shall be transmitted by said person to the Department of Human Resource Management prior to payment. 2. The City will make reasonable efforts to make "light duty" work available to an employee injured on the job, as defined by the Worker' s Compensation Act, provided that the employee is able to perform the "light duty" work and the employee has presented a release by their physician to the City certifying that the employee is able to return to work. 3. Long term disability shall be provided to eligible employees under the City' s Income Protection Program (Long Term Disability Plan) . ARTICLE XIII. j PART-TIME AND SEASONAL EMPLOYEES Part-time, and temporary employees shall not be entitled to any leaves or other employment benefits whatsoever, unless required by Federal, State or municipal Law. ARTICLE XIV. LEAVES OF ABSENCE Full-time, salaried employees shall be eligible for leaves of absence under the following circumstances: A. FUNERAL LEAVE 1. Time off with pay shall be granted a full-time salaried employee who suffers the loss of a wife, husband, child mother, father, stepmother, stepfather, stepchild, brother, sister, father-in- law, mother-in-law , grandchild, grandfather or grandmother. In the event of death in any of these instances, employees shall be paid his or her regular base pay for scheduled work time from the time of death through the day of the funeral not to exceed 5 working shifts. Employees shall be permitted one additional paid shift of funeral leave, on the day following the funeral, if such funeral is held more than 150 miles distance from -24- Salt Lake City and if the day following the funeral is a regular working shift. Satisfactory proof of such death, together with the date thereof, the date and location of the funeral, and the date of burial, must be furnished by the employee to the department head, if requested. 2. In the event of death of relatives other than those enumerated in subsection ( 1 ) , an employee shall be paid for time off from scheduled working hours while attending the funeral services for such person, not to exceed one work shift. 3. In the event of death of friends, an employee may be granted time off without pay while attending the funeral services for such persons, not to exceed four hours subject to the approval of his or her immediate supervisor. Nothing in this subsection shall prevent an employee from requesting earned and unused compensatory or vacation time. 4. In the event the death of any member of the immediate family, as set forth in subsection ( 1 ) of this article occurs while an employee is on vacation, his or her vacation shall be extended by the amount of time authorized as funeral leave under the said subsection. 5. The provisions of this article shall not be applicable to employees who are on leave of absence. B. LEAVE OF ABSENCE OF EMPLOYEES WHO ENTER MILITARY SERVICE Every employee of CITY who enlists or is called or inducted into and enters active service in the state militia or any branch of the federal military, naval, air or marine service shall be entitled to be absent without pay from his or her other duties as required by state and federal law. C. LEAVE WHILE ON ANNUAL ENCAMPMENT All employees who are or shall become members of the organized reserve of the United States Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard and Marines, shall be allowed the difference in pay between their regular rate of pay and the base pay received while on duty, not to exceed fifteen consecutive days while on duty at mandatory -25- summer camp in connection with the reserve training and instruction of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines of the United States. This leave shall be in addition to annual vacation leave with pay. D. LEAVE FOR JURY DUTY All full-time salaried employees shall be entitled to receive and retain statutory juror' s fees paid for jury service in the District and Federal Courts whose jurisdictions include Salt Lake County subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth. No reduction in an employee' s salary shall be made for absence from work resulting from such jury service whether consecutive or not. On those shifts that an employee is required to report for jury service and is thereafter excused from such service during his or her regular working hours for the CITY, he or she shall forthwith return to and carry on his or her regular CITY employment. Failure to so return to work shall result in the forfeiture of that shifts pay by such employee. E. DEPENDENT LEAVE A leave of absence may be requested by an employee of for the following reasons: a. Becoming a parent through birth or adoption of newly born children. b. Due to the hospitalization of a dependent. The following provisions apply to the use of dependent leave: a. Dependent leave may be granted with pay on a straight time basis for a period not to exceed five consecutive days from the date a dependent commences residence with employee or from the date of birth of the dependent or from the date the dependent becomes hospitalized. b. The employee has accumulated and available unused sick leave. Under no circumstances shall the employee be entitled to use as dependent leave more than five consecutive working days in a calendar year. c. The employee gives notice to his/her supervisor as soon as possible under the circumstances. -26- d. The employee provides, upon request of a supervisor, certification of birth or evidence of a child placement for adoption to his/her supervisor within five calendar days following termination of such leave. A letter may be requested from the treating physician in the event of hospitalization of a dependent within five calendar days following termination of dependent leave used for this purpose. e. An employee' s sick leave shall be reduced by the number of hours taken by an employee as dependent leave under this section. F. LEAVE OF ABSENCE FOR UNION ACTIVITY One employee of the UNIT elected to UNION positions, or selected by the UNION to positions the responsibilities of which require absence from employment with the CITY, shall upon written request from the UNION, submitted to the CITY, as soon as possible under the circumstances, but in no event later than thirty (30) days prior to the first day of absence, receive a leave of absence, without pay, for the period of service with the UNION. Upon termination of such employee' s leave of absence, another employee shall be eligible for a leave of absence under the terms and conditions set forth above. At no time shall more than one employee within a single division of a department ( if manpower allows) be absent from work under the provisions of this section. The employee' s seniority shall, upon his/her return to work, be reinstated according to the status and classification which he or she held and was last engaged in prior to taking leave. The employee shall upon the ending of such leave be reinstated into the first vacant position, which has a similar classification and was last engaged in prior to taking leave, that the CITY has open in any of its career service departments provided that the person meets the minimum qualifications according to the status and classification which was held and was last engaged in prior to taking such leave. The employee during such leave and for one year thereafter shall have pre-bid rights. G. ADDITIONAL LEAVES OF ABSENCE Employees requesting leave for anticipated or short- term disability, such as maternity, surgery, or other -27- medical reason, shall be allowed to take up to six ( 6) months ' unpaid leave without loss of seniority or position at the discretion of the department head. ARTICLE XV. LONGEVITY PAY A. LONGEVITY PAY In addition to the salaries herein provided, every employee who has completed six ( 6) consecutive full years of employment with the CITY, shall, after the seventh (7 ) anniversary date, receive a monthly longevity benefit in the sum of fifty dollars ( $50.00) . Every employee who has completed ten ( 10) consecutive years of employment with the CITY shall, after the eleventh ( 11 ) anniversary date, receive a total monthly longevity benefit in the sum of seventy-five dollars ( $75.00) . Every employee who has completed sixteen ( 16 ) consecutive years of employment with the CITY shall, after the seventeenth ( 17) anniversary date, receive a total monthly longevity benefit of one hundred dollars ( $100.00) . The computation of longevity shall be based on the most recent date the employee became a full time salaried employee. ARTICLE XVI. UNIFORM ALLOWANCE Employees, when required to wear uniforms in the execution of their duties with the CITY shall have such uniforms furnished and maintained at the CITY'S expense with the following exceptions: 1 . Employees in the Public Works Department (other than welders, mechanics and parking enforcement personnel ) shall maintain their uniforms at their own expense. 2. The following employees, when required to wear uniforms in their duties with the CITY, shall receive the following monthly uniform allowances in lieu of any other uniform expense to the CITY: Parking Enforcement Personnel $40.00 -28- Parking Meter Repair Personnel $40.00 Animal Control Officers $40.00 Watershed Patrol - $40.00 Police Clerical and Dispatch Personnel $40.00 Fire Department Clerical and Dispatch Personnel $40.00 4 . A joint committee consisting of representatives from the City and the Union shall meet quarterly to review and determine protective clothing and uniform needs. The composition of the committee shall reflect representation from all affected departments. ARTICLE XVII . AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCES Employees who are authorized to use and who do use privately owned automobiles for official CITY business shall be reimbursed for their operation expenses of said automobiles at the rate of 21C per mile actually traveled in official CITY business. Before payment is made to any officer or employee pursuant to the terms of this section, the use of the automobile must be authorized by the employee' s supervisor and the mileage traveled must be verified by the head of the department involved. The CITY shall provide, as of July 1, 1982, for all persons who have not been assigned a parking place or are provided parking, a $12.00 a month parking allowance. This shall be paid in $6.00 amounts on two biweekly paychecks each month. ARTICLE XVIII. TRAVEL ALLOWANCES Meal, lodging, and other allowances associated with employee travel, shall be established under general policies and procedures of the City. -29- ARTICLE XIX. INSURANCE 1 . The CITY shall make available life, accidental death, dismemberment and health insurance to all employees covered under this MEMORANDUM, upon the terms and conditions as may be from time to time determined by the CITY. 2. The amount which the CITY shall contribute to the employees' insurance during the term of this MEMORANDUM is set forth in Exhibit "B" attached. Payment shall be deducted biweekly consistent with the pay periods. 3 . The CITY shall continue to make available the same consulting service which shall provide limited consulting by an outside confidential firm for drug abuse, alcoholism, and marriage counseling. ARTICLE XX. PENSION PLAN CONTRIBUTION The CITY agrees to pay the employee' s share and employer' s share of the retirement contribution as mandated by state statute and as said statute is interpreted by the Utah State Retirement Board. ARTICLE XXI . SENIORITY A. SENIORITY DEFINED Seniority shall consist of an employee' s uninterrupted, regularly scheduled employment with the CITY, except as otherwise provided in Article VIII, sections F, 1,b. An employee' s earned seniority shall not be lost because of absence due to illness, authorized leaves of absence, or temporary layoffs not to exceed 2 years. Elected officials of the UNION shall be considered to have seniority above all other employees for purposes of layoff only, regardless of actual earned seniority. B. LAYOFFS Whenever it is necessary to reduce the number of employees performing an activity or function defined by -30- the Mayor or his or her designee within a CITY department because of lack of work or lack of funds, the CITY shall minimize layoffs by readjustment of personnel through reassignment of duty in other departments. 1. Whenever layoffs are necessary, emergency, temporary , probationary and hourly employees performing essentially the same duties as the aforesaid work activity or functions being reduced shall be laid off first; provided, that it is expressly understood that seasonal-hourly employees are not included in this limitation. 2. Full-time salaried employees shall be the last to be laid off in inverse order of the length of service of employees in the same job classification performing the same job functions and duties. 3. Full-time salaried employees designated for layoff or actually laid off shall move into a vacant equal or lower classified job position, wherever situated in the CITY, for which the employee is qualified. Vacant means that the Department of Human Resource Management has received a request to fill a position. Equal or lower classified means that the maximum salary for the vacant position shall be less than or equal to the maximum salary for the position being laid off. Said employee, within the CITY department in which the layoff occurred, may also bump less senior, full-time salaried temporary or probationary personnel ( in a job position and function previously and actually held by said laid off employee) for a position said employee is currently qualified and able to perform as determined by the Department of Human Resource Management. 4. Employees who have been laid-off shall have rights for a one year period to placement in any vacant job which is at an equal or lower classification where they meet minimum qualifications. They shall not be subject to any further examination. Minimum qualifications on laid off job positions shall remain unchanged for the same one year period not restricting changes for bona fide business and operational purposes. -31- 5. A re-employment list shall be established in the Department of Human Resource Management to facilitate the placement of any reduced in force employees. C. GENERAL RE-EMPLOYMENT LISTS Employees who have been laid off in accordance with paragraph (B) above or have been terminated without cause or prejudice, have the right to request pre-bid in accordance with Article XXII, Pre-Bid Procedures, paragraph A of this MEMORANDUM. Pre-Bid rights shall expire two (2) years from the employee' s date of layoff. Should the employee be rehired within this time period the employee shall have full reinstatement of all CITY seniority for purposes of vacation and sick leave computation. The employee shall be subject to the same probationary period as an employee hired under pre-bid. If the aforementioned employee has cashed out any sick leave, vacation or retirement monies, the employee shall not be eligible for reinstatement of same. D. SHIFT BIDDING Department heads or their designee shall decide the employee qualifications, abilities or experience recommended for each work shift or CITY operation deemed desirable to perform the functions, operations or mission of the department, and such considerations may include training , specialized knowledge, skill or other particularized needs of the entire department. After management has made shift assignments indicated by such needs or considerations, the remainder of the shift-work assignment shall be made on the basis of department seniority; provided, however, that seniority shall not be a basis for selection of work shifts if, with the concurrence of the department head, the employees of a designated work area elect that seniority should not be the determinant. In the event of such election, the vote shall be by secret ballot, within work areas and in a manner selected by the department head. Provided however that Police employees shall continue under current policy as adopted May 1, 1984 "Seniority in Records" and "Seniority in Communications" , Police Departmental Policies and Procedures. -32- ARTICLE XXII. PRE-BIDS A. PRE-BID PROCEDURE In order that qualified employees may be given proper consideration when a vacancy in a job exists and the department head deems it advisable to fill such vacancy on a full-time salaried basis, the department head shall utilize the following Pre-Bid Procedure: 1. An employee shall have the full responsibility to request a transfer or job bid to any appropriate job within the CITY. 2. An employee shall have the responsibility to update request(s) for such pre-bid. Such requests shall be valid for no more than two year period. 3. An employee(s) may apply at any time for a pre-bid in writing on forms specified by the Department of Human Resource Management for inclusion on such confidential register. 4. Such confidential pre-bid register shall be deemed closed when the department head advises the Department of Human Resource Management in writing that a vacancy needs to be filled on a full-time salaried basis. 5 . The department head shall make a selection from those applicants on a register designated by the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management, solely on the basis of qualifications; however, in the event that all qualifications are relatively equal, the length of CITY service shall be the basis of selection between such applicants. Employee objections to the selection process shall submit a complaint to the Labor Management Committee. 6. When a vacancy cannot be filled by a competent and experienced employee applying for the same job, the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management, at the recommendation of the department head, shall announce the job vacancy for external recruitment. Department heads shall be cognizant of job descriptions and afford first consideration to the employee. -33- 7. New positions shall be posted for a period not to exceed five working days, during which time employees may apply in writing on forms specified by the Department of Human Resource Management, to the Department of Human Resource Management for appointment_to fill such vacancy, setting forth any such information as may be required by the CITY. 8. Nothing contained herein prohibits the appointment of the employee during the review of a complaint on the selection process. 9. The Department of Human Resource Management shall provide periodic counseling on job bid positions. B. PROBATIONARY PERIOD A successful bidder for a job vacancy shall be on probation for a period not to exceed 90 calendar days, during the first 30 days of which time the employee may elect to return to the former position of employment. The probationary period may be extended, if necessary for training purposes, if agreed upon by applicant and supervisor or department head. During the probationary period, applicant shall not be eligible for any other job vacancy. If applicant is retained in the job applied for at the expiration of said probationary period, applicant shall be ineligible to be selected for another job opening for a period of 9 months after the expiration of said probationary period, unless authorization to apply is given by the department head. If applicant is not retained in said job so selected for before the expiration of the probationary period, the employee shall be returned to the position held prior to being accepted in the job for which he or she applied. ARTICLE XXIII. LABOR MANAGEMENT AND SAFETY COMMITTEES A. LABOR MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE There shall be a Labor Management Committee consisting of eight members; four employees appointed by the UNION and four employees appointed by the CITY. The committee shall meet monthly or upon call of either party in the event of an emergency. Meetings shall be held on CITY time. It shall be the general function of -34- the Labor Management Committee to discuss matters of mutual interest concerning wages, hours, and other conditions of employment except those which are specifically covered under the grievance procedure, in accordance with Article XXIV, Grievance Procedure. Items brought to this committee must have first been brought before the appropriate department management personnel in an attempt to resolve the issue. An agenda shall be prepared and delivered to each of the committee members ahead of time. The Labor Management Committee shall make appropriate recommendations to cabinet level directors for their decisions which shall be final and binding. The Labor Management Committee shall study such matters as apprenticeship and training , seniority, overtime, layoff procedures, employee productivity, and other matters of mutual interest to the CITY and UNIONS. It is the intent of this agreement that only one Labor Management Committee exist for the employees represented by the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees AFL-CIO. B. SAFETY COMMITTEE There shall be a Safety Committee consisting of 6 members; 3 appointed by the UNION and 3 appointed by the CITY. The Committee shall meet monthly or upon call of either party in event of an emergency. Meetings shall be on CITY time. It shall be the general function of the Safety Committee to make recommendations to the Office of the Mayor. A calendar of all safety meetings to be held shall be available for review by the UNION business agent and the Mayor. C. TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE The Union shall appoint one person to represent both the 100 and 200 series employees on the City' s Training and Development Committee. ARTICLE XXIV. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE It shall be the policy of the CITY to adjust grievances of employees properly and fairly, within a framework of existing laws and regulations. Every reasonable effort shall be made to adjust grievances in a manner mutually satisfactory to employees and management at the lowest possible level. -35- This grievance procedure shall be utilized only for terminations and suspensions, EEO complaints, demotions, and transfers. Any employee who believes that a grievance exists as defined above, may personally or through an attorney or a UNION representative utilize the grievance - procedure outlined herein. The above notwithstanding, employees who have terminated may submit their grievance immediately to the third (3rd) step of the grievance procedure outlined herein. An employee has a right to a UNION representative at all formal steps of the grievance procedure. The supervisor shall notify the employee of this right prior to the administration of disciplinary action. It is mutually understood that the prompt presentation, adjustment and/or answering of the grievance is desirable in the interest of sound relations between the employees and the CITY. The prompt and fair disposition of grievances involves important and equal obligations and responsibilities, both joint and independent, on the part of the representatives of each party to protect and preserve the grievance procedure as an orderly means of resolving grievances. Step ( 1 ) The grievance shall be submitted in writing to the immediate supervisor and the employee may have a representative at such meetings. The grievance shall be presented within ten ( 10) working days from the time the grievance occurs or from the time the employee could reasonably be expected to have become aware of such occurrence, provided, however, both parties agree that during this ten ( 10) day working period the alleged grievance shall be informally discussed with the employee involved, the employee' s supervisor, and the UNION representative. Failure to provide such notice within the time specified shall void any employee' s grievance rights provided hereunder. The supervisor shall render a decision on a grievance appropriately filed within six ( 6 ) working days from the date that the grievance was filed. Incidents of prior disciplinary action shall not be considered in a current disciplinary decision if, ( 1 ) at the time of the prior action the employee requested and was -36- unreasonably denied the presence of a union steward as a witness of the disciplinary action; and ( 2) the employee has submitted a written objection to the immediate supervisor within 10 working days of the prior disciplinary action. Such request shall not be considered to have been unreasonably denied if it would effect an unreasonable delay or disruption of work. Step ( 2) If no settlement is reached under Step ( 1 ) , then the grievance shall be presented in writing to the next level supervisor within six ( 6 ) working days after Step ( 1 ) . The next level supervisor shall notify the parties concerned of the decision within six ( 6 ) working days after hearing the grievance. Meetings held under Steps ( 2 ) and (3 ) of this procedure shall normally be held within ten ( 10) working days after receipt of the grievance at each step; however, such limits may be extended as may be agreed upon in writing by the parties hereto. Step ( 3) If no agreement is reached under Step ( 2 ) , the grievance shall be submitted within ten working days to an informal hearing before the appropriate cabinet level director or designee, and a representative from the UNION. Provided however, that if the grievance involves EEO ( including Title VII ) related matters, the employee may elect to proceed outside the chain of command and have a hearing before the City' s Government Compliance Manager. This meeting should be conducted within thirty ( 30) working days following receipt of the grievance. Such decision shall be final and binding absent a modification provided for under Step (4) . Step ( 4) If no settlement is reached under Step (3) , the employee may appeal to the Mayor' s Office in writing and by certified letter within six ( 6 ) days of receipt of the decision under Step (3) . In the event of appeal by the employee, the employee may choose to have the Employees -37- Appeals Board hear the case and render a recommendation to the Mayor The Employees Appeals Board shall submit a recommendation to the Mayor. The Mayor shall then render a final decision within ten ( 10) working days after receipt of the recommendation by the Employees Appeals Board. An employee, terminated for cause, who appeals his or her termination to the Employees Appeals Board, may elect to continue health insurance coverage with the City, until conclusion of hearing before such board, provided the employee makes timely payment of premium payments (both employee and CITY share) during the period between termination and hearing. If the employee is thereafter reinstated by the CITY, the employee shall be reimbursed for the CITY share of any insurance premium paid. The CITY agrees not to retaliate against any employee who exercise rights under the aforementioned grievance procedure; provided however, that failure to exercise these grievance rights shall bar judicial or administrative action by the employee on any grievable issue. The following procedures shall govern disputes relating to the promotion of a Unit employee into another City position: A. If a Unit employee who is an unsuccessful candidate for a promotion into another City position has a dispute concerning the promotional process, he or she shall notify the Union's business agent of the complaint within three working days from the date he or she received notice from the hiring Department that he or she was not selected for the position. The Union business agent shall notify the hiring Department ' s Director of the complaint within 48 hours after receiving notice from the employee. B. The Union business agent shall confirm in writing the dispute of the unsuccessful candidate with the hiring Department ' s Director or his or her designee within three working days from the date the Union business agent notified the Department Director pursuant to paragraph A above. -38- C. The hiring Department Director shall advise the selected candidate that the position is in dispute. The selected candidate shall not be precluded from working in the position. D. The Union business agent and the hiring Department - Director or his or her designee shall meet to discuss the selection process within five working days from the date the hiring Department Director or his or her designee was notified pursuant to paragraph B above. If the dispute is not resolved at the meeting by the Director and the Union business agent, the unsuccessful candidate may appeal in writing within 48 hours after the meeting to the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management for a hearing. (A list of three predetermined hearing officers shall be established by the Department of Human Resource Management. ) The Director of the Department of Human Resource Management shall designate a hearing officer and a hearing date within five working days from the date the Director received the appeal from the unsuccessful candidate. E. The hearing officer shall request briefs, documentation and all other pertinent written information prior to the hearing. Within two working days after the hearing, the hearing officer shall issue a determination. The City or the employee may appeal said decision to the Mayor. The appeal must be submitted in writing to the Mayor within 5 working days after the hearing officer' s decision. The decision of the Mayor shall be final and binding. F. Upon mutual agreement of the parties, the time limitations may be waived. The procedure described herein shall affect only promotions and shall not alter or change the provisions of the grievance procedure under Article XXIV. G. This process is exclusive for grievances involving a promotion and shall not be subject to review by the labor management committee. ARTICLE XXV. PERSONNEL FILES All personnel files shall be handled according to the City' s Executive Order 4.01 .201 - Policy and Procedure Manual. City agrees to notify all employees no less than annually of their right to request a review of their files -39- for purging purposes in accordance with Executive Order 4.01 . 201 . Written disciplinary actions shall be received by City' s Human Resource Department within 30 days of the issuance date. ARTICLE XXVI. LIMITATION ON PROVISIONS The provisions hereof shall be subject to the limitations, terms and conditions of the CITY' S Collective Bargaining Resolution. ARTICLE XXVIII. STRIKES AND WORK STOPPAGES Continuous and uninterrupted service by the CITY and its employees to the citizens, and orderly collective bargaining relations between the CITY and its employees being essential considerations of this MEMORANDUM, the UNION agrees, that none of the following acts shall be engaged in i or in any way approved of or encouraged by the UNION: 1 . A concerted absence, in whole or in part, by any group of employees from the full, faithful and proper performance of their duties of employment for the purpose of inducing, influencing, condoning , or coercing a change in the terms and conditions of employment, including sick calls, sick-outs, slowdowns, or any other concerted interference with services provided by the CITY, or 2. The collective concerted withholding of services or the performance of assigned duties by any person pending the signing of the contract, including those persons who are customarily employed on a yearly contract basis. In the event of a violation of this article by the UNION and/or the employees, the CITY may, in addition to other remedies, discipline such employees up to and including discharge. Employees shall not be entitled to any benefits or wages whatsoever while they are engaged in a strike, work stoppage or other interruption of work as specified herein or otherwise. -40- ARTICLE XXVIII. WAIVER CLAUSE Except as provided for in Article XXIV and XIX hereof, the CITY and the ASSOCIATION expressly waive and relinquish the right and each agrees that the other shall not be obligated during the term of this MEMORANDUM, to bargain collectively with respect to any subject or matter whether referred to or covered in this MEMORANDUM or not specifically referred to or covered in this MEMORANDUM, even though each subject or matter may not have been within the knowledge or contemplation of either or both the CITY and the UNION at the time they negotiated or executed this MEMORANDUM and even though such subjects or matters were proposed and later withdrawn. In the event laws are passed by the state or nation which conflict with the provisions of this MEMORANDUM relating to hours and wages, or other conditions of employment, the provisions of the MEMORANDUM which are in conflict therewith may be reopened for negotiations without affecting the remaining portions of this MEMORANDUM. ARTICLE XXIX. PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES The CITY agrees to make copies of all personnel policies and procedural directives. The City agrees to provide employees with one additional copy of written disciplinary action which the employee may elect to give to a Union representative, and will advise the employee of such. The City' s Department of Human Resource Management will provide the Union' s Business Agent with semi-annual reports of employer disciplinary action. Article XXX TERM OF AGREEMENT This MEMORANDUM shall remain in effect from July 1, 1989, through June 30, 1991 with the following exceptions: A. It is understood by the parties hereto that certain provisions of this agreement cannot be implemented by the CITY except upon public notice and hearing and compliance with various statutory and legal requirements. -41- B. The parties hereto may, by mutual consent, agree to an amendment to this MEMORANDUM. C. The Union and the City mutually agree to reopen this Memorandum for fiscal year 1990-91 pursuant to the City' s labor bargaining resolution of 1984 on the following issues: Wages and Salaries Pensions Insurances Snowfighter Pay Allowance Incomes and Reimbursements C. Both parties agree that this MEMORANDUM is subject to available funds and ratification by the City Council in accordance with paragraph 9, of the Third Amended Labor Bargaining Resolution, Salt Lake City, Utah, April 10, 1984. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have fixed their hands and seals the day and year first above written. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION By Attj 1 b ��^, e,- M ATTEST: C T R ER AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES AFL-CIO By erz,e4._ ION - LOCAL PRESIDE T M BER - ION EGOTIATING C MMITTEE -42- ,,,,, .,/ ,, -.<_y ME_ ER - UNION EG TIATING COMMITTEE -43- STATE OF UTAH ) County of Salt Lake) 9 On the ,2:3 01iday of (,tom, , 19 8X, personally appeared before me P MER DePAULIS and KATHRYN MARSHALL, who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are the MAYOR and CITY RECORDER, respectively, of SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, and said persons acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the same. i n —Notary Pudic — i1 , GOMTISSIOn Expires lit, S`taledUtah Y UBLIC, residing in - Salt Lake County, Utah My Commission Expires: -44- STATE OF UTAH ) . ss. County of Salt Lake) On the ,30 day of , 198p, personally appeared before me badov. , who being by me duly sworn, did say that he is the Director of Employee Relations of the AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES AFL-CIO and ayhl`j u, ,Z .44d Cei- and (yh/,' Q. e C , who being duly sworn, di$ say that they are thfe members of the committee of such Association, that both such persons executed the foregoing instrument on behalf of said Association and that said instrument has been duly ratified and approved by the membership of said Association and that their execution hereof constitutes as valid and binding acting on behalf of said Association and its membership. LANITA G.BROWN jiPff Ci 8 Count!Budcinngg WeChy tah64itt Exires T ijlnn Salt Lake County, Utah My Commission Expires: FMN:cc -45- APPE1 DIX A CLERICAL AND TECHNICAL A B C D E F C H I J K L M N 0 P 201 736 755 774 793 813 833 854 876 897 920 942 966 991 1016 1040 1067 202 764 784 803 823 844 865 886 908 931 955 979 1003 1028 1054 1079 1107 203 793 813 833 854 876 897 920 942 966 991 1016 1040 1067 1093 1121 1148 204 824 845 866 888 909 932 956 980 1004 1029 1055 1082 1108 1136 1164 1194 205 856 878 899 922 945 968 993 1018 1042 1069 1096 1123 1152 1180 1209 1240 206 889 912 934 957 982 1005 1031 1057 1083 1110 1138 1166 1196 1226 1256 1288 207 924 947 970 995 1020 1045 1071 1098 1126 1154 1182 1212 1242 1274 1305 1338 208 959 983 1007 1033 1059 1085 1112 1140 1168 1198 1228 1259 1290 1321 1354 1388 209 995 1020 1045 1071 1098 1126 1154 1182 1212 1242 1274 1305 1338 1372 1406 1441 210 1034 1060 1087 1113 1141 1170 1199 1229 1260 1292 1324 1357 1391 1426 1462 1498 211 1073 1100 1128 1156 1185 1214 1244 1276 1308 1340 1374 1408 1443 1479 1516 1554 212 1115 1143 1172 1201 1231 1262 1294 1326 1360 1394 1428 1464 1501 1538 1576 1616 213 , 1158 , 1187 1216 1246 1278 1310 , 1342 1376 1410 1446 1482 1519 1557 1595 1636 1677 214 1203 1233 1264 1296 1328 1361 1396 1430 1466 1503 1540 1579 1618 1662 1709 1755 215 1249 1280 1312 1345 1379 1413 1449 1485 1522 1560 1600 1640 1680 1726 1774 1822 216 1298 1331 1364 1398 1433 1469 1505 1543 1581 1621 1661 1703 1746 1794 1844 1894 217 1348 1382 1416 r 1452 1488 1525 1564 1603 1643 1684 1726 1770 1813 1862 1914 1966 218 1400 1435 1471 1507 1545 1584 1623 1663 1706 1748 1792 1836 1883 1934 1988 2042 219 1453 1489 1526 1565 1604 1644 1685 1727 1771 1815 1860 1907 1955 2009 2064 2121 220 1510 1548 1586 1626 1667 1709 1751 1795 1840 1886 1933 1982 2031 2087 2144 2203 221 1568 1611 1655 1701 1747 1795 1845 1895 1948 2001 2056 2113 2171 2231 2292 2355 222 1627 1672 1718 1765 1814 r 1864 1915 1967 2022 2078 2134 2193 2254 2315 2379 2444 223 1691 1738 1786 1834 1885 1937 1990 2045 2101 2159 2219 2279 2342 2406 2473 2541 224 1756 1805 1854 1906 1957 2012 2066 2124 2182 2242 2303 2367 2432 2499 2568 2638 225 1824 1875 1926 1979 2033 2089 2147 2205 2266 2329 2393 2459 2526 2596 2667 2740 6-12-89 APPENDIX B . GROUP INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1989 - 1990 • Medical Dental City Employee City Employee _ Share Share Share Share P.E.H.P Traditional Single 39.89 16.77 5.60 1.98 Couple 82.21 34.64 11.37 4.00 Family 109.76 46.24 14.87 5.23 P.E.H.P. Preferred Single 39.89 14.02 5.60 1.98 Couple 82.21 28.89 11.37 4.00 Family 109.76 38.57 14.87 5.23 Healthwise Single 39.27 13.81 4.89 1.73 Couple 80.01 28.12 9.83 3.46 Family 107.92 37.92 16.69 5.87 F.H.P. Single 36.37 12.78 6.33 2.23 Couple 80.86 28.41 13.07 4.60 Family 114.32 40.18 18.22 6.41 The following benefits are included with your Medical and Dental coverage regardless of your health insurance carrier . Employee City Share Share * Disability Income .47 1.36 * Basic Life for You .03 per $1000 .11 per $1000 * Basic Life for Your Family .11 .30 * Accidental Death & Dismemberment .07 .22 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Approving the Memorandum of Understanding between Salt Lake City Corporation and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004 representing the 100 Series Employees) AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1004 REPRESENTING THE 100 SERIES EMPLOYEES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. PURPOSE. Section 9(c) of the Salt Lake City Third Amended Labor Bargaining Resolution dated April 10, 1984, provides that no collective bargaining memorandum of understanding shall be effective until the legislative body of Salt Lake City Corporation approves said memorandum of understanding, enacts implementing legislation and appropriates all required funds. A Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 1004 representing the 100 Series employees, has been signed by the Mayor and authorized representatives of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 1004 on June 30, 1989. A copy of the Memorandum of Understanding is attached hereto. The City Council has appropriated necessary funds required to implement the provisions of the attached Memorandum of Understanding for fiscal year 1989-90. The provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding are effective for fiscal years 1989-90 and 1990-91 subject to a reopener provision, availability of funds, appropriations by the City Council and City Council approval for fiscal year 1990-91. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby evidences its approval of the attached Memorandum of Understanding. SECTION 2. APPROVAL. The attached Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 1004 is hereby approved. SECTION 3. AUTHORIZATION. Palmer A. DePaulis, Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, is hereby authorized to act in accordance with the terms and conditions of the attached Memorandum of Understanding. SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be deemed effective on July 1, 1989. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . CHAIRPERSON APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Date /';- �� By -2- 4.60 ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s Action: Approved Vetoed MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER FMN:cc I MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, is entered into this �Qs day of ~ Una , 1989, by SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, hereinafter referred to as the "CITY" and Local 1004 of the AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES; affiliated with AFSCME International AFL-CIO, hereinafter referred to as the "UNION" . WITNESSET H: WHEREAS, the City has endorsed the practices and procedures of collective bargaining specified in its Collective Bargaining Resolution of November 16, 1977, as amended on April 10, 1984, (hereinafter referred to as "RESOLUTION" ) , as a fair and orderly way of conducting its relations with its employees insofar as such practices and procedures are appropriate to the functions and obligations of the CITY and to retain the right effectively to operate in a responsible and efficient manner, consistent with the paramount interests of the CITY; and WHEREAS, the parties recognize that this Memorandum of Understanding, hereinafter referred to as "MEMORANDUM" , is not intended to modify any of the discretionary authority vested in the CITY by the Constitution and Statutes of the State of Utah, the body of law developed thereunder or under its ordinance or Collective Bargaining Resolutions; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the parties to this agreement to negotiate, where not otherwise mandated by statute or ordinance, for the salary structure, fringe benefits and employment conditions of the employees represented by the Union according to the Resolution, consisting of employees classified by the City as "100 Series" , hereinafter referred to as the "UNIT" to prevent interruptions to work and promote the efficient operation of the CITY, and to provide an orderly and prompt method of handling and processing grievances. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto declare their mutual understandings as follows: ARTICLE I PRODUCTIVITY AND CONSTRUCTION OF MEMORANDUM Delivery of municipal services in the most efficient, productive and courteous manner is of paramount importance to the CITY and the UNION. Such achievement is recognized to be a mutual obligation of both parties within their respective roles and responsibilities. All provisions of this MEMORANDUM shall be construed in compliance with such obligation and shall not abrogate in any respect provisions of the CITY's Collective Bargaining Resolution or the Ordinances of Salt Lake City, Utah. All questions of interpretation of this MEMORANDUM shall be resolved according to Article XXIV of this MEMORANDUM. ARTICLE II RECOGNITION The CITY recognizes the UNION as the exclusive bargaining agent pursuant to the Resolution for the purpose of negotiating salaries, wages, hours and other conditions of employment for employees in the UNIT. These rights of the employees' bargaining agent shall remain in effect subject to the terms and conditions of the RESOLUTION. ARTICLE III MANAGEMENT RIGHTS The City retains the exclusive right to manage all phases of its operations and to direct its work force except as specifically modified, curtailed, delegated, or relinquished under the terms of this MEMORANDUM. ARTICLE IV EMPLOYEE RIGHTS A. CITY employees shall have the right to join and participate in the activities of the Union subject to the Resolution for the purpose of representation on all matters of employee relations or to refuse to join or participate in such activities and shall have the right to represent themselves individually in their employment relations with the CITY. Employees shall be free from any and all restraint or coercion in the exercise of their rights and shall not be discriminated against because of membership or non-membership or activity or non-activity with the UNION. B. Both parties to this MEMORANDUM agree to assure equal employment opportunity to all employees and applicants of employment and to prohibit any employment practice which discriminates against any employee or applicant for employment with respect to compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of an individual' s race, color, religion, national origin, marital status, eligibility for military service, sex, age (as provided by law) or mental or physical handicap, to the full extent required by law. It is further agreed that representatives of both parties shall comply with this provision in the administration of this MEMORANDUM. C. If the subject matter of discussions with an employee and a decision by the CITY thereon would effect an interpretation or change in this MEMORANDUM, the UNION shall have the right to be heard before final action is taken by the CITY. D. The CITY shall make available to the UNION for distribution one ( 1 ) copy of this MEMORANDUM for each employee in the UNIT, in design, printing and form determined by the CITY in consultation with the UNION. The UNION agrees to consult with the CITY on the mode of distribution of such copies. E. The rights specified in this Article shall be in addition to grievance rights granted under Article XXV of the MEMORANDUM, relating to the presence of stewards and other persons in disciplinary proceedings. ARTICLE V UNION RIGHTS A. The UNION shall have the right to present its views to the CITY either orally or in writing. A representative of the UNION shall, at an employee' s request, be given the opportunity to be present for hearings in processing an employee' s grievance under the CITY' s grievance procedure. The UNION accepts the responsibility for, and agrees to represent in good faith, the interests of all employees in the UNIT without discrimination and without regard to membership in the UNION. B. The CITY agrees to recognize the officers and duly designated representatives of the UNION. The UNION -3- agrees to keep the CITY advised, in writing, of its officers and stewards. The number of UNION stewards shall be the number reasonably required, as determined by consultation, to assure that each employee in the UNIT shall have access to a UNION steward. The duly designated .UNION stewards shall, upon proper notification to their immediate supervisors and receipt of permission from such supervisors, be allowed a reasonable opportunity, during working hours, for the purpose of investigation, adjustment, and/or representing employees in grievances; provided that the CITY may require that no more than one steward shall be allowed such privileges, during working hours, for any one incident, regardless of the number of employees involved. Such permission shall not be unreasonably denied. The agreed upon number of stewards shall be distributed as follows: Police Records 1, Dispatch 2, Finance 1, Animal Control/Parking Enforcement 1, Public Utilities 9, Fleet 1, Public Works 5, City Hall 1, Courts 1, Airport 6, Parks 4. The UNION shall identify the representatives on July 1 of each calendar year to the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management. Any changes shall be reported as soon as is practical. It is the intent of this Agreement to limit the total number of stewards representing both 100 and 200 series employees to 32 stewards. C. It is agreed that internal UNION business such as soliciting membership, collecting dues, electing officers, membership meetings, and posting and distributing literature shall be conducted during the non-duty hours of the employees with the exception of the following : 1. One UNION representative from each department shall, upon receipt of permission from such employee' s immediate supervisor, be allowed a reasonable period during working hours, to attend UNION meetings or to participate in other UNION business as necessary, up to a maximum period of two hours per month, unless otherwise approved by the department head; and 2. Employees designated as official delegates to UNION conferences and conventions shall be allowed time off with pay for the purpose of attending such conferences and conventions not to exceed fifteen ( 15 ) working days per calendar year. 3. This does not preclude the business representative from delivering Union material to the designated -4- bulletin board when it does not interfere with normal work routine. The UNION shall provide the CITY 15 days ' notice of all conferences and conventions; and, in all cases, the employees shall obtain prior permission from their immediate supervisors at the earliest opportunity. Such permission shall not be unreasonably denied. D. The business representative may provide written information about the Union to coincide with other new employee written materials, to be distributed during new employee orientation. E. The CITY agrees to deduct twice a month, UNION membership dues and other fees designated by the UNION from the pay of each employee who individually requests in writing that such deductions be made. The CITY further agrees to cease deduction of such fees upon written request by the UNION. The CITY shall provide to the UNION a list of membership additions and deletions and current addresses, telephone numbers, and original dates of hire when available as computed by the CITY' s payroll department. Such information shall be provided upon the UNION' s request semiannually with ten days advance notice. F. The CITY agrees to designate space not less than four (4 ) feet wide and three (3 ) feet long in convenient view as determined by the CITY at the Water Department Complex at the Public Works Department Complex at the Salt Lake City International Airport, the Parks Department Complex , at the Salt Lake City Cemetery shops, Fleet Management shops, Water Reclamation Plant and Parking Enforcement office. Said space shall be available to the UNION for posting notices bearing the written approval of the UNION and shall be restricted to non-partisan and ethical matters. They may include: notices of UNION recreational and social affairs; notices of UNION elections; notices of UNION appointments and results of UNION elections; notice of UNION meetings and agenda; notices concerning bona fide UNION activities such as cooperatives, credit unions and unemployment compensation information; and/or other notices. The Labor-Management Committee shall make recommendations to the Mayor regarding placement of -5- bulletin boards which shall be maintained by the UNION for the purpose of UNION posters, according to the criteria of this article. There shall be no other general distribution, solicitations or posting of pamphlets, advertising or political matter, notices, or any kind of literature or solicitations upon CITY property other than as herein provided. Nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit distribution of appropriate UNION publications or notices defined hereinabove to members of the bargaining UNIT and as described in Article V C (3 ) . ARTICLE VI WAGE SCHEDULE All full-time salaried employees shall be paid in accordance with the wage schedule set forth in Appendix "A" effective from July 1, 1989 to midnight June 30, 1990. Employees shall be eligible for a merit increase on their anniversary date in accordance with the salary schedule provided in this Article VI during fiscal year beginning July 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990, subject to reopening as defined by Article XXXIII for fiscal year 1990-91 . All full-time salaried employees shall be paid monthly salaries. Part-time and seasonal employees shall be paid on an hourly basis. No employee paid on an hourly basis shall receive in excess of the starting rate of pay for similar job duties under the wage structure for employees newly hired as a full-time salaried employee. ARTICLE VII SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL In addition to the wage rates referred to under Article VI, the CITY shall pay an hourly premium of forty cents (400) to employees who work a regularly scheduled swing shift or night shift ( starting hours between 12:00 noon and 5: 59 a.m. ) . Shift differential premiums shall be used in the computation of overtime pay under Article IX of this MEMORANDUM; however, such premiums shall not be used to compute compensation for standby, callback, or any other premiums pay or minimum hourly guarantee. -6- ARTICLE VIII WAGE DIFFERENTIALS In addition to the wage rates referred to under Article VI, employees designated by the CITY as members of the Snow _ Fighter Corps, shall receive a pay differential equal to one hundred twenty-five dollars ($125.00) per month during the periods of November 15 through March 15 of each year. Such pay differential shall be for work related to snow removal and shall be separate from regular earnings on each employee' s wage statement. Employees who are qualified to operate snow removal equipment shall be assigned to the Snowfighter Corps by seniority on a volunteer basis. If the City does not have enough volunteers to staff a snowfighter crew, as determined by the supervisor or department head, employees shall be assigned on a seniority basis with the junior employees assigned first. Provided however, that any employee otherwise qualified for the allowance, who is absent from normal scheduled work more than ten (10) working days in a month, shall be ineligible to receive the allowance for that month. Vacation and compensatory time shall not be considered as absent work days for purposes of determining eligibility for the allowance described in this Article VIII. Eligible employees who have completed required training and testing for certification shall receive the following certification allowance: TABLE I Monthly Water Treatment Operators Distribution Workers Trainee Operator Sr.Operator Grade 1 -0- -0- -0- 2 $20 -0- -0- 3 $50 $30 -0- 4 $100 $80 $50 -7- TABLE II Wastewater Works Operator Grade 1 -0- 2 20 3 50 4 100 ARTICLE IX HOURS OF SERVICE AND OVERTIME A. HOURS OF WORK Forty hours shall constitute a normal work week except for work incentive programs approved by the CITY, provided, however, work in excess of 40 hours per week shall be considered as overtime work. Overtime work is to be discouraged. In case of emergency or whenever public interest demands, an employee may be required to perform overtime work by a department head. For the purposes of this article, a shift change shall mean a change from one permanent shift (day shift, swing shift, graveyard shift) to another shift. An emergency shall be defined as an act of God, i.e. , earthquakes, floods, and tornados or any other circumstance defined by the Mayor, Department head or the Salt Lake Emergency Management Plan. This clause shall not be construed to limit or prevent the CITY from changing or establishing work shifts as the need arises or to guarantee employees forty (40) hours work per week. The City with the concurrence of the UNION has adopted variable 40 hour work week schedules including 8 hour, 10, hour, and 12 hour shifts. It is the intent of the CITY to give 10 working days notice of any work schedule and shift changes to all affected employees. In the event such notice is not given to affected employees, the CITY will provide call back pay for each working day less than the required 10 working day notice. Such call back pay shall not be paid in emergencies. Notice of a shift change shall be given by the City orally and in writing to employees affected in accordance with the terms of this Article IX. -8- B. REST PERIODS Employees shall be entitled to a fifteen minute rest period or coffee break during each consecutive four (4) hour working period, which time shall be included within the work shift, except where extraordinary circumstances render such break impracticable. A reasonable effort shall be made to provide such breaks near the middle of each four (4 ) hour work period; provided, however, there shall be no additional compensation paid to employees electing or required to forego such rest period. C. MEAL PERIODS All employees shall be granted not to exceed, a sixty- minute lunch period during each work shift; provided, however, said lunch period shall be scheduled in accordance with the operational needs of the department by the shift supervisor. No employee shall be compensated for such periods unless the employee is required by the supervisor to be on the work site, and is required to perform any work during such time, then such employee shall be paid for the work. If, in lieu of payment, the employee wishes to end the work shift early by the same number of minutes worked into the lunch break, the employee may elect to do so with the consent of the supervisor. D. CLEANUP PERIOD Employees shall be granted a personal cleanup period prior to the end of each work shift. The duration of such period shall be as determined to be hygienically necessary by an employee' s immediate supervisor, not to exceed a maximum of fifteen ( 15 ) minutes per duty shift, exclusive of shutdown and travel times, unless a longer period has first been authorized by the immediate supervisor based upon extraordinary need and circumstances. E. OVERTIME COMPENSATION 1. Employees required to perform overtime work shall be compensated either by pay at one and one-half the applicable hourly rate; or an allowance of time off from employment with pay on the basis of one and one-half hours off for each hour of overtime worked.` The determination of whether to award pay or compensatory time off shall be the absolute discretion of the CITY, except, however, -9- that employees may indicate a preference for the form of overtime payment contingent upon approval by the department head, scheduling requirements and availability of funds. Employees are allowed to accumulate and maintain 40 hours minimum of compensatory time if such is allowed as compensation for overtime. Overtime work shall be distributed among qualified employees on the following basis: (a) A reasonable attempt shall be made to offer overtime work to qualified employees on a rotation basis; first to the employee with the least number and so on, until the overtime work has been accepted or until all employees contacted have declined such work so that at the completion of the calendar year all employee' s overtime hours are reasonably equal. In cases where two or more employees have an equal number of overtime hours as set forth above, seniority shall govern. Hours of overtime work offered but declined by an employee shall be computed as time worked for purposes of determining overtime eligibility under this paragraph; however, nothing in this section shall require payment for overtime hours not worked. (b) If no qualified employee accepts overtime work under the foregoing provisions, overtime assignments shall be made by the CITY by first attempting to contact the qualified employee with the least City seniority, and thereafter to the next least senior, qualified employee until all overtime work assignments have been made. For an employee to refuse an overtime assignment under this paragraph may be grounds for disciplinary action. When time off from employment is allowed as compensation for overtime, such time off shall be granted within twelve ( 12 ) months from the performance of the overtime work. (c) A department head may set by policy the amount of compensatory time hours an employee may accumulate at any one time. This maximum accumulation shall be based on departmental -10- needs, budget constraints and consideration for the employee' s best interests. Provided however that if an employee accumulates more than 240 hours compensatory time, the City shall pay for any overtime worked in excess of the 240 hours. 2. An employee may be required to work on holidays designated hereunder and shall be granted straight-time pay for holidays so worked. Such employees, however, may designate an alternate day to celebrate a worked holiday, provided the day designated is within one calendar year following the holiday worked, and a written request is approved in writing by the employee' s supervisor, who shall have the sole and absolute discretion to approve any such request. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties, holiday work selections shall be made by departmental seniority. 3. All paid time shall be defined as time worked for purposes of overtime computation; provided, however, that callback and standby pay premiums or unworked hourly guarantees shall be excluded from such computation. 4. An employee who, with supervisory approval, works two (2) or more additional hours to their regular duty shift shall be paid four dollars and fifty cents ($4. 50) as reimbursement for meals. Thereafter, employee(s) shall receive four dollars and fifty cents ( $4. 50) for each additional consecutive four (4) hours of work. Attempts to avoid the intent of this paragraph shall be discouraged. 5. An employee shall be entitled to receive compensation for a criminal or civil court appearance made during his or her off-duty hours as a witness subpoenaed by Salt Lake City or the State of Utah as follows: a. Felony and class "A" misdemeanor cases: four (4) hours of hourly base pay. b. All other misdemeanor, traffic and other cases, including juvenile court and drivers license cases and all civil cases: Three (3) hours of hourly base pay. -11- Compensation shall be provided by authority of this section only if: a. The time of the required appearance and of the witness' s release is noted on the subpoena and initialed by the prosecuting or City Attorney. b. The specified time of appearance is not within one ( 1 ) hour of commencement or completion of a duty shift, or the witness is required to appear during a duty shift and is released from appearance more than one (1 ) hour after completion of that shift. c. A copy of the witness' s subpoena complying herewith shall have been delivered to the witness' s supervisor within seven (7) days following the court appearance. Compensation shall be provided hereunder for no more than two ( 2) appearances per day. A second appearance shall be compensable only if it is specified to occur: a. More than four (4) hours after commencement of a witness' s appearance in a felony case; or b. More than three (3) hours after any other appearance compensable hereunder. The prosecuting or City Attorney shall have the right and the duty to refuse to initial the subpoena of any witness who through tardiness, absence or neglect fails to appear in compliance with the terms of the subpoena. Any employee failing to appear in compliance with the terms of a formal notice or subpoena shall be subject to disciplinary action. F. AVAILABILITY FOR WORK Any employee failing to remain available for work as required or to report to work in suitable condition to perform job functions, shall be subject to disciplinary action and forfeiture of applicable compensation; provided, however, that employees directed to return to work on callback status shall not be disciplined if they, as early as possible, inform the supervisor of any incapacity to perform the work directed. Any -12- employee determined as unfit at the time of report to callback duty shall not receive any compensation otherwise due him or her. G. INCLEMENT WEATHER Employees reporting to work on normally scheduled working days shall be guaranteed (3) hours regular pay when management directs that no work be undertaken and they are requested to return home. If any work is performed they shall be guaranteed (8 ) hours regular pay. ARTICLE X STANDBY PAY Employees may be required by an appropriate department head or designated representative to keep themselves available for City service during otherwise off-duty hours and leave word where they can be reached for an immediate call to service. Such employees shall receive the following compensation in addition to that to which they are otherwise entitled: 1. Employees designated by the CITY as members of the Snow Fighter Corps, shall be required to stand by as described in this Article XII to respond to emergency situations on a continuous basis and shall receive therefor the compensation referred to under Article VI of this MEMORANDUM or overtime compensation where applicable, but no other compensation or minimum hourly guarantees. 2. All other employees required to stand by as described in this Article X to respond to emergency situations shall receive two (2) hours straight time pay per each 24-hour day they are on the limited standby status. In addition thereto, each such Employee shall be guaranteed a minimum four (4) hours work or straight-time pay therefor on such occasions as they actually report to work while on the limited standby status. Provided however that employees in the Department of Public Utilities and the Airport exclusively shall receive two (2) hours of straight time pay per each 12-hour period they are on limited standby. Employees receiving snow fighter allowance pursuant to Article VIII shall not be affected by the additional standby allowance provided herein. Employees shall receive an additional two ( 2) -13- hours straight time pay for each occasion called to work, during the 24-hour stand by period, after the first occasion when the four hours is guaranteed. ARTICLE XI CALLBACK PAY Employees who have been released from normally scheduled work and standby periods and who return to work upon direction of an appropriate department head or designated representative, without advance notice or scheduling, shall receive a premium of three (3 ) hours straight-time pay and shall be guaranteed a minimum four (4) hours work or straight-time pay therefor. This Article XI shall not be construed as a shift change as described under Article VIII. ARTICLE XII HOLIDAYS A. HOLIDAYS SPECIFIED The following days shall be recognized and observed as holidays for all full-time salaried employees and all such employees shall receive their regular rate of pay for each of the following unworked holidays. Employees working 10-hour or 12-hour shifts shall be allowed the following days without reimbursement to the CITY. Part-time and seasonal employees shall not be entitled to holiday benefits: 1 . The first day of January, called New Year's Day; 2. The third Monday of January, observed as the anniversary of the birth of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. , also known as Human Rights Day. 3. The third Monday of February, observed as President' s Day; 4. The last Monday of May, called Memorial Day; 5. The fourth day of July, called Independence Day; 6. The twenty-fourth day of July, called Pioneer Day; 7. The first Monday in September, known as Labor Day; -14- 8. The second Monday of October, known as Columbus Day; 9. The eleventh day of November, known as Veterans ' Day; 10. The fourth Thursday in November, known as Thanksgiving Day; and 11 . The twenty-fifth day of December, called Christmas. 12. One personal holiday can be taken upon request of the employee at the discretion of the department head. Employees are eligible for this holiday only after satisfactorily completing their initial probationary period. Approval or disapproval of this holiday shall be given no later than five ( 5 ) working days after an employee's request. B. ALTERNATIVE AND ADDITIONAL HOLIDAYS When any holiday listed above falls on Sunday, the following business day shall be considered a holiday. When any holiday listed above falls on Saturday, the preceding business day shall be considered a holiday. In addition to the above, any day may be designated as a holiday by proclamation of the Mayor and/or the City Council. C. HOLIDAY WORK Full-time, salaried employees required to work on a day designated for celebration of a holiday hereunder shall, in addition to their holiday pay, receive pay at their regular rates or compensatory time off on a straight-time basis; provided, however, that when hours worked plus designated holiday hours exceed 40 hours in a single work week, overtime compensation shall be granted an employee in addition to his or her holiday pay. For purpose of this section, hours worked shall be construed as paid time as defined under the overtime section of this MEMORANDUM. D. HOLIDAY PAY LIMITATION No employee shall receive in excess of any one day of holiday pay for a single holiday. All employees must work or be on authorized leave their last scheduled working hours before the next scheduled working day following the holiday to qualify for holiday pay. -15- E. COLUMBUS DAY EXCEPTION Columbus Day may be celebrated within 45 days following the date of its actual occurrence as specified in Section A above; provided, however, that an employee may celebrate said Columbus Day on a day other than specified if a written request is approved in writing by the employee' s supervisor, who shall have the sole and absolute discretion to approve any such request. ARTICLE XIII VACATIONS A. VACATIONS AUTHORIZED Full-time, salaried employees shall be entitled to receive their regular salaries during vacation periods earned and taken in accordance with the provisions of this Article. Part-time and seasonal employees shall not be entitled to any vacation or other benefits. Every full-time salaried employee shall earn a vacation period monthly from the date employee becomes a full- time salaried employee; provided further, that no person shall be entitled to any vacation unless such person has successfully completed his or her initial probationary period of full-time salaried employment with the CITY. B. VACATION SCHEDULE 1. Except as provided in Article XIII B( 2) , employees shall accrue vacation under the schedule in paragraph 3 of this section; provided that no person shall be entitled to any vacation unless such person has successfully completed his or her initial probationary period. 2. Employees who became a full time salaried employee before June 30, 1986 and who have elected to continue using the former vacation schedule shall accrue vacation as outlined in paragraph 4 of this section. The election to accrue vacation pursuant either to the former vacation schedule (paragraph 4) or the vacation schedule outlined in paragraph 3 is a one time election and cannot be changed by the employee at a later date. -16- 3. Completed Years Hours of Hours Accrued of Consecutive Vacation Per Biweekly City Service Per Year Pay Period 0 to completion of year 1 40 1 . 54 Beginning of year 2 to completion of year 3 80 3.08 Beginning of year 4 to completion of year 6 96 3. 69 Beginning of year 7 to 120 4. 61 completion of year 9 Beginning of year 10 to 144 5. 54 completion of year 12 Beginning of year 13 to 160 6. 15 completion of year 15 Beginning of year 16 to 176 6. 77 completion of year 19 Beginning of year 20 or more 200 7. 69 C. FORMER VACATION SCHEDULE Completed years Hrs. of Vacation Hrs. Accrued of consecutive per year Per Biweekly City service Pay Period 0 to 9 96 3. 69 10 to 14 136 5.23 15 or more 176 6.77 D. RULES FOR TAKING VACATION 1. Employees with the greatest City seniority shall be given the first consideration for requested vacation periods. Supervisors shall respond to vacation requests by granting or denying each request as soon as possible or at least within ten ( 10) working days. Employees shall submit requests for vacation for the calendar year during the period commencing January 1 and ending January 31 of each year. Employees shall be granted vacation on a City seniority basis. The departments shall post the vacation schedule for the calendar year by March 1 of each year. -17- Requests for January vacation shall be submitted in November of the previous calendar year. 2. Employees called back to work during a vacation period shall be compensated for the time worked at time and one-half. An Employee shall not be paid vacation compensation during the callback however, the employee shall be allowed to reschedule the remaining vacation not used. 3. Employees may accumulate vacations (including both earned vacation and sick leave conversion time) , according to the length of their full-time consecutive years of employment with the CITY up to the following maximum limits: (a) After 6 months - up to 200 hours; (b) After 9 years - up to 240 hours; (c) After 14 years - up to 280 hours. Any vacation earned or accrued beyond said maximum shall be deemed forfeited unless utilized prior to the end of the calendar year in which such maximum has been accrued. 4. Except upon termination as provided in Section D, or purchase as provided in Section E, no employee shall be entitled to be paid for vacation earned but not taken. D. BENEFITS UPON TERMINATION 1. Every employee whose employment is terminated by resignation or otherwise shall be entitled to be paid for: (a) All earned vacation time accrued, unused, unforfeited and lawfully forwarded from previous years, plus; (b) A termination benefit consisting of all vacation accrued, unforfeited and unused for the year of employment during which the termination shall occur. (c) In cases of permanent separation, the CITY shall compensate employees for unused compensatory time off, within thirty (30) days from the date of termination. -18- (d) Employees subject to layoff because of lack of work or lack of funds shall be eligible for reimbursement of 50% of their accumulated unused sick leave hours. 2. An employee resigning from the CITY and giving less than-ten ( 10) working days' notice shall be eligible for reimbursement for all but up to two days of their accrued, unused vacation pay. All full-time salaried employees shall not be eligible to use accrued vacation until the successful completion of their initial probationary period. E. CASH PAYMENT OF EARNED VACATION TIME IN LIEU OF USE 1. The CITY may purchase up to, but not exceeding, 80 hours of earned and accrued vacation time, to which an employee is entitled as authorized in this article, with the consent of said employee and upon favorable written recommendation of the employee's department head. 2. Said purchase of accrued vacation time may be authorized, in the sole, exclusive and absolute discretion of the CITY, when, in its judgment, it is demonstrated that: (a) Vacation time is accrued and earned in accordance with this agreement; (b) The cash payment in lieu of vacation time use shall not interfere with an employee' s performance or create an unreasonable hardship on said employee. (c) There is a demonstrated need for the CITY to retain the services of the employee for the said vacation time; (d) There are sufficient monies in the departmental budget to pay for the vacation time as certified by the City Finance Director or designee, without disturbing or interfering with the delivery of CITY services; and (e) The employee consents voluntarily to the cash payment in lieu of time off from the employee' s regular work schedule. -19- 3. The foregoing, notwithstanding, under no circumstances may the CITY purchase more than 80 hours of earned but unused vacation time from an employee during any twelve ( 12) month period. ( a) The amount to be paid for any such purchase of vacation time as provided herein shall be based on the wage or salary rate of the said employee at the date of approval by the CITY. However, under no circumstances shall any overtime compensation be paid, computed or accrued by virtue of the City authorizing an employee to work a vacation period and receive cash payment therefor in lieu of use. (b) The CITY and its departments shall extend a diligent effort to provide every employee his or her earned annual vacation, and shall, through appropriate management efforts, seek to minimize the recommendations for cash payments in lieu of vacation use. Any vacation purchased by the CITY shall be considered to be an extraordinary circumstance and not a fringe benefit of the employee. ARTICLE XIV SICK LEAVE AND HOSPITALIZATION BENEFITS A. SICK LEAVE POLICY AND PROCEDURES 1 . Sick leave shall be provided to all full-time salaried employees only as insurance against loss of income when an employee is unable to perform assigned duties because of illness or injury. Maternity leave shall be treated as any other disability. 2. Each full-time, salaried employee shall be entitled to 120 hours of sick leave each calendar year, after successful completion of their initial probationary period. Sick leave shall be granted in a lump sum 120 hours during the first month of each calendar year. Employees who separate from the CITY for any reason prior to the end of the 12th month of the -20- calendar year shall have sick leave for the period prorated back to the CITY on an hourly basis per month as follows. January 120 hours February 110 hours _ March 100 hours April 90 hours May 80 hours June 70 hours July 60 hours August 50 hours September 40 hours October 30 hours November 20 hours December 10 hours 3. Employees absent from work on account of illness or injury shall report intended absence to their department head or supervisor when possible before commencement of their duty shift as soon as practical, but in no event later than fifteen ( 15 ) minutes before commencement of such shift unless justified by extraordinary circumstances. 4. An employee requesting sick leave in excess of two consecutive days or who is above the City average for sick leave usage may be required by his or her immediate supervisor to provide documentation by a written certification from a licensed practicing and attending physician, that during the period of leave, the absent employee was prevented by illness from discharging the duties required by his or her office or position of employment. Such certification shall also be required of any employee claiming sick leave benefits not reported in compliance with subsection 3 or when a supervisor or department head has probable cause to believe an abuse of sick leave has occurred. 5. Disciplinary action shall be deemed mandatory for abuse of sick leave privileges or procedures, except where the employee demonstrates justifiable excuse. 6. Employees who have accrued at least ( 80 hours ) of sick leave may be allowed to use no more than 16 hours of accrued sick leave per calendar year for their physician' s and dentist' s appointments. This leave may be used only upon prior approval of -21- the employee's immediate supervisor. This leave must be taken in minimum one-hour time periods. The City reserves the right to require written verification of actual attendance for the time claimed by the employee pursuant to this paragraph. B. ACCUMULATION OF SICK LEAVE Authorized and unused sick leave may be accumulated from year to year subject to limitations of Section G of this Article. C. SICK LEAVE CONVERSION TO VACATION TIME Any employee who has accumulated to his credit two hundred forty ( 240) sick leave hours may choose to convert a portion of the yearly sick leave grant for any given year to vacation hours according to the following schedule: For employees working 8 hour shifts No. Hours Sick Leave Used No. -Hours to Convert 0 40 8 32 16 24 24 16 32 8 40 0 For employees working 10 hour shifts No. Hours Sick No. Hours to Leave Used Convert 0 40 10 32 20 24 30 16 40 8 50 0 For employees working 12 hour shifts No. Hours Sick No. Hours to Leave Used Convert 0 40 12 32 -22- 24 24 36 16 48 8 60 0 D. SICK LEAVE CREDIT FORWARD The balance of the sick leave hours not converted to vacation days as permitted above, less the number of hours used during that calendar year as sick leave shall be carried forward as accumulated sick leave hours. E. NOTIFICATION OF CONVERSION ELECTION Any election by an employee to convert any sick leave to vacation time must be made by notifying the Department of Human Resource Management in writing , on or before January 31 of each year; the CITY shall make available to employees information regarding sick leave use for the previous year and forms to request conversion; otherwise, no conversion shall be allowed for that calendar year and such conversion privilege shall be deemed waived for that calendar year. In no event shall sick leave hours be converted for other than the immediately preceding year' s sick leave allocation. F. PRESUMPTION OF USE Any sick leave properly converted to vacation benefits as above described, shall be deemed to be taken prior to any other days of vacation time to which the employee is entitled; provided, however, that in no event shall any sick leave converted to vacation days be entitled to any pay or compensation upon an employee' s termination. Any sick leave converted to vacation remaining unused at the date of termination or retirement shall be forfeited by the employee; however, for purposes of this section, conversion hours shall be construed as used prior to vacation otherwise accrued by an employee. G. SICK LEAVE BENEFITS UPON RETIREMENT In addition to the sick leave conversion privilege to vacation days above described, at retirement an employee (or his estate, where death follows retirement but precedes payment) shall be eligible to receive a retirement benefit as stipulated in Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 6 of 1989. Persons who retire under the -23- eligibility requirements of the Utah State Retirement System and are not eligible under the above referenced order will be paid in cash at their then current pay scale, a sum equal to their daily rate of pay for 25 percent (25%) of the accumulated sick leave days reserved for the benefit of said employee at the date of his or her retirement. In lieu of the above, employee may elect to convert sick leave privilege to hospital and surgical coverage. 50% of the sick leave hours available at retirement may be converted to a dollar allowance at the time of retirement. The sick leave hours converted to a dollar allowance shall be subject to any state and federal income and social security tax withholding required by law. An employee' s available dollar allowance determines the number of months of medical and surgical coverage which may be purchased. If insurance costs go up due to group experience, the number of months of coverage will decrease. H. HOSPITALIZATION In addition to the sick leave authorized hereunder, each full-time, salaried employee shall be entitled to thirty (30) 8 hour calendar days hospitalization leave each calendar year, provided that such leave may be taken only if, and during the period that, such employee is actually confined to an acute care hospital or other free standing outpatient surgical facility. No accumulation of hospital leave shall be allowed. I . UNAUTHORIZED SICK LEAVE AND HOSPITAL BENEFITS No employee shall be entitled to receive sick leave or authorized hospitalization benefits as a result of injuries, or disability resulting from accidents arising out of or in the course of his or her employment for an employer other than the CITY. J. REGULAR SALARY TO BE CONTINUED Each employee who takes authorized sick leave or authorized hospitalization leave shall continue to receive his or her regular salary during his or her absence from work for the periods set forth in this article. -24- ARTICLE XV DISABILITY COMPENSATION 1. If an employee of the CITY becomes entitled to receive worker' s compensation as a result of suffering a CITY service-connected injury or illness, such employee shall be paid worker's compensation as provided by law; provided, however, that the employee may elect to use, during such disability, their accumulated sick leave credit and vacation time, such part of their wage or salary as will, when added to their worker's compensation payments, equal their regular wage or salary; and provided further, that satisfactory evidence of such election shall be transmitted by said person to the Department of Human Resource Management of the CITY prior to payment. 2. The City will make reasonable efforts to make "light duty" work available to an employee injured on the job as defined by the Worker' s Compensation Act, provided that the employee is able to perform the "light duty" work and the employee has presented a release by their physician to the City certifying that the employee is able to work. 3. Long term disability shall be provided to eligible employees under the City' s Income Protection Program (Long Term Disability Plan) . 4. The CITY shall establish rules and procedures for administration of an injury leave program (supplemental to regular sick leave benefits) for only employees who are airport operations officers under the following qualifications and restrictions: 1 . The disability must have resulted from a documented injury arising out of the discharge of official duties and/or while exercising some form of necessary law enforcement authority as determined by the City. Further, the injury disability must be the result of some external force delivered by the person (or persons ) who is the object of the law enforcement action by the employee. -25- 2. The employee must be unable to return to work due to the injury as verified by a licensed physician acceptable to the CITY; 3. The leave benefit must not exceed the value of the employee' s net salary during the period of absence due to the injury, less all amounts paid or credited to the employee as worker' s compensation, social security, long term disability, or retirement benefits, or any form of governmental relief whatsoever; 4. The aggregate value of benefits provided to employees under this injury leave program shall not exceed the total of $5000 per employee; unless approved in writing by the Mayor for extraordinary reasons or circumstances; and 5. The City' s Risk Manager shall be principally responsible for the review of injury leave claims, provided that appeals from the decision of the Risk Manager may be reviewed by the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management who may make recommendations to the Mayor for final decision. 6. If an employee is eligible for worker' s compensation as provided by law; and is not receiving injury leave pursuant to this provision said employee may elect in writing to the Director of Human Resource Management to use accumulated sick leave and authorized vacation time to supplement the employee' s worker' s compensation not to exceed the employee' s regular salary. ARTICLE XVI PART-TIME AND SEASONAL EMPLOYEES Part-time and temporary employees shall not be entitled to any leaves or other employment benefits whatsoever, unless required by Federal, State or Municipal Law. -26- ARTICLE XVII LEAVES OF ABSENCE Full-time, salaried employees shall be eligible for leaves of absence under the following circumstances: A. FUNERAL LEAVE 1. Time off with pay shall be granted a salaried full-time employee who suffers the loss of a wife, husband, child, mother, father, stepmother, stepfather, stepchild, brother, sister, father-in- law, mother-in-law, grandchild, grandfather or grandmother. In the event of death in any of these instances, employees shall be paid their regular base pay for scheduled work time from the time of death through the day of the funeral; however, no such leave shall be permitted to exceed more than five ( 5) working shifts. Employees shall be permitted one additional paid shift of funeral leave, on the day following the funeral, if the funeral or burial is held more than 150 miles distance from Salt Lake City and if the day following the funeral is a regular working shift. Satisfactory proof of such death, together with the date thereof and the date and location of the funeral and burial, must be furnished by the employees to the department head. 2. In the event of death of relatives other than those enumerated in subsection ( 1) , an employee shall be paid for time off from scheduled working hours while attending the funeral services for such person, not to exceed one work shift. 3. In the event of death of friends, an employee may be granted time off without pay while attending the funeral services for such persons, not to exceed four (4 ) hours subject to the approval of his or her immediate supervisor. Nothing in this subsection shall prevent an employee from requesting earned and unused compensatory or vacation time. 4. In the event the death of any member of the immediate family, as set forth in subsection ( 1 ) of this Article occurs while an employee is on vacation, his or her vacation shall be extended by the amount of time authorized as funeral leave under said subsection. -27- 5. The provisions of this Article shall not be applicable to employees who are on leave of absence. B. LEAVE OF ABSENCE OF EMPLOYEES WHO ENTER MILITARY SERVICE Every employee of CITY who enlists or is called or inducted into and enters active service in the state militia or any branch of the federal military, naval, air or marine service shall be entitled to be absent without pay from duties and service as required by State and Federal law. C. LEAVE WHILE ON ANNUAL ENCAMPMENT All employees who are or shall become members of the Organized Reserves of the United States Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard and Marines, shall be paid the difference in pay between their regular rate of pay and the base pay received while on duty at mandatory summer camp , not to exceed ten consecutive working days per year, in connection with the reserve training and instruction of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard and Marines of the United States. This leave shall be in addition to annual vacation leave with pay. D. LEAVE FOR JURY DUTY All full-time salaried employees shall be entitled to receive and retain statutory juror's fees paid for jury service in the District and Federal Courts whose jurisdictions include Salt Lake County subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth. No reduction in an employee's salary shall be made for absence from work resulting from such jury service whether consecutive or not. On those shifts that an employee is required to report for jury service and is thereafter excused from such service during his or her regular working hours for the CITY, he or she shall forthwith return to and carry on his or her regular CITY employment. Failure to so return to work shall result in the forfeiture of that shifts pay by such employee. E. DEPENDENT LEAVE A leave of absence may be requested by an employee for the following reasons: -28- a. Becoming a parent through birth or adoption of newly born children. b. Due to the hospitalization of a dependent. The following provisions apply to the use of dependent leave: a. Dependent leave may be granted with pay on a straight time basis for a period not to exceed five consecutive days from the date a dependent commences residence with an employee, or from the date of birth of the dependent or from the date the dependent becomes hospitalized. b. The employee has accumulated and has available unused sick leave. Under no circumstances shall the employee be entitled to use as dependent leave more than five consecutive working days in a calendar year. c. The employee gives notice to his or her supervisor as soon as possible under the circumstances. d. The employee provides, upon request by a supervisor, certification of birth or evidence of a child placement for adoption to his or her supervisor within five ( 5 ) days following termination of such leave. A letter may be requested from the treating physician in the event of hospitalization of a dependent within five ( 5) days following termination of dependent leave used for this purpose. e. An employee' s sick leave shall be reduced by the number of hours taken by an employee as dependent leave under this section. F. LEAVE OF ABSENCE FOR UNION ACTIVITY Up to two ( 2) employees of the UNIT elected to UNION positions, or selected by the UNION to positions the responsibilities of which require absence from employment with the CITY, shall upon written request from the UNION, submitted to the CITY as soon as possible under the circumstances but in no event later than thirty (30) days prior to the first day of absence, receive a leave of absence, without pay, for the period of service with the UNION. Upon termination of such employee' s leave of absence, another employee shall be eligible for a leave of absence under the -29- terms and conditions set forth above. At no time shall more than one ( 1 ) employee within a single division of a department be absent from work under the provisions of this section. The employee' s seniority shall, upon his/her return to work be reinstated according to the status and classification which he or she held and was last engaged in prior to taking leave. The employee shall upon the ending of such leave be reinstated into the first vacant position, which has a similar classification and was last engaged in prior to taking leave, that the CITY has open in any of its career service departments provided that the person meets the minimum qualifications according to the status and classification which was held and was last engaged in prior to taking such leave. The employee during such leave and for one year thereafter shall have pre-bid rights. G. ADDITIONAL LEAVES OF ABSENCE Employees requesting leave for anticipated or short- term disability, such as maternity, surgery, or other medical reason, shall be allowed to take up to six ( 6 ) months' unpaid leave without loss of seniority or position at the discretion of the department head. ARTICLE XVIII LONGEVITY PAY In addition to the salaries herein provided, every employee who has completed six ( 6) consecutive full years of employment with the CITY, shall, after the seventh (7th) anniversary date, receive a monthly longevity benefit in the sum of fifty dollars ($50.00) . Every employee who has completed ten ( 10) consecutive years of employment with the CITY shall, after the eleventh ( 11th) anniversary date, receive a total monthly longevity benefit in the sum of seventy-five dollars ($75.00) . Every employee who has completed sixteen ( 16 ) consecutive years of employment with the CITY shall, after the seventeenth ( 17th) anniversary date, receive a total monthly longevity benefit of one hundred dollars ( $100.00) . The computation of longevity pay shall be based on the most recent date employee became a full-time salaried employee with the City. -30- ARTICLE XIX TOOL, UNIFORM, AND AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCES A. TOOL ALLOWANCE - Employees meeting the following qualifications shall receive the sum of $40.00 per month as a tool allowance: 1. Be required to use the personal tools on the CITY job, said requirement being listed in the job description for the position held by the employee. The CITY agrees to consult with the UNION on designation of such classifications or classification subdivisions for receipt of tool allowance. 2. The replacement cost of the tools used must exceed $3, 000.00. 3. Actually use the tools on a daily basis and not just store them on the job site. 4. The employee' s immediate supervisor certify to the Office of Human Resource Management and department head in charge of said department that the employee requesting the tool allowance meets the minimum requirements, said certification to be in writing and updated at least annually. The CITY shall not require employees to provide their own tools in excess of $3, 000.00 without paying the tool allowance provided hereunder. The tool allowance shall not be paid unless such tools are required by the CITY. The CITY shall provide, at its own expense, $3, 000.00 of property insurance for tools used by employees under the preceding provisions of this section, payable to the tool owner, subject to the deductible hereafter provided. Each employee shall maintain an inventory of such tools and shall provide copies of that inventory to the CITY by September 1 on a yearly basis. The deductible for each loss under such insurance coverage shall be $250.00. -31- B. UNIFORM ALLOWANCE Employees, when required to wear uniforms in the execution of their duties with the CITY shall have such uniforms furnished and maintained at the CITY'S expense with the following exceptions: 1 . Employees in the Public Works Department (other than welders, mechanics and parking enforcement personnel ) shall maintain their uniforms at their own expense. 2. Airport Operations Officers who are required to wear uniforms while in the execution of their duties shall receive the sum of $45.00 per month as a uniform allowance in lieu of any uniform expense to the CITY. 3. The following employees, when required to wear uniforms in their duties with the CITY, shall receive the following monthly uniform allowances in lieu of any other uniform expense to the CITY: Parking Enforcement Personnel $40.00 Parking Meter Repair Personnel $40.00 Animal Control Officers $40.00 Watershed Patrol $40.00 4. A joint committee consisting of representatives from the City and the Union shall meet quarterly to review and determine protective clothing and uniform needs. The composition of the committee shall reflect representation from all affected departments. C. AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCES Employees who are authorized to use and who do use privately owned automobiles for official CITY business shall be reimbursed for their operation expenses of said automobiles at the rate of twenty-one cents ( 21C) per mile for each mile actually traveled in official CITY business. Before payment is made to any employee, pursuant to the terms of this section, the use of the automobiles must be authorized by the employee's supervisor and the mileage traveled must be verified by the head of the department involved. -32- ARTICLE XX INSURANCE 1. The CITY shall make available life, accidental death and dismemberment, dental, and health insurance to all employees covered under the MEMORANDUM, upon the terms and conditions as may be from time to time determined by the CITY. 2. The amount which the CITY shall contribute to the employees' insurance during the term of this MEMORANDUM shall be as set forth in Appendix "B" attached. Payment shall be deducted biweekly consistent with the pay periods. 3. The CITY shall continue to make available the same consulting service which shall provide limited consulting by an outside confidential firm for drug abuse, alcoholism, and marriage counseling. ARTICLE XXI PENSION PLAN CONTRIBUTION The CITY agrees to pay the employee' s share and employer' s share of the retirement contribution as mandated by state statute and as said statute is interpreted by the Utah State Retirement Board. ARTICLE XXII SENIORITY A. SENIORITY DEFINED Seniority shall consist of an employee' s uninterrupted, regularly scheduled employment with the CITY. An employee' s earned seniority shall not be lost because of absence due to illness, authorized leaves of absence, or temporary layoffs not to exceed two ( 2) years. Elected officials of the UNION shall be considered to have seniority above that of all other employees for the purpose of layoff only, regardless of actual, earned seniority. -33- B. LAYOFFS Whenever it is necessary to reduce the number of employees performing an activity or function defined by the Mayor or his or her designee within a CITY department because of lack of work or lack of funds, the CITY shall, minimize layoffs by readjustment of personnel through reassignment of duty in other departments. 1. Whenever layoffs are necessary, emergency, temporary , probationary and hourly employees performing essentially the same duties as the aforesaid work activity or functions being reduced shall be laid off first; provided, that it is expressly understood that seasonal-hourly employees are not included in this limitation. 2. Full-time salaried employees shall be the last to be laid off in inverse order of the length of service of employees in the same job classification performing the same job functions and duties. 3. Full-time salaried employees designated for layoff or actually laid off shall move into a vacant equal or lower classified job position, wherever situated in the CITY, for which the employee is qualified. Vacant means that the Department of Human Resource Management has received a request to fill a position. Equal or lower classified means that the maximum salary for the vacant position shall be less than or equal to the maximum salary for the position being laid off. Said employee, within the CITY department in which the layoff occurred, may also bump less senior, full-time salaried temporary or probationary personnel (in a job position and function previously and actually held by said laid off employee) for a position said employee is currently qualified and able to perform as determined by the Department of Human Resource Management. 4. Employees who have been laid-off shall have rights for a one year period to placement in any vacant job which is at an equal or lower classification where they meet minimum qualifications. They shall not be subject to any further examination. Minimum qualifications on laid off job positions shall remain unchanged for the same one year period not restricting changes for bona fide business and operational purposes. 5. A re- employment list shall be established in the [Office] Department of Human Resource Management to facilitate the placement of any reduced in force employees. -34- GENERAL RE-EMPLOYMENT LISTS Employees who have been laid off in accordance with paragraph (B) above or have been terminated without cause or prejudice, have the right to request pre-bid in accordance with Article XXIII, Pre-Bid Procedures, _ paragraph A of this MEMORANDUM. Pre-Bid rights shall expire two ( 2) years from the- employee's date of layoff. Should the employee be rehired within this time period the employee shall have full reinstatement of all CITY seniority for purposes of vacation and sick leave computation. The employee shall be subject to the same probationary period as an employee hired under pre-bid. If the aforementioned employee has cashed out any sick leave, vacation or retirement monies, the employee shall not be eligible for reinstatement of same. D. SHIFT BIDS Department heads or their designee shall decide the employee qualifications, abilities or experience recommended for each work shift or CITY operation _ deemed desirable to perform the functions, operations or mission of the department, and such considerations may include training, specialized knowledge, skill or other particularized needs of the entire department. After management has made shift assignments indicated by such needs or considerations, the remainder of the shift-work assignment shall be made on the basis of department seniority; provided, however, that seniority shall not be a basis for selection of work shifts if, with the concurrence of the department head, the employees of a designated work area elect that seniority should not be the determinant. In the event of such election, the vote shall be by secret ballot, within work areas and in a manner selected by the department head. E. ROUTE BIDS: Employees bidding for route assignments shall conduct their bidding according to the procedures in Article XXII, paragraph D in this section. -35- ARTICLE XXIII JOB BIDS A. PRE-BID PROCEDURE In order that qualified employees may be given proper consideration when a vacancy in a job exists, and the department head deems it advisable to fill such vacancy on a full-time salaried basis, the department head shall utilize the following Pre-Bid Procedure: Employee shall have the full responsibility to request a transfer or job bid to any appropriate job within the CITY. The CITY agrees to post any newly authorized or newly created positions on their initial bidding. An employee shall have the responsibility to update requests for such Pre-Bid. Such requests shall be valid for no more than a two-year period. An employee may apply at any time for a Pre-Bid in writing on forms specified by the Department of Human Resource Management for inclusion on such confidential register. Such confidential Pre-Bid register shall be deemed closed when the department head advises the Department of Human Resource Management in writing that a vacancy needs to be filled on a full-time salaried basis. Department supervisors agree insofar as practical to notify the department union steward of position openings. The department head shall make a selection from those applicants on a register designated by the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management, solely on the basis of qualifications; however, in the event that all qualifications are relatively equal, the applicable department or CITY length of service shall be the basis of selection between such applicants. Employees objecting to the selection process for positions covered by this Article shall submit their complaints to the Labor/Management Committee. If either side is not satisfied with the committee' s recommendations, they may submit the complaint to the Mayor' s designee within ten working days. The complaint shall be investigated and a written report submitted within fifteen -36- working days. The decision of the Mayor' s designee shall be final and binding. Nothing herein shall prohibit appointments as deemed appropriate by the CITY during the investigation period. _ Department manager, with the assistance of the Department of Human Resource Management, shall be cognizant of job descriptions and related requirements for positions and afford first consideration to employees within the affected department. When a vacancy cannot be filled by competent and experienced employees applying for the same job, the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management, on the recommendation of the department head, shall announce the job vacancy for external recruitment purposes. New positions shall be posted for a period not to exceed five ( 5 ) working days, (excluding holidays) , during which time employees may apply in writing, on forms specified by the Department of Human Resource Management for appointment to fill such vacancy, setting forth any such information as may be required by the CITY. The Department of Human Resource Management agrees to offer periodic position counseling and pre-bid training. B. PROBATIONARY PERIOD A successful bidder for a job vacancy shall be on probation for a period not to exceed ninety (90) calendar days, during the first thirty ( 30) days of which time the employee may elect to return to the former position of employment. The probationary period may be extended, if necessary for training purposes, if agreed upon by applicant and supervisor or department head. During the probationary period, applicant shall not be eligible to be selected for any other job vacancy. If applicant is retained in the job applied for at the expiration of said probationary period, applicant shall be ineligible to be selected for another job opening for a period of nine ( 9 ) months after the expiration of said probationary period, unless authorization to apply is given by the department head. If applicant is not retained in said -37- job before the expiration of the probationary period, the employee shall be returned to the position held prior to being accepted in the job applied for. ARTICLE XXIV LABOR MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE & SAFETY A. LABOR MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE There shall be a Labor Management Committee consisting of eight members; four employees appointed by the UNION and four employees appointed by the CITY. The committee shall meet monthly or upon call of either party in the event of an emergency. Meetings shall be held on CITY time. It shall be the general function of the Labor Management Committee to discuss matters of mutual interest concerning wages, hours, and other conditions of employment except those which are specifically covered under the grievance procedure, in accordance with Article XXV, Grievance Procedure. Items brought to this committee must have first been brought before the appropriate department management personnel in an attempt to resolve the issue. An agenda shall be prepared and delivered to each of the committee members ahead of time. The Labor Management Committee shall make appropriate recommendations to cabinet level directors for their decisions which shall be final and binding. The Labor Management Committee shall study such matters as apprenticeship and training , seniority, overtime, layoff procedures, employee productivity, and other matters of mutual interest to the CITY and the UNION. It is the intent of this agreement that only one Labor Management Committee exist for the employees represented by the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees AFL-CIO. B. SAFETY Management and employee, along with the Departmental Safety Committees, which shall consist of three employees appointed by the Union and three employees appointed by the City, shall coordinate to maintain a safe and healthful workplace. -38- C. TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE The Union shall appoint one person to represent both the 100 and 200 series employees on the City' s Training and Development Committee. ARTICLE XXV GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE It shall be the policy of the CITY to adjust grievances of employees properly and fairly, within a framework of existing laws and regulations. Every reasonable effort shall be made to adjust grievances in a manner mutually satisfactory to employees and management at the lowest possible level. This grievance procedure shall be utilized only for terminations and suspensions, EEO complaints, demotions, and transfers. Any employee who believes that a grievance exists as defined above, may personally or through an attorney or a UNION representative utilize the grievance procedure outlined herein. The above notwithstanding, employees who have terminated may submit their grievance immediately to the third (3rd) step of the grievance procedure outlined herein. An employee has a right to a UNION representative at all formal steps of the grievance procedure. The supervisor shall notify the employee of this right prior to the administration of disciplinary action. It is mutually understood that the prompt presentation, adjustment and/or answering of the grievance is desirable in the interest of sound relations between the employees and the CITY. The prompt and fair disposition of grievances involves important and equal obligations and responsibilities, both joint and independent, on the part of the representatives of each party to protect and preserve the grievance procedure as an orderly means of resolving grievances. Step ( 1 ) The grievance shall be submitted in writing to the immediate supervisor and the employee may have a representative at such meetings. The grievance shall be presented within ten ( 10) working days from the time the grievance occurs or from the time the employee could reasonably be expected to have become aware of such occurrence, provided, however, both -39- parties agree that during this ten ( 10) day working period the alleged grievance shall be informally discussed with the employee involved, the employee' s supervisor, and the UNION representative. Failure to provide such notice within the time specified shall void any employee' s grievance rights provided hereunder. The supervisor shall render a decision on a grievance appropriately filed within six ( 6) working days from the date that the grievance was filed. Incidents of prior disciplinary action shall not be considered in a current disciplinary decision if, ( 1 ) at the time of the prior action the employee requested and was unreasonably denied the presence of a union steward as a witness of the disciplinary action; and (2 ) the employee has submitted a written objection to the immediate supervisor within 10 working days of the prior disciplinary action. Such request shall not be considered to have been unreasonably denied if it would effect an unreasonable delay or disruption of work. Step ( 2 ) If no settlement is reached under Step ( 1 ) , then the grievance shall be presented in writing to the next level supervisor within six ( 6 ) working days after Step ( 1 ) . The next level supervisor shall notify the parties concerned of the decision within six ( 6 ) working days after hearing the grievance. Meetings held under Steps ( 2 ) and (3 ) of this procedure shall normally be held within ten ( 10) working days after receipt of the grievance at each step; however, such limits may be extended as may be agreed upon in writing by the parties hereto. Step (3 ) If no agreement is reached under Step ( 2 ), the grievance shall be submitted within ten working days to an informal hearing before the appropriate cabinet level director, or his or her designee, provided however, that if the grievance involves EEO ( including Title VII ) related matters, the employee may elect to proceed outside the chain of command and have a hearing before the City' s Government Compliance Manager and a representative from the UNION. -40- This meeting should be conducted within thirty (30) working days following receipt of the grievance. Step ( 4) If no settlement is reached under Step (3) , the employee may appeal to the Mayor' s Office in writing and by certified letter within six ( 6 ) days of receipt of the decision under Step (3) . In the event of appeal by the employee, the employee may choose to have the Employees Appeals Board hear the case and render a recommendation to the Mayor. The Employees Appeals Board shall submit a recommendation to the Mayor. The Mayor shall then render a final decision within ten ( 10) working days after receipt of the recommendation by the Employees Appeals Board. An employee, terminated for cause, who appeals his or her termination to the Employees Appeals Board, may elect to continue health insurance coverage with the City, until conclusion of hearing before such board, provided the employee makes timely payment of premium payments (both employee and CITY share) during the period between termination and hearing. If the employee is thereafter reinstated by the CITY, the employee shall be reimbursed for the CITY share of any insurance premium paid. The CITY agrees not to retaliate against any employee who exercise rights under the aforementioned grievance procedure; provided however, that failure to exercise these grievance rights shall bar judicial or administrative action by the employee on any grievable issue. The following procedures shall govern disputes relating to the promotion of a Unit employee into another City position: A. If a Unit employee who is an unsuccessful candidate for a promotion into another City position has a dispute concerning the promotional process, he or she shall notify the Union' s business agent of the complaint -41- within three working days from the date he or she received notice from the hiring Department that he or she was not selected for the position. The Union business agent shall notify the hiring Department ' s Director of the complaint within 48 hours after receiving notice from the employee. B. The Union business agent shall confirm in writing the dispute of the unsuccessful candidate with the hiring Department 's Director or his or her designee within three working days from the date the Union business agent notified the Department Director pursuant to paragraph A above. C. The hiring Department Director shall advise the selected candidate that the position is in dispute. The selected candidate shall not be precluded from working in the position. D. The Union business agent and the hiring Department Director or his or her designee shall meet to discuss the selection process within five working days from the date the hiring Department Director or his or her designee was notified pursuant to paragraph B above. If the dispute is not resolved at the meeting by the Director and the Union business agent, the unsuccessful candidate may appeal in writing within 48 hours after the meeting to the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management for a hearing. (A list of three predetermined hearing officers shall be established by the Department of Human Resource Management. ) The Director of the Department of Human Resource Management shall designate a hearing officer and a hearing date within five working days from the date the Director received the appeal from the unsuccessful candidate. E. The hearing officer shall request briefs, documentation and all other pertinent written information prior to the hearing. Within two working days after the hearing, the hearing officer shall issue a determination. The City or the employee may appeal said decision to the Mayor. The appeal must be submitted in writing to the Mayor within 5 working days after the hearing officer' s decision. The decision of the Mayor shall be final and binding. F. Upon mutual agreement of the parties, the time limitations may be waived. The procedure described herein shall affect only promotions and shall not alter or change the provisions of the grievance procedure under Article XXV. -42- G. This process is exclusive for grievances involving a promotion and shall not be subject to review by the labor management committee. ARTICLE XXVI . PERSONNEL FILES All personnel files shall be handled as per Executive Order 4.01.201. Written disciplinary actions shall be received by City' s Human Resource Department within 30 days of the issuance date. City agrees to notify all employee no less than annually of their right to request a review of their files for purging purposes in accordance with Executive Order 4.01 .201 . ARTICLE XXVII LIMITATION ON PROVISIONS The provisions hereof shall be subject to the limitations, terms and conditions of the CITY' S Collective Bargaining Resolution. ARTICLE XXVIII STRIKES AND WORK STOPPAGES Continuous and uninterrupted service by the CITY and its employees to the citizens, and orderly collective bargaining relations between the CITY and its employees being essential considerations of this MEMORANDUM, the UNION agrees, that none of the following acts shall be engaged in or in any way approved of or encouraged by the UNION: 1 . A concerted absence, in whole or in part, by any group of employees from the full, faithful and proper performance of their duties of employment for the purposes of inducing, influencing, condoning, or coercing a change in the terms and conditions of employment, including sick calls, sick outs, slow downs, or any other concerted interference with services provided by the CITY, or 2. The collective concerted withholding of services or the performance of assigned duties by any person pending the signing of a contract, including those persons who are customarily employed on a yearly contract basis. -43- In the event of a violation of this article by the UNION and/or the employees, the CITY may, in addition to other remedies, discipline such employees up to and including discharge. Employees shall not be entitled to any benefits or wages whatsoever while they are engaged in a strike, work stoppage or other interruption of work as specified herein or otherwise. ARTICLE XXIX PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES The CITY agrees to make copies of all personnel policies and procedural directives. The City agrees to provide employees with one additional copy of written disciplinary actions which the employee may elect to give to a Union representative, and will advise the employee of such. The City' s Department of Human Resource Management will provide the Union' s Business Agent with semiannual reports of employer disciplinary actions. ARTICLE XXX WAIVER CLAUSE Except as provided for in Article XXXIII, Term of Agreement, hereof, the CITY and the UNION expressly waive and relinquish the right and each agrees that the other shall not be obligated during the term of this MEMORANDUM to bargain collectively with respect to any subject matter or matter whether referred to or covered with the MEMORANDUM, even though each subject or matter may not have been within knowledge or contemplation of either or both the CITY and the UNION at the time they negotiated or executed this MEMORANDUM or even though such subjects or matters were proposed and later withdrawn. In the event laws are passed by the State or Nation which conflict with the provision of this MEMORANDUM relating to hours or wages, or other conditions of employment, the provisions of this MEMORANDUM which are in conflict therewith may be reopened for negotiations without affecting the remaining portions of this MEMORANDUM. -44- Article XXXIII TERM OF AGREEMENT This MEMORANDUM shall remain in effect from July 1, 1989, through June 30, 1991 with the following exceptions: A. It is understood by the parties hereto that certain provisions of this agreement cannot be implemented by the CITY except upon public notice and hearing and compliance with various statutory and legal requirements. B. The parties hereto may, by mutual consent, agree to an amendment to this MEMORANDUM. C. The Union and the City mutually agree to reopen this memorandum for fiscal year 1990-91 pursuant to the labor bargaining resolution of 1984 on the following issues: Wages and salaries Pensions Insurances Snowfighter Pay Allowance Incomes and Reimbursements D. Both parties agree that this MEMORANDUM is contingent upon available funds and approval by the City Council in accordance with paragraph 9, subparagraph (c) of the Third Amended Labor Bargaining Resolution, Salt Lake City, Utah, April 10, 1984. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have fixed their hands and seals the day and year first above written. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION By te„,,,,d_ deg,- MAYOR ATTEST. APPROVED AS TO FORM Sett Lake City Attomey's Office R ER - 30-89 Date /yf By F,rnr Ava,bthl9 ,1r2, Lt2p: Mmt hC l I!W!r -45- LOCAL 1004 OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNI IPAL EMPLOYEES, AFL-CI By RDON OTTLEY, AFSCME irector of Employee Relations Z.z/ ME ER AFSCME NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE -\\4(Vil MEMBER AFSCM NEGOTIATION C MMITTEE -46- STATE OF UTAH ) County of Salt Lake) On the c3O,Li day of , 198V, personally appeared before me ALMER DePAULIS- and KATHRYN MARSHALL, who being by me dul sworn, did say that they are the MAYOR and CITY RECORDER, respectively, of SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, and said persons acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the same. LAMITA G.Er+CI'. - '. ''i� ; Cirl 6 CountyBu4di,n u•a �,1� Salt LakeCity,.Ut:thEt� t ' 1i\y19a N}y Commission Exp;os Apri130 1991 i' RY PUBLIC, residing in te S ofura+, alt Lake County, Utah My Commission Expires: -47- STATE OF UTAH ) ss. County of Salt Lake) Q On the 4Ol!n day of , 198 , personally appeared before me G DON OT-'LEY, who being by me duly sworn, did say that he is he Director of Employee Relations of the AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND TF IPAL EMPLOYEES Local 1040 and Osvpdi 9. Lee, and I phCis f c,/43UF . , who being duly s orn, did say that they are the memberems of the board of such UNION, that both such persons executed the foregoing instrument on behalf of said UNION by authority of the Board of Directors of the UNION and that said instrument has been duly ratified and approved by the membership of said UNION and that their execution hereof constitutes as valid and binding acting on behalf of said UNION and its membership. Not Pub1e f Ct. L�AN1TA��uG�yBfiOWHn�gg take CitytU sail P r'%-"�: snit tits Commiss+on Expires Apri1301991 4 RY UBLI residing in smmotiiW/ Salt Lake County, Utah - My Commission Expires: FMN:cc -48- APPENDIX A OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE A B C D 1 101 986 1040 1095 1147 102 1019 _ 1075 1132 1186 103 1052 1109 1168 1224 104 1086 1145 1206 1264 105 1121 1183 1245 1305 106 1157 1222 1285 1347 107 1191 1257 1323 1386 108 1233 1302 1370 1436 109 1274 1344 1415 1483 110 1316 1389 1463 1533 111 1359 1434 1509 1581 112 1403 1480 1558 1634 113 1447 1527 1608 1685 114 1496 1578 1661 1741 115 1544 1629 1715 1797 116 1594 1683 1772 1856 117 1646 1737 1828 1916 118 1700 1793 1888 1979 119 1757 1854 1952 2046 120 1813 1913 2014 2110 121 1869 1973 2078 2177 122 1930 2037 2144 2247 123 1994 2104 2216 2322 124 2058 2172 2287 2396 125 2126 2243 2362 2475 6-12-89 APPENDIX B . GRCUP INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1989 - 1990 Medical Dental City Employee City Employee Share Share Share Share P.E.H.P Traditional Single 39.89 16.77 5.60 1.98 Couple 82.21 34.64 11.37 4.00 Family 109.76 46.24 14.87 5.23 P.E.H.P. Preferred Single 39.89 14.02 5.60 1.98 Couple 82.21 28.89 11.37 4.00 Family 109.76 38.57 14.87 5.23 Healthwise Single 39.27 13.81 4.89 1.73 Couple 80.01 28.12 9.83 3.46 Family 107.92 37.92 16.69 5.87 F.H.P. Single 36.37 12.78 . 6.33 2.23 Couple 80.86 28.41 13.07 4.60 Family 114.32 40.18 18.22 6.41 The following benefits are included with your Medical and Dental coverage regardless of your health insurance carrier. Employee City Share Share * Disability Income .47 1.36 * Basic Life for You .03 per $1000 .11 per $1000 * Basic Life for Your Family .11 .30 * Accidental Death & Dismemberment .07 .22 N•' >k�r DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS JOSEPH R. ANDERSON 324•SOUTH STATE STREET. . PALMER DEPAULIS PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SALT LAKE CITY,- UTAH 84111 MAYOR 535-7775 TO : SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL DATE : JUNE 20 , 1989 REFERENCE: Bids for Special Improvement District, California Avenue - Pioneer Road to 3400 West, Project No . 38-808 will be opened at 2 : 00 p .m . on Tuesday , July 11 , 1989 . A tabulation of the bids will be made to the City Council on July 11 , 1989 at 6 : 00 p .m. RECOMMENDATION ; That the Salt Lake City Council authorize the Salt Lake City Engineering office to award the work to the low bidder upon official determination of such . AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS ; Notice of Intent to create a Special Improvement District has received prior approval by the City Council . Funds are being budgeted in the Capital Improvement Budget for the 1989/90 Fiscal Year . DISCUSSION ; N/A SUBMITTED BY : JOSEPH R . ANDERSON , PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR c71 JRA : JH : po cc : Dan Noziska Tula Gamvroulas Vault Jh' of n4 • CP)7/ DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CRAIG E. PETERSON 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 201 DIRECTOR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 535-7777 To: Salt Lake City Council April 5, 1989 RE: Petition No. 400-596 submitted by Banj Investment Recommendation: That the City Council hold a public hearing. on July 11, 1989 at 6:20 p.m. to discuss Petition No. 400-596 submitted by Banj Investment. The petitioners are requesting that the alley located at approximately 750 South 750 West be vacated. • Availability of Funds: . Not applicable Discussion and Background: The petition was originally denied because it was first believed that the alley was not public but private but after further checking it has been determined that the alley is public. The appropriate City Departments have reviewed this petition and recommend that the alley be closed and sold to the petitioner for fair market value. Legislative Documents: The City Attorney has prepared and approved the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Submitted by: CRAIG E. PE'IERRSCN Director lf/ SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Closing a portion of an alley at approximately 750 South 750 West in Salt Lake City, Utah pursuant to Petition No. 400-596-88 ) AN ORDINANCE CLOSING A PORTION OF AN ALLEY AT APPROXIMATELY 750 SOUTH 750 WEST IN SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. 400-596-88. WHEREAS, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, finds after public hearing that the City' s interest in the public alley described below is not necessary for use by the public as a alley and that closure of said alley will not be adverse to the general public' s interest nor divest the City of title to the property without subsequent documents of transfer. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1 . That a portion of an alley at approximately 750 South 750 West in Salt Lake City, Utah, which is the subject of Petition No. 400-596-88 and which is more particularly described below, be, and the same hereby is, CLOSED and declared no longer to be needed or available for use as a public alley, with the title remaining with the City until subsequent sale for market value and repayment to the City of the cost of a City approved valuation appraisal : Said alley is more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING AT A POINT WHICH IS 13 . 25 RODS EAST AND 5 RODS NORTH FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER LOT 8, BLOCK 15, .`'- PLAT "A" , SALT LAKE CITY SURVEY, AND RUNNING THENCE NORTH 38 . 5 FEET; THENCE EAST 1 ROD; THENCE SOUTH 38. 5 - ``r�l FEET; THENCE WEST 1 ROD TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. l�' ` SECTION 2. RESERVATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS. The above enclosure is expressly made SUBJECT TO all existing rights-of-way and easements of all public utilities of any and every description now located on and under or over the confines of the property and also SUBJECT TO the rights of entry thereon for the purposes of maintaining, altering, repairing, removing or rerouting said utilities, including the City' s water and sewer facilities, and all of them. Said closure is also SUBJECT TO any existing rights-of-way or easements of private third parties. SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE .DATE. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989 . CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on . Mayor' s action: Approved _ Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER -2- Fi I • • STry �, � ` �+�Dn D�T 1 till.t.r S: ��V s1 11 V�IJRPO,1U-1,!1 ON `,:.FINANCE,,DEPARTMENT LANCE R. BATEMAN.CPA Purcfiasi{ig and Property Mdndgement.Division PALMER DEPAULIS DIRECTOR OF FINANCE , 324:SOUTA-II STATE STREET. • MAYOR SALT L.Ak CITY UTAH 84111 PURCHASING-(801) 535-7661 PROPERTY 535-7133 April 11, 1988 • T0: Doug Dansie Planning and Zoning FROM: Eric H. Thorpe . Property Manage RE: PET. 400-596, BANJ INVESTMENT I have reviewed the subject petition and recommend that this alleyway be closed, and that the petitioner be required to purchase the property and reimburse the City for the cost of a market value appraisal. Please contact me at ext. 6308 if you have any questions. EHT/bf cc: G. L. Failner 3)4°7 rJO\.) y p_ Y W Di T)Ns) m 12 gV5 ScYng- pt -gp5� - ,M)J1/D iZV y6 l/�GL1�, v�afG f i��;gi�7 ir-J�- 16®x Is6QLS 6°57 9 89 h• ALLEN C. JOHNSON - \ MEMBERS:j/ PLANNING DIRECTOR • Q.`'"1 CINDY GRbbtER SANDRA MARLER SAL ' T ' uipr�tgs9�'-E�usoN LAKE,.CITY CORPORATION LAV 1-DOLE-GAMONAL SECRETARY - .. ..�.� ..,i...r�. .•. ...... •.a. �.c.,,, ::....-.YZ.. DEPARTMENT •OF, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RICHARD HOWA EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS: RALPH P. NEILSON MAYOR OF SALT LAKE CITY Planning and Zoning Commission GEORGE NICOLATUS CITY ENGINEER - 324 SOUTH STATE STREET. ROOM 200 JOHN M. SCHUMANN CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER SALT LAKE CITY• UTAH 84111 F. KEITH STEPAN OITY BUILDING OFFICIAL 53rJ-7757 PETER VANALSTYNE KATHY WACKER March 3 , 1989 Craig F. Peterson, Director Community & Economic Development Salt Lake City, UT RE: Petition No . 400-596 Banj Investment Dear Craig : Please find attached Petition No . 400-596 requesting SLC vacate an alley between parcels #15 -12-233-006 and 15-12-233-015 at approximately 750 South 250 West . • After reviewing the petition, it is recommended that the petition be approved and the alley be sold at market value. Respectfully, Allen C. ohnson AICP • • Planning Director ACJ/jn cc : Engineering Fire Property Mgmt . Public Utilities • Transportation \'k ALL=.N C. JCHNSCN _ MEMBERS: PLANNING DIRECTOR _ TY CINDY CROMER SANDRA MARL ER � ' •u�+�' `�I.'•J. GORPORA�I'I.OVt THOMAS A. ELLISON `"�-'�"� '.."�"'� ''"',d . "" �_ ''v'+ LAVONE LIDOLE.GAMONAL SEGRE:aRY RICHARD HOWA Ex-OFFICIO MEMBERS: DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RALPH P. NEILSCN IA?OR OF SALT LAKE CITY Planning and Zoning Commission GEORGE NICOLATUS CITY ENGINEER 324 SOUTH STATE STREET. ROOM 2C0 JOHN M. SCHUMANN CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 F. KEITH STEPAN CITY BUILDING OFFICIAL 535-7757 PETER VwrvALSTYNE KATHY WACKER July 13, 1988 Mr, Craig Petersen, Director Dewar tment of Development Services - , 324 S. State, Suite 201 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Re: Petition No. 400-596 - Banj Investment Dear Craig: . Please find attached Petition No. 400-596 by Banj Investment requesting Salt Lake City vacate an alley between parcels #15-12-233-006 and 15-12-233-015 at • accrcxin:ately 750 South 25 West. ?rter reviewing the petition it was determined that the alley is a private right-of-way, not owned by the city. It is recommended that this petition be filed with no action taken and the petitioner be advised of the private status of the right-of-way. To resolve the issue, the petitioner should research the deeds at the County Recorders office to determine the owners and work with them individually. Respect= lly, 77 /- < . G vJJ Allen C. Johnson, AICP Acting Planning Director • • attach ACJ:CD cc: Engineering Fire Property Management Public Utilities Transportation • EXPANDED ONE STOP REVIEW DATE: May 15, 1988 _ 1 SUBJECT: Petition No. 400-596-88 Alley Vacation - between parcels #15-12-233-015 and #15-12-233-006 COMMENTS: Engineering:No objection. Fire: No objection, would prefer entire alley closed. Planning: No objection. Property management: No objection. Public Utilities: No objection. Transportation: No objection, would prefer entire alley closed. cc: Engineering Fire Property Management Public Utilities Transportation cfia lj gnveschnea Co ni an D. Eric Ensign General Manager 370 East South Temple, Suite 501 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 • SALT'11t i1 E;CITY Telephone (801) 531-0364 Home (801) 943-2123 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES '.RAIG E. PETERSON 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, SUITE 201 DIRECTOR SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 535-7777 July 20, 1988 Mr. D. Eric Ensign Banj Investment Company P.O. Box 20 Salt Lake City, Utah 84110 Dear Mr. Ensign: I have received your request to vacate -an alley located between parcels #15-12-233-006 and 15-12-233-015 at approximately 740 South 25 West. After reviewing the petition it was determined that the alley is a private right-of-way, not owned by the city. The City therefore, has no jurisdiction over the right-of-way. To resolve the issue, research would need to be done on the deed at the County Recorders office to determine the owners and work with them individually. If you have any questions, please contact LuAnn Fawcett of my office. Yours truly, .l C 1 4-- CRAIG E.! PEIERSCN S 5 ITva'1-i 0 W 1 +� Director lf/ l k cc: Petition No. 400-596 � " �� f� , on -(-a sr Cry c e-PcsE-- ieeNit-kr f � • '61) SALI vgjjat memo DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES -AMC; E• PETERSON 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 201 DIRECTOR SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 535-7777 TO: Salt Lake City Council April 17, 1989 RE: Petition No. 400-713-89 submitted by First Charter Development Corporation • Recommendation: That the City Council hold a public hearing on July 11, 1989 at 6:30 p.m. to discuss Petition No. 400-713-89 submitted by First Charter Development Corporation. The petitioners are requesting Salt Lake City to rezone the approximately 35 acres located below the University of Utah's "U" from "R-1" to l"R-]A" classification. Availability of Funds: Not applicable Discussion and Background: The rezoning request was made to allow for narrower private roads to be constructed. The narrower roads will mean reduced visual and environmental impact on the site and to surrounding areas due to the reduced amount of cuts and fill required for the narrow private roads. The "R-1" zone requires public roads built to City Engineering widths and specifications, the "R-lA" zone allows Planned Unit Developments and accompanying private roads. The Planning Commission has reviewed and approved the rezoning subject to the following conditions: 1. The zoning be conditional upon the final approval and recording of a PUD subdivision. • 2. The rezoning remain "R-1" until said subdivision is approved for recording with the County Recorder. 3. The zoning change be conditioned upon the project being approved as a single family detached development. The Planning Commission noted that many detailed development issues need to be resolved, separate from the rezoning issue. These issues will be resolved through the subdivision approval process for the Planned Unite Development. •. . Legislative Documents: The City AttorneyisiDfficeLhas prepared and approved the necessary ordinance and is ready for your action. Submitted by: • CRAIG E. PETEEiSON Director lf/ • • • SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 1989 (Rezoning property located below the Block U from "R-1 to "R-1A" pursuant to Petition No. 400-713-89 ) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 21 . 14.020 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE RELATING TO ZONING AND FIXING OF BOUNDARIES OF USE DISTRICTS. WHEREAS, in response to the rezoning petition initiated by FIRST CHARTER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, No. 400-713-89, the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, has held public hearings before its own body and before the Planning Commission, and has taken into consideration citizen testimony, filing and demographic details of the area and the Master Plan as part of its deliberation. Pursuant to these deliberations, the Council has concluded that the proposed change of zoning for the property located below the Block U from the present "R-1" to "R-lA" classification is appropriate for the development of the community in that area; THEREFORE, The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, hereby adopts the following amendments to the Use District provisions of Title 21. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake Cit , Utah: SECTION 1 . That the Use District Map, as adopted by Section 21. 14.020 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries of Use Districts, be, and the same hereby is AMENDED to read as follows: . . a^t; Sec. 21.14.020. Boundaries of Districts - Use District Map Adopted. That the following-described parcel of real property in Salt .Lake City, Utah, . presently zoned Residential "R-1" is hereby rezoned Residential "R-lA" and the Use District Map is amended accordingly: Beginning at a point that is North 89° 58 ' 03" East 877.57 feet along the South line of Arlington Park Subdivision from the Southwest corner of Lot 19, Arlington Park, a recorded subdivision in Section 33, Township 1 North, Range 1 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian and running thence North 89° 58 ' 03" East 337.38 feet along said South line to the Southeast corner of Lot 10 of said subdivision, thence - ✓ South 13. 61 feet; thence South 89° 58 ' 15" East 1,309 .32 feet; thence South 0° 00' 17" C 'c\ � East 1,014. 62 feet to the North line extended / IL - of Federal Heights Subdivision, Plat "F" ; `'� — thence South 89°58 ' 03" West 1,286.60 along It (`o • said extension and North line of Federal Heights Subdivision, Plats ."E" and "F"; thence North 0° 00' 17" West 392.38 feet; thence South 83° 44' 01" West 88.23 feet; thence North 65° 13 ' 44" West 300.00 feet; thence North 0°00' 17" West 520.99 feet to the point of beginning. Contains 34.926 acres. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE AND CONDITIONS. This ordinance shall not become effective until recorded and the Salt Lake City Recorder is instructed not to record this Ordinance until the Mayor certifies that the following condition has been met: 1. An approved Planned Unit Development Subdivision for development of the property has been recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder. If the foregoing condition is not completed within one year from the date of passage of this Ordinance, the time may be -2- extended for an additional year by certification from the Mayor. If the condition has not been met by the expiration of one year or any extension, this Ordinance shall be null, void and of no effect and shall not be recorded. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 1989. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: • CITY RECORDER ..T, Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor' s Action: Approved Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER BRB:cc -3- . . ' ALLEN C. JOHNSON S . . �S lqj r%gill/gang MEMBERS: PLANNING DIRECTOR NANCY K. PACE. CHAIRMAN BRENT B. WILDE DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ROBERT LEWIS TOYING ADMINISTRATCR Board of Adjustment on Zoning DOROTHY PLESHE PETER VAN ALSTYNE GEORGINA DIFCUR 324 SOUTH STATE STREET. ROOM 200 I. J. WAGNER SECRETARY SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 ALTERNATES: 535-7757 FAUN O. HANSEN March 15, 1989 W. KENT MONEY Craig E. Peterson, Director Department of Development Services 324 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Petition 400-713, Block "U" Subdivision Dear Craig: • Attached is petition 400-713 by Mr. Brent Beesley, representing I First Charter Development Corporation, requesting Salt Lake City to rezone approximately 35 acres located below the University of Utah 's "U" ( Attachment B) . The request is to rezone the property from the existing R-1 to R-1A in order to allow a planned unit development single family subdivision ( p. 3 Attachment B) . The rezoning request has been made to also allow private streets, thereby reducing the amounts of necessary cuts and fills for roads. The zoning surrounding the project is R-1 with P-1 zoning to the east and north. This parcel has been discussed for many years concluding with a complicated land trade between the Board of Education, Salt Lake City, and the Department of the Interior in 1985. The development of this property with low density residential subdivisions is consistent with the 1979 Avenues Master Plan, and the July 1987 Avenues Master Plan Update. The detailed development issues are presented in the February 22, 1989 staff report to the Planning Commission ( Attachment A). A briefing of the recent meetings prior to the March 9th Planning Commission Meeting is found in Attachment I. . On [•larch 9, 1989 the Planning Commission held an informal hearing and received comment from neighboring residents, property owners, the Avenues Community Council, and Citizens of Salt Lake City. The Planning Commission noted that many detailed development issues need to be resolved, separate from the rezoning issue. Those issues will be resolved through the subdivision approval process for this Planned Unit Development. The issue of access and easement locations through the future City park and the continuation of Eleventh Avenue are pivotal issues for this development proposal. The Planning Commission concluded with a recommendation 'to approve the rezoning and for the City Council to hold a public hearing. The rezoning to "R-lA" will permit a subdivision development consistent with the Avenues Master Plan. The Planning Commission recommends its approval subject to three conditions: 1 . The zoning be conditioned upon the final approval and recording of a PUD subdivision, 2. The zoning remain R-1 until said subdivision is approved for recording with the County Recorder, 3. The zoning change be conditioned upon the project being approved as a single family detached development. Respectfully Submitted, Allen C. Johnson, AICP Planning Director attachments ACJ: AGM cc: John Schumann, Planning Commission Chairman Jim Huppi , Petitioner ( local representative ) Brent Beesley, Petitioner lift • SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PETITION 400-713 FROM FIRST CHARTER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 1 =: FOR ZONING CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL R-1 TO RESIDENTIAL R-1A •. FOR A PROPOSED 31 LOT PUD SUBDIVISION OVERVIEW Mr. Brent Beesley, president of First Charter Development Corporation, is requesting a zone change for the block "U" area located east of the Virginia Street Park. The rezoning is to accommodate a 31 lot single family subdivision on 34. 90 acres. The request is to change the zoning from the existing R-1 ( Single Family Dwellings ) to R-IA ( Single Family and/or Planned Unit Developments ). The local representatives for this petition are John Pace, Babcock Pace Architects, and James Huppi, Bush & Gudgell, Inc. ° n f 1% A 1 r 1 C= I F) Y \ "'0O` A VICINTY MAP . /r�� - -- F i __� Parcel Co be CI ���INoser F^ '11rai" Rezoned _ _ cAHOENs sL.G #; 'C' a.> I*e i nn:uu: : C][TY ( .. ►ARK FR.%oY ` t L.""1+°„S•°1A "r 7 P A A. 1 A < Yam, ,- > "�ye. • C EMETJERY 'A 1+I IA A •.5:0 A A • I ❑ ❑ l I ' n nJ n _ n • • A i ❑ ❑ 0 t_ ----=-----j=� ..• �_ n , r'Nk_..(>, ) 'r -x,___________------- • ITV-1 r-1 r� O-1 f-1 Il ri rl I-1 F1 jh:(--A n GENERAL INFORMATION • OWNER: ' Board of Education • PARCEL NUMBERS: 9-33-251-001, ( 30. 0 acres ) . 9-33-176-013, ( 4. 90 acres ) REQUESTED CHANGE: R-1 to R-1A PROPOSED LOTS: . 31 single family lots STREETS: Eleventh Ave. - Proposed Public Street Balance - Proposed Private Streets OVERLAY ZONE: F-1 ( Foothill Development Overlay Zone ) LOT SIZE RANGE: 18, 500 to 43, 560 ( 1 acre ) square feet BACKGROUND This area has received much discussion over the past years and is brielfy summarized as follows: - A complicated land trade between the Board of Education, Salt Lake City, and the Department of the Interior occurred in 1985 placing the properties in their current ownerships. At that time agreements were written that Salt Lake City would use the park property only for park and recreation purposes. - This area has also been discussed in both the 1979 Avenues Master Plan and the July 1987 Avenues Master Plan Update. - To date the City has met on several occasions to work on an acceptable conceptual subdivision design for this property. - This subdivision was briefly presented and discussed at the February 1, 1989 Avenues Community Council Meeting. The proposal for this subdivision more formally was presented to the Community during the Avenues Community Council ' s March 8, 1989 .meeting. The comments received from the meeting will be presented at the Planning Commission Meeting. ANALYSIS • The request for the change in zoning from R-1 to R-1A has been made to allow for narrower private roads to be constructed. The narrower roads will mean reduced visual and environmental impacts cn the site and to surrounding areas due to the reduced amount of cuts and fills required for the narrow private roads. The R-1 zone requires that public roads be built to City Engineering widths and specifications, however, the R-1A zone allows Planned Unit Developments and accompanying private roads. Avenues Master Plan Update. The Avenues Master Plan Update mentions several points relating to this proposal: "The concerns are regarding new construction that is not compatible with established neighborhood character. " ( p. 2 ) "Many of the incompatibility problems created by new construction in residential areas are associated with excessive building height; new dwellings that tower over adjacent homes . _ . " ( p. 2 ) "Properties that the city should preserve as natural open space through the use of zoning regulations and through prohibiting access across city-owned property" (p. 4 ). The master plan update map classifies the Virginia Street park as, "Parks and Open Space" and the subject property as, "Very Low Density" residences ( 1 to 4 units per acre ) (p. 7 ) . 5', �=1 "Larger lots in the foothills will respond positively to the • following concerns. . . Traffic congestion, Views, Visual Appearance. . " (p. 5) Eleventh Avenue. The Master Plan Update provides a discussion of Eleventh Avenue on Page 6. Summarized, the following issues remain unresolved: - Eleventh Avenue has been proposed to facilitate local traffic between the upper Avenues and the University. - There continues to be some disagreement among Avenues residents regarding the Eleventh Avenue extension. - No definite decisions have been made regarding the eastward extension of Eleventh Avenue. - The Planning Commission accepts a concept of the eastward extension, but has not endorsed the extension. . • - The City to date has not agreed to allow access to this development as proposed across the adjacent park. property. I The proposed subdivision plan depends on this extension of Eleventh Avenue. - The City may desire to require dedication of .the eastern portion of Eleventh Avenue to allow for the eventual continuation of the right of way in the future. This dedication would be required during the subdivision process. Additional considerations expressed for Eleventh Avenue are: - The City Traffic Department is in the process of preparing an Avenues traffic study. The study is proposing Eleventh Avenue only as a future long term goal. - If Eleventh avenue is to continue eastward from this project, the right of way will cut across forty percent slope areas, which areas are prohibited from development. University of Utah "U". The northeast corner of this project contains the "U" of the University of Utah. The conceptual lot layout excludes this area and also provides an access for maintenance of the "U" . Legal easements exist surrounding this structure. This portion of land including the "U" , and the buffer area surrounding the "U" should not be included in the rezoning with the subdivision. Additional Property to the East. During meetings with the applicant, Mr. Beesley has expressed a desire to acquire additional property for lots. The conceptual subdivision plat • shows a Cul-de-Sac touching the eastern border of the property. These lots would eventually obtain access from this cul-de-sac. This additional property would likewise require a zone change, =,7 and the filing of a subdivision at a future date. The City shold maintain a protection strip along this side of the cul-de-sac. Slopes. Jim Huppi , engineer for Bush and Gudgell, Inc. has been preparing the engineering and slope maps for this . project. The conceptual subdivision has been platted over ground with portions of the property with up to fifty percent slopes. It appears that the subdivision can be built without °disturbing major forty percent slopes. Eleventh Avenue is shown on the conceptual lot layout as being optionally continued or with a cul-de-sac at the eastern end of this project. Zoning Options. The two options presented at this time are either leaving the property R-1, or changing the zoning to R-1A. The R-1 zone would require the streets built to City widths and standards, and would also be maintained by the City. The R-1A zone will allow narrower private streets, and would be therefore privately maintained. The R-lA zone also allows, ". . . clustered owner-occupied detached and attached single family dwellings, and multiple family structures under various ownership patterns including condominiums, and individual ownership of a building and its site by following the conditions and procedures as outlined . . . " The staff is recommending that as a condition of rezoning to R-lA that this project only be approved as a single family detached development as a condition to the rezoning. RECOMMENDATION The Staff respectfully recommends a change in the zoning for the above described property from R-1 to R-IA, and 1 . The zoning be conditioned upon the final approval and recording of a PUD subdivision, • 2. The zoning remain R-1 until said subdivision is approved for recording with the County Recorder, 3. The zoning change be conditioned upon the project being approved as a single family detached development. Allen G. McCandless Environmental Planner February 22, 1989 a FEB 211988: s ' First Charter Development Corporation 95 East Tabernacle Street. St.George,Utah 84770 Telephone:(801)628-0433 • Telecopicr.(801)628-5638 February 17 , 1989 . The Honorable Palmer A. DePaulis Mayor Salt Lake City 342 South State Street, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Realignment of Easement through Virginia Street Park Dear Mayor DePaulis : On July 12, 1988 , First Charter Development Corporation ("First Charter") acquired approximately 34. 9 acres of real estate from the Board of Education of Salt Lake City School - District (the "School Board") . This land is east of and adjacent to the proposed Virginia Street Park. The School Board acquired these 34.9 acres from Salt - Lake City in trade for the land upon which the Virginia Street Park is being built. At the time of the trade , Salt • Lake City conveyed to the School Board an "easement for construction, maintenance and repair of an access road in and over a strip of land fifty feet in width . " This easement runs along the south border of Salt Lake City ' s park property. This easement was sold to First Charter by the School Board along with the 34.9 acres . Within the next few days , First Charter will be making an application to Salt Lake City for approval of a subdivi- sion on the 34. 9 acres . It is contemplated that access for this development will be through the Virginia Street Park along our deeded easement or along the existing rough cut road. - There are several significant advantages to using the existing rough cut road as opposed to constructing a new access road through our deeded easement. Hon. Palmer A. DePaulis February 17 , 1989 Page 2 First , a road through our deeded easement would have to cross several areas where slopes are steeper than 407 . The new cuts and fills could detract from the beauty of the park and the neighborhood. Second , a road through our deeded easement would be adjacent to the back yards of all the neighbors which border the park on the south and could. create a concern for these families . Third , a finished road along the existing cut would provide public access to a larger portion of the park. Fourth , finishing and landscaping a road along the existing cut would enhance the beauty of the park as the existing cut is unsightly and appears to be a project that has been abandoned. Accordingly, First Charter respectfully requests that Salt Lake City exchange the existing easement owned by First Charter for an easement that would utilize the existing cut. If this realignment can be made , First Charter proposes to bear the cost of completing a public road along the existing cut as the City may design. We would envision a low-speed, relatively narrow road' for vehicles and paths for pedestrians and bicycles from the end of the improvements in Phase One of the new park approximately 2,000 feet to the east end of the City ' s property. It should be noted that the Federal Government approved the granting of our existing easement through the proposed park. We do not consider that a realignment of our easement would require additional approvals or that a road through the park is , in any event, inconsistent with the development and uri1 ' 7tion of the park. However ; if it is deemed that Federal approval is required to realign our easement from its current location to the location of the existing cut, we will be pleased to work with the City to obtain this approval in a timely manner . The present plans for the development of the Virginia Street Park call for the construction of improvements on .our deeded easement which could interfere with our construction of an access road in the event an agreement to realign our easement can not be reached . Therefore , today I have also written Parks Director John Gust requesting him to consider not going forward with the construction of those improve- ments in the new park that would impair our use of the deeded easement. • Hon. Palmer A. DePaulis February 17, 1989 • '-' Page 3 Enclosed is a . drawing which shows the 34. 9 acres which we have acquired from the School Board , our deeded easement through the park, the Virginia Street Park property and the proposed new easement along the existing cut. Also enclosed is a copy of part of the plans for the Virginia Street Park which illustrates how the proposed improvements are inconsistent with the use of our easement for an access road. We appreciate your attention to this matter and will be pleased to work with any of your staff to whom you may direct us . Sinc y • . Brent Bee ey President Enclosures CC: Hon. Sidney Reed Fonnesbeck Rodger F. Cutler , Esq. • John Gust Allen C. Johnson Douglas Wheelwright Allen McCandless W. Gary Harmer , Salt Lake City School Board John E. Pace , Babcock Pace and Associates James Huppi, Bush & Cudgel] , Inc . Wayne G. Petty, Esq. , Moyle and Draper . .. . i-,*4--. „,.... 1 - • ...... • -.,.. . ------) irj -•-•: '.10..:.‘•-••-•,.-.... .,,.....-.--:- i .1' . .'-':•..,• .,..•,"(;'..- 1 ;Jr . . !._;,;\ ' •/ ::-'2;•-• ; , • .„ / .•. . . ....,T.„ -.- -. , . .\`7•\\ . • .-i-r•-• . . •,r.....„, • .....--1 ..-' • . • I ( • . . \ \ .\....S ( . . . ). --'. • ti /. - / . _04V Ji . .- . . , ,?).. -' i •• (---, :. „. . s,..:.. .,./ , . ,. „ . • ,.> c-- ( .-; •-__1) , • ... . f.. .. i j. . ,, i t -...:. / •. . . :. ... , ,,, , • . . .) „,..s. ! . 1. - - • .. • Oil . . 1 r r ,J• CA 17 I ' / • St. „ ... .• .. - .4 . ,.., .......„...... 0 / / ./ , •:. / . ..• _ , .. , . ........._____ ,. 7,‘ /• i•tim . • . . ..t.„. , . / -,- /• ., , .. ;..: ,.,__.. . , /- -I ) I •• > , , • ..: . 77 . 27 er i. 0 . , _ o • s). / rn • • ) ..•.t.,, . S-......„........,......:„..., / ' i la / rn , /. • *7 - . . ! • r- . • , P I Mom . 1' '•< (I' . : g , . . , .. / , ic .. . ...... ,.•.... . • „...,. 1 . ;:a.: 1 / , . • - ,i / ,. I 7 • r - - • • •L; . --, .... . . . .,- . -- tri•- 's ,:nC . : . . ) q . -, i fi, i I n . , .. ' t/ . (..0 . c.,.•,, . .: -• • - / - .2.% •c... .' . 2 ...s' , .s.' . ‘. ,_,,•„.. rn /-sr - -- . : .- -..:.1- *---„-41.11ie -f' : ) , -t•t:' • • - ..4:1\ 4 ; , ... v ' -- -'-. 'tr. ik:._ • ' • ! . ,--- - - / ay. z ,- • • -- • . . ). - :., .- - 7 (,---- /- ; -- ..,, ... -. .. •- ...-:',,,;,.:..., •. ; ......< . .. " lir - (- ). - - ' '--3,-- • -.. . .„•;42‘'• - -E:. : ; I-- ' I• / . -I - .. . /• .;'(;. i•,i/.(•;•t'/.:"•'c.1,rl,•.'i r/. .•( .!j ' --I..,•-."-*\•t) 1 :( ... ''7`',..-.',1•1(,..-..,-....'..-e.)44.c 1' )1-14•V A 1f.. \I ••-N1.t.•.,%1 ).,)(• 'I•i•tf -1..--„Ir•.I r•i.)t1 CD•.0Z- - // .S \\ (, • . „ 1 1 ....>.00...).1., x - , . ---_. - . r-• .I, ... . , m CI .. . • ->'N. . '71 0 • :. 6 . .. ,;), - i; ____:•••r i i - i - m .... /./ r. • y z, ... , -...,,, \. • / . m m 'I . • - q,' .- :i :. .---1 ' 1 ,. . •. ) • • 1 . • ..__ r- -c"-- •,, ' I i .1, . •' I . • (} - . .-•-• . , -, • Y"-•, I /// 1 4 • .11 • ,, • - . fiZirf.T) . • . ? .,...... •-•-•• .-... , - ') / - _-_,2 • ... i; 1 i .. 4) ‘ .... . . -, /7- \ . i,/ - ii c . .,. :--- /- . • y 1 7,, ...., • '.,. 1 - • c.,...--/-v" i . : . / - -.."* - ., , - a • • / ! . •/ ,. ..- . ,-..--• ,:•___‘,../., . • . 1 • f- : , , - • - i , • b /,,, ,iAzi. , ,;•• .____ _) • =,17....L: ,. - , 1 ..."' .1 . . ' '':•••••---\.. , .j.),'1 II ; .'.•1 :.• . , - - — , ... •• - . . . , ... . .- 1 - w • . Li A • , .., .. . a Ile. A A • etiLlin 44111111111, .- . .A." . ,. .., . ,..i.,....; .14). . k . ....., • . , _,------ - ,A, '''...-".-.•..... .1., • ..t . . I, A I ST1 10•17-1-A CO \.. . 4 c i pl :: . . I t• '" -,...., ..,;..:11:1,:::r...e.;Y•'.''''' .." ''' ,•' ''''''...."."'.. --.1' r'-'-::: :—.'"'''''' =:;.-:-,-'".' . .!:.•:- `.:41.-.. PRC .11 : . •• -,4., 11441% • * ''''' ..)... i 11. -"........ i A ;r A A j c,.. ..4.......„..,..... - I.' ' ERTY TO BE VIRGINIA ST• PARK A ' 'DEVELOPED . 1, Exist . 50' Easement Fift44.2.'"......,1 . .• -.. • t4:4? .. ' .. :. -••••... $ i7T-----, Exist . Road Cut • [. ,.... .,.. •ii, i VI 1 A ,:.1-----------::.....i -A—ir A . A A . . I CiAta . • lir C '-. .. I ."'.."'s;i:73.... ..........%.....:7:,','"••••••• •••••• ...."."""...... • . t; I., • . i.I cc • •• • ---..........,7------.... . „ • AftraN F. )4 --______ .,.L.---—— —..-- —— .....————-- -- ..-. ----A , A •0 4... )•••_. a-- A A A A A rty. • _J -4 Wt.till I 411) : _______ _ •4 A A A A • N A . i -- . 4 . 0 • 4 *1 4141:1 •-• •O' . • / ...._ ......n...‘ ri,/, . A . • 1 ir • A 1 1-----j I —e— A ' .r, , . . . RI . I I . . -- — —--. 1 . 21... ...o..1/7; • ..0 ' . i I re------1 • 1-1 ' ' 1 . • . . . . T FEB 2 1 1989 First Charter Development Corporation 95 East Tabernacle Street. • St. George,Utah 84770 Telephone:(801)628-0433 Telecopier.(801)628-5638 February 17 , 1989 - Mr. John Gust, Director Salt Lake City Parks Department 1965 West 500 South Salt Lake City , Utah 84014 Re: Development of Virginia Street Park -- Phase One Dear Mr . Gust: • On July 12 ,� 1988 , First Charter Development Corporation ("First Charter") acquired approximately 34. 9 acres of real estate from the Board of Education of Salt Lake City School District (the "School Board") . This land is east of and adjacent to the proposed Virginia Street Park. The School Board acquired these 34.9 acres from Salt Lake City in trade for the land upon which the Virginia Street Park is being built . At the time of the trade , Salt Lake City conveyed to the School Board an "easement for construction, maintenance and repair of an access road in and over a strip of land fifty feet in width . " This easement runs along the south border of Salt Lake City ' s property . This easement was sold to First Charter by the School Board along with the 34.9 acres . First Charter has recently become aware that certain improvements related to the construction of the Virginia Street Park may be on this easement and may interfere with our construction of an access road over the easement . It would seem sensible to modify the easement to coincide with the new road and parking lot which the Parks Department is building in the new park. I have written to Mayor DePaulis requesting that our deeded easement be realigned to conform to the improvements in the park and also to the rough cut road to the east . However , until our deeded easement is realigned , we request that you consider not going forward with the construction of those improvements in the new park that would impair the use of our deeded easement in the event we are required to build our access road on our easement. Mr. John Gust • • February 17, 1989 Page 2 Within the next few days , First Charter will be making an application to Salt Lake City for approval of a subdivi- sion on the 34. 9 acres which contemplates the construction of an access road along our deeded easement or through the park along the existing rough cut road . To avoid the need to destroy or reconstruct any .of the proposed improve- ments in the new park, we would like to work with you to make certain that these improvement -will accommodate the new access road: It appears from what we know of the proposed improvements for the park that it would require significant modifications in order to build a road of the type we understand the City will require for the new subdivision. There are other 'matters that .may also require coordina- tion. If, for example , a sewer line is required to be built from the 34. 9 acres through the new park to Virginia Street , hopefully this could be done before the improvements in the new park are completed. Enclosed is a drawing .which shows the 34 . 9 acres which we have acquired from the School Board, our deeded easement through the park, the Virginia Street Park property and the proposed new easement along the existing cut. Also enclosed is a copy of part of the plans for the Virginia Street Park which illustrates how the proposed improvements are inconsistent with the use of our easement for an access road. Within the next several days you will be contacted by. Mr. Jim Huppi of Bush & Gudgell who is doing the engineering on the proposed subdivision. Mr. Huppi will be calling to set up a meeting where, hopefully, we will be able to work out a satisfactory solution to these issues. • Sinc ren Be ey President Enclosures CC: Hon. Palmer A. DePaulis Hon. Sidney Reed Fonnesbeck Rodger F. Cutler , Esq. Allen C. Johnson Douglas Wheelwright Allen McCandless W. Gary Harmer , Salt Lake City School Board John E. Pace , Babcock Pace and Associates James Huppi, Bush & Gudgell , Inc. ' �i..' Wayne G. Petty, Esq. , Moyle and Draper • • y�'a+ J ]Ills��� . • , f► ALLEN C. JOHNSON • x �J:aq lllllta " r • -, :: � MEMBERS PLANNING DIRECTOR - • - •.h.� a .i�,'._IiL14i4. _ 4.. �7�, G __ • __ f r • - CINDY CROMER •-- _ _ SANDRA MARLER I,` J1 1 1 a�' �1 iffiYr_C RPRATI.O� j `'LAVOHNEMLIBA.ALE SON • SECRETARY ,+...�r w__ r►.►rr +���w►��+r EX•OFFICIO MEMBERS: DEPARTMENT OF .DEVELOPMENT.SERVICES RIc,HARD HOWA RALPH P. NEILSON MAYOR OF SALT LAKE CITY rim Planning and:Zoning 'Commission GEORGE NICOLATUS CITY ENGINEER 324 SOUTH STATE STREET ROOM 200 JOHN M.SCHUMANN CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER 'SALT,LAKE CITY .UTAf 841.11 F. KEITH STEPAN CITY BUILDING OFFICIAL • '535-7757 PETER VANALSTYNE KATHY WACKE.R H. Brent Beesley First Charter Development Corp. 5260 South Geneva Way Englewood, Colorado 80111 February 21, 1989 I have met with the City Attorney and have reviewed the documents pertaining to your proposed subdivision of the property near the block "U". I understand your plans for this subdivision require Eleventh Avenue to continue eastward across the City's Virginia Street Park property to serve as access to your proposed subdivision. Unfortunalely, agreements with the Federal Government do not allow Salt Lake City to extend Eleventh Avenue across this park property as shown on your proposed plat. The agreement dated April 29, 1985 between the U. S. Department of the Interior and Salt Lake City states , • "Whereas, the Salt Lake City Corporation has agreed that it • will use said replacement lands exclusively for park and recreation purposes. subject to reversion to the United States of America for failure to so use said property. " The deed conveyed to Salt Lake City in 1984 further states this land is to be used only for park and recreation purposes. The exchange of deeds between the School Board and the City was "Without Warranty" and the access easement was clearly described in both deeds . The City therefore has no liability for any access other than as specifically provided in the deeds . To construct Eleventh Avenue across this park property could place this park property in jeopardy of reversion to federal ownership if used for any other purposes other than for park and recreation. • • • . •Th • . • • • • . .-•- ... • • • ASIg . •• . • . . • . . • • : • • .•• • • .• •41);••• - •:.•• ,• •'•• . - • • •• •••• -"••‘; ••':;;;- .7;. . • • • e • ••:.•.77'i• •••:.!•.; Salt- Lake City would not necessarily - . '..„T..modify these federal restrictions resulting in.more:tlexibility in development options than we currently enjOy.::::-EWe7are -generally-..7:-.7.-Till. 'pleased with your proposal for the subdivision. : The design seems • .- •• •to take into consideration the concerns of the citizens and City development goals. - We would like to keep a' dialogue%.open as your • • plans evolve. - - Please feel free to call if you have questions regarding this topic. Sincerely, Allen C. J hnson AICP Planning Director • • • :..• 4 • • • • — — _. _ _ • Attachment F ail 2 1989 • _ • ,. • • • ZC,GER F. CUTLER SALT'BAIT OITY{CORPORATION; ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS CITY ATTORNEY ---- ----- -�-+ ».�� RAY L. MONTGOME-Y LAW DEPARTMENT GREG R. HAWKINS CHERYL D. LUKE LARRY V. SPENDLCVE CITY PROSECUTOR 324 SOUTH STATE. FIFTH`•FLOOR STEVEN W. ALLRED SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 BRUCE R. BAIRD (801) .535-7788 '-• FRANK M. NAKAMURA FAX (801) 535.7640 ASSISTANT PROSECUTORS DONALD L. GEORGE CEC=LIA M. SPENO:A RICHARD G. HAM? February 24, 1989 GLEN A. COOK H. Brent Beesley - First Charter Development Corporation 95 East Tabernacle Street St. George, Utah 84770 • Re: Realignment of Easement through Virginia Street Park Dear Mr. Beesley: • Your letter to Mayor DePaulis, Roger Cutler and others in the city was referred to me today for response. There is no cuestion that the federal government did approve the easement described in the deeds between the City and the School Board which, pursuant to its terms, runs along the westerly and southerly boundaries of the property. By . virtue of topography an access road on this easement would not be buildable. There is further no question that there is no specific provision in the acceptance by the federal government for the City to unilaterally realign the easement. It is, accordingly, our position that the City does not have the unilateral right to realign the easement without the prior written approval of the Secretary of the Department of Interior. If you wish to seek approval from the Department for such a change the City may be willing to cooperate . The proper procedure to follow when dealing with property owned by the City is to initiate a petition with the Real Property Department for the change you propose. That petition would then be circulated to all of the relevant departments for comment. Assuming a favorable comment is received from all departments the City might H. Brent Beesley • February 24, 1989 Page -2- agree to realign the easements after you have obtained approval from the Department of Interior. You should note that the easement alignment which you propose might adversely affect the Virginia Street Park requiring compensation to the City. That would, of course, be a determination by the Parks Department in conjunction with the Real Property Department. If you have any further questions please feel free to call. Sin �Te E R. BAIRD • - . Assistant City Attorney • BRB:rc • cc: Mayor DePaulis Sydney Fonnesbeck • John Gust �// Allen C. Johnson - Doug Wheelwright W. Gary Harmer, Salt Lake City School Board John Pace, Babcock, Pace and Associates Jim Huppi, Bush & Gudgel Wayne G. Petty, Moyle & Draper • SALT! ., J IT Y''CORPORATION1 TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING` :'333 SOUTH 200,EAST. SUITE 201 JOSEPH R. ANDERSON SALT,LAKE CITY. UTAH 8411.1 .' TIMOTHY P. HARPST, P.E. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER :T(801) 535-6630 - March 6 , 1989 • Doug Wheelwright City Planner _ Planning and Zoning RE : Request for Review , Petition #400-713 - Block U Subdivision Dear Doug : The Transportation Division has no concerns in regard t.o the above referenced petition . Sincerely , W . Steve Me er , P . E . Deputy Transportation Engineer WSM/ lh . . PC MINUTES - •• . March 9, 1989 Page o recuired, the costs might be high enough to •endanger the entire project. - • Mr . Schumann opened the hearing for public comment and asked if anyone wishe to address the Planning- Commission. • Mr. Kim Anderso , 768 North Redwood Road, stated that he is in favor of the project only if the entire project is developed. He , , also said he does of want. any businesses in the project offering 24 hour services. Since no one else wa desirous of speaking on the matter, Mr. Schumann closed the he ring to the public. Mr. Howa asked if the rezoning would be limit d for this particular developer or if any B-3 use could go into th ' s site. Mr. Johnson explained that the Planning Commission could recommend to the City Council that the rezoning be subject to the or.struction of this project under this configuration, but not ecessarily to this particular developer . Mr . Johnson furth-r explained that the staff recommendation requests that tie zoning change not become effective until the building pemits have been obtained ( the developer has one year from the city council hearing to obtain those permits) . If the permits a e not obtained within the one year period, the rezoning issue di- . Mr . Schumann then pointed out that this would give the develo -r year to obtain financing and line up tenants . Mr . Neilson inquired= if this means all . ermits have to be applied for simultaneously. - Mr . Schumann respon:ed in the negative and stated- that the permits could be obtained 'n different phases. Mr . Nicolatus moved to accept staff ' s recom -ndation ( includinc seven master plan considerations and two cony . ti ons listed in the report) to recommend approval of Petition No. 400-705 to the City Council . Mr . Howa seconded the motion; all voted "Aye. " The motion passes . • -V INFORMAL HEARING - Petition No. 400-713 , First Charter Development requesting the property located at approximately 1800 East llth Avenue be rezoned from a Residential "R-1" to a Residential "R-lA" zoning district. Mr. Allen McCandless presented the staff report stating that Mr . • Brent Beesley is requesting a zone change for the block "U" area located east of the Virginia Street Park . The rezoning is to accommodate a 31 lot, single family dwelling subdivision on 34 . 9 acres. Mr . McCandless added that this area has received much discussion in the past and is summarized as follows: 1 . A complicated land trade between the Board of Education, Salt Lake City, and the Department of the Interior occurred in 1985 placing the properties in their current • PC MINUTES .March 9 , 1989 • Page 7 ..'.- ownerships . At that time, agreements were written that . t ' . Salt Lake City would use the park property only for park and recreation purposes . 2. This area has also been discussed in both the 1979 Avenues Master Plan and . the July 1987 .Avenues Master Plan Update. • 3 . To date, the City has met on several occasions to work on an acceptable conceptual subdivision design for this property. 4 . This .subdivision was briefly presented and discussed at the February 1, 1989 Avenues Community Council Meeting. The proposal for this subdivision was presented to the Community during the Avenues Community Council ' s March 8 , 1989 meeting . The request for the change in zoning from R-1 to R-1A has been made to allow for narrower private roads to be constructed. The narrower roads will mean reduced visual and environmental impacts on the site and to surrounding areas due to the reduced amount of. cuts and fills required for the narrow private roads . The R-1 zone requires that •public roads be built to City Engineering widths and specifications , however , the R-1A zone allows Planned Unit Developments and accompanying private roads . Mr . McCandless stated that the following issues remain unresolved in connection with the Avenues Master Plan Update: Eleventh Avenue has been proposed to facilitate local traffic between the upper Avenues and the University. There continues to be some disagreement among Avenues residents regarding the Eleventh Avenue extension. No definite decisions have been made regarding the eastward extension of Eleventh Avenue . The Planning Commission accepts a concept of the eastward extension, but has not endorsed the extension. The City, to date, has not agreed to allow access to this development across the adjacent park property as proposed . The proposed subdivision plan depends on this extension of Eleventh Avenue . The City may desire to require dedication of the eastern portion of Eleventh Avenue to allow for the eventual continuation of the right-of-way in the future. This dedication would be required durinc the subdivision process . • PC MINUTES /� • • March 9, 1989 page 8 Mr. McCandless said the staff is recommending that, as a ``. condition of --rezoning to R-1A, this project only be approved .as a •• single family detached development. Mr. McCandless further stated that the Planning Staff recommends a change in the zoning for the above described property from R-1 to R-1A, subject to the following conditions : - 1. The zoning be contingent upon the final approval and recording of a PUD subdivision. 2. The zoning remain R-1 until said subdivision is approved for recording with the County Recorder . 3 . The zoning change be contingent upon the project being approved as a single family detached development. Mr . Brent Beesley, the petitioner said he concurs with the staff recommendations. Mr. Schumann opened the hearing to the public and asked if anyone wished to speak. Mr . James Richards 1555 • Federal Heights Drive, said they are concerned about the access - issue and asked if there are specific rules regarding access. Mr . Johnson responded that the subdivision plat has to be ready for recording before the subdivision can be developed, and this requires the access issue be resolved. Mr . Richards said he supports the:rezoning but is concerned about the access. Mr . Ernest Dixon, 77 "C" Street said he is concerned that the community won' t be given the opportunity to express their opinions. He also stated that he would prefer access other than • llth Avenue. Mr . Beesley stated that the reason •for the rezoning request is solely to allow for private roads in the subdivision. The configuration, as presently shown could be developed in the existing zoning . He added that the reason for the private roads is because they can be narrower than public streets and would require less cut and fill . Mr. Beesley stated that the civil engineers are going to try and develop alternative access other than the access from Virginia Street Park. Ms . Hermoine Jex, representing Land Use and Natural Resources and SLACC, handed out copies of a letter to the Planning Commissioners, a copy of which is filed with the minutes . She stated that .theybelieve no action should be taken on this matter until the issue of access has been settled. Ms . Jex said they are requesting denial of this petition until all pertinent facts are disclosed to the community. Ms . Deedee Corradini, 1600 Tomahawk, stated that they realize this land will be developed at some point in time and said she is in favor of this particular development over anything else they • have reviewed. Ms . Corradini said she would prefer a development with large lot sizes over some future development which might not be as good. • PC MINUTES . March 9 , 1989 Page 9 • • Mr . Stan Penfold , 715 Second Avenue, stated that there is tremendous concern in the community about the llth Avenue Extension. - Mr . Nicolatus asked how the residents in the back portion of the site would cope with only one access if there was a fire blocking the entrance of the access . Mr . Nicolatus also inquired about garbage collection. Mr . Beesley stated that the issue of the fire is probably one of the reasons the city is desirous of _ having private roads in the area and that this issue heeds further investigation . He added that the cost of garbage collection would have to be absorbed by the property owners . Mr . Nicolatus expressed concern about losing sight of the "U" on the side of the mountain due to development that is too close to the site . Mr . James Huppi stated that no one can build within 100 feet of the "U" and the homes closest to the -site will be 70 • feet below the "U" which will keep it in clear view. • Mr . Howe inquired- how they will deal with the Chevron and Mt. . Fuel pipelines . Mr . Huppi responded that they might have to move the Chevron pipeline and that the city has requested that no lots front on the lower road of the subdivision. He added that at ' this point , no homes are desicned that conflict with the Mt . Fuel pipeline. Mr . Neilson pointed out that the area is already zoned "R-1" and the only real issues in rezoning to "R-lA" are the width and ownership of the streets involved . Mr . Nicolatus moved to approve recommending approval cf Petition No . 400-713 to the City Council, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Mr . Howe seconded the motion. Mr . Neilson asked if this restricts the development to the 31 lots shown in the current site plan . Mr . Johnson responded that with the Planned Unit Development (PUD) , the developer will have to come • back before the Planning Commission for approval . He added that they could handle the number of lots allowed at that time. Mr . Huppi informed the Planning Commission that Mr . Beesley might possibly purchase additional land which could add another three lots to the plan . All voted "Aye" to the motion . The motion passes . Ms . Liddle-Gamonal stated that she is in favor of holding a hearing on this matter due to the number of concerns the neighbors have expressed regarding the llth Avenue access . Mr . Wright suggested that when the PUD issue comes back before the Planning Commission as a part of the subdivision, the i( Planning Commission could hear the matter in the format of an informal hearing . . •Y :Y� t ATTACHMENT I Summary of Events Jan 23; 1989 - Initial meeting with City concerning the proposed subdivision development. Conceptual subdivision plans were presented and discussed with several City staff members. Feb 7, 1989 - Meeting with Allen Johnson, Roger Cutler, Syndey Fonnesbeck, Bruce Baird, Doug Wheelwright, Allen McCandless to discuss City's position on the Eleventh Avenue Extension. • Feb 13, 1989 - Meeting with Brent Beesley, Jim Huppie, Doug Wheelwright, Allen McCandless to discuss next steps necessary in the subdivision approval. • Feb 14, 1989 - Rezoning Petition submitted by Brent Beesley for the proposed subdivision, petition # 400-713 ( Attachment B ) . • Feb 17, .1989. - Letter from -Brent Beesley to the City concerning the realignment of existing easement through Virginia Street Park ( Attachment C ) . Feb 17. ` 1989 - Letter from Brent Beesley to John Gust, Director of .Salt Lake City Parks Department concerning the existing access easement for the proposed subdivision (Attachment -D). Feb 21, 1989 - Letter from Allen Johnson to Mr. Beesley regarding the City's position of allowing Eleventh Avenue through the park property (Attachment E ) . Feb 24, 1989 - Letter from Bruce Baird to Brent Beesley concerning the right of way over the City Park Property ( Attachment F ) . Mar 1, 1989 • - Plan and profile for roadway on existing 50 foot easement filed with Development Coordination Team for review. - • Mar 8, 1989 - The plans for the proposed subdivision were presented formally to the Avenues Community Council for comments and review. Major negative comments were concerning the eventual extension of eleventh avenue. Mar 9, 1989 - Petition for Agreements with Salt Lake City was presented to the City ( Attachment G ). Mar 9, 1989 - Planning Commission review and motion to approve of the rezoning request from R-1 to R-1A. Surrounding property owners were notified of the informal hearing with the Planning Commission (Attachment H - Minutes ) . �gPLICATION FOB ZONING �I�ENDEENT • _- _ L - ...- q', Y - i 1... it 1 1 '•.1. .. To be. filed in .duplicate with the.departurnnt Development Services 324 South State Street Suite • Filing Fee $100.00 . Advertising Fee* - '• $100.00 ��- - (*if.a public hearing is held) _. - Application is hereby made to the Mayor and City Council of Salt Lake City . Utah, to: Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance. By amending Section (Use reverse side for requested text change) Amend the Use District (Zoning) Map. Of Salt Lake City by reclassifying the following property located at: approximately 1800 East llth Avenue fran a R-1 classification to a R-1A classification (Use reverse side for legal description) • ATI*PLi TO APPLICATION * 1. The reasons why the present zoning is.not proper for the area. * 2. Changes which have taken place in the area which justify a change in zoning. * 3. Description of the pi.pcsed use to be made of the property. 4. Other items which justify a change in the existing zoning. 5. Indication of support for rezoning fran all affected property owners. 6. Any other information or exhibits which would aid the planning Cocrmission in arriving at a proper recommendation. 7. . Sidwell Parcel Identification Number. * See Attached Sheet. THE ABOVE INFC)RI.%TICN, IN DETAIL, MUST ACCOMPANY THIS APPLICATION IN ORDER FOR THE PETITION 7O BE PROPERLY CONSIDERED BY THE PLC COMMISSION. First Charter Development Cor . Signature of the applicant - Address 5260 S. Geneva Way, (303) Englewood, CO Telephone Number 7 -8720 Zip Ccde 80111 Local Representative : James Huppi • Bush & Gudgell , Inc. FILL cur REVERSE SIDE 555 South 300 East Utah 84111 Attach all exhibits and supporting data to application. Petition No. y(7)- /3 Date ,--)lAfl g . Receipt No. r?<o - Amount $ . • (7 72 6' Salt Lake City Planning Commission Staff Report ' Petitions .No_ 400-731 and 732 by Clark Development . to Rezone Property and to Vacate and Close Certain Streets and Alleys within the Sugar House Business District. OVERVIEW j t C-7 MEm1N This staff .report is addressing __I coLLEGE two separate petitions . Petition Z _ 400-731 is requesting the city to rezone properties located between ►I I ( _ Simpson Ave. and Interstate 80 l �� 3 : and between Highland Drive and 1300 East Street from Residential 6 �jl �" r51 int "R-2" and Commercial "C-1" to a ��� - Commercial "C-3" . Petition 400- 732 is requesting the city to vacate public streets and alleys Ia rC. in the same general area . (see ,mao) The area affected by this • ID-' . recuest is within Phase III of FAIR WONT PARK • the Sugar House -Neighborhood va� . =D D._ Development Plan / Redevelopment - - i ,,_• Project Area . (See Figure 1) t • • ' 1111. • .0 `,,_ The Clark Development proposal calls for 235 ,000 sq. ft. of new , retail uses . The Shopko building consists of 102,000 sq. ft. of the new retail area . See the attached table for a detailed breakdown of buildings proposed. Several .restaurant pads and a - grocery store are included in the building- tabulation. Also proposed is the renovation of the existing Simpson Avenue retail mall . Clark Financial Corporation is requesting from Salt Lake City . financial assistance of over S2 . 6 million to provide the opportunity to redevelop this area of the Sugar House Business District. If Salt Lake City is to assist financially in this • development, all impacts related to implementing the proposed development package should be mitigated and the development should comply with the master plan policies of the Sugar House Business District. BACKGROUND The 1985 Sugar House Master Plan identified this area as a medium to high density residential area . However, with the adoption of the Sugar House Neighborhood Development Plan this area was identified as a mixed used retail center . The land use plan contained within the Sugar House Business District Strategies/Recommendations Plan (Westplan) establishes the . present city policy for "future land uses" within the Sugar Ho s Business District . (See Figure 2) . \V \r' • L. J. ^ - t t - . • Figure • 1 -• ' SJ.31.R BOI.ZE SEaGRIKFECCO rommF', a7r P/Azi • . . . I. • i . ' l • - • • 1 • 1 t ocn i CGuc'C c 1 c c . 3-• ..... — .....1 ri _ ,_ c {�'_, � r~ - _ -1 - C -- � PHASE l i 1.1\_ „ Wiz: 01' r eL__ ... _. _ .. �_i nc . .e— ;� i-=_- - -=�__ PHASE 11 1r I ILL- � . I = =r _ . - == mo;=- =L _:- _ — e . ._i _. — s; • \ P"= --ri. - _ = P H_AS_E III ------------------------- - J: 1 1 • • • • • . '•Figure 2 ••. • • • • • • •• •• \\ 1 1 • • c,. t. . .It:A - • litt. L:J OUQQo a • ��rL�7 c • o • 1 1 � RA AVE4UE QC Q Q C G �'Y`" 1 „d1y ` AE� Si0ENT1 Al . 0 Op D C STREET1�:• „a ....... ,. _...» fi p r, 1 n= ---:NSTTTlTT10NAL " C Q s, R E S I O E N T I A , 'Y� .._ - 'tell•1 •^- C LDL • ITj�C ` C-" PERF4RMANICE�' ' ,": c_=1.•:1_ r-.IZIO N - . I.! ?�:::.H.:r PARKING 1 4.z IMUITI-FA IAL -- I • ,_.• ::v .. . Ic: -5_ r-r • <I -- RESIDENTIAL_ 1 ,„r,., ..,, i,—,..�.3-t7'I _.is,!. ,,R}KIN _ cl .♦\\.\\ \� • p .. ,.j y< I ) �[ MIXED USE: "'�^- I< ?`C } _ rK G PK G - " 1 �.YTTew..ExTC ~G±�dEL I < 1i 14 ti. �U +...`" ��I _ `A ET JSEAv. .riit�lllwi,�„ • ..._.::_. ....•a:_;:. ..._.._..�... IC u..o_...._..._..71 n,.•...ul,,.::rm+a.•I ...,..1,..-:.:; ,, �I, a,...,�c • r • _ •: iCU:n 0, i��_,- 1 1cS T R�� T=..Cso:_,.v. ria„..n'::,..,_`.,I 1 .I a 3 A an.A A... ♦\\\\\Xv.\\\\\\h\.\ ` r` \ \\\\\\�1\� �� — •F:;':,K::i:.,: #:N.=- MMIX_D USE ' w \\.\'\r_ -r� ; r11 ,:I".„a ll I•:..nr,•:• „r....::: aErxL'sEAL ,,& • \♦ ' 1 CS\ _ _lI •.�.,.. :'_` ,._-_ t` aes�emAL v wNVErEtIe_ \ \? r S..' . _ 1.. I —.t v. ♦♦\„ -\� ACTA4.AL. . \ '• T lT ::.1 i L = I : w:i.N:.:•r`: ii .♦ �i� �\�\��\�C':\\` \ ��Afs10EYTL4 7 \ • . viM .... „„, DNS i l + •:- ';;::�:1..• .' a :` C. ham... rJ:.. ]F.:: ::::T~::'.':!:_ C 1 I A.�.:n,•',.j...,..-.•..r. _ X A L C 7'�3 1 F C a . -` . \• - P_RFOR ANC 1: _ ,,,�.,.'; museum C _ n •'. ......V:bYR MVSEUM 1.•.;..to :. ,� \\ 'R 1 , i 'i°.`•7.MAJOR .:::::.:. \`--r n \b ♦` . '-.::: .rt •' I •x,.J I I L ::Mn'::.•.'i:i::l1i.4::::::: 1 .U.• \ III ' ... v>/. ACC.ANT. 1 :Et::^tia:a:i:i:.i�.�? �'\. \\ `• :;»• i..:.. MOTEL r n �� • ?AET;IL;:a :?v::;:z AEMCE: I- r 1 .r) ♦�\�. - .... ...........-..::iT::r:rii. +\EAv aETl� C ♦\' •" ,-..'i:.1v _ :::::::: ::i:::::L ♦.:Jam:,..'• j \ ':rti*:•:7f••••'• A`CR RETAIL`?:i::i0:: } C:+�OCy^,,1 AVC+;,�C I 1I ...,. ';:. O, :.N.::.'l.':::..r c:,�1CR AY!?,,, .'c .N ( �Y['y:\\\\\•. !•. �•._r••-w:,:. EiaATMCMT STOAES _•:` c^ , : ^ , :^:�E4CLOSCO uALL SHOPS-'r` \\ ,(MIXED U..0 .i: ...:ri:• .. ..r.-.r:::::•rrrw•rw•r.•::'.'.11::. \\\\�\ 91 • .7:?ETAIU ScAv• ,C_ ::.lii:y:::ti=...1'{r'.Utto«i.:•,rJ...n: r1;9,w���. _< . ]I: gFFICf . :::::r::..:.......::..............�::�:::./ ,•411XE7♦\.•• x�J�AESIOEMTIAL•� •::.,.�7XylGF...W.:'.:Ei:;:� • USC c .1' In-cur.:::.v::::r.0� r ♦OCnC2 - �/ �. -r•S-. •• i AIRMONT PARK• +��♦•`� :tY :1:••::� }• Y.u• ♦SEAv,CE I .�,,• �,�Z:{' :.1`":'•[:ai:i7':f:.f::::.....n:Y.Y.Y::.t:. COMAI•,?� .. 1 k7.11:.k3S::;;;:::;, :..X.S",k\• --It:V:/nv:1:V;_fr •':.Af.A•I T.'Y.�• • • 1 -f IriT S'ST'c RO \\\ - ----- ----j • P/ I I 1 • -< 1• -The proposed project is within Phase III development area and the land use designation is for a mixed use retail center . The purpose of this mixed use retail center is to encourage. a mixture of retail commercial, service commercial, office, hotel and - public openspace uses . Any complex of multiple structures developed within this area needs to- be functionally and aesthetically interrelated. • Planning criteria in the Master Plan for this area does not catl for neither the extremes of detailed standards nor complete flexibility and discretionary negotiation of standards . A review of development proposals may be made by a design review committee established by the Redevelopment . Agency. On their May 11, 1989 meeting the Redevelopment Agency referred to the Planning Commission the implementation- of Phase III of the Redevelopment Plan. The design objectives for this area are contained in the Sucar House Master Plan on pages 6-9 and 16-17. • Within the Redevelopment Plan Phase III development was recommended not to occur until Phases I and II were completed as part of .implementing the neighborhood development plan. Phase III. is to be considered only if market conditions have changed to warrant proceeding with development within this area prior to completion of development of the other two areas . To .support and recommend the actions of these petitions within Phase III of the redevelopment plan •a determination of whether . market chances have occurred to warrant the _city' s participation in. Phase III needs to be made. This was. accomplished through a public meeting on May 11, 1989 by the Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors. At that meeting, Clark Financial Corporation sebmitted evidence to the Redevelopment Agency indicating the market changes to support the development of Phase III . The Redevelopment Agency found that current market conditions in the Sucar House Project Area, and the completion of portions of Phase I activities , and portions of Phase II activities, that the Board of Directors have determined that the market conditions referred to- in Section K of the Sugar House Neighborhood Development Plan have changed and now warrant that the Agency proceed with the planning and implementation of Phase III activities. • ANALYSIS Existing Land Uses The requested rezoning area consists of approximately 17 . 7 acres . Within the Residential "R-2" area there are 37 residential structures . Within the Commercial "C-1" area there is three residential structures and six commercial structures . This information is based upon the existing land use files of the city. Several of the residential structures are occupied. Street and Alley Closures. Three streets are requested for closure between Highland Drive and 1300 East along with the existing alleys . A portion of the Ashton right of way functions as the access to Interstate 80 and has been deleted from the calculations below. The requested areas are highlighted on the site plan. Streets Alleys Simpson Ave . 87 , 500 sq. ft. North 19 , 200 so. ft. Stringham Ave . 64 , 700 sq. ft. South 18 , 300 sq. ft. Ashton Ave . 55 , 200 sc. ft. Total 37, 500 sq. ft. Total 207 , 400 so. ft. Aooraisal estimate of land value in this area by David Van Drimmelen, MAI and Tod Jones Appraisers is $10 . 50 per square • - foot. The approximate value of property requested for closure would S2 , 571 , 000 . • Closure of only a portion of Stringham Avenue is requested however , the staff recommends that if the proposal is. accepted, then complete closure of this street is necessary. A remnant stub street is not a desirable solution. The construction of a culdesac would be necessary to allow a stub street. MASTER PLAN CONSIDERATIONS The following are Planning Criteria excerpted from the Sugar House Master Plan: ' SUGAR HOUSE DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES • - To encourage new development which will substantially strengthen and unify the Sugar House Business District focused at the Sugar House Plaza Monument at 2100 South and 1100 East . - To improve circulation capabilities including street networks , off-street parking , pedestrian movement opportunities . - To provide pedestrian-scale activities in the Sugar House Business District by providing openspace corridors and streetscape amenities . HOUSING PRESERVATION AND REDEVELOPMENT - Creation of an urban residential neighborhood within the Sugar House Business District . - Comprehensive rezoning for appropriate residential development and mixed-use development. • • ..* • (111) •. .::7-1. • . i;'.....::, • SITE PLAN PROPOSED—BY CLARK-DEVELOPMENT -• WILMINGTON AVE • • . ___, -\ r -‘ r \ (- l • - C_ - • ... .. r---, • .:. _.. _.. - . ----- st,. C..C111 .1 = = = .= -.... •- : .-- C--- • I --- - ..--- -- .---=. I r-- • 1....... .I • •• .!':•-• --- N • • ,= — —_ — — — -- ' — — — — — __ _ ,, • ' ':= :_-_'-- _-7_-. •__ — — =.. _ _ ••-•-. _ 7-'. .-'1• ••i - ...._ -.. . ,__ _ ___ — — — = _, _ _ _ _ j t__ — —_ — — _ _, _ _ ..-,- •- 1.- — — — — _ _ ._, . __ —. __ — — \•:._ -- __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -...... :, -_____, '---1 A i t• s r .•__. _ — — — — — ,__ — — — — — ; 1; : • r__.= _ „=-_,•,_, =.-_ =7-_ •_. ...-z.-_-__• ••=-. •._ .,....-----T_:....i ...._ ,•_,.....: „...._...„ . 1 ...... NI '. . ..-----...... . • ; . • • t•t:• ;; . :! 1;':I •c;T: ! . IIi•!;II! !•::.!' *: ., - .- L. .• 7 1- — - -_• / - v: .._ ...; 7 L.. /A• , •.. • . ,,,....- ,....•••-•`. 1 II ,i-•,i- • . -, ,.„----.. ---•---/ I . --- ---..,, -- A . . i , •.....,____- --•,`--1 ii N\ c2. ...„ 7-74, /A *sem...se . /. .•••••....... ,.. I I'• I I I. I 1 .• 1 rj--7-_. . g _...=I •.• ef •••-•.- A\ ,V -.:-...-. 'A • K • . / ..- ..' I _ a _L • . • , • -_ ••,,.;,r-1 '‘'./. _ ,. , Ilr--_ _ 1 • . I . . . .0 .,./• -_-_-_ .,-.,\ , .- • ': II! 7... =' I • r- l - - ---' • I I r \ 2., • • . ., . ...... ,., •. .;;,„.,;;,,‘,...;,,,,,,,;;_.;,1.1 _ _ \-,..-,---.••g.IIIIIII;f1,1•tg..i.s.I.......11 I .. .._ , ( .. •• SIMPSON AVE \ 1';:;...:7-,-1,.,.,: _ T .-_-_-7------•--i -,-_-=-_....-=_,....._... --_._:_ ,.... ______I= = = = = ..,..., \A,..„. _• ..,.—, . 1 — — — --. ...__ . ,.__, „..- • t..- If-. 7---....-.7..-.-7.....-------.••••••----. --....---.---.--.---- . - ----.• \: / I.. •!!i• • •!..— ..- -.- -- .4.—. ..-....,-.1 i.- ... . ..- "•-'• . ... \I -... ...... • • —... . '----"-".“•••••••=.. =....I 7=A :.- . . • • . -}...--;.---..z--• -= = e••=. =_ — i— --• . • • • --___ -- — ....__. = .= _ = = I 1 1 i . 1::= •- ___,. _ --\ • -. --= =_— =. = _. _____ _ =.. :e i ; 1-- - — •-- — =_-i =.-_ =_•-••••---=-, . ! __ . . • -,-__-. = = _._____ _____ ___..._\ . , _____ _...._______ = ___._. ___ ___ _ _ ___ . i 1 ! ! ..•._ ,, . •_ . ,.---. ! ! -_-_-•\ , _. _. .; e.- — __• , .: __ - --- -.__-- -___...— =--__..—• :_ .........-_—_,..-._-_——- • —-_____I____ ____ _ ._ _. •k: ',..- . -..... ." _____ ......i ..-.. •••-•- C"I ./7....... I= 1 r•-• - r. .-... A •r.....": •.-- i . _ --- -... •-- t-- ..3 • •., . - •-' r,•• t••• -';.•,•111- I •iiittlic. I-- -- . • t.- - - .1 •_ _ - -— • '4 - • '•-•'•••• — ----' -•• • r .. ,... • - -.---; -.......--.-.:-----7, ..,_,-__ __=_--z-_-..,---1 I .. STRINGHAM AVE - ,.._ 1 f . •t•;---..,..--... -,..-•• -; - -' - ' !--•::....... .:.' •:: :------- - .-. - • • - -1---.• •• - -- --..-, -. . ‘ ' ... _. ..• 1. . .A •iosi.•:.•._ •. i••: . • "...1..;.•-;=...:::"..7:1:.,C.L.I.":L..::7:::-7 ...' . • -'•....-r."." r=.-. ......:.:t-n....I=: I g . .....r=i- ,i, • ' 1,LA..1 . . ... . ••:.t i .." : ---• ..-.. .77-T,'4..f.•::::-.4.i. ---- 3..7;-'r'... . .- , .;I .... , ---- • : I i • • 1 . I ...7'..:...r-;::;:;.....:-..7-r-4!-.n.„...,;---.,,... ! 2.,.......1:..P.,1 I I .. I • .... ..:......-•••-•-•-•.;:r:......::::7._•::":4.:.(--"__..;....,::: . .. •• ,1 ••- 7 I 1 ... -----7------------ \ c".... :•-..:..:..-.J.-:-:.=.....!....... --.--'-'-:•-,....- ' " • ' : ;I .: .':7.• •:. • i .. .I . . . . _'..27,..-d.._•-r=_,_, ......7-,..... .-‘--s••••=1 - .. ...- . . I „ - ! ....._ . -- .. ,. 1 ---' I(-Le' „".,-,,---'-:::7,1. ;.::7;:-`:_.r._=',,•''...._t;t1t' ; r, . .•- ,, . . - . • . , . 4, • i..i.........i!-• : • -.:-..-.....f.::-.....,:_-,,,,r.zr.T.f.,.....t.,..s.‘,..--_- : l• a i •—. - •••• A.•ow. /TS , I I.=! ' • ••-.t : .77.f........Z..:-.7 -a•:-.7.!,,. ,•;f7-7; .i i..g I.I I...I.I i I.: Al.. .. I ...••.,::.:i 4 , 1 7--........ • . r-• :!:!' i!---t •:-**L. •••7".17•-.-.*:•:-'7'..7-1z1! ---:" .17: I 1 II:7-•I: \ -.-.:,L•.: • .. -•......i.----;r7..:,-,:::z .1'--, s i I.U._..!•!. ..-...: ...• . s \. I,. 1 ! I . 7.-__:._,•_,;_•-„,z,L----:,=:` •:.•;i-t-441:22..„ ‘ '"1••'•'•i ,-__':I - -: L-:•.--7:::•::•••'•"•-•.- --.,i'•••.-• :-----: ••=7-- - i -..‘ i i -j.• -*. -2--...-7.,-;••1,-.-.777!,..-1:,.-..:..;.`74,::: .. G r_ r• - . • ••._, ••-••.-:: z..--:-.••• ••,:--:-....--;•pszr.:- • ___ , •-- — -:.--------- — - ____,..„.„. • ----. " %I",-;..\ tii.11L:t6iilliillilillitILiiii,h,;," :1,,Iiiiiii..---- ' -. . \ ASHTON AVE _ . •-• ._...1 •,.;tt- •--:•-:-T,- ---•r'T1-••••••-•'• • -- -- ----- ------________,,_ , \ . .... .. . • ill i t.:::_'_:!UAL...I :I i I I I I CI....--------f_:.___---_-;:...-;---, - .. ••••• . t \ .- ....../ ,....---- •-•• . -----------•="------------ ._-- -- — ---- - . • ___— Streets and Alleys Petitioned for Closure • • - . • • - Providing residential development in the mixed-use center north of Simpson Avenue and east of 1200 East may fulfill the objectives of introducing an urban residential neighborhood. COMMERCIAL AREAS - SUGAR HOUSE BUSINESS DISTRICT - Ccncern for decentralized commercial growth. - Incorporate pedestrian orientation and pedestrian. amenities into development alternative; use convenient and attractive pedestrian linkages between anchor attractions . . - Incorporate adequate off-street parking into development with identified access , proper buffering and landscaping. - Provide guidance to development proposals through a "Compatibility Review" ordinance to ensure harmony with the • urban design objectives of the Master Plan. - Innovative development proposals integrated properly -with open space amenities , community facilities , and pedestrian opportunities . - Salt Lake City should retain ownership of all property it currently owns in the Sugar House .Business District, including - streets , alleys and parcels , until such time as comprehensive development plans are to be implemented. Future rights-of-way could thus, .be acquired through land trade arrangements rather than expenditure of capital funds . _ - Whereas the city can offer financing incentives and capital improvements , private developers can provide innovative development proposals integrated properly with the urban design criteria and policies . • OPENSPACE IN THE BUSINESS DISTRICT - Presently the amount and quality of openspace in the Sugar House Business District requires ' improvement. A streetscape improvement plan should include a landscaping element and a street tree element providing more "green space" to the business district. - As redevelopment occurs in the Sugar House Business District and the multi-use center , bikeways and pedestrian corridors should be incorporated into development plans . TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION - In designing any off-street parking facility, customer service • and convenience , and minimum interference with street traffic flow must receive high priority. Accessibility and ease of entering , circulating , parking , unparking , and exiting , are all important factors in the location and design of off-street • carking .facilities . Access points should be •landscaped, however , vegetation should- be low so as not .to interfere with sight distance and signage. - 1300 East Street south of 2100 South is an arterial street designed to serve large volumes of traffic. Access to adjacent land should be from side streets. - - Commercial-oriented traffic should use Interstate 80 , 1300 East, 2100 South, and a new road aligning the I-80 off ramp with Sugarmont Drive as primary access to the business district. Secondary access is along 1100 East and Highland Drive. Sugar House Business District - Parking and Circulation Study 2100 South Street is a major east-west route crossing the Salt Lake Valley. By relocating local traffic to an alternative east- west street the .conf list between through and turning vehicles could be reduced. CONSERVATION AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION - The proposed Highland Park Historic District is divided into eastern and western halves by 1300 East Street, the western half is bisected again by Highland Drive. To encourage stabilization of the western half of the Highland Park District , the following steps are recommended: - Encourage commercial through-traffic to use 1100 East Street, instead of Highland Drive, to get to the Sugar House Business District. - Redesign the intersection at Richmond Street and Highland Drive to ensure that commercial through-traffic uses 1300 East. - It is recommended" in the master plan that the portion of Highland Drive between Richmond Street and Interstate 80, which is located within a potential historic district, be downgraded to a residentially oriented two-lane roadway. • - The collector street connecting Highland Drive and 1300 East is essential to the elimination of negative impacts of excessive traffic on .Highland Drive upon the preservation of this potential historic district. URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT Design Guidelines - The streetscape design should incorporate a consistent theme strengthening the association of unrelated buildings. • - The general pattern of buildings should help to define street areas and other public openspaces . - Islands should be provided between parking aisles and stalls to - break up hard-surfaced areas. Berms .and other changes of grade are recommended wherever possible. - Uniform identification signs should designate access to parking lots and parking structures . - Distinctiveness of buildings and areas should be revealed by preserving and highlighting architectural features common to the area by using special material and colors . Building Height and Setback • - Highland Drive is a commercial fringe area which has a fifteen foot landscaped setback and a height limit of two stories . - Mixed-use areas are required to have a twenty foot landscaped front yard setback with the height limit approved . by the • Planning Commission . HOUSING WITHIN THE SUGAR HOUSE BUSINESS DISTRICT 1 . Rezoning of the Residential R-2 area would eliminate the city ' s .most effective tool to ensure that some form of urban housing will occur within the Business District . A transfer of land area that is zoned for residential development would allow the city to retain this leverage tool to imDlement' the master plan. It is recommended that property to the north- within Phase IT_ area , that is designated for Residential Host Mixed-Use be rezoned temporarily to a Residential "R-7" or "R-5" classification as a holding zone until the city can create and put in place an Urban Residential Host Mixed Use Zone. The Residential "R-S" classification is identified within the Sugar House Master Plan as the temporary base zone for the residential area . - 2 . Public property that is requested to be vacated instead of being sold could be traded for other property owned by Clark Financial to be used for future housing development and right of ways for public streets . OTHER PLANNING ISSUES Social considerations In rezoning residential property to commercial and utilizing city subsidies the city should require that adequate notice to renters be provided and possible relocation assistance be required. • Property Disposition :=: "') Within the Neighborhood Development Plan it is identified that l all real property acquired by the Redevelopment Agency be sold or leased to public or private persons or entities for the development for uses permitted in the plan. Salt Lake City ordinance Chapter 2-58 City-Owned Real Property identifies methods of surplus property disposition. These methods are either trade, sale, lease, or irrevocable transfer preceded with Planning Commission review. SITE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS - To comply with master plan guidelines Circulation 1. Provide east/west connector street from 1300 East that links with Sugarmont Drive. This street would allow building- orientation to 'a public street and provide the necessary linkace • to minimize the traffic impact upon 'Highland Drive south of the Interstate . Without a connector street traffic would be focused toward Highland Drive and negatively impact the housing preservation objectives of the master plan. 2. Provision for a design solution that would be adequate for west bound traffic onto Interstate 80 . Until it is known how much property if any is needed to allow for an appropriately designed interchange for I-80 vacation of the portion of Ashton Avenue effecting the on ramp should not occur . 3 . Access Drives into parking lots. To ensure efficient internal circulation, storage areas at access drives must be designed to allow for adequate capacity. Storage on the driveway should be of sufficient length to keep stopped vehicles from blocking the path of entering vehicles . Failure to provi.de sufficient .storage will result in unsafe and confusing vehicle ' conflicts . The following are recommended minimal design recuirements for access drives off of arterial roadways and the major access point off of Highland Drive: a . Minimum throat length of 75 feet that is free of curb cuts into parking areas. b . Maintain a 120-150 feet of internal storage area . c. Use of landscaped areas to provide adequate visibility of access drives . 4 . Loading Docks - location and design a . Locate at south side of building along freeway. • • C. hr . • \• - bJII,f lNG ra t T ON . - C.. . SQUARE 7007'AGE us • •80 ,000 - -•zu=e Office 3Tu__c1,c ._.. - C 54,923 - New G=oce_r c-.- - 7,700 New•_Pestaur :` . 7 ,_- Newac__}+�-�-:- r _ • - _ 2, 400 New Con_ve^- S -_/,. v c C_.'tiC • 102,000 24,000 • New era c cs 1. 27 , 302 -::_st _-= 1 2,700 New Re_=z_tu„r_ - . • r'= '-_ill; L:----= - _ . 1---- - --- ,7 77 s= ft.. " 0_- -,J_J is LX.NS O 7 • • _ • 49 ,650 •(^c_a; not induced in nes. • • :- - . _ . .. . . _e_a_'_ scue=e =, ct`ce above) . �:�Ta .�.._. .._.. _ _. _ .... - • - - 1 2 j -1 i "— 7., - ..- 3 . . ._ _•.••. . . . . . . . . . . . 1 176 -rIC __:: ' :- tural -t 345 • • 1r V • L• otVd.,NfJ1N. .1...----- iv;,,.�,1( u . • . si•JI,:...'Cl.............,•••••'".".... -• !I r . ' .r4 .r ti .11 1 ~ — _ -• '' r ,ter'l c' I"0",I''� '.ii(irr+�(\ \ /•\ 1 . ti/ x 1- I I 1 i • I � iiII' I 1' CJ5 •-./ `. 1 ; , ! ! -- UIII(1I([I111Il 1 1 : I ! H 1- I. -'1 II I::11 NMI limi ,:.,, „.-„ ,=--__.:7_.- , , i , , ,, .. .. 1 ,..), ,, ,i _ -1 '. — — — -- V_ II I/ ,• ' I I ;, iLI'tI1t ;' 1 1r—1 • I :-- -- �r TiTIfrFf�-I1 ii a-t L!J : I I I I.I ' AIL' C1L:_ITI i I IT-1 I '' [ • .ILL1u.i_I..i_l..l.l_11_II i. V - • i I• -1_ ' -1—_4= �i. •i, '— :��c- '! .`I'nc.�•: { �• i _ �"1 �_� • -- HI —�� �—'• -- I .= ::•O '•l.,l_•: 4• '• �i•1y.1- .f ..1.11 • TL r r ! 1 ��• �'1.� 1i - 1}• ,I1/�11, { �c'Ili'it;:r- i. 4...f :ti,V!::,l ,i-,..-t:jr•'. t •: I i i ! =i 7C I 1-. 1 h .. ;.• 1�! ` I1.1-11-111.111. -1� FSi1r� �}}I11fti�=: �' :�fl!y�? ';:'' ` IIIITt� jl!! 111 � —i• r�'C • II • Ulf-•_1 — r�tt•`t:;F?'."'4'4: �.i;',,l4.lrt� rt":i t , ! r _r Iv - {I ,— 5p.S t•i', .1 �3+� ��if i i •'rl LI�_ fi • DhIHI)iflhIIIIIIH+IH!t[i = - — ` —j' _ 1[-13di:'�ki�1:Sll: +r i• 7,...;�!';�i 1 •1. '' I . i ~IlEli'l ! \ 11111 I 1 MIilir -.i.. N•it1,.`'., y'— 1 • ! ( iI �I y\ _ O •t•r"'� . .1.V;'•r;;• itfi_ilintr -1) � IIIII IiNIIIIIiNIE l .�_ . _ _ z i ljsl' ;�;'.} f ;r�':fHJr{K;f ''tcflr,F—!/ i_it i .% - m ' - -�-- =—ill.:,.'-.. ,% II II11I III11.1I IIIILII1111111 i1 • 1• -_ � -- � L:1: : .' .t I i � i 1 1_ 1--11!l=-1 r-1 cis• : ci,-, i 4' i I, __ - _._ .;_1.1_-_— _-- -_1 —N _! [1CIIIIII iI��11IiIIIIIIi11rI-111 1 ! /' �� o = _ • �_= _ _• _ � C]1ICIf�I �lIINIIIIIIIINI�I�.� I co \ < ij___:=-- - _ -_',=_"' iIIIiIiHJMJIIIIIIII )_ Till ° • f ' • _ , . , _ i --1i !__ � ,I: i r97__, CI-: < <! , [F1[11111 III" m:! ; . - _ ! - _ - — i C, _ . f. I t---I-- - i [l ;�-- 1 - 1I ,•- - u1 . IIIIIII Ii I1IIINi IIII 1 !1 - LI • • _ iIII ) i-i - _1 - • ._ = __ - - , = = - ! - 1• _� -- I j.!iI LWnLLL1 LT • NIIIIIQ i__:_7_ Ill- - ! , . i [I --- —1----i 11----P. t i1 ; . _1 lilllif I1IIIIiil!111(,IlliffirJ - ' 1 -_ - K _ _1 1 of • _ •1.__--. � r � �I I I .i lllllllllllllllIoI J , L - 1300 EAST • b. Provide and show location for other buildings. c. Loading docks should be screened from 1300 East and Highland Drive view. 5 . Provision of handicapped parking spaces. 6 . Meet all of the circulation_ and transportation concerns of the city Transportation Engineering Division. Open Space 1 . Provision of landscaped front yard setbacks for 1300 East, the new connector street, and Highland Drive. 2 . Provision of island landscaped areas to break up the impact • of the hard surfaced parking areas . Refuse Collection Show locations and how they will be appropriately screened . RECOMMENDATIONS Rezoning Petition Considerations To rezone this area to a Commercial "C-3" classification would not be in accordance with the master plan. A commercial "C-3A' zone classification would be more appropriate. This district recuires a fifteen foot landscaped front yard setback, which would be equivalent to what the master plan calls for within the • commercial fringe areas . However , the Master Plan acknowledges the need for a new zoning designation. As a condition of the rezoning the city should require that the approved site plan meet the urban design criteria of the master plan. Specifically a determination as to the minimal landscapinc recuirements of parking areas . The development plans need to include provision of street trees . Provision of a holding zone of other properties within Phase II to ensure provision of future residential development should be considered . Street and Alley Closures Petition Considerations All of the existing streets and alleys should be closed excluding any necessary right of way needed for access to Interstate 80 . However , the developer should provide an appropriate right of way and improvements of a public connector street between Sugarmont Drive and 1300 East . , Recommendation t 11 The staff recommends that the Planning Commission convene the informal hearing on June 8 , 1989 to receive presentation of the development proposal from Clark Development, a staff review of the Master Plan considerations, and citizen input by receiving public comment on the development proposal. Clark Financial is presenting their development plan to, the Sugar House Community Council of June 7-, 1989. • The staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue the review of this proposal to their June 22nd meeting focusing on the site design considerations. At this meeting the Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council should be formulated. At the request of Clark Development the City Council has scheduled a July 11, 1.989 public hearing on these petitions . The staff will continue to prepare the final recommendations to • the Planning Commission for the June 22nd meeting. Based upon the present information and site plan, the staff can conclude that many of the critical design elements and development criteria of the master plans are not being followed. These critical planning. elements include: 1.' • Circulation No provision for east - west connector street. 2 . Building orientation and focus - The present site plan . apoears to be decentralizing the commercial growth within the Sugar House Business District. Retail use on_ Highland Drive between Ashton and Stringham Avenues should be rebuilt or retained , a parking lot with the back of the Shopko' building expose to Highland Drive view is not an acceptable urban design solution. • • 3 . Pedestrian Circulation - Not addressed in present site plan. The Planning Commission should consider how this would be accomplished within the Sugar House Business District if not included in the Phase III area such amenities need to be provided in the Phase II area . 4. Landscaped Setbacks - Request for Commercial C-3 zoning. Landscaping within parking lots. Streetscape design on 1300 East should respond to existing design on Highland Drive and 2100 South. • • Everett Joyce June 1989 APPLICATION FOR ZONING AMENDEMENT To be filed in duplicate with the department of Development Services 324 South State Street Suite #201 Filing Fee $100.00 • Advertising Fee* $100.00 (*if a public hearing is held) Application is hereby made to the Mayor and City Council of Salt Lake City Utah, to: Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance. By amending Section (Use reverse side for requested text change) • Amend the Erse District (Zoning) Map. Of Salt Lake City by reclassifying - • the following property located at: from Simpson Avenue to Interstate 80 and from Highland Drive to 1300 East R-2 and from a C-1 classification to a C-3 classification (Use reverse side for legal description) ATTAal TO APPLICATION 1. The reasons why the, present zoninc is rot proper for the area. Changes which have taken place ini the area which justify a chance in =inc. 3. Description cf the propose._ use to be made of the property. 4. Other items which justify a chance in the existing zoning. . 5 . Indication of support for rezoning from all affected property owners. 6. Any other information cr exhibits which would aid the planning Commission in arriving at a proper'recommendation. 7. Sidw•ell Parcel Identification Na ber. 'llir; ABOVE D ORMATICN, IN DETAIL, MST ACCCMPANY THIS APPLICATION IN ORDER FOR THE PETIT'ICN TO BE PROPEZLY CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING COWISSION. Signature of the applicant Z.()¢.z'� --C. r • - Address 21 44 Hi gh1 and nrive, St200 / Salt Lake City, UT Telephone Nurrioer 485-2321 Zip Code 84106 FILL CUT REVERSE SIDE Attach all exhibits and supporting data to application.. Petition No. �(V)- ,3/ Date ( II1 'I 9 Receipt No. ,50. 3 5- Arrcurt $ /(v7.(7f ... 0....c cni.4 u! EJou-aLSCtJ A4aaCOad ;o ucrpdTazsap Ieoa'' ._.. .a- t --. ..4. —_ a'. ��'.-. .-Z -r. fir`:'tt. ,!. ` ~4 -;7,-,. _ :. .• iA`.-`A .-•.;s:_.7�- i • �s'}�. •:7' - .- '," ,'!;.gal T•F'r� f" . `?'-ss"b .r- f-c-:tt r „• _ :e .' :'.-".t +i � �f:�y� s�'y ¢r.i *s`e'°'v`: •'�::.s- t i<: '?4•r'. Y-.�ii-.t__- - :.� _i:._.�'; ++Ye- �.5+:... .:_. _..� max•:..n.� 'c _ }i.;_ - _:..vir;: JOSTIFICATION'FOR : fikr` z ? i -- - .-: - 4. = APPLICATION FOR ZONING AMENDMENT - " _`"-- "' -=': `°`'"i"� ` - •I- _ -'4-= Yam: ^ •-- __ .�x � :"r� .. ,. s a bR.;:-n. ...ass' _.. ._ i r y, _ _- -- _ ..,... ,. - _ �.....-. ... "': ._ - - - - ter-_... The area for which re-zoningis q —"� requested (the area between Simpson Avenue and Interstate 80 and between Highland Drive --_ and 1300 East) was once a viable residential neighborhood. - However, when Interstate 80 divided it from the rest of the residential neighborhood to the south , it became an island, , bounded on the north and west by commercial uses, on the east by a major arterial (1300 East) , which carries 37,000 cars per day, and on the south by an interstate highway (Interstate 80) , which carries 74,000 cars per day. During the period since the construction of Interstate 80 the neighborhood has gradually but steadily declined to the extent that it is no longer a viable residential area. Banks have red-lined the area making it impossible to obtain financing to acquire or improve the existing homes. Vandals have stripped electrical panels and wiring from some of the vacant homes and have broken windows, knocked holes in . interior walls and even burned others. Approximately eighty-six percent (85. 5%) of the land for which re-zoning has been requested is owned by Salt Lake City Corporation and Clark Financial Corporation. Additionally, almost one-fourth (22. 5%) of the land is used as a parking lot serving the retail center north of Simpson Avenue. Re-zoning the property will permit it to be put to its highest-and-best use, a retail shopping center. It will also put a halt to the continuing decline of the existing residential area and will substantially revitalize the Sugar House business district, upgrading the quality of retail tenants in the area, increasing sales tax revenues to Salt Lake City and raising property values. Clark Financial Corporation A Professional Financial and Investment Consulting Firm • May '5, 1989 Mayor Palmer DePaulis 324 South State Street Third Floor Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Dear Mayor DePaulis: Clark Financial Corporation hereby requests that Salt Lake City Corporation vacate the following streets and alleys: (1 ) Simpson Avenue, from Highland Drive to 1300 East (2) Stringham Avenue, from the eastern boundary of Bond Floral to 1300 East (3) Ashton Avenue , from Highland Drive to 1300 East (4 ) All of the publicly-owned alleys in the area bounded by Highland Drive and 1300 East and by Simpson Avenue and Interstate 80 The above vacations together with the re-zoning which has also been applied for , would result in construction of 165, 000 square feet of new retail space in Sugar House as well as rehabilitation of 120,000 square feet of existing retail space (see attached site plan -. S ' cerely, Jame A. McGuire, Devel pment Director JAMCG:vp 2144 South Highland Drive, Suite 200 Salt Lake City, Utah 84106-2807 (801) 485-2321 FAX 467-1505- SLACC �Py�E ASSOc,�� 324 So. State Street cry Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Telephone(801)535-7915 COS 4 MUNITY GO MEMORANDUM DATE: May 11, 1989 Redevelopment Agency F%M: Salt Lake Association of Comrunity Councils ( SLACC ) SUBJECT: Shopko The SLACC Board in its May 10, 1989 meeting voted unanimously to support the Sugar House Community Council vote taken at their May 3. 1989 meeting to support the Sugar House Master Plan. SLACC opposes any proposals which would be contrary to the Sugar House Master Plan, i.e. , Shopko. 4_,JA )) cavN Cm-ca bu-J- 4-D cLA . < FINANCIAL i ,\ . '`.-t- :. r i,.. t_ . ' )fe 7, -1 , ) dli 1 cxr c- s? ., -'„ . -1 , ' ,..-,. I u c Ili( (1 i . ._ , . , ( - r . , i ' , I , : . 6. - , .. I, '/ ‘ ) r , . (4, ' 0, i':e. .0/- e. .. • 0 ,:„0, , . 0 . 7 1 •-1 U e: ''' 't / A- "P.oir of if 6.4:1 -tqk -, it.,-- t(„0 1.c i-_,,-) i,, .... , .- .: , -1A.vrec 4 4-1„., f 0 ti 1(- LI q 1,-11t)Ce4;;ci - ita(S ' '1' ( -c ,....r .,•- t ( , (,),-) - • .,• Regarding Petition 400-731, the administration recommends the approval of the rezoning to Commercial "C-3A" subject to the following: 1. The proposed development shall be processed as a Commercial Planned • Unit Development, and obtain approval from both the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment. 2. The rezoning of the properties shall only become effective once the building permits are in order and ready to be issued. 3. That the Planning Commission be requested to hold an informal hearing to recommend a six month moratorium on commercial development within the area along Parley's Creek that is master planned for Residential Mixed Use and the mixed use area north of Parley's Crock. During this time, the planning commission, property owners, and business community will develop a proper zoning district to regulate new development assuring residential opportunities. 4. The petitioner provide a public open space element for pedestrian and bicycle circulation connecting Fairmont Park/ Elizabeth Sherman Parkway/ Sugarhouse Park/ 1200 East/ Parley's Creek. The open space connecting element shall consist of a space not less than 8 feet wide and contain elements of pedestrian amenities such as trees, benches, lights, etc. designed in a theme consistent with the Sugar House Beautification Project. 5. Construction of Wilmington Avenue similar as designed in Alternative 1 of the "Parking and Circulation Study". The design speed is recommended to be lowered to 25 mph. The City should participate with the costs of these improvements. Various options for the construction and funding should be explored with the administration. CRAIG E. PETERSON SALIr 1Cair((W T JJ tI;Ogj DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 218 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 1 TELEPHONE 535-7777 MEMORANDUM TO: Salt Lake City Council FROM: Craig Peterson° RE: Shopko Developmen in Sugar House DA1't: July 10, 1989 • Attached please find the Planning Commission's recommendation regarding the Shopko Development in the Sugar House Area. sigr A) a0;cal _rIogi ALLEN C. JOHNSON, AICP - PLANNING AND ZONING PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMISSION MEMBERS, W IL LIAM T. WRIGHT, AICP COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RALPH BECKER DEPUTY DIRECTOR PLANNING DIVISION - DAN BETHEL SUPERVISOR LONG RANGE PLANNING Planning and Zoning Commission CINDY CROMER AND URBAN DESIGN THOMAS A. ELLISON SANDRA MARLER 451 SOUTH STATE STREET. LAVONE LIDDLE-GAMONAL SECRETARY ROOM 406, CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING RICHARD J. HOWA RALPH P. NEILSON SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 GEORGE NICOLATUS TELEPHONE 535-7757 JOHN M. SCHUMANN July 10, 1989 Mr. Craig E. Peterson, Director Community & Economic Development Salt Lake City Corporation • Dear Craig: On Thursday July 6, 1989 the Planning Commission held a final informal hearing on Petitions 400-731 and 400-732 and concluded their review of the'Clark Development proposal for Sugar House Business District. Besides discussing the rezoning and development proposal on throe regular Planning Commission agendas, the Commission appointed a subcommittee which met four times to work with the developer on specific master plan and site plan issues. The proposal is complex; requiring Master Plan revisions, detailed site plan negotiations, and public financing commitments for infrastructure improvements. The Planning Commission concludes its review with a recommendation to the City Council to approve Petition 400-731 to rezone the requested properties from Commercial "C-1" and Residential "R-2" to Commercial "C-3A" with specific conditions. This decision is based upon findings of fact that the proposed development with conditions, will further the implementation of the goals and policies of the Sugar House Master Plan and the Redevelopment Plan as amended. The Planning Commission believes the conditions placed upon the rezoning action are critical in order to assure compliance with the necessary public infrastructure improvements, urban design policies, and site planning standards. The detailed findings of fact and conditions of rezoning are listed later in this letter. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council to act upon Petition 400-732 by "closing" (not vacating) the public streets and alleys requested and sell or trade the property at fair market value. The City should allow Clark Development first rights to purchase the property for land assembly reasons. The "closure" of the public property is consistent with existing City policy and the policy contained in the Sugar House Master Plan. The revenue generated from the sale needs to be used to finance public infrastructure improvements necessary to implement this development proposal. Craig F. Peterson July 10, 1989 Page 2 The Planning Commission concludes their review of the proposed Clark Development "Sugar House Center" with the following findings of fact to support its recommendation. MARKET CHANGES AND PHASING Absent the present interest of Shopko, no evidence has been submitted to substantiate a market change within the Business District. Shopko will compete within the existing community or regional market. This destination retailer will draw additional shoppers to the Sugar House Business District. However, other existing retailers within the exiting market (i.e. Brickyard, K-Mart, Fred Meyer, etc. ) will probably experience a decline in their market. The Planning Commission recognizes the development of Shopko as simply a market opportunity to provide an additional "community level" retail shopping opportunity for the Sugar House Business District. Along with Shopko, Clark Development will provide additional "speculative" retail space and renovate the existing retail strip center along Simpson Avenue. The additional retail space and the renovation of existing space would not be viable without Shopko. The Sugar House Redevelopment Plan established development to occur in three phases. In Phases I and II development activities have increased in recent years. Some properties are redeveloping and others are postured for new development. Opportunities to develop Phase II might actually be enhanced by the Shopko project, but Phase II development potential could be hurt by a Phase III development unless conditions are imposed that would mitigate potential adverse consequences. The impact (positive or negative) upon Phase I is difficult to determine; however, the Commission finds that Phase I is acting "independent" of what may occur in Phase III. The "McIntyre" property on the southeast corner of 2100 South and Highland Dr. is the critical development site for the success of Phase II, which will link the Shopko site to the Monument area. Pedestrian, auto and visual linkages and other design issues betwccn the two sites are absolutely essential to assure that Shopko and other Phase III "spec" uses complement the existing Sugar House Business District. The resolution of internal and external circulation issues raised by the Shopko development and infrastructure requirements are critical to the balanced, desirable development of Sugar House. TRANSPORTATION, CIRCULATION & INCRASTRUCIURE Evidence submitted in the "Sugar House Business District Parking and Circulation Study" prepared for the Redevelopment Agency supports the development of an east west collector street between 900 East and 1300 East Streets. Four alternative methods of constructing the road are analyzed. Craig F. Peterson July 10, 1989 Page 3 Additional traffic analysis was prepared in the "Sugar House Center- Traffic impact Analysis" June 1989. The same consultant prepared both studies. Evidence in this traffic analysis supports the recommendations of the earlier study to provide for the necessary east west collector circulation system to support development of this area. The Planning Commission finds that an east west collector street is imperative. Without this improved roadway, the circulation system will be caused to fail as a result of the additional traffic generated by this development proposal. The Planning Commission supports Alternative 1: Wilmington Avenue to Sugarmont connection. The development of 1200 East Street is necessary to connect 2100 South with the project site. The creation of 1200 East will also necessitate the immediate cleanup of the Parley's Crock area which is located on city property. The Sugar House Master Plan identifies the need to connect Fairmont Park with • Sugar House Park through the Business District. An open space pedestrian element must be designed through this project site to implement that necessary goal. A pedestrian connection through a "promenade" as identified in the WestPlan report is still valid and the opportunity for this connection must be developed within this project. • The development of this project without the identified infrastructure improvements is unacceptable. To aid in the costs of those improvements, the city should participate by using property tax increment financing, revenues generated from the sale of city property, and other public financing resources. All public financial incentives directed to this project should be focused on infrastructure improvements to benefit not only the developer but the entire Sugar House Business District in accordance with the Master Plan. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES The Master Plan places a high emphasis on development of new housing in the Sugar House Business District. The location of that housing was refined in the WestPlan and Redevelopment Plans to the Parley's Crock area. Because this project will remove 37 housing units, the Planning Commission finds that now is the time to begin the implementation of detailed planning to assure residential development along Parley's Creek. The City must develop a new Residential Host Mixed Use zoning district and develop a financing strategy to clean up and develop Parley's Creek. In order to assure appropriate development of this area during the planning phase, a moratorium or downzoning of the property is recommended. Housing will not be viable without the financial involvement of the City. A market analysis for housing in a mixed use context should proceed in the immediate future to provide critical information as zoning and financing issues are addressed. Craig E. Peterson July 10, 1989 Page 4 THE FINANCIAL VIABILITY OF REDEVELOPMENT AS A PINING 'FOOL The present philosophy of returning all increment tax monies generated to a developer impairs the ability of the City to provide public infrastructure improvements necessary to support individual projects that benefit all of the Sugar House Business District and their shoppers. That philosophy contradicts the development objective of the Redevelopment Plan to "provide improved public strccts and road access to the area to facilitate better traffic circulation and reduce traffic hazards" . In order to implement the Master Plan and Redevelopment Plan, property tax increment financing should be used to offset the cost of the public infrastructure improvements required as a result of the Shopko development. Redevelopment activity in Phases I & II are generating little if any tax increment for the RDA Project Area. Additional public financing strategies will need to be developed if the City is to successfully implement the Redevelopment Plan. One such strategy would be a traffic impact fcc to apportion costs of major roadway improvements to benefited properties as they develop. IMPACT UPON DOWNTOWN MASER PLAN The development of Phase III in a "community scale power center" is complimentary with the Sugar House Master Plan as amended, the Downtown Master Plan and the Salt Lake City Urban Design Element. The scale, mass and height of the proposed development is consistent with Salt Lake City Master Plans prepared by the Planning ColTunlssion. DETAILED SITE PLANNING ISSUES The "Sugar House Center" must be developed as a whole project. The Shopko development will not perform unless the Simpson Avenue strip center is renovated and the additional "spec" retail space is developed simultaneously to assure a positive contribution to the Sugar House Business District. Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that the project shall be developed through a "Commercial Planned Unit Development". This will assure compliance with detailed site design guidelines of the Sugar House Master Plan and will resolve issues and problems with the site plan as proposed, such as internal circulation, the west elevation of the Shopko store, the perspective of the center from Highland Drive and landscaping issues. Craig F. Peterson July 10, 1989 Page 5 Based upon these Findings of Fact, the Planning Commission recommends the approval of the rezoning to Commercial "C-3A" and the closure of public streets and alleys subject to the following conditions. Master Plan Conditions: 1. The City amend the Phasing Schedule of the Redevelopment Plan to allow development of Phase III to proceed by recognizing the Shopko project as a market opportunity to provide a "Community level" retail shopping opportunity for the Sugar House Business District south of Simpson Avenue. 2. The proposed development shall be processed as a Commercial Planned Unit Development and obtain approval from both the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment. 3. The rezoning of the properties shall only become effective once the Planning Director has certified to the Mayor that all conditions of approval are met and building permits are in order and ready to be issued. 4. Additionally it is also recommended that the City Council; Place a six month moratorium on commercial development within the area along Parley's Crock that is master planned for Residential Host Mixed Use and the mixed use area north of Parley's Crock. During this time, the City, property owners and the Business Community will develop a proper zoning district to regulate new development assuring residential opportunities. The City develop a public financing strategy to clean up and improve Parley's Crock Corridor with amenities to support a residential development. Site Design Conditions are based upon review of the submitted site plan at the July 6th Planning Commission meeting: 1. Orient the Shopko building to the north with loading docks on the south along the freeway. Orient the north end of building "J" to align with the promenade between buildings "K" and "L" and parallel with Highland Drive. 2. Provide additional landscaping along the freeway to screen the loading docks. 3. Design the 1300 East entry across from I-80 with deceleration lane and design depth and width that meets UWT and City Transportation standards. Design both Highland Drive and 1300 East entrances as gateways enhanced with landscaping features. 561J//,p " / ?%//24e/d/ Craig E. Peterson /r��il., . Y July 10, 1989 (Y Page 6 ke6d 12,01, 74. 4: Ind 4 / 4.&/, 4. Provide a 24 foot aisle width for internal circulation connecting 1300 East with Highland Drive aligned with'Simpson Avenue / I-80 off ramp. ty� Provide a 24 foot aisle width which connects Wilmington Avenue with the nl(ei ' center of the Shopko site. Alignment with 1200 East is referred. 4iI �k' platy G 5choman- 1u5+ � 'Ib wrk. - ,pg am 6. Landscape all parking lots to a standard of 18 square feet per parking 1 stall and one tree per six parking stalls. _ (DL wI p1 n it _ �3 (,()tak GUT. cne 7. Final project landscape plan must be approved by the Planning Director. ,g 8. Provide a public open space element for pedestrian and bicycle circulation Wconnecting Fairmont Park / Elizabeth Sherman Parkway / Sugar House Park / m , - 1200 East / Parley's Creek. The open space connecting element shall consist of a space not less than 8 feet wide and contain elements of pedestrian amenities- such as trees, benches-, lights, etc. designed in a theme consistent with the Sugar House Beautification Project. These elements will need final approval by the Planning Director. 9. Provide for the miti-gation of adverse impacts of the Shopko building height and the impact on the back of all new buildings on Highland Drive through landscaping, terracing and,Ladjusting' the Shopko building pad to the east and south. ` K • I K�� oCcel` td ('ieWh' 10 Construction of Wilmington Avenue as designed in Alternative 1 of the m` "Parking and Circulation Study". The design speed is recommended to be 04AEVA lowered to 25 mph. Explore the option to phase the regrading of �I��n�� �,L,l�L Wilmington with the development of Pad "A". The City should participate 1` with the costs of these improvements with property tax increment 16 cowl financing, the revenue generated from the sale of city owned property and possibly a loan from the "UDAG" repayment account. Clark Financial Corporation shall exchange property for the 1200 East -D Street dedication for city owned property south of Simpson Avenue. The cxoner>ily exchange should be value for value. _ �hnln�j62m01. 12. Developer shall donate any/all viable housing structures for relocation to UJani. other sites. No interior demolition or salvage rights shall be retained Gtearlq sfair) by the owner unless the city determines that relocation is not viable. Thal L( ((CO re k ctzbn (6.3-15. -r /AVdio -6012, &in- p,d-Ok. - bK . The Planning Commission and staff believe this project, if developed with these conditions, will strengthen the Sugar House Business District. The conditions imposed are not insurmountable and wherever public infrastructure improvements are warranted, the Commission recommends a public financing option to help offset the costs. In other development situations elsewhere in the City, the developer provides those infrastructure improvements generally without public participation. Because this is a Redevelopment Project Area, the Planning Commission supports using certain public funds to assist in the construction of necessary infrastructure. 10 art ( 1 cit( fur Planwe6 *5 Can be -0-041&Q • Craig E. Peterson July 10, 1989 Page 7 Attached you will find copies of three staff reports and minutes of the Planning Commission meetings that have been transcribed. If you have any questions concerning this complex recommendation, please call upon John Schumann, Allen Johnson or Bill Wright. Respectfully submitted, A -,?14flegAge) so‘h, /e.id/Mae/ I Allen C. Johnson AICP John M. Schumann Planning Director Planning Commission Chairman attachments ACJ:WIW cc: Planning Conunissioners Petitioner Mayor's office Incentive Review Committee Buzz Hunt, City Treasurer file I. SYNOPSIS OF CLARK FINANCIAL PROPOSAL A. Proposed Development Proposed project includes approximately 17 acres in the southern Sugar House area bounded by Simpson Avenue, 13th East, Interstate 80 and Highland Drive. The proposed development is anchored by a new Shopko retail outlet, other new retail space, and remodelling and renovation of existing strip mall space along Simpson Avenue. In total, the project includes approximately 350,000 square feet of space, consisting of the following: -- Shopko 100,000 square feet -- New retail space 60,000 square feet -- Restaurants 15,000 square feet -- Grocery store 55,000 square feet -- Remodeled (existing) retail space 120,000 square feet Total 350,000 square feet The project also anticipates future development of approximately 150,000 square feet of additional retail and office space on the site, as market conditions warrant. B. Benefits of Project According to the Clark proposal, approximately 250 new full time jobs and 250 part time jobs will be created by the project, assuming full occupancy of new and remodeled space. Over 98% of these jobs will be filled locally. Nearly all of the jobs, however, will likely be lower-paying retail and service oriented employment. In terms of City tax revenues, the Clark proposal claims the development will generate $51,840,000 in taxable retail soleB, representing a gain of $40,640,000 over current sales of existing stores on the site (current sales are $11,200,(10p) . According to the Clark proposal, these increases in taxable sales Will generate $250,000 in sales tax revenues. In addition, the Clark proposal claims the project will increase business licensing revenues by roughly $8,800 per year. The Shopko anchor and related retail, restaurant and grocery store development envisioned in the Clark proposal may serve to rejuvenate the Sugar House business district, a well-established but declining community-scale business area. C. Requests of City Participation The proposal requests substantial participation, and in some instances, unprecedented subsidies fiuu the City. These requests include the following: ° Approval of Owaxtpre front Sugar House Master Play, objectives; 'U o Rezoning of site from Residential "R-2" and Commercial "R-2" and Commercial "C-1" to more permissive Commercial "C-3" o Vacating public azwts and alleys on proposed site, totalling 245,000 square feet/ and contributing the property valued at approximately $2,571,000; o Approval of $830,000 in property tax increment fran the Redevelopment Agency; o Conversion of existing UDAG loan ($2.4 million over 22 years) to a grant, valued at $900,000 net present value; o Subsidy of $1,750,000 in "Economic Development Finds," consisting of "sales tax increment" for next 20 yers; and o Issuance of bonds via .Municipn1 Building Authority to capitalize $1,750,000 Economic Development Fund, repaid by sales taxes (annual appropriation) over 20 years, debt service payments of approximately $240,000 per year. II. POLICY ISSUES A. Planning and Zoning Considerations and Infrastructure Issues 1. Sugar House Master Plan Planning and Zoning Commission and staff are currently reviewing the Clark proposal, and response will be submitted under separate cover. 2. Infrastructure Requirements Infrastructure requirements identified include: o Roadway improvements; -- East/West Connector Street frcan 900 East to 1300 East with 1200 East connection; -- Preferred alternative (Alternative 4 of Sugar House Business District Parking and Circulation Study) estimated construction cost of $9,183,000); o Traffic control improvements; o Pedestrian and bicycle access improvements; -- Estimated construction cost of $729,000; o Customer and public pnrking improvements; -- Estimated construction cost of $2,968,000; o Additional fire protection improvements; o Improvements to water supply system grid; and B. Financial Incentives o (Excluding $830,000 property tax increment which has been tentatively approved by the RDA. ) 1. Contribution of City Property One of the two petitions currently before the Planning and Zoning Commission (Petition 400-732) request the City to vacate public (City-owned) streets and alleys, including the following: o Streets -- Simpson Avenue 87,500 square feet -- Stringham Avenue 64,700 square feet -- Ashton Avenue 55,200 square feet -- Subtotal 207,400 square feet o Alleys -- North 19,200 square feet -- South 18,300 square feet -- Subtotal 37,500 square feet o Total City property = 244,900 square feet Appraisal estimates of land value in this area by David Van Drinmilen, MAI and Tod Jones Appraisers is $10.50 per square foot. Thus, approximate market value of requested property is $2,571,000. As to the question of disposing of City property, the City Attorney's Office issued a letter of opinion June 22, 1989, answering two relevant questions: o "The City is permitted under state law to transfer its interest to whomever may be abutting property owners in the subdivision by vacating the street; and o "The City has long maintained a policy, adopted by the Council, that in a commercial context the City does not usually vacate streets. Instead, the City "closes" the street while specifically retaining title thereto. The City's interest is generally then sold for an appraised fair market value or other equivalent consideration. " 2. Conversion of UDAG Loan to Grant Clark Proposal requests that the City convert an existing UDAG loan to a grant. The existing loan is $1,150,000 at 8.5% interest over 22 years. Annual debt service payments are approximately 110,000 per year, and principal and interest over the life of the loan exceeds $2.4 million: Clark requests to capture the full income stream from the repayments of the Parkview UDAG to supplement the Sugar House project. The "new present value" of future income stream (loan repayments) discounted at 11% is $900,000. Hence, the Clark proposal suggests that conversion of the loan to a grant is equivalent to a $900,000 City subsidy, which is $250,000 less than the principal amount of the original UDAG loan. Thus far, City policy on UDAG loan .repayments is to use that income stream to form an "Economic Opportunity Revolving Loan Fund. " The Economic Opportunity Fund is administered by the Capital Planning Division of Development Services. Decisions on loan awards are to be made by the "Incentive Review Committee" consisting of representatives fzcau various City departments, including Council Office, Mayor's Office, Finance and Development Service. Criteria used in ranking Economic Opportunity Fund applications include the following: o Location and type of project; o Net impact on City tax structures;, o Total new jobs created; o Percent low/moderate income jobs; o Economic Opportunity Fund dollars per new job; o Leverage ratio of Economic Opportunity Fund to other project dollars; and, o Contribution to the physical and social welfare of the City. Annual revenues to the Economic Opportunity Fund fiem the three existing UDAG loans (City Center, Warner and Parkview) is $460,000. The program conceived by the Incentive Review Committee would limit the maximum amount of any one loan award to $75,000 per fiscal quarter. However, awards for several consecutive quarters could be considered for projects of extraordinary merit. Hence, the maximum award under the incentive program would be $300,000 in any one year. The Incentive Review Committee met on June 8 and again on June 15 to review the Clark proposal. On the second meeting, the Committee unanimously voted to recommend the following: o Program guidelines, policies and decision-making criteria should be retained to optimize the economic development potential of UDAG repayment funds; o Rather than lose the $2.4 million benefit of the Parkview UDAG over 22 years as proposed, Clark Financial should submit a request for Economic Opportunity Fund award from the general pool within the parameters of established pivyiam guidelines; and, o Sales tax increment should not be used as an economic development incentive, but should be retained in the general fund as a critically important source of general fund revenue. 3. Sales Tax Increment The Clark proposal requests that the City make an up-front cash investment of $1,750,000 into the project with what the proposal calls "Economic Development Funds. " The proposal suggests issuing lease revenue bonds via the Municipal Building Authority over 20 years to be repaid by increased sales tax revenues generated by the project (or, in other words, "sales tax increment") . "Sales tax increment" is defined as net additions to sales caused solely by the new development. It is "net" because total gross sales are discounted for taxable sales that are already occurring within the City or would otherwise occur within the City without the new Sugar House development. In response to the proposal, the Finance Department has performed the following tasks: o Reviewed Clark forecasts and compared them with other sources, including feasibility study commissioned by Clark Financial; o Prepared independent sales forecasts based on State Tax Commission and City data base; o Determined extent to which gross sales are to be adjusted to properly discount existing or redistributed sales (again, using feasibility study analysis commissioned by Clark) ; o calculated "sales tax increment" for both Clark sales forecasts and Finance Department forecasts; o Calculated sales tax revenues generated by the increment by running sales tax increment calculations through the state mandated "point of sale vs. population" distribution formula; and, o Analyzed bonding requirements, cost of issuance, and debt service schedules for an MBA lease revenue bond necessary to capitalize a $1,750,000 construction fund at 8.5% interest over 20 years. The results of these tasks are summarized as follows: Clark Forecasts City Forecasts Gross Taxable Sales $51,840,000 $39,138,000 Sales Incrnt 24,112,322 16,860,176 Tax Revenue 1990 173,982 121,654 1994 129,952 90,867 1999 132,015 92,309 2004 132,015 92,309 2009 132,015 92,309 Total Revenue (20 Years) 2,730,206 1,909,055 Net Present Value $1,128,456 $789,054 Surplus/(Deficit) ($1,356,509) ($2,177,660) Net present value calculations of the future revenue generated by sales tax increment is ti$l,128,000 using Clark forecasts, and $789,000 using City s . This suggests that future revenues could only support a bond issue half the size proposed by Clark using Clark forecast, and only about one-third of the Clark proposal using Finance forecasts Using Clark forecasts the City would incur over $1.3 million in deficits. Using Finance forecasts, the defici. s would approach $2.2 million. It should be added that all risks associated with the financing would be borne on the City. If, for example, Clark was unable to fully lease all developed and remodelled space, taxable sales would obviously decline, and the City would incur larger deficits. It should further be emphasized that the City's sales tax revenues are extremely vulnerable and are certain to face steady decline throughout the first half of the 1990s. Changes it the distribution formula mandated by existing law will result in a 25.3% decrease over a five year period, unless offset by future growth. 4. Use of Municipal Building Authority to Bond for City Participation Chapman and Cutler, who serves as bond counsel for the City's Municipal Building Authority, was asked to review legal aspects pertaining to the Clark Financial proposal for City participation. In brief, Chapman and Cutler's conclusions consist of the following: ° The proposal appears unconstitutional because it violates the constitutional prohibition of "lending of credit" contained .sin Section 29, Article VI of the Utah Constitution; ° The proposal appears to violate the "public purpose" doctrine of municipal law; o The proposal appears to violate Title 10 of the Utah Code which authorizes the .City to issue debt because the purpose of the debt is to principally benefit one or a limited number of private enterprises; o Title to property and improvements financed by City debt poses irreconcilable conflicts between City bondholders and Clark Financial and/or Shopko private lenders ,(both City bondholders and private lenders would want the same collateral as security for their respective loans) ; • The proposal would not allow the City to issue tax.-exempt debt as it would violate the "private activity" test of Federal tax law; and, o The City financing and requirements of the bondholders trustee are mutually incompatible with lender requirements to be placed on Clark Financial and/or Shopko, rendering the City's bond unmarketable or an inability of Clark Financial and/or Shopko to secure a lender. III. POLICY OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Planning and Zoning and Infrastructure 1. Master Plan Considerations Planning and Zoning Commission and staff are currently reviewing the Clark proposal, and will submit their response under separrate cover. 2. Infrastructure Needs Infrastructure needs include roadway improvements, traffic controls, pedestrian and bicycle access improvements, parking, fire protection improvements, and improvements to water supply system grid. These needs could exceed $14 million (roadway improvements alone could cost $9.2 million) . Currently, there is no plan to finance these infrastructure needs. The Clark proposal, as currently planned, does not allow for an East/Wrest Connector Street with 1200 East connection. Traffic congestion is a significant concern of Transportation Division of Public Works. Congestion could also permanently stymie development of Phases I and II of the Master Plan. The following position is therefore recommended: o Support Transportation Engineering's s efforts to resolve both off-site and on-site circulation problems, including pedestrian/bicycle circulation; o Support efforts by which both the City and developer could jointly share costs of infrastructure astructure improvements; o Oppose any plan in which the developer does not share responsibility in financing infrastructure; o Oppose any plan in which City revenues ger eratPi by the project (e.g., property tax increment, sales tax increment, etc. ) could not be available to first fund infrastructure needs; and, o Prevent final approval of project until mutually acceptable infrastructure plan is in place. B. Financial Incentives Issues 1. Property Management The following position is recommended: o Support continuation of existing policy to dispose of City-owned land at fair market value or equivalent considerations. 2. UDAG Loan The following position is recommended: o Suppart motions of Incentive Review Conmittm; and, o Encourage Clark Financ i a 1 to apply for incentive itive award tinder established program guidelines. 3. Sales Tax Increment The following position is recommended: o Oppose use of sales tax revenues (or sales tax increment) as an economic developue it incentive. Supporting rationale includes the following: o Sales tax revenues constitute 26.4% of general fund revenues and is therefore the second most significant source of general fund revenues which are vital in providing ha s is municipal services. o Sales tax revenues are already very vulnerable herause existing State law which specifies a "point of sale vs. population" distribution stri txrti on formula will result in serious reductions in City sales tax receipts. Over the first 5 years of the 1990's, City sales taxes will be reduced by 25.3%, resulting in a cumulative loss of general find revenue of more than $5 mi l l i on unless offset by growth in taxable sales. o Sales taxes are also vulnerable to cyclical oscillations in the local economy. During economic downturns, taxable sales normally go down, resulting in revenue shortfalls. • As a practical matter, "sales tax i nc-r it" is extremely y difficult (if not impossible) to measure. Unlike property tax increment which is fairly straightforward, sa 1 es tax increment requires estimation of existing and/or redistributed sales which is further ccmplicated if these estimations are made over time herause of cyclical fluctuations in the economy. • Use of sales tax is constrained from a legal standpoint since any multi--year ccarmiUiiiits would likely violate both State law and Utah Constitution. 4. Bonding via Municipal Building Authority The following position is recommended: • Oppose use of Municipal Building Authority bending approach based on review and advise of bond counsel indicating significant state and federal law as well as state constitu- tional problems. BH/kh dte6ci Pitefor- . . . . 0 -Oind Os( - Nah 0/41- (7(,,d.. .01oinaZ - O(r)7?Ca . 6v -- /' m, (friodz:. /- bitke ace ail .y.60//7r ift, #filowpaiAt - il 5(h_ ‘od, /146N-;14°`' luldj- tatfkbatatiteo ddefo t846 Agra ,, 17-z/ivi ocz A, Taiy /InAp-)41-.. / ovrici .t, e_ , 1/1 0 9 - docou v, ,B. UMls fi- Pleilt 90ne,CICY, cYX D. lletA.41 5CoP F) y6cra- K 7-Syt1-Lo qtaki- u>. doak, - NILS 07l4,4 aWilinic aqa 7h.' � til I�u�� e5olurlo� ��D- lk'1� '�ryl(m � - Low,. fnsk�d °a �irG� AC: UQCG {7;�r� � Claspi� l7t�fl`l - nvr boclOD '6-tort_ la`65 '6,506-65K - &MIN 1?A,caq n plu��dbe� l�� ROGER F. CUTLER S'- 'H FAKE CITY(C_1<PV =1111,0 I ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS CITY ATTORNEY �.► RAY L. MONTGOMERY STEVEN W. ALLRED LAW DEPARTMENT GREG R. HAWKINS LARRY V. SPENDLOVE DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING BRUCE R. BAIRD ' CHERYL D. LUKE 451 SOUTH STATE STREET. SUITE 505 FRANK M. NAKAMURA CITY PROSECUTOR SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 (801) 535-7788 ASSISTANT PROSECUTORS FAX (801) 535-7640 DONALD L. GEORGE CECELIA M. ESPENOZA • June 22, 1989 RICHARD G. HAMP GLEN A. COOK Mr. Everett L. Joyce Planning Division Salt Lake City Corporation 451 South State Street, Room 406 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Disposition of Sugar House Streets - Petition No. 400-732-89 Dear Everett: You have asked our office for an opinion concerning the potential disposition of the City's interest in three streets and two alley systems in the Sugar House area. Research has disclosed that the City acquired its interest in those streets in 1908 as part of the dedication of the Union Heights Subdivision. Answering your question involves two issues: 1. Can the City' s interest be transferred without compensation under state law? Pursuant to §10-8-8. 5, Utah Code Annotated, when the City vacates a public street which it has acquired by dedication, the property automatically reverts to the abutting property owner or owners in the Subdivisions See Sears v. Ogden City, 572 P.2d 1359 (Utah 1977 ) . Accordingly, since the City' s interest in these streets and alleys was acquired by dedication, the answer to the first question is that the City is permitted under state Law to transfer its interest to whomever may be the abutting ppop&rty owners in the subdivision by- vacating the street, 2. Would vacation and transfer without compensation be permissible under City policies? Mr. Everett L. Joyce Planning Division June 22, 1989 Page 2 The City has long maintained a policy, adopted by the Council, that in a commercial context the City does not usually vacate streets. Instead, the City "closes" the street while` specifically retaining title thereto. The City' s interest is gep,epAAlya then sold for an appraised fair market v°alte or other equivalent Consideration. Without resort to extensive citations, it suffices to say that the City can vary from its existing policy if the facts of any particular case justify' SUCTria deviation based on the publio intcreft. In the particular question presented by your letter, our office does not have from the record sufficient facts to allow us to determine whether or not there are sufficient reasons for varying from the existing policy. In the event that a determination is made to further consider transrrr5,ng the property by vacating the streets and alleys, we will, when appropriate, outline the factual investigation and determinations, which would need to be considered in varying from the established policy. If you have any further questions, please feel free to call. Sincere37 . ;3 CE R. BAIRD Assistant City Attorney BRB:pp PLANNNG AND ZONING CONSIDRAT ONS AND NRASTRCTJE ISSiS Regarding Petition 400-731, the administration recommends the approval of the rezoning to Commercial "C-3A" subject to the following: 1 . The proposed development shall be processed as a Commercial Planned Unit Development, and obtain approval from both the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustment. 2. The rezoning of the properties shall only become effective once the building permits are in order and ready to be issued. 3. That the Planning Commission be requested to hold an informal hearing to recommend a six month moratorium on commercial development within the area along Parley's Creek that is master planned for Residential Mixed Use and the mixed use area north of Parley's Creek. During this time, the planning commission, property owners, and business community will develop a proper zoning district to regulate new development assuring residential opportunities. 4. The petitioner provide a public open space element for pedestrian and bicycle circulation connecting Fairmont Park/ Elizabeth Sherman Parkway/ Sugarhouse Park/ 1200 East/ Parley's Creek. The open space connecting element shall consist of a space not less than 8 feet wide and contain elements of pedestrian amenities such as trees, benches, lights, etc. designed in a theme consistent with the Sugar House Beautification Project. 5. Construction of Wilmington Avenue similar as designed in Alternative 1 of the "Parking and Circulation Study". The design speed is recommended to be lowered to 25 mph. The City should participate with the costs of these improvements. Various options for the construction and funding should be explored with the administration. • ALLEN C. JOHNSON a SALT'TAKEGITY:GORPORATI,OI ; MEMBc_E, PLANNING DIRECTORROB v.'vts>caara� -.s NANCY K. PACE, CHAIRMAN GEORGINA DUFOUR DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES L-"RT LEWIS DOROROTHY PLESHE SECRETARY - Board of Adjustment on Zoning PETER VAN ALSTYNE BRENT B. WILDE 324 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 200 I. J. WAGNER SUPERVISOR OF SALT LAKE CITY,-U T AH 84111 ALTERNATE: CURRENT PLANNING 535-7757 W. KENT MONEY MEMORANDUM TO: Buzz Hunt FROM: Everett L. Joyce -P- . DATE: June 24, 1989 RE: Planning Commission response to petitions for rezoning property and street closures in the Sugar House Business District for Clark Development. On the June 8th meeting the Planning Commission set up a subcommittee to meet with Clark Development, citizens, business owners, and staff to work on resolving certain issues related to the retail project proposed by Clark Development. After three meetings the subcommittee reported to the Planning Commission on the June 22nd meeting. Please note that additional meetings are to be held with the Planning Commission on this matter. The Planning Conunission anticipates to make a recommendation on the two petitions by Clark Development on a special meeting set for Thursday July 6th. Eclosed is a copy of the draft Planning Commission Subcommittee report, the Planning staff report with addendum and the City Attorney's response to the request to vacate public streets. PLANNING COMMISSION SUBCOPMI'r1'Eh REPORT ON PETITION NOS. 400-731 and 400-732 (Clark Development) SUBCOMMITTEE REPO RT - DRAFT There are seven main categories of impact which relate to the master plan for Sugar House. They are as follows: 1. Evidence of Market Change 2. How development will occur in the balance of Sugar House if this petition is approved. 3. Infrastructure requirements and the financial viability of redevelopment as a tool to contribute to the infrastructure requirements. 4. Traffic Circulation. 5. Open Space and Pedestrian Issues. 6. Residential/Mixed-Use Components. 7. Impact of this development on the Downtown Master Plan. MARKET CHANCES The proposed development is a colluuunity development and comes under Phase III of the Sugar House Master Plan and will permanently affect the implementation of Phase I and Phase II. The very fact that Clark Development is interested in developing this site indicates a market change. The most recent variation of the Master Plan identifies this area as a potential mixed-use area. There is no evidence of demand for residential construction in the area, and even though the current residential uses may be viable for the time being, there is no evidence this area will be a mixed-use area. MASTER PLAN CONSIDERATIONS Absent Clark Development's plans for constructing a Shopko in this area, there is no justification for implementing Phase III of the Sugar House Master Plan with community level investment. The issue of whether or not this development would sacrifice the rest of the Master Plan for the area needs to be closely examined. The Master Plan calls for solidifying the commercial core of Sugar House in Phase I, then obtaining community level development in the area immediately south of the commercial core in Phase II and finally, implementing Phase III with community leve] development in the area south of the area developed in Phase II. This phasing process allows for more stable growth patterns and the opening of corridors for handling the increased traffic. This development is out of timing with the Master Plan for the area. INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES The average trips per day are expected to reach 32,000 with the completion of this project. Parking numbers have not been reviewed in detail and the impact on north/south and east/west collectors will be substantial. The subco mittee's preference for the east/west collector is Wilmington Avenue and that Parley's Creek needs improvement to prevent it from becoming a public eyesore. Clark Development is requesting a substantial amount of money to subsidize this project as well as requesting that the monies from the Clark Development office building, which would normally roll back into other development projects, be rolled back into this project. The vacations and street closures involve more than $2.5 million worth of land transactions and this request needs extensive study. The subcommittee felt the costs involved with infrastructure have not been examined closely enough. Even though some portion of the traffic would be general traffic, this development will result in a tremendous increase of traffic which needs to be addressed. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION The subco mittee preferred Alternative #1 (the connection between Sugarmont and Wilmington) as the corridor for handling the traffic congestion. They feel a connection is needed between the proposed McIntyre project and the Clark Development project. It also needs to be insured that stacking on 1300 East does not become a traffic problem. The other traffic concerns relate to internal traffic congestion and the subcommittee does not feel the site plan proposed by Clark Development has addressed this issue adequately. PEDESTRIAN/OPEN SPACE ISSUES There is a need for friendly pedestrian crossings and walkways. Access from Fairmont Park to Sugar House Park should also be a consideration as well as a visible orientation connecting this project to the core of Sugar House. The subcommittee feels that the open spaces and landscaping should be handled with gateway treatment and that internal site landscaping on the project needs to be addressed very carefully. RESIDENTIAL/MIXED-USE COMPONENTS The Sugar House Master Plan calls for development in this area to be of a mixed-use nature. The subcoiuudttcc does not fool, at this time, that a residential construction requirement in conjunction with this project is appropriate. However, they do foci that residential uses are viable, particularly in the Parley's Crock area and the area east of Fairmont Park. In addition to the upzoning being requested, a downzoning of certain commercial areas to residential might be appropriate. The possibility of replacing the housing that would be lost in the Clark Development project should be stated affirmatively in the Master Plan. DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN CONSIDERATIONS The affects of this development on Downtown and its Master Plan need to be considered. Though the areas are separated, much of the same market is involved and development in one area should not cause a significant sacrifice to the other. Salt Lake City Planning Commission Staff Report Petitions No. 400-731 and 732 by Clark Development to Rezone Property and to Vacate and Close Certain Streets and Alleys within the Sugar House Business District. OVERVIEW - __] I / MESTMIN L + p .COLLEGEEThis staff report is addressing ` two separate petitions . Petition . _. (� . i1U I 400-731 is requesting the city to rezone properties located between 11 I \ Simpson Ave . and Interstate 80 h:- •I~•q7 IMAM and between Highland Drive and 1300 East Street from Residential %/, "R-2" and Commercial "C-1" to a ir_•ii Commercial "C-3" . Petition 400- �„ ;:, 732 is requesting the city to =._ =i vacate public streets and alleys ///,' • in the same general area . (see map) The area affected by this =A= .#��� request is within Phase III of FAIR MONT ' I the Sugar House Neighborhood PARK maa ` Development Plan / Redevelopment Project Area . (See Figure 1) I The Clark Development proposal calls for 235 , 000 sq. ft . of new retail uses . The Shopko building consists of 102 , 000 sq. ft. of the new retail area . See the attached table for a detailed breakdown of buildings proposed. Several restaurant pads and a grocery store are included in the building tabulation . Also proposed is the renovation of the existing Simpson Avenue retail mall . Clark Financial Corporation is requesting from Salt Lake City financial assistance of over $2 . 6 million to provide the opportunity to redevelop this area of the Sugar House Business District . If Salt Lake City is to assist financially in this development, all impacts related to implementing the proposed development package should be mitigated and the development should comply with the master plan policies of the Sugar House Business District . BACKGROUND The 1985 Sugar House Master Plan identified this area as a medium to high density residential area . However , with the adoption of the Sugar House Neighborhood Development Plan this area was identified as a mixed used retail center . The land use plan contained within the Sugar House Business District Strategies/Recommendations Plan (Westplan) establishes the present city policy for "future land uses" within the Sugar House Business District . (See Figure 2) . 1 Figure 1 SOGA.R B E IZEIGHBORF3000 PLAN PFS ING PROGRAM • • . \\ 1 = 0 I COGO� o \Lr ,__. , - 1 ! r 1 �L`��.j, ,VENVE I�nI`' ❑ G= C h ff Jnri uC."0 r o o f L . ‘ ?_ o �c c o )1 1.1 � — = p - a ° c OIL rwGCC -`+uE ❑ .� C 7� PHASE I _ � �'� r-= 0 1- (____ , t.--;) 1 " �1 r-; ,G I r I , 4 II /� i - 5 UGARHOU5E PARK � � -�� A L 42� 1 � PHASE 1IP +- T—I -� - - Vii - -I T ~1 L = = ► - i1 - it17; . -__-I � _ a - _ ___=_:-:_= n:==_ _ =: PHASE 111 ____:_ :__ f AIR uONi PARK _ _ -� _-� _Y= _-- . \ I y�--�_ __��-- Y"�-fit-�t��r-�_ ___ ___ -_-__ /1) // INTEaSTATE 30 \ \• 1r Figure 2 , , \\\\ Q nOrn r1oonc1 :o Irl !,,RESIDENTIAL�_• r� �`70 p 4.1 SORE T I —' loommo `. • _ G a 1 �' -.NST1TUTIONAL. l `. L — _0 _ i�sac4 ` r- I - C �I Co '; -. Li INSTITUTION •-- P E R F� R M�, N�C c ' J = �:u+ud=N_N - r- 7- ° N E =s '-'—'" ooi 1 PARK ING MU��TI-rAMILY o-i O RESIDENTIAL _ • J �:bra u.m:11 31x-I, n 111_tns- ,1 o ... i y• °ARKIN Ic t dln▪D US � al PK'G PK'G �]I`r I I 1 Jc; ` rNTERTAInm �� - ,a..TALLJS .7i1 I �.ItI, .:. -... rV� �-. ...r...............:� ':L"�Ifir�rr.rr.i.: I :.. CFx✓NS-� r �'--Y'_ ;� -r E T rC 0 M u R C I A L .�: �1 II l.. SCUT- o 1 S 1 R T C C of Ni = \ \\\\ � . \�''- I �r71r -, _`R C I a L- 1 7 In D US A\\\\\MIX°D USE'\\`\�� _ 11/��9., �.I,amo 11 ,r^ R L$ vK .} \\ \` CONVENIENCE \\\\\`_ ' T L Il 1 7- A lI _ \\R O 4 IAL ,„_:..`:_2.,;,..',,,..., RE ar.,SERVEC:J \\\ `lr, ! U .Sy L I AA Vv?VAA A� R 51oENfAL • !!(( - .= 1 1N$i 1T •o P a R L _ r s 1 c'a ` \\�\\\ r: 1f # 11 PERFCI ",ANCE- t } eRc rj 1 1 Kr \�\�� I Off. P _.-ZONE :5�. .. ` e, y.Lan�.nr..O..rw..F�.@ :� .\\l- I sLc,:�.�.cu== = r - _ I. ty MAJOR • 1 "�s"�- y 4 s ,,,.„' _d _- -J �� RET,,IL 1'1 11XcD USc I \\\ I `A )+.� C �iR y VA NIXED USE R-,aIv sE• ,.. \\•seavlc✓n 2 \ f ... I •r{ __ __� I �I aIL.. Rvl., :� �RE .11L;� MED,caL, F `.:\aGFICE \\\��\�y� j �+=� "'` '•. Li'� - L ' 1 4 �i MEN }{'R 10 4 I. °F;',DE4TLIL �1 ,SP C L YshOPS ,G ^"\ �. ;i� \.)),,� \ ,�R. RESIOE`I l L P.? PCG of tc v \� "'J �I ,HOTEI � - suc1 HOTEL r� nR I..IL- , �CONFCRENCE� l 1 N i . Q \ ,1 \SEAV IC ' • I M y` _- � I . MA OR RETAIL` i - glrocO`1 -vE1N.E I � r �` ; CcNTcR - ps \ "\ O� ...y D PART M ENT STORES ‘p \. ` C CS J. Al.�SHOPS _.jf( T \T\ \�'- r' I. .a_TAIL S RvIC E / 'G 1 X'=b ..i i slo 4 lu \ .I ra USE 1,.:IR:.tO•,' PARK I \r• 'Y; .::,':::::. 5\OMN \5 I r1: ..c7.1, • I \\ '� l rl ,,.,.,-p1 : ni' • 1ti l � 11 1 The proposed project is within Phase III development area and the land use designation is for a mixed use retail center . The purpose of this mixed use retail center is to encourage a mixture of retail commercial, service commercial, office, hotel and public openspace uses. Any complex of multiple structures developed within this area needs to be functionally and aesthetically interrelated . Planning criteria in the Master Plan for this area does not call for neither the extremes of detailed standards nor complete flexibility and discretionary negotiation of standards . A review of development proposals may be made by a design review committee established by the Redevelopment Agency. On their May 11, 1989 meeting the Redevelopment Agency referred to the Planning Commission the implementation of Phase III of the Redevelopment Plan. The design objectives for this area are contained in the Sugar House Master Plan on pages 6-9 and 16-17 . Within the Redevelopment Plan Phase III development was recommended not to occur until Phases I and II were completed as part of implementing the neighborhood development plan. Phase III is to be considered only if market conditions have changed to warrant proceeding with development within this area prior to completion of development of the other two areas . To support and recommend the actions of these petitions within Phase III of the redevelopment plan a determination of whether market changes have occurred to warrant the city ' s participation in Phase III needs to be made. This was accomplished through a public meeting on May 11, 1989 by the Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors. At that meeting, Clark Financial Corporation submitted evidence to the Redevelopment Agency indicating thF: markat changes to support the development of, Rha.s.e, _ . The Redevelopment Agency found that current market conditions in ..'ugar House Project Area , and the completion of portions of Phase activities, and portions of Phase II activities, that the Board of Directors have determined that the market conditions referred to in Section K of the Sugar House Neighborhood Development Plan have changed and now warrant that the Agency proceed with the planning and implementation of Phase III activities . ANALYSIS Existing Land Uses The requested rezoning area consists of approximately 17 . 7 acres . Within the Residential "R-2" area there are 37 residential structures . Within the Commercial "C-1" area there is three residential structures and six commercial structures . This information is based upon the existing land use files of the city. Several of the residential structures are occupied. Street and Alley Closures Three streets are requested for closure between Highland Drive and 1300 East along with the existing alleys . A portion of the Ashton right of way functions as the access to Interstate 80 and has been deleted from the calculations below. The requested areas are highlighted -on the site plan. Streets Alleys Simpson Ave. 87 , 500 sq. ft. North 19 , 200 sq. ft . Stringham Ave. 64 , 700 sq. ft . South 18 , 300 sq. ft . Ashton Ave . 55 , 200 sq. ft . Total 37 , 500 sq. ft. Total 207 , 400 sq. ft. Appraisal estimate of land value in this area by David Van Drimmelen , MAI and Tod Jones Appraisers is $10 . 50 per square foot . The approximate value of property requested for closure would $2 , 571 , 000 . Closure of only a portion of Stringham Avenue is requested however , the staff recommends that if the proposal is accepted, then complete closure of this street is necessary. A remnant stub street is not a desirable solution. The construction of a culdesac would be necessary to allow a stub street . MASTER PLAN CONSIDERATIONS The following are Planning Criteria excerpted from the Sugar House Master Plan: SUGAR HOUSE DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES - To encourage new development which will substantially strengthen and unify the Sugar House Business District focused at the Sugar House Plaza Monument at 2100 South and 1100 East . - To improve circulation capabilities including street networks , off-street parking , pedestrian movement opportunities . - To provide pedestrian-scale activities in the Sugar House Business District by providing openspace corridors and streetscape amenities . HOUSING PRESERVATION AND REDEVELOPMENT - Creation of an urban residential neighborhood within the Sugar House Business District . - Comprehensive rezoning for appropriate residential development and mixed-use development. • SITE PLAN PROPOSED BY CLARK DEVELOPMENT • ---- WILMINGTON AVE ..' --. r •, .. - \ . • . _ ._. . - N - — -- • _ _ ._ ..___ __ •, .- • _ • -- _ - ._ , —• - =\\... 1 I \ \ .‘ . .,-- _ --7- , — _ Li •- -,...,...,-. -_--------.\./1 I -- , , , , . '-',...-ct..7--ar - • I I , ,----- ? r \ \ ,----7,!!•!WIll• '!! 1,':i!1; T. • • ;•• • . ; '. ' 1 •' . • . • - •• • :. i ..-- --___-- • • '( 1 --__ -- -- / ..- / 7' - ' --- !! ,r---7, , 7 - ----------___..., -- ../ -- ''‘, 7— : , 4 . ' - //\\ . --' / . -- , ..-- E. .•-__,-- ___.. , _.., __ i 4----,-;-,,..,- 7 •,,/ -7-. /A L . ' K ./ ` \ ..::: \ ---.... A II,------- I- - \\ 4 1/1 ‘\••.. :_-7, ,, • ....•ji.• ---.- '!'\ . - .. r - •______ r,,. _____.: i ___________ _ _ H ----. _. \\ •,--, ---• ',ii i; ;; ;I,;f 1 H•i i, I;;:;-•-;i i,:;., ;c;ri I;,,;1.1._;i i 1,,,:,„,..., _ .co \.„..., ____ ,,y___ . , ... . SIMPSON AVE _ - • . , -\ . __ . _ . • 'L.-7i-_-_ -_ ... A i ..-- ,,• :. I ,. .i,.-- —. \:1 ---.--.•-,1,--=-_,_._ . '_--_.::_--. — — \ ' .'• , - • ; i ; - . • _ -- \ \ . . ,.• . , ' Il ' )- 1.- -- - .. • --;-7 ._._\ - ____,,,,,-.---- • .,- u•J . . . E.,....,..,...G - -;. - -• c-) • - -.1 -, '. ;- _ -- :: -,' -_ -, ; ; ---_-.-- — —'• ; _ —11 -•_ - . H-- •- . - -- .• _,,....,_____ ..-...,.„_„ ...____.,.,.-._,..-i ... . STRINGHAM AVE ,- _ •:_, 1 -.‘, 11 E,P57•75, - 1 _ p....p.. . .p p._ _. p.p• 1 •• p• . Pi I.I ,1 1,i p , . -..-- . --- • li I . i-..--,-,7--'-.7-2-':,--7.f.--,--,_':-7_,.---.-:'•t;;.,..,-,:e--..---:- . ,i ! • . . . ; . -- L II.' '..!'• 11 ,:l • 1.;;;',• •11. ....1.1,11 ; ; II •I ! I ! 1 1 • -• •-.!•---11: 1':',:-..t..„7::11•-.%::••.- -_-:•5•4:7-'...1‘.:•--'1••, •' p I P----- - ST'-:-.,-1-L,:.'"-'''.'"'"'"'"--.?.-12.-------::.--EZ-1...r-; • ,1 ,, . . 2-;--7:-..-C.'-- • • -i ., , !. \r'.-,_------•--.7-•-f":'•••----':-::::.7:2_7:::_•,--';'••;, _ ... . . ...; i _ . . !' . . , ,,........ ;•— , • ......•--;f,•..-7,-„,7,...77.7:,:r-_7.-.,..•-•c?;,-,-4.- • ; II ! :_s'"-I ' -7 ,-....-, ..,-, ,, I I= I '' i....,:;•,i, ;Hi I,..I. :: I •.• I',, :-. li ; i 7..... ...", ' • -.., :-.-• i 1 11 ', '' ' • \ . `..• i 1 t i _... -• ....::-..... ,•:=' .'•'••..L1::,i;,-."., , --. . . , . 7 • ; I G i 1,--- -•-.•.'-.;:.7-7...r-7,-_7,--,-,._-_,-.-,...‘7,-7.11..:_--,-.7.-':-.--`7.1--- . _ 77 -.......--- • , \,'., l' l,,i\-,,,Hi!iiii_ilL:IUtililoiii!LIH;,i,,....„H.,;,, ,[ 1------- ASHTON ------7"--77-------^.: •. ,:..,... T7E."7 r77.:."..-7'.''' • _....-..-- • -------- \ - -- _.--- • i • . ' -- --— •- .. .---- ---. - . . Streets and Alleys Petitioned for Closure - Providing residential development in the mixed-use center north of Simpson Avenue and east of 1200 East may fulfill the objectives of introducing an urban residential neighborhood . COMMERCIAL AREAS - SUGAR HOUSE BUSINESS DISTRICT - Concern for decentralized commercial growth . - Incorporate pedestrian orientation and pedestrian amenities into development alternative; use convenient and attractive pedestrian linkages between anchor attractions . - Incorporate adequate off-street parking into development with identified access , proper buffering and landscaping . - Provide guidance to development proposals through a "Compatibility Review" ordinance to ensure harmony with the urban design objectives of the Master Plan. - Innovative development proposals integrated properly with open space amenities , community facilities , and pedestrian opportunities . - Salt Lake City should retain ownership of all property it currently owns in the Sugar House Business District, including streets , alleys and parcels , until such time as comprehensive development plans are to be implemented . Future rights-of-wav could thus be acquired through land trade arrangements rather than expenditure of capital funds . - Whereas the city can offer financing incentives and capital improvements , private developers can provide innovative development proposals integrated properly with the urban design criteria and policies . OPENSPACE IN THE BUSINESS DISTRICT - Presently the amount and quality of openspace in the Sugar House Business District requires improvement . A streetscape improvement plan should include a landscaping element and a street tree element providing more "green space" to the business district . - As redevelopment occurs in the Sugar House Business District and the multi-use center , bikeways and pedestrian corridors should be incorporated into development plans . TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION - In designing any off-street parking facility , customer service and convenience, and minimum interference with street traffic flow must receive high priority . Accessibility and ease of entering , circulating, parking , unparking , and exiting , are all important factors in the location and design of off-street parking facilities . Access points should be landscaped , however , vegetation should be low so as not to interfere with sight distance and signage . - 1300 East Street south of 2100 South is an arterial street designed to serve large volumes of traffic . Access to adjacent land should be from side streets . - Commercial-oriented traffic should use Interstate 80 , 1300 East , 2100 South, and a new road aligning the I-80 off ramp with Sugarmont Drive as primary access to the business district . Secondary access is along 1100 East and Highland Drive . Sugar House Business District - Parking and Circulation Study 2100 South Street is a major east-west route crossing the Salt Lake Valley. By relocating local traffic to an alternative east- west street the conflict between through and turning vehicles could be reduced . CONSERVATION AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION - The proposed Highland Park Historic District is divided into eastern and western halves by 1300 East Street, the western half is bisected again by Highland Drive . To encourage stabilization of the western half of the Highland Park District , the following steps are recommended : - Encourage commercial through-traffic to use 1300 East Street , instead of Highland Drive, to get to the Sugar House Business District . - Redesign the intersection at Richmond Street and Highland Drive to ensure that commercial through-traffic uses 1300 East . - It is recommended in the master plan that the portion of Highland Drive between Richmond Street and Interstate 80 , which is located within a potential historic district, be downgraded to a residentially oriented two-lane roadway . - The collector street connecting Highland Drive and 1300 East is essential to the elimination of negative impacts of excessive traffic on Highland Drive upon the preservation of this potential historic district. URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT Design Guidelines - The streetscape design should incorporate a consistent theme strengthening the association of unrelated buildings . - The general pattern of buildings should help to define street areas and other public openspaces . - Islands should be provided between parking aisles and stalls to break up hard-surfaced areas . Berms and other changes of grade are recommended wherever possible. - Uniform identification signs should designate access to parking lots and parking structures . - Distinctiveness of buildings and areas should be revealed by preserving and highlighting architectural features common to the area by using special material and colors . Building Height and Setback - Highland Drive is a commercial fringe area which has a fifteen foot landscaped setback and a height limit of two stories . - Mixed-use areas are required to have a twenty foot landscaped front yard setback with the height limit approved by the Planning Commission. HOUSING WITHIN THE SUGAR HOUSE BUSINESS DISTRICT 1 . Rezoning of the Residential R-2 area would eliminate the city ' s most effective tool to ensure that some form of urban housing will occur within the Business District . A transfer of land area that is zoned for residential development would allow the city to retain this leverage tool to implement the master plan . It is recommended that property to the north- within Phase II area , that is designated for Residential Host Mixed-Use be rezoned temporarily to a Residential "R-7" or "R-5" classification as a holding zone until the city can create and put in place an Urban Residential Host Mixed Use Zone . The Residential "R-5" classification is identified within the Sugar House Master Plan as the temporary base zone for the residential area . 2 . Public property that is requested to be vacated instead of being sold could be traded for other property owned by Clark Financial to be used for future housing development and right of ways for public streets . OTHER PLANNING ISSUES Social considerations In rezoning residential property to commercial and utilizing city subsidies the city should require that adequate notice to renters be provided and possible relocation assistance be required . Property Disposition Within the Neighborhood Development Plan it is identified that all real property acquired by the Redevelopment Agency be sold or leased to public or private persons or entities for the development for uses permitted in the plan . Salt Lake City ordinance Chapter 2-58 City-Owned Real Property identifies methods of surplus property disposition. These methods are either trade , sale , lease , or irrevocable transfer preceded with Planning Commission review. SITE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS - To comply with master plan guidelines Circulation 1 . Provide east/west connector street from 1300 East that links with Sugarmont Drive. This street would allow building orientation to a public street and provide the necessary linkage to minimize the traffic impact upon Highland Drive south of the Interstate . Without a connector street traffic would be focused toward Highland Drive and negatively impact the housing preservation objectives of the master plan. 2 . Provision for a design solution that would be adequate for west bound traffic onto Interstate 80 . Until it is known how much property if any is needed to allow for an appropriately designed interchange for I-80 vacation of the_ portion of Ashton Avenue effecting the on ramp should not occur . 3 . Access Drives into parking lots . To ensure efficient internal circulation, storage areas at access drives must be designed to allow for adequate capacity . Storage on the driveway should be of sufficient length to keep stopped vehicles from blocking the path of entering vehicles . Failure to provide sufficient storage will result in unsafe and confusing vehicle conflicts . The following are recommended minimal design requirements for access drives off of arterial roadways and the major access point off of Highland Drive . a . Minimum throat length of 75 feet that is free of curb cuts into parking areas . b . Maintain a 120-150 feet of internal storage area . c . Use of landscaped areas to provide adequate visibility of access drives . 4 . Loading Docks - location and design a . Locate at south side of building along freeway . • BUILDING TEUL TION CODE SQUARE FCCTAGE USE 80 , 000 Future Office Building 3 54 , 925 New Grocery Store C 7 , 700 New Restaurant 7 , 31 New Restaurant - _ 2 , 400 New Convenience Store/Gas G 24 , 000 New Retail S` o_oko 102 , 000 S"ooko 34 , 200• hew ?eta_ K • 56 , 027 Existing Retail 35 ,-448 Existing Retail N • 27 , 302 Exst_nc Retail 2 , 700 New Restaurant L S1_lll; /7 n TJ 118 , 777 sc 1777 r,'"'i;ll i ▪ 1Y ii5 ( exclucin office ": " ) 235 , 238 sc . ft . Total T54 , 015 - r U' U r EXP S;ON ▪ F' 120 , 000 Future office Building T, 5 , 850 Fut ure Retail M 11 , 000 Future Retail D 12 , 800 Future Retail - Total 149 , 650 (Total not included in new retail scua_e footage above ) • PACKING IO� S • Zone 1 .. - 101 :77 i . _ Zon�...�.._. . ._._ . - - 127 4-17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 , 126 ',-Po •Zone:--4 . - - - 346 __- _-.Structural parking under grocery store "3" - 85 . Total 1, 919 • lsva o0CL • a i fl �= I, •_ �. 1 1 IHIIIM IIIIIIIII I.11 ill.1 — • F" l 1 :, - '"—- q , . .g • 0111111 l!flll_I1111IIIIILI!IIIII ._ — - -I 1I • 11 , ' I_� = 1 == 1. 11��11- i - a ,• 1 --I----a— --._=jw -17= ) lt4.--,:=,.---...--, - ....,,,,--4P1:141— ,, : -- i ,,11 --� I 1111111 —I 1 11- . 1 1-::, ll_.1 IILLLll.II.1 i 1 I 1= _ 1 ! -j _ _ : = - I'1 =1I L I II LL !1II I ! W IRII II-11111111111II11111111I1 ! W ; 6-i.� .. • _ ' ! mIIII-( ' ! • g li rl 1111111111111111111111111-11 .1=�- 1E '= `_=__P. _ ° i\, �I�I IIII 1 \ I a .-•i ! i —I-_-,1- __.._! ! - Z 0, Il.111111.1111111111111111I1111.11[I �; Pc = - _ ;1 :- _? 1 I ,11;11111111 T 11!l111111llfl�' l I —: I I _ a �IIIfIIH 1 IIIIIIIIIIiIII'I(IIIIIII ��, - !' la - �� � 1 1 111.11 I 9I Y I�l{!t'Jx�- - It -151-1{ - . a 1 I m I- 1 i•i i ! tlKl ur S9 t''Ca �.r- ;.! z _ I1111111IillF!fIIF IFS i I 1 , .17,,,,,,,it,i x p1 O 1��II I`II ! I i f!6F!1 k } 1I�YI q'I if ir1 Ya �Ci_ C71 E, II I-1111U \� i .jam i ! I �; i!.fl llair'(`jy1 Yt (.{;t.I t�11l��i4!l �1=, [II!f111111111111111!11 1.1 `�t �` ! ,.'1t .rl° ' •V _ !- i }M t ¢t'� I 3 't i:;1 r9�i i 1, 3 111111 �!I IIII' ; 0 '1 Jllil. 1.111.LJ (,...,,!'I ,1I Iv i�el�, !r,,,,A 1 • r,_: , Y !_ .I I I I I I IIII I� ri .I six YY,,t��,rrnl '';';.,`r{� �, , I-" �I1-I1111III1I[ -.._ I I i lit .,� 11u 11!• f� ' ' i 1C I.I-IHI I I f l-I I I I11 ri I � ! A! 1 ' i I 1 1 rr1?111,1 i _I LI.�!I ill .. I 4 11111._ I.I )...,=1= r1IIIIIIIIIIIIC ;1 i ;Iinlii�r iI_p_i .u.Lui.u.ul,____- .-:_1,' _ __- 'Ii �11111111 II I IIf �` II" 'ILI 11_11111111 I 1 I� 1-'II II! 1111 I' II ,!, ILL]LI_LIlJlJlq __ - I. i1111' t _ I ii ! � •, i.JN11,1 .. , , rrf .„off, -0: ,. r Jir,rr�o . p p oRV JHG/� 1rl'�jH -� , • b. Provide and show location for other buildings . c. Loading docks should be screened from 1300 East and Highland Drive view. 5 . Provision of handicapped parking spaces . 6 . Meet all of the circulation and transportation concerns of the city Transportation Engineering Division. Open Space 1 . Provision of landscaped front yard setbacks for 1300 East , the new connector street, and Highland Drive. 2 . Provision of island landscaped areas to break up the impact of the hard surfaced parking areas . Refuse Collection Show locations and how they will be appropriately screened . RECOMMENDATIONS Rezoning Petition Considerations To rezone this area to a Commercial "C-3 " classification would not be in accordance with the master plan . A commercial "C-3A ' zone classification would be more appropriate. This district requires a fifteen foot landscaped front yard setback, which would be equivalent to what the master plan calls for within the commercial fringe areas . However , the Master Plan acknowledges the need for a new zoning designation. As a condition of the rezoning the city should require that the approved site plan meet the urban design criteria of the master plan . Specifically a determination as to the minimal landscaping requirements of parking areas . The development plans need to include provision of street trees . Provision of a holding zone of other properties within Phase II to ensure provision of future residential development should be considered . Street and Alley Closures Petition Considerations All of the existing streets and alleys should be closed excluding any necessary right of way needed for access to Interstate 80 . However , the developer should provide an appropriate right of way and improvements of a public connector street between Sugarmont Drive and 1300 East . Recommendation The staff recommends that the Planning Commission convene the informal hearing on June 8 , 1989 to receive presentation of the development proposal from Clark Development , a staff review of the Master Plan considerations , and citizen input by receiving public comment on the development proposal . Clark Financial is presenting their development plan to the Sugar House Community Council of June 7 , 1989 . The staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue the review of this proposal to their June 22nd meeting focusing on the site design considerations . At this meeting the Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council should be formulated . At the request of Clark Development the City Council has scheduled a July 11, 1989 public hearing on these petitions. The staff will continue to prepare the final recommendations to the Planning Commission for the June 22nd meeting . Based upon the present information and site plan , the staff can conclude that many of the critical design elements and development criteria of the master plans are not being followed. These critical planning elements include : 1. Circulation - No provision for east - west connector street . • 2 . Building orientation and focus - The present site plan appears to be decentralizing the commercial growth within the Sugar House Business District . Retail use on Highland Drive between Ashton and Stringham Avenues should be rebuilt or retained, a parking lot with the back of the Shopko- building expose to Highland Drive view is not an acceptable urban design solution. 3 . Pedestrian Circulation - Not addressed in present site plan . The Planning Commission should consider how this would be accomplished within the Sugar House Business District if not included in the Phase III area such amenities need to be provided in the Phase II area . 4 . Landscaped Setbacks - Request for Commercial C-3 zoning . Landscaping within parking lots . Streetscape design on 1300 East should respond to existing design on Highland Drive and 2100 South. Everett Joyce June 1989 Addendum to Staff Report for Petitions 400-731/732 by Clark Development in the Sugar House Business District MARKET CHANGE The market perspective outlined in the Sugar House Master Plan, the Sugar House Business District Plan and the Neighborhood Development Plan are likely market opportunities for the near future . With respect to the phasing of the redevelopment plan there may be "windows of opportunity" that materialize as the Sugar House plan is implemented . Such opportunities should be pursued if they can be developed , consistent with the intent of the master plan, business district plan and the redevelopment plan . Two avenues of redevelopment appear to be viable for the Sugar House Business District : 1 . Sugar House could recapture its primary trade area demand with a mix of community scale businesses that are grouped attractively and conveniently . This reinvestment in the Sugar House Business District should trigger a redistribution of shopping behavior back to Sugar House. 2 . Sugar House has a uniquely strong character and identity . There are market opportunities to create regional-scale demand for specialized businesses or services . Such as , building on the existing Sugar House " theme" of home furnishings and the redevelopment of Irving Commons with a unique identity (performing arts or entertainment) . It is not clear whether Sugar House can support a new, major retail center . Market studies developed to date neither demonstrate nor refute the idea that such demand does or will exist . Amending the Master Plan Few amendments are necessary to the master plan. The major land uses and public infrastructure elements as outlined in the plan are still applicable . The development of Phase III at this time as a "window of opportunity" will have the greatest impact upon the Phase II area development potential . The "Shopko" will probably act as a catalyst for additional development of the district . The focus of issues must be on the site plan orientation and access to the central core of the Sugar House Business District . The Plan anticipated the Phase III area to develop as a retail mixed use center with a "regional" scale of focus . The current market conditions ( future projections) anticipate a "community level" market. With a shift to a community scale the McIntyre parcel becomes critical in providing the link to the "Core" monument area . The Sugar House Neighborhood Development Plan identifies a circulation element that allows a major retail development to occur south of Wilmington Avenue . The proposed project is a "community" scale retail development compatible with the redevelopment plan . However , the orientation of the Shopko/Remodeled Retail complex completely turns its back on the "Monument" core area of Sugar House . The development proposals of the McIntyre and Clark parcels must work together to provide the necessary pedestrian and vehicle connections to achieve a cohesive Sugar House Business District . The pedestrian circulation can be oriented through the existing promenade on the strip center . However , the auto circulation needs 1200 East Street extended into the Shopko project site opening the visual and physical tie to monument area and phase II area of the business district . Proposed Development Impacts on Phases I and II Phase I redevelopment actually started prior to the initiation of the Neighborhood Development Plan . The 2100 South / 1100 East / Highland Drive street beautification project was the first physical redevelopment improvement in the area . Since the time of the streetscape improvements private redevelopment activity has occurred . Phase I area of the redevelopment plan is not completed at this time , however , development activity is occurring . A brief list of projects includes : - McDonalds at Lincoln St. / 2100 So. - Expanded parking lot - Interlake Thrift at 1000 E. 2100 So . - New bldg . & parking lot - First Interstate Bank at McClelland / 2100 So . - Demolish old Muffler Shop" and build new parking lot and new entry to bldg . - Granite Furniture - Improved streetscape on McClelland south of 2100 So . and a new bldg . facade . - New Jiffy Lube on 1200 East 2100 So . - Proposed new 6400 sq. ft . retail bldg . at Douglas St . 2100 So . - Post Office acquisition of property for new post office Phase II also has seen development activity: - Improvement to Clark Financial Headquarters 2144 S . Highland - Demolition of Hygeia Ice Bldg . and Peerless laundry on property necessary for the 1200 East street extension. - Proposed new development at 1300 E. 2100 S . - Chevron gas/convenience and car wash Phase II development must be strongly coordinated with the circulation and orientation of Phase III development . PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE Circulation North sector improvement to the circulation system consists of the extension of Hollywood Avenue from 1100 East to 1200 East and construction of cul-de-sacs on Lincoln , McClelland and Douglas Streets . Construction costs for the Hollywood extension would be approximately S200 , 000 plus right of way acquisition . However , presently the planning staff would not recommend the extension of Hollywood Avenue . The reason being the potential increase for commercial traffic being directed towards residential areas . Circulation improvements for the south sector of the Sugar House Business District are the East/West Connector Street from 900 East to 1300 East with a 1200 East connection . Development costs are shown on the summary of alternative roadway improvements table . This connector street would need to be provided due to the impact of traffic generated from a development of the scale proposed by Clark Development . Traffic Control Improvements Traffic control improvements would become necessary with the scale of development proposed . The following improvements are recommended in the Sugar House Business District Parking and Circulation Study. 1 . Improve signal control at 900 East and 2100 South to include left turn phasing . 2 . Install signal at Sugarmont and 900 East . 3 . Install signal controls on 1300 East at Wilmington Avenue and the Interstate off-ramp . Along with the signal at the off-ramp an adequate ingress/egress access drive needs to be provided . SUGAR 11O11SE 11USIN SS Ilisl'IUCI' CA1'1'FAi. COST En.1.1AIA'1'IO(IS SUMMARY OP ALTERNATIVE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS Alternative item Unit Cost 1 2 3 4 1. Roadway Construction A. Earthwork $10.00/c.y. $ 121 ,620.00 $ 146,950.00 $ 46,210.00 $ 46,210.00 11. Retaining Wall $25.00/sq.ft. 117,000.00 58,500.00 --- --- C. New/Removol/Replacement of Roadway $15.00/s.y. 175,905.00 185,895.00 191,895.00 199,305.00 1). Widening Roadway $22.50/s.y. 25,210.00 28,192.00 27,743.00 40,570.00 E. Curb & Gutter $9.00/I.f. 73,890.00 77,490.00 83,070.00 - 85,050.00 Drainage 5% oft 25,680.00 21,851.00 17,446.00 '18,557.00 Mobilization and Temporary Traffic Control 25% of 1 13.1,826.110 130,470.00 91,591.00 97,423.00 II. Structures A. New Structures $76.00/sq. ft. 718,200.00 718,200.00 718,200.00 718,200.00 It. Slope Protection $1.60/I.f. 480.00 480.00 48(1.00 480.00 C. Widening Existing Structure $76.00/sq.ft. --- --- --- 218,880.00 III. Transportation System Elements A. Traffic Signals $75,000.00 co. 225,000.00 225,000.00 225,000.00 225,000.00 D. Systemwide Elements , (Lighting, Signing, Pedestrian 23.5% of 380,185.00 375,066,00 329,384.00 387,673.00 Ways, Landscaping) 01 II + IILA) IV. Add-on Costs A. CM, PM and Design 20% of (I 111 { III.A) 323,562.00 319,206.00 280,327.00 329,935.00 11. Contingency 20% of 319,206.00 2110,527.00 329,935,00 (I ' II * IILA) 323,562.00 Subtotal: $2,645,120.00 $ 2,6119,506.00 $2,291 ,673.00 42,697,218.00 V. Right-of-Way $50.00/sq.ft. $3,641, I85.00 17,861 ,2(10.00 45,116,200.00 $6,485,400.00 GiRANDTO'I'AL1 $5,909,120.00 110,470,706.00 47,407,873.00 $9,182,618.00 f Parking Improvements Parking District Alternative 1 (Phase I area north of 2100 South Street) Improvement needs and costs are excerpted from the Sugar House Business District Parking and Circulation Study . The cost presented are for all identified improvements, review and analysis of the feasibility of providing all such improvements has not taken place. Pedestrian Improvements Parking Improvements Short Term $ 5 , 000 Short Term $ 257 , 000 Intermediate 73 , 000 Intermediate 1 , 982 , 000 Long term 651, 000 total $ 729 , 000 total $ 2 , 968 , 000 How to Pay for Improvements The east/west connector street improvements should be funded by monies from the value of property requested for street and alley closure by Clark Development . In addition , tax increment monies from the development proposal should be used for this major public infrastructure improvement. Funding for traffic control improvements should be provided by development exaction when large scale retail development occurs in Phase III area . To provide for parking improvements in the area north of 2100 South Street it is recommended that a Parking District be created with funding through business license fees and special assessments . MIXED USE — HOUSING ON PARLEYS CREEK The rehabilitation of Parley ' s Creek as an open space amenity offers perhaps the most desirable location for a housing element within the Sugar House Business District. Housing units facing Parley ' s Creek from the north and south would be preferable to a location nearer the interstate highway . A second possible residential redevelopment area would be the mixed use area east of Fairmont Park . Mechanisms Funding Land write down Federal grants Infrastructure improvements Tax Increment Financial subsidy Bonding City property ownership Salt Lake City Departmental Review of Petition Number 400-732 Given below are the concerns and recommendations of affected city departments with the petition to vacate streets and alleys and one lot within Union Heights Subdivision within the Sugar House Business District . Fire Department The Fire Department would have no objections to the streets being vacated subject to the following assumptions : 1 . Additional fire hydrants will probably be required because of the change from residential to commercial . 2 . Access for fire fighting must be maintained all around each proposed building. 3 . A preliminary site plan must be submitted for review before approval . Property Management The Real Property Management Department recommends that the streets and alleys be closed and sold to the petitioner rather than vacated . The petitioner should be required to compensate the city for the cost of an MAI appraisal to determine fair market value of this property. Department of Public Utilities If the project is constructed in a manner that the existing pipelines could be abandoned and others installed to grid the water system, then the petitioners request could be granted. The water main system within the Sugar House Business District needs to maintain an adequate grid system to provide adequate water pressure for fire suppression demands . The Public Utilities Department can not recommend street closure until final building locations , fire hydrant locations and service capacity necessary for the proposed projected are identified . Provision of any adjustment to the water supply system grid necessary would be the responsibility of the developer . SALT'LAKE CITY'CORPORATION{ TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 333 SOUTH 200 EAST, SUITE 201 JOS_PH R. ANDERSON PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TIMOTHY P. HARPST. P.E. (801) 535-6630 CITY TRANSFORTAT:cY ENGINEER To: John Schumann, Chairman Salt Lake City Planning Commission From: Steve Meyer, P.E. Deputy Transportation Engineer Date: June 21, 1989 Re: Petitions 400-731 and 400-732 by Clark Development Overview The Transportation Division has perfoiined a preliminary review of the site plan for the proposed Sugar House Center development with respect to access from the street system and internal circulation. The review references the Sugar House Master Plan, the recently completed Sugar House Business District Parking and Circulation Study Final Report, and the Sugar House Center Traffic Impact Study. The Sugar House Center will occupy the area bounded by Wilmington Avenue, 1300 East, I-80, and Highland Drive. This is approximately 32 acres in size which is larger than three downtown blocks. The development will have a total of nearly 560,000 square feet of office, retail, and restaurant use. It is estimated that the fully developed site will generate in excess of 32,000 vehicle trips per day. Off-Site Circulation Development of an adequate off-site circulation system insures that traffic can move to and from the site safely with a minimum of delay. Traffic around the Sugar House Center site currently uses 1300 East, Highland Drive, Wilmington Avenue, Simpson Avenue, Stringham Avenue, and Ashton Avenue. Highland Drive and 1300 East are arterial streets which provide traffic movement between collector streets and access to major developments. Wilmington Avenue, Simpson Avenue, Stringham Avenue, and Ashton Avenue are local streets which provide direct access to individual businesses and residences. Currently, access to and through the area is difficult. East and west access through the area is hindered by the lack of aligned intersections on Highland Drive between 2100 South and I-80. This results in increased delay and higher accident rates at these tee intersections. North and south access through the area is restricted because there are no collector or local north/south streets between Highland Drive and 1300 East. This increases congestion and delay on the arterial streets because they must also provide the direct access that a collector or local street would provide. The proposed development will eliminate Simpson Avenue, Stringham Avenue, and Ashton Avenue. The traffic volume on Wilmington Avenue will therefore increase as the development creates traffic demand and alternative routes have been eliminated. Traffic volumes on Highland Drive and 1300 East will also increase to handle the estimated 32,000 vehicle trips per day generated by the proposed development. The persons involved with the creation of the Sugar House Master Plan and the Sugar House Business District Parking and Circulation Study recognized the potential impact on the transportation system by development in this area. Both documents recommend that an east/west collector street and a north/south collector street be constructed in conjunction with development of the site to mitigate the impacts on the transportation system. The Sugar House Master Plan states: "Complete redevelopment of the Sugar House Business District will generate increased traffic. Studies show that an additional 600,000 square feet of retail uses will generate approximately 30,000 vehicles per day. In order to allow some "pass through" traffic from 1-80 to avoid the heavily burdened 2100 South/1300 East intersection, a new collector road connecting Highland Drive with 1300 East is proposed. The new road will align with the 1-80 westbound off-ramp at 1300 East and bisect the redevelopment project area aligning with Sugarmont Drive at Highland Drive." "The new construction of 1200 East south of 2100 South will provide appropriate access and circulation into the redevelopment project area from 2100 South . The Sugar House Business District Parking and Circulation Study recommends the following: "The need was identified for additional east-west streets both north and south of 2100 South Street, and a north-south street to penetrate the block bounded by Highland Drive, 2100 South, 1300 East, and Wilmington. These proposed streets may be viewed as an extension of Hollywood Avenue between 1100 and 1200 East Streets, an extension of Sugarmont Avenue east to 1300 East Street, and a continuation of 1200 East Street from 2100 South Street to the Sugarmont extension. The purpose of these additional streets is to relieve the traffic on 2100 South Street, 1100 East, and Highland Drive by providing alternate routes for Sugar House traffic. Their construction should be phased in conjunction with both new development and major improvements to the existing commercial district." • There are certain requirements for the alignment of the east/west and north/south streets. The east/west street is required to align with a street west of Highland Drive. It should intersect 1300 East at the westbound 1-80 off-ramp or at Wilmington Avenue. In general, alternatives 1 and 4 as shown in the Sugar House Business District Traffic and Circulation Study meet these requirements. The extension of 1200 East is required to intersect with the east/west collector street. Regardless of how the east/west and nonh/south collector streets are ultimately aligned, they must link with an adequately designed internal circulation system. On-Site Circulation The same principles that apply for off-site circulation also apply to the on-site circulation system. Major driveway entrances function as arterials, circulation roads and circulation aisles at the end of parking rows serve as collectors, and aisles within the parking lot serve as locals. Locating major driveways is important to the operation of both the off-site and on-site circulation systems. The number of driveways onto 1300 East and Highland Drive should be held to a minimum to maintain the carrying capacity of these arterial streets. A larger number of driveways can be allowed onto the east/west and north/south collector streets because of the reduced volume and travel speeds of these streets. Circulation in the development from the major driveways should be accomplished with the use of a ring road or circulation aisles at the end of parking rows. Pedestrian/Bicycle Circulation The site plan for the Sugar House Center should accommodate pedestrian and bicycle access from Fairmont Park to Sugar House Park. gecommenclations: Based on a preliminary site plan review of the information available at this time, if the Salt Lake City Planning Commission approves Petitions 400-731 and 400-732, the Transportation Division recommends the Planning Commission require the following conditions pertaining to transportation in and around the site as conditions of petition approval. The Transportation Division shall require these conditions be satisfied prior to issuing permit approvals. 1. Construction by the developer of an acceptable east/west collector street from 1300 East to Highland Drive aligning with a street west of Highland Drive. This shall include the installation of traffic signals at the intersections with 1300 East and Highland Drive. Alternative 4; with modifications to meet city standards, of the Sugar House Business District Parking and Circulation Study is the preferred alignment. 2. Construction by the developer of 1200 East from the north boundary of the development to the east/west collector. 3. Development in the site plan of an approved internal circulation system. 4. Accommodation of pedestrian and bicycle access from Fairmont Park into Sugar House Park. This shall include the means for pedestrians and bicyclists to safely cross Highland Drive and 1300 East. 5. The complete vacation of Stringham Avenue. 6. The final site plan shall meet all design policies of the Transportation Division. cc: Joe Anderson Craig Peterson Willie Staler Cindy Gust-Jenson Allen Johnson Max Peterson Tim Harpst Bill Wright Everett Joyce Doug Wheelwright Chuck Call Barry Walsh Jim McGuire MEMORANDUM TO: Linda Hamilton FROM: Richard J. Turpin THRU: Michael R. Chitwood DATE: June 13, 1989 RE: Tax increment subsidy available to Clark Financial Corporation for Sugar House Shopko. You requested an explanation of the procedure by which the Redevelopment Agency determined the level of subsidy it was able to offer Clark Financial in support of their Sugar House Development. The Agency utilizes a computer based model to determine the present value of future tax increment cash flows generated by a given project. All Redevelopment Agency projects which occur within the tax increment areas are subjected to the same analysis . When the Sugar House project was modeled using the same parameters as were assigned to the Broadway Center and Boyer projects the result derived was S830,000.00. As with the other two projects , the S830,000 is only considered an estimate. All three projects are subject to performance based contracts whereby the final value of the subsidy provided is only determined after the projects are producing a tax increment. Under this arrangement any funds advanced to the developer are guaranteed by a letter of credit until the final value of the subsidy is set. I trust this answers your question, if you need further information please give me a call . CLARK FINANCIAL REQUEST FOR UDAG FUNDS Proposal: On May 22 Clark Financial submitted a request to capture the full income stream from the repayment of the Parkview UDAG to supplement their proposed Sugarhouse/Shopko project. The repayment schedule for the $1 , 150 , 000 UDAG is $111, 288 for 22 years at 8 . 5% for a total of $2, 448, 336 . Clark' s proposal reduced the amount to approximately $900, 000 net present value at 11% . The use of these funds would be for land cost writedown. Action: The application was discussed in several review sessions of the Incentive Review Committee. The Committee had previously taken a position the UDAG repayment funds ought to be used to promote the economic development objectives of the City through the creation of an Economic Opportunity Revolving Loan Fund. As conceived by the Committee, this incentive program would be capable of lending $75, 000 per calendar quarter at below-market interest rates to businesses that demonstrate need, and show a public benefit for City involvement . Awards for consecutive quarters could be considered for projects of extraordinary merit. The Incentive Review Committee suggested rather than loose the benefit of the Parkview UDAG over 20 years as proposed, that Clark Financial submit a request for a Revolving Loan Fund award from the general pool within the paramaters of the guidelines established for the program. An applications submitted to the Capital Planning Division could be processed as soon as it is submitted to facilitate the Sugarhouse/Shopko project timeline. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY REVOLVING LOAN FUND il (;`j !l • 90411 Purpose: The Economic Opportunity Revolving Loan Fund (EO Fund) is established to offer financial incentives to new and expanding businesses in Salt Lake City through a working partnership with local financial institutions and/or other small business investment entities . The general intent is to provide supplemental funding to projects which: . will demonstrate a measurable positive impact on the local economy through job creation and by stimulating private sector investment, . can show a justifiable need for public financial participation, . can meet minimum eligibility requirements , . have the capacity to repay the loan. Incentives Available: Applications may be submitted requesting EO Fund participation as follows : . Gap Financing - A short teLlu secured loan supplement to medium and long term financing of fixed assets used in conjunction with, but in instances where other financing is not sufficient . A repayment schedule and an interest rate near, but usually below prime will be negotiated on tetlus generally over 5 years or less . Maximum EO Fund participation will be 40% of project costs (but no more than any other investment partner) and minimum owner equity must be 10% . Eligible projects include the purchase of real estate, buildings and improvements; the purchase of machinery, and equipment with a life of the term of the loan; and the cost of construction or renovation. The upper commitment limit to a single project in any funding period is $50, 000 . The loan must be fully collateralized, however, subordination may be considered. . Relocation or Expansion Enticement - A short term secured loan for fixed assets or working capital ordinarily used in tandem with financing from a private lending institution or other investment partner. The maximum short term participation by the EO Fund will usually be an amount no greater than any other investment partner. Interest and repayment terms will be negotiable but full repayment is required within 5 years . Eligible activities include construction and expansion as well as working capital activities . The upper commitment limit to a single project in any funding period is $50 , 000 . The loan must be fully collateralized, however, subordination may be considered. . Conventional Loan Interest Buy-down - A conventional loan subsidy provided through an interest rate buy-down for any project qualifying for institutional financing and meeting EO Fund requirements . The extent of the incentive for any particular project is negotiable, however, no more than $20 , 000 will be expended for buy-down purposes during any calendar year. . Conventional Loan Guarantee - A conventional loan enhancement provided by a guarantee of up to 50% of the loan face value or an amount no greater than the participation of the conventional lender(s) . Generally available for any project qualifying for institutional financing and meeting EO Fund requirements, needing short term financing up to 5 years . The maximum guarantee placed in guarantee escrow during any funding period will be $50, 000 . Selection Process : Applications will be received for project funding only during the first 30 days of each calendar quarter. Applications will be screened and those meeting threshold eligibility requirements will be presented to the EO Fund Loan Board for funding consideration. Awards will generally be announced during the last week of the quarter. Where more than one qualified application is received during the application period, each project will be ranked and assigned a numerical score based on project performance across a range of factors . The criteria for assigning points to each project is : Where applications exceed available fund resources, projects will be ranked and assigned a numerical score derived from their projected performance across a range of factors . The criteria for determining the priority of each project is : . Location and type of project . Net impact on City tax structure . Total new jobs created . Percent low/moderate income jobs . EO Fund dollars per new job . Leverage ratio of EO Fund to other project dollars . Contribution to the physical and social welfare of the City In a funding round where projects are competing for priority, funds will be awarded first to the project with the highest score total, then other projects in the order of their ranking until the quarterly fund allocation is depleted. Unsuccessful qualified projects may be submitted for subsequent funding rounds , but no preference will be given to previous submittals . The EO Fund Board will have final and total discretion in making awards based on the anticipated benefit to the City compared to the risk level of the loan. Fund Capitalization: The EO Fund will be capitalized with quarterly injections of $75, 000 from UDAG repayment monies . Awards will be made to the extent funds are available in any funding round. Funds not allocated will be carried into the subsequent round . A $100, 000 reserve fund will be maintained for extraordinary economic development opportunities that meet program criteria. Administration: The program will be administered by the Salt Lake City Department of Development Services and applications for funding will be submitted to the Capital Planning and Programming Division. The Division will be responsible for program coordination, accepting and screening applications, and making project score assignments . The Division will process applications through prescribed departmental reviews and submit projects to the EO Fund Loan Board. The Board will consist of five members appointed from the business and finance community by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council . Program administrative costs will be derived from interest on the fund account and a 1 .5% loan origination fee. Successful applicants will pay all direct costs related to securing the loan. UDAG REPAYMENTS SUMMARY (including proposed EO Fund withdrawals over first 2 years of program) - April 1989 CUMU- PROJECTED CITY PARK- LATIVE EO DRAWS DATE CENTER VIEW WARNER TOTAL TOTAL AND BALANCE 12/1/86- 12/31/88 253,800 - - 253,800 253, 800 253 , 800 3/31/89 70, 800 - - 70 , 800 324, 600 324, 600 6/30/89 70, 800 9, 200 5,400 85,400 410, 000 410 ,000 ( 1989 reserve fund withdrawal ) -100, 000 310,000 9/30/89 70 , 800 27 , 700 16 ,500 115, 000 525, 000 (EO Fund award) -75 ,000 350,000 12/31/89 70, 800 27 , 700 16 ,500 115, 000 640, 000 (EO Fund award) -75,000 390, 000 ** (1990 reserve fund withdrawal) -100, 000 290, 000 3/31/90 70 , 800 27 ,700 16,500 115, 000 755, 000 (EO Fund award) -75, 000 320, 000 6/30/90 70 , 800 27 , 700 16 ,500 115, 000 870 , 00 (EO Fund award) -75,000 360 ,000 9/30/90 70, 800 27 , 700 16,500 115, 000 985, 000 (EO Fund award) -75 , 000 400 , 000 12/31/90 70, 800 27, 700 16,500 115, 000 1 , 110, 000 (EO Fund award) -75 , 000 440, 000 ** Total amount of UDAG repayments and term of loans . 7,400, 000 2,400 , 000 2 ,500, 000 12, 300, 000 ( 25 yr) ( 22 yr) (22 yr) ** Actual year-end balance will be determined by amount committed from $100, 000 reserve fund. Options for use of balance may be, 1 ) continue to accumulate balance for future unspecified program(s ) , 2) commitment to SBIC or other venture capital type fund, 3 ) increase amount of quarterly awards, and/or 4 ) increase reserve account. MNICPA RU LD NC AUHCRY S'-iT r�!a, CURT ►IONS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE VERL "BUZZ" HUNT Treasurer PALMER DEPAULIS TREASURER CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING MAtCR 451 SOUTH STATE STREET. ROOM 228 LINDA HAMILTON SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 (801) 535-7946 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE MEMORANDUM T0: Incentive Review Committee FROM: Buzz Hunt DATE: June 26, 1989 SUBJECT: General Policy Recommendation on Use of Sales Tax Increment as Economic Development Incentive Over the past several yrrs, state and local governments have developed several forms of financial incentive to induce economic development within their jurisdictions, including tax breaks. Salt Lake City continues to utilize such an incentive through use of piupei Ly tax increment via the City Redevelopment Agency. The use of sales tax increment is another approach at providing economic development incentives. At its June 15, 1989 meeting, however, the Incentive Review Committee unanimously voted to reject this approach, and to recommend that sales tax increment not be used as an economic development incentive. There are several reasons to support this policy recommendation, as was discusser] during the Incentive Review Committee meeting. The following will attempt to summarize those reasons. Policy Recommendation Sales tax revenues (or sales tax increment) should not be used as an economic development incentive, but should be wholly retainer] in the general fund as a critically important source of general fund revenue. Suportinq Rationale 1. Sales tax revenues constitute 26.4% of general fund revenues and is therefore the second most significant source of general fund revenues which are vital in providing basic municipal services. Incentive Review Committee - 2 - June 26, 1989 2. Sales tax revenues are already very vulnerable because existing State law which specifies a "point of sale vs. population" distribution formula will result in serious reductions in City sales tax receipts. Over the first 5 years of the 1990's, City sales taxes will be reduced by 25.3%, resulting in a cumulative loss of general fund revenue of more than $5 million unless offset by growth in taxable sales. 3. Sales taxes are also vulnerable to cyclical oscillations in the local economy. During economic downturns, taxable sales normally go down, resulting in revenue shortfalls. 4. As a practical matter, "sales tax increment" is extremely difficult (if not impossible) to measure. Unlike property tax increment which is fairly straightforward, sales tax increment requires estimation of existing and/or redistributed sales which is further complicated if these estimations are made over time because of cyclical fluctuations in the economy. 5. Use of sales tax is constrained from a legal standpoint since any multi-year commitments would likely violate both State law and Utah Constitution. EH/kh r��QJ G; T1Yf ;L °'" ' '1I014 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE VERL "BUZZ" HUNT Treasurer PALM ER DEPAULIS MAYOR TREASURER CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING 451 SOUTH STATE STREET. ROOM 228 LINDA HAMILTON SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE (801) 535-7946 MEMORANDUM TO: Incentive Review Camittee r'ROM: Buzz Hunt DATE: June 26, 1989 SUBJECT: Clark Financial Proposal on Sales Tax Inclement Clark Development, a subsidiary of Clark Financial Corporation, proposes to develop a 290,000 to 345,000 square foot regional shopping center in Sugar House, anchored by the construction of a new 100,840 square foot SHOPKO Store. The proposal requests substantial and unprecedented subsidy from the City, including: o $830,000 property tax inclement from the RDA; o $900,000 UDAG grant (conversion of past loan to a grant) ; o $1,750,000 "Economic Development Funds" consisting primarily of estimated "sales tax increment; " and, o Donation of 264,831 square foot of City-owned land valued at approximately $2.5 million. In total, the proposal is requesting nearly $6.0 million in subsidies from the City. Equity contributions flow Clark Financial, on the other hand, total approximately $3.8 million, of which $2.6 million is sunk costs consisting of prior land and real estate acquisitions of residential properties currently located on the proposed development site. Perhaps the single most important element of the requested subsidy is the $1,750,000 in "Economic Developcent Funds," which consists of Clark Financial's estimates of "sales tax increment. " The following analysis considers the issue of sales tax increment as proposed by Clark Financial, including certain aspects pertaining to bonding via the City's Municipal Incentive Review Committee - 2 - June 26, 1989 Building Authority. Legal considerations of the bonding proposal will also be reviewed by Chapaan and Cutter in a separate memorandum. Sales Tax and Debt Fiancing Proposal The Clark proposal requests that the City make an up-fiunt cash investment of $1,750,000 into the project. The funds would be used for land acquisition ($637,500) , off-site improvements ($900,000) and parking facilities ($212,500) . The proposal suggests that the City issue lease revenue bonds via the Municipal Building Authority over 20 years in order to raise the up-front capital. The future revenue stream to be used to repay the debt will be increased sales tax revenues generated by the project, or in other words, "sales tax increment. " Sales tax increment is defined as the net addition to the City's sales tax receipts causer] solely by the new development. It is expressed in terms of a "net" addition because total gross sales generated by the project are discounted for taxable sales that are already occurring in the City or would otherwise occur within the City without the new Sugar House development. Thus, sales tax increment only includes new sales tax revenues exclusive of sales tax receipts we are currently receiving, and are fully discounted for sales that would otherwise occur within the City but are simply redistributed to the new site in Sugar House. In addition to sales tax increment, the Clark proposal requests that all business licensing fees generated by the new development also be placer] into the Economic Development Fund and thereby also be available for debt service on the City MBA bonds. Clark estimates that some 30 new businesses with 500 employees will be located at the development, generating $8,787 in business licensing fees each year. According to Clark's proposal, annual sales tax revenues are estimated at $250,000, whereas annual debt service is estimated at $185,000. Thus, according to the proposal's estimates, sales tax increment will exceed debt service requirements by $65,000 per year even without the use of business licensing revenues. Sales Tax Projections The Clark proposal includes projections of total taxable sales for the regional shopping center. Clark projections consists of the following: ° New Space -- SHOPKO (100,000 s.f. @ $200/s.f. ) $20,000,000 -- Speculative space (65,000 s.f. @ $150/s.f. ) 9,750,000 -- Restaurants (2 @ $2,000,000) 4,000,000 ° Remodeled space -- Retail ($134,000 s.f. @ $135/s.f. ) 18,090,000 Total Sales $51,840,000 Incentive Review Committee - 3 - June 26, 1989 These projection exceed estimates prepared for Clark Financial by an independent consultant (Howard L. Green & Associates, Inc. ) in a March, 1985 feasibility study commissioned by Clark Financial. According to the Green study, nationwide industry standards for regional shopping centers of the type proposed by Clark reveal average sales per square foot of $94 per year. Adjusted for inflation, this figure is currently $112 per square foot per year. Projections of taxable sales prepared by the Green study estimate $105 average sales per square foot per year in 1985 dollars, or approximately $118 per square foot in current dollars (adjusted for inflation) . Using the Green study estimates, total taxable sales for the proposed regional shopping center would be approximately $40 million per year, or nearly $12 million lower than sales projections contained in the Clark proposal . The Finance Department has also prepared sales projections for the • proposed project using the City's own sales tax data hose. This data includes annual taxable sales for more than 12,000 businesses throughout the City. Ccnparable type stores and shopping centers were used to derive independent sales projections. Although individual cony sales data are protected by a confidentiality agreement with the State Tax Commission, the City's research efforts have produced ample evidence to suggest that sales per square foot are likely to be much lower than those presented in the Clark proposal, including sales estimates prepared by SHOPKO. Finance Department projections indicate that total gross taxable sales for the shopping center will be $39,138,000, or approximately $12.7 million lower than those contained in the Clark proposal. Adjusting Gross Sales to Account for Redistribuion of Existing Sales The Clark proposal involves the concept of sales tax increment. Therefore estimates of gross taxable sales must be adjusted downward by subtracting out all sales that are currently taking place within the City or would otherwise take place within the City without development of the now shopping center. The Clark proposal does include such an adjustment; however, the Clark pivposal adjustment only includes subtraction of sales currently taking place in the existing strip of stores on Simpson Avenue. Current sales, according to Clark, total $11,200,000. Thus "net" new sales according, to the proposal, will be $40,640,000. Clark's adjustment (subtracting existing sales at the Sugar House site) does not account for other sales taking place throughout the City that would be "redistributed" to the new shopping center. Yet, these redistributed sales are already in the City's tax base, and therefore can not be included in the sales tax increment. In order to derive estimates of existing redistributed sales, the Finance Department consulted with the Howard L. Green & Associates, Inc. feasibility study which includes analysis of market penetration in market areas within the Incentive Review Committee - 4 - June 26, 1989 City. The Green study partitions the total market area for the new regional shopping center into 18 trade area sectors. Total 1990 population of the market area is estimated at 153,365. Of that total market, an estimated 84,903 are within the City. Of the 18 partitioned trade areas, 8 are completely within the City, and 3 others are partially within the City. The Green study uses these 18 trade areas to analyze potential market penetration which, in turn, is used to derive sales projections. 5y using the Green study estimates of market penetration, the same analysis can be applied to determine existing or redistributed sales. In this manner, it can be determined that approximately 53% of the gross sales at the new regional shopping center are existing or distributed sales currently taking place within the City. Thus, using the fusibility study commissioned by Clark Financial it is possible to derive estimates of the sales tax increment. This analysis yields the following results: Gross Sales Sales Increment Clark Forecasts $51,840,000 $24,112,322 City Froecats $39,138,000 $16,860,176 Point of Sale vs. Population Formula for Tax Distritution The final step in calculating sales tax revenue is to place estimates of taxable sales increment through the distribution formula to determine actual City revenue. State law mandates that local option sales tax receipts be divided into two "pots of money. " The first is "point of sale" (i.e. , the local government jurisdiction within which the sale takes place) . The second is the "population pool. " Local governments receive the entire amount of point of sale portion and split the population pool with other local governments on the basis of percentage of State population. Salt Lake City currently receives 11% of the population pool because the City's population is 11% of the State population (based on 1980 census) . Currently, point of sale constitutes 75% of direct taxable sales. The population pool receives 25%. Unfortunately for Salt Lake City, the point of sale vs. population split will gradually change over the next five yrars, as specified in existing State law, until it reaches a 50/50 split. Also unfortunate is the fact that the 1990 census is anticipated to show that the City's share of total State population will decrease to 9.5%. Thus, just as the population pool increases at the expense of point of sale, the City's share of the population will decrease from 11% to 9.5% beginning in 1991. The City's current local option tax rate on taxable sales is 58/64 of 1%, or approximately 0.91%. Effective January 1, 1990, that tax rate will increase to 63/64 of 1%, or approximately 0.98% (assuming that the Olympics Referendum passes in November) . It will then remain at that level until 1999 when it will increase to exactly 1%. Using the distribution formual as described above, the following summary presents the resulting revenues for both the Clark sales forecasts and the City sales forecasts: Incentive Review Committee - 5 - June 26, 1989 Clark Forecasts City Forecasts Gross Taxable Sales $51,840,000 $39,138,000 Sales Increment 24,112,322 16,860,176 Tax Revenue 1990 173,982 121,654 1994 129,952 90,867 1999 132,015 92,309 2004 132,015 92,309 2009 132,015 92,309 Total Revenue (20 Years) 2,730,206 1,909,055 Net Present Value $1,128,456 $789,054 Please note that because of programmed changes to the "point of sale vs. population" formula in existing law, the City can expect its current sales tax base to decrease 25.3% frcnn 1990 to 1994. This fact accounts for the decrease in tax revenues shown above for both the Clark and City forecasts from 1990 to 1994. The modest increase shown for 1999 reflects the additional 1/64 of 1% in the City's tax rate upon cciupletion of the Olympics financing mechanibm. The difference in revenue between the Clark and City forecasts is approximately $820,000 over 20 yrvirs. The net present value calculations are important in determining the extent to which bonding is advisable fnu a financial standpoint. Debt Service Obligations The Clark proposal calls for the City issuing $1,750,000 in lease revenue bonds via the City's Municipal Building. The proposal assumes a 20 year debt financing at 8.5% interest. There are several significant legal implications of this proposal; however, these are aptly discussed in a letter dated July 20, 1989 from Chapman and Cutler who act as bend counsel on the City's MBA debt issues. These issues will be discussed in a separate memorandum. To assist in analyzing the financial feasibility of the Clark proposal, the City's Financial Advisor, Ehrlich Bober & Co. Inc. , was asked to prepare a debt service schedule with even debt service payments over 20 years at 8.5% interest. The Clark proposal requires $1,750,000 to be available for the construction fund (uses of these funds are mentioned earlier) . In addition to the construction fund requirements, the financing will require at least one year's capitalized interest (assumed at $163,000) and a 10% of par debt service reserve fund (at $226,000) . Cost of issuance would include bond counsel, printing costs, trustee fees, financial advisory fees, and contingency totalling $76,340. Underwriter's discount is assumed at 2% ($45,200) . Thus the par amount of bonds required to capitalize a $1,750,000 construction fund would be $2,260,000. Incentive Review Committee - 6 - June 26, 1989 Total principal and interest payments for a $2,260,000 issue at 8.5% over 20 years is $4,872,900. Gross debt service can be reduced by the amount of capitalized interest, debt service reserve and interest earnings on unexpended fund balances which are estimated at $792,695 over 20 years. Thus, net debt service for the 20 year obligation would be $4,086,715. The Clark proposal suggests that sales tax inc.iement be used to repay the obligation. Under the two different forecasts of taxable sales, the plan would result in the following: Clark Forecasts City Forecasts Increment Revenues $2,730,206 $1,909,055 Net Debt Service 4,086,715 4,086,715 Surplus/(Deficit) ($1,356,509) ($2,177,660) as indicated, under either sales forecast, the City would incur significant deficits by pursuing the Clark proposal. Using the Clark sales projections, the City would incur over $1.3 million in deficits. Using the City forecasts, the City's deficits would approach $2.2 million. These deficits, of course, would have to be covered by general fund revenues that are currently and would otherwise be used to finance necessary public services. Net present value calculations of future revenue stream generated by sales tax increment suggest that the piuposed project is not capable of producing sufficient revenue to go forward with the proposal. Future revenues could only support a bond issue of half the size proposed by Clark even if the company's own sales forecasts are used in the analysis. City forecasts, on the other hand, suggests that revenue would be sufficient to cover only about one third of the Clark proposal. Summary The Clark Financial proposal is not feasible frcutr a financial standpoint. Analyzing just the sales tax increment portion of the proposal , the City would incur serious deficits by pursuing a bonding package as suggested in the proposal. This is true whether or not Clark's forecasts of future sales are used in the analysis. It should be added that all risks associated with the financing would be totally borne by the City. If, for example, Clark was unable to fully lease all developed and remodeled space, the City would incur even larger deficits which would ultimately be an obligation of the City's general fund. It should further be emphasized that the City's sales tax revenues are extremely vulnerable and are certain to face steady decline throughout the first half of the 1990's. Changes in the distribution formula mandated by existing law will result in a 25.3% decrease over a five year period. Incentive Review Committee - 7 - June 26, 1989 Sales tax is a major source of general fund revenue. Future declines will present the City with major difficulties in finding ways to absorb these revenue losses. Participation in the Clark piuposal in light of these and other circumstances would therefore appear to be a bad decision frau a revenue policy perspective. BD/kh S..AR r iIOf DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE VERL "BUZZ" HUNT Treasurer PALMER DEPAULIS TREASURER CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING MANOR 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 228 LINDA HAMILTON SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE (801) 535-7946 MEMORANDUM lU: Incentive Review Committee r'ROM: Buzz Hung, DATE: June 26, 1989 SUBJECT: Clark Financial Proposal on Bonding for $1,750,000 City Participation Attached is a letter dated June 20, 1989 from Darrell R. "Buzz" Tarsen, Jr. of Chapman and Cutler who serves as bond counsel for the City's Municipal Building Authority. The letter is in response to my request for review of legal aspects pertaining to the Clark Financial proposal for City part- icipation in their regional shopping center development. The letter is brief and self-explanatory, but I will summarize it's conclusions. The Clark piuposal requests that the City participate in the Sugar House project by bonding for $1,750,000 at 8.5% interest over 20 years. They suggest use of the Municipal Building Authority issuing such bonds which, according to the pLuposal, would be repaid by the City with "sales tax increment. " The issues surrounding sales tax inciement are discussed in a separate memorandum. Summary of Bond Counsel Opinion In brief, Buzz's conclusions consists of the follc ing: ° The proposal appears unconstitutional because it violates the constitutional prohibition of "lending of credit" contained in Section 29, Article VI of the Utah Constitution; ° The proposal appears to violate the "public purpose" doctrine of municipal law; Incentive Review Committee - 2 - June 26, 1989 • o The proposal appears to violate Title 10 of the Utah Code which authorizes the City to issue debt because the purpose of the debt is to principally benefit one or a limited number of private enterprises; o Title to property and improvements financed by City debt poses irreconcilable conflicts between City bondholders and Clark Financial and/or Shopko private lenders (both City bondholders and private lenders would want the same collateral as security for their respective loans) ; o The proposal would not allow the City to issue tax-exempt debt as it would violate the "private activity" test of Federal tax law; and, o The City financing and requirements of the bondholders trustee are mutually incompatible with lender requirements to be placed on Clark Financial and/or Shopko, rendering the City's bonds urmiarketable or an inability of Clark Financial and/or Shopko to secure a lender. BH/kh Law Offices of CHAPMAN AND CUTLER a partnership including professional corporations Theodore S.Chapman 50 South Main Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84144 2 North Central Avenue 1677-1943 Phoeniy,Ari:cna 55004 FAX(501)533-9o95 Henry E.Cutler Telc hone(£CI)S 3-OC o to02) 1Si9-1959 P 100 Peachtree _:reet.N Atlanta.Georgia 30303 June 20, 1989 (404)420-1420 111 rrVest Monroe Street Chicago illinc_ o0603 Verl F. "Buzz" Hunt (S12 )" 300 Salt Lake City Treasurer Room 228 City and County Building 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Proposal Regarding Public Parking Improvements in Sugar House Business District Dear Buzz: You have requested our advice in connection with the legal implications of a certain economic development proposal that Salt Lake City (the "City") is presently considering for the benefit of Clark Financial Corporation (the "Company"). It is our understanding that the City proposes to acquire certain land (the "City Portion"), title to which may or may not be in the name of the City, constituting a portion of the site on which a Shopko store will be constructed (the "Shopko Store") and acquire and construct on the City Portion certain public parking improvements and public infrastructure improvements (collectively, the "Public Improvements"). The City proposes (among other methods currently under consideration) to finance the cost of acquiring the City Portion and the costs of acquiring and constructing the Public Improvements by causing its Municipal Building Authority (the "Authority") to issue approximately $1,750,000 aggregate principal amount of Lease Revenue Bonds (the "Bonds") the proceeds of which would be used to pay such costs of acquisition and construction. The City expects interest on the Bonds to be excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes. The City will- not impose a user fee or other charge on the users of the Public Improvements, but will meet its debt service obligations on the Bonds through annual appropriations from its General Fund, subject to a reduction in such annual appropriations to the extent that other legally available moneys may be used to make such payments (such as through any available sales taxes or otherwise). While the Public Improvements will be available for use by members of the general public on an equal basis, the members of the general public who are expected to use the Public Improvements consist largely, if not exclusively, of those who will be shopping at the Shopko Store and any adjoining commercial facilities. The foregoing proposal raises significant State constitutional and statutory issues and federal tax law issues that are discussed more fully below. In addition, certain financing considerations should be evaluated relating to the interplay between financing requirements for the Shopko Store and those relating to the marketing of the Bonds as discussed more fully below. La«Ofiiccs of CHAPMAN AND CUTLER Verl F. "Buzz" Hunt June 20, 1989 Page 2 I. State Law Implications 1. Lending of Credit. Section 29 of Article VI of the Utah Constitution provides, in relevant part, that "[t]he Legislature shall not authorize . . . any . . . city . . . to lend its credit . . . in aid of any railroad, telegraph or other private individual or corporate enterprise or undertaking." The use of the Utah Municipal Building Authority Act, Chapter 29 of Title 11, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, (the "Act") to finance the acquisition of the City Portion and the acquisition and construction of the Public Improvements essentially for the benefit of the Company and the Shopko Store may result in a violation of this constitutional prohibition on the City lending its credit in aid of a corporate enterprise. The Utah Supreme Court has on several occasions interpreted Section 29 of Article VI of the Utah Constitution, but in no case has the Court considered this Section where proceeds of a bond issue, which will be repaid from amounts annually appropriated from a city's general fund, will be used to construct improvements that benefit such a limited number of private entities. In many of the "lending of credit" cases, the proceeds of bond issues (such as industrial development bonds) have been used for the benefit of a private entity, but that private entity was liable for repayment of the bonds and no credit was extended by the issuing municipality. The proposal described above raises a significant lending of credit issue under the Utah Constitution. 2. Public Purpose. A fundamental principle of municipal law, which the Utah Supreme Court has recognized in various constitutional provisions, is that public funds must be spent for public, not private, purposes. What constitutes a valid "public purpose" is obviously susceptible to varying interpretations. In this context, the argument to support the "public purpose" for the proposal described above is that it will stimulate economic development and any private purpose is merely incidental. On the other hand, the extent of private benefit that is limited largely to one commercial enterprise (i. e., the Shopko Store) suggests that the expenditures and financing by the City are not primarily for a public purpose, but are primarily made for the private purpose of benefitting one or a limited number of commercial enterprises from public funds contrary to the "public purpose" doctrine. 3. Statutory Authority. Under the Act, the City is authorized only to finance the acquisition of property that it is "authorized or permitted by law to own, possess, or hold." The issue for the proposal becomes whether the City is authorized under applicable law to own and hold the Public Improvements as described above. Under Section 10-8-2 of the Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, the City is authorized (among other things) to hold real and personal property "for the benefit of the city." Under Section 10-8-8 of the Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, the City is authorized to lay out, establish, grade, pave and otherwise improve parking lots or other facilities for the parking of vehicles off streets. If the City Portion and the Public Improvements are held for the benefit of the La.v Offices of CHAPMAN AND CUTLER Verl F. "Buzz" Hunt June 20, 1989 Page 3 City, the City would have the authority to own and hold such property under the applicable provisions of Title 10 of the Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, and finance its acquisition and construction under the Act. On the other hand, the applicable provisions of Title 10 may be read to not authorize the City to, in effect, own and hold a private parking lot for the benefit primarily of one or a limited number of commercial enterprises. 4. Title to the Financed City Portion and Public Improvements. As we understand the proposal, the precise arrangement relating to title to the City Portion and the Public Improvements and the Shopko Store's and Company's rights (if any) in and to the City Portion and the Public Improvements has not yet been resolved. Please be advised that under the Act, the Authority is authorized to issue the Bonds solely for the purpose of acquiring property for the City and not for the Company or any other private entity (such as the Shopko Store). Similarly, the City (as lessee from the Authority under a lease agreement) has limited authority under the Act to sublease financed facilities, which would not include a sublease to the Shopko Store or the Company. Any effort by the Company to have the City Portion become property of the Company (whether by outright transfer of title or a long-term leasehold estate, particularly if the property may be foreclosed upon for the benefit of the lenders for the Shopko Store) would defeat a financing under the Act which may, nevertheless, conflict with the Company's expectations as to requirements that the lenders for the Shopko Store may impose. II. Federal Tax Law Implications As you are aware, there are basically two types of tax-exempt bonds which are permitted by the Internal Revenue Code. First, there are what are commonly referred to as "governmental bonds" which are traditional general obligation and revenue bonds issued for traditional governmental-type purposes and which are not considered private activity bonds under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the "Code"). Secondly, there are private activity bonds which are bonds the proceeds of which will be used by non-governmental entities. Private activity bonds may be tax-exempt only if they comply with specific provisions of the Code. It is our understanding that the City intends that the Bonds qualify as governmental bonds and not private activity bonds. If the Bonds were private activity bonds, the interest thereon would not be exempt from income taxation under the Code. Section 141 of the Code defines a private activity bond as any bond which meets the private business use test and the private security or payment test. The private business use test is met if more than 10% of the proceeds of the bond are to be used for any private business use. A private business use means use (directly or indirectly) in a trade or business carried on by any person other than a governmental unit. The private security or payment test is met if more than 10% of the proceeds of a bond directly or indirectly is secured (i) by any interest in property used or to be used in a private business use, (ii) payments in respect of such property used in a private business use or (iii) payments to be derived from payments in respect of such property used for a private business use. Law Offices of CHAPMAN AND CUTLER Verl F. "Buzz" Hunt June 20, 1989 Page 4 The 10% private business use test is reduced to a 5% test to the extent that the private business use is not related to or is disproportionate to the governmental use financed by a bond. In other words, no more than 5% of a private business use can be for a use that is not related to the governmental purpose of the facility. A major exception to the private business use test is that use of a bond- financed facility as a member of the general public is not treated as a private business use. For this reason, the City Portion and the Public Improvements may be deemed not to be used for a private business use simply because private, non-governmental entities (such as individuals) use the Public Improvements if such use is on the basis as a member of the general public. However, problems arise with respect to the general public exception when use of a facility is in effect limited to patrons of one or a limited number of commercial enterprises such as appears to be contemplated by the proposal described above. I have not discussed with our Tax Department whether, under the facts presented, they would feel that the nexus between the City Portion and the Public Improvements and the Shopko Store is such that the City Portion and the Public Improvements financed with proceeds of the Bonds become indirectly used in a trade or business of a non-governmental entity and the Bonds, therefore, become private activity bonds. However, given the facts as we understand them, a significant question exists as to whether interest on the Bonds would be tax-exempt because of the close relationship between the Shopko Store and the uses of the bond-financed City Portion and Public Improvements, notwithstanding the general public use exception. In essence, the reason for the proposal as we understand it is to provide tax- exempt financing as part of a combined effort to finance a viable Shopko Store operation, which clearly presents the risk that the Bonds may be treated as private activity bonds the interest on which is not tax-exempt under the Code. III. Other Financing Considerations Though not strictly legal in nature, one other area deserves mention for the City's consideration of the proposal. Presumably, the lenders who will provide the financing for the Shopko Store will want to assure access across the City Portion and to the Public Improvements, which could take various forms (e.g., reciprocal easement agreement, license agreement, etc.). Regardless of the form selected, the lenders for the Shopko Store will want their rights to be superior to any rights that the City or the Trustee on behalf of Bondholders may want in the City Portion and the Public Improvements to assure continued access notwithstanding foreclosure in the event that the City nonappropriates (for whatever reason) under its lease agreement from the Authority. This expected position of the lenders for the Shopko Store directly conflicts with what the requirements will be for the City and the Authority to market the Bonds. The owners of the Bonds would require that their interests in the City Portion and the Public Improvements remain first and superior to insure that if the City terminates its annually renewable lease agreement the Bondholders and the Trustee could recover the City Portion and the Public Improvements to be used for whatever purpose, following Law Offices of CHAPMAN AND CUTLER Verl F. "Buzz" Hunt June 20, 1989 Page 5 foreclosure, desired by the Bondholders. The City should anticipate these conflicting demands that may arise in financing the Shopko Store and in financing the City Portion and the Public Improvements. The City will need to take steps to assure that no commitments are made relative to the Shopko Store that may impair the marketing of the Bonds, assuming that the City can effectively resolve in the first instance the significant legal issues presented by the proposal. The foregoing discussion raises a lot of issues and makes certain factual assumptions that may or may not change over time as the proposal is considered by the City. Please do not hesitate to call me at any time if you would like to discuss the contents of this letter further or any other matters that may be raised relating to this proposal. Best personal regards. Very truly yours, CHAPMAN AND CUTLER By Darrell R. Larsen, Jr. DRL/cha HAND DELIVERED CLARK F'IMNaAL PROPOSAL t f a ktix,Air IV:I ]f r17 F a nano{[Fe 440, * (#.3 ti 0 r )4*. A Professional Financial and Investment Consulting Firm May 22 , 1989 Mr . Bob Buchanan Grants Acquisition and Project Coordinator Capital Planning and Programming Division 324 South State, Room 240 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Dear Bob: Enclosed please find Clark Financial Corporation ' s application for $ 900, G00 of UDAG funding and $1 , 750, 000 of economic development funding in connection with our proposed development in Sugar House. The narrative information required by the application follows form 5 and the application includes four attachments : Attachment 41 - a copy of a recent appraisal of the property as if it were vacant and ready for development Attachment f2 - A list identifying the owner of each parcel of property in the proposed project Attachment3 - A project pro forma and supporting schedules , including a sources and uses of funds analysis of the proposed economic development funds Attachment '-; 4 - A copy of a study of the market feasibility of retail development in Sugar House As I understand it , you intend to hold the first Incentive Review Committee meeting later this week to begin the process of formulating a recommendation to Mayor DePaulis early in June . Please advise me of how I may be of assistance in the process . Sincere}y, of /�` 1 z� James A . McGuire i ( Development Director JAMCG: vp Enclosure 2144 South Highland Drive, Suite 200 Salt Lake City, Utah 84106-2807 (801) 485-2321 FAX 467-1505 11 • PART III Description of Proposed Project kith exhibits as appicpriate, respond to each of the following: Section A - State,-rent of Problems and Cbiectives 1. In no more than three paragraphs, describe the relation between the procosed project and the residential or ecorxanic development needs of the (...-uilitunity. Also discuss now the project will provide jobs for CF`!A eligible and minority persons, arid, if applicable, what role minority businesses or contractors will play in the project. Description of projects with residential cnents shuJ.d also �nress the gt.stien of the project's consistency with the city's housing Assistance Plan (hAP) reds and god i s, if the city has a HAP. 2. For pocket of poverty Applicants only; If the proposed project is part of a pocket of poverty application, o r nstrate the relation between the project and plans for the physic??1 and economic development of the p cket that provide direct Denew±its to the pocket`s lam:--and [ ierate--in re residents. Section B - PLcject Description • 1. hrief Project Description: L�cribe the nature, size and scope of project, Pius participating parties in one page or less. 2. Preliminary Information (Cbecx colurn for the correct answer below and explain as aprru&riate) Yes b (a) have citizen pa.rticioation bearirrs been held? X If the answer is no, explain. Proposed project will` be presented to the Suaar House • Community Council on June 7 , 1989 . Further citizen involvement will occur at a Planning Commission hearing on June 8 , 1989 and a hearing before the City Council on July 11 , 1989 . (b) Is the env_rornentl level of clearance finding cuuolete? X Late of Clearance Finding Not Applicable (c) Does the project r''uir.e an Ern•irormen to 1 IrriDact Statement? _ If the answer is yes, p rov is e a schedule for r iT ie tion. 13 Yes No (a) Is an environmental review complete? , Date If the answer is no, provide a schedule for carpletion. Not Applicable (e) Is the project in a designated flood hazard area? x If the answer is yes, explain the inpacts. (t) kill historic prrties be aff ect ? x If the answer is yes, explain the impact. (g) kill the proposed project result in the relocation of :industrial or commercial facilities frati one jurisdiction to another? If the answer is yes, provide a detailed explanation. • (h) Does the applicant have any emresolved issues arising from civil rights compliance reviews or previous CEG conditions relating to fair housing issues, citizen participation allegations, lawsuits, or other allega- tions against the prcposeo or any other f eaera.,1 y assisted project (or fo-,dint') administered by the applicant? If answer is yes, explain. - 14 • Yes No (i) hill the project for which the assistance is requested directly cause the displacement of indiviav ls, families, businesses or farms? If the answer is yes, complete and attach Form 1, Relocation Effects. 15 ULAG FOF1 i 1 • RE1LCATICN EFFECTS Instructions: Carplete the t Phle below with the numbers of tt i i 1 ies, individuals, farms, and businesses which will be relocated as a result of the proposed project. NOTE: The following definitions apply to this table: (1) Low and Moderate Income: Families or L related ihdiviouals wicse indite does not exccod the applicable im ne limit for eligibility for assistance under the Section 8 housing program. %here size of Emily is not known, use Section 6 limit for a family of tour persons. (2) Other Income Categories: Families or unrelated irdividt.P1s whose income exceeds the applicable income limit for eligi- bility for assistance under the Section 8 pLwiar:: Low and Moderate Cther income total: Income Categories Minority ter_--r-amity t.inxrity i'bn-I1n !'or1ty r rity I �n-hinar: 1. Families r,i c aced 6 2 8 23 14 25 2. Unrelated Individuals Displaced 1 2 2 1 4 • 3. Farms Lost 4. businessess Displaced 4 4 5. Jobs Lost Fl.on Fv s i— neFs in Line 4 _ 12 • =Itis fouu constitutes the response to Part III. Section B2(i) . 16 3. Project Description by transaction: Describe each transaction in detail, inchving the following information. If the proposed transaction involves infrastructure improvements or demolition, or if housing is to be provided, complete either Form 2a or 2b and insert: a. Description of the PLuyvsed Site (1) trration of the site (inclirie m-p. ); physical characteristics of site at present (existing buildirs, utilities, sped features, and current condition) ; The site is bounded by Simpson Avenue , Highland Drive, 1300c1ast t:- and Interstate 80 (see attached plat map) . It currently 36 residential structures and three commercial structures (2) Acreage; or number of municipal lots or land parcels which will be asselroled for project; 17 . 75 acres (3) Agg-regate cost of acreage; attach, as appe ix, it onnatiori verifying c' t; $7 , 537 , 230 • (4) Cost per s uare toot or acre of pr rty; gable land costs in loc_ l vicinity of transaction; $9 . 75� per square foot ttached appraisal for comparable land costs (Attachment -1) (5) Proof of present ownership and public or private developer's control • of site, such as through peed, title insurance policy, plat rrt n, purchase contracts, c lion, c r emnation resolutions and authorizations . (6) Zoning of site: Is it arivpriate fcr intended uses? Is re-zoning require;i? hhat is the status? The site is currently zoned C-1 and R-2 . A petition has been filed requesting that the site be re-zoned C-3 . (7) If the transaction involves the rehabilitation of historic structures, briefly describe now structures will be restored or ad ted to new uses. .hre available and relevant, provide docunentation Larrnark (aini.ssions, the State historic Preservaticn C±ficer (ShP0) , the Keeper of the National legister of the 1-ar- ent of t e Interior (for deter- mination of historic eligibility) , or the Advisory Council on historic Preservation. Not applicable • WAG FOldi (2a) ALLEVIATION OF PHYSICAL UIS'111' S I<ESILti'T1AL T1iANSAC.TIONS OR CLNPONEN1S* (A) (b) (C) (D) New Construction hehaLilitation Single Multi Single hull1 lxvolished Historic Family 1'amii Family Family 1% Substandard) kestoration Nuc.ber of Units Number of Occupants Iietore Project Completed N/A C/A Wmber of Occupants At ter Project Completed 1NE'1tAS2R fCIUR1-: FOR RLS1L .NTI L PPOJEC .IS (V 1iER : APPL1CA1iLE) Linear Feet- Linear Feet of Capacity Added (Units Served) . of Ne., Pipe Pipe hcplaced A. V+ater U. Sewer C. Sanitary *'leis torm constitutes the response to Part IIl. Section 113. WAG Ft) (2b) 11.L1ZVITi!'IC�.^I C)1' PLYSICAL LAS'1'P}c;S CX.a*'r,iL1 C1AL,/1NL 'DUAL PIduJLC."15* (A) (Li) (C) New Construction Rehabilitation Historic Re.storation 14 m r of Buildings 6 6 --0- 'Total Square kb tape 236 , 000 130 , 000 -0- INFMS1l.LC,'1'UJ FUR C. .,1^11 2IAL,/INLULaR1AL P1AJ SC1S (hHERG APPLICABLE) Linear Feet Linear Peet ot Capacity Added of New Pipe Pipe Replaced A. hater Information being developed B. Sewer C. Sanitary *ahis form constitutes the response to Part III. Section Ci3. • b. Eevelcprnent Sulinary: Carplete the following: (1. ) Develaper(s) : list and minimal but relevant ir. ormation on their background and develcpment experience. Include. name a-Ad tPl ephone number of developer's contact person Clark Development-subsidiary of Clark Finanbia_ Corp : , a 25 yr . old real estate co . which is the General Partner in more than $500 , 000 , 00 of real estate owned in more than 13 states . Previous development experience includes the Capital Hill Mall in Helena , MT, a 110 , 000 sq . ft . office building, Parkview Plaza , in Salt Lake City , UT, and a 14 acre retail development surrounding the Layton Hills Mall in Layton, UT. Contact Person : Jim McGuire (485-2321) (2. ) ;sources of Funds and Amounts to corrplete project. (Indian 'Tribes and til kan Native Village must indicate whether they • are using tr i i1=1 trust f urds, and if so, must provide documentation allowing release of such funds) . (a) 5t Financing source Amomt Rate/Term Status Contact Person Contact Te1e°ohone T`tl $5 , 739 , 336* *Application for financing has not yet been submitted . (b) Ecuity Investment by Devrlcper(s) , iscluoing limitea partnerships, syndicates, coreJrationS, iflaividuals: Source Amounts C� rk Financial Corporation $3 , 817 , 451 20 • (c) U 1-G Amount Ieouestea: • • Net present value of the UDAG loan repayments on Parkview Plaza (estimated to be $9.00 , 0.00 at 11% interest) (d) Other Public Funds_ (Give source and amount) Tax increment financing - $830, 000 Economic development funds - $1 , 750 ,.000 (e) Other rungs (S ify) Sale of land to ShopKo - $3 , 000 , 000 ShopKo contribution to site costs - $700 , 000 (f) For a pocket of poverty project, provide source and nsP of pocket's 20% match (3) . Consultants (rate and addresses, if any) Nichols , Naylor Architects Eckhoff, Watson & Preator Eng , 1400 Foothill Drive 1121 East 3900 South_ SuiteB-34 Parkview• Building "C" Salt Lake City , UT 84108 Suite 100 Salt Lake City, UT 84124 Ca r lete Fors 3a, Source- arid Uses of .Fins and Fonii 3b, Other Public Financial Assistance Summary, arri insert behind this pa9e.. Also include detailed unit cost cccistructlon estimate, detaileo 10 year cash flaw projections for =rrnercial real estate projects, and 5 year cash f projections for inaustsial projects. SOURCES AND USES OF 'l.!?�DS FOR PROJECTS `ih s constitutes partial response to Part IlI. .Section :3 Jb. EGUicCfS OF FUNDS ULAG Private Loans ( Including Line Item I:ctivi y Funds Equity Revenue t or s) Other* otal a. I_a,s.! I uisition 900 , 000 5 , 257 , 230 212 , 500 1 ( 167 ( 500 $7 , 537 , 230 53o,coOP b. F,elocation of Persons 6 37,,SoD and businesses included in (a) c. Clearance and L olition 300 , 000 300 , 000 d. ttt-Site Impresiements 900 , 000 900 , 000 e. On-Site Improvements 1 , 172 , 479 1 , 172 , 479 t . building Construction 2 , 757 , 225 2 , 757 , 225 g. Parking Facilities 487 , 500 212 , 500 700 , 000 h. Capital Equipment _ i. Nal-Capital Equipuent (FFE, etc. ) j. . Professional Fees 867 , 143 89 , 600 9_56 ( 743 .k, interim Costs: • Construction Pericxl lntereste .teal Estate • - 'IaxespInsurance, Loan costs 1 , 020 , 032 1 , 020 , 032 ULWG Form 3a Lont'd. • EOU1d'r_S AND U5L•3 OF FUNDS FOR P1 3EC S UIi1G Private Loans ( Including Line Item Activity F'unas FLiuity ievenue bonds) Other* Total 1. Contingency 577 , 248 577 , 248 m. Cost Subtotal (sum of lines a-1) 900 , 000 6 , 354 , 001 5 , 739 , 336 2 , 580 , 000 15 , 920L957 n. kininistration 815 , 831 815{ 8 31 o. Ivorkiny Capital p. `Dotal Project Costs (sum of lines m + n + o) 900 , 000 7 , 517 , 451* 5 , 739 , 336 2 , 580 , 000 16 , 736 , 788 * Includes sale -of land to ShopKo ($3 , 000 , 000) and ShopKo participation in site costs ($700 , 000) *On a separate page, specify the source and use of other tunras if: they are not included on UL.AG Form 3b. For Indian Iribes, Tribal Enterprise equity should be placed under "private equity." ni ibal `trust Funds should be distinjuished from other tribal tu_rd.u. r,J [RAG FON,: 3b Crliit1"PUBL1C FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE SUNNAItY INSTIUC1IC S: Caiplete one row to describe each kind of public financial ancial assistance used in the proposed project. • Public Entity Funding Status Program Title Contact Person Application Ad dress%'lelephone. `1 'pe of Assistance recipient of Use of Public not Number Amount (.Loan, (want) Public Funds Funds Committed Pendinicj Submitted (A) (U) (C) (U) (E) (F) (G) (f1) UDA 1 oan $900 , 000 Grant Clark fnvn npment Land writ-down X repayments Tax increment $830 , 000 Grant Clark Development Land writedowri X clearance and financing demolition • Economic $1 , 750 , 000 Grant Clark Development Land acquisition X development public parking funds improvements , public infrastructure improvements *With Form 3a, this form constitutes the response to Part III Section U 3b. 24 c. UCAG Repayment Summary (Complete the form below) Amount of Action Grant to be repaid: S -0- (Action Grant awunt involved in recawture plan) Term: Interest Rate(s) : Participation in Gross Revenues or Aft Cash Participation in Residuals ( le, Refinance, etc. ) : Lescriba the Administration of Pepayment Process a. Project Sched ul e (Carr le to the form below) Start C arsple to Site Acquisition Underway 7/31/89 Private Cstrition 8/15/89 9/30/90 • Public Construction 8/15/89 9/30/90 New Permanent Jobs -0- 500 25 section C - Statement of "But For"; Justification of hhV the Action Grant is Needed Using t gloss ry def inition of the "but for" stati2ment, state the need and justification for the grant. Discuss the "but for" condition(s) that pertain to each transaction and/cr to the project. :ection D - ikarket Feasibility • x n one page or less, discuss and document info-oration used to describe the market feasibility of each aspect of the proposed project. Lf formal feasibility or ccmparable studies have been preoared, attach such reports as an Ppoandix to this application. Section F -- Evidence of Developer, Private Investor, and Other Public (r rL1tnents and belated Information UDA.G awa ds will be crofvided only if private entities associated with the pt rosed project offer firm c=i nenrs to cartici ete and earn such entity deTcnstrates that it has ;he financial ca-ac:i ty to deliver the resources to which it has Ocl[rdi.t.te:i. In this subsection provide evidence of both firm commitment and r inorr: - 0 whion oarrciorates the description of the Project`s financial structure in tart cn B, 3b. , Levelc rent S a.[u ary. - All C:..iitroent letters ._e_luirad in this pact should ln;ll> he general provisions - - State that the signatory has the authority to cci nit his/her organization. Ordinarily this means the chairman of the board or the chief executive officer of a financial institution cr_ corporation, the general partner of a 'limited r+tnersh p, the chief e;ecutive or governing body of a c:.siaruni tY, and the iupriate state agency representative. -- Specify the size or amoant, the terns and conditions, of the ca ail rent, e:nd the nq's, Pure ose, and timing of each part of the investment. State a v:illirgness of the signatory to sign a legally binding co rnitment Lpon award of an Action (.Font. 7 re applicable, the signator's cui[u[ith Sit to provide a specified number and type of jobs, and the scheduling of when the e[mloyrrent is to ta,e •• 26 1. Documentation truth Levelers, E uity Investors, Employers, or Major Tenants In acidition to the general provisions, developers' or equity investors' letters should: a. Lescribe the size and scope of the project; b. .Summarize the activities of each participating party, and the sources, elaIUunts, and status of all funding and financing; c. Indicate the mount of the Action Grant requested, its uses, and, repayment terms; a. Affirm and explain why the commitment or invests it is contingent upon receipt of the Action Grant and that it will not take place without the Action Grant. - Provide su orting documentation. 2. Evidence of Commitments Zion Private Iaders Include documentation of commitments stun all private lenders making loans to the project. ortcaae broker cor itner'ts to find financing and letters o-f interest f��:i leroana institutions are not considered coura nts for financing. Though ocntirgent on the UL G,ien er cmaaitments must otherwise be 6ri Jt." In addition to the general provisions, lender commitment letters snoniri • - include: a. rescription of the type of loan (e.g. , first ncn ;sae, permanent financ- ing, construction financing, etc. ) which the lender is making the amount and status (a orrved, conditionally approved) of the loan provided for the specific activity to be undertaken. If the loan is conditionally approved, the caunitmant letter should state the conditions. b. fine arromr_ of the loan, the interest rate, the term, and the security. C. Statement that the loan has oxrc1etec a11 necessary reouirements of the &PJrovals process of the lender. e.g. , ap.Jrov el of loan c ymittoe. 3. E bt Securities (Ebnds) In e-'reciition to the general provisions, if the issuance of debt securities is involved in the financing of the proposed project, attar-h the following: a. A copy of the infix nt resolution flow the issuing authority; b. An opinion of bond counsel as to the authority of the city or public agency to issue the proposed bonds; c. A letter fica the proaosea underwriter or investor committing to purchase the fords. Such letter must include the di:alnt and nse of bond funds, and all terms and conditions of purchase. Documentation by the underwriter of his financial capacity to deliver on the c7timitnent. d. it ere apprcciiate, a c. Jy of the issuing authority's ordinance covering the authority to issue bonds. e. W ere apprczriate, bocci counsel opinion regarding tax exe~.:pt status of the bonds. 27 • 4. .Evidence of Commitments f Lun Other P.bl is Sources Providing Financial Ass is tanc Each public entity which will participate in the project rmist offer evidence of its firm commitment to do so. Such evidence may include the- city or agency's standard notification of approval or a letter flan the responsible a ninistrator verifying the commitment and, where cuprcpriate, that the Board of the c uniting agency has .approved theo:urlmitment. In aoditon to the aerierai provisions, public Cu iwitmant letters should describe the tv�.,e of funding provided (e.g. , general obligation bands, industrial authori loans, Block Grant funds, etc. ) , the amounts to be provided and when such fundu-x_ will be av�i)able. 5. Loan A olication Submit, as an abpenbix to this application, a copy of any lc en application pack- ages, including exhibits, which have been provided to the lending institutions. 6. Financial Statements Provide the latest financial ancial statement of each private entity involved in the project. L h enteticn of financial caoacity may include net worth staEements, balance sheets, or profit and loss statements. Attach published statements, if any. Ztrou�h HUD is bound to honor the Freedom of Information Act MIA) , it need not disclose records containing "trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and considered privileged or confidential.' Accordingly, if requested, financial statements will be treated confidentially and held apart from the body- of the application., hbte. If limited partnerships are involved as investors in the project, the financial scat rents of general partners must be submitted. - • 26 • Sec_ion F Evidence of l eetir Frog/am Objectives 1. Alleviation of Economic Distress a. Jobs - Job creation is an important factor in evaluating fiction Grant applications. FOFM 4 projects the net number of jobs to be created, with an adjustment for part-time jobs. The percentage of jobs expected to go to minority and low- and moderate- income persons is an important factor in application review. This town divides the totti1 net jobs to be createa according to four parameters related to economic distress. The form requires information on sources of job estimates. Applicants may use historical records and industry standards, or may elect to use other methods which should be documented with attachments referenced on this FC N. hUD excepts Action Grant project participants to till the positions ident-1fie: in the application. Complete tDAG FORM 4, Jobs. Fill in all lines or insert °N/A' where items are not rwlicable to the propossed project. If two or more cirterent cate- gories of jobs (industrial, retail, and office) make iirport nt cont_riouticns to the total in a mixed-use project, an applicant may wish to tile a-separate FOF 4 for each category to make assumptions clear. Numbers one and two refer to the site of the Action Grant project and the project itself , not the developer, tenant, or entire company. For Pockets of Poverty only: Note that 75% cf jobs resulting f Luu the project must directly benefit low- and n deLate-.inosne persons, and 51% of the jobs resulting f?czri the project must go to low- and moderate-income residents of the pocket. PocketLL applicants must also aemonstrate how and to what extent job opportunities for minority will be provided by the project relative to the percentage of minorities in the pocket. ''CEaA - Fligible Jobs filled by irndividRels who are either (a) participating in a program similar to the tormer CET (Oarprehensive Employment and Training Act) funded program, or (b) were referred to the e,4,,loyer by CETA officials, or (c) are econanirla tly disadvantaged,, unemployed, underemployed or in school, according to the regnlFtions of the former C:ETA pic z i. 29 ULA EOM 4 A. P MANE 1• JOBS PR3JE0'iia (excluding c:.nstruction jobs) ki11-.TrTIME -BALF-T1hE JCS (a) 'JOSS (b) 1. Aiumber of jobs projected for Action Grant site after completion of project: 250 (la) 250 (i) Source (check box and enter figure if appic.,priate) l / lr i ustry standard j aos/per square foot: jobs/per S cu1 es: Local it ustry statistics l / Levelc:per/ e t estimates / Other (explain w/attach nts) 2. Nara. r of jobs currently at Action Gant site: 6 (2a) 6 (2k;) • • Source (check box) /-7 Employer records / 1©ca.l industry statistics X l Other ( lin Developer 3. Z aroer of existing jobs projected to be transferred to Action Grant site: -0- (3a) -0- (3b) Source (check box) / / Employer recoris/estimates / / Inau.stry standards / / Local industry statistics / X / Other (ex nlain) Developer 4. Aft totals (line 1 - line 2 - line 3) 244 (4a) 244 (4b) 5. Net jobs (4a ± 1/24b) 366 (5) av JtA .G r O}, 4 • b.. PERMANENT JOB CiAL.. CTERI S l'I CS Enter the % and number at NET JCS (line-5 fLuill previous page) which will fall in each of the categories described 6. NET JOBS (line 5) projected to be filled by CET —eligible people: 30 % 110 jobs 7. NET JC?_S (line 5) projected to pay less than 60% of the E"S median ins : jobs 8. NET JC `-; (line 5) projected to be entry level positions, open to low and mxierate income persons, but paying over 80% of the EhSA rredian income: jobs 9. NET JCES (line 5) projected to be filled by minority people: 7 _ 2 5 jobs lu. S.SA .Minority % of emulation in the 19b0 Census: 5 . 8 % 11. Net Jobs to be provided by dies which wenlld have gone out of business, but for the Action Grant. (Signet state,-Ants to that effect may Le rec,u i._reo f t-Lim officers. ) -0- jobs • C. CCNSTRUCTICN JCS PF11JECI'ICLV HUT) keeps track of the number of construction jcos LfAG projects generate since - they help alleviate distress. Tne form below estimates construction jobs to be c eat'- by Action Grant projects. 12. Total estimated construction cost of Action Cant project (fr-c.L1 'uAG r`CcM 3a, lines c + d�- e + f + q) : , 829 , 704. 13. % of construction cost attributable to labor: 40 Source (check one box) / Ckntractor's estimate �7 developer's estimate lcc industry statistic / / otter (explain) / % national industry standards 14. labor cost of cxnstruction (line 12 ,. line 13) : r2 , 331 , 882 15. Average annnrt1 construction salary and fringe benefits: Q 25 , 000 Source (check one box) /7 developer's estimate Li Contractor's estimate / / ether (explain) J local inoustry statistics • 16. Projects total Construction Jobs. 125 31 b. Z xes - Using the ollo ping instructions t ork with your jurisdiction's Tax Asse s cnaz t (or Finance and Revenue) Ct f i ce to cauplete Ui2ziG FORM 5. You w it l need to refer to the corpleted UI.AG FORM 4 and infoLA ation on tax atlatenent, tenancy, ware footage by a and projects males in the project. UEAG FORM 5--lax Revenues--seeks an estimate of the net ir=rease in tax reven.iis that the applicant jurisdiction will reei.zze fiord the proposed ULAG project. Applicants may elect to use alternate methods for estimat- ing changes in real property tax revenues or other tax revenues, provided that the estimating method and calculations are shaven and explained. Section 1 of the fout --Real Property Taxes determines the taxes that will De bald cn the project when it is completed. If the 1WAG project only involves capital equipment a juisition, enter °N/A" in Items la, b, c, d, and t and "0" in item le. Otherwise, complete these items and enter 'N/A" in Item 1g. Item la is the market value of the project upon coo etion, estimated by a standard tax 7 r ra i c.�1 p ro ed ure. Err multiphase projects, s w the estimated value of the project upon completion of the final. phase. State the estimate in current Collars. one rep,-;enable estimate of market value is the sun of land value and estimated construction cost. Item lb is the fractional tax assessment rate. This rate con be obt.a?ne t1CSlar. ten.. ....�.. from the tax assessor's office. Item lc is the product of Items la and lb. Item l.d is the nominal tax rate for. the ;.ILAG project use. Include only mat urtaon of the rate for taxes that will accrue to the 1ca1 jurisdiction and its s;xcl board. Exclude that portion cf the rate that will accrue to cial districts or other levels of goverment. The tax assessor can supply information on nominal tax rates. In a multiple nnFi= project, sale _urisdic- tions may have different tax rates or assessment rates tor different uses. In these cases, the calculations in Items la through le should be run separately for each gro of uses that is at a different rate. - Item le is the product of lc x ld. Item 1f is the average tax abatement that will be received by the project over vane next 20 years. If no tax abatement will be offered, enter "0" . Otherwise sun the amount of tax /eauction that the tax abatement schedule prescribes for each of the first 20 years after project u«nencnt. Divide the sup by 20, and enter the resulting quotient. Include the tax e.oate ent schedule in the application narrative. It am lg. Explain met 000 of calculation and duration of payment for PIILYI' it less than 20 years. Item In is the mount cf project--related special assessrr nt and special district tax revenue that is expected to be generated in the first full Year after project completion. Count only revenue that the applicant jurisdiction will receive. 32 • ' Item li is the `mount of real property tax that the UD G project parcels generate as presently developed. If the pprcels currently generate no tax revenues, e.g. because they are held by a government or ruin-profit organization,• enter (0) . The amount of the current tax bill fcr each project p�ro1 can be dot:inad tiuu the tax assessor. Item 1 is the total of ItP-ms le - if + ig + lh - Section 2 of the form—Other Laxes---determines the likely changes in other tax revenues that will result the mAG project.` Include only taxes levied by the applicant jurisdiction and taxes returned to the alicant jurisdication (e.g. , by the state) by a legally mandated formula. If the state legislatlr'e aecides annl: lly on the amount of income or sales tax to return to the xmlicant jurisdiction, rather than using a legally fixed percentage, ao not cunt these tax revenues. Exclude all Federal taxes. Items 2a through 2c sock the sales tax impacts of the project. Include "icy the drink" taxes in sales tax. It no sales tax is levied by or returned by formula to the licant jurisdiction, enter "N/A" in Item 2c. If an alternate calculation meth is used, do not include sales tax charges to now/increased expenditures by e nloyees and businesses or trcm sources other than businesses mving to or frail o i on - - retained n the ULYIL croje-ct site. Item 2a is the c i es tax generated by new businesses located in the MAO project. E.-xcl de busine,s moving to the site from another site within the ap<lirRnt jurisdiction. Item 2b is the change in sales tax generate by businesses ;nciving to or from the project site. I'L sure to precede the enty with a "+' sign if sales tax will increase or a "-" sien if it will aecre,,se . If any busi- ness will relocate wi tnin the applicant jurisdiction but c f the project site and will not suffer a loss in s,i1es aue to its rive, do not consider this business when computing sa i es tax changes. Similarly, do not consider any business u:h i_r^ to the project site frn,n elsewhere in the applicant jurisdiction and not ex-rueriencing an increase in sales tax revenues. Item 2c is the sum of Items 2a + 2b . Item 2d is the business income tax impaot of the t3IYG project. If no business income tax is levied by or returned by formula to the appli- cant jurisdiction, enter "N/A" in Item 2d. be sure to sow the method and calculations user to estimate Income taxes. Incluoe oe income taxes of new businesses, plus the increase in incrxne taxes of business moving to or expanding at the site, less the loss in irlc i e taxes for businesses currently on the site that will discontinue or relocate outside t<' applicant jurisdiction. 33 it-am 2e is the average net chafe in personal property taxes that the applicant jurisdiction will realize in the first 20 years of the proj- ect's life. Include personal picjerty taxes on new businesses at the site, and on businesses locating at the site f ciu outside the:aplicant jurisdiction, and the inc ease in taxes for businesses exparding currently on the site. Personal pro e ty tax is reduce each year as the property is depreciated. The tax on a given type of property has a .life cycle that st-,-rts with purchase and continues beyond the end at the deprecia- tion period to cusolescence and replac rent. Ida-11y, one should compute the average annual person,-1 property tax, auruss the eropertY's life cycle for each type of property, then sum across the different tvbes. This meths is burdensome, therefore many local revenue departments ano tax assessment offices use rules of thumb to estimate likely personal pLc_.er.-ty tax receipts flan a project. Please shot arcs explain your estiraatih9 met-c s and computations. State estimates in current dollars, ignoring inflation effects. Item 2E is the net change in hotel inventory, business franchise and mercan- tile taxes that the applicant jurisdiction will realize once the UT..KG project is built. USe currant tax rates in making this estimate. Include taxes on newly created businesses and businesses re7Jir into the nrplic:nt jurisdiction, plus increase in taxes due to business expansion, less taxes lost due to cuiscrntini.i nce or departure from the jurisdiction ofbusinesses currently' lcateo an the [razz broject site. Item 29 is the place to show any other =yje of tax revenues that the ULAG project will generate for the acclicent jurisdiction. Sxi.i the nature a d amount of each tax. Exclude tees for service such as license or oeri;it fees that cover the costs of inspection. Item 2n is the sum ci items 2c, 2d, 2e, if, 2n, Section 3 is the total of It as lj and 2n. 34 ULA.G FORM 5 Tax Fevenues Instructions: This form obtains the net increase in tax revenues that the applicant jurisdiction expects to receive due to the pb uwsed ULAG project. It counts only taxes levied by or returner by a set fo g 11a to the applicant. In this form, co-:- plete all items that are aylicable to the proposed project. On a separate page, include a narrative description of the basic assumptions and techniques used in calculating these figures. If an item is not applicable to the proposed project insert 'N/A". Refer to the preceding Instruction Sheets if further guidance is needed. Amount* Section 1 Peal Property Taxes a. Estimated tax rai s�1 of project's $ morxet value gpon completion b. Fractional tax assessment rate c. Assessed value of project upon completion $ (a x b) d. Nominal tax rate of the local jurisdiction /$1000 and its schicol board for the MAG project of assessed value use, excluding portion of tax rate allocated to special districts or ji.-Elatictions other -Tian ar' l lean t e. Estimated real pru:,erty tax revenues toti be paid to applicant before any tax abatement (c x d) r . If tax abatements are clied, estimate the $ average ann'»1 w unt abated over 20 years aocording to abatement schedule- (count for years with no �,iltement) g. Payment in lieu of Z-axes (pilot) $ *Ease information on fiscal improvement on an estimate of circumstances in the first year after ccar„lotion of the 1?st ph se of the UELG project. • 35 • Amount h. bcoectes revenues flan special assessments and special tax districts that will result from this project i. lax bill in current year for project parcel(s) $ as presently developed j. 'ICIIAL: C1.ange in prooerty tax revenues paid to Local govesmen t (e - t + g + h W i) ection 2 Other Taxes: Changes in other tax revenues levied by or returned by formula to applicant jurisdiction as a result of this LTAG project. Exclude all Federal taxes a. E1es tax generated by new businesses $ and levied by or returned by formula to applicant jurisdiction b. Change in sales tax generated by businesses m v ing to or from USG Project site or expanding at the - • site; indicate A+" or �--r c. Net Granges in sales tax levied by or returned by formula to applicant jurisdiction (a+b) d. kdetchare due to LEAG project in $ business income taxes levied by or returned by formula to alicant jurisdiction e. Average net change in personal S property taxes (over a 20 year period) levied by or returned by formula to applicant jurisdiction f . Net change in hotel inventory, S business franchise and mercantile taxes levied by or returned by formula to a licant jurisdiction 36 g. Change in other taxes, excluding fees for service (e.g. permit tees) Nature of tax - h. TOtal other taxes (2c + 2d + 2e + 2f + 2g) $ Section 3 ICfIAL: Net change in tax revenues of applicant jurisdiction due to ULAG Project (lj + 2h) TJIA_L: $ Certification • I hereby certify that this form acurat=_ly reflects the likely f isca I impact of the proposed project. Chief Tax Assessor or Chief Fiscal (.ff icer CLARK FINANCIAL CORPORATION UDAG APPLICATION PART III DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT Section A - Statement of Problems and Objectives The Sugar House business district is an old , well- established but deteriorating community-scale business area in the southeast quadrant of Salt Lake City. Because it was unable to expand the size of its store , J. C . Penney' s abandoned its Sugar House store in 1983. With the departure of J . C . Penney' s and the resultant reduction of traffic , other Sugar House businesses (e .g . , Keith O 'Brien , Grant ' s , Anderson-Hill) have also been forced to either relocate or close. The proposed project will provide the Sugar House business district with what it has lacked since 1970 when because it could not expand its Sugar House store, J .C . Penney' s located at the Cottonwood Mall and began phasing out its Sugar House store - a traffic-generating retail anchor. With the location of a ShopKo in Sugar House , the Sugar House business district will again have a second major retail anchor to complement its existing Granite Furniture anchor . The additional retail business traffic generated by ShopKo will result in the survival of many existing Sugar House retailers who are currently struggling and will provide enough retail draw to permit development of considerably more new retail space in the area . Based upon employment levels projected by ShopKo and developer estimates of the employment which will be generated by the balance of the project , it is estimated that 500 new jobs will be provided by the project. It is expected that approximately one-half of the jobs will be full-time and one-half will be part time. In excess of 98% of the jobs will be filled locally. Section B - Project Description 1 . Brief Project Description - The proposed project includes approximately 17 acres in the area bounded by Simpson Avenue, 1300 East, Interstate 80 and Highland Drive . The existing commercial structures within the project area (except the Bond Floral property at 2277 South Highland Drive and the Key Bank property at 2299 Highland Drive) will be demolished and the existing residential structures will be made available at no cost to any wishing to move them for future residential use . Any residential structures not moved by September 1 , 1989 will have to be demolished . The project includes a 100, 840 square foot ShopKo store approximately 60, 000 square feet of new retail space and two restaurant pads . Additionally, if the project is implemented , the partnerships owning the retail strip center along Simpson Avenue between Highland Drive and 1300 East and along Highland Drive between Wilmington Avenue and Simpson Avenue will remodel those strip centers, upgrading approximately 130, 000 square feet of retail space. Likewise, these partnerships have plans (contingent upon the ShopKo development) to develop a 55, 000 square foot grocery store to anchor their remodeled centers . In total , then , approximately 350, 000 square feet of retail space will either be constructed or remodeled as a result of the project . /D4 f kaVALiaj/lu,cliai64 4,o) s,t9 o le/efi j� / , a m o s5� D9 ,b oy CLARK FINANCIAL. CORPORATION UDAG APPLICATION PART III Section C - Statement of "But For" v Pursuant to the attached pro forma analysis (see `\ Attachment #3) , the developer ' s equity requirement for the proposed project (assuming UDAG and other City financial D participation totaling $3, 480, 000) is $3 , 817, 451 . Return on this equity is provided by the projected $ 94, 699 annual cash �` flow. This represents only a 2 . 5% return on investment, ti well below the amount that could be earned by depositing the c equity in the bank . However , in this case $2 , 556, 617 of the developer' s equity is a sunk cost , having already been contributed . Thus , the effective return provided by the \ '� cash flow is 7 . 7% , a marginally acceptable return on investment. Without the City participation, the developer would have to contribute an additional $3 , 480, 000 of equity, lowering the effective return to 2 . 0% and the real return to 1 . 3o and rendering the project economically unfeasible . o 1 Section D - Market Feasibility . The market feasibility of 'Uhe ShopKo store has been determined by ShopKo . Although ShopKo considers the study to be proprietary information and will not release it for public scrutiny, they have indicated that it satisfactorily demonstrates the market and economic feasibility of a 100 , 000 square foot store in the northeast quadrant of the Salt Lake valley. A !larch 18 , 1985 feasibility study performed by Howard L. Green and Associates (see Attachment #4 ) concluded that the market would support a 120 , 000 square foot full-lines general merchandise anchor , an 80 , 000 square foot conventional anchor , a 60, 000 square foot upscale department store and 245, 000 square feet of ancillary retail space in Sugar House. Thus , the 100, 000 square foot full-lines general merchandise anchor and the 190, 000 square feet of ancillary retail space proposed fall comfortably within the market potential . y/ rtep, ,f(,_/ ,/f,, 1)Lb ( /f o1 'orb / 00, o c qO 000 l L � G),, d.ii: I A D60 -leil( /u 'r(,,( )//S, or° ) qb, 0 v i/ b s cr. a 10 C 0 1 • /- N. f. 1' 1. . • ...., ' . . / ey . • • 36.1.1- II : ! ' t•.�' a 1 o%•y O� , 11 r /- = �^ • 11T • Z1lST ST Y y F.. VA. j- 1 s -�_ r )u/yn e. 1• wa I:.at ; ,i )u -Isa r, 1 cam. -5. 14S rj. 4- g. • • • Yo,� { .I 01 •� .� Iwo r+J -0 I{_ L� - V. - tl _ .- .rn; �--'�•L.• / ,I • I_r -'.•, •••• , t, i �G'17 _1 ' i 1. ., •-V• •..•.� • 1 •I•I �,y�Ir.l -t ` 'I`1 p ����- 'I-� •�1w •� 'l., �U ➢w'`I • .•-'0'1 or .I-`1� Q Il,, ,aL N V'1'•'•,-y •+ i ; •.� J 1245 I-�. M -.....--L.► ..••. ♦.- ,+ :I. •`5 -N- •II''r`�S _ s' "I. ...i 1,•f , oo:. 4 ; L,.;.i,+^..^ t. ..+� 1 Z40 , cl. U8.. .- •I 1. =t . r J�•.rrH I. 1' ,"1 �� ,� . _ �� , rt� _ -I I . I ., to 9 : .VC.' 1` ,. ` r p , r _ . p : //(,� `ra' -{II 1- -;J-w L. : 5,°` : :I- �+ r �L+m.at . ,. t / -'., v _ ',l•� `'q • ',�... b 'I b�y , L _• .� 40' l.G ./ �_+y .-•- 0. .1:. Jr. .....+. /•16111 : ,. • 1 ,` n:,}'{�0 I I_ •v F"• „ r 6t° + .,0 •1 7 w; . I - :,u •1. .`, .1.a ,•-• :1 ,r:♦ x' L y r�, 1'• A I `�{1' v a*. . • /- � 1 P . i 1 i� "+' 1: I, .1- . .`0` • •` 1_ -"••+ ~o C ° 5 7Y r �..4.. o •nI •!y''I= - I _ .-lint �' S' - - { •: `' !+ r'•.l .G,. - .. _,- I , - `10•°ty II pC-''• �•.�•,i o =�,1-J•��• ..I 1)f II t. ' p ' ;y p ..,, A '-- , sT' oft o;`: 1. r Ir 1 "_ 13t<.4 ^ • - r "F,.1 " ,' 1`\ •'+ « / 1‘1... ..• SSL.1 :.•S�.l i.i I :iancl' I. 1• M� ,', ,1►.at w ! 1 1 n t\ pi r1".1.- , 0' �� /: )'f•. 1- ✓-"'1r. CO • •._•-•-'y . 131") 'CV:_ .. -sa 4„ I: 1'' v yl L ac.r, 1' ,y ,....t)1!:11D ..t'. •;,� �'1'6/ ,- �` -I - i 14LII. .a4.r ro .,+• •."- •Lo 011c.1=dr -� 1a;,1 13�.)T •_ 1 .. F-- 1t ,t>-7� r Sp•4Z` i- - ••j0 0 ! � Q .. -'41.+' - = .�'q ""LIZ Ti-?. S 1. P. Kr• 1, f• _ , • L i`'rJ: N 'I.r�'... f ."� • ,.).tJ �c 0 2t.}4 I • b• ":L+' 7 I` l• - /'f" T).-.I -- 1 ]C:aI- r �} Y f - G •C I `L ,. 1 s•.}7 _� a