Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
06/24/2003 - Minutes (2)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, DUNE 24 , 2003 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in a Work Session on Tuesday, June 24, 2003, at 5:30 p.m. in Room 326, City Council Office, City County Building, 451 South State Street. In Attendance: Council Members Carlton Christensen, Van Turner, Eric Jergensen, Nancy Saxton, Jill Remington Love, Dave Buhler and Dale Lambert. Also in Attendance: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; Michael Sears, Council Budget and Policy Analyst; Janice Jardine, Council Planning and Policy Analyst; Gary Mumford, Deputy Director/Senior Legislative Auditor; Lehua Weaver, Council Constituent Liaison; Gordon Hoskins, City Controller; Steve Fawcett, Management Services Deputy Director; Susi Kontgis, Budget Analyst; Rick Graham, Public Services Director; Kevin Bergstrom, Public Services Deputy Director; Laurie Dillon, Budget Analyst; Mayor Ross C. "Rocky" Anderson; Ed Rutan, City Attorney; David Dobbins, Business Services Director; Louis Zunguze, Planning Director; D.J. Baxter, Mayor's Senior Advisor; Doug Wheelwright, Land Use & Transportation/Subdivisions Planner; Alison Weyher, Community and Economic Development Director; Brenda Hancock, Human Resource Management Services Division Director; Rocky Fluhart, Mayor's Chief Administrative Office; LeRoy Hooton, Public Utilities Director; Fire Chief Charles Querry; Chris Bramhall, Assistant City Attorney; John Vuyk, Fire Department Assistant Financial Manager; Stephanie Duer, Water Conservation Coordinator; Jeff Niermeyer, Public Utilities Deputy Director; Nancy Tessman, Library Director; and Beverly Jones, Deputy City Recorder. Councilmember Christensen presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5:37 p.m. AGENDA ITEMS #1. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. Ms. Gust-Jenson said Item 5A, discussion of policy issues relating to the budget, straw polls were needed to give staff specific direction on what the Council wanted to vote on later in the evening. She said during the briefing, Item No. 6, water conservancy plan, staff would work with the Administration to confirm figures so Council could adopt the budget during the formal meeting. No announcements were discussed. #2. INTERVIEW CRAIG GALLI PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Mr. Galli said one item not appearing on his application was his interest in the Legacy Highway and his involvement in the litigation. He said he was no longer in a representational capacity with the Legacy Highway plaintiffs. He said he taught part- time at the University of Utah College of Law. He said he worked for Parsons, Bailey and Latimer where he was head of the Environmental Litigation Department. He said he was a member of the Transportation Committee for the Chamber of Commerce and was involved with Envision Utah. #3. INTERVIEW BABS DELAY PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HER APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Ms. DeLay said she had served on the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Board for two 03 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, DUNE 24 , 2003 years, but felt that board was not a good use of her skills. She said she was looking for more education. She said she dealt with planning and zoning issues on a daily basis because she sold real estate. #4. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING A PROPOSED REZONING OF THE LAURELWOOD APARTMENTS LOCATED AT 1341 SOUTH STATE STREET. View Attachment Ray McCandless, Doug Wheelwright, Louis Zunguze and Janice Jardine briefed the Council from the attached handout. Councilmember Christensen said currently the apartments were under the same ownership. Mr. Wheelwright said historically, the apartments were developed on the same property by the same owner. He said the apartments served as two separate uses. Councilmember Saxton asked why the City did not allow residential use in a commercial zone. Mr. McCandless referred to a map and explained current zoning boundaries. Mr. Zunguze said the issue had evolved over time. He said as uses were developed there were conflicts that emerged based on intensity and types. He said there was a move in the planning field to separate uses that had conflicts and negative impacts. Councilmember Saxton asked if it would be advantageous to do a text change instead of a zoning change. She said if residential was included in a commercial area then that area was no longer nonconforming. She said the area became conforming because of residential zoning. Mr. Zunguze said a text change was one way to go. He said there was inconsistency in the area where the text had not been changed but zoning still classified it as commercial corridor. Mr. Wheelwright said the buyer of the residential portion had requested the rezoning. He said the buyer was financing and project approval required he be fully conforming in terms of zoning. #5. DISCUSS POLICY DIRECTION AND OTHER ISSUES RELATED TO THE BUDGET. View Attachment Michael Sears briefed the Council from the attached handouts. Councilmember Saxton asked for clarification on the Fire Department handout. Ms. Gust-Jenson said the document provided a response to the Council's questions on fourhanded crews. Mr. Sears said the next memo from Public Services contained information on the golf fund and what would happen if proposed golf fees were not increased. Councilmember Christensen asked for a straw poll. Council Members Love, Christensen, Turner, Lambert, and Jergensen supported the fee increase. Council Members Saxton and Buhler were not in favor of the fee increase. Mr. Sears said Council had decided not to recognize telecommunication fees. He said a motion had been made and a public hearing held. Ms. Gust-Jenson said the issue needed to be closed. She said if no council member made a motion then the Chair could indicate that the item failed due to lack of motion. Councilmember Christensen asked if there were alternatives to that procedure. Ms. Gust-Jenson said a council member could make a motion requesting the Administration continue their evaluation of the issue. Councilmember Buhler said he preferred no motion be made. He said if the Administration did not come back to the Council then the Council could request a legislative action to restructure the issue. He said a fee was currently in place. A straw poll was taken on telecommunication fees. All Council Members were opposed to the proposed ordinance at this time. Mr. Sears said proposed use of fund balance was a reduction of $2 million from the proposed use of $3,200,544. He said Item No. 3, use of fund balance for the retirement payout liability, the Mayor' s recommended budget was $650, 000 of ongoing expenditure. 03 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, DUNE 24 , 2003 He said Council had discussed using money from fund balance to make the payment. Mr. Sears said Item No. 4 was a balancing amount. He said the Council was looking at $94, 978 in the black. He said that could change for Items 5-16. He said they ended up with a total general fund revenue budget of $163,711, 696. Mr. Sears said the next item was a savings of $96,000 from fleet maintenance, fuel, and road salt savings in Public Services. All Council Members were in favor of the cut. Mr. Sears said Item No. 6 added one additional Information Management Services (IMS) network technician. Mr. Sears said the Council had straw polled to eliminate the proposed position. All Council Members were in favor of the cut. Mr. Sears said the next item was a correction of $30, 000 for bus passes. Council Members were in favor of the savings. Mr. Sears said Item No. 9, the Administration recommended the Council eliminate the contingency appropriation of $278,500 from the ongoing budget so any additional funding would come from the General Fund balance rather than contingency. All Council Members were in favor. Mr. Sears said the next item was the elimination of $18,482 for the Career Ladder Program in the Prosecutor's Office. Ms. Gust-Jenson said if a department chose not to fund this program, the program would not be eliminated. She said the department could choose to continue the program if they had other types of savings. Councilmember Saxton said it was advantageous for the Prosecutor's Office to present the savings to the Council because it was motivation used within the department. She said if the Council eliminated the savings at this juncture then they needed to send directives to all City departments that they did not have latitude with extra monies to do the same thing. She said she was not in favor of the cut. Councilmember Christensen asked for a straw poll. Council Members Lambert, Love, and Saxton wanted to restore the program and Council Members Turner, Buhler, Christensen and Jergensen wanted to keep the cut. Mr. Sears said Item No. 11, consolidation of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) administration, would result in one layoff. He said $32,000 would go to Community and Economic Development (CED) to run the CIP process. He said there would be a savings of $34,228. Council Members Turner, Christensen, Lambert, Buhler and Jergensen were in favor of keeping the cut. Council Members Saxton and Love wanted the cut restored. Mr. Sears said Item No. 12 eliminated a midlevel management position in Building Services, for a savings of approximately $87,000. Council Members Jergensen, Buhler, Love, and Christensen wanted to keep the cut. Council Members Lambert, Turner, and Saxton wanted the cut restored. Mr. Sears said Item No. 13 could consolidate the equal employment opportunity (EEO) and organizational development functions in Human Resources. He said that would result in one layoff. He said the Council could eliminate the Equal Opportunity Manager or the Organizational Development Training Manager position. Council Members Jergensen, Love, Buhler, Turner, and Christensen wanted to keep the EEO position and cut the Organizational Development Training Manager position. Council Members Lambert and Saxton wanted to restore both positions. Mr. Sears said Item No. 14, a supplemental request relating to an error in the unclassified pay table, CED's budget would be reduced by $13,000 and the Council Office budget by $3,732. He said Management Service' s budget would be increased by $3, 000 and the Mayor' s Office budget would be increased by $17,000 resulting in a total increase of $3, 948. Mr. Sears said Item No. 15 was a supplemental request from the Mayor to restore the Fire Education Specialist position. He said one option was to restore the full time 03 - 3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 24 , 2003 employee (FTE) without funding or the other option was to restore the FTE with funding of $45,435. Council Members Jergensen, Buhler and Love wanted to maintain the funding cut but restore the position. Council Members Turner, Lambert, Christensen, and Saxton wanted to restore the proposed cut. Councilmember Buhler said Item No. 16, proportional cuts, the Council had been critical that the Mayor had given them a budget which used over $3 million of fund balance to balance the budget. He said the Council proposed to use $1.7 million of fund balance to balance the budget. He asked if there was any support for proportional cuts to make up the difference instead of taking monies from fund balance. A straw poll was taken. Council Members Jergensen, Saxton, and Lambert, were not in favor of proportional cuts. Mr. Sears said the last item was CIP. He said Projects 1 and 2 were impact fee projects. He said the first one recognized anticipated revenue received and the other was debt service for the Pioneer Precinct bond. He said Items 3 thru 6 were debt service for the City. He said Item 7 was Percent-for-Art which the City funded every year. He said Items 8 through 15 were time sensitive projects. He said Item No. 8, Rose Park Lighting project, the estimated cost was $300,000. He said if Item No. 14, the Sugar House lighting project was funded by the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) , then $675,000 could go to the Rose Park lighting project. Mr. Sears said one Council Member had suggested that $675,000 from Item No. 14 drop down to the CIP holding account and that No. 8 be fully funded to the amount of $975,000 with $675, 000 of that coming from CIP contingency. All Council Members were in favor. Councilmember Saxton asked about funding for a traffic signal at 100 South and 800 East. Mr. Bergstrom said if money for the signal was obtained the signal would need to be designed before construction could take place. He said the signal would not be ready by the beginning of school. Ms. Gust-Jenson asked if there was money in a fund for signals. Mr. Bergstrom said all the money had been spent. Ms. Gust-Jenson asked how the signal was ranked. Mr. Bergstrom said they had three locations where signals were warranted. He said he did not know where the signal ranked. Councilmember Christensen asked if the Council wanted to move this item forward or hold it until August. Council Members Buhler, Turner, Saxton, Lambert and Christensen wanted to appropriate $125,000 for the signal at 100 South and 800 East. Councilmember Christensen said his understanding was that the budget amount for Governmental Immunity was actually greater than what the tax levy would generate. Mr. Sears said that was correct. Councilmember Christensen said there would still be a general fund appropriation on top of that. Mr. Sears said there would be an appropriation of approximately $112, 000. Council Members Lambert and Love were in favor of a separate governmental immunity fund. Council Members Jergensen, Turner, Buhler, and Saxton were in support of leaving the governmental immunity as it currently was. Mr. Sears said Councilmember Christensen said if there was no judgment levy then the Council would have to go back and cut the budget. Mr. Sears said the Council was looking at $855,000 and that included the General Obligation amount and the Library. Councilmember Christensen said if they were going to do a judgment levy, it needed to apply to everyone. All Council Members were in favor of a judgment levy. Ms. Gust- Jenson said the Truth in Taxation hearing would be held on August 12th, 2003. #6. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING PREPARATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A WATER SHORTAGE CONSERVANCY PLAN AND RELATED CIVIL FINES. View Attachment LeRoy Hooton, Chris Bramhall, Stephanie Duer and Jeff Niermeyer briefed the Council 03 - 4 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, JUNE 24 , 2003 from the attached handout. Councilmember Christensen asked about the timeline of the plan. Mr. Niermeyer said the department knew what runoff numbers were, how much water was being received and they had an indication of how much conservation was going on. He said the plan was not time sensitive in terms of dealing with this year' s drought. He said a plan was needed to deal with ongoing water years which could have varying degrees of reduction in water. Councilmember Saxton said the Council was being asked to implement a policy which allowed Public Utilities in conjunction with the Administration to implement other policies as they came up during severe water situations. Mr. Hooton said that was correct. He said he felt the plan cleared up confusion. He said some people felt there were mandatory restrictions in place now and other people had different beliefs. Councilmember Saxton said she was concerned about the violation section of the plan. Ms. Duer said the Public Utilities Advisory Committee (PUAC) spent a lot of time discussing that issue. She said the PUAC came to a conclusion that focus was still on voluntary action and education. Ms. Duer said the PUAC wanted to be proactive in getting information out to the community and the water customers about how to use water more wisely with the idea that if they act early enough they could forestall more serious water shortages. She said it was important that Public Utilities be able to meet their ability to deliver water to the community for essential reasons. She said the plan provided for a warning and the educational component would continue. Councilmember Love said she liked the idea of having a plan in place. She recommended that the word "voluntary" be replaced with the word "recommended" in the plan. Councilmember Lambert asked if the City' s water situation was currently on the line between mild and moderate. Mr. Niermeyer said the current supply to the normal supply was approximately 76%. Councilmember Lambert asked how a category was determined. Mr. Niermeyer said it was an ongoing process. He said typically by this time of year they had a good indication of what the free flowing streams were going to produce as well as the storage water. He said there were other situations where an aqua duct failed or a treatment plant came on line where water supply could change dramatically. Councilmember Buhler said he was in support of the water shortage conservancy plan. Councilmember Jergensen said he also supported the plan. He asked if meter readers and inspectors would enforce the proposed ordinance. Mr. Hooton said that was not their intention. He said if their department found the City moving into a critical water stage they would train a group of City employees. Councilmember Jergensen asked about the appeals process. Ms. Duer said emphasis was on education. She said accidents happened so the department did not want to assume that someone was willfully or wantonly wasting water. She said if someone received a ticket and wanted to address the ticket or fine, they would appear before a hearing officer identified through the Public Utilities Director. She said the hearing officer would make a decision about the status of the fine. She said if the fine was upheld, the citizen could appeal to the PUAC who would create a subcommittee to meet on a regular basis to hear complaints or concerns about issued fines. Councilmember Jergensen asked what if a person did not like the subcommittee' s decision. Mr. Bramhall said the next action would be to bring civil action against the City. He said that would be the final appeal as far as the City' s procedural process went. He said from that point it went to District Court. Mr. Hooton said the PUAC was made up of City and County citizens, recommended by the Mayor, and appointed by the City Council. He said it was an independent citizens group who volunteered their time to assist in those matters. He said years ago they changed their sewer rate structure 03 - 5 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TUESDAY, DUNE 24 , 2003 from a flat rate to a usage rate. He said the committee at that time took the role to listen to citizens' complaints and adjudicate complaints about billings. A discussion was held concerning notification and education of the public concerning the plan. Mr. Niermeyer briefed the Council on water usage during previous years from a chart. Ms. Duer said the PUAC was not eager to impose fines on the community. She said they wanted to make sure the fines were fairly and equitably addressed. Councilmember Lambert asked if renters or landlords of apartment complexes would receive notification of violations. Ms. Duer said the name that appeared on the water connection would be the individual the violation would be delivered to. She said if the department knew who both parties were, a warning would be delivered to both. Councilmember Christensen asked if the City's hearing officers in Municipal Court could handle the appeals. He said that process was already in place. Mr. Bramhall said that was a possibility. Councilmember Christensen asked if the ordinance went beyond the City' s corporate limits. Mr. Hooton said if the City's ordinance was more stringent than what the County had passed. He said each customer in the County when they signed up for City water, signed a card stating they would abide by Salt Lake City' s rules and regulations in the delivery of their water. Councilmember Christensen asked if there were other appealing bodies a person could go to other than another citizen appointed group. Mr. Bramhall said it would have to be a body appointed by the Council. He said if the appealing bodies were not the PUAC or the Justice Court it would have to be an independently appointed citizen board. All Council Members were in favor of the PUAC board hearing the appeals. The meeting adjourned at 8:51 p.m. bj 03 - 6 , • Proposed Motions for Budget Adoption FY 2003-04 Item F— 1 Ordinance: Tax Levy ["I move that the Council"] Adopt an ordinance establishing Salt Lake City's certified property tax rate upon all real and personal property within Salt Lake City made taxable by law for the fiscal year commencing July,2003 and ending June 30,2004,including [excluding] judgment levies, as follows: 1. General Fund: .003924 (certified rate) 2. Library Fund: .000777 3. General Obligation Bonds for Block 37: .000585 4. Governmental Immunity Fund: .000100 5. Judgment Levies ■ General Property .000055 ■ G.O. Property .000008 ■ Library .000009 • Or if the Council does not want a separate Governmental Immunity Fund Tax Levy ["I move that the Council"] Adopt an ordinance establishing Salt Lake City's certified property tax rate upon all real and personal property within Salt Lake City made taxable by law for the fiscal year commencing July,2003 and ending June 30,2004,including [excluding] judgment levies, as follows: 1. General Fund: .004024 (certified rate) 2. Library Fund: .000777 3. General Obligation Bonds for Block 37: .000585 4. Judgment Levies • General Property .000055 ■ G.O. Property .000008 ■ Library .000009 • Salt Lake City Council Agenda Thursday,June 14, 2001 Page 2 Item F—2 • Ordinance: Final Budget Fiscal Year 2003-2004 After reading the agenda heading --- ["I move that the Council") enact a moratorium on the Traffic Calming Program until the Council receives a briefing from the Administration on the findings in the Traffic Calming Program audit. In addition to the audit findings,the briefing from the Administration should address the following program criteria: • A plan will be prepared to notify residents and property owners on adjacent streets and neighborhoods to the proposed traffic calming locations and a simple signage and notification system to solicit formal comment on the proposed project will be developed; • Impacts on surrounding streets will be factored into the criteria system; • A variety or"toolbox" of traffic calming measures and options will be considered for each proposed project location and factored into the criteria system; • Proposed traffic calming projects will be reviewed by all participating departments to ensure that the proposed measures do not affect ADA ramp and sidewalk access and that additional expenses are not incurred due to the placement of the traffic calming measures. • Proposed traffic calming projects will be reviewed to determine their impact on • traffic patterns supporting community destinations such as universities and hospitals. After the above motion--- ["I move that the Council"] Adopt an ordinance approving Salt Lake City's revised tentative fiscal year 2003-2004 budget(See attached spreadsheet), excluding the budget for the Library Fund which is separately adopted,the employment staffing document, all compensation plans and Memorandum of Understandings, the Council Legislative Intent Statements. (See attached Intent Statements). Item F—3 Ordinance: Library Fund ["I move that the Council"] Adopt an ordinance approving the revised tentative budget for the Library Fund of Salt Lake City, Utah for fiscal year 2003-2004 with supplemental proposal attached memo. • Salt Lake City Council Agenda Thursday,June 14, 2001 Page 3 • Item F—4 Ordinance: Telecommunication Right-of-Way Permits ["I move that the Council") Adopt an ordinance enacting Section 14.32.425 of the Salt Lake City Code,relating to telecommunication right-of-way permits, and establishing annual fees therefore. If no motion is made,the Chair would state "Hearing no motion, this item fails_" Item F—5 Ordinance: Golf Course Green Fees ()- Lk ["I move that the Council"] Adopt an ordinance amending Section Salt Lake City Code,relating to Golf Course Green fees and group proposed. Or ["I move that the Council") Not adopt an ordinance amending Section 15.16.031 and 15.16.035, Salt Lake City Code,relating to Golf Course Green fees and group reservations. • Or ["I move that the Council") Adopt an ordinance amending Section 15.16.031 and 15.16.035, Salt Lake City Code,relating to Golf Course Green fees and group reservations as proposed minus the proposed increase to golf course -green fees. All proposed discounts, off-season, off-peak,punch pass, season pass surcharge and Frequent Player Discount Card, etc proposals would be accepted,but the rates would be based on the current fees and not the increased fees.All other wording changes,clarifications, etc would be accepted as proposed. Item F—6 Ordinance: Parkin!Meters ["I move that the Council") Adopt an ordinance amending Section 12.56.170, Salt Lake City Code,relating to parking meter rates. If no motion is made,the Chair would state "Hearing no motion,this item fails." Item F—7 Ordinance: Parks and Recreation Fees ("I move that the Council") Adopt an ordinance amending Title 15 of the Salt • Lake City Code,relating to Parks and Recreation fees. Salt Lake City Council Agenda Thursday,June 14, 2001 Page 4 Item F—8 • Resolution: Municipal Building Authority ["I move that the Council"] Recess as the City Council and convene as the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City. ["I move that we"] Adopt a resolution approving the budget of the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City for fiscal year 2003-2004. ["I move that we"] Adjourn as the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City and reconvene as the City Council. • II • Fiscal Year 03-04 CIP Expenditure Detail FY 2003-2004 FY 2003-2004 Cumulative Total Title of Project Request Estimated Cost Council Amount Adj Council Cost 1 Impact Fee Projects $425,000 S425,000 Construct various Police,Fie,Pads and Street capial improvement projects identified it the Impact Impact Fee Fee Analysis,Capital Facikties Plan. Revenue 2 MBA Debt Service for Pioneer Precinct Bond 6434,160 S434,160 Debt service for the MBA bond used to complete the Pioneer Precinct.Impact fees may be used to Impact Fee pay for 19%of the cost of the facility. Expenditure 3 MBA&MFET(Class C)CIP Bond Debt Service $4,221,474 $3,787,314 $3,787,314 Debt service for several MBA and MFET bonds used to complete various capital improvements throughout the city. 4 CM,6 County Building Debt Service $2,401,967 S2,401,967 $8,189,281 Debt service payment on the bond used to rehabilitate and refurbish the City&County Building. Thu bond Mg mature in 2011. 6 Police/Firs Radio'800 Trunked Radio System $540,794 S540,794 $6,730,075 To pay the lease purchase on radio equipment for Police and Fie.This is the final payment 6 Pollce/Flre Radio'800 Tower Repeater System $61,717 $61,717 86,791,792 To pay the lease purchase for the tower repeaters associated with the 800 bunked radio system. Final payment cork ben FY 2005. 7 Percent for Art $60,000 S60,000 86,351,792 Provide enhancements such as decorative pavement,fa ings,sw8ures,fountains,and other wake of art. 8 Rose Park Lighting Project $300,000 S300,000 S7,151,792 To remove all existing over head street lighting and natal new decorative poles with underground wring throughout the Rose Park Community Council Disect An addlional$561,000 is being provided through a special Improvement district(SID)bond. 9 Quayle Avenue from 9th W to 10th W $120,000 $120,000 S7,271,792 To design and construct curb,gutter,sidewalk and a roadway on Quayle Ave nee 900 West and 1700 South.375,000 wok be con$thoted through an area special knprovement district(SID)bond. 10 Irrigation System-Sugar House Park/Phase ill $80,000 $80,000 $7,351,792 • To partially fund phase III of the Sugar House Park Irrigation refurbishment to bring the entire park Irrigation system up to date with a more efficient irrigation equipment.The portion of the irrigation Osten that has not been refurbished is currently _11 Pedestrian Safety Devises $150,000 S150,000 37,601,792 To provide for the Installation of pedestrian safely devices throughout the city.These Subtle pedestrian signals wed countdown timers,n-pewment or overhead crosswalk lighting,or improved pavement markings.These devices are Metalled throughout t 12 Sidewalk Replacement SID $600,000 S400,000 $7,901,792 To replace defective sidewalk and remove tripping hazards is,the designated special improvement district(SID)area.This project wit also natal ADA pedestrian ramps,provide some bee replacement where trees have damaged sidewalk,and Sopore draiag 13 New and Replacement Streetlights $60,000 S60,000 S7,961,792 To replace eidstilg streetlights that are no cnger aervkable or Instal new streetlights on and as needed basis.To be coordinated with other city protects 14 Sugar douse Lighting Project $675,000 SO 87,961,792 To remove all existing over head street kitting and Metall new decorative poles with underground Funded by RDA Wing.Street aghts would be replaced on 2100 South kw 700 East to 1300 East,and Highland Orion born Ramona to I-00 and Wilmington. _16 Jordan Park Peace Garden-Unigatlons System Phase II $190,000 5190,000 88,151,792 To provide for the second phase of Peace Gardens irrigation construction.The irrigation system is being replaced to maxdmae water efficiency and to atladr k to the Central Control System.Jordan _ Park Peace Garden u located 1000 West 1000 South. 16 CIP"Holding"Account $5,729,483 $5,729,483 513,881,275 To provide an account to hold the remaining CIP allocation until further discussion can be held in August or September. • 1 Fiscal Year 03-04 CIP Expenditure Detail III FY 2003-2004 FY 2003-2004 Cumulative Total Title of Project Request Estimated Cost Council Amount Adj Council Cost 1 Impact Fee Projects $425,000 $425,000 Construct various Police,Fire,Park and Street capital improvement projects identified in the Impact Impact Fee Fee Analysis,Capital Facilities Plan. Revenue 2 MBA Debt Service for Pioneer Precinct Bond $434,160 $434,160 Debt service for the MBA bond used to complete the Pioneer Precinct. Impact fees may be used to Impact Fee pay for 19%of the cost of the facility. Expenditure 3 MBA&MFET(Class C)CIP Bond Debt Service $4,221,474 $3,787,314 $3,787,314 Debt service for several MBA and MFET bonds used to complete various capital improvements throughout the city. 4 City&County Building Debt Service $2,401,967 $2,401,967 $6,189,281 Debt service payment on the bond used to rehabilitate and refurbish the City&County Building. This bond will mature in 2011. 6 Police/Fire Radio'800 Trunked Radio System $540,794 $540,794 $6,730,075 To pay the lease purchase on radio equipment for Police and Fire. This is the final payment 6 Police/Fire Radio'800 Tower Repeater System $61,717 $61,717 $6,791,792 To pay the lease purchase for the tower repeaters associated with the 800 flunked radio system. Finat payment will be in FY 2005. 7 Percent for Art $60,000 $60,000 $6,851,792 Provide enhancements such as decorative pavement,railings,sculures,fountains,and other works of art. 8 Rose Park Lighting Project $300,000 $975,000 $7,151,792 To remove all existing over head street lighting and install new decorative poles with underground $675,000 from wiring throughout the Rose Park Community Council District. An additional$561,000 is being CIP Contingency provided through a special improvement district(SID)bond. 9 Quayle Avenue from 9th W to 10th W $120,000 $120,000 $7,271,792 To design and construct curb,gutter,sidewalk and a roadway on Quayle Ave near 900 West and 1700 South. $75,000 wilt be contributed through an area special improvement district(SID)bond. 10 Irrigation System-Sugar House Park!Phase III $80,000 $80,000 $7,351,792 To partially fund phase III of the Sugar House Park irrigation refurbishment to bring the entire park IIIirrigation system up to date with a more efficient irrigation equipment. The portion of the irrigation system that has not been refurbished is currently 11 Pedestrian Safety Devices $150,000 $150,000 $7,501,792 To provide for the installation of pedestrian safety devices throughout the city. These include pedestrian signals with countdown timers,in-pavement or overhead crosswalk lighting,or improved pavement markings. These devices are installed throughout t 12 Sidewalk Replacement SID $600,000 $400,000 $7,901,792 To replace defective sidewalk and remove tripping hazards in the designated special improvement district(SID)area. This project will also instal ADA pedestrian ramps,provide some tree replacement where trees have damaged sidewalk,and improve drainag 13 New and Replacement Streetlights $60,000 $60,000 $7,961,792 To replace existing streetlights that are no longer servicable or install new streetlights on and as needed basis. To be coordinated with other city projects. 14 Sugar House Lighting Project $675,000 $0 $7,961,792 To remove all existing over head street lighting and install new decorative poles with underground Funded by RDA wiring. Street tights would be replaced on 2100 South from 700 East to 1300 East,and Highland Drive from Ramona to 1-80 and Wilmington. 16 Jordan Park Peace Garden-Irrigations System Phase B $190,000 $190,000 $8,151,792 To provide for the second phase of Peace Gardens irrigation construction. The irrigation system is being replaced to maximize water efficiency and to attach it to the Central Control System. Jordan Park Peace Garden is located 1000 West 1000 South. 16 CIP"Holding"Account $5,729,483 $5,729,483 $13,881,275 To provide an account to hold the remaining CIP allocation until further discussion can be held in August or September. • Station Apparatus Officer Engineer EMT's/FF Paramedic's/FF Applicable Laws or Standards 1 Engine 1 1 2 2,3 2 Engine 1 1 2 1,2,4 2 Ladder Truck 1 1 2 2,3 3 Engine 1 1 2 1,2,4 4 Engine 1 1 2 2,3 5 Engine 1 1 2 1,2,4 5 Ladder Truck 1 1 2 2,3 6 Engine 1 1 2 2,3 6 Haz-Mat Unit 1 1 2 2,3 7 Engine 1 1 2 1,2,4 8 Engine 1 1 2 1,2,4 8 Ladder Truck 1 1 2 2,3 9 Engine 1 1 2 2,3 10 Engine 1 1 2 2,3 11 Engine 1 1 2 1,2,4 12 ARFF Units 2 2 2 2 1,2,4 13 Engine 1 1 2 2,3 14 Engine 1 1 2 1,2,4 1. The State Division of Emergency Medical Services requires that a minimum of 2 state certified paramedics be on every paramedic/rescue vehicle. 2. NFPA 1710 requires a minimum of 4 personnel per apparatus. This applies to both fire and emergency medical calls. 3. NFPA 1710 requires that Basic Life Support (BLS/EMT) have a response time of 4 minutes of less. 4. NFPA 1710 requires that Advanced Life Support (ALS/Paramedic) have a response time of 8 minutes of less. • • III ::..::..:. Proposed Revenue Budget $ 161,483,349 1 Less Telecom fee (326,675) $ 161,156,674 Proposed Use of Fund Balance $ 3,002,544 2 Reduction in the use of fund balance(allow a$2 million appropriation from fund balance) (1,002,544) 3 Use of fund balance for retirement payout liability 650,000 4 Balancing amount($94,978 is available to restore cuts, etc.) (94,978) $ 2,555,022 r Total General Fund Revenue Budget and Use of Fund Balance $ 163,711,696 ........... .. Ems.: Proposed Expenditure Budget $ 164,48'5,893 5 Fleet maintenance,fuel, road salt savings in Public Services (96,000) 6 Eliminate proposed IMS network technician (75,936) 7 Eliminate proposed IMS web programmer (75,936) 8 Correct bus pass amount (30,000) 9 Eliminate contingency appropriation (278,500) 10 Eliminate funding for Career ladder in Prosecutor's Office (18,482) 11 Consolidate CIP Administration(one layoff)-$66,228 less$32,000 allocation to CED (34,228) 12 Eliminate Mid-Level Management Position in Building Services(one layoff) (87,000)_ Eliminate one position in Management Services 13 (Consolidate Equal Employment Opportunity and Organizational Development functions in HR (78,115) or eliminate Equal Employment Opportunity Manager position • or eliminate Organizational Development&Training Manager position) Supplemental request relating to error in unclassified pay table-net increase$3,948 decrease CED$13,296 14 decrease Council Office$3,732 increase Management Service$3,156 increase Mayor's Office$17,820 Supplemental Request from the Mayor-restore Fire Education Specialist position(Council 15 Members may restore the FTE in staffing document with the necessary funding($45,435)or restore the FTE and urge the Administration to identify funding within the Fire Department 16 Proportional Cuts to Departments Total General Fund Expenditure Budget $ 163,711,696 • Council Council Adjustment Adjustment to FTE to Amounts Proposed Budget �. .. � :._� ,. $ 161,186,949 Correction of error-impact fees 650,000 Withdraw of parking meter rate increase (353,600) Telecom fee (326,675) GO bond revenue will be less than proposed(See Nondepartmental budget) (13,998) Property tax revenue for Governmental Immunity 1,300,000 Intergovernmental revenue relating to UDOT Street Sweeping resolution 17,000 Total Adopted Budget $ 162,459,676 Proposed Budget(including$3,847,444 use of fund balance) $ 3,847,444 Reduction in use of fund balance-impact fee revenue error (650,000) Reduction in use of fund balance-Fire FICA less parking meter rate¶legal positions (194,900) Reduction in the use of fund balance (1,025,139) Use of fund balance for retirement payout appropriation 650,000 Total Adopted Budget $ 2,627,405 Total General Fund Revenue and Use of Fund Balance $ 165,087,081 Attorneys Office • Proposed Budget 32.29 $ 2,754,750 Supplemental request-two paralegal positions 2.00 77,500 Career ladder in Prosecutor's Office (18,482) Total Adopted Budget 34.29 2,813,768 Community and Economic Development Proposed Budget 119.40 8,561,426 Consolidate CIP Administration 32,000 Eliminate Mid-Level Management Positon -1.00 (64,000) Correction of error in salary projections (13,296) Total Adopted Budget 118.40 8,516,130 City Council Office Proposed Budget 18.60 1,583,783 Correction of error in salary projections (3,732) Total Adopted Budget 18.60 1,580,051 Fire Proposed Budget 358.00 27,528,366 Correction of FICA (626,000) Restore Fire Education Specialist Postion 1.00 45,435 Total Adopted Budget 359.00 26,947,801 • r Council Council Adjustment Adjustment to Amounts Management Services Proposed Budget 120.96 8,915,333 Transfer funding for CIP Coordinator position from CIP 66,228 Consolidate CIP Administration -1.00 (66,228) Consolidate EEO and Organizational Development functions in HR -1.00 (78,115) Correction of error in salary projections 3,156 Total Adopted Budget 118.96 8,840,374 A -%av< - Mayor Proposed Budget 19.00 1,325,202 Correction of error in salary projections 17,820 Total Adopted Budget 19.00 1,343,022 Police , Proposed Budget 577.18 43,219,399 rrk � �t -,,ge` Total Adopted Budget 577.18 43,219,399 Public Services Proposed Budget 451.01 34,063,834 Fleet maintenance,fuel,road salt (96,000) Intergovernmental revenue relating to UDOT Street Sweeping resolution 17,000 • Total Adopted Budget 451.01 33,984,834 Non Dept Proposed Budget 37,082,300 Transfer funding for CIP Coordinator position back from CIP (66,228) Eliminate proposed IMS network technician (75,936) Eliminate proposed IMS web programmer (75,936) Correct bus pass amount (30,000) Eliminate contingency appropriation (278,500) \ Reduce transfer for GO bond to County's numbers (13,998) Transfer to Governmental Immunity 1,300,000 Total Adopted Budget 0.00 37,841,702 Total General Fund 1696.44 $ 165,087,081 • Council Council Adjustment Adjustment to Amounts to FTE 1 .t * § • • r: yid x Proposed Revenue Budget $ 7,780,997 Reduce transfer from General Fund-IMS network technician (75,936) Reduce transfer from General Fund-IMS web programmer (75,936) $ 7,629,125 Proposed Expenditure Budget 61.00 $ 7,780,997 Eliminate proposed IMS network technician -1.00 (75,936) Eliminate proposed IMS web programmer -1.00 (75,936) 59.00 $ 7,629,125 Proposed Revenue Budget $ 1,474,031 Reduce property tax revenue $ (1,300,000) Transfer in from General Fund 1,300,000 Sources $ 1,474,031 Proposed Expenditure Budget 4.65 $ 1,474,031 • Uses 4.65 $ 1,474,031 Proposed Revenue Budget $ 27,601,997 Transfer in from General Fund (66,228) Sources $ 27,535,769 Proposed Expenditure Budget $ 27,601,997 Transfer funding for CIP Coordinator position back to General Fund (66,228) (See attached Expenditure Detail) Uses $ 27,535,769 • • • Fiscal Year 03-04 CIP Expenditure Detail FY 2003-2004 FY 2003-2004 Cumulative Total Title of Project Request Estimated Cost Council Amount Adj Council Cost 1 Impact Fee Projects $425,000 $425,000 Construct various Police,Fire,Park and Street capital improvement projects identified in the Impact Impact Fee Fee Analysis,Capital Facilities Plan. Revenue 2 MBA Debt Service for Pioneer Precinct Bond $434,160 $434,160 Debt service for the MBA bond used to complete the Pioneer Precinct. Impact fees may be used to Impact Fee pay for 19%of the cost of the facility. Expenditure 3 MBA&MFET(Class C)CIP Bond Debt Service $4,221,474 $3,787,314 $3,787,314 Debt service for several MBA and MFET bonds used to complete various capital improvements throughout the city. 4 City&County Building Debt Service $2,401,967 $2,401,967 $8,189,281 Debt service payment on the bond used to rehabilitate and refurbish the City&County Building. This bond will mature in 2011. 5 Police/Fire Radio'800 Trunked Radio System $540,794 $540,794 $6,730,075 To pay the lease purchase on radio equipment for Police and Fire. This is the final payment 6 Police/Fire Radio'800 Tower Repeater System $61,717 $61,717 $6,791,792 To pay the lease purchase for the tower repeaters associated with the 800 trunked radio system. Final payment will be in FY 2005. 7 Percent for Art $60,000 $60,000 $6,851,792 Provide enhancements such as decorative pavement,railings,sculures,fountains,and other works of art. 8 Rose Park Lighting Project $300,000 $975,000 $7,151,792 To remove all existing over head street fighting and install new decorative poles with underground $675,000 from wiring throughout the Rose Park Community Council District. An additional$561,000 is being CIP Contingency provided through a special improvement district(SID)bond. 9 Quayle Avenue from 9th W to 10th W $120,000 $120,000 $7,271,792 To design and construct curb,gutter,sidewalk and a roadway on Quayle Ave near 900 West and 1700 South. $75,000 will be contributed through an area special improvement district(SID)bond. 10 Irrigation System-Sugar House Park/Phase III $80,000 $80,000 $7,351,792 • To partially fund phase Ili of the Sugar House Park irrigation refurbishment to bring the entire park irrigation system up to date with a more effn.ioit irrigation equipment. The portion of the irrigation system that has not been refurbished is currently 11 Pedestrian Safety Devices $150,000 $150,000 $7,501,792 To provide for the installation of pedestrian safety devices throughout the city. These include pedestrian signals with countdown timers,in-pavement or overhead crosswalk lighting,or improved pavement markings. These devices are installed throughout t 12 Sidewalk Replacement SID $600,000 $400,000 $7,901,792 To replace defective sidewalk and remove tripping hazards in the designated special improvement district(SID)area. This project will also instal ADA pedestrian ramps,provide some tree replacement where trees have damaged sidewalk,and improve drainag 13 New and Replacement Streetlights $60,000 $60,000 $7,961,792 To replace existing streetlights that are no longer servicable or install new streetlights on and as needed basis. To be coordinated with other city projects. 14 Sugar House Lighting Project $675,000 $0 $7,961,792 To remove all existing over head street lighting and install new decorative poles with underground Funded by RDA wiring. Street lights would be replaced on 2100 South from 700 East to 1300 East,and Highland Drive from Ramona to 1-80 and Wilmington. 15 Jordan Park Peace Garden-Irrigations System Phase II $190,000 $190,000 $8,151,792 To provide for the second phase of Peace Gardens irrigation construction. The irrigation system is being replaced to maximize water efficiency and to attach it to the Central Control System. Jordan Park Peace Garden is located 1000 West 1000 South. 16 Traffic Signal Installation at 800 East and 100 South $375,000 $125,000 $8,276,792 To install new traffic signals at intersections where they are warranted. 17 CIP"Holding"Account $5,538,255 $5,538,255 $13,815,047 To provide an account to hold the remaining CIP allocation until further discussion can be held in August. 18 CIP Contingency ($675,000) ($675,000) ($675,000) To provide funding for the Rose Park Lighting Project.$675,000 from prior year CIP Contingency. • 1 FYO4 Legislative Intent Statements Based on Council Members'discussions and comments,following are Legislative Intent• Statements for fiscal year 2003-2004 that were tentatively adopted by the Council on June 10, 2003. Tentatively Adopted Legislative Intent Statements for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 A. Bonding for Efficient Irrigation Systems for Parks and Golf Courses-It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration investigate the possibility of bonding for improving the water efficiency of some of the City's golf courses, parks and other green space. Efficient systems should include secondary water systems using reclaimed water,springs,shallow ground water,or other water sources. It is the intent of the City Council that the study include the repayment of the bonds through savings in the cost of water including projected future increase to the cost of culinary water. B. Retirement Payouts-It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration provide to the Council by September 1,2003 information,options and a recommended plan to budget for payments of vacation leave and other retirement payouts. C. Collection of Fines-It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration report quarterly on the successfulness of its special collection effort.This report is to include quantitative information as well as progress regarding the City's efforts to work with the State and with collection agencies.The report information is to • be separated based on the age of the fine(6 month, 1 year,etc.)per the information available from the Justice Court GEMS computer program. D. Library Fiscal Controls—It is the intent of the City Council that the Library Fund follow all of the ordinances,policies and fiscal controls in place for other City departments. Further,it is the intent of the Council that controls be put in place to require that any transfer of funds between the basic Library budget and the Library contingency and capital funds be approved by the City Council... E. Semiannual Reports on the Status of Legislative Intent Statements and Action Items-It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration provides reports regarding the status of all active legislative intent statements (including unresolved statements from previous years and statements adopted outside of the official budget process)and all active legislative action items.The semiannual reports are to be submitted to the Council Office by January 31 and the first Tuesday in May each year. F. City Policy Coordination—It is the intent of the City Council that the policies adopted by the City Council be noted by Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City employees and incorporated in staff reports to the Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors as relevant so that funding decisions remain consistent between the two organizations. G. Revenue Collection-It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration report to the City Council by January 15,2004 on fiscal year 2003-2004 revenue • collections. H. Early Retirement Program - It is the intent of the City Council that the 1111 Administration transmit to the City Council by July 31, 2003 options for consideration and recommendations necessary to implement an Early Retirement Program. I. City Employee Benefit Plan Review - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration and the Citizens Compensation Advisory Committee review the City's Employee Benefit Plans and transmit to the City Council by February 3, 2004 information, comparisons and recommendations for options relating to the benefit package; the Council is particularly interested in options that would reduce the amount of the vacation and personal time payout upon employee retirement or resignation. 0 0 e i t.MCZ CITY Memo Public Services Department To: Michael Sears Copy: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rocky Fluhart, Steve Fawcett, Kevin Bergstrom, Steve Wetherell From: Rick Graham Date: Re: Follow-up item requested by City Council re: Golf Fund Budget and the fee increase for Fiscal Year 2004 (requested by email on Friday June 13, 2003) •Request: What would be the budgetary effect if the fee increase didn't gain approval from the City Council?Would it result in FTE reductions? Reductions in Golf Fund retained earnings? Response: The FY04 budget included $387,000 of anticipated revenue attributable to the fee increase. This represents a half year of revenue, from January through June 2004. The following fiscal year would benefit from an entire fiscal year's worth, or$773,000, of the fee-increase revenue. This revenue projection is based on anticipated revenue generated from increases on all fees currently in place. The assumption has been made that rounds of play would not be materially affected by the fee increase. Indeed, City Administration and the Golf Advisory Board have worked diligently to develop a broad spectrum of discounted fee opportunities in an attempt to ensure that pricing features remain attractive versus the market and that rounds played will not decline. In the development of this budget, department and division management prepared a six-year pro forma that incorporated fee increases every two years. The frequency and percentage of increases were established in order to cover inflation-affected operating expenses and to provide a reasonable amount of capital outlay. If the fee increase were to be postponed for one year only, from January of 2004 to January of 2005, there would be a decrease in cash flow of $773,000 over the same period of time. Due to the cumulative effects over time, if the fee increase were to be delayed a year and the subsequent fee increases were held at the same percentage increases as planned for in the six-year pro forma, the projected decrease in total revenues collected over this six year span of time would be approximately $1,600,000. iA reduction of anticipated revenues of this magnitude would require a fundamental shift away from the business operating practices for the Golf Fund established by the Golf Business Plan in 1997. It may be recalled that the Business Plan was developed by Golf Administration following a consultant 6/24/2003 1:59Int Page 1 of 4 • study commissioned by the Salt Lake City Council and conducted by the National Golf Foundation Consulting Services. In their September 21, 1995 report to the City Council, the National Golf Foundation Consulting team (NGF) confirmed a number of operational and financial challenges facing the Salt Lake City Golf program (Golf). NGF arrived at the conclusion that a higher level of revenue was needed, not a decrease in operational expenditures. They specifically noted: "For many years it was perceived that the golf operation was generating profits. In reality, the courses produced excess revenues because operating expenses were kept to a minimum and capital improvements were underfunded or deferred" "Our analysis of the operating budget revealed that any further cuts in [operating] expenses are likely to result in inferior conditions. In reality, more money rather than less is needed to maintain and operate the courses, if they are expected to be competitive with other area courses, especially those that have opened in the past ten years." Since no single change in management approach would likely prove operationally sustainable to address a one-time reduction in cash flow of$773,000, a combination of changes would need to be assessed. There are at least five potential options which might be given consideration: 1. Reduce cash reserves 2. Reduce capital outlay efforts 3. Lower operating expenses 1111 4. Increase revenues 5. Subsidy from the General Fund Reduce Cash Reserves After implementation of the Business Plan, Golf Fund administrators have endeavored to achieve a general rule of thumb of retaining three months worth of operating costs in the Fund's cash reserves. Given the weather-related effects on the Golf Fund's business, it has been felt prudent to try to maintain a reasonable reserve for fortification against the weather's unpredictability. Three months worth of operating expenses, as budgeted for fiscal year 2004 (FY04), is equal to $1,779,000. If the fee increase is instituted, the projected cash reserve balance at the end of FY04 would be $1,063,000, or$715,000 less than the rule of thumb amount. If the fee increase were to be delayed a year and the revenue shortfall were to be defrayed from the cash reserve balance, given typical weather conditions, average operations and capital spending, cash reserves would be $1,102,000 short of the desired level at the end of FY04 and $2,227,000 short by the end of the six year period, in FY09 because of the cumulative effect of this type of reduction. While it's possible to operate with a low level of cash reserves, it runs counter to what the Fund has been prudently striving to achieve. In practice, operating at a low cash reserve level frequently elevates the overall operational expense due to increased interest expenses. The Fund participates in the pooled cash account of the City and either receives monthly interest income or is charged interest expense depending on its cash balance during a month. Reduce Capital Outlay Efforts As indicated by the NGF study and reiterated in the Golf Business Plan, an ongoing, aggressive III capital improvement program is necessary to maintain the attractiveness in value of the City's golf 6/24/2003 1:59 P911 Page 2 of 4 e s courses to the area's golfers. This is particularly important in the current competitive business environment. • As noted earlier, due to the cumulative effects over time, if the fee increase were to be delayed a year and the following fee increases were held at the same percentage increases as planned for in the six-year pro forma, the projected decrease in total revenues collected over this six year span of time would be approximately $1,600,000. The largest operational challenge for Golf in the implementation of its Business Plan has been to address a backlog of needed capital improvements, while still offering golf at competitive prices for this market. A decrease of$1,600,000 over the next six years in capital improvements would only exacerbate the overriding challenge of maintaining the appeal and marketability of the City's golf courses. Lower Operating Expenses A fundamental financial challenge in golf operations is based on the fact that it takes a fixed amount of funds to maintain a golf course in premium condition regardless of how many golfers elect to play it. The natural processes that affect golf course conditions require short- and long-range attention. The requisite spending for materials, equipment, and staff to manage the operational processes cannot be easily turned on and off as sales of golf rounds fluctuate. The proposal to increase golf user fees beginning in Jan. 2004 is driven by several factors: • Normal Inflationary Growth in Expense Budget — While some of the fee increases are higher and some lower, the average fee increase requested is approximately 8%. This represents a 4% per annum increase since the last fee increase in Jan. 2002, typical of normal inflationary growth patterns in the expense side of the budget.• • Lease/Purchase of New Golf Car Fleet—As indicated in the 5-year year CIP Plan for Golf, the entire 6-1/2 year old golf car fleet was replaced in Jan. 03 with 505 new golf cars. The first of five $260,000 annual payments for the purchase of the new golf cars occurs in FY04. • Water Rates— By the summer of 2003, the budget for irrigation water will have increased 77% since 1999. Despite strenuous ongoing efforts to conserve water, which resulted in an actual reduction in water use of 10% overall in FY03 compared to FY02, the old irrigation systems on several of the golf courses make it very difficult to sustain large consecutive annual decreases in the amount of irrigation applied while still meeting the demand for high-quality turf conditions expected by golfers in a highly-competitive business environment. Rate increases and abnormally long, hot summers have combined to create a water expense increase from $480,000 actual in FY99 to a budgeted expense for FY04 of$850,000. • Personal Services Costs— Includes implementation of a new pay plan for Golf employees long recommended by Human Resources and the Citizen's Advisory Committee on Compensation to place Golf employees' benefit package on relatively equal footing with other City employees. (Does not increase the base pay but would require a buyout of all accumulated comp time that is outstanding in the spring of '04, in addition to recurring annual purchases of vacation and personal leave time.) Management has responded to Council within the last month on the issue of staffing of the golf courses and has indicated its concern that, following significant cuts in staffing in FY02, further reductions in labor-related expenses may significantly reduce the current level of quality and service expected by Golf's customers. iAccording to published NGF data for municipal golf courses in the Intermountain West (Region 7), on a per-course basis, the current number of full-time staff used by Salt Lake City to operate its courses places it in the bottom 50 percent of all surveyed municipal golf courses in the region. The 6/24/2003 1:59PAf Page 3 of 4 operational efficiency may be better appreciated by analyzing data from the same source which indicates that the number of standard golf rounds played on the City's 18-hole valley golf courses places them in the upper 25 percent of all the municipal golf courses in the region, with Bonneville in ill the upper 5 percent. In further consideration of the staffing issue, please note that the NGF indicated that Golf operations were understaffed and recommended increasing salaried staffing in all three major component areas of Golf Fund operations: Golf administration, Pro shop operations, and Maintenance operations. That has not occurred. Faced with the financial realities of current operations, management has instead elected to minimize full-time staffing wherever it was judged operationally prudent. Increase Revenues Management continues to explore virtually every opportunity to generate additional revenue from its golf operations. All of the known opportunities are already captured in the proposed budget and fee ordinance that has been submitted. Subsidy from the General Fund Although some local governmental entities choose to subsidize golf operations, Public Services' management is certainly not proposing to do so, either now or in the future. Conclusion Examining historical performance and noting how long it has taken the Golf Fund to build its cash reserves to produce a more or less comfortable margin of fiscal security, management is reluctant to • propose that ongoing operations could be funded from significant reductions in its cash reserves. Management sees little potential for cutting operating expenses without jeopardizing course conditions or service levels and consequently course appeal and marketability. In the same context, management does not feel it is prudent to reverse course in the implementation of capital improvements. However, if the proposed fee increase were not to be approved, management would address the anticipated revenue loss through a reduction of capital outlay which means that all capital outlay, except that portion which is already committed to debt service, would be delayed. Again, this type of funding delay would have a cumulative effect and represents a reduction of $1.6 million over a six- year period. Without a fee increase at this juncture, the question then arises as to the magnitude and timing of subsequent fee increases. Management recommends that the principles identified in the Business Plan continue to be followed, with the implementation of strategies designed to increase the attractiveness of City courses and the enactment of reductions in operational expenditures that do not compromise the competitiveness of the City golf courses. The current market environment and upward pressures on operating costs has placed the City's golf program in a circumstance where regular increases in golf user fees — to address inflationary increases, operating costs and critical capital needs—are essential to maintain the appeal of its courses. • 6/24/2003 1:59Pf Page 4 of 4 S • SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20,2003 SUBJECT: Petition No.400-03-06—Asset Management Services,Inc.-Laurelwood Apts. -Request to rezone properties located at 1341 South State St.from Commercial Corridor CC and Residential Multi-Family RMF-35 to Residential Multi-Family RMF-45 AFFECTED COUNCIL DISTRICTS: If the ordinance is adopted,the rezoning will affect Council District 5 STAFF REPORT BY: Janice Jardine,Planning Policy Analyst ADMINISTRATIVE DEPT. Community and Economic Development—Planning Division AND CONTACT PERSON: Ray McCandless,Principal Planner • KEY ELEMENTS: • A. The proposed rezoningwould facilitate the sale and renovation of the existing Laurelwood Apartments. Currently,the property includes a commercial retail center on State Street zoned Commercial Corridor and the i avrelwood Apartments zoned Residential Multi-Family RMF-35 located on 1300 South and Edison Street. If the rezoning is approved,the apartment complex and related parking would be zoned Residential Multi Family RMF-45. The Administration notes that the current zoning boundary will be shifted to the west to be consistent with a new subdivision lot line and include existing parking for the apartment complex. (Phase see the attached map for reference.) B. Current zoning is Commercial Corridor,Residential Multi-Family RMF-35 and the South State Street Corridor Overlay classifications. The proposed multi-family RMF-45 zoning classification would eliminate the non-conforming status of the apartment complex by providing a zoning classification that allows a density consistent with the existing development.The Overlay district zoning would remain the same. C. The apartment complex includes a total of 95 units(one and two bedrooms)in 9 separate buildings. Surrounding land uses include low-density,single-family uses to the east and commercial businesses and State offices to the south,west and north. D. In a related matter,Morse Health and Housing in partnership with Utah Nonprofit Housing Corp.has requested a$200,000 loan from the City Housing Trust Fund to assist in rehabilitation of the apartments. The apartments are intended to remain affordable for people at 55%of area median income or less for a period of 51 years. Twenty of the residential units will be specifically set aside for use by Valley Mental Health clients.The Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board reviewed the loan application and recommended • approval on May 15th. The Council is scheduled to receive a briefing on the Housing Trust Fund loan request on Tuesday,July Page 1 participation and interaction,transit-oriented development,encouraging mixed use developments, housing preservation,rehabilitation and replacement,zoning policies and programs that preserve housing opportunities as well as business opportunities. C. The City's 1990 Urban Design Element includes statements that emphasize preserving the City's image, neighborhood character and maintaining livability while being sensitive to social and economic realities. Applicable policy concepts include: 1. Ensure that land uses make a positive contribution to neighborhood improvement and stability and building restoration and new construction enhance district character. 2. Treat building height,scale and character as significant features of a district's image. 3. Ensure that features of building design such as color,detail,materials and scale are responsive to district character,neighboring buildings,and the pedestrian. D. The City's Strategic Plan and the Futures Commission Report express concepts such as maintaining a prominent sustainable city,ensuring the City is designed to the highest aesthetic standards and is pedestrian friendly,convenient,and inviting,but not at the expense of minimizing environmental stewardship or neighborhood vitality. The Plans emphasize placing a high priority on maintaining and developing new affordable residential housing in attractive,friendly,safe environments and creating attractive conditions for business expansion including retention and attraction of large and small businesses. CHRONOLOGY: ➢ BACKGROUND The Administration's transmittal provides a chronology of events relating to the rezoning request. • Please refer to the Administration's chronology for details.Key meeting dates are listed below. > KEY DATES • February,2003 Central City Community Council meeting • March 12,2003 Liberty Wells Community Council meeting • May 7,2003 People's Freeway Community Council meeting • May 14,2003 Planning Commission meeting cc: Rocky Fluhart,Dave Nimkin,DJ Baxter,Ed Ratan,Lynn Pace,Alison Weyher,David Dobbins,Roger Evans,LuAnn Clark,Louis Zunguze,Brent Wilde,Doug Wheelwright,Ray McCandless,Jan Aramaki, Barry Esham File Location: Community and Economic Development Department,Planning Division,Rezoning, Laurelwood Apartments,Asset management Services, 1341 South State St • Page 3 Ir cn0 Snl nH STREET _30(190 I AMENDMENT TO LOTS 1 THROUGH • PORTION OF LOTS 18 AND 25 0 A SUBDIVISION LOCATED I, 1300 SOUTH STREET TOWNSHIP 1]C... .w - (N 89..56'37"£407.8.5)40778'84515 0r 85ARING n .w >, SALT v r.ve,,,e .. N 89"54'13-E Si 75'.—��. a,'o.s.. froZ7 +on w.ee-in !"'81:435! y1.82' Y. earn v I r. I n 33 5 56'47'56'E 221' r I- -I ..— I r -I- 1 L. n I- A -I I ION 1 1 ., I y 3 W d -—E,,,►r Fxrsaa,-Svic 3s- 0=' C� -- r 3avwaay - - a VOOI�Oay .4T3T0.7�— a^ • r 41"i.: / " F 3 W .0 Lee Et, o0 I,' ?'^ U a 2 �' - 1 '5 13"E TOM 0' u o zo ' Ofio3E1*-1--Oc-ttgq— ts lyb_89.610A`I_— s- „'-I1_ 31r . 34 M� . I .s o $f I ifit' we SS 8915416"W 314.00' • FW°T.O.SED gUtreiwt$MO 34, CLEVELAND AVENUE (1442 SOUTH STREET) - CITY PLANNING)COMMISSION CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT r ,Kater NR,r,our r mot'WO rM,S NI fN.wM(0 e✓ LARSEN&MALMQUIST,INC. RVRo r0 rR:� .o ..r1,5 coRao NO.,.CfORo+NCf R.w. .W.>1 riLgv1uI 1 Jardine, Janice • From: Zunguze,Louis Sent: Monday,June 16,2003 9:32 AM To: McCandless,Ray Cc: Wheelwright,Doug;Wide,Brent;Jardine,Janice;Gust-Jenson,Cindy Subject: PETITION NO:400-03-06 ASSET MANAGEMENT SERVICES Categories: Program/Pokcy Ray: Please be advised that I have clarified the apparent confusion regarding the motion of the Planning Commission regarding this case. I contacted Ms.Funk(who made the motion)regarding the motion and she noted that it was: To rezone the property located at 1341 South State Street from a CC(Commercial Corridor)and RMF-35(Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential)to RMF-45(Moderate/High Density Multi-Family Residential,including the approval of a subdivision plat amendment,and deed restrictions on the number of units and height of the development. I hope that this clarifies the matter for you,please coordinate with Janice onxhis. Thanks, Louis 110 6/16/2003 . JUN 1 7 2003 ALISON WEYHER sap � �' �r't�J� TY kb.P RAT � ` `T �+ ' r(). mot ROSS C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON • DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MAYOR COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL <T A TO: Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officei DATE: June 10,2003 FROM: Alison Weyhei(Ckl„ ' RE: Petition 400-03-06: Asset Management rvices Inc. requesting to rezone property located at 1341 South State Street from Corridor Commercial (CC) and Moderate Density Multi- Family Residential (RMF-35) to a Moderate/High Density Multi-Family Residential (RMF-45) Zoning District; including approval of a 2-lot subdivision plat amendment, amending lots 1 through 17, lots 26 through 46, a portion of lots 18 and 25 of the Nye's Addition Subdivision. STAFF CONTACT: Ray McCandless,Principal Planner 535-7282 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance BUDGET IMPACT: None DISCUSSION: The property located at 1341 South State Street is a single parcel of land with an existing commercial strip center fronting State Street and a 95-unit apartment complex (Laurelwood Apartments) on the east half of the property fronting Edison Street. Although a single parcel of land, the property is split zoned. The commercial center is zoned Corridor Commercial (CC) and the apartments are zoned RMF-35. The zoning district boundary runs north and south,mid-way between State Street and Edison Avenue. The owners wish to sell the apartments which will be renovated by the buyer and are requesting approval to create a new property line behind the commercial buildings and shift the zoning district boundary line west to follow the new property line. The owners also are requesting the apartments be rezoned from RMF-35 to RMF-45 so that the density of the existing apartments matches its zoning designation. If approved, the existing zoning district boundary line will be shifted to the west meaning that property now zoned CC will be rezoned to RMF-45 (see attached staff report). On May 14, 2003, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission approved the subdivision with the condition that the height of any future buildings or future rehabilitated buildings not exceed the height of the existing buildings,which is 25 feet. This was a community council recommendation. The Planning Commission also recommended approval of the rezoning subject to the density of the apartments remaining the same, which is 95 units. The existing athletic club between the commercial buildings and apartments will be removed to accommodate parking for the apartments. S 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 80 1-535.6230 FAX: 801•535-6005 ®aceveieo PnPea . r Findings of Fact: Based on Section 21A.50.05 Standards for general amendments of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission has determined the proposed rezoning is appropriate based on the following findings of fact as discussed in the Staff Report to the Planning Commission: III • The proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies of the adopted general plan of Salt Lake City. The Zoning Rewrite Project of 1995 modified the land use on the eastern half of the property from "Limited Commercial Service" to multi-family residential. The proposed rezoning goes one step further by making the density of the existing development consistent with its zoning designation. The proposed zoning not only reflects the existing use on the property but provides a transition between the commercial development on State Street with the low density residential neighborhoods to the east which is consistent with the master plan as amended in 1995. • The proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The area is characterized by a mix of commercial and residential uses. Generally,the uses along both sides of State Street are commercial businesses and office buildings. Going eastward, the commercial development transitions towards low density residential development. The proposed rezoning provides a transition between the commercial and low density residential uses which is harmonious with the overall character of the area. The proposed amendment will not change existing site conditions. 411 • The proposed amendment will not adversely affect adjacent properties. The proposed rezoning and subdivision will establish a new property line and corresponding zoning district boundary line between the apartments and commercial businesses. The applicants have indicated they are negotiating the sale of the apartments which will be renovated by the buyer sometime in the future. As the area was developed many years ago, and some of the buildings on the block are in disrepair. The renovation will improve the area. • The proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. The property lies within the South State Street Corridor Overlay District. The purpose of the overlay district is to "acknowledge and reinforce the historical land development patterns along South State Street between 900 South and 2100 South." The overlay district exempts buildings in the CC zoning from meeting the required 15' front yard setback. No additional standards are imposed by the overlay district as the buildings are existing. The overlay district provides an opportunity to eliminate the required 15' front yard setback along State Street to reinforce historical land development patterns along the street (buildings with no front yards or setbacks). This applies to new development only and not to existing development. The commercial development on State Street is existing. Therefore, there are no additional requirements that need to be met. The proposed • amendment is consistent with the provisions of the applicable overlay zoning district. • Public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property are adequate, including but not limited to roadways, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection, schools, storm water drainage systems, water supplies, and waste water and refuse collection. The various City departments have reviewed the proposal and their comments are attached to this Report. The buildings are existing and do not create any need for additional City services. Public Process: This petition was reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 14, 2003 (see attached meeting minutes). The Planning Commission recommended that the petition be forwarded to the City Council. The proposal also was discussed at the Central City Community Council on January 14, 2003, by the Liberty Wells Community Council on March 12, 2003 and by the People's Freeway Community Council on May 7,2003 (see attached letters). Section 21A.10 requires that the legislative body hold advertised public hearings prior to amendments to the zoning map.Newspaper advertised notice is required prior to consideration by the City Council.A draft notice has been provided in this transmittal packet. Relevant Ordinances: Rezoning: 21A.50.050 Standards for General Amendments Land Use: 21A.24.140 RMF-45 41, 21A.34.090 South State Street Corridor Overlay District. Subdivision: Title 20 Subdivision Ordinance S TABLE OF CONTENTS 1110 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Chronology 2. Ordinance 3. Notice of City Council Public Hearing A. Notice of City Council Hearing Newspaper Publication Draft B. Newspaper Publication Transmittal C. Mailing List and Labels 4. Agenda of Planning Commission Hearing for May 14, 2003 5. Staff Report for Planning Commission Hearing for May 14, 2003 including: a)Department Comments b) Community Council Comments 6. Planning Commission Minutes for May 14, 2003 7. Planning Commission Public Hearing Notices 1. CHRONOLOGY • PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • March 21, 2003 Petition assigned to Planning. • March 21, 2003 City Departmental Comments Requested. • May 14, 2003 Planning Commission Hearing. • May 20,2003 Ordinance requested from Attorney. • May 30, 2003 Ordinance received from Attorney. • May 30,2003 City Council Transmittal Prepared. I 2. ORDINANCE SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE • No. of 2003 (Rezoning property located at 1341 South State Street) AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1341 SOUTH STATE STREET, FROM COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR(CC) AND MODERATE DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RMF-35), TO MODERATE/HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RMF-45), PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. 400-03-06. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have held public hearings and have taken into consideration citizen testimony, filing, and the demographic details of the area,the long range general plans of the City, and any local master plan as part of their deliberations. Pursuant to these deliberations, the City Council has • concluded that the proposed change of zoning for the property located at 1341 South State Street is appropriate for the development of the community in that area. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Rezoning. The property located at 1341 South State Street, which is more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto, shall be and hereby is rezoned from Commercial Corridor(CC) and Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential (RMF-35), to Moderate/High Density Multi-Family Residential (RMF-45). SECTION 2. Amendment of Zoning Map. The Salt Lake City zoning map, as adopted by the Salt Lake City Code, relating to the fixing of boundaries and zoning districts, shall be, and hereby is amended consistent with the rezoning identified above. SECTION 3. Conditions. The rezoning approved herein is conditioned upon: (1) Recordation of a final plat, with notations indicating that building height is limited to 25 feet and that the total number of units shall not exceed 95 units (59 one • bedroom units and 36 two bedroom units); (2) Compliance with all City Departmental requirements; and (3) Implementation of all site developments as shown on the proposed site plan. SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication and shall be recorded with the Salt Lake County Recorder. The City Recorder is instructed not to publish or record this ordinance until the conditions identified above have been met, as certified by the Salt Lake City Planning Director. SECTION 5. Time. If the conditions identified above not been met within one year from the date this ordinance is signed, this ordinance shall become null and void. The City Council may, for good cause shown, extend the time period for satisfying the conditions identified above. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah this day of , 2003. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER • Transmitted to Mayor on • Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 2003. Published: 1111 G:\Ordinance 03\Rezoning property at 1341 So.State Street-May 29,2003.doc l MALMQUIST,L RS N & AL QUIST, INC. ' CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS °"" pyi 1574 West 1700 South •Salt Lake City, Utah 84104 • (801) 972-2634 4111 Legal Description Proposed Parcel 2, Proposed Amendment to Lots 1 through 17 and 26 through 46 and a portion of Lots 18 and 25 of Nye's Addition Subdivision All of the proposed Parcel 2 of the proposed Amendment to Lots 1 through 17 and Lots 26 through 46 and a portion of Lots 18 and 25 of Nye's Addition Subdivision, a subdivision being part of Block 12, Five Acre Plat "A", Big Field Survey, more particularly described as follows: VI; V3 Ala Beginning at the Southeast corner of Lot 1,Block 2 of the Nye's Addition Subdivision, a Subdivision being part of Block 12,Five Acre Plat "A",Big Field Survey, said point being South 00°01'43"East 614.80 feet and North 89°54'26"East 374.94 feet from a found Salt Lake City brass cap monument at the intersection of State Street (100 East) and 1300 South Street and running thence South 89°54'26"West along the South line of 111 said Block 2, 190.92 feet;thence North 00°03'49"West 239.56 feet;thence North 89°54'13"East 10.00 feet;thence North 00°04'07"West 80.76 feet;thence South 89°54'13"West 10.00 feet;thence North 00°03'49"West 98.95 feet;thence North 89°52'32"East 41.61 feet;thence North 00°02'11"West 151.51 feet;thence North 87°43'51"East 91.82 feet to a point on the North line of said Block 2 of said Nye's Addition Subdivision;thence North 89°54'13"East along said North line 51.75 feet; thence South 56°20'56"East 7.21 feet to a point on the East line of said Block 2;thence South 00°02'11"East along said East line 570.30 feet to the point of beginning. Contains: 102,284 sq.ft. or 2.3 acres Prepared for: Asset Management Service Attn: Greg Strong 5107 South 900 East Salt Lake City, Ut 84117 Prepared by: Larsen&Malmquist, Inc. April 18, 2003 Job No. 05013-02 EBK 40 CONSULTING CIVIL— STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AND LAND SURVEYING 3. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING • Posted By NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is reviewing Petition 400-03-06 by Asset Management Service representing Laurelwood Apartments requesting approval to rezone property located at approximately 1341 South State Street from a Moderate Density Residential (RMF-35) and Corridor Commercial (CC)to a Moderate/High Density Residential (RMF-45) zoning district. The proposed rezoning to RMF-45 will affect only the easterr half of the property where the apartment buildings now exist. The western portion of the lot, the commercial businesses fronting State Street, will remain CC. The rezoning is being requestec''to make the zoning consistent with the existing apartment building density. The City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petition request. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be held: • DATE: TIME: PLACE: ROOM 315 City and County Building 451 South State Street Salt Lake City If you have any questions relating to this proposal, please attend the meeting or call Mr. Ray McCandless at 535-7282. Monday through Friday. • 110 MEMORANDUM To: Lynn Valdez Newspaper Corporation From: Salt Lake City Council's Office Re: SPECIAL NOTICES -010—CLASSIFIED ADS Date: Please run the following ad,one time only,on ,in both papers NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING An amendment to the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance. On , the Salt Lake City Council will hold a public hearing to consider rezoning property located at 1341 South State Street from Corridor Commercial (CC) and Moderate Density Multi- Family Residential (RMF-35) to a Moderate / High Density Multi-Family Residential (RMF-45) Zoning District.The proposed rezoning will make the zoning of the property match the existing building density of Laurelwood Apartments. The public meeting of the City Council begins at p.m. in Room ,City and County Building,451 South State Street, Salt Lake City,Utah.For more information or special arrangements,call Mr.Ray McCandless at 535-7282. • 4. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA • NOTE: The field trip is scheduled to leave at 4:00 p.m. AGENDA FOR THE SALT LAKE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING In Room 326 of the City&County Building at 451 South State Street 111111 Wednesday, May 14,2003, at 5:30 p.m. The Planning Commission will be having dinner at 5:00 p.m., in Room 126. During the dinner, Staff may share planning information with the Planning Commission.This portion of the meeting will be open to the public. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES from Wednesday,April 23,2003 2. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR 3. CONSENT AGENDA—Salt Lake City Property Conveyance Matters: 4. LONG RANGE PLANNING ISSUES a. Presentation by Envision Utah and UDOT on the Mountain View Corridor(Previously called The Western Transportation Corridor). (Staff—Brent Wilde at 535-6180) 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. PUBLIC HEARING at 6:00 p.m.—Petition No.400-03-10,by Shaw Homes Inc. requesting an amendment to the West Salt Lake Zoning Map to rezone the property located at 1551 West 200 South from R- 1/5,000(single-family residential district)to CG(general commercial district).This request would also require an amendment to the West Salt Lake Master Plan. (Staff—Marilynn Lewis at 535-6409) 0 PUBLIC HEARING at 6:20 p.m.—Petition No.400-03-06 by Asset Management Service requesting to rezone property located at 1341 South State Street from a Corridor Commercial(CC)and Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential (RMF-35)to a Moderate/High Density Multi-Family Residential (RMF-45)Zoning District including approval of a 2-lot Subdivision Plat Amendment,Amending lots 1 through 17 and Lots 26 through 46 and a portion of lots 18 and 25 of the Nye's Addition Subdivision. (Staff—Ray McCandless at 535-7282) • c. PUBLIC HEARING at 6:40 p.m.—Petition No.400-02-05, by Thomas A. Duffin requesting to rezone the property at 2275 South Green Street from R-1-7000,single-family residential to SR-1,Special Development Pattern Residential Zoning District. The applicant proposes to construct a duplex on the existing vacant lot, if the rezone is approved by the City. (Staff—Melissa Anderson at 535-6184) d. PUBLIC HEARING at 7:00 p.m.—Petition No.410-632, by Johansen Thackeray Commercial Real Estate Services requesting a conditional use and planned development permit in the C-SHBD zone at 2100 South McClelland Street. The proposal involves demolition of an existing building to construct a new, single story commercial structure for retail and restaurant use. (Staff—Melissa Anderson at 535-6184) e. PUBLIC HEARING at 7:30 p.m.—River Glen Subdivision Phase II, by Iverson Homes to create nine Single Family Dwelling lots at 1345 South Utah Street in an R-1-7000 Zoning District. (Staff—Jackie Gasparik at 535-6354) f. PUBLIC HEARING at 8:00 p.m.—400-03-12, by Chabad Lubavitch of Utah, requesting to amend the zoning map for the property located at 1433 and 1435 South 1100 East from a RB Residential Business district to a R-1-5000 Single Family Residential district. (Staff—Joel Paterson at 535-6141) g. PUBLIC HEARING at 8:30 p.m.—Scott Turville is requesting preliminary subdivision approval for the Carrigan View 2 Subdivision;a redesigned proposal of a 3-lot,single-family residential subdivision located at approximately 1977 South Lakeline Drive(2950 East)in a Foothill Residential"FR-2"Zoning District. (Staff—Greg Mikolash at 535-7932) Salt Lake City Corporation complies with all ADA guidelines. If you are planning to attend the public meeting and,due to a disability,need assistance in understanding or participating in the meeting,please notify the City 48 hours in advance of the meeting and we will try to provide whatever assistance may be required. Please call 535-7757 for assistance. PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES AND PAGERS BEFORE THE MEETING BEGINS. AT YOUR REQUEST A SECURITY ESCORT WILL BE PROVIDED TO ACCOMPANY YOU TO YOUR CAR AFTER THE MEETING. THANK YOU. COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT•PLANNING DIVISION•451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 406•SALT LAKE CITY,UT 84111 TELEPHONE:801-535-7757•FAX:801-535-6174 5. STAFF REPORT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION • DATE: April 29,2003 TO: Salt Lake City Planning Commission FROM: Ray McCandless, Principal Planner RE: STAFF REPORT FOR THE MAY 14,2003 MEETING CASE#: 400-03-06 APPLICANT: Asset Management Services STATUS OF APPLICANT: Representative for Muse, L.C.,Dba Laurelwood Management Group • PROJECT LOCATION: 1341 South State Street _ 1 1 w "/� -t I ter. .,st . F ,:,*:.,i-lVL,I 7e,'.z..,,-.I,,01H,:,.,_,'" •;.i-4_,-,:.-.k..1---;„sy.,:,-.-.--- '. "_'''[' Ivry_^ ! (• �1 i., }'.-: T - .+ Ili .,' __ '_iYR : $ ' +i ) s 1V fr '` _ V - '! +ems-4,-;x+`„ I` ea -;:, E' j ' .. r' `` ! t - f .` (n ` 3 s .:. �;7 ' , ---} .., . ',A- ' -_.� °+ c - ress _A if �c . '� x "1 I- t ff 14.. r ; gym r—,'� !lI =21 -` ��—_ ;:,. 412f' III PROJECT/PROPERTY SIZE: 3.5 acres I COUNCIL DISTRICT: District 5 REQUESTED ACTION: • Petition 400-03-06 by Asset Management Services requesting to rezone property located at 1341 South State Street from a Corridor Commercial (CC) and Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential (RMF-35) to a Moderate / High Density Multi-Family Residential (RMF-45) Zoning District; including approval of a 2-lot Subdivision Plat Amendment, Amending lots 1 through 17,Lots 26 through 46, a portion of lots 18 and 25 of the Nye's Addition Subdivision. PROPOSED USE(S): Apartments/Commercial Retail Center (existing) APPLICABLE LAND USE REGULATIONS: Subdivision: Title 20 Subdivision Ordinance Rezoning: 21A.50.050 Standards for General Amendments Land Use: 21A.24.140 RMF-45 21A.34.090 South State Street Corridor Overlay District. SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS: North - Corridor Commercial (CC) South - Corridor Commercial (CC) • East - Single Family Residential (R-1-5000) West - Corridor Commercial (CC) SURROUNDING LAND USES: North - Commercial Center South - State Office Building East - Residential West- Commercial Businesses MASTER PLAN SPECIFICATIONS: The last master plan for this area was adopted in 1974, the zoning for which was updated as part of the Zoning Rewrite Project of 1995. The City is currently working on a revised Central Community Master Plan but it has not been adopted to date. SUBJECT PROPERTY HISTORY: The Laurelwood Apartments and commercial retail center on State Street are on one piece of property which is split zoned. The retail center fronting State Street is zoned Corridor Commercial (CC) and the apartments are zoned Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential (RMF-35). Behind the commercial center is an athletic club which extends into the RMF-35 zoning district. 41111 ACCESS: Access to the commercial portion is primarily from State Street. The apartments are accessed from Edison Street and 1300 South. Both uses share common driveways and parking areas. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Subdivision: The subdivision plat amendment is being requested to facilitate the sale of the apartments which will be rehabilitated sometime in the future. The subdivision will create a property line between the commercial building and apartment buildings as shown on the accompanying drawings. Rezoning: The rezoning is being requested to make the zoning consistent with the density of the existing development and to match the new subdivision boundary. The athletic club will be removed so that both properties meet setback and parking requirements. If the request is approved, the existing RMF-35 zoning will be replaced by RMF-45 zoning and the west boundary will be shifted further to the west to include the parking for the apartments. The new zoning district boundary lines will match the new lot lines created by the subdivision. The subdivision can only occur if the rezone is approved so that property lines do not extend over zoning district boundary lines. COMENTS,ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS: • 1. COMMENTS Comments from applicable City departments are as follows: a) Transportation: The Transportation Division sees no impact to the Salt Lake City transportation system. Cross access agreements will need to be implemented as a condition of approval. Front yard parking encroachments will need to be addressed. b) Public Utilities: The Public Utilities Department has no conflicts with the proposal. c) Police: The Police Department has no concerns with the request. d) Engineering: -A permit to work in the public way permit is required. - Several sidewalk panels and some curbs and gutters must be replaced on State Street, 1300 South and Edison Streets. -An ADA ramp must be installed on 1300 South Street. f} Fire Department: The Fire Department has no concerns with the proposed rezoning or subdivision plat amendment. g) Community Council(s): The applicant is required to receive input from three community councils: Central City The applicants attended the January 14, 2003 Community Council Meeting. According to the attached letter from the applicants, the item was unanimously approved. • 3 Liberty Wells - The applicants attended the March 12, 2003 Community Council Meeting. According to the attached letter, the Community Council voted to approve the application with two conditions: • 1. The building height is restricted to the existing height, and 2. The number of units not to exceed the current number of units. People's Freeway - This item was discussed and approved at the People's Freeway Community Council meeting on May 7, 2003 as indicated in the attached letter. 2. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS The 1974 Central Community Development Plan identifies this property as "Limited Commercial Service". The plan envisioned a gradual 'phasing out' of non-commercial land uses by the year 2000, but this did not occur. The Zoning Rewrite Project of 1995 modified the 1974 plan by zoning the east half of the property multi-family residential. The western half of the property zoned "CC" remains consistent with the original plan. In determining whether a zoning amendment is appropriate, the Planning Commission must consider the following standards: 21A.50.050 Standards for general amendments. . A. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the adopted general plan of Salt Lake City. Discussion: The Zoning Rewrite Project of 1995 modified the land use on the eastern half of the property from "Limited Commercial Service" to multi-family residential. The proposed rezoning goes one step further by making the density of the existing development consistent with its zoning designation. The proposed zoning not only reflects the existing use on the property but provides a transition between the commercial development on State Street with the low density residential neighborhoods to the east which is consistent with the master plan as amended in 1995. Findings: The proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies of the adopted general plan of Salt Lake City. B. Whether the proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Discussion: The area is characterized by a mix pf commercial and residential uses. Generally, the uses along both sides of State Street are commercial • businesses and office buildings. Going eastward, the commercial development transitions towards low density residential development. The proposed rezoning • provides a transition between the commercial and low density residential uses which is harmonious with the overall character of the area. The proposed amendment will not change existing site conditions. Findings: The proposed amendment is haiinonious with the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. C. The extent to which the proposed amendment will adversely affect adjacent properties. Discussion: The proposed rezoning and subdivision will establish a new property line and corresponding zoning district boundary line between the apartments and commercial businesses. The applicants have indicated they are negotiating the sale of the apartments which will be renovated by the buyer sometime in the future. As the area was developed many years ago, and some of the buildings on the block are in disrepair. The renovation will improve the area. Findings: The proposed amendment will not adversely affect adjacent properties. D. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. • Discussion: The property lies within the South State Street Corridor Overlay District. The purpose of the overlay district is to "acknowledge and reinforce the historical land development patterns along South State Street between 900 South and 2100 South". The overlay district exempts buildings in the Corridor Commercial (CC) zoning from meeting the required 15' front yard setback. No additional standards are imposed by the overlay district as the buildings are existing. Findings: The overlay district provides an opportunity to eliminate the required 15' front yard setback along State Street to reinforce historical land development patterns along the street (buildings with no front yards or setbacks). This applies to new development only and not to existing development. The commercial development on State Street is existing. Therefore, there are no additional requirements that need to be met. The proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of the applicable overlay zoning district. E. The adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including but not limited to roadways, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection, schools, storm water drainage systems, water supplies, and waste water and refuse collection. • 5 Discussion: The various City departments have reviewed the proposal and their comments are attached to this Report. The buildings are existing and do not create any need for additional City services. • Parks —Not applicable. Recreational Facilities —Not applicable. Police - The Police Department does not have any concerns with the request. Fire Protection - The Fire department does not have any concerns with the proposed development. Schools—Not applicable. Storm Water Drainage, Water Supplies and Waste Water - The City's Public Utilities Department has no concerns with the proposed rezone or subdivision. Storm water drainage, water supplies and sewer is adequate to serve the existing facility. Refuse Collection - The buildings are existing. No additional services will be needed. Findings: Public facilities are adequate to serve the apartments and commercial 4110 retail center. 20.31.090 Standards for general amendments. Subdivision amendments not involving the creation of new streets can be approved • administratively,however, staff is forwarding the subdivision amendment to the Planning Commission together with the zoning map amendment to both provide an overall context to the Commission members and expedite the approval process. The standards for subdivision amendments are contained in Section 20.31.090 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. The Planning Commission will need to determine the following: A. The amendment will be in the best interests of the City; Discussion: The commercial and residential uses will be on separate parcels bringing the site into compliance with current zoning standards and further the goals of the master plan. . Findings: The amendment will be in the best interests of the City. B. All lots comply with all applicable zoning standards; • Discussion:. Both lots will comply with applicable zoning standards. Several • existing non-complying parking spaces located in the front yard on Edison Street will be eliminated and replaced with landscaping. Findings: Both lots comply with applicable zoning standards. C. All necessary and required dedications are made; Discussion: No additional dedications are needed. Cross access easements will be required between the apartments and commercial developments that share access to the parking spaces. Findings: Cross access easements/ agreements will be required. D. Provisions for the construction of any required public improvements are included; Discussion: All required public improvements are detailed in the City departmental comment letters. Findings: Provisions for the construction of any required public improvements are included. • E. The amendment complies with all applicable laws and regulations; Discussion: Both lots will comply with applicable zoning standards. There is adequate on-site parking for both the commercial and residential development as indicated in the attached letter from Larsen and Malmquist dated April 3, 2003. Findings: The amendment complies with all applicable laws and regulations. F. The amendment does not materially injure the public or any person and there is good cause for the amendment. Discussion: The proposed subdivision amendment and rezoning will make the zoning consistent with existing development and the subdivision will separate the commercial and residential properties by a property line. This enhances public safety through delineation of uses. As such, the amendment does not materially injure the public. By sorting out the split zoning issue,the proposed rezoning and the subdivision are a positive step toward improving the area. Findings: The amendment does not materially injure the public or any person and there is good cause for the amendment. 411 • RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above comments, analysis and findings, Staff recommends preliminary subdivision amendment approval and approval of the rezoning from RMF-35 to RMF-45 as requested subject to the following conditions: I. Recordation of a final plat. 2. Meeting all City departmental requirements. 3. Implementation of all site improvements as shown on the proposed site plan. 4. The building height is restricted to the height of the existing buildings which is 25 feet. (Community Council Recommendation) 5. The number of units not to exceed the current number of units which is 59, 1- bedroom units and 36, 2-bedroom units, 95 units total. (Community Council Recommendation) • • 8 EE(x RJ Rim tr RICHARD GRAHAM SAL �t A\ a �'t Galin 1I.OIN1 � -� >,_. ,. I ROSS C. "ROCKY"ANDERSON PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES MAYOR • TO: RAY McCANDLESS,PLANNING FROM: SCOTT WEILER, P.E., ENGINEERING Aim DATE: APRIL 15, 2003 SUBJECT: Amendment to Lots 1-17 and Lots 26-46 and a Portion of Lots 18 and 25 of Nye's Addition Subdivision 1300 S. Edison Street City Engineering review comments are as follows: 1. Prior to performing the work described below, a "Permit to Work in the Public Way" must be obtained from SLC Engineering. 2. The plat must conform to the comments on the attached plat checklist and redlined review print. State Street I. Curb, gutter and sidewalk exist in State Street along the frontage of the proposed plat • in good condition with the exception of two sidewalk panels around telecommunication boxes and seven other sidewalk panels that are causing tripping hazards and must be replaced. One section of curb & gutter is defective and must be replaced. 1300 South Street 1. Curb, gutter and sidewalk exist in 1 300 South Street along the frontage of the proposed plat in good condition with the exception of one broken sidewalk panel and one settled sidewalk panel that must be replaced. The existing sidewalk ramp at the southwest corner of the intersection of 1 300 South/Edison Street has no landing or detectable warning surface and must be replaced with a ramp meeting ADA requirements. Edison Street 1. Curb, gutter and sidewalk exist in 200 East Street along the frontage of the proposed plat. Fourteen cracked sidewalk panels and ten settled sidewalk panels must be replaced. An additional eight sidewalk joints are uneven causing tripping hazards and must be ground down or replaced. Two sections of curb & gutter have settled and must be replaced. cc: Craig Smith Brad Stewart • Barry Walsh Vault SALT LAKE CITY ENGINEERING 349 SOUTH 200 EAST,SUITE 100, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH B41 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535-7961 FAX: B01.535-6093 �� accvcco P<ocn POLICE McCandless, Ray From: Kirkwood, Brendon Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 3:02 PM • To: McCandless, Ray Subject: RE: CPTED Petition 400-03-06 Categories: Program/Policy RAY, SORRY FOR THE DELAY. I HAVE BEEN OUT OF TOWN. ALICIA DID FORWARD THE PLANS AND I HAVE LOOKED OVER THEM. BASED ON THE PLANS AND MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE AREA I DO NOT FORE SEE ANY PROBLEMS OR ISSUES WITH THE CHANGES. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE CHANGES WILL IMPACT THE POLICE DEPT IN ANY DIFFERENT WAY. IF THERE ARE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS PLEASE LET ME KNOW. THANKS, BRENDON. Original Message From: McCandless, Ray Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 12:00 PM To: Kirkwood, Brendon Subject: FW: CPTED Petition 400-03-06 Brendon, Did Alicia forward the plans for Laurelwood to you? Ray Original Message From: Orgill, Alicia Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 8:08 AM To: Kirkwood, Brendon Cc: McCandless, Ray Subject: CPTED Petition 400-03-06 Brendon: It looks like the request for a CPTED comment is in your area, please get back with Ray McCandless on your review, if you need assistance I would be happy to help. Thanks agene. • 4/21/2003 Page 1 of 1 1—IRC McCandless,Ray From: Larson,Bradley Sent: Tuesday,April 08,2003 12:54 PM To: McCandless,Ray Subject:Amendment to Lots 1-17 and Lots 26-46 and a portion o Lots 18 and 25 of Nyes's Addition Subdivision and Petition 400-03-06,Rezone request from RMF 35 to RMF 45 Ray, Please consider this note as Fire Department approval for the above mentioned petition. Thank you, Brad Larson Deputy Fire Marshal . • 4/14/2003 TRD PoarATtoN • McCandless, Ray • From: Walsh, Barry Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 9:30 AM To: McCandless, Ray • Cc: Weiler, Scott; Stewart, Brad Subject: Nyes's Sub & Pet 400-03-06 Categories: Program/Policy March 26 ,2003 Ray McCandless Planning Division 451 South State St, Rm.406 Salt Lake City,Utah 84111 Re: Review—Amendment to lots 1 -17 and lots 26—46 and a portion of lots 18 and 25 of Nyes's Addition Subdivision and Petition 400-03-06,Rezone request from RMF 35 to RMF 45 at 13141 South States Street. Dear Ray: The Transportation Division has reviewed the Nyes's Amendment proposal drawing as shown. Our review comments are as follows: We see no direct impact to the Salt Lake City transportation system. We do need circulation cross easements for all three parcels and parking status calculation's for each use. The Plat describes one parcel but shows 2,please clarify between two parcels and two zoning districts. There are two fiont yard parking setback encroachments that need to be addresses along with the public way encroachment at the south east driveway area. Public way upgrades are subject to Engineering reviews along with the ADA ramp installation on the corner of 1300 South at Edison Street. Please feel free to call me at 535-6630 if you have any questions or concerns about these comments. Sincerely, Barry D.Walsh Transportation Engineer Assoc. cc: Kevin J.Young,P.E. Scott Weiler,P.E. Brad Stewart File Barry D. Walsh Engineering Technician VI • Salt Lake City Transportation Division 349 South 200 East, Suite 450 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 (801) 535-7102 (801)535-6019 FAX • barry.walsh@ci.slc.ut.us t rUaL(C UT1 WITS Fage l oI I McCandless,Ray From: Garcia,Peggy • Sent: Friday,March 28,2003 9.04 AM To: McCandless,Ray Subject: Amendment to lots 1-17 Categories:Program/Policy Ray, Salt Lake City has no conflicts with any of our utilities for this zoning change. If you have any questions please contact Ray Eastman at 483-6787. Thanks, Peggy • • 3/28/2003 • • • MAPS: 10 x.f,. lit ' r. r t • Nla. ,, 1�300 S i t ,, ,.' '40.1V:"A• '''i''. °"'fv '7;,ry " 3.ar `i "�I ,...m.. 4L 1 } 7Fu` .,,. pa.�.0 fN f ."r #h .e r 1 nr Av..i� t,l1 N^ 'ij fey 1 § .4� {gn r j;`f� • • ' t �rY•.. {, Q `I ,y ,;r"x y!`lrrye" ;'��I�64 • • • • I �, 5.,,., ,., . ., I . x ,3��i?GN�� k"iI ;k „� t i ( -^ , „Mrm," lhu,A� „14; d1 i ,,', @ ,. ._ ;,,_.0 r �'a t ''. "hot""` ,I,v k, a," n v.! �, Vic" t oft • ` a +'� yp; .7� (, .- rL�tl.,S f; 1 �' �, ro0 .I '� 4 ,w nnal skr 4, ' ,,,,:,w d1 • r .,� ,r, ,.. ''iu. " s„+m�" r i ,,4„,„6,..aa, • .1;,..„. a - 6' i ; 1 er I "s L ' S " ,uP�9 a� `1'l�"" I y i uY.., .. < ,� �l �h d .,,+r„.„„.."m«,,Bid "twh� f 'fYa.r ,,7! n "Z k'` + .",'�k+ .\ ~�"�'"V:`,e ��; '" . +. S"?`! 1 ��';n. ,7+y' P t,q�' .+. 5 �I .a„ g d'{r. ,mot ter, n ,o r . '+. �" ' c ''" i f r t I i .e 7"' '„ ,. a ,,'f '4: I� q I '� ' ` 0,? .•` t ry i`l.�. ` .,3 ' f,r; .1y+1'u y,{ �.,4 , rt.l dj >`,;ry, I !�;'i 5., r Y "•04, , ,.' .y�, jo‘Imili �+ b 1i y�,a x" °", ' 9/'i�' ge " y ?r *ii`�'r, ,. �1r 'W v, b�.'tr ' fN{ � J — � 1j ,r.. Yr ^ +'Y ` ��' +E �' Warr: �' „ . F��e �'�' i ?. h j"� 0, ,, ,4..,." + ,� +'�' J' �,, r w,' y.. yy �r y r iil -'+.' aye , �, _ + ,_ P ._ t ^r �",�` .,.:.r <x • 1,4 h i 9 ,�r I € Y �P ! 7"�,y Y"�4.. d • t�0 '. " e "'1, ., , lit ', i2' 4 4 '� n a .. "' �7�' Ili -i d .r" e *• "sd,.9N`µ1, °`, ec lN� l t,' •k"n, 4!�f".ir 7- � , t ,r, f. ` r n p y ry I,. R v o i k tl yy fart H' , nr 4 ".. "w..G, , =+ . rC P yp.t a w......._.... +r ,•n4olo,ty ,,��i ° °�+� 8 {p�IwwA, I " '-p;4' , cc 4 .,; :.a°.se.,...,a ° r+, 1 1d I1M��y;wV. "'''' 1M�4 -1 'r S I .. , h4` "' lynx ' 7Yx� W , P' ;pN :iy&�, �F+ y ,. .i:i 'ki �, gt tYl �. j ,fNi op, !. ".l 4""$r't J 44,,. , , .,,. r +:.): ' .--..i, i i."`I;'..„. e ,u , k. , , � �' y�, W Fn t s„ ,,. �' '.rrl t'°In'n'/d "",^ q euw .raf4 , r.i `,?�°r„xr','�8`,. a """ w ,. .. .... J'G a 'y, , - r '„ �, „ �r`" °{ y.*e: J." " ` ny'�?, .vr';°'a' y ule''`,.. W. .�;n .a,.,: , t ``'�,'> •; � !h'.a�, i .r �:�dY C�", ' !• 41 N , +." w',f • rya,,, _. ,� 41 ry',r :9',.!;`,P; 4 o.•,, �• y r1 ...na1fr'�1.a. Yll "" Cip-,: '� W�',!r�"a 'FjA?'91t �' j ''d'i 9=r °6"�'y."' ,, w»i" !,�5 t H. %M q it i 1,. ,m,k m . c. 4`.9 d a an", ki° . , " DSite Area N • 1�;,.°/';?,;x ,'t Proposed Rezone from RMF-35 to RMF-45ItikirNy W 7� E ill ' , Area to be included in the RMF-45 Zoning District (one from CC to RMF-45) s 40 I ,i, <n,,TN .TREET AMENDMENT TO LOTS 1 THROUGH • PORTION OF LOTS 18 AND 25 G ,, SUODIDSION LOCATED 1 1 SOO S-T/H ,TRi E I TOTTNHIT ",O"v' "; .I e0i 5/ 0/lA 6 IS Ol L'EAIOOG � SV SALT 55u:,h f L I K �_< 5 1 ElosTuc. Ematrx.-1614 3sc - F- -. Cc=c r llay.aAay ,a 1 • ,-5 3 C I O DO' 'pgopo3ED- LOr LIOC1-- 1 2orb At 6-8o60oAR� • H 1 t V - - �- f ' z 1 i__ , L1I • F OPFSED •t+?DI orAIMO ,wow-,iiLEVELANO AVENUE (1442 SOUTH STRTTT) C'iTT' ,'LANNINGI COMMISSION (-IT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT /4®, LARSEN&MALMQUIST,INC — a K. oA..r_.,, °0 �500 SOUTH STREET j 3t�0 SvuTH (OUNO SALT LAY(CIT' _ _ (OLv/O SaU LAuE my BPA$$ CAP,xONUufNT (,3/ 59 56.57- ( 40785) 407 78. EAS15 or 6£ARlt'oG 8RA><CAP MONVM(NT If ' e Ex�CanON a- °u.+a[ ExCEF;ION ni 89'S4';3' E s 75'� c PprM O[ EUNNw_y°.rc[ a 1 i r-000-01EAS-/ cOPNER / BLOCK 1 /— ,cam[ ..<- 0 • NORTVWCST GOGN(R,-� Pak w+c[, ..w,- CV, �1I/J�\ 3300 $LOCK 7 I _ _ — _ °r Za `\ I _° ` ` J \ ' "x[ /1" �� _ - � I— — // ,, . �' s 56.20 56- E 7 2; , /, -/7,-7, ,. .,. 1 , f" . ...,x , ., _ „.„....,,, I I / XISTINC // / /i"// j`/ / � BU,L_/NL / O/ '{ // ;,-----III'” [[ 7 v+a 0 faw now 5/_fZ/ - - .sr i W 1\- ji 5 ry a .: p 1c a, rCc.)I['SIX�.,r 1 I . , z I I 1 r�,1 ` , gym- 1 .5-4-3,-CC' r / WY'PO. ,. 9 I \f 1 3O FAI-� E -u 3 — I ' . 1 L 6088 \ 7213 1— — —1 a,b( ./. °1 ,,[:..r rt _ / 1,,vurt \, 1r / [r] ( - I I co4[8n[Srrt'w... V/� / /'/ ,/z '-- ,D- - r s..,wrea,v,rs CO -XI w[D a,ca.[°n[ Y.0 Z a O v 1 — -V/ s// „ 5 644 i win(; q /' j7i7,�/,,., 1 _ n W 3— 0 0° / LI Lti d W a., [,[cp — — — —1 y.;/ I-r.J •-'dy J -=-- I— — ,/ ., ; ` r I '' W tivi w[� _ — ._ woof 1 _'%' / �/V //1�/,//.�/ • �,�//� ///�,1_ — -h� I•wmxr�� Q _ ->' 1 � / :✓Can}-// �/'�I //,�/y,%�2, //I `I I , • ,f7 E 6/ j/ • Q an 01 a �� / /�/ ; U- ,nwa c„ •II / : xcT/NG/_ /� //$DLDNG _ _ ! `/._V wa.r MOx ` I II r wurc nin /// MII , ° K �w �.. $ I , ten[v � _, NOT:OUND 1111—' ) ___ri- _. 1 — — i // _ _ ' 1 / In I :://v/A1 -, ' 1 e -y.. a-z NG'' s°n[. WE 4 M.'-_- Yr' ,h. 4. •*, I. 1-,WC., °"" eua v Nc 1 /-- — — -' — 'j j I wrwn[sra.°[ 1 I I I I , O� n / , y - , "i 1 v -:,w, , _, , —,. Ca _MP.: }°r«,w roc° na .,[o nm)1 f_ _ w'ia:[K—-P- '— sue['- __ lid O —) I ! �s�s _`,_ \` ; _„ ano°ram. v j7 Co — — — - ' Ex STMG 1 / / s w,� _ I O 1 $ I ,_ c 1 -/$u/LOLNG I ,(<///� D,NG�/ / —G— F 1 Il rion,Ow, —I"' ' .t:1-'" 1,71t'RI',wt... an n[c, _ — c cor '[ �yr+l/ u — -I l ✓ j/ %i //�Z/Icw+•..w� — I [ i,...,,,,,,4 I \s\ s l3*3,..,y w.[o \--- wrz: 2/T$/D3 Isc.rEfic199 ,Zl o,["vn �•[� f .57 1M1 r r?0 97 UN y, ff 33 00 D¢Sr6Nm: I��N__ "-c[[Ow,..[U.S i t rv.c oE,[ u+ DATE _ u[° J$3 7 \ S�g: K 54'76" .314 00 ...[ _ C,+w N Pt',w [,.r0..“ S-,. /rs+awyyrur,.•.40.28, 1 1 .x1 srixsel $1?c. F N 89'5113 C 5 No,., p«.OWNER ovu[u — TE— 87 91e ^> `0. �, 994, vl UC 1 r —7/ °/ //X 1� vID ro / ;'. �� • ,1 ,/ g7 / , t /V L / y� y�v, .y, /U, / L 1I / o^/ / \3 C// / i � ug • i, •_,I_ + I' , �N 84 232—C--i64-`�.- —1—'[- - -- J , —. - - ' - - - ` ,., ..... �. i i�-,�..�Y.� ., I /if -- ^I„ -- 7 / C -tr--/�S a<754 Ls_ -i000 ./Z -ice/ ro v m; ;� J n �rr' �. — ...b- o - -sz— — 7 „f/7 ., 89.Tn,311Er'PO-rs1 _ r 4, --II g..:f[-�//i ,.-- CON. S 102.284SNR `�11\,s'li �� ... 1 , n�e,,21 . zc w UI[ //�� s l ,, , ,,,,,,, Z l _ _ o �: „,c .,/ =__ M __ / ,vn)' / —.,, _ � S 95476 w 3t4 o0." I N_ ,� 'F'ROPoSED SITE PLAN — 0 • • OTHER: 11 • Coffey, Cheri • From: ToCANew@aol,c n Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2a03 6:35 AM To: Cheri.Coffey ci.slc.ut.us Subject: Nonconforming Use Application 128 East 1300 South 03.13.03 email this date, hardcopy USPS Ms. Cheri Coffey, Salt Lake City Planning Division 451 South State, #406 Salt Lake City 84111 Re: Nonconforming use application, Laurelwood Apartments, 128 East 1300 South Dear Cheri, At Liberty Wells Community Council regular monthly meeting 12 March 20003, the Council voted to approve the application above with two clear restrictions: 1. Building height restricted to existing height, and 2. Number of units not to exceed current number of units. Respectfully, Catherine New, Chairperson 2002-2003 Copy: Mr. Jonathan H. Morse Morse and Associates Commercial Real Estate Services 1336 South Embassy Way Salt Lake City, Utah 84108 • 3/14/2003 People's Freeway Community Council E-State Street S-2100 South Salt Lake City, UT May 6, 2003 Mr. Larry Butcher Planning and Zoning 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Dear Mr. Butcher: This letter is to confirm that the Peoples' Freeway Community Council met on May 7, 2093 to consider whether it should approve the requested zoning change from RMF 35 11111 o RM 45 for the Laureiwood Apartments located at State Street and 1300 South in Salt Lake , Utah. The requested change was approved. ry ruly yours, mantha Francis Chairperson orse and associates COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES wt Mr.Ray McCandless Planning and Zoning 451 S.State Street Salt Lake City,UT 84111 April 24,2003 Dear Mr.McCandless, Utah Non-Profit Housing Corporation is the joint venture developer along with Morse Health and Housing,Inc.of the Laurelwood Apartments rehabilitation. Mr.Dave Baus is the Development Coordinator for Utah Non-Profit Housing. Mr.Batts is also on the Central City Community Council. Mr.Baus discussed the proposed zoning change on January 14,2003 and the proposal was unanimously approved. Ana Archuleta is the Chairman of the Central City Community Council. She is preparing a letter to that effect. It will be delivered as soon as possible. Please put this matter on your agenda ibr your • May 14`h meeting. Thank you. V Jonathan H.Morse President Morse Health and Housing,Inc. s 1336 South Embassy Way-Salt Lake City.Utah 84108 Phone/Fax:(801)583-7083 • CENTRAL CITY NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL CIO 204 Herbert Avenue, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 * (801) 355-7095 • April 30, 2003 Dave Baus Utah Nonprofit Housing 756 South 200 East Salt Lake City, Utah 8411) Dear Mr. Baus: This letter is to serve as verification that you did present the Laurelwood's apartment project to CCl�• the month of February 2003. CCNC is supportive of all preservation of affordable housing such as the renovation the Utah Nonprofit organization will be doing at the Laurelwood Apart)nents. Ii`you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (801) 355-7095. Sincerely, „ Ana A• rchuleta • a CCNC Chair ' - . •• , ; t - • Muse, L.C., Dba Laurelwood Management Group 448 EAST 6400 SOUTH,SUITE 4 200 O.LAYNE WILCOCK,MANAGING MEMBER SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84107 OEL. (801)261-8930 FAX. (801)266-3063 April 4,2003 Doug Wheelwright Fax#535-6174 Salt Lake City Planning Dear Mr.Wheelwright, This is a letter of authorization for Gregory W. Strong to represent the interests of Muse, L.C., Dba Laurelwood Management Group, for the application for the subdivision end rezoning amendment for Laurelwood Apartments located at 1333 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84115. �5ay O.Layne Wilcock Managing Member • LARSEN & MALMQUIST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS&LAND SURVEYORS • 1574 West 1700 South,Suite 2D•Salt Lake City,Utah 84104-3469•(801)972-2634 3 April 2003 Salt Lake City Planning Attn.:Ray McCandless 451 South State Street Suite 406 Salt Lake City,UT 84121 RE: LAURELWOOD APARTMENTS 1300 SOUTH STATE STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS Mr.McCandless, Per your request,the following information is provided with regards to the above referenced project: Commercial Office Space(Parcel 1): Gross Square Feet: 23,500 Parking ordinance: 3 spaces per 1000 sq.II. Total Parking required: 71 stalls • Parking stalls provided: 80 stalls Apartment Building(Parcel 2): Total Units: 1 Bedroom 59 2 Bedroom 36 Parking ordinance: 2 parking spaces for each dwelling unit containing two or more bedrooms 1 parking space for 1 bedroom and efficiency dwelling Total parking required: 131 stalls Parking stalls provided: 131 stalls Please review this information and contact me with any further questions. )han. you, eCAA vvt., Randy Smith t Cc:Greg Strong(Asset Management)fax • • CONSULTING CIVIL—STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AND LAND SURVEYING 6. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend a zoning change from R-1 • /5,000 (single-family residential to CN (neighborhood commercial) rather than CG (general commercial) as originally requested for the following reasons: 1. The CN (neighborhood commercial) zoning district affords development opportunities that are appropriate for the location near the transportation corridors without permitting high intensive commercial uses that are inappropriate in a residential neighborhood. 2. The CN (neighborhood commercial) zoning district will provide a variety of small neighborhood business development opportunities that would be more complimentary to the neighborhood setting, and consistent with the West Salt Lake Master Plan. This hearing ended at 6:36 p.m. Petition No. 400-03-06 by Asset Management Services requesting to rezone property located at 1341 South State Street from a Corridor Commercial (CC) and Moderate Density Multi-Family Residential (RMF-35) to a Moderate / High Density Multi-Family Residential (RMF-45) Zoning District including approval of a 2-lot Subdivision Plat Amendment, Amending lots 1 through 17 and Lots 26 through 46 and a portion of lots 18 and 25 of the Nye's Addition Subdivision. • This hearing started at 6:37 p.m. Planner Ray McCandless presented the petition as written in the staff report. He presented aerial site maps to the Commission. The property is one piece, but is unusual because it has a commercial strip center along the west side, and on the east side there is a 90-unit apartment complex. The petitioner wishes to sell off the eastern half of the property to Utah Non-profit Housing. The property needs to be subdivided in order to sell it. Mr. McCandless presented a drawing of the site plan to the Commission. Initially there was an alley running through the middle of the property. That is where the existing zoning boundary line lies. He explained to the Commission the various rezoning requests for different areas on the property. Staff recommends preliminary subdivision amendment approval and approval of the rezoning from RMF-35 to RMF-45 as requested and subject to the following conditions: 1. Recordation of a final plat. 2. Meeting all City departmental requirements. 3. Implementation of all site improvements as shown on the proposed site plan. 4. The building height is restricted to the height of the existing buildings which is 25 feet. 5. The number of units not to exceed the current number of units whish is 59, 1- bedroom units and 36, 2-bedroom units, 95 units total. 11111 Planning Commission Meeting Page 9 May 14, 2003 Mr. Jonas asked if the proposed new lot line at the east edge of the commercial building was consistent with a CC zoning. Mr. McCandless said yes. . Ms. Funk wondered why the petitioner wanted RMF-45 zoning. Mr. McCandless said it was because of density. If it was left as RMF-35 the number of units would not comply with the current zoning. Ms. Arnold asked if the property was left as RMF-35 and a fire burned down the apartments, the petitioner would have to rebuild less units. Mr. McCandless said yes. Mr. Jonas asked what zoning was in place when the complex was originally built. Mr. Wheelwright said it was probably R-6, a high density residential zoning district. Mr. Jonas asked what the maximum density would be for RMF-35. Mr. McCandless said 66 units. Ms. Arnold asked if Staff was looking at total units or whether the units were 1-bedroom or 2-bedroom. Mr. McCandless said they were looking at total units. Mr. Jonas invited the applicant to speak. Mr. Randy Smith, 1574 West 1700 South, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84104, represented the applicant. He is from the land surveying and engineering firm working on the site for Asset Management. He said the applicant was pleased with the site and that the removal of the fitness club would improve the area and bring it into compliance by having adequate parking. It will increase the flow of • traffic and increase security of the units by allowing better fire and emergency services access through the property. The applicant supports the staff's recommendation to approve the petition. Mr. Jonas asked what the applicant's connection was to Utah Non-Profit Housing. Mr. Smith said Mr. Jonathan Morris, of Utah Non-Profit Housing, is working on purchasing the property from Asset Management and will be the owner of the property pending the petition approval. Mr. Jonathan Morris spoke next. The name of the buyer for the property is Morris Health and Housing, Inc. It is a non-profit organization formed four years ago. It has a dual charter to provide housing for the mentally ill and urban poor. It is working with Valley Mental Health to set aside 20 units for patients who are part of the Valley Mental Health system. Mr. Daniels asked what changes and improvements would not be made if the rezoning was not granted. He asked if the property could not be improved upon even if it were not rezoned. Mr. Smith said the rezoning application is the solution to the history of the property being in nonconformance and non-enforcement of previous decisions by councils and commissions. Mr. Morris said he could not get financing unless the zoning was in conformity. I Planning Commission Meeting Page 10 May 14, 2003 Mr. Jonas asked if anyone from the community council wished to speak. None were • forthcoming. Mr. Jonas then opened the hearing to the general public. None were forthcoming. Mr. Jonas closed the public hearing and brought it back to the Commission for discussion. Mr. Muir questioned whether the Commission could legally grant the petitioner's request. It appeared that they would be changing a zone and then applying conditional use tools to a rezone process in imposing restrictions. He was in favor of a rezone, but not imposing restrictions. Mr. Jonas said he thought the Commission could grant the request because they would also be granting a subdivision amendment. Mr. Wheelwright said in similar situations they had done a "conditional rezoning". The Commission should be careful not to get to the point of"contract zoning". In the past, the Commission has included conditions such as the height limit in a rezoning ordinance. It becomes like a deed restriction to the property. Mr. Wheelwright believed it came down to the question of whether the Commission would be comfortable with the building being at 45 feet. If they are comfortable with it, they can go with Mr. Muir's suggestion. If they are not comfortable with it, they could structure the rezoning ordinance to include that condition. If it was approved by the City Council, it would be binding like a deed restriction on the property. Mr. Jonas asked what the height was in a CC zone. Mr. Wheelwright said it is 30 feet or two stories, with the potential through conditional use to go to 45 feet. • Ms. Arnold asked why the restrictions needed to be included. Mr. Jonas said it was because right now it was zoned RMF-35 and it abuts to an R1/5,000. Ms. Funk said the community council had requested the height restriction. Mr. Jonas said the applicant seemed fine with the 25 foot height restriction as long as they could get the density. Mr. Muir said he was uncomfortable with the restrictions and the precedent it would set to approve RMF-45 along with the restrictions. He did not like incrementally rewriting the zoning ordinances. Ms. Arnold agreed. Ms. Funk asked the applicant if it made any difference on his funding whether it was RMF 35 or RMF 45 zoning. Mr. Dave Bouse, from Utah Non-Profit, spoke next. He said the different zonings do make a difference because of density. Financing requires that if the 95 units were destroyed, the same 95 would have to be rebuilt. That would be impossible with an RMF-35 zone. The height restriction was requested to protect the community's interest. Motion Ms. Funk moved to approve Petition 400-03-06 with regard to the rezoning to RMF-45, based on the findings of the staff report and the testimony heard; that the Commission give the applicant subdivision amendment approval; and forward a recommendation to the City Council, including the five recommendations as listed. Ms. Noda seconded the 1111 motion. Planning Commission Meeting Page 11 May 14, 2003 Mr. Jonas clarified that the motion includes a 25 foot height restriction and a restriction • of 95 units total. Ms. Seelig agreed with Mr. Muir and was concerned with the height restriction. However, she did agree with the rezone. Ms. Funk said it could be rephrased to say that there be a deed restriction to limit the height. She agreed with Mr. Muir that they did not want to rewrite the zones. Ms. Arnold asked if they could vote separately on the zoning and deed restrictions. She did not like the height restrictions. Ms. Funk amended her motion to rewrite Restriction Number 4 to state that there be a deed restriction on the height at 25 feet. Ms. Noda accepted the amendment. Amended Motion Ms. Funk moved to approve Petition 400-03-06 with regard to the rezoning to RMF-45, based on the findings of the staff report and the testimony heard; that the Commission give the applicant subdivision amendment approval; and forward a recommendation to the City Council, including recommendations 1, 2, 3 and 5 as listed. Recommendation 4 shall be rewritten to say that there be a deed restriction imposed upon the property to limit the height to 25 feet. Ms. Noda seconded the motion. IIII Ms. Scott, Ms. McDonough, Ms. Funk, Mr. Daniels, Mr. Diamond and Ms. Noda voted "Aye". Ms. Arnold, Ms. Seelig, Mr. Muir, and Mr. Chambless voted "Nay". Mr. Jonas, as Chair, did not vote. The motion carried. Mr. Zunguze asked if the deed restriction would apply to the subdivision of the property and not to the zoning. Ms. Funk said that was correct. If the property is not subdivided, the zoning remains separate. Mr. Jonas clarified that the 25 foot restriction was only on the RMF-45 property, not the CC property. Findings of Fact: 21A.50.050 Standards for general amendments A. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the adopted general plan of Salt Lake City. Findings: The proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies of the adopted general plan of Salt Lake City. • Planning Commission Meeting Page 12 May 14, 2003 B. Whether the proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall character of IIIexisting development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Findings: The proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. C. The extent to which the proposed amendment will adversely affect adjacent properties. Findings: The proposed amendment will not adversely affect adjacent properties. D. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of any applicable overlay zoning districts which may impose additional standards. Findings: The overlay district provides an opportunity to eliminate the required 15' front yard setback along State Street to reinforce historical land development patterns along the street (buildings with no front yards or setbacks). This applies to new development only and not to existing development. The commercial development on State Street is existing. Therefore, there are no additional requirements that need to be met. The proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of the applicable overlay zoning district. E. The adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject • property, including but not limited to roadways, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection, schools, storm water drainage systems, water supplies, and waste water and refuse collection. Findings: Public facilities are adequate to serve the apartments and commercial retail center. 20.31.090 Standards for general amendments. A. The amendment will be in the best interests of the City; Findings: The amendment will be in the best interests of the City. B. All lots comply with all applicable zoning standards; Findings: Both lots comply with applicable zoning standards. C. All necessary and required dedications are made; Findings: Cross access easements / agreements will be required. D. Provisions for the construction of any required public improvements are • included; Planning Commission Meeting Page 13 May 14, 2003 Findings: Provisions for the construction of any required public improvements are • included. E. The amendment complies with all applicable laws and regulations; Findings: The amendment complies with all applicable laws and regulations. F. The amendment does not materially injure the public or any person and there is good cause for the amendment. Findings: The amendment does not materially injure the public or any person and there is good cause for the amendment. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above comments, analysis and findings, Staff recommends preliminary subdivision amendment approval and approval of the rezoning from RMF-35 to RMF-45 as requested subject to the following conditions: 1. Recordation of a final plat. 2. Meeting all City departmental requirements. 3. Implementation of all site improvements as shown on the proposed site plan. 4. A deed restriction shall be imposed upon the subdivided property to limit the height to 25 feet. 5. The number of units not to exceed the current number of units which is 59, 1 • - bedroom units and 36, 2-bedroom units, 95 units total. (Community Council Recommendation) This hearing ended at 7:05 p.m. Petition No. 400-02-05, by Thomas A. Duffin requesting to rezone the property at 2275 South Green Street from R-1-7000, single-family residential to SR-1, Special Development Pattern Residential Zoning District, to facilitate the construction of a two family dwelling. This hearing began at 7:06 p.m. Planner Melissa Anderson presented the petition as written in the staff report. The SR-1 zoning would allow for single-family and two-family homes. The applicant wishes to build a duplex on the property and is applying for a rezone. The staff report outlines the policies associated over time with the area, which has had more than one downzone. In the 1950's there was an impetus in the City to upzone properties to create more housing. After some development occurred, there was some deterioration of single-family neighborhoods. The cost of that was recognized by the City and efforts to downzone some of the neighborhoods went forward. That was outlined in the Sugar House Master Plan in 1985 and then implemented with a downzone. In 1995 there was another downzone with a city-wide rezoning process, which established the area as an R-1-7000 zone. Prior to that, there were a handful of multi-family homes along the block. The existing policy is to preserve • Planning Commission Meeting Page 14 May 14, 2003 0 0 7. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES A. LDUIS ZUNGUZE SA IT I w� a�!j �'T1 MLR() 4' 0N1 � '�-+�RID/ '���® �a-a.'Nom R O S S C. AND E R S O N PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MAYOR • BRENT B. WILDE PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION DEPUTY PLANNING DIRECTOR DOUGLAS L. WHEELWRIGHT, AICP DEPUTY PLANNING DIRECTOR April 29, 2003 Dear Property Owner: The Salt Lake City Planning Division is reviewing Petition 400-03-06 by Asset Management Service representing Laurelwood Apartments requesting preliminary subdivision amendment approval and approval to rezone property located at approximately 1341 South State Street from a Moderate Density Residential (RMF-35) and Corridor Commercial (CC) to a Moderate/High Density Residential (RMF-45) zoning district. The proposed rezoning to RMF-45 will affect only the eastern half of the property where the apartment buildings now exist. The western portion of the lot, the commercial businesses fronting State Street, will remain CC. The subdivision, amending lots 1 through 17 and lots 26 through 46 and a portion of lots 18 and 25 of the Nye's Addition Subdivision, is being • requested to separate the commercial strip center fronting State Street from the apartments which are now on a single piece of property. The rezoning is being requested to make the zoning consistent with the existing apartment building density. The Planning Commission will be holding a hearing to accept public comment on: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 at 6:20 p.m. City and County Building 451 So. State Street Room # 326 If you have any questions, comments or wish to view the proposal, you may do so at that time. Please direct any questions you may have concerning this request to Ray McCandless at 535-7282, Salt Lake City Corporation, 451 South State Street Room 406, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111. Salt Lake City complies with all ADA guidelines. To request accommodations; please call 535-7757 at least 48 hours prior to the hearing. • 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 406, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE: 801-535-7757 FAX: 801-535-6174 0 4, 0 NOTICE OF HEARING • '-1-4--7-:,--,,--'lA.,-'i-.-_--s:--,_.---sg,'-e--<-'r'_'-:t-e-',',3'1-.'p=''zt-'.5,z--'.--;.':'''-_,q.;,-:-!'-:-4-4_-•.V_.':,'4 1'4‘=7'!;e'P,i-1---'.4i1--v ik-•z4--;,,l-!ctI-C-,4.f--,=---.'•.:i--..,E,c-.:,L-"_,-'z''r„,,:r-a--v f-;*1-.-4-*--..mi_-'..1,--:tF-Z_,7-44.,'i--'v4-e 11 4'„'"-,-',,'-'A V tLtr,='.';--.:,:-•'';,,:LP1--i.'.",.-?,t-,'„-i-,!M,"'"-;_-,'-..;7-,.--A_-i;:„:-i„t-.::,,•,, I „.-t_-t4-A,--r,f:--t--,=,.-,..--,,I.,1,-.e,,4-i-,4 i-•_v,'.-t:„-,.-,t4t._,,--,;-,,.',t-•f-,„yvr,:-,:k-.t.;,i,,._..-..-gi-, i7 41„.,„-4..o:3'.-,..--,i''icw24.'.,,.Z-%9t_,-,7:Af-i,_.74-,-,--.--'.4-42:,...;-,-4-',l;-'.•.-„:,?-,1----:-k-4?--.:-l-=:-,-..;4•'-l1'„',-*1'-4-',-ftr1.-1-"ei'.,A.4,.-'7to:4..).-0.7-.:,.-'t,-..l..„,Ai.*-7-:‘n,--e--.L.,6-,k.1-k,,„.:.34.g.i..t--.4,-,''---.4-'.,!k-,,,2,1:;2',,,!..'„„,t,g''--tn,,.?f-,-:-;..,1 a,-z.4,-,-:,-7f':-:..l'.v,!,l,e:-f,-=,i„4--k—.1-,,,,.'t,7,i1y.1,,.-,---jL.!--,-,'--_r a--.,-k,w.'-:...•-',.,,-„,*,-:1,t,4:-l:41-l4.i--14-,:I-.,4t5'i_'i;e10",,l-1,4:q1'1,-'if--:-g-4!:,-1v[_-t-1,;0 4 t,.7';f,;&1.-:rt-3:,4.h-%--44-VrtkP-,, .-.•-2-4;:-.-,-.4:,---t,-I-,--.---r-=:-o " , , - ia q ,..7A-4-;k,;-,‘t',f-.-i.-.+,.-„,,:--'.-‘i-;,'-!-n4=„-'-c3U-,,.,',r;-'-;,.,1:-,4-!.':,.-:-',:,),r,,4V„,--„,-,,i,--,I,,-r,4„-,)g',:-1iI-i.''---_--'--"--.-1--V-',-4',„l-,4.t2-f'-..-.-;-.,-,:.,c•..A°:-7-:,--,,3:_54-'t,,--..''i-."--,-,-:,_.-,4 i,:---0-,.4-=r1,I i s,',,-,0,,,,j.t-„„.---kw--,1v_:,-,,r,,,.:,_u-1-,,,.a.-i,,_,4.„.4:-:',,-.i,:7,'.-'"_f,1l--,'`,6-:•,*,-.,'''=.'t1.--u._-4-V.-;--„,.'•7;,-l—,4...v'.N-;-,-..e-11I:=',-„:=--;-r..,-‘..T ;1 i.-„=.,,„-;-:-t7i.1,• I 1 , , 12=, t ' I --::-.,4 0,,,f;,--,, :-,•,:., ,-,--lit-I--.. , .,,w,1/4,i :,...,- -._,4„-, ,...,ziFE-:',.7':::.4,17,k4.."-'Fst:V't'4:.iril--''45 ,, ' ',„ ;.,„,v,---,,,.- ,-t,- -•`'. ifr,',4117,,z,,,,!?:;-;:r.,Priza .-' '1;4:-'!' -',•,-:.,„=„1-irri-,-:. -_-__we-4-0F4.-;-.,,T= ,; ,,,,,,,.,,,,==4.-------rTri‘-'44.41.:41.4. --4_,1-7:1.,:-.tiN114-=1-,f,''.'. !-I:-7._ fc•-,.,--: "is „-„ x-4--"'-'1'. i'i* ',14t!,--__,....,,y,..i.,-k4,-,-:',,•t--'‘-•_ -_r..„ ...r4f ;;,„„it,,.„, .1,..„1:....1 , _ , :7. tP-- '4,-4',-'•:‘-„'..---..„, -.„---...--.,-;=•,,Jk-,,.-- '- - .;:-..,;:: -44i ;-'FIL:.--,----.'...------ ,-,...24,01,-, &I_ -,1--.IN,I, 0------; . -,, .), .„,,,..A ''''-<- -%k, ---,-- IA. 0.‘k - Division i i..„• •1/4-. .. h .... Salt Lake City Planning •-• Lil,„.,,, Attn.RM South State 1 451 ....---- _., Utah 8411 Street, Room 406 Salt Lake City • - CLARK,LUCY M;ET AL DIDERICKSEN,DARREN FERRINI,ENRIQUE& Sidwell No. 1607357024 Sidwell No. 1607379021 Sidwell No. 1607380007 4 BOX 1902 701E 500 S 1321 S 200 E ERTON NV 89040 BOUNTIFUL UT 84010 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 CHAIREZ,NATIVIDAD& DAVIS, KELLER R . FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAG Sidwell No.1618126002 Sidwell No. 1607357042 Sidwell No. 1618126008 1355 S EDISON ST 172 E EDITH AVE 12222 MERIT DR SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 DALLAS TX 75257 CASEY,DEBRA A DAVIS, DEE M& FALKNER,CATHY-UN Sidwell No. 1618126001 Sidwell No. 1618102007 Sidwell No. 1618126017 1349 S EDISON ST 3207 S 2045 E 1404 S 200 E SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 CAHOON,KATIE A&J WALLA DAVIS, DEE M& FAIRBANKS CAPITAL CORP Sidwell No.1618103010 Sidwell No. 1618102005 Sidwell No. 1607379009 135 E CLEVELAND AVE 3207 S 2045 E 338 S WARMINSTER RD SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109 HATBORO PA 19040 BURBOROUGH,TREVOR I& DAVIS,DEE M& • EUBANKS,OWEN W& Sidwell No.1607379002 Sidwell No. 1618102004 Sidwell No.1607357028 3510 S CHRISTINE ST 3207 S 2045 E 3935 LYNN ORA DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109 PENSACOLA FL 32504 • BING KONG TONG INC DAVIS INVESTMENTS,LC EUBANKS,OWEN W& Sidwell No.1607353014 Sidwell No. 1618102003 Sidwell No. 1607357013 1212 S STATE ST 1383 S MAJOR ST 3935 LYNN ORA DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 PENSACOLA FL 32504 AUTONOMY INC DALLEY,CHERYL B ESCOBAR,ADRIAN Sidwell No.1607357020 Sidwell No. 1607379004 Sidwell No.1618127006 PO BOX 711906 12457 S JANICE DR 1377 S 200 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84171 RIVERTON UT 84065 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 ALPHA T-R LLC CUGLIETTA,ALBERT B& ERICKSON,SVEN A.,GRETA Sidwell No. 1607355010 Sidwell No.1607379006 Sidwell No. 1618102006 9355 S ALVEY LN 8029 S DEERCREEK RD 1389 S MAJOR ST SANDY UT 84093 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84121 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 AGUILAR,EFREN& CRANE,ROBYN L& EGAN,LYNNE Sidwell No.1607379016 Sidwell No. 1618126013 Sidwell No. 1618126015 1322 S 200E 1360 S 200E 1414 S DEVONSHIRE DR SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84108 ►1 SOUTH 300 WEST LC CORNIA,GINA L DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT Sidwell No.1607355011 Sidwell No.1607379019 Sidwell No.1618102017 48 W BROADWAY ST#2405 1336 S 200 E 1374 S STATE ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84101 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 6 AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160® a+.+�. w�.IIIrt 4t�. IVI JiVV HADLEY,JUSTIN J& JOHNSON,CRAIG W LOVE,BLANCHE W;TR Sidwell No. 1618127003 Sidwell No.1618102008 Sidwell No. 1607357010 1363 S 200 E 1401 S MAJOR ST 146 E EDITH AVE SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 III GERBER,GREG A;ET AL JENSEN-WYSINGER,HAZEL& LOCKHART,JERRY W Sidwell No. 1607379017 Sidwell No. 1607380013 Sidwell No. 1607355002 1326 S 200E 1703 E CANNES WY 1398 N 640 W SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84121 W BOUNTIFUL UT 84087 GEHMLICH,GUY HOUSING AUTHORITY OF SALT LEGGETT,JOHN B Sidwell No. 1607357043 Sidwell No.1607379012 Sidwell No. 1607357044 1264 S BRIDGECREEK LN 1776 S WESTTEMPLE ST 164 E EDITH AVE LAYTON UT 84041 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 GARCIA,ROSELLA HILTON,DAVID G LARA,WILSON J& Sidwell No.1607380010 Sidwell No.1607379011 Sidwell No.1618103007 1337 S 200 E 1333 S EDISON ST 121 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 FURNESS,JOHN T.&EMMA A HATA,GEORGE M.&KIYOKO KELLOGG,STEVEN C Sidwell No. 1618126010 Sidwell No.1618126019 Sidwell No. 1618126009 1425 S EDISON ST 1420 S 200 E 1421 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 • FUJIKAWA, GEORGE& HART,BRADLEY J KEKAULA,SHEILA Sidwell No. 1607379008 Sidwell No.1607380011 Sidwell No.1618127005 2947 S WARR RD 1343 S 200 E 1373 S 200 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 FOLSOM STREET ASSOCIATES HANSEN,DREW KATOA,ALLAN L&MARY H Sidwell No. 1607357038 Sidwell No.1607357004 Sidwell No.1607357012 150 S 600 E#1C 120 E EDITH AVE 156 E EDITH AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84102 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 FLOREZ,BENITO D& HAMILTON,MIKEL P JOHNSON,CRAIG W Sidwell No. 1607357045 Sidwell No.1607380008 Sidwell No. 1618102028 130 E EDITH AVE 3366 W OLIVE TREE CIR 1401 S MAJOR ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 WEST JORDAN UT 84088 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 FIRST UTAH BANK HALLMARK INVESTMENTS,LTD JOHNSON,CRAIG W Sidwell No. 1607357039 Sidwell No.1607380005 Sidwell No. 1618102010 3826 S 2300E 1315 S 200E 1401 S MAJOR ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 FIRST TONGAN METHODIST CH HALL,JULIEANNE JOHNSON,CRAIG W • Sidwell No.1607353010 Sidwell No.1618103009 Sidwell No.1618102009 57 E 1300 S 131 E CLEVELAND AVE 1401 S MAJOR ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 46 AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160® autumn reeu Jneets"°' Use template for 5160w STATE BRASS FOUNDRY, INC TRACY,BILL A WOLDER,JERRI S Sidwell No. 1618102021 Sidwell No. 1607379005 Sidwell No. 1607357008 airS STATE ST 4471 MISSION ST#3 PO BOX 1163 LAKE CITY UT 84115 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94112 WEST JORDAN UT 84084 STATE BRASS FOUNDRY THORELL,KATHY WILLIAMSON, LAMAR S Sidwell No. 1618102020 Sidwell No. 1607379014 Sidwell No. 1618126024 1392 S STATE ST 1208 JEFF ST 13447 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 LAYTON UT 84040 DRAPER UT 84020 STATE BRASS FOUNDRY TERRELL,JAY D&PAT;JT WILLIAMSON,LAMAR S Sidwell No. 1618102019 Sidwell No. 1607353009 Sidwell No. 1618126023 1400 S STATE ST 4253 S PARK ST 13447 S 1300 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 MURRAY UT 84107 DRAPER UT 84020 SILVER OAK ENTERPRISES,L SUI SANG TAK;ET AL WHITNEY,JEFF K Sidwell No.1618103011 Sidwell No. 1618102030 Sidwell No. 1618127004 1435 S STATE ST 1356 S STATE ST 1369 S 200 E SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR STUCKI,JASON R& WHITE, PAUL H Sidwell No.1607355009 Sidwell No.1607379013 Sidwell No. 1607357035 PO BOX 31356 8886 S TRACY DR 152 E EDITH AVE iiiiMPA FL 33631 SANDY UT 84093 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SELF,LILA K;TR STINCELLI,NICHOLAS& WHITE,OLIVER&DIANA;JT Sidwell No.1607355008 Sidwell No. 1607379003 Sidwell No. 1607379010 6556 S 1670 E 162 E 1300 S 1327 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84121 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SELF,LILA K;TR STAUFFER,DAVID M;TR WETZEL INVESTMENTS,LLC Sidwell No.1607355007 Sidwell No. 1618102001 Sidwell No.1618126018 6556 S 1670E 1538 S 700E 1790 S 1400 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84121 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84105 SCHONEY,ERMA J;TR,ETA STATE OF UTAH DIVISION OF WANG,WILLIAM J& Sidwell No. 1618102023 Sidwell No.1618126025 Sidwell No. 1607379018 1390 E SAXONY PL#A 450 N STATE OFFICE BLDG 9171 1/2 NOBLE AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84117 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114 NORTH HILLS CA 91343 SCHNEIDER PROPERTIES LLC STATE BUILDING OWNERSHIP UTAH POWER&LIGHT COMPAN Sidwell No. 1607355005 Sidwell No. 1618103013 Sidwell No. 1618126005 1335 S MAJOR ST 450 N STATE ST#4110 700 NE MULTNOMAH ST#700 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114 PORTLAND OR 97232 011HILLING,BRUCE C;TR STATE BRASS FOUNDRY,INC UNIVERSAL SIGNS INC Sidwell No.1607355013 Sidwell No. 1618102022 Sidwell No. 1607355006 917 E MILLCREEK WY 1400 S STATE ST 1345 S MAJOR ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 14, AVERY@ Address Labels Laser 5160® NAZAR ENTERPRISES,LLC QUAILITY FOR ANIMAL LIFE SCHILLING,BRUCE C;TR Sidwell No.1607357047 Sidwell No. 1607379001 Sidwell No. 1607355012 1207 S STATE ST • PO BOX 711937 917 E MILLCREEK WY SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84171 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106III NATE WADE INVESTMENT PETERSON,GARY L& SANONE,TERESA;LIFE ET A Sidwell No. 1607355001 Sidwell No. 1607353015 Sidwell No. 1607379015 1207 S MAIN ST 1220 S STATE ST 1886 S WASATCH DR SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84108 NATE WADE INVESTMENT PEARMAN,CECILIA& SANDERS,CLIFTON G& Sidwell No. 1607355004 Sidwell No. 1607380012 Sidwell No. 1618126014 1207 S MAIN ST 1345 S 200 E 1368 S 200 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 NATE WADE INVESTMENT OVIEDO,SECUNDINO& SALT LAKE COUNTY Sidwell No. 1607355003 Sidwell No.1618126007 Sidwell No.1607357037 1207 S MAIN ST 1409 S EDISON ST 2001 S STATE ST#N4500 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84190 MUSE,LC;ET AL OSSES,LUCILA G SALT LAKE COUNTY Sidwell No. 1607358007 Sidwell No.1607379007 Sidwell No. 1607357009 448 E WINCHESTER ST#200 3723 S OXFORD WY 2001 S STATE ST#N4500 MURRAY UT 84107 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84119 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84190 • MOUNTAIN VALLEY RESIDENT! OSEGUERA,ANTHONY ROBINSON,JESSE A Sidwell No. 1607379020 Sidwell No.1607380001 Sidwell No.1607380006 2270E 4500 5#1 B 202E 1300 S 1319 S 200 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84117 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 MILLS,KENNETH B OKAZAKI,KENNETH A;ET AL ROBERTS,TIMOTHY J& Sidwell No.1618127002 Sidwell No.1618103006 Sidwell No. 1607380009 1355 S 200E 2159 S 700E#150 1333 S 200 E SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84106 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 MECHAM,ARLIN T& NIKOLS,JOHN ROACH,BYRON Sidwell No.1618127001 Sidwell No.1607358001 Sidwell No.1607357034 1351 S 200 E 1313 S STATE ST 136 E EDITH AVE SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 MAYERS,CARL L NEVE,SUE G& RISER,ELVA H D,EMIL 0& Sidwell No.1607357027 Sidwell No.1618126012 Sidwell No.1618102018 1057 E BELLE MEADOWS WY 2763 E EVERGREEN AVE PO BOX 30880 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84121 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84109 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84130 LOVE,BLANCHE W;TR NAZAR,ENTERPRISES,LLC RAMOS,JORGE&VIDAL;JT • Sidwell No.1607357025 Sidwell No.1607357046 Sidwell No.1618103008 146 E EDITH AVE 1207 S STATE ST 127 E CLEVELAND AVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111 SOUTH SALT LAKE UT 84115 g�0 AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160® 1�o h.4,s !(iR.Attsati Tyi, SLG Ppleas%A i53q r IHcad� n+aor 141- 4r3J UREIC wicat S L C ckt144 4 Si s. zna-r- km 44 c • 84((1 54c_. , (41014 4f/( N&f t W Ode T.auca-i- # SLC Plattniv+Ci 4 Z l2 S . ^Icpfw.e br• 14M-u. Wei M`CA..1Ik SS 5 . L. e . ��raw SI S. SYz k ft*Cf 'km4 c4 t 24 C. S .L. . 84(f CIYG� Bunt )Cc..S T01,^3 r"- Aho, rch0644 12 (2 S. 204 E. Ozer b*.4 ilvtiouc S.c.. c. ur' S.t_.C. Una. Jurre44, Eih-e Tv- CCAE key;it.( �cw 39 C 2 E. Brocx bask wy. P. o. a6,( sz►7 44 6C.C., 4Ft�y a g4(SZ Ser••n.e Mob,(,, � Pik. r-rrA 1364 S. -,jcsv- S�rc � 70 (.u, VoK 3Veee• Ave . Lke_, lA pH LG cc-kJ, 8ci (r,"' 841tc • YOUNG,JAMES A&BONNIE L Sidwell No.1618126004 1361 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 `SUNG,BONNIE L Sidwell No.1618126003 1361 S EDISON ST SALT LAKE CITY UT 84115 6, AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160® ,�S SST },v,a(emu cr-yLlt- PETITION NO. 160 - 0 3 - CC • PETITION CHECKLIST Date Initials Action Required w' b Petition delivered to Planning 3 Z/ �• Petition assigned to: aid Planning Staff or Planning Commission Action Date s'f Sd Return Original Letter and Yellow Petition Cover 436 etv1/4- Chronology ek, Property Description (marked with a post it note) S1 IV (2- Affected Sidwell Numbers Included 5 .2}-rc tck•no.J • c Mailing List for Petition, include appropriate Community Councils Sian RA) Mailing Postmark Date Verification a 4 QC- Planning Commission Minutes Ott,- Planning Staff Report Cover letter outlining what the request is and a brief description of what action the Planning Commission or Staff is recommending. 130 (Lw1/4- Ordinance Prepared by the Attorney's Office 5 1345 (LN- Ordinance property description is checked, dated and initialed by the Planner. Ordinance is stamped by Attorney. I4I4 k OWt,46.,44.055 Planner responsible for taking calls on the Petition • Date Set for City Council Action Petition filed with City Recorder's Office `VCz .0 rg- Yet cr`a>0 cflt7irk3 lettL,:F ,,,,, a: ,,,,, FOR OFFICE USE ONLY f , L c.yn\\\\Tr , 7% Petition No. Q'_1`'2-A-�'' Zoning Amendment =/ -\n'i = Receipt No. Amount$ � 3 -��nim�uciriJ-- z tll _MliiiM i l: �� 3- 1 Z -e 3 0 - im -Im:m Date Received '' e- -1. -- / Reviewed by Lcu,t; G.ntwx- 2 t - Sqttti K 2-t? Grcy S.4�' rr- S$c - Tscf 3 c,0 NI 6?b7 Date Z- ►9-03 Name of Applicant AssE-r T1tcNsAG,E.t-t -r Sezvtc.e Phone (ect) zS6 - 881I Address of Applicant 5t©n coot.Im 4c0 EAST SALT 1-At[-E. Crri , u-r. 8y117 CE-maaddress of Applicant ilCell/Fax Applicant's Interest in Subject Property O .it Name of Property Owner SAME. As A&ovE Phone )L 4 Address of Subject Property 13+-k\ sou,-r-t STATE St-eEer SALT- 1.441<E.Grt , UT-. County Tax Parcel#(Sidwell#) Ito -07- 35B- 00-g Zoning of Property C--/ K I Existing Use of Property o Amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance by amending Section: ❑Amend the Zoning Map by reclassifying the following property: Ineel From a ( C-cc...4 r 3$ classification to a 2 Yn4 l classification. fl Please include with the application: 1.A statement of the text amendment or map amendment describing the purpose for the amendment and the exact language, boundaries and zoning district. ›,..4 2.A complete description of the proposed use of the property where appropriate. • 3. Reasons why the present zoning is not proper for the area. E__4 4.The names and addresses of all property owners within four-hundred fifty(450)feet of the subject�� parcel- exclusive of streets and alleys. The name,address and Sidwell number of each property owner must be typed or clearly printed on gummed mailing labels. Please include yourself and the appropriate Community Council (1.) Chair. The cost of first class postage for each address is due at time of application. Please do not provide postage stamps. 5. Legal description of the property. rT 6.Six(6)copies of site plans drawn to scale(where applicable). �,••LI 7. A signed statement that the petitioner has met with and explained the proposal to the appropriate Community Council. 7. Related materials or data supporting the application as may be determined by the Zoning Administrator. 8.Filing fee of$500.00 plus$100 for each acre over one acre,due at time of application. If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this petition,please contact a member of the Salt Lake City Planning staff(535-7757)prior to submitting the petition. r Sidwell maps and names of property owners are available at: Salt Lake County Recorder ) i'l 2001 South State Street, Room N1600 Salt Lake City, UT 84190 1051 Telephone: (801)468-3391 Cr) File the complete application at: Salt Lake City Planning 451 South State Street, Room 406 • Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Telephone: (801)535-7 / -1 , t Signature of Applicant E_L.,. , r 1 <..' ,`. vv` - fa r or authorized agent Title of agent 1/26/2001 LARSEN & MALMQUIST, INC. LE-5 CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS • =. 9 1574 West 1700 South • Salt Lake City, Utah 84104 • (801) 972-2634 Legal Description f Proposed Parcel 2, \ Proposed Amendment to Lots 1 through 17 �� " ` and 26 through 46 and a portion of Lots 18 and 25 of Nye's Addition Subdivision All of the proposed Parcel 2 of the proposed Amendment to Lots 1 through 17 and Lots 26 through 46 and a portion of Lots 18 and 25 of Nye's Addition Subdivision, a subdivision being part of Block 12, Five Acre Plat"A",Big Field Survey, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of Lot 1,Block 2 of the Nye's Addition Subdivision, a Subdivision being part of Block 12,Five Acre Plat"A",Big Field Survey, said point being South 00°01'43"East 614.80 feet and North 89°54'26"East 374.94 feet from a found Salt Lake City brass cap monument at the intersection of State Street (100 East) • and 1300 South Street and running thence South 89°54'26"West along the South line of said Block 2, 190.92 feet;thence North 00°03'49"West 239.56 feet;thence North 89°54'13"East 10.00 feet;thence North 00°04'07"West 80.76 feet;thence South 89°54'13"West 10.00 feet;thence North 00°03'49"West 98.95 feet;thence North 89°52'32"East 41.61 feet;thence North 00°02'11"West 151.51 feet;thence North 87°43'51"East 91.82 feet to a point on the North line of said Block 2 of said Nye's Addition Subdivision;thence North 89°54'13"East along said North line 51.75 feet; thence South 56°20'56"East 7.21 feet to a point on the East line of said Block 2; thence South 00°02'11"East along said East line 570.30 feet to the point of beginning. Contains: 102,284 sq.ft. or 2.3 acres Prepared for: Asset Management Service Attn: Greg Strong 5107 South 900 East Salt Lake City,Ut 84117 Prepared by: Larsen&Malmquist, Inc. April 18, 2003 • Job No. 05013-02 EBK CONSULTING CIVIL—STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AND LAND SURVEYING •REMARKS petition N 400-03-06 • By Asset Management Service Is requesting a Zoning Map Amendment for the property located at 1341 S. State Street from a CC and RMF-35 to a classification of RMF-45. I � Date Filed Address S C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON S,.,a`` 1 1` (`a�v r t5/VR T 1laOi�\i ,(� MAYOR OFFICE OF THE MAYOR `OO MEMORANDUM To: Rocky J. Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer 1 From: D.J. Baxte -nior Advisor to the Mayor Date: June 17, 2003 Re: Funding Options for 900 South Quiet Zone Pursuant to an agreement between Salt Lake City and Union Pacific Railroad, Salt Lake City is seeking state and federal approval for "quiet zones" along the 900 South rail line and in the downtown area. Once we receive the • necessary approvals, we intend to proceed immediately with final engineering, cost estimating, equipment purchase, and construction. Because Union Pacific has the exclusive ability to perform much of the work needed to improve the crossings in the quiet zones, detailed cost estimates must come from Union Pacific. We cannot request those until our plans have been approved by the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). As of this date, UDOT has conditionally approved both quiet zone proposals, but the FRA is still reviewing our designs. While approximately $1 million in RDA funds have already been set aside for the downtown quiet zone, no funds have yet been identified for the improvements needed along the 900 South line. As soon as we receive FRA approval for our designs, we will request a cost estimate from Union Pacific. That estimate should accurately predict the actual cost of the work. In the meantime, however, I wish to provide the Council with a very rough estimate of the likely costs. Including Union Pacific's work and equipment and Salt Lake City's work in the streets (such as median curbs), the 900 South quiet zone improvements are likely to cost $2.0-2.5 million for improvements at seven crossings (700 West, 800 West, 900 West, 1100 West, Emery Street,Navajo • Street, and Redwood Road). 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535-7704 FAX: 1301-535-6331 /% There are three potential sources of funds for this project. • 1. Fund Balance: The most feasible source of funds for this project is the fund balance. Although we should be very judicious with our use of the City's fund balance, reducing the negative railroad impacts for those who live along the 900 South line is a high, time-sensitive priority. Residents have endured the sound of train whistles along that line for nearly 18 months, and we would like to implement the quiet zone as quickly as possible. 2. Redevelopment Agency Funds: Redevelopment Agency funds for the fiscal year 2003-2004 have already been fully allocated. Nevertheless, the 900 South quiet zone project would qualify for RDA funds under the category of city-wide housing funds to benefit a low-income neighborhood. Use of these funds would impact currently funded projects and would require the reallocation of 03-04 priorities. If the Council wishes to consider this option to cover a portion of the 900 South quiet zone costs, it should, acting as the Redevelopment Agency Board, ask the RDA staff to prepare options for making a certain amount of funding available. 3. Bonding: The City could issue a general obligation bond to cover all or a • portion of the costs. One additional option is to reduce the cost of the project by closing street crossings on the 900 South line. Whereas installation of four quadrant gates at a crossing would likely cost approximately $300,000, closure of the street would cost less than $10,000. The clear disadvantage to this approach is that it would further limit movement in a neighborhood already significantly divided by the railroad tracks. One street along the line, 1100 West, has previously been considered for closure due to low traffic volumes. In the last year, however, the City has installed significant improvements to connect the Jordan River Parkway trail across the tracks at 1100 West, taking advantage of the existing signal equipment and gates. Closing the street to vehicle traffic only, while still allowing pedestrians and bicyclists to cross, could result in substantial savings, as the existing automatic signal arms could be moved and reused. On the other hand, closing 1100 West at the tracks raises some serious access concerns with the Fire Department and would restrict access to and from Hayes Avenue. All other streets crossings in the area carry higher traffic volumes than 1100 West, and their closure would cause higher, but varying degrees of disruption and III inconvenience. Weaver, Lehua From: Fawcett, Steve Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 3:11 PM To: Sears, Michael; Fluhart, Rocky Cc: Gust-Jenson, Cindy; Mumford, Gary;Jones, Sylvia; Weaver, Lehua; Kontgis, Susi; Roberts, Susan; 'ntessman@mail.slcpl.lib.ut.us' Subject: RE: Budget Related Info Request Importance: High Categories: Program/Policy Michael, et al. Here is the information you requested on judgment levies. I am attaching an older document that Susan Roberts prepared in FY2001 explaining the levy issue. The data is different but the basis is the same. I am also sending the new judgment levy tax rate and dollars generated and will continue to work on an update to the explanation Susan prepared. I also obtained some information from the County about the entities that received the judgments. There are 30 of them, so I will give you some examples of the larger ones. THE LEVY: Residential General Fund $150,000 market value home Levy $4.54 per year Tax rate .000055 G.O.Bond $150,000 market value home Levy $0.66 per year Tax rate .000008 Total GF $5.20 Library Fund $150,000 market value home Levy $0.74 per year Tax rate .000009 Total Lib $0.74 Grand Total $5.94 Business General Fund $1,000,000 business value Levy $55.00 per year Tax rate .000055 G.O. bond $1,000,000 business value Levy $8.00 per year Tax rate .000008 Total GF $63.00 Library Fund $1,000,000 business value Levy $9.00 per year Tax rate .000009 Total Lib $9.00 Grand Total $72.00 Combined levy dollars generated from General Fund $653,309 Combined levy dollars generated from G.O. Bond $95,026 Total impact to the General Fund $748,335 Total levy dollars generated from Library Fund $106,905 Total impact to the Library Fund $106,905 Total impact of combined levy $855,240 There are thirty business entities that received judgments during this tax period. The cases were filed in 1994, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002. The seven largest entities are: AT&T, Broadwing Communications, Emery Worldwide, Skywest Airlines, Southwest Airlines, United Airlines, and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). These tax levy is for a one year period only. The County withholds the judgment amount from City proceeds, we do not receive the revenue. Susan 2001 idgment Levies.doc. Original Message From: Sears, Michael 1 Judgment Levy Overview and Example • • A judgment levyis an additional property tax rate imposed to offset a shortfall p p Y p al stemming from a Tax Commission or court decision that significantly reduces a tax entities tax base. • Every property taxpayer has the opportunity to appeal the taxable value of his or her property to the assessing agency. • The county assessors establish taxable values for most properties—real and personal—within their counties including residences and business that are entirely located within county borders. • The State Tax Commission's Property Tax Division assesses the real and personal property of airlines,railroads, utilities, natural resource properties, geothermal fluids and resources and other businesses whose operations cross county or state lines. • Appeals on current year taxes made to the county Board of Equalization or the State Tax Commission, which are decided within the current tax year, do not fall under the judgment levy process. Adjustments to property tax revenue from these appeals are accounted for in the certified rate setting process. Example for Tax Year 2000 With and Without Corrections Tax Year 2000 Actual Taxable Tax Taxes Value Rate Collected General Fund 12,130,281,641 0.003500 40,787,807.53 GO Bond 12,130,281,641 0.000591 6,887,312.64 Library 12,130,281,641 0.000785 9,148,122.57 With Correction Taxable Tax Taxes Value Rate Collected General Fund 12,059,039,927 0.003521 40,787,807.53 GO Bond 12,059,039,927 0.000594 6,887,312.64 Library 12,059,039,927 0.000790 9,148,122.57 If the disputed assessed value had been corrected: • Total assessed value decreases, • Since revenue must remain at last year's amount, the tax rate increases. S Affect on Taxpayers 4111 2000 Tax Year Market Taxable Actual Corrected Percent Value Exemption Value Tax Paid Amount Difference Change Primary Residence $150,000 45% $82,500 General Fund $288.75 $290.48 $1.73 0.60% GO Bond $48.76 $49.01 $0.25 0.51% Library $64.76 $65.18 $0.41 0.64% Small Business $2,000,000 0%$2,000,000 General Fund $7,000.00 $7,042.00 $42.00 0.60% GO Bond $1,182.00 $1,188.00 $6.00 0.51% Library $1,570.00 $1,580.00 $10.00 0.64% If the corrections had been made: • The tax rates in tax year 2000 would have been higher, • The taxes charged on a$150,000 primary residence would have been$2.39 higher than what was actually charged, • The taxes charges on a$2,000,000 small business would have been$58 higher than what was actually charged. Affect on Taxpayers of the Judgment Levy Proposed for Tax Year 2001 Since the corrections were not made in previous tax years, the City could have applied a • judgment levy. The levy would have had the following impacts: 2001 Tax Year Judgment Judgment 2001 Tax Rate Taxes 2001 Tax Rate With Levy Rate Amount w/o Judgment Charged w/Judgment Judgment Primary Residence General Fund 0.000018 $1.49 0.003745 $308.96 0.003763 $310.45 GO Bond 0.000003 $0.25 0.000551 $45.46 0.000554 $45.71 Library 0.000002 $0.17 0.000773 $63.77 0.000775 $63.94 Small Business General Fund 0.000018 $36 0.003745 $7,490 0.003763 $7,526 GO Bond 0.000003 $6 0.000551 $1,102 0.000554 $1,108 Library 0.000002 $4 0.000773 $1,546 0.000775 $1,550 • The taxes charged on a$150,000 primary residence for the Judgment Levy would have been$1.91. • The taxes charged on a$2,000,000 small business for the Judgment Levy would have been$46. • The amounts charged are less than the original impact would have been because of new growth. There are more taxpayers in tax year 2001. S q` .Gyp JUN 2 0 2003 ROSS C."ROCKY"Y ANDERSON SPa MR ilF1(r1.MEW SALT 11L 11�11 l� R jj��Jj LT LAKE 2002 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Q5 9 MEMORANDUM To: Carlton Christensen, Chair, Salt jLake City Council From: Ross C. Anderson,Mayor p�'�/ Date: 6/13/2003 Re: Alternative budget adjustments for FY 2004 Thank you for your consideration of the information I provided to you on June 10, 2003 regarding your proposed budget adjustments, the impacts they would have on service levels, and where cuts might be made to mitigate service reductions. I am grateful for your decision to accept some of our suggestions, with a resulting budget savings of$593,500. While some of you may be tempted to devote all of these savings to reduce one-time spending, I urge you to use $260,500 of these reductions to avoid the layoffs and cuts discussed below. Fire Education Specialist Position In my original proposed budget,we included a recommendation from the Fire Department to cut one Fire Education Specialist position. Community support for the position and the potential impact on services have caused me to reconsider its elimination. I have received additional information, summarized for you here, about the positive results in the community produced through that position. In many ways this position is very similar to the Community Mobilization Specialist positions we recently put back into the budget. We continually hear from community councils and other neighborhood activists that the Community Mobilization Specialists demonstrate the positive impact that just one employee can have on a neighborhood. In the same way,the Fire Education Specialist can leverage community and volunteer resources to obtain results that could never be achieved by one employee alone. • 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 306,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84111 TFI FPHINJF•A111_CZC 77AA cnv.on, coc<». A •• Salt Lake City's below average residential fire rate is partially the result of education programs. The main service this position provides is coordinating school safety programs, which are one of only means available to reduce residential fire losses. This program assures that safety messages reach nearly every household in the City with children. About 15,800 students in 35 public and private elementary schools are taught by the incumbent each year. For the years 2000 and 2001, Salt Lake City's residential fire rate was 34%below the state average, and the average dollar loss was 66%below the state average. These results are impressive given the fact that a third of our housing units were constructed prior to 1940.Like most education programs,however,the work is never done. For us to maintain these impressive rates, we must continue and enhance our aggressive education Currently,the public education position is working to expand our programming to include other high risk groups, besides children, in the community, including the elderly and people who have difficulty in accessing English language materials. Other community safety education programs, such as fire extinguisher training, community emergency response teams(CERT), and high rise evacuation and survival are being provided. The Specialist also represents the Fire Department at community events, such as the Avenues Street Fair. • The position is needed to introduce and deliver the National Fire Protection Association's Risk Watch program in all of Salt Lake City's elementary and • middle schools over the next three to five years. In the last few months, the Fire Department launched a pilot delivery of the Risk Watch program at Beacon Heights and Meadowlark Elementary Schools, which was endorsed by the faculty and the students involved in the pilot project. Risk Watch is a program developed by the National Fire Protection Association that targets students in grades Pre-K through 8, teaching them about safe behaviors. As preventable injuries are the#1 cause of death for children over one year of age,the program has the potential for enormous positive results—saving lives and preventing injuries. The program requires very few public resources and is connected with the Utah elementary school curriculum. The program is delivered by the teachers,rather than City employees, as part of the language arts and health sciences curriculum. The Fire Department's role is to coordinate training for schools implementing the program and to provide resources and follow-up for teachers delivering the program. With this method of deployment, Salt Lake City can have an updated comprehensive safety education program in all of its schools within five years. • The Specialist can provide important back-up to inspection personnel. The Fire Education Specialist is a trained and certified fire inspector who can provide back-up assistance to aid with inspection services within the Fire Department. Salt Lake City has five full-time fire inspectors who are charged with handling all business license requests,hazardous materials permits,and permits for places of assembly,hospitals, long-term care facilities,and high rise buildings. Having additional expertise within • the Department is a valuable resource for the community. Other positions considered for layoffs and the Prosecutor's Office career ladder Since the Council first started discussing layoffs beyond those included in our original budget proposal,I have passionately supported maintaining the following positions currently being considered by the City Council for layoff or consolidation: the Equal Employment Opportunity Manager,the Organizational Development and Training Manager, the Capital Improvement Coordinator, and the Deputy Director of Business Services and Licensing. The rationale behind retaining these positions was discussed in my prior memo, so I will not repeat those specifics here. Each of these positions has a full-time workload and performs a function in the organization and the community that would be severely impacted if there were no full-time staff committed to the effort. I urge you, again,not to cut these positions,permanently impacting our ability to serve the residents of Salt Lake City. Likewise, I emphasize the importance of the career ladder program in the Prosecutor's Office, as outlined in my earlier memo. The Administration provided additional alternatives for budget reductions in the memo of June 10,2003,in a genuine effort to balance the budget responsibly, without causing undue reductions in service to the Salt Lake community. The City Council accepted$593,500 of those reductions. The total amount required to mitigate the need for the layoffs discussed above and to retain the career ladder is $260,500. Funding these four positions and retaining the process for career advancement in the Prosecutor's Office should be the top priority for the funds from the additional budget reductions. • I am happy to discuss the ideas presented here, as well as those I identified previously. Please do not hesitate to contact me. • • SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: June 20,2003 SUBJECT: Water Shortage Contingency Plan AFFEcnD COUNCIL DISTRICTS: Citywide STAFF REPORT BY: Gary Mumford ADIVIINISTRAIWE DEFT. Public Utilities AND CONTACT PERSON: LeRoy Hooton KEY ELEMENTS: The Administration is requesting that the Council adopt an ordinance that requires the Department of Public Utilities to prepare a water shortage contingency plan. The plan is to have graduated stages of water shortage severity and water use restrictions for each stage. The plan is to establish guidelines by which the Mayor,upon recommendation of the Director of Public Utilities,would designate applicable water shortage stages. The proposed ordinance sets civil fine amounts and provides for an appeals process. The Department of Public Utilities • will enforce the ordinance. MATTERS AT ISSUE: Water Shortage Contingency Plan-The Department of Public Utilities modeled the Water Shortage Contingency Plan after similar plans in Denver,Colorado;Tucson,Arizona;Phoenix, Arizona;Portland,Oregon;Irvine,Texas;and Arlington,Texas. Salt Lake City's plan has five water shortage stages. The guidelines for designating these stages are contained in the plan. One of the guidelines is water supply levels compared to average annual supply as follows: Stage 1-Advisory Water supply is significantly below average annual supply for the current time of the year Stage 2-Mild Water supply is projected to be 80% of average annual supply Stage 3-Moderate Water supply is projected to be 70% of average annual supply Stage 4-Severe Water supply is projected to be 60% of average annual supply Stage 5-Critical Water supply is projected to be 50% of average annual supply The proposed Water Shortage Response Summary and related appendixes-In developing the response measures,input was obtained from the Utah Irrigation Association,Utah Turf Growers Association,Utah Carwash Association,and from representatives of hotels, restaurants,bottling industry,washing equipment industry,and ice equipment industry. The Public Utilities Advisory Committee reviewed and provided input to the ordinance and the contingency plan. The water shortage contingency plan and the response summary are not part of the ordinance. These documents can be periodically updated to reflect changing water supplies,customer demand patterns,and best management practices. ti The Advisory Stage is intended to increase the community's awareness of the potential for • future water shortages. Conservation education efforts will increase during this stage. There are certain voluntary and mandatory restrictions in the other four stages. Municipal and other governments will be those first restricted by mandated actions. These restrictions are not adopted by ordinance,but are contained in the Water Shortage Response Summary prepared and updated by the Department of Public Utilities. The following is an example of some of the restrictions in the Department's document Examples of Voluntary and Mandatory Response Measure Mild Moderate Severe Critical Residential Lawn watering-1/s inch once every 4 days in Voluntary Voluntary Permitted Lawn May;once every 3 days in June,July,August; two days watering once every 6 days in September; per week prohibited no watering between 10 AM and 6 PM; maintain system in good working order with no damaged,misaligned or missing heads No lawn watering between 10 AM and 6 PM; Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory Lawn maintain system in good working order with watering no damaged,misaligned or missing heads prohibited Swimming pools-use pool cover when not in May not be use;lower water level by 4 inches Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary filled Fountains-do not spray into the air Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory Mandatory • No hard-surface washing Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory Mandatory Washing personal vehicles-use bucket or Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory Prohibited positive pressure nozzle Commercial and Industrial Follow Best Management Practices Voluntary; Voluntary; Voluntary; Mandatory; reduce use reduce use reduce use reduce use by 5%-14% by 15%-24% by 25%-34% by 35% Lawn watering-1/z inch once every 4 days in Voluntary Voluntary Permitted Lawn May;once every 3 days in June,July,August; two days watering once every 6 days in September; per week prohibited no watering between 10 AM and 6 PM maintain system in good working order with no damaged,misaligned or missing heads Swimming pools-use pool cover when not in Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory Mandatory use;lower water level by 4 inches Fountains-do not spray into the air Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory Mandatory Restaurants-serve water upon request Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory Mandatory Hotels/lodging-request that laundry not be Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory Mandatory washed daily Government(Parks,Golf,Schools&other facilities) Lawn watering-follow established water Mandatory Mandatory Mandatory Not target;no watering between 10 AM and 6 PM; 15%less 25%less allowed maintain system in good working order with than target than target • no damaged,misaligned or missing heads Swimming pools-use pool cover when not in Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory Mandatory use;lower water level by 4 inches Do not operate fountains that spray into the air Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory Mandatory 4 Enforcement-When mandatory compliance is in effect,water meter readers and inspectors will enforcement the ordinance. Council staff understands that the Department's intent, where possible,is to resolve compliance issues by a short informal educational discussion with the water customer. The ordinance provides that a civil fine would be imposed only after the issuance of a written warning. This will be accomplished by certified mail and will contain water conservation information. Civil penalties-The proposed ordinance provides for the following civil penalties to be added to the water bill: First violation $100 Second violation $250 Third violation $500 Fourth violation $1000 Fifth violation $1000 and water service shut off The ordinance provides that fine revenue be use for water conservation programs or to pay costs to administer the Water Shortage Contingency Plan. Appeals process-A customer can discuss a fine with a hearing officer designated by the Director of Public Utilities. Appeals can be made to a panel composed of three members of the S Public Utilities Advisory Committee. Variances and exceptions can be given based on a history of effort or specific circumstances. OPTIONS: The Administration is requesting that the Council set the date for a public hearing. The Council agenda for June 24 suggests that the public hearing be set for July 8. This would allow the ordinance to be effective in July. Other options include holding an additional work session discussion,requesting that the Department obtain further input,or holding the public hearing in August so that information and notices of the hearing can be distributed in water bills. cc Rocky Fluhart,David Nimkin,LeRoy Hooton,Jeff Niermeyer,Stephanie Duer,JD Baxter JUN 1 7 2003 LEROY W. HOOTON, JR. = '0 �� r \ a l�io ® llO ,.. a4, l ROSS C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES MAYOR WATER SUPPLY AND WATERWORKS WATER RECLAMATION AND STORMWATER COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL TO: Rocky J. Fluhart Chief Administrative Officer FROM: LeRoy W. Hooton, Jr. e Director, Department of P .is ties SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance enacting new sections (17.16.092 and 17.16.792) Relating to a Water Shortage Contingency Plan STAFF CONTACT: Stephanie Duer, Water Conservation Coordinator 483.6860 Jeff Niermeyer, Deputy Director, Dept. of Public Utilities, 483.6785 LeRoy W. Hooton, Jr.,Director, Dept. of Public Utilities, 483.6768 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Ask the City Council to pass an ordinance enacting new sections • 17.16.092 and 17.16.792, relating to the preparation and implementation of a Water Shortage Contingency Plan and related civil fines BUDGET IMPACT: N/A BACKGROUND: It is the goal of the Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities to deliver an adequate supply of high quality drinking water to customers within the Public Utilities service area. The City Council, on April 6, 1999, adopted the 1999 Water Conservation Plan Update and the Resolution for Water Use Ethic, in which we recognized that we live in a semi-arid climate and are subject to drought, and acknowledged the importance of water shortage and drought management planning. In order to meet the goals as stated in the Water Conservation Plan Update and the Resolution, Public Utilities has undertaken to develop a Water Shortage Contingency Plan(referred to here after as the Plan). This Plan has three components, (i)the Water Shortage Management Ordinance; (ii) the Water Shortage Contingency Plan; and (iii) the Response Summary. Water Shortage Management Ordinance • Given the prevailing semi-arid climate of the region, the limited water resources available to Salt Lake City, and the vitally important role an adequate supply of water plays in maintaining a healthy and safe environment in the community, Public Utilities recommends that during times of water shortage caused by drought, facilities failure or any other condition or event, municipal and industrial (M&I) water usage within the City's water service area shall be managed, 11111 regulated,prioritized and restricted in such a manner as to prevent the wasteful or unreasonable use of water, and to preserve at all times an adequate supply of M&I water for essential uses. Page 1 of 3 1530 SOUTH WEST TEMPLE, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 TELEPHONE: 801-483-690❑ FAX: S01-483-6818 `r� aecrcLco PnPER • • The proposed ordinance addresses water shortage management through the following: • • Directs the Department of Public Utilities to prepare and implement a Water Shortage Contingency Plan that among other things, establishes graduated stages of water shortage severity, and establishes appropriate water use response measures for each stage • Authorizes the Mayor to declare one of five (5)water shortage stages, upon recommendation of the Director of Public Utilities • Provides for the enforcement of such plan and fines for non-compliance • Identifies Public Utilities as the enforcing agency • Creates an appeals process • Identifies the minimum criteria for mandatory response from residential and commercial customers (municipal and other public sites will be required to take mandatory actions at an earlier stage) Water Shortage Contingency Plan The ability for a community to withstand drought or other interruption of service, in large part depends on how well a community has prepared for an event. The greater the duration of the event, whether natural or man-made, the more critical it becomes that a community responds to the event in a planned and logical manner,based on knowledge of available water supplies, demand patterns, and analysis of past events. The threat of a water shortage to public health and safety, to economic viability, and to our quality of life depends on our ability to act clearly and decisively, with forethought and planning. The WaterContingency Shortage Contin enc Plan provides for incremental response as conditions warrant, • through the following: the definition of five (5) stages of drought or water shortage; establishment of criteria for the implementation and termination of each stage; identification of specific responses within each stage; and the process of enforcement. The plan also provides for variances and exceptions based on a history of effort or specific circumstances, and for an appeals process. This document is intended to be a supplement to the Conservation Master Plan and does not replace that document. It is also intended to be a working plan that grows and changes with the needs and character of the community and the conditions of its water supply. Water Shortage Response Summary This document is an attachment to the Water Shortage Contingency Plan and concisely identifies each stage and specific voluntary and mandatory response actions for each water shortage stage. It is designed to be web and brochure friendly. PUBLIC PROCESS: The Public Utilities Advisory Committee (PUAC)has reviewed the Ordinance, the Water Shortage Contingency Plan, and the Response Summary on four separate occasions, including • Page 2 of 3 Y i • two special meetings devoted to discussion and review of the documents. On May 14th, the PUAC voted that these documents as presented here be forwarded to the Mayor's office with the recommendation that they be forwarded to the City Council for approval. Additionally, relevant portions of these documents have been discussed or reviewed by the Utah Irrigation Association, the Utah Turf Growers Association, and the Utah Carwash Association. Portions of earlier drafts have been made available to the media and have been met with favorable response from the public. Other municipalities, including Salt Lake County, are interested in modeling the ordinance, plan, and response summary guidelines. RESEARCH: The proposed Ordinance would enact new sections, 17.16.092 and 17.16.792, to existing codes. Section 17.16.092 calls for the creation of a Water Shortage Contingency Plan by Public Utilities, establishing guidelines by which the Mayor, upon recommendation of the Director of Public Utilities, would designate applicable water shortage stages under the Plan. These stages, in turn, trigger different water use response measures as outlined in the Plan, some of which are mandatory, and provides that Public Utilities shall act to enforce those mandatory response actions. This new section is in addition to the existing authority the Mayor has under Section 17.16.080 to limit the use of discretionary water under events of water scarcity by proclamation. Section 17.16.792 establishes the authority of Public Utilities to levy fines under certain • circumstances for failure to comply with water use restrictions as defined in proposed Ordinance 17.16.092 and in the Plan, and establishes a hearing panel. Additionally, the water shortage contingency plans of comparable Western cities were studied and reviewed, and interviews were conducted with those municipalities to determine the effectiveness and shortcomings of those plans. • Page 3 of 3 • • SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2003 (Enacting new Sections 17.16.092 and 17.16.792,relating to a Water Shortage Contingency Plan, and related civil fines.) AN ORDINANCE ENACTING NEW SECTIONS 17.16.092 AND 17.16.792, RELATING TO THE PREPARATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN AND RELATED CIVIL FINES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Section 17.16.092 of the Salt Lake City Code is hereby enacted, to read as follows: 17.16.092 Water Shortage Management 4111 A. Declaration of Policy. Given the prevailing semi-arid climate of the region, the limited water resources available to Salt Lake City, and the vitally important role an adequate supply of municipal and industrial (M&I) water plays in maintaining a healthy and safe environment in the community, it is hereby declared to be the policy of Salt Lake City that, during times of water shortage caused by drought, facilities failure or any other condition or event, M&I water usage within the City's water service area shall be managed, regulated, prioritized and restricted in such a manner as to prevent the wasteful or unreasonable use of water, and to preserve at all times an adequate supply of M&I water for essential uses. B. Water Shortage Contingency Plan. The Director of the Department of Public Utilities shall cause to be prepared and implemented a Water Shortage Contingency Plan (the "Plan"). Such Plan may be included as part of, or prepared separately from, the Water Conservation Master Plan provided for in Section 78-10-32, Utah Code Annotated, and shall be revised from time to time as conditions and circumstances warrant. The Plan shall, among other things (i) establish graduated stages of water shortage severity, and (ii) establish appropriate M&I water use restriction response measures for each stage. The Plan shall include guidelines and criteria for determining the appropriate stage to be implemented under various water supply, delivery, and demand conditions. Each Plan stage of water shortage, and the accompanying use restrictions, shall be implemented by declaration of the Mayor, upon the advice and recommendation of the Director pursuant to the Plan guidelines. C. Compliance. Compliance with the water use restriction response measures called for under any applicable Plan stage may be either voluntary or mandatory, as specified in the Plan. The Plan may not provide for mandatory restrictions • on residential or commercial customers until either(i) the projected water supply from all sources is sixty(60)percent or less of the average annual water supply, or(ii)the Director otherwise determines that, in the exercise of his or her best professional judgment, the City is unable to meet anticipated essential water needs without implementing such mandatory measures. D. Enforcement.The Director shall enforce compliance with all mandatory response measures set forth in the Plan through the imposition and collection of civil fines, as provided in Section 17.16.792 of this Code. Any customer who fails to promptly pay any civil fine imposed by the Director shall be subject to having the water supply to the premises of such customer shut off. Water service shall be restored only upon full payment of the civil fine imposed, any penalty provided for in Section i • • 17.16.790, and the turn-on fee provided in Section 17.16.660. In addition, the Director may install flow restrictors in appropriate circumstances. E. Plan Non-Exclusive. The creation and implementation of the Plan shall be in addition to, and not exclusive of, any other steps taken by the City from time to time to conserve water or manage limited water supplies, including Mayoral proclamations issued pursuant to Section 17.16.080. SECTION 2. Section 17.16.792 of the Salt Lake City Code is hereby enacted, to read as follows: 17.16.792 Water Shortage Contingency Plan-Civil Fines A. Any customer of the City's municipal and industrial water system found to be in violation of any mandatory water use restriction in effect from time to time under • the Water Shortage Contingency Plan established under Section 17.16.092, shall be subject to the following maximum civil fines, and to water service shut-off, as follows: First violation: $100 Second violation: $250 Third violation: $500 Fourth violation: $1,000 Fifth violation and thereafter: $1,000 and water service shut-off The violation level shall be based on violation history for the preceding 12 months. A civil fine for a customer's first violation shall be imposed only after the issuance of a written warning to such customer. Any civil fine based on a violation susceptible to corrective action shall be imposed only after failure by the customer to take such corrective action within a reasonable period of time, as determined by the Director, taking into account the nature of the action needed and the anticipated cost. S B. Any customer subject to a civil fine under this Section shall be notified by 411 the Director, in writing, of the date, nature, and circumstances of the violation, which notification shall be delivered by certified mail no more than 15 calendar days after the date of occurrence of the violation. The notice shall advise the customer of his/her right to protest the fine to the Director, or his or her designee, within ten business days after receipt of the notice. Any determination by the Director or designee may be appealed to a(3)member Water Shortage Appeals Panel. The City Council shall designate three (3) members of the Public Utilities Advisory Committee to serve on the Panel; provided, however, that the Director may designate other members of the PUAC to serve as alternates as needed. All decisions of the Water Shortage Appeals Panel shall be final. C. All fines collected pursuant to this Section shall be set aside in a segregated fund within the Public Utilities Enterprise Fund, and used exclusively for 1111 paying all or a portion of the costs and expenses incurred by the City in connection with the implementation and administration of the Plan and other elements of the City's water conservation program. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon the date of its first publication. S Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of , 2003. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 2003. Published: G\Ordinance 03\Water Shortage Ordinance.doe • Water Conservation Master Plan • WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities Last Modified June 2003 SECTION I: DECLARATION OF POLICY, PURPOSE, AND INTENT In order to conserve the available water supply and protect the integrity of water supply facilities, with particular regard for domestic water use, sanitation, and fire protection, and to protect and preserve public health, welfare, and safety, and at the same time minimize the adverse impacts of water supply shortages or other water supply emergency conditions, the Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities (Public Utilities) hereby adopts the following Plan to address water shortages brought about by drought, service interruption, or other emergency or event. This Plan is intended as a supplement to the Water Conservation Master Plan. For information pertaining to Public Utilities long-term water conservation plans and measures, as well as support information on water conservation, consult the appropriate section of the Water Conservation Master Plan. • SECTION II: LEGAL AUTHORITY This Plan is adopted by Public Utilities pursuant to the direction of the City Council contained in Section 17.16.092, Salt Lake City Code (hereafter referred to as the Ordinance). SECTION III: APPLICATION The provisions of this Plan shall apply to all persons, customers, and property utilizing water provided by Public Utilities. SECTION IV: DEFINITIONS For the purposes of this Plan, the following definitions shall apply: Acre feet(AF): A quantity of volume of water that covers one acre to a depth of one foot; equal to 43,560 cubic feet or 325,851 gallons. Average Annual Demand: 105,000 AF as measured from supply to conduit. • SLCDPU Page 1 of 12 06/05/2003 , Water Conservation Master Plan Average Annual Supply: 126,900 AF, as of January 1,2003. In 2005, Salt Lake City's average IP annual supply will increase by 4000 AF per year for five years as a result of additional Central Utah Project water, increasing the average annual supply by 20,000 AF in 2008. Best Management Practices (BMPs): Applicable Best Management Practices for a particular industry(see Appendices for examples). Conservation: Those practices, techniques, and technologies that reduce the consumption of water, reduce the loss or waste of water, improve efficiency in the use of water, or increase the recycling and reuse of water so that a supply is conserved and made available for future or alternative uses. Culinary Water: See Municipal and Industrial Water. Customer: Any person, company, corporation,partnership, association, organization, or other legal entity using water supplied by Public Utilities through system connections, or legal or contractual agreement. Director: Shall mean the Director of Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities, or his or her designee. Even number address: Street addresses ending in 0, 2, 4, 6, or 8 and locations without addresses. Hearing Officer: Shall mean the Director of Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities or such other employee of Public Utilities as the Director shall designate from time to time. Hearing Review Panel: A panel designated by the Salt Lake City Council and comprised of three (3) current members of the Public Utilities Advisory Committee. Industrial water use: The use of water in processes designed to convert materials of lower value into forms having greater usability and value. Landscape irrigation use: Water used for the irrigation and maintenance of landscaped areas, whether publicly or privately owned, including lawns, gardens, golf courses,parks, rights-of- way, medians, and park strips. Municipal and Industrial Water (M&I): Water treated by Public Utilities specifically to meet Safe Drinking Water Standards as defined by the Safe Drinking Water Act. For the purpose of this Plan, M&I water is divided into the following categories: 1) domestic use is that water which is used in private residences, apartment houses, etc., for drinking, bathing, cleaning, landscape sprinkling, sanitary, and other purposes; 2) commercial and industrial use is that water used by commercial establishments and industries; and 3)public use includes water required for use in parks, public golf courses, civic buildings, schools, hospitals, and churches. SLCDPU • Page 2 of 12 06/05/2003 , Water Conservation Master Plan • Odd numbered address: Street addresses ending in 1, 3, 5, 7, or 9. Ordinance: Ordinance adopted by Salt Lake City Council, enacting Section 17.16.092 of the Salt Lake City Code, authorizing the adoption of the Plan. Positive Pressure Nozzle: A spring-loaded nozzle attached to the end of a hose that requires positive pressure to maintain water flow. Projected Demand: The estimated water demand at any given point in time (stated as a percentage of the average annual demand or as total gallons per day). Projected Supply: The anticipated supply at any given point in time (stated as a percentage of the average annual supply or as total gallons per day). Public Utilities: Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities Reclaimed Water: Wastewater treated by Public Utilities to levels appropriate for irrigation and industrial uses Response Plan: Shall mean the Water Shortage Response Summary, an attachment to the Plan which identifies each Water Shortage Stage and the specific calls to action, both voluntary and • restricted. This Response Summary is to be updated as the Plan is updated. SECTION V: CRITERIA FOR INITIATION AND TERMINATION OF WATER SHORTAGE STAGES Monitoring All relevant components of the Salt Lake City water system will be monitored to ensure timely response to water situations by the Director. Public Utilities will monitor supply, treatment and distribution system, demand trends, and potential constraints, for the purpose of identifying potential shortages. The Director shall determine when conditions warrant initiation or termination of each stage of the Plan,that is, when specified triggers are reached. Initiation of Water Shortage Stage Meeting or exceeding one or more trigger conditions will be sufficient cause to initiate a corresponding Water Shortage Stage. However, the Director can decide that a stage not be initiated under these circumstances. The decision may be influenced by factors that include, but are not limited to, the time of year, weather conditions, anticipation of replenished water supplies, or anticipation that facilities will be placed on-line to meet water demand. The Director shall make a recommendation to initiate a stage or a stage change to the Mayor, who will make the final determination in accordance with the Ordinance. • SLCDPU Page 3 of 12 06/05/2003 Water Conservation Master Plan It is not incumbent on the Director to implement lower steps before higher ones. If the Director judges the situation to warrant it, he can declare a higher stage of water shortage response at any IP time. All measures contained in the Plan for lower levels of response automatically come into action at that point. Termination of Water Shortage Stage Termination of the Plan stage will be announced when the trigger conditions that initiated the drought measures have subsided and the shortage no longer exists, by the determination of the Director. Upon terminating a stage, it is not incumbent on the Director to implement the stage immediately lower. If the Director does not designate a Plan stage,then the next lower stage becomes active. SECTION VI: NOTIFICATION AND EDUCATION The Director shall notify the public of the initiation of the applicable Plan stage and corresponding conservation measures, or the termination of a Plan stage and corresponding conservation measures, by one or more of the following means: • Publication of notices in a newspaper of general circulation • Direct mail to each customer on the utility bill, as a bill insert, and/or as a special mailing • Public service announcements • • Signs posted in public places • Take-home fliers at schools • Public meetings/community council meetings • Public Utilities Water Conservation website • Salt Lake City municipal website Customer Agency Notification: The Director shall endeavor to notify directly the following individuals and entities: Salt Lake City Council Public Utilities Advisory Committee Fire Chief(s) City and/or County Emergency Management Coordinator(s) Salt Lake City Department of Public Services State Disaster District/Department of Public Safety Critical water users, i.e. hospitals Additionally, Public Utilities will periodically provide customers and customer agencies with information about the Plan, including information about water conditions under which each stage of the Plan is to be initiated or terminated, the response measures to be implemented in each stage, as well as any Plan updates. • SLCDPU Page 4 of 12 06/05/2003 Water Conservation Master Plan O The success of any water conservation program in achieving short term and immediate water conservation targets as might be required under a water shortage is dependant on Public Utilities' ability to convey to the community the water-supply situation, the expected response actions, and clear and measurable targets. The Response Summary and Appendices have been developed to enhance public understanding of water supply levels, response actions, and restrictions. SECTION VII: STAGES AND RESPONSES This Plan provides for five Water Shortage stages and responses of increasing severity, as progressively more serious conditions warrant. The triggering criteria described are based on the projected percentage of water available from a number of sources, including, but not limited to snow pack, soil moisture, surface water, ground water, stored water, and spot market water. Degrees of flexibility have been built into this Plan to allow for timely adjustments at all levels of planning and implementation. Key elements of a successful demand management program are that the resources and hardships are shared as equitably as possible, and that customers are kept informed about the status of the shortage. The five stages are characterized as follows: 0 • STAGE 1—ADVISORY Stage: the public is informed as early as meaningful data are available that a possible shortage may occur. • STAGE 2—MILD Stage: this stage is initiated if supply conditions worsen and relies on voluntary cooperation and support of water customers to meet target consumption goals. During this stage, specific voluntary actions are suggested for all customers, and specific mandatory actions are identified for municipal customers, including parks, golf courses, schools, and other government facilities. • STAGE 3—MODERATE Stage:this stage is to be initiated if the Mild Stage does not result in the reduction needed, or circumstances warrant its initiation as specified in Section V: Initiation. This stage increases the prohibition or limitation of certain actions and relies on both voluntary and mandatory actions. • STAGE 4—SEVERE Stage: this stage is to be initiated if the Moderate Stage does not result in the reduction needed, or circumstances warrant its initiation as specified in Section V: Initiation. The Severe Stage has increasingly stringent prohibitions and limits on certain actions, including certain mandatory actions for residential and commercial customers. • SLCDPU Page 5 of 12 06/05/2003 Water Conservation Master Plan • STAGE 5—CRITICAL Stage: this stage addresses the most critical need for demand • reduction and increases the number of restricted water uses and mandatory actions. This could be used as a stage of a progressive situation, such as a drought of increasing severity, or to address an immediate crisis, such as a facility failure. STAGE 1—ADVISORY The ADVISORY STAGE is intended to increase the community's awareness of the potential for future water shortages. Under this stage, conservation efforts which are on-going will receive additional emphasis, and measures not pursued during normal water supply times because they are not cost-effective will be re-evaluated. The ADVISORY STAGE triggers an increase in public education and information to assist all customers impacted by the shortage in order that those customers better understand the state of the water shortage condition and the need for voluntary action. Trigger • Total reservoir storage is not projected to be at standard operating capacity on or near April 1, due to exceptionally low snow pack,precipitation and/or lack or carryover storage from the previous year • Total reservoir storage and predicted inflows are significantly below historical normal for the current time of year, and supply modeling indicates that expected demands may not be • met if current trend continues or worsens • Other water supplies are protected to be below standard operating capacity or historic levels Objectives • To prepare Public Utilities, the City, relevant agencies, and water customers for a potential water shortage thereby allowing all parties adequate time for planning and coordination • To undertake supply management actions that forestall or minimize the need for later, more stringent supply or demand management actions • To minimize the waste of water through carelessness, either intentional or accidental STAGE 2—MILD The conservation measures in this stage are focused on specific voluntary actions. However, some prohibitions on water waste are enforced with fines and/or flow restrictors or disconnection. SLCDPU 1 Page 6 of 12 06/05/2003 Water Conservation Master Plan • Trigger • Supply levels identified in the ADVISORY STAGE have not improved • Demand levels indicate the need for a more systematic response to manage the situation • Water supply levels are projected to be eighty(80)percent of the Average Annual Supply. Response As outlined in the Response Summary. Target: Achieve a five (5)percent reduction in total daily water use or Average Annual Demand. Objectives: • To maintain or reduce demand to meet target consumption levels by customer voluntary actions • To forestall or minimize the need for later, more stringent actions • To minimize disruption to customers' lives and businesses while meeting target consumption goals II • To maintain the highest water quality standards throughout the shortage Termination of Stage The Director may rescinded STAGE 2 of the Plan when the conditions listed as triggering events have ceased to exist for such a period as deemed appropriate and reasonable. Upon termination of Stage 2, the ADVISORY STAGE becomes active unless otherwise stated. STAGE 3—MODERATE Demand reduction responses are voluntary, with the exception of Park, Golf, and other Government facilities, having some mandatory response actions. Trigger The Director would approve progression to this stage if the goals established in the preceding stage have not been met and additional action is needed. The specific voluntary restrictions imposed during the MODERATE STAGE would be determined based on the season of year, targeted demand levels, and other considerations. • Projected water supply is seventy(70) percent of the Average Annual Supply • Supply levels identified in the MILD STAGE have not improved • SLCDPU Page 7 of 12 06/05/2003 Water Conservation Master Plan • Demand levels indicate the need for a more systematic response to manage the situation • Response As outlined in the Response Summary. Target Achieve a fifteen (15)percent reduction in total daily demand or Average Annual Demand. Objectives • To achieve targeted consumption reduction goals by restricting defined water uses • To ensure that adequate water supply will be available for the duration of the situation to protect public health and safety and to balance the need for stream flows • To minimize the disruption to customers' lives and businesses while meeting target consumption goals • To maintain the highest water quality standards throughout the shortage • To promote equity amongst water customers by establishing clear restrictions that affect all customers Termination of StageID The Director may rescinded STAGE 3 of the Plan when the conditions listed as triggering events have ceased to exist for such a period as deemed appropriate and reasonable. STAGE 4—SEVERE Some elements of STAGE 4 will become mandatory and be enforced, in addition to elements under previous stages. Such elements may include mandatory curtailments of water for certain types of non-essential use. Trigger The Director would approve progression to this stage if the goals established in the MODERATE STAGE have not been met and additional action is needed. Increasingly stringent water restrictions may be established and enforced. • Projected water supply is sixty(60)percent of the Average Annual Supply. • Supply levels identified in the MODERATE STAGE have not improved • Demand levels indicate the need for a more systematic response to manage the situation, including restricted or prohibited water uses SLCDPU II Page 8 of 12 06/05/2003 Water Conservation Master Plan • Response As outlined in the Response Summary. Target Achieve a twenty-five (25) percent reduction in total daily water use or Average Annual Demand. Objectives • To achieve targeted consumption reduction goals by restricting defined water uses • To ensure that adequate water supply will be available for the duration of the situation to protect public health and safety and to balance the need for stream flows • To minimize the disruption to customers' lives and businesses while meeting target consumption goals • To maintain the highest water quality standards throughout the shortage • To promote equity amongst water customers by establishing clear restrictions that affect all customers Termination of Stage • The Director may rescinded STAGE 4 of the Plan when the conditions listed as triggering events have ceased to exist for such a period as deemed appropriate and reasonable. STAGE 5—CRITICAL Elements under STAGE 5 are mandatory, unless otherwise stated. Trigger The Director would approve progression to this stage if the goals established in the SEVERE STAGE have not been met and additional action is needed. Increasingly stringent water restrictions may be established and enforced. • Major water line breaks, or pump or system failures, which cause unprecedented loss of capability to provide water service • Natural or man-made contamination of the water supply source(s) • Supply levels identified in the SEVERE STAGE have not improved • A projected water supply of fifty(50)percent of the Average Annual Supply • SLCDPU Page 9 of 12 06/05/2003 Water Conservation Master Plan Response • As outlined in the Response Summary. Target Achieve a thirty-five (35) percent reduction in total daily water use. Objectives • To achieve targeted consumption reduction goals by restricting defined water uses • To ensure that adequate water supply will be available for the duration of the situation to protect public health and safety and to balance the need for stream flows • To minimize the disruption to customers' lives and businesses while meeting target consumption goals • To maintain the highest water quality standards throughout the shortage • To promote equity amongst water customers by establishing clear restrictions that affect all customers Termination of Stage The Director or his or her designee may rescinded STAGE 4 of the Plan when the conditions listed as triggering events have ceased to exist for such a period as deemed appropriate and • reasonable by the Director. SECTION VIII: ENFORCEMENT Provisions of the Plan and Response Summary shall be enforced as indicated in the Ordinance. Penalties for violation of any portion of the Plan are defined in the Ordinance. A civil fine for a customer's first violation shall be imposed only after the issuance of a written warning to such customer. Any civil fine based on a violation susceptible to corrective action shall be imposed only after failure by the customer to take such corrective action within a reasonable period of time, as determined by the Director, taking into account the nature of the action needed and the anticipated cost. The time allowed will vary with the nature of the violation; for instance, corrective measures can be taken more quickly for a violation of time-of-day restrictions than can be taken for a system repair or a pump retrofit for a fountain. Subsequent violations will result in a formal violation notice, a fine, and/or water service shut off. Notification of a violation shall be as set forth in the Ordinance. • SLCDPU Page 10 of 12 06/05/2003 Water Conservation Master Plan • Customers violating any portion of the Plan as defined by Public Utilities shall be assessed a fine according to the following schedule. The violation level shall be based upon violation history for the preceding twelve (12) months. The fines for a violation and each subsequent violation are as follows: 1st Violation $ 100 2"Violation $ 250 3rd Violation $ 500 4th Violation $ 1000 5th Violation Flow restrictor or interruption of service until corrective action is taken and previous fines paid in full If a service is disconnected, Public Utilities may assess and collect a fee before service is restored. That fee is in addition to other fines or charges imposed under a particular water shortage response measure. Any customer subject to a civil fine shall be notified by the Director, in writing, of the date, nature, and circumstances of the violation, which notification shall be delivered by certified mail no more than 15 calendar days after the date of occurrence of the violation. The notice shall advise the customer of his/her right to protest the fine to the Director, or his or her designee, within ten business days after receipt of the notice. Any determination by the Director or designee may be appealed to the Water Shortage Appeals Panel, as established in the Ordinance. • All decisions of the Water Shortage Appeals Panel shall be final. The Director may grant written variances to persons who apply, on forms supplied by Public Utilities,for usage of water not in compliance with the Plan or for relief from a fine. Variances may be granted if it is found that such water use is necessary to prevent an emergency condition relating to health or safety,extreme economic hardship,or essential government services such as police,fire, and similar emergency services. Variances may also be considered for customers under irrigation targets who have already made every reasonable effort to reduce water use. Monies collected from fines are not considered rates for the production of water revenue. Those monies will be placed in a special fund,to be administered by Public Utilities, and will be used for, but not limited to, meeting the expenses of enforcement of restrictions under this Plan, producing educational materials relating to water conservation, promoting information related to the Plan, or augmenting water supplies. SECTION IX: LIMITED EXEMPTION FOR RECLAIMED WATER The Director may exempt certain uses and users of Reclaimed Water from any or all of the water use restriction requirements contained in this Plan.Users must apply for exemption on forms supplied by Public Utilities. Only the use of Reclaimed Water may be exempted from the provisions of the Plan. Users of both Reclaimed Water and M&I Water will not be exempt from restrictions on the use of • SLCDPU Page 11 of 12 06/05/2003 , Water Conservation Master Plan M&I Water, and must comply with restrictions in effect during all stages of the Plan. 410 The Director, in the interest of equity and community acceptance of such exemption on the use of Reclaimed Water during a declared drought,water shortage,or other water emergency,may require exempt users to clearly post notices to the effect that the water being used is not from the public drinking water supply, and that the use conforms to restrictions in force at the time.Failure to make such posting in a timely fashion may, at the discretion of the Director, result in loss of exemption from the provisions of this Plan. ‘Ilf W, 4-.taa v 6. 5 .0_3 LeRoy W. oton, Director, epartme t Public Utilities Date • SLCDPU • Page 12 of 12 06/05/2003 • • • Water Conservation Master Plan Water Shortage Response Summary/Vater Shortage Contingency Plan Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities Water Shortage Response Summary Advisory. Stage . Follow guidelines for water conservation as presented in Water Conservation Master Plan ` V � T�1 �>vl�i T' /�� i�f� ` i� �y I, 4 • ■ {,}� 4' n. rya'• C'+ Y J ,' ,3�i .���.. ..� f:�l!,��� �5,���/: ,�ce • �M',:�3�,. ���, ,u7.. •?. ,�v�^,, ^N�k� 7.P:',u.,. n ��� ,F .�r!�� 0 �y f f��r,.�e�;,.,.�'•A; .vk`'AA�i .,.x�x5. ,nfi:+y ,{,.�n;�...� k`��'r'•';l..�i iiY+�2:,�,v�ln•-, L: r >.i�t�.�ru.y>;,�e�" �{.�,p• .i 7 a rchca,• *a.Fiy'I, 3,g ✓cw ; €fg ��y ioj f•,1,t * .a.i kI;CR,,. G�, b`yq� n i. .f. 7�',t� �, �ih °,�� RT�:wk9�aK���i 9 r'�"�Si,...�,�yY..'.4r.,;Y ,�r;`','�.'��s. ,y` "b1 K"'Su3`�'T"rYl rr�b?�i4 „gip ,Pw!i�,"Et ,�?'�g�Z'�� t ,�:,z'' Sr..a; 'j a} P,�4t .�:,d ,�j'. tt��:.� g/��•h�. L.. <rg t� r•ee tt! �,+ �l'�;',y.�,�}};;.�ir.r., Y r 25k, o, r. � ��.�✓, t.. �m,,.'Id �Aa �'.�;..�V'�,���. ,'�.+�s,:� � � ��'.�;.� P�.i,i�.=;:.: :;� 7.:. k i.."C t.' v �s, � ,.S'�'`A^�., f '� ,iPd51 �-��„r.Jr' � 4t'x, S�: �a �+ e. General Information: Water Waste may be subject to fines and/or delivery restriction or disconnection Single Family, Duplex, and Triplex Residential Lawn Watering Voluntary Voluntarily follow schedule (see Appendix A) Trees, shrubs, perennials, annuals, and vegetables Voluntary It is encouraged that non-turf areas are watered separately and less frequently from lawn areas; use of hand-held hoses, hand-held buckets, drip irrigation, or subterranean irrigation recommended Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Voluntary Avoid watering between 10 AM and 6 PM Irrigation Systems Voluntary Maintain irrigation systems in good working order with no damaged, misaligned, or missing sprinkler heads; minimize spray on walks, drives, and gutters New Landscape Voluntary No restrictions; spring and fall planting recommended Pools and Jacuzzis Voluntary No restrictions; pool covers are recommended . Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Voluntary No restrictions; the use of recirculation pumps is recommended Hard-surface Washing Voluntary No restrictions; the use of brooms is encouraged Personal Vehicle Washing Voluntary No restrictions; the use of hand held buckets or positive pressure nozzles encouraged Commercial, Industrial, Business, Multi-family Apartments, and Home Owners Associations All Businesses, Industries, and Commercial Users Voluntary Develop, adopt, and implement Best Management Practices for Water Conservation; reduce consumption 5 to 14 percent Lawn Watering Voluntary Voluntarily follow schedule (see Appendix A) Trees, shrubs, perennials, annuals, and vegetables Voluntary It is recommended that non-turf areas are watered separately from lawn areas; use of hand-held hoses, hand-held buckets, drip irrigation, or subterranean irrigation recommended Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Voluntary Avoid watering between 10 AM and 6 PM 6/4/2003:Final Draft Page 1 of 8 H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Response Summary.doc Water Conservation Master Plan Water Shortage Response SummarylWater Shortage Contingency Plan Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities Irrigation Systems Voluntary Maintain irrigation systems in good working order with no damaged, misaligned, or missing sprinkler heads; minimize spray on walks, drives, and gutters New Landscape Voluntary No restrictions; spring and fall planting recommended Pools and Jacuzzis Voluntary No restrictions; the use of pool covers is encouraged; lower water level by four(4) inches to minimize loss due to splashing Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Voluntary No restrictions; the use of recirculation pumps is encouraged Hard-surface Washing Voluntary No restrictions; brooms are recommended Commercial Car Washes Voluntary Implement Best Management Practices (see Appendix E) Commercial and Fleet Vehicle Washing Voluntary No restrictions; positive pressure nozzles recommended; use Best Management Practices (see Appendix E) Commercial Plant Nurseries Voluntary Utilize Best Management Practices; Voluntarily restrict all non- essential water use (see Appendix F) Hotels/Lodging Voluntary Utilize Best Management Practices (see Appendix D) Restaurants Voluntary Voluntarily do not serve water except upon request; Utilize Best Management Practices Parks, Golf, Schools, and other Government Facilities . Lawn Watering Mandatory Follow established water target(See Appendix C) Trees, shrubs, perennials, annuals, and vegetables Voluntary Water separately and less frequently from lawn areas; use of hand-held hoses, hand-held buckets, drip irrigation, or subterranean irrigation recommended Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Mandatory No watering between 10 AM and 6 PM Irrigation Systems Mandatory Maintain irrigation systems in good working order with no damaged, misaligned, or missing sprinkler heads; minimize spray on walks, drives, and gutters New Landscape Voluntary No restrictions; recommend installing in spring or fall Fleet vehicles Voluntary No more than once per week(emergency vehicles exempted) Pools and Jacuzzis Voluntary No restrictions; the use of pool covers is encouraged; lower water level by four(4) inches to minimize loss due to splashing Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Voluntary No restrictions; use of recirculation pumps is encouraged Hard-surface washing Voluntary No restrictions; use of brooms is encouraged 6/4/2003:Final Draft Page 2 of 8 Hip Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Respoummary.doc • • • • Water Conservation Master Plan Water Shortage Response SummaryM/ater Shortage Contingency Plan Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities e: e d � �.. i•C;idx:`.:.Sri„:,' •'r S+• '• ink i.tr•% � 1Fry "N'•:.• r�„',�vo- Nye +,:J ..'f"''�.: :i°G:Y b)•r':-„"�,`i� rn •t;'99 � ,z r t .t.'i' � �{Zi C ^il t:' .%�.? :b a?, +r. ,:'�4/.+?,",.,,•.• :,y. {m4 -f. }' ,,hv'n. .3 +j1: .A... ud•:.,y'9�iYr, y a.. ^,h ''^ .� .yAv1 .�•";fi1;r'7f�..rr'yi^wf:':. r, .i:.. .4i.:8a;F'P?' S!s,. �?Y+, ;ifiu'•'y;`'ii.,.tFr ir:•. f. �._vr. k.,f a .;1�'' tt3... 1 f'' ... .N• ,,.,� ;�t•^�ti;'': 2r rF ,a "R'r �, 1'. 4 ks . X �i <4�:, i ��,a . � ' • '� .g ,.,„,,.i1J ,4 eL..; ri 'N'�?r' r •:•':'„ +:tiT;:.,...a^'',,..•r ,i .A""r:t:, {is a,, tie Q� L { � W-,x'p��(r,y�S;';; ' ' r: Yy� ,. : .�y ,/ E�+ Xi'. v S�./,Y"' �'.,�'tYhaf'r'hM� .)�i i'.•.q••'X KS�vt 4Y1T.9',1.�"'�`1��1'u rLr!r4!i'',4`.dTi�l..:y,fvHk,44fii`'•b^x.)it.f,xt PRlt'1��G��.�Y++1}•F.J` iS.(r YsM",k±i���'�IN%L'•�i.ie {:''TlfkiY".�;'+"L.�:t� V`tn;1�,���4`S%n General Information: Water Waste may be subject to fines and or delivery restriction or disconnection Single Family, Duplex, and Triplex Residential Lawn Watering Voluntary Voluntarily follow schedule (see Appendix A) Trees, shrubs, perennials, annuals, and vegetables Voluntary It is recommended that non-turf areas are watered separately and less frequently from lawn areas; use of hand-held hoses, hand-held buckets, drip irrigation, or subterranean irrigation recommended Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Voluntary Avoid watering between 10 AM and 6 PM Irrigation Systems Voluntary Maintain irrigation systems in good working order with no damaged, misaligned, or missing sprinkler heads; minimize spray on walks, drives, and gutters New Landscape Voluntary No restrictions; recommend installing in spring or fall Pools and Jacuzzis Voluntary No restrictions; the use of pool covers is encouraged; lower water level by four(4) inches to minimize loss due to splashing Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Voluntary No restrictions; installation of recirculation pumps encouraged Hard-surface Washing Voluntary No restrictions; the use of brooms is encouraged Personal Vehicle Washing Voluntary No restrictions; the use of positive pressure nozzles and hand held buckets recommended Commercial, Industrial, Business, Multi-family Apartments, and Home Owners Associations All Businesses, Industries, and Commercial Users Voluntary Reduce consumption by 15 to 24 percent; Develop, adopt, and implement Best Management Practices for Water Conservation Lawn Watering Voluntary Voluntarily follow schedule (see Appendix A) Trees, shrubs, perennials, annuals, and vegetables Voluntary It is recommended that non-turf areas are watered separately and less frequently from lawn areas; use of hand-held hoses, hand-held buckets, drip irrigation, or subterranean irrigation recommended Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Voluntary Avoid watering between hours of 10 AM and 6 PM Irrigation Systems Voluntary Maintain irrigation systems in good working order with no damaged, misaligned, or missing sprinkler heads; minimize spray on walks, drives, and gutters 6/4/2003:Final Draft Page 3 of 8 H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Response Summary.doc Water Conservation Master Plan Water Shortage Response Summary/Water Shortage Contingency Plan Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities >z. >Y'.' .4 7' �� J, '•.1%7, ay .4 q.rat"1 J 'a �'S. : �v�ire:a�ac' a : fed u,���Qn•-Goal-25 0..;;3 P in , r!r,r„�,�5;;r,.i�r"' ,r..i;1��r},2,,a I,, ..qa r.,�•-lb'�`., o e.,,,,3�...1�� `i'";5M';j h�:u`�Y� '�� ,°. Jtia. 'd:i •,1:Svx, .�q,, ;•;+,! kir.'• (u, 1 ,i• moo?,*J,d ;ri rTy„. i /. rf •; *t'•�::.aa' ,.i.' �$1, .; �d" :w;J..':,,,ti,�•dre `,,'�Y ;3� : �r. :.a� � ,fir: r. .�: �1 "4. R. ^'Fs dp; ':i:S;:r,4� '+r� ;4r. #.o-:.G�' +'.a. � ,• ;.4 .rm r,.. 5 F r<>'�. �<•. ') ,•�� 2 a. �„r"•F';�i"..,�J� '�s`a''�,�'r*"�;. ;i� '1:!'=', 'S ,r4: ,. .r "�r,�, r ;t g icy t.n..., :T ✓� -X=yr f, iti e. a:k�'f.�'.'fi� r.Fh,: :�•:'R'y ..t$�;:a$ �'aY, , ,S'iti,+ •�.�,�. 1 .rih u•5»aw 5:?.hr.��! � � ,��"'� 1�, {.5.+�-••-%'•�• , 40.! ;'i lath ; i w.`••.y d -,.f�a..t, ..Yd Q! Z 'Fr ,> i.t, .,rr .^r+A[+' , .;: i e�. ,t :,.!i a3a9 ,Y y. ,..} J al. j'r R' u ,y'.� "„'` r ra Yt..f,S''�u`,nth.s�,�`r�':,�...r: frfdib.'b`��.i}tS�.n3'�".i .a' Z �1�'�'a5>.e "r�?t�. �' '�i•.4°2p'.',L'�'.�Y�ck�:�. �',i,W.a j :,�.S.rr>as;'..y :a, E°. ,.�' '�t•,a,r . rr. �Yy.9 +4 r`dk ;;53 �;Y �' d�,. �;.��i.x C''� .�J;�•a..'."n J� •,a. ..'t,S.14. � ,ks b b.).. bs:.a.1K .iMa. �:^m .�"4�.'�n,r4:4A Y�.:T• General Information: Violation of restrictions and/or water waste may be subject to fines and or delivery restriction or disconnection Single Family, Duplex, and Triplex Residential Lawn Watering Mandatory Permitted two days per week (see Appendix B) Trees, shrubs, perennials, annuals, and vegetables Mandatory Water with hand-held hoses, hand-held buckets, or drip irrigation only Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Mandatory No watering between hours of 10 AM and 6 PM Irrigation Systems Mandatory Maintain irrigation systems in good working order with no damaged, misaligned, or missing sprinkler heads; minimize spray on walks, drives, and gutters New Landscapes Voluntary Recommend installing in spring or fall; must follow mandatory watering practices (new lawns up to 42 days after installation may be watered more frequently but must comply with the time of day rule) Pools and Jacuzzis Voluntary No restrictions; the use of pool covers is encouraged; lower water level by four(4) inches to minimize loss due to splashing Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Mandatory Outdoor features may not be operated if water sprays or shoots into air; must have recirculation pump Hard-surface Washing Mandatory No washing of walks, drives, patios, gutters Personal Vehicle Washing Mandatory Only with bucket or hand-held hose with positive pressure nozzle Commercial, Industrial, Business, Multi-family Apartments, and Home Owners Associations All Businesses, Industries, and Commercial Users Voluntary Reduce consumption by 25 to 34 percent; Develop, adopt, and implement Best Management Practices for Water Conservation Lawn Watering Mandatory Permitted two days per week (see Appendix B) Trees, shrubs, perennials, annuals, and vegetables Mandatory Water with hand-held hoses, hand-held buckets, drip irrigation, or subterranean irrigation Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Mandatory No watering between hours of 10 AM and 6 PM Irrigation Systems Mandatory Maintain irrigation systems in good working order with no damaged, misaligned, or missing sprinkler heads; minimize spray on walks, drives, and gutters 6/4/2003:Final Draft Page 5 of 8 H:\ Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\RespoiOummary.doc • • Water Conservation Master Plan Water Shortage Response SummaryNVater Shortage Contingency Plan Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities New Landscape Voluntary No restrictions; recommend installing in spring or fall Pools and Jacuzzis Voluntary No restrictions; the use of pool covers is encouraged; lower water level by four(4) inches to minimize loss due to splashing Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Voluntary May be filled; use of recirculation pump recommended Hard-surface Washing Voluntary No washing of walks, drives, patios, gutters except for health or safety Commercial Car Washes Voluntary Implement Best Management Practices (see Appendix E) Commercial and Fleet Vehicle Washing Voluntary May be washed no more often than once per week (see Appendix E) Commercial Plant Nurseries Voluntary Utilize Best Management Practices; exempted from designated watering restrictions (see Appendix F) Hotels/Lodging Voluntary Serve water to customer only upon request; display table tents or public notice (see Appendix D) Restaurants Voluntary Voluntarily do not change sheets for multiple night stays; voluntarily reduce consumption by 15 percent Parks, Golf, Schools, and other Government Facilities Lawn Watering Mandatory Water target less 15 percent(see Appendix C) Trees, shrubs, perennials, annuals, and vegetables Voluntary Water separately and less frequently from lawn areas; use of • hand-held hoses, hand-held buckets, drip irrigation, or subterranean irrigation recommended Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Mandatory No watering between 10 am and 6 pm Irrigation Systems Mandatory Maintain irrigation systems in good working order with no damaged, misaligned, or missing sprinkler heads; minimize spray on walks, drives, and gutters New Landscape Voluntary No restrictions; recommend installing in Spring or Fall Golf Courses Mandatory Water target less 15 percent Pools Voluntary No restrictions; the use of pool covers is encouraged; lower water level by four(4) inches to minimize loss due to splashing Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Voluntary May be filled; use of recirculation pump recommended Hard-surface Washing Voluntary No washing of walks, drives, patios, gutters except for health or safety Fleet vehicle washing Voluntary No more than once per week with equipment or at certified car wash (emergency vehicles excepted); utilize Best Management Practices (see appendix E) 6/4/2003:Final Draft Page 4 of 8 H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Response Summary.doc Water Conservation Master Plan Water Shortage Response Summary/Water Shortage Contingency Plan Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities New Landscapes Voluntary Recommended installing in spring or fall; must follow mandatory watering practices (new lawns up to 42 days after installation may be watered more frequently but must comply with the time of day rule) Pools and Jacuzzis Mandatory May be filled under the following circumstances: pool covers are utilized when pool not in use; lower water level by four(4) inches to reduce loss due to splashing; water sprays into the air may not be operated Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Mandatory Outdoor features may not be operated if water sprays or shoots into air; must have recirculation pump Hard-surface Washing Mandatory No washing of walks, drives, patios, gutters except for health or safety Commercial Car Washes Voluntary Implement Best Management Practices (see Appendix E) Commercial and Fleet Vehicles Mandatory No more than once per week; utilize Best Management Practices (see Appendix E) Commercial Plant Nurseries Mandatory Utilize Best Management Practices (see Appendix F) Hotels/Lodging Mandatory Utilize Best Management Practices (see Appendix D) Restaurants Mandatory Required to not serve water except upon request; utilize Best Management Practices (see Appendix D) Parks, Golf, Schools, and other Government Facilities Lawn Watering Mandatory Water target less 25 percent(see Appendix C) Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Mandatory No watering between 10 am and 6 pm Irrigation Systems Mandatory Maintain irrigation systems in good working order with no damaged, misaligned, or missing sprinkler heads; minimize spray on walks, drives, and gutters New Landscapes Mandatory No new landscapes unless already under contract at time of stage implementation or if irrigated by drip system Golf courses Mandatory Water Target less 25 percent Fleet vehicle washing Mandatory No more than once per week (emergency vehicles excepted) Pools Mandatory May be filled under the following circumstances: pool covers are utilized when pool not in use; lower water level by four(4) inches to reduce loss due to splashing; water sprays into the air may not be operated Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Mandatory Outdoor features may not be operated if water sprays or shoots into air; must have recirculation pump 6/4/2003:Final Draft Page 6 of 8 H:1 Conservation12003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Respo ummary.doc • • 11111 • Water Conservation Master Plan Water Shortage Response Summary/Water Shortage Contingency Plan Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities Hard-surface washing Mandatory No washing of walks, drives, patios, gutters except for health or safety . . r.v•4 Critical,Stage: Reduction Goal 35 Percent or more , • .'SSttskkgitltfig*fStMiSiOfiai*ratDik.j4 General Information: Violation of restrictions and/or water waste may be subject to fines and or delivery restriction or disconnection Single Family, Duplex, and Triplex Residential Lawn watering Mandatory Prohibited Trees, shrubs, perennials, and vegetables Mandatory On permitted day(see Appendix B) using hand-held hoses, hand-held buckets, or drip irrigation only Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Mandatory Prohibited between the hours of 10 AM and 6 PM New Landscape Mandatory No new landscapes without permit(see Appendix G) Pools and Jacuzzis Mandatory May not be filled Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Mandatory May not be filled Hard-surface washing Mandatory No washing of walks, drives, patios, gutters Personal vehicle washing Mandatory Prohibited Business, Multi-family Apartments, and Home Owners Associations • All Businesses, Industries, and Commercial Users Mandatory Develop a plan to reduce consumption by at least 35 percent; Develop and/or adopt, and implement Best Management Practices for Water Conservation Lawn watering Mandatory Prohibited Trees, shrubs, perennials, and vegetables Mandatory On permitted day(see Appendix B) using hand-held hoses, hand-held buckets, or drip irrigation only Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Mandatory Prohibited between the hours of 10 AM and 6 PM Irrigation System Mandatory Maintain irrigation systems in good working order with no damaged, misaligned, or missing sprinkler heads New Landscape Mandatory No new landscapes without permit(see Appendix G) Pools and Jacuzzis Mandatory May be filled under the following circumstances: pool covers are utilized when pool not in use; lower water level by four(4) inches to reduce loss due to splashing; water sprays into the air may not be operated Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Mandatory May not be filled Hard-surface washing Mandatory No washing of walks, drives, patios, gutters except for health or safety 6/4/2003:Final Draft Page 7 of 8 H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Response Summary.doc Water Conservation Master Plan Water Shortage Response Summary/Water Shortage Contingency Plan Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities Commercial and Fleet Vehicles Mandatory Washing of cars is prohibited (emergency vehicles and instances of public safety are excluded) Commercial Plant Nurseries Mandatory Utilize Best Management Practices (see Appendix F) Hotels/Lodging Mandatory Utilize Best Management Practices; request that laundry not be washed daily unless requested by guest; display table tents or public notice Restaurants Mandatory Will not serve water except upon request; Utilize Best Management Practices Parks, Golf, Schools, and other Public Facilities Lawn Watering Mandatory Not allowed without permit( see Appendix G) • Trees, shrubs, perennials, and vegetables Mandatory Hand-held hoses, hand-held buckets, drip irrigation, or water trucks only Time of Day (applies to over-head sprays only) Mandatory No watering between 10 am and 6 pm New Landscapes Mandatory Prohibited except by permit(see Appendix G) Golf Courses Mandatory Watering greens and tees allowed by permit (see Appendix G); no watering of roughs and fairways unless from non- culinary source Irrigation System Mandatory Maintain irrigation systems in good working order with no damaged, misaligned, or missing sprinkler heads • Fleet vehicle washing Mandatory Not allowed; emergency vehicles excepted Pools and Jacuzzis Mandatory May be filled under the following circumstances: pool covers are utilized when pool not in use; lower water level by four(4) inches to reduce loss due to splashing; water sprays into the air may not be operated Fountains, Waterfalls, and Ponds Mandatory Not allowed 6/4/2003:Final Draft Page of 8 H:\ Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Respor1mmary.doc • Water Conservation Master Plan Appendix A: • Lawn Watering Schedule Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities, Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District, USU Extension Services, Bureau of Reclamation, and Division of Water Resources jointly developed this watering schedule based on historic ET data provided by USU. It is recommended that 1/2 inch of water be applied to the lawn during each interval. With average water pressure and fixed pop-up heads,this would take approximately 21 minutes. It is best that the water be applied in cycles in order to maximize penetration of water into the soil and to the root zone. For example, set the automatic timer to run for seven minutes, repeated three times,with one hour between each cycle to achieve 21 minutes or 1/2 inch of water per interval. But keep in mind this schedule is based on averages, and your lawn may require a different cycle time, and you may need to water less frequently. Lawn Watering Schedule Month Interval (1/2 inch of water per interval) Startup until April 30 Only as necessary; no watering if there is rain May Once every 4 days • June, July, and August Once every 3 days • . September Once every 6 days October to shutdown Once every 10 days; no watering if there is rain Watering less frequently and more deeply will save water,money, and time by reducing water consumption, decreasing the need for frequent fertilizer applications, lessening the likelihood of disease, reducing the presence of weeds, and making your long stronger and healthier. It is also recommended that mowing heights be adjusted to 2-1/2 to 3 inches. Longer grass blades mean deeper roots and shaded soil,thus reducing water demand. An added benefit to mowing higher is that weed seeds are more lightly to be shaded and less likely to germinate and that translates to fewer weeds. Regularly check your irrigation system for misaligned, broken, or missing sprinkler heads. Conducting annual irrigation audits can help you in identifying system inefficiencies and fine tuning your irrigation schedule. 41111 Appendix A SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Appendix A.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com Water Conservation Master Plan Appendix B: Limited Lawn Watering Schedule , This watering schedule is to be followed when a STAGE 3—SEVERE water shortage has been declared. Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Even No -Home Odd Even -Home Odd Addresses Watering Owners Addresses Addresses Owners Addresses Associations Associations Single- Public -Apartments Single-family Single- -Apartments Single- family Utilities -Multi-family residential family -Multi-family family residential approved (Duplex, residential (Duplex, residential exceptions 3plex, etc) 3plex, etc) only -Government -Government Even or Odd Addresses Determined by the last digit of the home address Watering Hours 6 PM to Midnight on your assigned watering day Midnight to 10 AM on your assigned watering day • • Appendix B SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Appendix B.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com Water Conservation Master Plan Appendix C: • Irrigation Targets Meters that are read only during non-winter months are referred to as irrigation-only accounts. Under the Department of Public Utilities rate structure, irrigation-only accounts receive a water-use target based on a number of factors, including, but not limited to the total area being irrigated, historical evapotranspiration data(ET), landscape coefficients, and demand levels, with each account receiving a unique target. The formula used to calculate each water-use target was developed by the Utah State University, utilizing local ET data. Water used within the target will be billed,per unit, in Tier 2; water consumption exceeding the target will be billed, per unit, in Tier 3. All water customers receiving a water target should strive to maintain their irrigation system in optimum operating standards to maximize efficiencies and minimize water waste. During periods of declared water shortages, irrigation-only accounts may be called upon to make measurable reductions in outdoor water consumption so as to help in reducing overall water demand. For information on how to save water in the landscape, refer to Appendix F: Best Management Practices for the Green Industry, or visit www.slcsaveh2o.com. • • Appendix C SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Appendix C.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com Water Conservation Master Plan Appendix D: Hotel and Lodging Water Conservation Best Management Practices Water conservation needs to be a part of our daily activities. The hotel and lodging industry offers many opportunities to save water without compromising the quality of the visit or public health and safety. The average-sized hotel, with 150 rooms, can save about$30,000 a year if 65 percent of their guests participate in a linen-reuse program. Every employee needs to understand the importance of conservation, and be educated on water saving practices and how their job affects water use. Make conservation part of their job and part of the day to day work environment. Consider using this simple three step process • Educate and involve all employees on water conservation • Locate all water-using sources (dishwashing machines,wash sinks, cooling water, HVAC, etc in your facility) and examine for leaks, check for inefficiencies, and conduct repairs • Identify and implement water conservation practices Icemakers • Replace old icemakers with new air-cooled,water efficient model. The useful life of an icemaker is about five years • Use ice flake machines rather than ice cube machines • Use softened water in ice cube machines to minimize bleed-off • Collect spent cooling water from water-cooled icemakers and use it for non-potable purposes such as mopping floors •' Laundry • Operate laundry equipment with full loads only • Reduce water levels, if possible, for partial loads '• Replace or modify existing conventional laundry equipment(e.g., washer-extractors)to reduce water use • Install a computer-controlled rinse water reclamation system • Install a wash and rinse water treatment and reclamation system • Install a continuous-batch washer • Install an electrically generated ozone laundry system • Adjust chemicals or washer program to reduce the number of wash and rinse steps • Avoid excessive backflushing of filters or softeners; backflush only when necessary • Place "save water" notices in guest rooms • Encourage your guests to forego daily linen changes for multiple night visits • Replace conventional washers with high-efficiency, horizontal axis machines Building Maintenance • Replace water-cooled refrigeration units with air-cooled units • Repair leaks and malfunctioning equipment promptly • Install on-demand, point-of-use hot water dispensers where feasible, eliminating the need to run faucets to produce hot water • Appendix D SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Appendix D.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com ♦ 1 Water Conservation Master Plan • Replace worn-out fixtures with water-conserving models • • Install low flow toilets and faucet aerators in restrooms Exterior Areas • Water landscapes only as needed • Remove turf from hard to water areas such as islands in parking lots • Sweep loading docks, sidewalks, and driveways rather than hosing them off • Install rainfall sensors on automatic irrigation systems • Mulch around plants to reduce evaporation and discourage weeds • Do not water on windy or rainy days • Use low angle nozzles when feasible • Avoid using overhead sprinklers or sprays in narrow areas, islands, and medians to eliminate overspray onto hardscape surfaces • Set watering times to reflect plant type • Install pressure reduction valves where pressure exceeds optimum operating levels (30 psi for spray heads and 60 psi for rotor heads) • Utilize pressure compensating and reducing equipment when appropriate • Appendix D SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Appendix D.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com Water Conservation Master Plan Appendix E: Suggested Best Management Practices for Commercial Car Washers • The amount of water used by carwash facilities varies with the type of facility,the cleaning system used, and the utilization of water reclamation and recycling processes. And while recycling can greatly reduce the volume of M&I water used,there are many other ways in which carwash facilities can save water. All Carwash Facilities • Maintain all water devices and equipment to original or improved specifications at all times • Modify existing carwashes to recycle as much water as possible by installing filters, storage tanks, and high-pressure pumping systems • Limit the number of spray nozzles and set flow rates at the minimum volume and pressure required • Take advantage of gravity; place bigger nozzles on top and smaller nozzles on the sides • Replace all nozzles annually • Install automatic shutoff valves or preset timers on faucets and hoses • Increase conveyor speed to reduce rinse cycles to no more than 40 seconds per vehicle • Minimize dripping by replacing or maintaining positive-cutoff solenoid valves at all control points for prewash, wash,hot wax, and rinse • Conduct regular checks for leakage and maintenance of all water-using equipment • Install positive shut-off valves on all wringer sinks 411 • Sweep out bays before washing them; use high-pressure wands instead of hoses • Avoid using water to wash impervious surfaces; broom or use high-pressure, low- volume water systems • Install water-efficient faucets and toilets In addition to implementing the above practices, utilize the following for specific facilities Self-serve • Set a maximum flow of 3.5 gallons per nozzle • Turn off spot-free rinse or recycle reject water • Install a weep management system • Install automatic shutoff valves on hoses or preset timers for self-serve car wash systems • In-Bay Automatic • Ensure that the direction, arch, and timing of sprays on automatic car washes are properly set and that they shut off when no longer in contact with the vehicle • Set timers to create a minimum 5-second dwell time for water to run off into the bay before exiting • Calibrate spray bars to use no more than 55 gallons per basic wash • Appendix E SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation12003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Appendix E.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com Water Conservation Master Plan Conveyor Systems • • Install automatic high-level water cut-offs in all towel and chamois washing machines • Fit all hoses with positive pressure nozzles or automatic timer shut-offs; never leave open hoses unattended • Appendix E SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal PacketWppendix E.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com Water Conservation Master Plan Appendix F: Suggested Best Management Practices for the Green Industry11110 Of the water we use per person, it has been estimated that half of that water goes to the landscape, and of that, as much as half is wasted, or in other words, as much as 25 percent of the total volume of water used for domestic purposes. Summer water usage increases to a peak that is nearly 4 to 5 times more than the typical daily winter consumption, and it is that peak which drives our need to build large infrastructure. By utilizing Best Management Practices in the landscape, whether as a professional or a home or business owner, we can sustain our landscape, reduce dependence on supplemental water and chemicals, while extending the life of existing infrastructure and reducing future costs to the community. Using water more wisely protects this vital, finite resource, improves the health of our landscape, and maintains our quality of life. All Green Industries • Educate employees on water quality and conservation practices • Model and teach water conservation and pollution prevention to customers, the general public, and the industry • Utilize brooms to clean walks, drives, decks, and other impervious areas • Avoid watering, whenever practicable, between the hours of 10 am and 6 pm • Water flowers, shrubs, and trees separately from lawns • Utilize positive pressure nozzles on all hoses • If utilizing an irrigation-only meter, stay within irrigation target(see Appendix..C) • • If not utilizing an irrigation-only meter, follow the recommended watering schedule (see Appendix A)unless directed to follow Watering Schedule B (see • Appendix B) Landscape and Irrigation Design • Make wise choices in the design process to how water will be used consciously choose to use it efficiently and wisely • Select those plants best suited to a particular site, taking into account such things as soil and microclimates • Group plants together with similar water requirements and design and install irrigation to deliver the appropriate amount of water to each group (i.e., "hydrazoning"); water turf areas separately from other landscaped areas • Design, install, and maintain irrigation systems to ensure uniform distribution of water • Limit turf to functional areas, and select the appropriate turf species; use alternative groundcovers where appropriate • -Avoid oscillating sprinklers and sprinkler heads that produce mists or fine sprays • Evaluate soil and improve, if necessary,to promote plant health and maximize water efficiency • Install a rain shut-off device • Establish a site-specific water budget I Appendix F SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Appendix F.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com Water Conservation Master Plan Landscape and Irrigation Maintenance • • Examine irrigation systems to ensure that those systems do not leak and are operating efficiently on a regularly scheduled basis; make needed repairs or adjustments • Hand water brown or dry spots; don't over-water the entire lawn • Turn off irrigation systems when wind or rain is forecast • Mulch flowers, shrubs, and trees to reduce moisture loss due to evaporation, reduce soil loss, suppress weeds, and provide a more uniform soil temperature; avoid using plastic or fiber barriers • Minimize erosion and control sediment • Use pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides responsibly; dispose of unused products properly • Practice regular maintenance such as weeding and appropriate pruning to maximize plant health; healthy plants are more likely to withstand periods of drought than are plants under stress Lawn Maintenance • Adjust or replace sprinkler heads to eliminate over-spray on hardscape, fences, and buildings • Conduct regularly scheduled water audits of both indoor and outdoor water appliances, features, and plumping • Mow lawns to the proper height and at the proper frequency to maintain turf • health,thereby minimizing the need for fertilizer and pesticide application and reducing water usage • Aerate lawns to reduce compaction and improve nutrient uptake and minimize runoff • Leave turf clippings on the lawn to increase organic material and to reduce soil temperature and loss to evaporation; recycle and compost when ever possible, disposing of waste so as to minimize negative environmental impacts Nurseries, Greenhouses and Growers • Properly irrigate crops with the minimum amount of water waste • Utilize positive pressure nozzles to hoses and faucets; never leave operating hoses unattended • Operate to maintain the health of the plants, to conserve water, and to promote water conservation and water resource protection • Appendix F SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Appendix F.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com Water Conservation Master Plan Appendix G: Suggested Best Management Practices for Commercial Water Customers • It is strongly encouraged that each business, in adopting Best Management Practices (BMP), addresses water-use issues relating to that specific business, industry, or work place. The most effective BMPs result from employee involvement and provide for training and verification of implementation. • Generally examine water use, both indoors and out of doors, to eliminate waste • As new landscapes are developed or as established landscapes are renovated, consider how water will be used, and make choices regarding irrigation, plants, and design that use water efficiently and wisely • Examine irrigation systems, indoor plumbing and water-using appliances,to ensure that those systems do not leak and are operating efficiently on a regularly scheduled basis; make needed repairs or adjustments • Adjust or replace sprinkler heads to eliminate over-spray on hardscape, fences, and buildings • Conduct regularly scheduled water audits of both indoor and outdoor water appliances, features, and plumping • If not utilizing an irrigation-only meter, follow the recommended watering schedule (see Appendix A)unless directed to follow Watering Schedule B (see Appendix B) • If utilizing an irrigation-only meter, stay within irrigation target(see Appendix c) • Avoid watering, whenever practicable,between the hours of 10 am and 6 pm • Hand water brown or dry spots; don't over-water the entire lawn • Turn off irrigation systems when wind or rain is forecast • Water flowers, shrubs, and trees separately from lawns • Utilize positive pressure nozzles on all hoses • Avoid using water to wash or clean walks, drives, and gutters • Mulch flowers, shrubs, and trees to retain soil moisture • Use washing machines and dish washers only when full, or adjust water levels accordingly • When installing or replacing appliances, install water-efficient appliances • Become a partner in the EPA Water Alliance for Voluntary Efficiency(EPA- WAVE)program Appendix G • SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Appendix G.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com Water Conservation Master Plan Appendix H: • Suggested Best Management Practices for Restaurant and Food Service Commercial and institutional kitchens use water primarily for food and drink preparation, dishwashing, ice machines, ice cream and frozen yogurt machines, garbage disposers, and scrapping troughs. Additionally, water is used for washing, cleaning, and sanitizing processes (including laundry), plumbing fixtures in restrooms, cooling and heating systems, and landscapes. For BMPs relating to uses not directly related to food preparation, consult the index to locate the appropriate BPMs. Water Audits Conduct regular audits on water-using fixtures and features, being certain to include the following: • Record the number and type of water-using appliances or pieces of equipment, such as dishwashers, garbage disposers, ice makers, faucets, and food scrapping troughs • Determine the average number of loads per day completed by each water-using appliance and piece of equipment • Determine the average number of meals served per day • Determine the amount of time faucets and other continuous-flow appliances are used each day • Identify pipe sizes and estimate flow rates of incoming water supply lines • Catalog dripping faucets, puddles, and leaks • General Practices • Train employees to conserve water, and post signs in the kitchen and other work areas promoting water conservation • Promptly repair leaks and malfunctioning equipment .• Replace appliances and equipment with water-saving models • Recycle water whenever feasible and consistent with regulatory requirements • Become a partner in the EPA Water Alliance for Voluntary Efficiency(EPA- WAVE) program Food and Drink Preparation • Kitchen faucets should use a maximum of 2.5 gpm at 80 psi; if higher flows are needed for utility sinks install a fingertip control valve for aerated or full flow operations • Reduce or eliminate using water to thaw food; if water must be used, reduce flows to minimum need • Turn off continuous flows used to clean drains trays such as those utilized in beverage islands, unless required by law • Install hands-free or foot activated valves and faucets • Serve water to customers only upon request; provide signs at the table or entryway urging water conservation • Appendix H SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal Packet\Appendix H.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com Water Conservation Master Plan • Use the minimum amount of dishware, glasses, utensils, and cookware needed so as to reduce dishwashing loads • • Avoid using water to melt ice in strainers • Wash vegetables and fruits in ponded water; avoid using running water • Install on-demand, point-of-use hot water dispensers to eliminate or reduce the need to run water at faucets; choose a unit that does not require a constantly running recirculation pump • Install automatic shutoff faucets for bar sinks Dishwashers • Presoak and wash items in basins of water instead of under running water • Fit hoses used to wash sinks and kitchen areas with throttling valves on the spigot to reduce water use; these valves should be checked regularly for leaks • Use full loads in sanitizers, sterilizers, dishwashers, and washing machines consistent with sound sanitary practices and infection control requirements • Scrape or brush dishes and cookware rather than using running water or pre-rinse sprayers, when possible • Replace pre-rinse sprayers with water-saving 1.6 gpm sprayers • Install pressure reducing valves on dishwasher supply lines when water pressure exceeds the pressure recommended by the manufacturer • Operate scrapping troughs only during dish washing operations • Wash full loads only in rack-type machines • Turn dishwasher off when not in use Ice Cream and Frozen Yogurt Machines; Walk-in Coolers and Freezers • Replace water-cooled units with air-cooled units, or install storage tanks and re- circulating systems to reuse waste water • Connect water-cooled machines to existing chilled water systems, if possible • Turn off the machines when not in use, if possible Food Disposers • Replace disposers with garbage strainers if possible • Scrape food from dishes and cookware into trash receptacles when possible • Use the minimum acceptable flow of water through the disposer by installing electronic sensors to detect food in the grinding chamber and by installing solenoid valves to stop the flow of water when the disposer is off • Reuse water from the dishwasher in the mixing chamber of the disposer • Eliminate excess water flow by installing pressure reducers on the dispoer's water supply lines per manufacturer's specifications • Replace older disposer models with a model with pre-set controls to reduce the amount of time the disposer is operated • Appendix H SLC Department of Public Utilities H:\Water Conservation\2003 Drought Plan Finals\Drought Plan Transmittal PacketWppendix H.doc www.slcsaveh2o.com