10/07/2021 - Meeting Materials PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRY AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY
This meeting will be an electronic meeting and will not have a physical location. All attendees will
connect remotely. Members of the public are encouraged to participate in meetings.
Formal Meeting
Thursday,October 7,2021
5:00 p.m.—6:30 p.m.
WebEx Virtual Meeting Link:
https://saltlakecity.webex.com/saltlakecity/j.php?MTID=mfc17709ad4face12e2f42ecda24d01 c1
Meeting Number(access code): 2492 252 1480
Meeting Password:4MsdSevje43
Join by Phone: 408-418-9388
AGENDA
1. Convening the Meeting
a. Anchor Location Statement
I, Samantha Finch,Chair of the Parks,Natural Lands,Urban Forest and Trails Advisory
Board hereby determine that conducting public meetings at an anchor location presents a
substantial risk to the health and safety of those who may be present at the anchor location.
Due to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) social distancing requirements,
I find that conducting a meeting at the anchor location constitutes a substantial risk to the
health and safety of those who may be present at the location.
b. Call to Order
c. Chair Comments
Approval of Minutes 5:03 PM
a. Approve September 5, 2021 Meeting Minutes
3. Public Comment Period 5:05 PM
a. Verbal comments are limited to no more than 3 minutes; 12 minutes total.Written
comments are welcome.
4. Discussion Ite
a. Foothills Trails Discussion-Letter of support/recommendation
—Board Discussion 10 Min.
b. Proposed Formation of Trail Alignment Subcommittee(Action Item)
—Samantha Finch 5 Min.
c. Proposed PNUT CIP Prioritization Process—Lewis Kogan 50 Min.
d. Donation Proposals(Action Item)—Kezia Lopez 5 Min.
5. Board Comments & Future Agenda Items (Time Permitting)
a. Board Comment Period
a. Request for Future Agenda Item
b. PNUT Board Field Trip
c. Upcoming Involvement Opportunities
6. Confirmation of Next Meeting
a. November 4,2021
7. Adjourn
PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRY AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY
This meeting will be an electronic meeting and will not have a physical location. All attendees will
connect remotely. Members of the public are encouraged to participate in meetings.
Formal Meeting
Thursday,September 2,2021
5:00 p.m.—6:30 p.m.
WebEx Virtual Meeting Link:
https://saltlakecity.webex.com/saltlakecity/j.php?MTID=ma74a06e4ad64e3b809c22dcb40783be2
Meeting Number(access code): 146 391 5392
Meeting Password: 8Yuw4TpjHz3
Join by Phone: 408118-9388
AL
Minutes (Pending Approval)
Partial Recording: Some items may be incomplete.
1. Convening the Meeting 5:00 PM
a. Anchor Location Statement
I, Samantha Finch, Chair of the Parks,Natural Lands,Urban Forest and Trails Advisory
Board hereby determine that conducting public meetings at an anchor location presents a
substantial risk to the health and safety of those who may be present at the anchor location.
Due to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) social distancing requirements,
I find that conducting a meeting at the anchor location constitutes a substantial risk to the
health and safety of those who may be present at the location.
b. Call to Order '
a. Samantha •
Polly Hart
elanie Pehrs
d. Carroll
e. Br na Binncbose
f. CJ Whittaker
g. Ginger Cannon
h. Jenny Hewson
c. Chair Comments
2. Approval of Minutes
a. Approve August 5,2021 Meeting Minutes
All board members unanimously agreed to approve the August 5, 2021 meeting minutes with the
correction to the sentence: "Regarding the agenda, each topic to be considered at the meeting
must be included in the agenda with the exception to
this being that if a member of the public raises a topic, the board may suggest, and the chair may
allow discussion of the public comments."
3. Public Comment Period 5:05 PM
a. Verbal comments are limited to no more than 3 minutes; 15 minutes total.Written
comments are welcome.
a. Dan Schelling
Dan Schelling,a member of citizen's group Save our Foothills, expressed his concerns regarding the
Foothills Trails Masterplan. Mr. Schelling stated the City Council included a conditional appropriation
clause in the 2021-2022 budget,which requires Public Lands to meet certain criteria related to evaluating
strategies for the preservation and stewardship of the land prior to obtaining funds to work on Phase 2 of
the Foothills Trail Masterplan.
Mr. Schelling stated areas of the Foothills designated as c l habitat study areas have not had habitat
studies take place as of Summer 2021. He also stated the study should to ce over the course of one
year to ensure examination during all four seasons.
Mr. Schelling noted to the PNUT board the land utilized in Phase 2 is located on orest Service land,
which should require NEPA studies prior to trail construction. He also noted the pub unaware if any
portion of the Phase 2 funds are alloca abitat studies.
Mr. Schelling called on the PNUT board to inform City Council that funding included in the Phase 2
budget should not be approved from the City Council until habitat studies have been completed and ask
Public Lands to explain why some areas of the Foothills are included as habitat studies where other areas
are not.
li
b. Jim Webster
Jim Webster raised a comment regarding Miller Bird Refuge and Nature Park. Mr. Webster indicated
after completing a walkthrough of the park with Public Lands staff,he learned that the scope of work in
the park has been expanded considerabl et there is no plan in place to complete this work. He and other
members of the public would like to know n for the park.
f. Discussion Items
a. SLC Public Lands M rplan Draft Review—Nancy Monteith,Anna Laybourn
& Mary Oliver 50 Min.
Nancy Monteith, Senior Landscape Architect and Project Manager for the SLC Public Lands Masterplan,
introduced Design Workshop consultants Anna Laybourn and Mary Oliver,who provided the PNUT
Board with a presentation overviewing the Masterplan.
Ms. Laybourn begin by outlining the Reimagine Nature Planning Process. She indicated that first, a
Public Lands needs assessment took place in 2018-2019. Then, a three phased master plan formulation
comprising of forming a foundation of understanding,drafting vision, goals and transformational projects
and drafting the master plan has taken place during 2020-2021. Following these steps,the Reimagine
Nature SLC Public Lands Implementation Process will take place from 2022-2040.
Ms. Laybourn indicated that during the plan's community engagement windows, over 12,000 community
members provided input. She also emphasized the community engagement efforts had clear
representation of input from a wide range of members of the community. In addition to community
feedback,interdepai tmental communication and collaboration within Salt Lake City was also facilitated.
Ms. Laybourn then outlined the framework of the Masterplan,which consists of a vision statement,three
value lenses, five big goals,ten transformational projects, strategies and actions. She expressed that after
listening to community feedback,updates to this framework have been implemented including an
emphasis on climate change,more robust vision statements and ex ' n of goals.
Ms. Oliver then outlined to the PNUT board the structure of the Mas n's goals. Each goal includes a
goal statement,top strategies to achieve the goal and a progress metric t sure achievement.
Ms. Oliver also indicated that in Chapter 8 of the Master Plan, action strategies to achieve the Master
Plan's goals are outlined in detail. Chapter 8,is considered a"working document",meaning the action
strategies outlined can be modified as needed.
Ms. Oliver indicated the review actions the PNUT Board will complete. She recommended board
members to think about the following actions as they review the Master Plan:
1. Does the plan provide a compe case fo lic Lands,with a vision that inspires and clear
direction forward?
2. Has the plan articulated and captured im nt components in the ten Transformative Projects
that support the five Plan Goals and public input?
3. Ple focus your review on"Chapter 8: Action Strategies"and consider:
a. Ho our comments and feedback for the overall plan support Plan policies, strategies and
actions. se identity where your comments would be applied in the tables.
b. Are we mi any key policies?
c. Within that, are we missing any key strategies for action?
4. What elements of the plan should be promoted to City Council and the community that may
form the basis of a recommendation by the PNUT Board?
Ms. Monteith,Ms. Laybourn and Ms. Oliver concluded their presentation and took questions from the
board.
Board member Jenny Hewson asked for clarification on what guidance they are looking for the PNUT
Board to provide.
Ms. Laybourn responded that Chapter 8 of the Master Plan contains the details of the plans and that they
are looking for recommendations from the board in the form of needed modifications to Chapter 8.
Samantha Finch asked if the consultant team can provide more information on the time frame of the
Master Plan's action steps. Ms. Laybourn responded the action steps of the Master Plan encompass a 20-
year implementation period. Every year,Public Lands staff and others involved will prioritize the actions
included and apply time frames on a rolling basis.
Ginger Cannon proposed that the board forms a sub-committee to review the Master Plan Document and
draft a recommendation letter to City Council.A straw poll was conducted by the PNUT board to form a
sub-committee. The straw poll passed with the quorum of board members present.
Ms. Cannon asked the consultant group to provide clarification regarding how the ten projects, action
items and supporting policies connect.Ms. Laybourn stated the ten transformational projects aid in
describing the ideas of the plan's goals. The transformational projects encapsulate the overall goals the
masterplan strives to accomplish.
b. Introduction&PNUT Board Policies& Procedures—Ashley Cleveland 5 Min.
Ashley Cleveland,Deputy Chief of Staff, introduced herself to the PNU board regarding her role in
assisting the board. Ms. Cleveland shared she will be working with Public Lands and the PNUT board to
look at the framework of the board's structure and sub-committees. She will be rting the onboarding
of new board members and facilitating communication been divisions and depa ts.
Ms. Cleveland also invited the PNUT board to attend the Governor's Office of Economic Development's
Outdoor Recreation Summit, an event that will have an emphasis on trial education.
Ms. Cannon asked Ms. Cleveland to share m*with the board regarding what she does in her new role.
Ms. Cleveland shared that within the Mayor's office,her duty is to assist the Chief of Staff in making sure
department and division directors have the assistance they need regarding interactions with councils,
access to resources through the Mayor's office and assisting with listening to community members.
Ms. Riker expressed that Ms. Cleveland is looking to meet with the PNUT Board to further discuss the
board's policies,procedures and sub-committee formation.
A straw poll was conducted to gauge interest in the board conducting an additional meeting with Ms.
411 Cleveland.
A quorum was reached to establish an in-person meeting with Ms. Cleveland to discuss policies,
procedures and sub-committee formation,with a Doodle Poll conducted to determine board availability.
c. Minor Naming ge to the Mark Smith Memorial Arboretum in
Salt Lake City Cemetery(Action Item)—Tony Gliot 5 Min.
In the absence of Mr. Gliot,Ms. Riker shared that City attorney's recommended amending of the name of
the Mark Smith Memorial Arboretum to the Mark Smith Memorial Arboretum in the Salt Lake City
Cemetery. This change to the name is recommended to provide clarification regarding the location of the
arboretum.
Ms. Hart made a motion to approve the name change as recommended,Mr. Carroll seconded the motion.
The motion to approve the name change passed unanimously.
d. Donation Proposal(Action Item)—Kezia Lopez 5 Min.
Kezia Lopez shared a donation request from the Utah Civic Center to install a pickleball rotation system
at Fairmont Park. The donation request is valued at$942. The Parks Division will be responsible for
installing the system and the community will be responsible for any needed repairs or replacements.
Ms. Cannon asked what the lifespan of the rotation system is.Ms. Lopez responded that she is unsure of
the lifespan. The donation was accepted on the condition that the community is responsible for any future
repairs or replacements.
A motion to approve the donation was made by Mr.Whittaker and seconded by Ms. Binnebose. The
motion to approve the donation passed unanimously by the board.
r5. Board Comments & Future Agenda Items 6:25 PM
a. Board Comment Period
a. Request for Future Agenda Item
i. Ms. Finch—Requested formi b-c Itee regarding creating a 501 c
and supporting the Master Pi items
ii. Mr. Whittaker—Requested an update on the Foothills Trails Masterplan
regarding erosion,vandalism, and the public's reacti to phase 1 of the plan.
Ms. Cannon requested clarification as to why sixty minute is needed to review the Foothills Trails
Masterplan and what topics specifically are being requested for staff to discuss.
Mr. Whittaker stated he would like to understand how the City is re ing to recent erosion,vandalism
and the public's reaction to the first phase. He is worried mistakes fro implementation of the first
phase will be repeated.
1110
Ms. Cannon encourage d members to review the past three months of discussion regarding the
Foothill Trails Plan and the answers staff have provided for questions received in order to provide staff
with specific questions and concerns.
Ms. Riker requested a list of questions from the boarhat are new to staff by email. She shared Public
Lands has proposed a plan to ayor on how the department will move forward. She explained the
plan is currently being reviewe the Mayor and her staff and will share it with the board as soon as
possible.
Ms. Hart stated,assisting to develop master plans is under the purview of the board and inquired as to
why the board can't see what is being put forward.
Ms.Riker shared these are just the next steps the department will be taking and not a master plan. She
explained the department is working together the Mayor the Administration to review and will share with
the board as soon as possible.
b. PNUT Board Field Trip
c. Upcoming Involvement Opportunities
6. Confirmation of Next Meeting 6:29 PM
a. October 7, 2021
7. Adjo 6:30 PM
Ms. Binnebose motioned to adjourn the meeting and Ms. Hart seconded the motion. All board
members unanimously agreed to adjourn the meeting.
from Riker,Kristin to everyone: 5:04 PM
You know more about it,I think you should.
from Cleveland,Ashley to everyone: 5:39 PM
WONDERFUL JOB!!
from Melanie Pehrson to everyone: 5:44 PM
Agreed!
from Cleveland,Ashley to everyone: 5:44 PM
Wonderful!
from Bri Binnebose to everyone: 5:44 PM
That's a great idea Ginger, second that!
from Cleveland,Ashley to everyone: 5:52 PM
BRAVO!
from Cleveland,Ashley to everyone: 6:00 P
We could have a longer retreat styl get together too.
from Cleveland,Ashley to everyone: 6:00 PM
style*
from Bri Binnebose to everyone: 6:00 PM
Agree Polly
from Cleveland,Ashley to everyone: 6:01 PM
Maybe a Friday or weekend`?
from Cleveland,Ashley to everyone: 6:01 PM
Retreat style :)
from CJ Whittaker to everyone: 6:08 PM
I agree, Samantha
from Ginger Cannon to everyone: 6:09 PM
I would like to meet separately in a retreat style format for our policies and procedures discussion wtih
Ashley.
from polly hart to everyone: 6:10 PM
Yes-I agree with Samantha
from Cleveland,Ashley to everyone: 6:11 PM
In person retreat? *
from Ginger Cannon to everyone: 6:11 PM
Please, in person.
from Cleveland,Ashley to everyone: 6:11 PM
Tracy Aviary? *
from Ginger Cannon to everyone: 6:11 PM
I can find us a public location at the University of Ut
from CJ Whittaker to everyone: 6:12 PM
in person would be great
pILfrom Bri Binnebose to everyone: 6.
Love the aviary
from Cleveland,Ashley tolleryone: 6:13 PM No
Bri,it's lovely! Ginger ha a greats stion too
from Riker,Kristin to everyone: 6:13 PM
We can reach out to the Aviary to see if it might be available.
from Ginger Cannon to everyone: 6:13 PM
Thank you Ashley '%
from Riker,Kristlik to everyone: :22 PM
Is the Foothills something we could ive you an update on?
from Riker,Kristin to every=: 6:23 PM
In writing.
from Bri Binnebose to everyone: 6:23 PM
Kristin-I like the written updates,really helpful
IT
Public Lands
Parks I Trails&Natural Lands I Urban Forestry I Golf
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FY 2023
Capital Improvement Program (CIP): Salt Lake City's Capital Improvement Program is a multi-year
planning program for capital expenditures needed to replace or expand the City's public infrastructure.
CIP pays for big projects like parks, public buildings, and street projects. Capital improvements involve
the design, construction, purchase and/or rehabilitation of the City's infrastructure. Each budget year,
money is set aside for CIP.The Council reviews the CIP plan during the annual budget process and
approves the total amount of available funding. Over the summer,the Council further reviews and
appropriates project-specific funding.
Capital Improvement Project: Capital improvements involve the construction, purchase, or renovation
of buildings, parks, streets, or other physical structures.A capital improvement must have a useful life of
five or more years and has a cost ranging between $50,000 and $5 million. A capital improvement is not
a recurring capital outlay item (such as a motor vehicle or a fire engine) or a maintenance expense (such
as fixing a leaking roof or painting park benches).
CIP Application Process Timeline:
• September/October: Public Lands project development and PNUT Board discussion and
approval
• November-December: Application development, cost estimating and application submittal
• January-April: Community Development&Capital Improvements Program (CDCIP) Board
presentations, CDCIP Board review and recommendation of projects to Mayor's Office
• May-July: Mayor's recommended budget (including CIP) is released, and SLC City Council review
• August: Final City Council approval of CIP funds
Categories of Public Lands CIP Projects:
Design: Projects that exceed $500k and or projects that have uncertainty in scope and cost development
are recommended to first be funded for design only. City Council Resolution 29 recommends this
process.The Design phase of projects also includes a public engagement process, project planning,
construction documentation and cost estimating.
Design and Construction: Projects that are generally under$500,000 and are relatively straightforward
in terms of cost estimating and design, or projects that have already gone through the design process
will be included in the Design and Construction category.
Planning: The outcome of these projects is a formalized plan that Public Lands may utilize to guide
future implementation of projects based on goals, objectives and strategies included in the plan.
Planning projects will generally involve robust community engagement and may include some high-level
design alternatives for implementation.
Land Acquisition:The CIP process includes funding for the acquisition of new land for the purposes of
park development and conservation of open space. Land acquisition projects demonstrate specific
locations for desirable acquisition.These projects are generally impact fee eligible and will go through
an approval process through the PNUT board prior to CIP application. Note that some acquisition
projects are instead expedited through a mid-year Budget Amendment process when waiting for the full
budget process could cause the City to lose a potential acquisition in a competitive real estate market.
Capital Renewal Projects: Capital renewal projects secure funding for asset renewal or replacement at
our parks and open spaces citywide.These funds are utilized to make improvements to already-existing
assets, and do not necessarily add services. Each asset has a useful life and requires maintenance or
replacement at a certain point and must be repaired or replaced. Because these generally do not add
new service to public lands, these projects are not ranked and prioritized in the same way as Design,
Construction and Acquisition projects. Public Lands uses an app called Cartegraph to determine current
asset conditions based on age and inspection reports, which determines an Overall Condition Index
(OCI).The OCI then determines the priority within each asset category for a CIP application. Applications
will be put forward on an annual, rotating basis to make citywide replacements to certain asset groups,
such as playgrounds, drinking fountains, sidewalks, courts etc.The assets within each group with the
lowest OCI become the priority for application.
Public Lands CIP Project Sources:
Public Lands has compiled the current list of 34 projects based on projects derived from the following
sources.
• Master Plans or Studies, e.g. Public Lands Master Plans, City Master Plans, Community Master
Plans or other Park Management Plans: City Master Plans have always been a good general
guide for developing our Public Lands network. More recently, Parks completed a system-wide
needs assessment that informed future projects.The next major plan update for Parks is a
system-wide Parks Master Plan.
• SLC Capital Facilities Plan (CFP):The CFP is a 10-year plan for capital improvements throughout
Salt Lake City.The comprehensive plan guides development of growth and forecasts future
needs for existing assets.This is a flexible plan, but contains specific Public Lands project goals
for the next ten years.
• Citizen and stakeholder requests at public forums, letters, etc.
• City Council directives
• Land acquisitions opportunities
• Mayoral or Internal priorities
Project Scoring:
The prioritization of the eligible projects is completed by Public Lands staff through use of a CIP Scoring
System as outlined in the attached chart. Each potential project must first be classified as a CIP project
according to the definition above. If the above criteria are met,the project will be given a project score
to help staff determine the highest priority projects based on the criteria attached below. Each project is
given a score, 0-3,for each of the criteria line items below. Those scores are then weighted according to
the tier listed below. Scores for each criteria were then weighted according to the tiers listed below. The
criteria scores were then added together to give each project a prioritization score which allows the
projects to be ranked.
CIP Project Criteria Tier
Improves environmental quality of the city and its neighborhoods 1
Increases activation of public lands in particular underutilized site or 1
facility
Preserves and protects health and safety of the community 1
Addresses sustainability and climate resiliency 1
Is specifically called out in the PLMP or another Park or Community 1
Master Plan
Is the project located in an identified opportunity zone identified in 1
the Consolidated Plan?
Improves high-use/high-demand site or facility 2
Provides for the renovation of existing facilities resulting in 2
preservation of the community's prior investment
Adds service within a high needs area identified in needs assessment 2
Achieves efficiencies through cross-departmental benefits or project 3
bundling
Leverages funds from other sources 3
Readiness of proposed project phase 3
Decreases operating costs or other significant cost saving 3
Criteria Sources:
This criteria is developed based off of priority areas determined by City Council in Resolution 29,
Administrative Priorities and Public Lands Mission and Master Plan. The following are the sources and
justification for why these criteria were utilized:
• Improves environmental quality of the city and its neighborhoods: Resolution 29. Resolution 29
states specific criteria to which City Council adheres in determining final funding allocations for
CIP.
• Increases activation of public lands in a particularly underutilized site or facility: Public Lands
Master Plan.The Public Lands Master Plan outlies specific priorities and strategies to inform
Public Lands' decisions and actions moving forward.
• Preserves and protects health and safety of the community: Resolution 29
• Addresses sustainability and climate resiliency: Mayor's Priority and Public Lands Master Plan.
The Mayor's Annual Salt Lake City Plan outlines priorities to drive projects and decisions for the
upcoming year.
• Is specifically called out in the Public Lands Master Plan or another Park or Community Master
Plan: Public Lands Master Plan, Community Master Plan. Several departments, communities,
parks and open spaces have their own Master Plans which detail the vision, policies and
framework developed by the community that guide the growth and development of an area or
site over a period of time.
• Improves high-use/high-demand site or facility: Resolution 29
• Provides for the renovation of existing facilities resulting in preservation of the community's
prior investment: Resolution 29
• Adds service within a high-needs area as identified in the Public Lands Needs Assessment: Public
Lands Master Plan. The Public Lands Needs Assessment identified levels of service throughout
Salt Lake City and made recommendations to increase the level of services in low-services areas.
• Achieves efficiencies through cross-departmental benefits or project bundling: Resolution 29
• Leverages funds from other sources: Resolution 29
• Readiness of proposed project phase: Resolution 29
• Decreases operating costs or other significant cost savings: Resolution 29
• Located in an opportunity zone identified in the Consolidated Plan? Mayor's Priority, Public
Lands Master Plan.The Consolidated Plan is a City document that addresses community
development needs and establishes goals, priorities and strategies to address those needs.The
plan outlines an opportunity zone to promote equitable investment in underserved areas.The
opportunity zone corresponds to the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City(RDA) project
areas. These project areas were determined based on low Opportunity Index scores, which were
determined using census data and measured 16 factors, including education, health,
environment, social, economic opportunities throughout Salt Lake City. This criteria is included
as an equity measure. More information regarding the opportunity zone can be found in the
Consolidated Plan.
Funding Sources:
Impact Fees: Impact fees are fees charged to new development for the local government's cost
associated with providing infrastructure to serve the new development. Impact fees can be used only on
projects that contribute additional service to a community.Therefore,these fees can be accessed for
new asset projects, but cannot be applied to asset renewal or updating existing infrastructure, unless a
new service is added.
General Fund: General fund money comes from fees,fines,taxes, licenses and permits, etc. General
Fund dollars can be used on design, planning and asset renewal projects, as well as new infrastructure.
Constituent Requests:
Salt Lake City welcomes and values community input for potential capital improvements throughout the
city.The Constituent application process allows residents to be directly involved in the CIP process. Each
year any constituent can submit an application for a project to be considered during the CIP Process.
The deadline for these submissions is September 30t". Once submitted, constituent request applications
are forwarded to the appropriate city division to evaluate for specific criteria and the alignment with the
Division or City's master plans, Impact Fee Facilities Plan, or Capital Facilities Plan. During this process,
Division staff will collaborate with the applicants concerning the project scope and estimates. After
confirming the necessary criteria are met,the City Division will submit the application for funding
recommendation. If a Division finds that the request application does not meet these criteria and/or
does not align with the City's current priorities, they will not submit the application for funding
recommendation. Please note:The constituent request application deadline is not the final application
submission deadline. Internal divisions are responsible for submitting all final applications for funding
recommendations in late December.
Constituent applications for FY 2022 are not included in the current project list that has been provided
to PNUT board members since the application deadline is still open. On average SLC Public Lands
receives 10-15 constituent applications. A complete list of FY 2023 constituent applications will be
provided to the board following the submission deadline.
Next Steps
Based on anticipated funding allocation, and staff capacity projections for project management,we
recommend moving forward with approximately five design projects,ten design and construction
projects, three planning projects and the four asset replacement projects. Public Lands also generally
works to ensure that there is project representation across all Council Districts with each year's suite of
CIP application submittals. Prior to the December submittal deadline, Public Lands' CIP process will also
be informed by discussions with the PNUT Board and additional information regarding Constituent CIP
applications that are submitted by the September 30th deadline.
Public Lands Proposed CIP Projects FY 2022-2023
.....sdood
5. Parks $100.000 $104000 13005€ 2021-2022 GIP...bon 59
20212022 CIP Appicabon,
I. TOOL Van Farm Development at 2200 W.I.d Cannon Greens 875.000 $73.000 Dd. 58
C.2020-2033,Public Lands
18.2 Pads Jordan Over Tree Ph..and hod. $150.000 $150,000 Dd. 57
W.H.do Master Plan.3021-
Pads 5100.000 $100000 00. 52 02
2
Crit 2023,912.blaster Man,
2021-2022 CIP Appicabon,
pades $1..000 $150,000 Dd. Open Space Master Plan 50
6
5 Ped.F.H. Tree Succession Dd..LA*Park WA. $50000 Dd. 49
Pubic Lards Naster M.N..
I. Pads Jordan Over Paddle Share Development $100.000 $100000 Dd. SLCo 49
Pubic rands Master Pl.CFP
I Pads Rose Pad Grn.Ran.and Ro.Disc Golf Conce.2113.. $1.50.000 $150.0 Dd. 2021 48 CFP 2092,Sustandle Sat Lake
TOOL $1.50.000 $150.3 Dd. Plen 47 Greenways 1
2 0.00.7 UW0000000I00O€€ 5170000 0170. 13 0 .. Plan,2019-2020 CIP Appicabon .I TOOL Pdenneer Nabve Phd Center Nese! $1.50.000 $150400 Dd. 43
3 Pads 575.000 $73.000 Dd. 2019 CFP 34
2019 CFP,2019.20 CIP
4 Pads 875.000 $73.000 Dd. OPINGION 42
RAC vow° slaw,. am, 26 propc.m.sc)
I
1,595,000 $1.5,000
[gig...Gambian
...i...
2 Pads Folsom T.I Landscap.Phase. 1.000000 1.000000 Consbuction Plen 62
CFP 20202023,Pubic Olds
Goon 8. Master Pl.2021-20.CIP
2 TOOL .1 or.Over 1700 Sou.irndovene.(P.ce Labyr.1) Ramo 500000 OPIdoston 60
0.2020-2023,Sustainable Sad
PI Fordby linfordtabon Phrtang 8 000 Tree Ind..) $150.000 8150.000 Consbuction Lake Plan 60
1:1.8n 8. CFP 2023,Mod M.er Ph,
2 TOOL Med Asphalt Pump.. Ramo 250.000 250700 Consbucbon 2021-2092 CIP Oddicabon 48
13.8n 8. COP 2019-20E5,Pubic Lands
2.5.374 500000 250000 270,00 Con... Master Man 47
C..and 2019-2020 CIP,Cemetery
3 Cernetery Geo0[e71007710e.0007[ 530.000 .53400 Consbuction Nester Nan 45
Doon 8.
6O1. 500000 250000 45
13.8n 8. CFP 2010 Pll.Lands Nader
2 TOOL Fisher Cam.Nouse Exhirt S.. 200000 200.00 Consbucbon Plan,2019-2020 CIP Appicabon 45
13.8n 8.
1 504090 250000 250.000 Cowl/lotion CFP 2019 42
13.8n 8.
5 Pads Rotery Playground and Splash Pad at Liberty Park 00,00 SO.. 500.000 CFP 2019 41 821 5100.000 1.104000 2071 73
821 Parks $100. $100000 65
4 $100.000 $1011000 0
2 Parks 51.50.000 S150000 57
All $75,000 575.000 56
$0 0925.000 $505.030
Rcclu,,..
5750.000 5750,000 0,900000 950,4 30 3
S730.000 5750000
ASSET RENEWAL
PROJECTS
CFP.Car,e6"0...mt
C.Wide Pads $1.002000 81400000 C,€4€00000 Condition SePoN
CFG Caste..1 ON..
C717002 Pa. Pubic Lends ADA Welkway Replacement $507,000 S507000 Condition SePoo
Potera locations enae Glendale,Para Way,Goa.
CFP,C,rt®apn Asa Wawa Bar Pak srmua Poplar Grove Wan Spina
c'iy nde Pau Drag Poona]Replacement $ltgofo $100,000 Construction Conawn Rgot Riverside and Rosewood
Replace or through parks
CFP,Carrara Assn ��Salons m;su Coto y enn
Cayw Pau Court Pa Court Pau.. 100.000 .000 Construction Conan Part t watpointe Tenraad Basketball,Riverside Tennis
Ave Renal Torah II.004000 fZRRomR
Ted Project Etli ate. f10.150000 fsAs0.eee f0.fvoaee
v Public Lands
I'T,4
Parks I Trails&Natural Lands I Urban Forestry I Golf
Memorandum
To: Parks,Natural Lands, Urban Forestry, & Trails Advisory Board
From: Lee Bollwinkel, Parks Division Director
Date: September 29, 2021
Re: Proposed Fairmont Park Pickleball Rotation System Donation
Background:
Salt Lake City,Public Lands Department requests the Parks,Natural Lands,Urban Forestry, and Trails Board
to provide a formal recommendation for the donation proposal listed below. Prior to approval, Salt Lake City
will develop a contract for the proposal. Donations to the City are governed by Salt Lake City Code Chapter
3.60. Final donation approval is granted by the Salt Lake City Mayor.
Overview:
Name Donor Amount/Value Description
Kimball Young Foothill Sunnyside $1,500 The Foothill Sunnyside Community Council is
Community Council donating$1,500 to used to cover materials and
labor for painting pickleball court lines on the
Sunnyside Park tennis courts.
Giridhar Giridhar 2 Trees/ Giridhar Thiagarajan is donating two Eastern
Thiagarajan Thiagarajan $500 Redbuds to be planted at Westminster Park.
The trees will be 1.75"caliper and be place on
the northern side of the park.
Charmaine Charmaine Gallegos 1 Tree/$250 Charmaine Gallegos is donating a tree to replace
Gallegos a tree which fell over in last year's windstorm
event. The tree is a London Plane tree,2"
caliper and will be planted on the middle island
on 800 east between 100—200 south.
Deb Sawyer Deb Sawyer 2 Trees/$658 Deb Sawyer is donating two juniper 2"caliper
trees. These will be planted on the west side of
City Creek just above Memory Grove near
Freedom Trail.
The Parks Division has performed its due diligence and finds no reason to reject the proposed donations.
The City's Public Lands Department has conducted the analysis required under Chapter
3.60.070 of the City Code and finds that the proposed donation meets or exceeds all the pertinent
requirements set forth in said Chapter. Because the contemplated donations consist of a park amenity and
labor costs that satisfy all the criteria set forth in Salt Lake City Code
1
Section 3.60.050 and 070 the decision to accept or reject such donations is subject to review and
recommendation from a board or commission or may be requested by the Mayor.
2