12/14/2021 - Meeting MaterialsBoard of Directors of the
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
SALT LAKE CITY
AGENDA
December 14,2021 Tuesday 2:00 PM
Council Work Room
451 South State Street Room 326
Salt Lake City,UT 84111
SLCRDA.com
This is a discussion among RDA Board Directors and select presenters.The public is welcome to listen,
unless otherwise specified as a public comment period.Items scheduled may be moved and /or discussed
during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance or availability of speakers.Item start
times and durations are approximate and are subject to change at the Chair’s discretion.
Generated:18:45:17
The Board has returned to a hybrid meeting approach.Hybrid Board meetings
allow people to join online through Webex or in person at the City &County
Building.
Public Comments:The public can give comments to the Board during their
2 p.m.meetings online through Webex and in-person in Room 326 of the City and
County Building.For more information,including Webex connection information,
please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings.(A phone line will also be
available for people whose only option is to call in.)
What to Expect:The hybrid format allows in-person participation and remains
mindful of existing COVID-19 protocols and gathering limits.A maximum of 24
people,including Council members and City staff,will be permitted in a meeting
room.If the capacity has been reached in the primary meeting room,overflow
space will be provided.Social distancing will be maintained.
Per an executive order signed by Mayor Mendenhall,face coverings are required
for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals inside Salt Lake City facilities.
A.Comments:
1.General Comments to the Board ~2:00 p.m.
5 min
The RDA Board of Directors will receive public comments regarding Redevelopment
Agency business in the following formats:
1.Written comments submitted to RDA offices,451 South State Street,Suite 118,P.O.
Box 145455,Salt Lake City,UT.84114-5455.
2.Comments to the RDA Board of Directors.(Comments are taken on any item not
scheduled for a public Hearing,as well as on any other RDA Business.Comments are
limited to two minutes.)
B.Public Hearing -individuals may speak to the Board once per public hearing topic
for two minutes,however written comments are always accepted:
NONE.
C.Redevelopment Agency Business -The RDA Board of Directors will receive
information and/or hold discussions and/or take action on:
1.Approval of Minutes ~2:05 p.m.
5 min.
The Board will approve the meeting minutes of Tuesday,February 9,2021;Tuesday,May
4,2021;and Tuesday,July 20,2021.
2.RDA Audit Review and Approval for Fiscal Year 2020-21 ~2:10 p.m.
15 min.
The Board will review and consider approval of the Fiscal Year 2020-21 RDA Audit,which
shows the Agency's financial conditions as of June 30,2020.
3.Informational:Release of 9 Line Project Area Seed Funds ~2:25 p.m.
20 min.
The Board will consider a straw poll to release 9 Line Project Area Seed Funds.This would
fund the construction of a crosswalk at approximately 745 West and the environmental
remediation of the RDA’s property at 877 West 400 South.
4.Resolution:Housing Development Loan Funding Allocations for
Affordable Housing
~2:45
p.m.
20 min.
The Board will be briefed about,and will consider approving,a resolution that would
provide inexpensive loans for qualified affordable housing projects as part of the Housing
Development Loan Program.A selection committee has recommended that $5.3 million
of the $8.0 million made available by the RDA Board for this year be allocated to four
applicants to incentivize development and preservation of affordable housing within City
boundaries.
5.Resolution:RDA Sustainable
Development Policy ~3:05 p.m.
20 min.
The Board will receive a briefing about,and consider adopting a resolution that would
approve the Sustainable Development Policy.The purpose of the RDA sustainable
development policy is to promote a built environment that incorporates sustainable
building practices and technologies to reduce building-related greenhouse gas emissions,
improve local air quality,preserve natural resources and enhance community resiliency.
6.Resolution:Potential Revisions to the
Guiding Framework ~3:25 p.m.
20 min.
The Board will receive a briefing about,and consider adopting a resolution that would
approve the revisions to the RDA guiding framework for Mission and Values.The
framework is an operational document that strategically guides and prioritizes the RDA’s
work.The RDA has utilized the framework throughout the past two years to analyze
requests for Agency financial assistance.During that time,RDA staff has noted where the
framework might be improved to better serve its purpose.Potential changes to the
framework include centering equity and inclusion and adding several housing related
benchmarks among other suggested revisions.
7.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director TENTATIVE
5 min.
Report of the Executive Director,including a review of information items,
announcements,and scheduling items.The Board of Directors may give feedback or
policy input.
8.Report and Announcements from RDA Staff TENTATIVE
5 min.
The Board may review Board information and announcements.The Board may give
feedback on any item related to City business,including but not limited to;
•Project Completions;
•Staff Updates;
•Gallivan;and
•Scheduling Items.
D.Written Briefings –the following briefings are informational in nature and
require no action of the Board.Additional information can be provided to the Board
upon request:
1.Informational:Redevelopment Semi-Annual Property Report
The Board will receive a written briefing of all Tier 1 and Tier 2 properties owned by the
RDA,as per the Land Disposition Policy.The November 2021 report includes the
description,address,parcel ID,size,zoning and tier category of each property.In
addition,the report details approximate acquisition date,current category of disposition,
interim use and proposed permanent use for each property.
E.Consent –the following items are listed for consideration by the Board and can be
discussed individually upon request.A motion to approve the consent agenda is
approving all of the following items:
NONE.
F.Closed Session
The Board will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session.A closed meeting described under
Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including,but not limited to:
1.discussion of the character,professional competence,or physical or mental health of
an individual;
2.strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation;
3.strategy sessions to discuss the purchase,exchange,or lease of real property:
(i)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration;or
(ii)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible
terms;
4.strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property,including any form of a water
right or water shares,if:
(i)public discussion of the transaction would:
(A)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration;
or
(B)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible
terms;
(ii)the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered
for sale;and<
(iii)the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the
sale
5.discussion regarding deployment of security personnel,devices,or systems;and
6.investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct.
A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to
Utah Code §78B-1-137,and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of
the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act.
G.Adjournment
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
On or before 5:00 p.m.on _____________________,the undersigned,duly appointed City Recorder,does
hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1)posted on the Utah Public Notice Website created under
Utah Code Section 63F-1-701,and (2)a copy of the foregoing provided to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the
Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others who have indicated interest.
CINDY LOU TRISHMAN
SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER
Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda,including but not limited
to adoption,rejection,amendment,addition of conditions and variations of options discussed.
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation,which may include alternate
formats,interpreters,and other auxiliary aids and services.Please make requests at least two business days in
advance.To make a request,please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com,
801-535-7600,or relay service 711.
PENDING MINUTES –NOT APPROVED
The Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency (RDA)of Salt Lake City met on Tuesday,February 9,
2021 in an Electronic Meeting,pursuant to the Chair’s determination and Salt Lake City Emergency
Proclamation No.2 of 2020(2)(b).
The following Board Members were present:
Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Present Agency Leadership:
Mayor Erin Mendenhall
Danny Walz –Chief Operating Officer
Present City Staff:
Katherine Lewis –City Attorney,Allison Parks –Senior City Attorney,Lauren Parisi –Project Manager,
Tammy Hunsaker –Deputy Chief Operating Officer,Kory Solorio –Assistant City Recorder,Jennifer Bruno
–Council Deputy Director,Allison Rowland –City Council Staff,Amanda Lau –City Council Staff,Robert
Nutzman –City Council Staff
Full Meeting Audio
Meeting Packet Material
Director Chair Valdemoros presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 2:00 pm
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,February 9,2021
1
A.Comments:
1.General Comments to the Board ~2:00 p.m.
5 min
The RDA Board of Directors will receive public comments regarding Redevelopment Agency business in
the following formats:
1.Written comments submitted to RDA offices,451 South State Street,Suite 118,P.O.Box 145455,Salt
Lake City,UT.84114-5455.
2.Comments to the RDA Board of Directors.(Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for a
public Hearing,as well as on any other RDA Business.Comments are limited to two minutes.)
Minutes:
Director Valdemoros presented the rules of decorum.
Casey McDonough commented on the Utah Theater sale agreement and concerns about the sale and
the lack of affordable housing option at the site.
B.Public Hearing -individuals may speak to the Board once per public hearing topic for two
minutes,however written comments are always accepted:
NONE.
C.Redevelopment Agency Business -The RDA Board of Directors will receive information
and/or hold discussions and/or take action on:
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,February 9,2021
2
1.Approval of Minutes ~2:05 p.m.
5 min.
The Board will approve the meeting minutes of Tuesday,May 5,2020 and Tuesday,January 12,2021.
Motion:
Moved by Director Johnston,seconded by Director Fowler to approve minutes from May 5,2020
and January 12,2021.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,
James Rogers
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
2.Resolution:Adopting an Updated RDA Art Policy ~2:10 p.m.
5 min.
The Board will confirm the adoption of a resolution for an updated RDA Art Policy.The RDA’s original
policy,adopted in 1990,authorized 1%of certain Agency construction project budgets for public art.The
RDA is proposing the Agency’s art policy change to 1.5%and to include additional ongoing annual
funding,RDA tools,and incentives to promote art.
Motion:
Moved by Director Johnston,seconded by Director Mano to adopt and confirm RDA Resolution 3
of 2021,Adopting an Updated RDA Art Policy.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,
James Rogers
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
Minutes:
Danny Walz stated items C2 and C3 were resolutions that the Board adopted in December and due to
noticing and scheduling issues they were present today for confirmation of the adoption.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,February 9,2021
3
3.Resolution:Housing Allocation Policies ~2:15 p.m.
5 min.
The Board will confirm approval of the draft RDA Housing Allocation Funds Policy,which was given
preliminary approval in December 2020.The draft Housing Allocation Funds Policy establishes
guidelines for allocating funding and directing resources to develop and preserve housing in the City.
Minutes:
No further discussion was held.
Motion:
Moved by Director Fowler,seconded by Director Johnston to adopt and confirm RDA Resolution 4
of 2021,Housing Allocation Funds Policy.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,
James Rogers
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
4.Informational:Housing Development Loan Program Policy ~2:20 p.m.
20 min.
The Board will be briefed about the proposed Housing Development Loan Program Policy.The draft
Housing Development Loan Program Policy creates a program that would centralize the application,
underwriting,and approval process to streamline access for developers.
Minutes:
Allison Rowland,Danny Walz,Tammy Hunsaker,and Allison Parks briefed the Board,
provided additional information to Board Members through an email answering questions concerning
the program.
A discussion ensued regarding:
•The intent relating to the sustainability and green design of building requirements.
•Modifying the language in the intent statement to include a mix of household incomes across unit
types.
•The interest rate,how it was calculated each year,and if it should be tied to a market index.
•How and when the Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)would be outlined each year to support
the development and financial health of the City and how smaller projects would be assisted
with funding if it was only set forth once a year.
◦It was determined that conversations may need to be held yearly,monthly and possibility
weekly to help accommodate the requests by developers.
•How the program was going to be monitored or required.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,February 9,2021
4
5.Informational:Disposition of Real Property for Block 70 Project Area
Development (Walker Center)Follow-up
~2:40
p.m.
20 min.
The Board will receive a follow-up briefing about the sale of RDA-owned property at 156 South Regent
Street in the Block 70 Project Area.The 3,111 square-foot parcel is located underneath the Walker Center
garage overhang.
Minutes:
Danny Walz briefed the Board regarding the property on Regent Street and stated the Redevelopment
Agency (RDA)was taking new direction with the project that did not require Board approval.
6.Informational:Update on Sales Pricing Terms of the Utah Theater and
Adjacent Retail Property at 144-158 South Main Street ~3:00 p.m.
30 min.
The Board will receive an update about requirements to the sales pricing terms of RDA-owned property at 144 –158
South Main Street.As part of the potential project,the Board requested any redevelopment include certain public
benefits such as affordable housing,a mid-block walkway,and repurposing of some historic elements of the theater.
Upon approval of the sales pricing terms to Hines Acquisitions and 160 Main LLC in December 2019,the Board also
required green open space in addition to the mid-block walkway and historic documentation of the theater.The public
can access the Pantages Theater Archive here:https://pta.lib.utah.edu/
Minutes:
Danny Walz,Tammy Hunsaker,and Lauren Parisi briefed the Board with attachments regarding
the history of the building and the proposed development of the parcel.
Discussion was held regarding:
•Ownership of decor elements,salvaging components,if the Board would be involved in the final
discussions of sale,and the preservation of elements
•Public access to the park and possible events
◦A more in depth discussion regarding the park may be held at a future meeting
•Size of the affordable units in the proposed development
•Timeline for the project
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,February 9,2021
5
7.Motion:Meeting Remotely Without an Anchor Location ~3:30 p.m.
5 min.
The Board will consider a motion to ratify the determination that the Board will continue to meet
remotely and without an anchor location under HB5002.
Motion:
Moved by Director Johnston,seconded by Director Mano to ratify the determination.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,
James Rogers
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
8.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director TENTATIVE
5 min.
Report of the Executive Director,including a review of information items,announcements,and
scheduling items.The Board of Directors may give feedback or policy input.
Minutes:
No report was given at this time.
9.Report and Announcements from RDA Staff TENTATIVE
5 min.
The Board may review Board information and announcements.The Board may give feedback on any item
related to City business,including but not limited to;
•Update on $700,00 of CARES Act Funding How It Was Split and Recipient Locations;and
•Scheduling Items.
Minutes:
Danny Walz provided Board Members with information about the CARES Act funding distribution.
10.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair TENTATIVE
5 min.
Report of the Chair and Vice Chair.
Minutes:
Director Valdemoros recognized Greg Mikolash,a long-time City employee who recently passed away.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,February 9,2021
6
D.Written Briefings –the following briefings are informational in nature and require no action of
the Board.Additional information can be provided to the Board upon request:
1.Informational:University of Utah Research Park Project Area Creation Update
The Board will receive a written update about potential creation of the University of Utah Research Park
Project Area.In January 2020,the Board adopted a boundary survey resolution which started the process
to determine whether project area development is feasible within the survey area.RDA Staff will update
the Board on creating a draft Community Reinvestment Area (CRA)plan and next steps for consultants to
analyze any future development.
Minutes:
Written briefing only.
E.Consent –the following items are listed for consideration by the Board and can be
discussed individually upon request.A motion to approve the consent agenda is approving
all of the following items:
1.Resolution:Amending the 9 Line Community Reinvestment Project Area Budget
The Board will set the date of Tuesday,March 23,2021 to accept public comment about,and may
consider adopting,a resolution amending the 9-Line project area budget based on the terms of interlocal
agreements with participating taxing entities.
Motion:
Moved by Director Fowler,seconded by Director Rogers to approve the Consent Agenda.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James
Rogers
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,February 9,2021
7
F.Tentative Closed Session
The Board will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session.A closed meeting described under Section
52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including,but not limited to:
1.discussion of the character,professional competence,or physical or mental health of an individual;
2.strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation;
3.strategy sessions to discuss the purchase,exchange,or lease of real property:
(i)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration;or
(ii)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms;
4.strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property,including any form of a water right or water
shares,if:
(i)public discussion of the transaction would:
(A)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration;or
(B)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms;
(ii)the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale;and<
(iii)the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale
5.discussion regarding deployment of security personnel,devices,or systems;and
6.investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct.
A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code §
78B-1-137,and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public
Meetings Act.
Minutes:
Item not held
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,February 9,2021
8
G.Adjournment
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
On or before 5:00 p.m.on _____________________,the undersigned,duly appointed City Recorder,does hereby certify that
the above notice and agenda was (1)posted on the Utah Public Notice Website created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701,and (2)
a copy of the foregoing provided to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any
others who have indicated interest.
CINDY LOU TRISHMAN
SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER
Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda,including but not limited to adoption,
rejection,amendment,addition of conditions and variations of options discussed.
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation,which may include alternate formats,interpreters,and
other auxiliary aids and services.Please make requests at least two business days in advance.To make a request,please contact the
City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com,801-535-7600,or relay service 711.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,February 9,2021
9
Motion:
Moved by Director Johnston,seconded by Director Dugan to adjourn the meeting.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Andrew Johnston,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James
Rogers
Final Result:7 –0 Pass
Meeting adjourned at 3:30 pm
Minutes Approved:
______________________________
Redevelopment Agency Chair
______________________________
City Recorder
This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as additional discussion may have been held;please
refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203(2)(b).
This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the Salt Lake City
Redevelopment Agency meetings (afternoon and evening)held 09 February 2021.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,February 9,2021
10
PENDING MINUTES –NOT APPROVED
The Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency (RDA)of Salt Lake City met on Tuesday,
May 4,2021 in an Electronic Meeting,pursuant to the Chair’s determination and Salt Lake City
Emergency Proclamation No.2 of 2020(2)(b).
The following Board Members were present:
Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James Rogers
Present Agency Leadership:
Danny Walz –Chief Operating Officer
Present City Staff:
Katherine Lewis –City Attorney,Kimberly Chytraus –Senior City Attorney,Cara Lindsley
–Project Manager,Lauren Parisi –Project Manager,Tammy Hunsaker –Deputy Chief
Operating Officer,DeeDee Robinson –Minutes and Records Clerk,Allison Rowland –Council
Public Policy Analyst,Jennifer Bruno –Council Deputy Director,Robert Nutzman –City
Council Staff,Amanda Lau –City Council Staff,Cindy Gust-Jenson –Council Executive
Director
Full Meeting Audio
Meeting Packet Material
Director Chair Valdemoros presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 2:05 pm
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,May 4,2021
1
A.Comments:
1.General Comments to the Board ~2:00 p.m.
5 min
The RDA Board of Directors will receive public comments regarding Redevelopment
Agency business in the following formats:
1.Written comments submitted to RDA offices,451 South State Street,Suite 118,P.O.
Box 145455,Salt Lake City,UT.84114-5455.
2.Comments to the RDA Board of Directors.(Comments are taken on any item not
scheduled for a public Hearing,as well as on any other RDA Business.Comments are
limited to two minutes.)
Minutes:
George Chapman spoke regarding reconfiguring/expanding TRAX in the Ballpark/400
West area and suggested to instead use impact fees to provide a park,inquire with
surrounding residents/businesses on what they wanted in the area,the Ballpark area
deserved additional mixed income/affordable housing,the area needed a 10 foot wide
sidewalk to comfortably access TRAX (for pedestrians/bicyclists),and urged the Board to
re-evaluate the project/loan proposal.
B.Public Hearing -individuals may speak to the Board once per public hearing topic
for two minutes,however written comments are always accepted:
NONE.
C.Redevelopment Agency Business -The RDA Board of Directors will receive
information and/or hold discussions and/or take action on:
1.Motion:Meeting Remotely Without an Anchor Location ~2:05 p.m.
5 min.
The Board will consider a motion to ratify the determination that the Board will continue
to meet remotely and without an anchor location under HB5002.
Motion:
Moved by Director Mano,seconded by Director Dugan to ratify the Chair’s decision.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James
Rogers
Final Result:6 –0
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,May 4,2021
2
2.Resolution:Loan to Colony B LLC for Affordable Housing
Development at Approximately 228 West 1300 South
~2:10
p.m.
20
min.
The Board will receive a briefing about,and will consider approving,a loan to Colony B
LLC for an affordable housing development at approximately 228 West 1300 South.The
project will contain 140 residential units with 106 units affordable to households earning
50%of the area median income (AMI)and below for a minimum of 50 years.
Minutes:
Allison Rowland provided an introduction to the proposal,loan program details,noted
the Housing Trust Fund (HTF)Advisory Board unanimously recommended approval of
the loan,and said the Board was anticipated to take action on May 18,2021.
Katherine Lewis introduced Sara Montoya (new Senior City Attorney assisting the
RDA),provided Ms.Montoya’s history/prior experience,indicated she would be taking
over all City and RDA loans,and welcomed her to the team.
Lauren Parisi and Tammy Hunsaker provided information regarding Colony B
Multi-Family Housing loan request,including:
•Site location
•Applicant prior experience (affordable housing development)
•Project details –five-story building,140 units,one-bedroom and studios provided,
etc.
•Financial overview –total project cost $21,047,807,tax credit details,funding
sources,etc.
•Project projected to generate a positive cash flow for entire 16-year investor period
•Construction projected to start in July 2021
•Loan terms –16-year term,$1,340,000 total loan amount,qualifying for .25%
interest rate reduction due to proximity to transit,applicant’s request for an
additional 1.55%in interest rate reduction (RDA Staff having recommended approval
of this reduced interest rate),etc.
•Project aligning with multiple policies in the City’s housing plan (high number of
deeply affordable units,proximity to transit,etc.)
•City funding sources
Director Mano expressed concern regarding lack of ground level commercial
space (ground floor not ideal for residential due to proximity to transit/pedestrians
–commercial space would help revitalize the neighborhood)and family-sized housing for
this area of the City,but indicated his support for the project.
Director Fowler expressed appreciation for a project that reserved space for those who
were aging out of foster care and commended/thanked the applicant for considering this
vulnerable population.She inquired if there was a way to continue providing space
specifically for this population.Jake Williams (developer/applicant)noted the
possibility of partnering with the nearby Volunteers of America (VOA)to keep a running
list of those in need to keep those dedicated spaces filled.He also shared ways pedestrian
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,May 4,2021
3
traffic and transit would be buffered from residential units and that by seeking the
maximum amount of units allowed for more affordable units.
Director Rogers echoed Director Fowler’s appreciation for consideration of the targeted
population and said he saw it as a win-win public/private partnership and applauded the
developer’s efforts with this project.
Kimberly Chytraus responded to Director Fowler’s question regarding continuation of
targeted population housing in the project and detailed current loan agreement
restrictions (typically 50-years)and spoke on the City’s ability to incentivize
keeping vulnerable populations housed in the project through various programs and new
policies going forward.
Director Wharton said he also wanted to see more projects like this where vulnerable
populations/youth leaving the foster system were considered and appreciated the project
included a mix of different groups that were traditionally underserved.
Jake Williams and Josh Runhaar (representing Neighborhood Nonprofit)provided
information regarding history of similar projects,partnership details,inspiration for the
project,benefits to the residents (proximity to transit and VOA),location of
accessible/ADA units within the building,and shared hopes that this project was the first
of many to come.
Director Valdemoros inquired why family-sized units did not meet the requirements for
the project.Mr.Williams responded it was due to land constraints (small site),
construction costs were high,and found it was more cost effective to build smaller units.
He added there was consideration for another project on North Temple to include
larger/family-sized housing.
Motion:
Moved by Director Dugan,seconded by Director Fowler to adopt RDA Resolution 8 of
2021,approving a loan of $1,340,000 to Colony B,LLC for an affordable
housing project at approximately 228 West 1300 South.
AYE:Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James
Rogers
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,May 4,2021
4
3.Resolution:Fiscal Year 2021-22 Affordable Housing Development
Funding Priorities
~2:30
p.m.
30 min.
The Board will receive a briefing about,and will consider adopting,a resolution that
would adopt housing funding priorities for Fiscal Year 2021-22.The proposed funding
priorities for the upcoming fiscal year will provide policy direction for RDA staff on
affordable housing developments eligible for subsidies.The Board will discuss the total
funding amount of housing dedicated to affordable housing developments,and the
allocation of this amount among different program categories,on May 18,2021.
Minutes:
Allison Rowland provided an introduction to the proposed resolution and noted the
goal today was to discuss priorities/provide policy direction to RDA Staff with potential
action scheduled for May 18,2021.
Danny Walz and Tammy Hunsaker provided information regarding:
Fiscal Year (FY)2022 Housing Strategy &Funding Priorities
•Housing Budget &Administration Workflow –Administration of housing
activities according to budget allocations and Board-adopted policies
•Revenues &Expenses –RDA’s four housing funds collectively total $4,732,627 in
revenue,$3,482,627 was proposed for the Housing Development Loan Program,$1
M set aside for a strategic site acquisition,$250,000 for an accessory dwelling unit
(ADU)program (revenues from the Inland Port),$5,654,228 available from prior
year budget (funds left over from current FY that could be utilized with FY 2022
resources to be provided through a new Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)),with
a total of $10,386,855 to deploy for housing development for FY 2022
•Funding Priorities –(Utilized to rank/compare applications through NOFA and
provide interest rate reductions for projects):Family Housing,Target Populations,
Neighborhood Safety,Missing Middle &Unique Housing Types,Homeownership,
Sustainability,Expand High-Opportunity Areas,Neighborhood Impact,
Transportation Opportunities,Historic Preservation/Adaptive Use,Commercial
Vitality,Public Art,and Funding Leverage
•Impact Targets –Availability of $10,386,855 planned to be leveraged at 1:15 ratio
(RDA funds to total cost)with $150,000,000 in capital for affordable housing
deployed into the City;estimating 45 high opportunity affordable units,116 units at
50%AMI and below,232 affordable units,348 total units,and 10 development
projects
•Activities –Housing Development Loan Program;three NOFA types:City-wide,
Emergency Gap,and High Opportunity totaling $9,106,400.Strategic Site
Acquisition;funds potentially used for distressed motels,properties in target
locations,and other properties that aligned with RDA project area goals/City’s
objectives.Accessory Dwelling Unit Program;targeting the 9 Line area for
implementation,anticipating two projects with available funding (financing,
technical assistance,design competition for standardized ADU plans for the
community,etc.)
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,May 4,2021
5
•Board’s Role –Adoption of Housing Policies (Housing Allocation Funds Policy
adopted February 2021 and Housing Development Loan Program Policy adopted
March 2021),adoption of RDA’s annual budget (including revenue and expenses for
housing),and adoption of Annual Housing Funding Priorities as proposed through
the Annual Housing Development Funding Strategy
Director Rogers said blighted properties should have a higher priority on the list and
suggested to remove the Northwest Quadrant (NWQ)funds from this list and initiate a
community land trust for affordable homeownership/economic growth on the Westside.
He added he did not feel comfortable distributing funds until he explored all options in
regards to the community land trust because it had not been done before and wanted to
create an environment where the RDA was funding it and creating affordable housing
(rentals,etc.–including market)to supplement the affordability component.
Jennifer Bruno explained that there were models in different areas that had not
necessarily been explored and there was a community land trust line item located in
Housing &Neighborhood Development (HAND)that did not preclude the RDA from
participating in a community land trust with City-wide housing or NWQ housing funds,as
long as they operated within the legal requirements of each funding source.
Director Wharton inquired on why there was funding set aside for Acquisition when it had
not been set aside in previous years ($1 M not being sufficient for potential properties).
Ms.Hunsaker noted no specific properties had been identified at this point and it was
added in the budget for future opportunities,realizing $1 M might not be enough,but it
would be available to assemble other resources to get a property purchased.
Director Fowler thanked RDA Staff for recognizing the Board’s intents/goals and
implementing them into the plan/priorities (emphasis of 10%needing to be spent on the
westside,importance of homeownership,etc.).She added that the community land trust
idea was worth exploring further.
Director Dugan expressed the importance of the priorities being sustainable (and not
necessarily incentivized to be sustainable),and discussed how family-housing,missing
middle housing,homeownership,etc.should be incentivized.Ms.Hunsaker said the RDA
was currently working on a sustainability policy and the Mayor’s direction to RDA
Staff had been to implement stricter sustainability requirements by 2023.She said
the transition over the next few years would be through incentivizing sustainability
aspects of projects,and preparing community partners and the development community
(through outreach)for what was to come in 2023.
Further discussion was held regarding ranking/balancing priorities,how many priorities
should be met to qualify for funding,and making more informed decisions once the
budget had been presented.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,May 4,2021
6
4.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director TENTATIVE
5 min.
Report of the Executive Director,including a review of information items,
announcements,and scheduling items.The Board of Directors may give feedback or
policy input.
Minutes:
Item not held.
5.Report and Announcements from RDA Staff TENTATIVE
5 min.
The Board may review Board information and announcements.The Board may give
feedback on any item related to City business,including but not limited to;
•Project Milestones;
•Staff Updates;and
•Scheduling Items.
Minutes:
Danny Walz informed the Board of Cara Lindsley’s promotion to Senior Project
Manager and thanked Directors Fowler and Valdemoros and the Mayor for attending the
recent opening of Spyhop (Youth Media Arts Center in the Central 9th neighborhood)and
expressed gratitude to the Board for supporting the project.Mr.Walz said the RDA had
participated in the project by selling the property to Spyhop and provided financing for
the project.
D.Written Briefings –the following briefings are informational in nature and
require no action of the Board.Additional information can be provided to the Board
upon request:
1.Informational:Redevelopment Agency Semi-Annual Property Report
The Board will receive a written briefing of all Tier 1 and Tier 2 properties owned by the
RDA,as per the Land Disposition Policy.The April 16,2021 report includes the
description,address,parcel ID,size,zoning and tier category of each property.In
addition,the report details approximate acquisition date,current category of disposition,
interim use and proposed permanent use for each property.
Minutes:
Written briefing only.No discussion was held.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,May 4,2021
7
E.Consent –the following items are listed for consideration by the Board and can be
discussed individually upon request.A motion to approve the consent agenda is
approving all of the following items:
NONE.
F.Tentative Closed Session
The Board will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session.A closed meeting described under
Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including,but not limited to:
1.discussion of the character,professional competence,or physical or mental health of
an individual;
2.strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation;
3.strategy sessions to discuss the purchase,exchange,or lease of real property:
(i)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration;or
(ii)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible
terms;
4.strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property,including any form of a water
right or water shares,if:
(i)public discussion of the transaction would:
(A)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration;
or
(B)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible
terms;
(ii)the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered
for sale;and<
(iii)the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the
sale
5.discussion regarding deployment of security personnel,devices,or systems;and
6.investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct.
A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to
Utah Code §78B-1-137,and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of
the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act.
Minutes:
Item not held.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,May 4,2021
8
G.Adjournment
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
On or before 5:00 p.m.on _____________________,the undersigned,duly appointed City Recorder,does
hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1)posted on the Utah Public Notice Website created under
Utah Code Section 63F-1-701,and (2)a copy of the foregoing provided to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the
Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others who have indicated interest.
CINDY LOU TRISHMAN
SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER
Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda,including but not limited
to adoption,rejection,amendment,addition of conditions and variations of options discussed.
People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation,which may include alternate
formats,interpreters,and other auxiliary aids and services.Please make requests at least two business days in
advance.To make a request,please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com,
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,May 4,2021
9
801-535-7600,or relay service 711.
Meeting adjourned at 3:48 pm.
Minutes Approved:
______________________________
Redevelopment Agency Chair
______________________________
City Recorder
This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as additional discussion may have
been held;please refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code
§52-4-203(2)(b).
This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the Salt Lake
City Redevelopment Agency meetings (afternoon and evening)held Tuesday,May 4,2021.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,May 4,2021
10
PENDING MINUTES – NOT APPROVED
The Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency (RDA)of Salt Lake City met on Tuesday,
July 20,2021 in a Hybrid Meeting.
The following Board Members were present:
Dennis Faris,Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,Darin Mano,James
Rogers
Present Legislative leadership:
Cindy Gust-Jenson,Executive Director;Jennifer Bruno,Deputy Director;Lehua
Weaver,Associate Deputy Director
Present Agency Leadership:
Mayor Erin Mendenhall,Danny Walz –Chief Operating Officer,Lisa Shaffer,Chief
Administrative Officer
Present City Staff:
Lisa Shaffer –Chief Administrative Officer,Rachel Otto –Chief of Staff,Katherine Lewis –City
Attorney,Allison Parks –Senior City Attorney,Amanda Greenland –Communications &
Outreach Manager,Ashley Ogden –Project Manager,Cara Lindsley –Project Manager,Danny
Walz –Chief Operating Officer,Tammy Hunsaker –Deputy Chief Operating Officer,Tracy Tran
–Project Manager,Cindy Lou Trishman –City Recorder,Thais Stewart –Deputy City
Recorder ,Ben Luedtke –Public Policy Analyst ,Allison Rowland –Public Policy Analyst ,
Lehua Weaver –Associate Deputy Director,Robyn Stine –RDA Office Manager,Cindy Gust-
Jenson –Council Executive Director,Amber Pehrson –City Council Staff,Taylor Hill –City
Council Staff,Kira Luke –City Council Staff
Full Meeting Audio
Meeting Packet Material
Director Chair Ana Valdemoros presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 2:09 pm
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,July 20,2021
1
A.Comments:
1.General Comments to the Board ~2:00 p.m.
5 min
The RDA Board of Directors will receive public comments regarding Redevelopment
Agency business in the following formats:
1.Written comments submitted to RDA offices,451 South State Street,Suite 118,P.O.
Box 145455,Salt Lake City,UT.84114-5455.
2.Comments to the RDA Board of Directors.(Comments are taken on any item not
scheduled for a public Hearing,as well as on any other RDA Business.Comments are
limited to two minutes.)
Minutes:
Director Valdemoros welcomed attendees to the meeting explaining that technical
difficulties might arise as hybrid trials continue;also explained rules of decorum.
Michael Valentine commented on the process concerning the sale and future
demolition of the Pantages Theater;and expressed disagreement with what occurred,
provided documentation to the board.
Jennifer McGrath,representing University of Utah’s Research Park,spoke in support
of the Station Center proposal and offered assistance with any questions regarding the
proposal.
Keith Marmer,Chief Innovation Officer –University of Utah,spoke in support of the
Innovation District proposal and offered assistance with any questions regarding the
proposal.
Clark Cahoon,representing Salt Lake City’s Economic Development Office,explained he
would be providing a presentation and could answer any questions regarding the
Innovation District proposal.
Casey McDonough spoke about the success of hybrid City meetings (in-person/online)
as it offered an opportunity to include the whole community.McDonough also commented
on the Pantages Theater and asked board members to halt the progression of the project
until further investigations can be conducted.
Robert Stefanik spoke in suppose of saving the Pantages Theater.
B.Public Hearing -individuals may speak to the Board once per public hearing topic
for two minutes,however written comments are always accepted:
NONE.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,July 20,2021
2
C.Redevelopment Agency Business -The RDA Board of Directors will receive
information and/or hold discussions and/or take action on:
1.Approval of Minutes ~2:05 p.m.
5 min.
The Board will approve the meeting minutes of Tuesday,May 19,2020.
Motion:
Moved by Director Wharton,seconded by Director Dugan to to approve the
minutes of Tuesday,May 19,2020.
AYE:Dennis Faris,Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,James
Rogers
ABSENT:Darin Mano
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,July 20,2021
3
2.Informational:Station Center Innovation District Concept ~2:10 p.m.
30 min.
The Board will receive a briefing about the Station Center Innovation District concept.
Station Center is located between 500 to 600 West and 200 to 400 South in the Depot
District Project Area.The Innovation District concept would be anchored by the
University of Utah for technology development,from research to start-up incubators to
mature profitable businesses.As part of the briefing,the Board will also receive a pre-
disposition report that includes preliminary information prior to marketing the property.
Minutes:
Ben Luedtke provided a bried introduction to the Station Center Innovation District
Concept,explained a funding gap due to design ($3-5M),and noted the opportunity for
the RDA to enter into a long-term agreement to stay involved in an Innovative District.
Ashley Ogden and Cara Lindsley provided information regarding scope/location of
proposal,examples of various successful innovation districts,feasibility study
components(stakeholder engagement,innovation asset assessment,programming and
partnership strategy),resources/benefits in partnering with the University of Utah as the
“programmatic champion”(a leader to anchor programs to the district),benefits to the
community,the planned disposition strategy,details of the RDA/University of Utah
partnership agreement process,and timeline/next steps.
Director Mano expressed concern with selling all parcels and said the proposed area
should be a destination for all people of the City (including people not Biotech or related
fields).He suggested the RDA retain a few of the parcels and sell to unrelated entities but
ones that would also help build the neighborhood.
Danny Walz clarified a few points regarding the project concept such as the sales
proceeds and how it would fill gaps within the budget.
Director Dugan agreed with Director Mano’s concerns and requested more information
regarding if other innovation districts were sold or held as long-term leases and if
properties had only one anchor tenant or multiple entities.He also inquired if the City’s
Innovation District’s six locations/lots could be broken up into different long-lease/sale
instead of selling all to one.
Clark Cahoon explained the possible public benefits of the Innovation District,
including creating a robust,balances,and thoughtful neighborhood,being able to connect
underserved communities,and creating connectivity with education partners in the form
of apprenticeships/mentorship.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,July 20,2021
4
3.Resolution:Fiscal Year 2021-22 Affordable Housing Development
Funding Priorities Follow-up
~2:40
p.m.
20 min.
The Board will continue consideration of RDA housing development funding priorities for
Fiscal Year 2021-22,and may consider adopting a resolution formalizing these priorities
to provide policy direction for RDA.
Minutes:
Allison Rowland explained that the topic was a continuation of a conversation started
last spring.
Director Dugan indicated that priority groups and thresholds were created for the
projects and gave a brief explanation of the groups.
Tammy Hunsaker inquired for clarity of the priorities provided should be used to
rank/compare applications and for determining interest rate reductions.Director Dugan
confirmed that the priorities should be used for both.
Danny Walz explained that in light of timing,this did not need to be a priority for today,
as the window for noticing the Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)had closed,taking
pressure off the Board should they need to delay further discussion.He added that further
context could be provided to the Board today or for discussions at a later date and
explained that the purpose of the discussion was to determine the Board’s priorities for
funding,providing direction for the Agency to consider levels of financing.
Mayor Mendenhall detailed previous frustrations as a Board member regarding the
City’s definition for interest rate reductions for environmental/sustainability
improvements in a project (seemed insufficient),and cautioned that what ever priorities
were chosen that they were not multi-layered in a way that granted more
benefits/discounts for limited/insufficient impacts in the City.
Board Members discussed the topic and priorities of the funding and expressed interested
in moving the discussion to a later meeting.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,July 20,2021
5
4.Resolution:Utah Performing Arts Center Interlocal Agreement ~3:00 p.m.
5 min.
The Board will receive a briefing about,and will consider adopting,a resolution ratifying
execution of a second amendment to an interlocal agreement between Salt Lake City,the
Redevelopment Agency (RDA),and the Utah Performing Arts Center Agency (UPACA),
for operation of the George S.and Delores Dore Eccles Theater.
Motion:
Moved by Director Rogers,seconded by Director Fowler to approve RDA
Resolution 13 of 2021,Utah Performing Arts Center Interlocal Agreement.
AYE:Dennis Faris,Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,James
Rogers
ABSTAIN:Darin Mano
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
Minutes:
Jennifer Bruno provided a brief introduction to the resolution.
5.Motion:Meeting Remotely Without an Anchor Location TENTATIVE
The Board will consider a motion to ratify the Chair’s determination to continue meeting
remotely and without an anchor location due to the health and safety of the people who
may be in attendance,and considering the continued closure of the City and County
Building to the public.
Minutes:
Item not discussed.
6.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director TENTATIVE
5 min.
Report of the Executive Director,including a review of information items,
announcements,and scheduling items.The Board of Directors may give feedback or
policy input.
Minutes:
Item not discussed.
7.Report and Announcements from RDA Staff TENTATIVE
5 min.
The Board may review Board information and announcements.The Board may give
feedback on any item related to City business,including but not limited to;
•Project Milestones;
•Community Updates;and
•Scheduling Items.
Minutes:
Danny Walz detailed projects that were in progress,noted the Overniter Motel had been
demolished,and mentioned the Gallivan Center was currently operating once again.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,July 20,2021
6
D.Written Briefings –the following briefings are informational in nature and
require no action of the Board.Additional information can be provided to the Board
upon request:
NONE.
E.Consent –the following items are listed for consideration by the Board and can be
discussed individually upon request.A motion to approve the consent agenda is
approving all of the following items:
NONE.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,July 20,2021
7
F.Closed Session
The Board will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session.A closed meeting described under
Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including,but not limited to:
1.discussion of the character,professional competence,or physical or mental health of
an individual;
2.strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation;
3.strategy sessions to discuss the purchase,exchange,or lease of real property:
(i)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration;or
(ii)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible
terms;
4.strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property,including any form of a water
right or water shares,if:
(i)public discussion of the transaction would:
(A)disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration;
or
(B)prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible
terms;
(ii)the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered
for sale;and<
(iii)the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the
sale
5.discussion regarding deployment of security personnel,devices,or systems;and
6.investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct.
A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to
Utah Code §78B-1-137,and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of
the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act.
Minutes:
Start Time:3:50 pm
Board Members in Attendance:Ana Valdemoros,Dan Dugan,James Rogers,Dennis Faris,
Chris Wharton,Darin Mano,and Amy Fowler
City Staff in Attendance:Mayor Mendenhall,Rachel Otto,Lisa Shaffer,Danny Walz,Tammy
Hunsaker,Tracy Tran,Robyn Stine,Amanda Greenland,Cindy Gust-Jenson,Jennifer Bruno,
Lehua Weaver,Ben Luedtke,Adriana Lopez,Tracy Tran,Allison Parks,Allison Rowland,Amber
Pehrson,Taylor Hill,Katherine Lewis,Kira Luke,and Cindy Lou Trishman.
Director Wharton moved,Director Dugan seconded to exit the Closed Session.All Directors
voted aye (roll call)
Closed Meeting Ended:4:06 pm
Sworn Statement
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,July 20,2021
8
Motion:
Moved by Director Wharton,seconded by Director Fowler to enter into Closed
Session for the purposes of strategy sessions to discuss the purchase,exchange or
lease of real property,discussion of pending or reasonably immminent litigation,
and advice of Counsel.
AYE:Dennis Faris,Amy Fowler,Ana Valdemoros,Chris Wharton,Daniel Dugan,James Rogers
ABSENT:Darin Mano
Final Result:6 –0 Pass
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,July 20,2021
9
G.Adjournment
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
On or before 5:00 p.m.on _____________________,the undersigned,duly appointed City Recorder,does
hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1)posted on the Utah Public Notice Website created under
Utah Code Section 63F-1-701,and (2)a copy of the foregoing provided to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the
Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others who have indicated interest.
CINDY LOU TRISHMAN
SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER
Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda,including but not limited
to adoption,rejection,amendment,addition of conditions and variations of options discussed.
The City &County Building is an accessible facility.People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable
accommodation,which may include alternate formats,interpreters,and other auxiliary aids and services.Please
make requests at least two business days in advance.To make a request,please contact the City Council Office
at council.comments@slcgov.com,801-535-7600,or relay service 711.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,July 20,2021
10
Meeting adjourned at 4:06 PM
Minutes Approved:
______________________________
Redevelopment Agency Chair
______________________________
City Recorder
This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as additional discussion may have
been held;please refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code
§52-4-203(2)(b).
This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the Salt Lake
City Redevelopment Agency meetings held Tuesday,July 20,2021.
MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Tuesday,July 20,2021
11
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 118 WWW.SLC.GOV · WWW.SLCRDA.COM
P.O. BOX 145518, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5518 TEL 801-535-7240 · FAX 801-535-7245
MAYOR ERIN MENDENHALL
Executive Director
DANNY WALZ
Director
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF MEMO
DATE: November 24, 2021
PREPARED BY: Erin Cunningham
RE: Review and Acceptance of the 2020/2021 Audit.
REQUESTED ACTION: Pass a motion accepting the audit and direct staff to distribute the audit
as necessary.
POLICY ITEM: The Utah Community Development and Renewal Agencies Act,
Section 17C- 1-604, requires that an annual independent audit of the
Agency’s records be conducted.
BUDGET IMPACTS: N/A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Presentation of the 2020/2021 audit to the Board.
ANALYSIS & ISSUES: The audit shows the Agency’s financial conditions as of June 30, 2021.
The staff and Salt Lake City’s Finance Division have worked closely with the auditors on their report
and will also be available to address any questions Board members may have.
PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: None. The audit report will arrive directly from the auditors.
1
November 8, 2021
The Board of Directors
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Salt Lake City, Utah
We have audited the financial statements of Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (the Agency) as of and
for the year ended June 30, 2021, and have issued our report thereon dated November 8, 2021. Professional
standards require that we advise you of the following matters relating to our audit.
Our Responsibility in Relation to the Financial Statement Audit under Generally Accepted Auditing
Standards
As communicated in our letter dated August 5, 2021, our responsibility, as described by professional
standards, is to form and express an opinion about whether the financial statements that have been prepared
by management with your oversight are presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Our audit of the financial
statements does not relieve you or management of your respective responsibilities.
Our responsibility, as prescribed by professional standards, is to plan and perform our audit to obtain
reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit of financial statements includes consideration of internal control over financial
reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the
purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control over financial reporting.
Accordingly, as part of our audit, we considered the internal control of the Agency solely for the purpose of
determining our audit procedures and not to provide any assurance concerning such internal control.
We are also responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are, in our
professional judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process.
However, we are not required to design procedures for the purpose of identifying other matters to
communicate to you.
Planned Scope and Timing of the Audit
We conducted our audit consistent with the planned scope and timing we previously communicated to you.
Compliance with All Ethics Requirements Regarding Independence
The engagement team, others in our firm, as appropriate, our firm, and other firms utilized in the
engagement, if applicable, have complied with all relevant ethical requirements regarding independence.
What inspires you, inspires us. | eidebailly.com
5 Triad Center, Ste. 600 | Salt Lake City, UT 84180-1106 | T 801.532.2200 | F 801.532.7944 | EOE
2
Qualitative Aspects of the Entity’s Significant Accounting Practices
Significant Accounting Policies
Management has the responsibility to select and use appropriate accounting policies. A summary of the
significant accounting policies adopted by the Agency is included in Note 1 to the financial statements. There
have been no initial selection of accounting policies and no changes in significant accounting policies or their
application during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. No matters have come to our attention that would
require us, under professional standards, to inform you about (1) the methods used to account for significant
unusual transactions and (2) the effect of significant accounting policies in controversial or emerging areas for
which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus.
Significant Accounting Estimates
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based
on management’s current judgments. Those judgments are normally based on knowledge and experience
about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are
particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility
that future events affecting them may differ markedly from management’s current judgments.
The most sensitive accounting estimates affecting the financial statements is management’s estimate of the
net pension liability. The net pension liability is actuarily determined by the Utah Retirement Systems (URS) in
accordance with the requirements of government accounting standards. The estimate is prepared by the URS
for Salt Lake City Corporation, and the City allocates the liability and other related balances to the various
funds. We evaluated the report provided by the URS and the key factors and assumptions used by the City in
the allocation of the net pension liability to the agency and determined that the estimated net pension
liability is reasonable in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.
Financial Statement Disclosures
The financial statement disclosures are neutral, consistent, and clear.
Significant Difficulties Encountered during the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management relating to the performance of the
audit.
Uncorrected and Corrected Misstatements
For purposes of this communication, professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely
misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that we believe are trivial, and communicate
them to the appropriate level of management. Further, professional standards require us to also
communicate the effect of uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods on the relevant classes of
transactions, account balances or disclosures, and the financial statements as a whole. There were no
uncorrected or corrected misstatements identified as a result of our audit procedures.
3
Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a matter,
whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, concerning a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter,
which could be significant to the the Agency’s financial statements or the auditor’s report. No such
disagreements arose during the course of the audit.
Representations Requested from Management
We have requested certain written representations from management which are included in the management
representation letter dated November 8, 2021.
Management’s Consultations with Other Accountants
In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting
matters. Management informed us that, and to our knowledge, there were no consultations with other
accountants regarding auditing and accounting matters.
Other Significant Matters, Findings, or Issues
In the normal course of our professional association with the Agency, we generally discuss a variety of matters,
including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, operating conditions affecting the
entity, and operating plans and strategies that may affect the risks of material misstatement. None of the
matters discussed resulted in a condition to our retention as the Agency’s auditors.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the board of directors, and management of the
Agency and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Salt Lake City, Utah
Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
(A Component Unit of Salt Lake City Corporation, Utah)
Table of Contents
June 30, 2021 and 2020
INTRODUCTORY SECTION:
Table of Contents .............................................................................................................................................................i
FINANCIAL SECTION:
Independent Auditor’s Report ...............................................................................................................................................2
Management’s Discussion and Analysis ...............................................................................................................................4
Basic Financial Statements
Financial Statements
Statements of Net Position ..........................................................................................................................................10
Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position ...............................................................................12
Statements of Cash Flows ...........................................................................................................................................13
Notes to the Financial Statements ....................................................................................................................................15
Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies ....................................................................................16
Note 2. Cash and Cash Equivalents ................................................................................................................19
Note 3. Restricted Net Position .......................................................................................................................20
Note 4. Loans and Other Long-Term Receivables .........................................................................................21
Note 5. Capital Assets .....................................................................................................................................22
Note 6. Bonds Payable ....................................................................................................................................23
Note 7. Pension Plans .....................................................................................................................................26
Note 8. Equity Interest in Joint Venture .........................................................................................................33
Note 9. Commitments and Contingencies ......................................................................................................35
Note 10. Concentrations ....................................................................................................................................38
Required Supplementary Information
Schedule of the Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability ...................................................................................40
Schedule of Contributions ................................................................................................................................................41
Notes to Required Supplementary Information ................................................................................................................41
Supplementary Information
Combining Statement of Net Position Information by Project Area ................................................................................43
Combining Statement of Revenues and Expenses and Changes in Net Position by Project Area ...................................44
Selected Financial Information by Project Area ...............................................................................................................45
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
i
Financial Section
1
2
Independent Auditor’s Report
The Board of Directors
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Report on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying statements of net position of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake
City (the Agency), a component unit of Salt Lake City Corporation, Utah, as of June 30, 2021 and 2020 and
the related statements of revenues, expenses and changes in net position and cash flows for the years then
ended and the related notes to the financial statements.
Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Statements
Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the
design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair
presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or
error.
Auditor’s Responsibility
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted
our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free from material misstatement.
An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgment, including the assessment
of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making
those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair
presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the
circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal
control. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of
accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management,
as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.
We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our
audit opinions.
Opinion
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of the Agency as of June 30, 2021 and 2020 and the changes in its financial position and its cash
flows for the years then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America.
What inspires you, inspires us. | eidebailly.com
5 Triad Center, Ste. 600 | Salt Lake City, UT 84180-1106 | T 801.532.2200 | F 801.532.7944 | EOE
3
Other Matters
Required Supplementary Information
Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management’s
discussion and analysis on pages 4 through 8 and Required Supplementary Information on pages 40 and 41
be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the
basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to
be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate
operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required
supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of
America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and
comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial
statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not
express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not
provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance.
Other Information
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial statements that collectively
comprise the Agency’s basic financial statements. The supplementary information on pages 43 through 45 is
presented for purposes of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements.
The supplementary information is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates
directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. Such
information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial
statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly
to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the
basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing
standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the supplementary
information is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole.
Salt Lake City, Utah
November 8, 2021
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
(Unaudited)
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (Agency) management presents to the readers of its financial statements
this narrative information. It contains an overview and analysis of the financial position and results of operations
as of, and for the years ended, June 30, 2021 and 2020. As management of the Agency, we encourage readers to
consider information contained in this discussion.
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
As of June 30, 2021 and 2020, assets and deferred outflows of the Agency exceeded its liabilities and deferred
inflows by $205,176,484 and $188,363,901, respectively (net position). Of the total amounts, $91,065,333 and
$82,601,051, as of June 30, 2021 and 2020, respectively, are available to meet ongoing obligations to creditors.
The remaining net position amount of $114,111,151 and $105,762,850, as of June 30, 2021 and 2020,
respectively, are either restricted or invested in capital assets, net of related debt, and therefore not available to
meet the Agency's ongoing obligations.
Net position increased by $16,812,583 and increased $15,180,220 during the years ending June 30, 2021 and
2020, respectively. During 2014, the Agency began construction on a new project, the George S. and Dolores
Dore Eccles Performing Arts Center (Eccles Theater) and issued Tax Increment Bonds of $64,730,000 to partially
fund the project. In addition, Salt Lake City Corporation (the City) issued Sales Tax Revenue Bonds and
contributed the proceeds to the Agency, resulting in contribution revenue of $51,270,000. In addition, the Agency
has received $37,749,109 in donations for the project through June 30, 2021.
A significant portion of total assets, as of June 30, 2021 and 2020, is the unrestricted cash amounting to
$47,846,331 and $44,828,823, respectively. Statutorily, the Agency is required to spend the tax increment funds
received within the boundaries of the project area for which it was collected, except for affordable housing
projects that benefit any area within the City. No one project or project area has access to all of the unrestricted
cash balance shown above. Restricted cash of $56,038,523 and $48,860,977, as of June 30, 2021 and 2020,
respectively, reflects remaining bond proceeds for the Eccles Theater and the Regent Street projects, and other
funds already committed to specific projects.
Another significant portion of assets is the loans receivables balance. Loans are awarded to individuals and
businesses for acquisition, rehabilitation, new construction or façade renovation, and continue to be an important
aspect of the Agency’s blight elimination mission. For fiscal years 2021 and 2020, the Agency originated
$7,920,337 and $6,316,483 in new loans, respectively. The amount of principal received on outstanding loans was
$3,046,275 for fiscal year 2021 and $350,890 for fiscal year 2020. The Agency’s loans receivable balance as of
June 30, 2021 and 2020, including accrued interest was $27,077,890 and $17,319,022, respectively, which is an
increase of $9,758,868 and $5,158,130, respectively.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Management's Discussion and Analysis
June 30, 2021 and 2020
4
OVERVIEW OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
This discussion and analysis serves as an introduction to the Agency's basic financial statements and the notes to
the financial statements. This report also contains information in addition to the basic financial statements that
will help the reader to gain a more in-depth understanding of the Agency.
The Statements of Net Position show the Agency’s total assets, deferred outflows, liabilities and deferred
inflows with the difference shown as net position for the two most recent fiscal years. Increases or decreases over
time in net position give an indicator as to whether the financial condition of the Agency is improving or
declining.
The Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position show the changes to net position that
occurred during the two most recent fiscal years. These changes are recorded when the underlying event that
causes the change occurs regardless of when the cash transaction takes place. Therefore revenues and expenses
are recorded in this statement for some items that the resulting cash flows occur in a future period. Examples are
future debt interest payments when the fiscal year ends between interest payments, and earned, but not yet
received, interest on loans.
The Statements of Cash Flows show the inflows and outflows of cash for the two most recent fiscal years as a
result of transactions in four categories. The categories are operating activities, capital and related financing
activities, non-capital and related financing activities and investing activities.
Notes to the Financial Statements contain additional information important to a complete understanding of the
information contained in the basic financial statements. Notes to the financial statements begin on page 15 of this
report.
OTHER INFORMATION
Required supplemental schedules containing pension information and other supplementary information containing
selected data by project area are included in this report immediately following the notes to the financial statements
and can be found on pages 41-46.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
As mentioned earlier, changes in net position may over time indicate the Agency’s financial position. A
significant portion of the Agency’s net position (65.6% as of June 30, 2021 and 67.3% as of June 30, 2020) is
comprised of its unrestricted amounts and amounts invested in capital assets - net of related debt, and results from
the Agency’s ongoing purpose of eliminating urban blight. The Agency has issued debt to support several large
scale economic development and public infrastructure projects. As an incentive to a developer, the Agency may
sell land for less than its cost or market value. Newly developed properties generate increased property taxes, a
portion of which the Agency receives to pay debt and finance ongoing activities. The remaining portion (34.4% as
of June 30, 2021 and 32.7% as of June 30, 2020) of net position represents resources that have restrictions on how
they can be used.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Management's Discussion and Analysis
June 30, 2021 and 2020
5
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Net Position
Fiscal 2021 Fiscal 2020 Fiscal 2019
Current and other assets $ 222,142,174 $ 208,926,489 $ 198,023,855
Capital assets 43,458,627 44,175,908 43,924,608
Total assets $ 265,600,801 $ 253,102,397 $ 241,948,463
Deferred outflow of resources $ 5,554,560 $ 6,089,381 $ 162,159
Bonds payable $ 61,915,454 $ 66,836,999 $ 64,705,272
Other liabilities 3,717,952 3,784,980 4,209,713
Total liabilities $ 65,633,406 $ 70,621,979 $ 68,914,985
Deferred inflow of resources $ 345,471 $ 205,898 $ 11,957
Net position:
Invested in capital assets - net of related debt $ 43,458,627 $ 44,175,908 $ 43,924,608
Restricted for capital construction 70,652,524 61,586,942 52,183,452
Unrestricted 91,065,333 82,601,051 77,075,621
Total net position $ 205,176,484 $ 188,363,901 $ 173,183,681
Agency Activities
The Agency’s receipt of incremental property taxes, that portion of property taxes generated from higher property
values from earlier redevelopment activities, increased by $2,692,248 (6.33%) and increased $9,777,794
(29.86%) during fiscal years 2021 and 2020, respectively.
For the year ended June 30, 2021, total operating expenses of the Agency increased by $2,033,915 (7.8%). The
change was due to an increase in overall redevelopment activities of the Agency of $2,023,082 and an increase in
Depreciation Expense of $10,833.
For the year ended June 30, 2020, total operating expenses of the Agency increased by $3,150,907 (13.8%). The
change was due to an increase in overall redevelopment activities of the Agency of $3,272,538 offset by a
decrease in Depreciation Expense of $121,631.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Management's Discussion and Analysis
June 30, 2021 and 2020
6
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Changes in Net Position
Fiscal 2021 Fiscal 2020 Fiscal 2019
Revenues
Program revenues:
Rental and other income $ 1,430,088 $ 1,678,189 $ 1,998,889
General revenues
Transfers in from Salt Lake City Corporation 16,627,173 15,835,339 10,401,935
Interest and investment valuation income 623,224 1,844,879 2,401,525
Gain/(Loss) on sale of capital assets 891,630 (1,730,001) 1,598,229
Grants and other contributions 31,457,931 29,274,510 22,340,120
Miscellaneous income (expense) (1,321) 2,195 25,295
Total revenues 51,028,725 46,905,111 38,765,993
Expenses
Personnel services 1,560,415 1,815,623 1,459,843
Operating and maintenance 1,607,423 1,620,635 1,512,735
Charges and services 24,173,439 21,881,937 19,073,079
Depreciation and amortization 666,847 656,014 777,645
Interest and fiscal charges 4,854,399 5,150,135 6,090,465
Contributions to Salt Lake City Corporation — — 1,417,706
Change in equity interest in joint venture 1,353,619 600,547 (179,494)
Total expenses 34,216,142 31,724,891 30,151,979
Increase/(Decrease) in net position 16,812,583 15,180,220 8,614,014
Net position, beginning 188,363,901 173,183,681 164,569,667
Net position ending $ 205,176,484 $ 188,363,901 $ 173,183,681
Capital Asset and Debt Administration
Capital Asset investments by the Agency consist of land, land improvements, buildings, construction in process
and a small amount of equipment. The investment in capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation, decreased by
$717,282 and increased by $251,301 in fiscal 2021 and 2020, respectively.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Capital Assets, Net of Depreciation
Fiscal 2021 Fiscal 2020 Fiscal 2019
Land and easement rights $ 21,306,270 $ 21,456,012 $ 21,456,012
Parking facilities and plaza 7,796,018 8,399,989 8,994,307
Other buildings 833,520 772,496 801,647
Equipment 174,183 198,776 75,198
Construction in progress 13,348,636 13,348,636 12,597,444
Total $ 43,458,627 $ 44,175,909 $ 43,924,608
Additional information relating to the capital assets of the Agency can be found in Note 5, on page 23 of this
report.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Management's Discussion and Analysis
June 30, 2021 and 2020
7
Long-term debt (net) of the Agency totaled $61,915,454 and $66,836,999 as of June 30, 2021 and 2020,
respectively. The tax increment bonds require semi-annual interest payments. Principal payments for the 2013
bonds started in April 2016. Principal payments for the 2015 bonds began in April 2018. Principal payment on the
2019 refunding bonds began in April 2020.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
Long-Term Debt
Fiscal 2021 Fiscal 2020 Fiscal 2019
2013 Tax increment bonds, net $ 7,335,454 $ 10,791,999 $ 52,280,272
2015A and 2015B Tax increment bonds 11,235,000 11,910,000 12,425,000
2019 Tax Increment refunding bonds, net 43,345,000 44,135,000 —
Total $ 61,915,454 $ 66,836,999 $ 64,705,272
Additional information on the Agency’s long-term debt can be found in Note 6, beginning on page 24 of this
report.
Requests for information
Questions concerning any of the information provided in this report or requests for additional financial
information should be addressed to the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City, 451 South State Street, Room
118, P.O. Box 145518 Salt Lake City Utah, 84114-5518.
* * * * *
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Management's Discussion and Analysis
June 30, 2021 and 2020
8
Basic Financial Statements
9
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Statements of Net Position
June 30, 2021 and 2020
2021 2020
Assets
Current assets
Unrestricted cash and cash equivalents $ 47,846,331 $ 44,828,823
Restricted cash and cash equivalents 56,038,523 48,860,977
Loans receivable-current portion, including interest receivable of
$0 and $251,109, respectively 288,237 524,752
Other current receivables — 155,891
Other long-term receivables, current portion — 925,891
Deposits 719,778 719,778
Prepaid expenses 48,082 56,414
Total current assets 104,940,951 96,072,526
Non-current assets
Capital assets, at cost
Land and rights 21,306,270 21,456,012
Parking facilities and plaza 55,022,530 55,022,530
Other buildings 1,110,451 1,020,275
Office furniture and equipment 500,836 491,704
Construction in progress 13,348,636 13,348,636
Accumulated depreciation (47,830,096) (47,163,249)
Net capital assets 43,458,627 44,175,908
Loans and other long-term receivables, net of current portion 26,789,653 16,794,270
Land and buildings held for resale 39,394,118 43,688,621
Investment in joint venture 51,017,452 52,371,072
Total non-current assets 160,659,850 157,029,871
Total assets 265,600,801 253,102,397
Deferred Outflows
Deferred outflows - Bonds 5,333,646 5,867,010
Deferred outflows - Pension 220,914 222,371
Total assets and deferred outflows $ 271,155,361 $ 259,191,778
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement
10
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Statements of Net Position
June 30, 2021 and 2020
2021 2020
Liabilities
Current liabilities
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $ 2,924,837 $ 2,760,485
Accrued compensation, current portion 61,384 24,588
Accrued interest payable 440,257 484,437
Bonds payable, current portion 5,570,000 4,925,000
Total current liabilities 8,996,478 8,194,510
Non-current liabilities
Accrued compensation, net of current portion 241,028 151,482
Net pension liability 50,446 363,988
Bonds payable, net of discounts and current portion 56,345,454 61,911,999
Total non-current liabilities 56,636,928 62,427,469
Total liabilities 65,633,406 70,621,979
Deferred inflows
Deferred inflows relating to pensions 345,471 205,898
Net Position
Net investment in capital assets 43,458,627 44,175,908
Restricted for construction and loan commitments held in escrow 70,652,524 61,586,942
Unrestricted 91,065,333 82,601,051
Total net position 205,176,484 188,363,901
Total liabilities, deferred inflows and net position $ 271,155,361 $ 259,191,778
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement
11
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
2021 2020
Operating revenues
Rental and other income $ 1,227,045 $ 1,467,855
Interest income from loans receivable 203,043 210,334
Miscellaneous income (expense) (1,321) 2,195
Total operating revenues 1,428,767 1,680,384
Operating expenses
Personnel services 1,560,415 1,815,623
Operating and maintenance 1,607,423 1,620,635
Charges and services 24,173,439 21,881,937
Depreciation 666,847 656,014
Total operating expenses 28,008,124 25,974,209
Operating Loss (26,579,357) (24,293,825)
Non-operating revenues (expenses)
Interest income 623,224 1,844,879
Grants and other contributions 31,457,931 29,274,510
Changes in equity interest in joint venture (1,353,619) (600,547)
Gain (loss) on sale of capital assets 891,630 (1,730,001)
Interest and fiscal charges (4,854,399) (5,150,135)
Total non-operating revenues (expenses) 26,764,767 23,638,706
Gain/(Loss) before operating transfers 185,410 (655,119)
Transfers in from Salt Lake City Corporation 16,627,173 15,835,339
Change in net position 16,812,583 15,180,220
Net position, beginning of year 188,363,901 173,183,681
Net position, end of year $ 205,176,484 $ 188,363,901
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement
12
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Statements of Cash Flows
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
2021 2020
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Cash received from rentals $ 1,227,045 $ 1,467,855
Cash from miscellaneous income 406 2,195
Cash paid to suppliers (25,432,613) (23,698,461)
Cash paid to employees (1,603,560) (1,560,563)
Loans disbursed (7,920,337) (6,316,483)
Principal collected on loans receivable 3,046,275 350,890
Interest collected on loans receivable 137,921 167,796
Net cash used in operating activities (30,544,863) (29,586,771)
Cash flows from capital and related financing activities
Payments for acquisition of land and buildings held for resale 25,891 (751,192)
Proceeds from sale of land and buildings held for resale 602,850 —
Private donations 809,823 800,000
Property and equipment purchased during the year (9,132) (156,122)
Issuance of Bonds — 44,640,000
Principal payments on bonds payable (5,645,000) (43,095,000)
Interest and fiscal charges paid on bonds payable (3,641,760) (10,708,386)
Net cash used in capital and related financing activities (7,857,328) (9,270,700)
Cash flows from non-capital and related financing activities
Transfers in from Salt Lake City Corporation 16,627,173 15,835,339
Contributions from other taxing entities 31,215,269 29,250,198
Net cash from non-capital and related financing activities 47,842,442 45,085,537
Cash flows from investing activities:
Interest received from investments and cash and cash equivalents 623,224 1,844,879
Distributions received from interest in joint venture 131,579 430,962
Net cash from investing activities 754,803 2,275,841
Net change in cash and cash equivalents 10,195,054 8,503,907
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year 93,689,800 85,185,893
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year $ 103,884,854 $ 93,689,800
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement
13
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Statements of Cash Flows
For the Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2021 and 2020
2021 2020
Balance sheet presentation of cash and cash equivalents
Unrestricted $ 47,846,331 $ 44,828,823
Restricted 56,038,523 48,860,977
Total cash and cash equivalents, end of year 103,884,854 93,689,800
Reconciliation of operating loss to net cash used for operating activities
Operating Loss (26,579,357) (24,293,825)
Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash used for operating activities
Depreciation 666,847 656,014
Principal forgiven on loans receivable 178,590 50,000
Increase (decrease) from changes in
Change in interest receivable (65,122) (42,538)
Change in prepaid expenses 8,332 22,207
Change in deferred outflows-pensions 1,457 (60,212)
Change in accounts payable 164,352 (239,411)
Change in accrued compensation 126,342 23,228
Change in net pension liability (313,542) 69,418
Changes in deferred inflows-pension 139,573 193,941
Total (25,672,528) (23,621,178)
Loans disbursed (7,920,337) (6,316,483)
Principal collected on loans 3,048,002 350,890
Net cash used for operating activities $ (30,544,863) $ (29,586,771)
Non-cash transactions affecting financial position
Recognition of equity interest in joint venture $ (1,353,619) $ (732,126)
Loans issued in exchange for land $ 5,000,000 $ —
Land donations $ 266,974 $ —
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement
14
Notes to the Financial Statements
15
1.Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Organization and History
The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (the Agency) was established in 1969 by Salt Lake City
Corporation (the City) pursuant to the provisions of the Community Development and Renewal Agencies Act.
The Agency is charged with the responsibility for the elimination of blight through the process of redevelopment
in designated project areas. This objective is generally accomplished through: installation of public
improvements, grants and loans provided to residents and businesses for improvements, and acquisition and
preparation of land sites and sale of such land for development by the private or public sector. As an incentive to a
developer, the Agency may sell land for less than its cost or market value.
Basis of Presentation
The Agency, a separate legal entity that operates as an enterprise fund, is a blended component unit of the City
and is included in the City’s comprehensive annual financial report. The accompanying financial statements
include certain funds which were established in accordance with bond requirements. The records of the Agency
are maintained on the accrual basis of accounting.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The Agency considers all highly liquid debt instruments purchased with an original maturity of three months or
less to be cash equivalents.
Investments
Investments are shown at fair value, based upon quoted market prices. A portion of the Agency’s investments at
June 30, 2021 and 2020, are deposited in the pooled cash account of the City. The City’s pooled cash account is
invested primarily in the Public Treasurer’s Investment Fund (the Treasurer’s Fund) which is not registered with
the Securities and Exchange Commission. Regulatory oversight of the Treasurer’s Fund is provided by the Money
Management Council, which is subsequently monitored by the State of Utah. The fair market value of the
Agency’s position in the fund is the same as the value of the fund shares owned by the Agency.
Allowance for Doubtful Receivables
Historically, the Agency has not experienced any significant losses from bad debts in the past and management
does not believe there are any impairments with the loan portfolio at June 30, 2021 and 2020, therefore, no
reserve for bad debt expense has been established.
Capital Assets
Property, equipment, and land are carried at cost. Depreciation of equipment and structures is computed using the
straight-line method over the estimated useful lives that range from 5 to 35 years. No depreciation is provided on
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
16
construction in process until the construction project is complete and the asset is placed into service. When assets
are retired or otherwise disposed of, costs and related accumulated depreciation, if any, are removed, and any
resulting gain or loss is included in revenues or expenses. The capitalization threshold for capital assets is $5,000.
Land and Buildings Held for Resale
Land and buildings held for resale, purchased as part of the Agency’s redevelopment efforts, are carried at the
lower of cost or net realizable value. The cost of buildings and improvements that the Agency determines not to
be recoverable are expensed. Gains and losses (including impairment) on land and buildings held for resale are
included in revenues and expenses.
Deferred Outflows and Deferred Inflows of Resources
In addition to assets, financial statements will sometimes report a separate section for deferred outflows of
resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred outflows of resources, represents a consumption of
net position that applies to a future period(s) and will not be recognized as an outflow of resources (expense) until
then. In addition to liabilities, the financial statement will sometimes report a separate section for deferred inflows
of resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred inflows of resources, represents an acquisition of
net position that applies to a future period(s) and will not be recognized as an inflow of resources (revenue) until
that time.
Transfers In and Transfers Out
Transfers In are property taxes and sales taxes received and collected by the City and transferred to the Agency.
Transfers In of property taxes are the portion of the incremental property tax in the designated program areas
attributable to increases over the base year in which the properties were designated as redevelopment areas.
Transfers Out are expenditures of program funds through another City department or operating expenditures for
internal services of the City.
Revenue Recognition
Rental revenue, interest revenue from loans, and miscellaneous revenue are reported as operating revenues.
Transactions which are capital, financing or investing related, including transfers in, are reported as non-operating
revenues. Revenue for services is recognized at the time the service is performed. Revenue from private donations
is recognized in the fiscal year in which all eligibility requirements have been satisfied.
Operating and Non-Operating Revenue and Expenses
Operating revenues and expenses result from providing goods and services relating to the primary operations of
the Agency. Other revenues and expenses are reported as non-operating. All expenses related to operating the
Agency are reported as operating expenses. Interest expense and financing costs are reported as non-operating
expenses.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
17
Restricted and Unrestricted Resources
Some projects may receive more than one source of funding. The Agency is restricted by some sources to apply
funds only to specific approved projects. The Agency priority is to utilize restricted funds, before using
unrestricted funds.
Pensions
For purposes of measuring the net pension liability, deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of
resources related to pensions, and pension expense, information about the fiduciary net position of the Utah
Retirement Systems Pension Plan (URS) and additions to/deductions from the URS’s fiduciary net position have
been determined on the same basis as they are reported by URS. For this purpose, benefit payments (including
refunds of employee contributions) are recognized when due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms.
Investments are reported at fair value.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America requires the Agency to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and
the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual amounts could differ from
those estimates.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
18
2.Cash and Cash Equivalents
The following is a summary of cash and cash equivalents at June 30:
2021 2020
Cash and cash equivalents
Money market accounts $ (3,702,809) $ (1,083,840)
Investments in the pooled investment account of Salt Lake City Corporation 107,587,563 94,773,540
Petty Cash 100 100
$ 103,884,854 $ 93,689,800
Financial statement presentation
Unrestricted cash and cash equivalents $ 47,846,331 $ 44,828,823
Restricted cash and cash equivalents, current portion 56,038,523 48,860,977
$ 103,884,854 $ 93,689,800
The Agency maintains funds in the City’s pooled cash and investment accounts. The Agency pays the City or
receives from the City an allocation of interest expense or income based upon each of the RDA's fund's relative
balance in the pooled accounts.
Deposits
It is the policy of the City to invest public funds in accordance with principles of sound treasury management and
in compliance with state and local laws, regulations, and other policies governing the investment of public funds,
specifically according to the terms and conditions of the Utah State Money Management Act of 1974 (the Act)
and Rules of the State Money Management Council as currently amended, and the City’s own written investment
policy.
City policy provides that not more than 25% of the total City funds or 25% of the Qualified Depository’s
allotment, whichever is less can be invested in any one Qualified Depository. Not more than 20% of total City
funds may be invested in any one certified out-of-state depository institution. However, there shall be no
limitation placed on the amount invested with the Treasurer’s Fund and other money market mutual funds,
provided that the overall standards of investments achieve the City’s policy objectives. All of the Agency’s
deposits during the years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020, were made with Qualified Depositories.
Deposit Custodial Credit Risk
Custodial credit risk is the risk that in the event of a bank failure, the government’s deposits may not be returned
to it. The State of Utah does not require collateral on deposits. As of June 30, 2021 and 2020, none of the
Agency’s cash balance was covered by federal depository insurance. The Agency’s cash balances of
$103,884,854 and $93,689,800 as of June 30, 2021 and 2020, respectively, were uninsured and uncollateralized
and therefore were exposed to some degree of custodial credit risk.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
19
Investments
The Agency’s investment balances as of June 30, 2021 and 2020, included in cash and cash equivalents, were
$107,587,563 and $94,773,540, respectively.
The City may place public money in investments authorized by the Act (U.C.A 51-7-11). The Utah State
Treasurer shall ensure that all purchases and sales of securities are settled within 15 days of the trade date. In
general, these investments can be any of the following subject to restrictions specified in the Act: Obligations of
the U.S. Treasury and most Government-Sponsored Agencies; Commercial paper; Bankers Acceptances; Publicly
traded fixed rate corporate obligations; Certain variable rate securities and deposits; Deposits with the State Public
Treasurer’s Investment Pool; Certain fixed rate negotiable deposits with a qualified depository or through a
certified dealer; Qualifying repurchase agreements; Open-end managed money market mutual funds; Utah State
Treasurer’s Investment Pool; and Investment with deferred compensation plan administrators.
The Agency did not enter into any reverse repurchase agreements during the years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020.
The Agency does not have a formal investment policy that limits investment maturities as a means of managing
its exposure to fair value losses arising from increasing interest rates.
Fair Value of Investments
The Agency measures and records its investments using fair value measurement guidelines established by
generally accepted accounting principles. These guidelines recognize a three-tiered fair value hierarchy, as
follows:
•Level 1: Quoted prices for identical investments in active markets;
•Level 2: Observable inputs other than quoted market prices; and,
•Level 3: Unobservable inputs.
At June 30, 2021 and 2020, respectively, the Agency had $107,587,563 and $94,773,540 in investments in the
pooled investment account of the City, which were invested in the State Public Treasurer’s Investment Pool.
These investments were valued by applying the fair value factor, as calculated by the Utah State Treasurer, to the
Agency’s average daily balance in the Treasurer’s Fund at June 30, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Such valuation is
considered a Level 2 valuation for GASB Statement No. 72 purposes.
3.Restricted Net Position
Certain components of net position are restricted by provisions of the applicable bond resolutions adopted and
entered into by the Agency (Note 6).
The following is a summary of restricted net position at June 30:
2021 2020
Restricted for construction on Regent Street improvements under the related bond resolution $ 576,941 $ 572,453
Restricted for construction by appropriation 70,075,583 61,014,489
Total restricted net position $ 70,652,524 $ 61,586,942
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
20
4.Loans and Other Long-Term Receivables
The following is a summary of loans and other long-term receivables at June 30:
2021 2020
Tax increment rehabilitation loans bearing interest from 0% to 5%.
Principal and interest payable in monthly installments, includes
accrued interest of $86,890 and $42,768 respectively.$ 14,353,296 $ 7,834,197
Loans bearing interest at 2.5% to 3%, interest payable monthly;
collateralized by property, letters of credit, and restricted cash
accounts; includes accrued interest of $0 and $0, respectively. 1,105,717 426,030
Housing loans bearing interest from 0% to 3%, with principal and interest
due monthly; collateralized by property; includes accrued interest
of $229,341 and $208,341, respectively. 11,618,877 9,058,796
Pledges from private donors — 925,891
Total 27,077,890 18,244,914
Less current portion (288,237) (1,450,643)
Total loans and other long-term receivables $ 26,789,653 $ 16,794,271
As of June 30, 2021 and 2020, the Agency had committed to, and approved funding for, additional loans totaling
$5,611,965 and $0, which funds had not yet been disbursed.
During the years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020, the Agency received no new pledges from private donors. During
the years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020, the Agency collected $900,000 and $800,000, respectively.
The remaining balance of pledges from private donors due to the Agency for the year ending June 30, 2021 is $0.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
21
5.Capital Assets
The following is a summary of transactions affecting capital assets for the year ended June 30, 2021:
Description
Balance
July 1, 2020 Additions Transfers Retirements
Balance
June 30, 2021
Office furniture and equipment $ 491,704 $ 9,132 $ — $ — $ 500,836
Parking facilities and plaza 55,022,530 — — — 55,022,530
Other buildings 1,020,275 90,176 — — 1,110,451
Construction in process 13,348,636 — — — 13,348,636
Land and rights 21,456,012 — (149,742) — 21,306,270
Total 91,339,157 99,308 (149,742) — 91,288,723
Accumulated depreciation
Office furniture and equipment (292,928) (33,725) — — (326,653)
Parking facilities (46,622,541) (603,971) — — (47,226,512)
Other buildings (247,780) (29,151) — — (276,931)
Total accumulated depreciation (47,163,249) (666,847) — — (47,830,096)
Net capital assets $ 44,175,908 $ (567,539) $ (149,742) $ — $ 43,458,627
The following is a summary of transactions affecting capital assets for the year ended June 30, 2020:
Description
Balance
July 1, 2019 Additions Transfers Retirements
Balance
June 30, 2020
Office furniture and equipment $ 415,529 $ 156,229 $ — $ (80,054) $ 491,704
Parking facilities and plaza 55,022,530 — — — 55,022,530
Other buildings 1,020,275 — — — 1,020,275
Construction in process 12,597,444 751,192 — — 13,348,636
Land and rights 21,456,012 — — — 21,456,012
Total 90,511,790 907,421 — (80,054) 91,339,157
Accumulated depreciation
Office furniture and equipment (340,330) (32,545) — 79,947 (292,928)
Parking facilities (46,028,223) (594,318) — — (46,622,541)
Other buildings (218,629) (29,151) — — (247,780)
Total accumulated depreciation (46,587,182) (656,014) — 79,947 (47,163,249)
Net capital assets $ 43,924,608 $ 251,407 $ — $ (107) $ 44,175,908
Land and rights includes approximately $10,598,000 for Block 79, site of the Vivint Smart Home Arena sports
complex. Block 79 was leased to Larry H. Miller Arena Corporation for 50 years at $1 per year. The lease will
expire on June 7, 2040.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
22
6.Bonds Payable
The following is a summary of bonds payable at June 30:
2021 2020
Bonds collateralized by a first pledge of property tax increment revenues
generated within the Central Business District and the Block 70 project areas.
Unrefunded Series 2013 tax increment revenue bonds
4.161% to 4.611%, due 2020 through 2023 $ 7,370,000 $ 10,830,000
Series 2015A tax increment revenue bonds
2.57% due 2020 through 2029 11,235,000 11,910,000
Series 2019 tax increment revenue refunding bonds
(Advanced Refund Series 2013); 1.95% to 2.976%, due 2020 through 2031 43,345,000 44,135,000
Less unamortized discounts (34,546) (38,001)
Total bonds payable 61,915,454 66,836,999
Less amount due within one year (5,570,000) (4,925,000)
Total bonds payable less amount due within one year $ 56,345,454 $ 61,911,999
The following is a summary of transactions affecting bonds payable for the year ended June 30, 2021:
Balance
July 1, 2020 Additions
Principal
Payments
and
Reductions
Balance
June 30, 2021
Due Within
One Year
Federally taxable tax increment
revenue bonds Series 2013 $ 10,830,000 $ — $ (3,460,000) $ 7,370,000 $ 3,605,000
Subordinate tax increment
revenue bonds Series 2015A 11,910,000 — (675,000) 11,235,000 1,160,000
Federally taxable subordinate tax
revenue refunding bonds Series 2019 44,135,000 — (790,000) 43,345,000 805,000
Less unamortized discounts (38,001) — 3,454 (34,546) —
Total bond obligations $ 66,836,999 $ — $ (4,921,546) $ 61,915,454 $ 5,570,000
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
23
The following is a summary of transactions affecting bonds payable for the year ended June 30, 2020:
Balance
July 1, 2019 Additions
Principal
Payments and
Reductions
Balance
June 30, 2020
Due
Within
One Year
Federally taxable tax increment
revenue bonds Series 2013 $ 52,320,000 $ — $ (41,490,000) $ 10,830,000 $ 3,460,000
Subordinate tax increment
revenue bonds Series 2015A 12,215,000 — (305,000) 11,910,000 675,000
Federally taxable subordinate tax
increment revenue Series 2015B 210,000 — (210,000) — —
Federally taxable tax increment
revenue refunding bonds Series 2019 — 44,640,000 (505,000) 44,135,000 790,000
Less unamortized discounts (39,728) — 1,727 (38,001) —
Total bond obligations $ 64,705,272 $ 44,640,000 $ (42,508,273) $ 66,836,999 $ 4,925,000
In October 2013, the Agency issued $64,730,000 in federally taxable tax increment revenue bonds, with interest
rates ranging from 3.0% to 6.0%. The bond proceeds were used to fund the construction of the Eccles Theater.
The Agency received net proceeds of $63,929,046, including accrued interest of $1,377,835, and net of issuance
costs of $735,103 (which were expensed on the statement of revenues and expenses and changes in net position),
and a discount of $65,851, which is being amortized over the life of the bonds using the effective interest method.
In May 2015, the Agency issued $12,215,000 in Series 2015A subordinate tax increment revenue bonds and
$1,060,000 in Series 2015B taxable subordinate tax increment revenue bonds (total of $13,275,000) for the
construction of the Regent Street Improvements. The interest rates on the Series 2015A and 2015B bonds are
2.57% and 2.66%, respectively. The Agency received net proceeds of $12,543,274, including accrued interest of
$631,975 and issuance costs of $99,752, which were both expensed as incurred.
In August 2019, the Agency began the process for issuance and sale of $44,610,000 in Taxable Tax Increment
Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2019 for the purpose of refunding a portion of the Agency's outstanding
Taxable Tax Increment Revenue Bonds, Series 2013 (Performing Arts Center Project). The bonds were sold and
the transaction completed in November 2019. On November 21, 2019, the RDA issued Tax Increment Revenue
Refunding Bonds Series 2019 at par amount of $44,640,000. The difference between the cash flows required to
service the old debt and the cash flows required to service the new debt was $6,133,692. The Agency also
incurred a cost of issuance of $347,995, which was expensed as incurred. The bonds carry coupon rates of 1.90%
to 2.976% and have a final maturity date of April 1, 2031. The bonds were issued to partially refund Tax
Increment Bonds Series 2013. The True Interest Cost of the bonds is 2.745%. The refunding of the Series 2013
bonds resulted in net present value savings of $2,305,750.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
24
Bond principal and interest maturities are as follows:
Year ending June 30 Principal Interest
Total
Obligation
2022 $ 5,570,000 $ 1,761,027 $ 7,331,027
2023 5,815,000 1,556,179 7,371,179
2024 6,075,000 1,333,604 7,408,604
2025 6,265,000 1,191,945 7,456,945
2026 6,455,000 1,038,946 7,493,946
2027-2031 31,770,000 2,597,275 34,367,275
Less unamortized discount (34,546) — (34,546)
Total $ 61,915,454 $ 9,478,976 $ 71,394,430
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
25
7. Pension Plans
General Information about the Plan
Plan Description
Eligible plan participants are provided with pensions through the Utah Retirement Systems (URS). The URS are
comprised of the following pension trust funds:
•Public Employees Noncontributory Retirement System (Noncontributory System)
•Tier 2 Public Employees Contributory Retirement System (Tier 2 Public Employees System),which is a
multiple-employer, cost-sharing, public employee retirement system
The Tier 2 Public Employees System became effective July 1, 2011. All eligible employees beginning on or after
July 1, 2011, who have no previous service credit with any of the Utah Retirement Systems, are member of the
Tier 2 Retirement System.
The URS are established and governed by the respective sections of Title 49 of the Utah Code Annotated 1953, as
amended. The URS defined benefit plans are amended statutorily by the State Legislature. The Utah State
Retirement Office Act in Title 49 provides for the administration of the URS under the direction of the Utah State
Retirement Board (URS Board), whose members are appointed by the Governor. URS are fiduciary funds defined
as pension (and other employee benefit) trust funds. URS is a component unit of the State of Utah. Title 49 of the
Utah Code grants the authority to establish and amend the benefit terms.
URS issues a publicly available financial report that may be obtained by writing to the Utah Retirement Systems,
560 East 200 South, Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 or by visiting the website: www.urs.org.
Benefits Provided
URS provides retirement, disability, and death benefits. Retirement benefits are as follows:
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
26
System
Final Average
Salary
Years of Service
Required and/or Age
Eligible for Benefit
Benefit Percentage per
Year of Service COLA**
Noncontributory System Highest 3 years 30 years any age 2.0% per year all years Up to 4%
25 years any age*
20 years age 60*
10 years age 62*
4 years age 65
Tier 2 Public Employees System Highest 5 years 35 years any age 1.5% per year all years Up to 2.5%
20 years age 60*
10 years age 62*
4 years age 65
*with actuarial deductions
** All post-retirement cost-of-living adjustments are non-compounding and are based on original benefit except for Judges,
which is a compounding benefit. The cost-of-living adjustments are also limited to the actual Consumer Price Index (CPI)
increase for the year, although unused CPI increases not met may be carried forward to subsequent years.
Contributions
As a condition of participation in the URS, employers and/or employees are required to contribute certain
percentages of salary and wages as authorized by statute and specified by the URS Board. Employer contributions
are actuarially determined as an amount that, when combined with employee contributions (where applicable) is
expected to finance the costs of benefits earned by employees during the year, with an additional amount to
finance any unfunded actuarial accrued liability.
Contributions rates as of June 30, 2021, are as follows:
Employee Paid Employer Paid Employer 401(k)
Noncontributory System
15 Local Government Div - Tier 1 N/A 18.47 %N/A
Tier 2 DC Only
211 Local Government N/A 6.69 % 10.00 %
For the year ended June 30, 2021, the employer and employee contributions to the URS were as follows:
Employer
Contributions
Employee
Contributions
Noncontributory System $ 116,519 N/A
Tier 2 Public Employees System 21,953 N/A
Total Contributions $ 138,472 $ —
Contributions reported are the URS Board approved required contributions by URS. Contributions in Tier 2
Systems are used to finance the unfunded liabilities in the Tier 1 Systems.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
27
Pension Liabilities, Pension Expense, and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflow of
Resources Related to Pensions
At June 30, 2021 and 2020, the Agency reported a net pension liability of $50,446 and $363,988, respectively.
Measurement Date:
December 31, 2020
Measurement Date:
December 31, 2019
Net Pension
Liability
Proportionate
Share
Net Pension
Liability
Proportionate
Share
Increase
(Decrease)
Noncontributory System $ 41,780 0.0815 %$ 351,656 0.0933 % (0.0118) %
Tier 2 Public Employees System 8,666 0.0603 % 12,332 0.0545 % 0.0058 %
Total $ 50,446 $ 363,988
The net pension asset and liability was measured as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively, and the total
pension liability used to calculate the net pension asset and liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of
January 1, 2020 and 2019, respectively, and rolled forward using generally accepted actuarial procedures. The
proportion of the net pension asset and liability is equal to the ratio of the employer's actual contributions to the
URS' during the plan year over the total of all employer contributions to the URS during the plan year.
For the years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020, the Agency recognized pension expense of $118,829 and $241,343,
respectively.
At June 30, 2021, the Agency reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources relating
to pensions from the following sources:
Deferred Outflows
of Resources
Deferred Inflows
of Resources
Differences between expected and actual experience $ 64,029 $ 3,968
Changes in assumptions 10,961 5,780
Net difference between projected and actual earnings on pension plan investments — 330,414
Changes in proportion and differences between contributions and proportionate
share of contributions 13,175 5,308
Contributions subsequent to the measurement date 132,749 —
Total $ 220,914 $ 345,471
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
28
At June 30, 2020, the Agency reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources relating
to pensions from the following sources:
Deferred Outflows
of Resources
Deferred Inflows
of Resources
Differences between expected and actual experience $ 35,437 $ 9,284
Changes in assumptions 42,510 354
Net difference between projected and actual earnings on pension plan investments — 187,314
Changes in proportion and differences between contributions and proportionate
share of contributions 9,302 8,946
Contributions subsequent to the measurement date 135,122 —
Total $ 222,371 $ 205,898
Contributions made by the Agency prior to fiscal year-end, but subsequent to the measurement date of December
31, 2020, resulted in $132,749 reported as deferred outflows of resources at June 30, 2021. These contributions
will be recognized as a reduction of the net pension liability in the upcoming fiscal year. Other amounts reported
as deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized in
pension expense as follows:
Year ended December 31,
Net Deferred Outflows
(Inflows) of Resources
2021 $ (72,140)
2022 (34,725)
2023 (105,396)
2024 (49,146)
2025 613
Thereafter 3,487
Actuarial assumptions
The total pension liability in the December 31, 2020 and 2019 actuarial valuations was determined using the
following actuarial assumptions, applied to all periods included in the measurement:
Inflation 2.50%
Salary increases 3.25 - 9.75%, average, including inflation
Investment rate of return 6.95%, net of pension plan investment expenses, including inflation
For fiscal year 2021, mortality rates were adopted from an actuarial experience study dated January 1, 2020. The
retired mortality tables are developed using URS retiree experience and are based upon gender, occupation, and
age as appropriate with projected improvement using 80% of the ultimate rates from the MP-2019 improvement
assumption using a base year of 2020. The mortality assumption for active members is the PUB-2010 Employees
Mortality Table for public employees, teachers, and public safety members, respectively. For fiscal year 2020,
mortality rates were developed from actual experience and mortality tables, based on gender, occupation and age,
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
29
as appropriate, with adjustments for future improvement in mortality based on Scale AA, a model developed by
the Society of Actuaries.
The actuarial assumptions used in the January 1, 2020 and 2019 valuations were based on the results of an
actuarial experience study for the five-year period ending December 31, 2019 and 2016, respectively.
The long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was determined using a building-block method
in which best-estimate ranges of expected future real rates of return (expected returns, net of pension plan
investment expense and inflation) are developed for each major asset class and is applied consistently to each
defined benefit pension plan. These ranges are combined to produce the long-term expected rate of return by
weighting the expected future real rates of return by the target asset allocation percentage and by adding expected
inflation. The target allocation and best estimates of arithmetic real rates of return for each major asset class are
summarized in the following table:
Expected Return Arithmetic Basis
Asset class
Target
Asset
Allocation
Real
Return
Arithmetic
Basis
Long-Term
Expected
Portfolio Real
Rate of Return
Equity securities 37.00 % 6.30 % 2.33 %
Debt securities 20.00 % — % — %
Real assets 15.00 % 6.19 % 0.93 %
Private equity 12.00 % 9.50 % 1.14 %
Absolute return 16.00 % 2.75 % 0.44 %
Cash and cash equivalents — % — % — %
Totals 100.00 % 4.84 %
Inflation 2.50 %
Expected arithmetic nominal return 7.34 %
The 6.95% assumed investment rate of return is comprised of an inflation rate of 2.50% and a real return of 4.45%
that is net of investment expense.
Discount Rate
The discount rate used to measure the total pension liability was 6.95%. The projection of cash flows used to
determine the discount rate assumed that employee contributions will be made at the current contribution rate and
that contributions from all participating employers will be made at contractually required rates that are actuarially
determined and certified by the URS Board. Based on those assumptions, the pension plan’s fiduciary net position
was projected to be available to make all projected future benefits payments of current active and inactive
employees. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was applied to all
periods of projected benefit payments to determine the total pension liability. The discount rate does not use the
Municipal Bond Index Rate. The discount rate remains unchanged at 6.95%.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
30
Sensitivity of the Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Asset and Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate
The following presents the proportionate share of the net pension liability/(asset) calculated using the discount
rate of 6.95%, as well as what the proportionate share of the net pension liability/(asset) would be if it were
calculated using a discount rate that is 1-percentage-point lower (5.95%) or 1-percentage-point higher (7.95%)
than the current rate:
1% Decrease Discount Rate 1% Increase
5.95%6.95%7.95%
Noncontributory System $ 724,352 $ 41,780 $ (527,245)
Tier 2 Public Employees System 145,818 8,666 (96,252)
Total $ 870,170 $ 50,446 $ (623,497)
Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position
Detailed information about the pension plan’s fiduciary net position is available in the separately issued URS
financial report.
Defined Contribution Savings Plans
The Defined Contribution Savings Plans are administered by the URS Board and are generally supplemental plans
to the basic retirement benefits of the URS, but may also be used as a primary retirement plan. These plans are
voluntary, tax-advantaged retirement savings programs authorized under sections 401(k), 457(b), and 408 of the
Internal Revenue code. Detailed information regarding plan provisions is available in the separately issued URS
financial report.
The Agency participates in the following Defined Contribution Savings Plans with URS:
•401(k) plan
•457(b) plan
•Roth IRA plan
•Traditional IRA plan
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
31
Employer and employee contributions to the URS Defined Contribution Savings Plans for the years ended June
30, were as follows:
2021 2020 2019
401(k) Plan
Employer contributions $ 27,814 $ 37,442 $ 25,143
Employee contributions 64,847 43,410 31,032
457(b) Plan
Employer contributions — — —
Employee contributions — 9,830 8,174
Roth IRA Plan
Employer contributions N/A N/A N/A
Employee contributions 14,271 13,364 6,465
Traditional IRA Plan
Employer contributions N/A N/A N/A
Employee contributions — — —
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
32
8. Equity Interest in Joint Venture
Formation
In March 2013, the Agency, along with Salt Lake City (City) and Salt Lake County (County), executed an
Interlocal Cooperation Agreement to form and create a separate legal entity, the Utah Performing Arts Center
Agency (UPACA), an interlocal entity that will own, operate, maintain and improve the George S. and Dolores
Doré Eccles Theater (Theater).
Structure
The Agency owns 41.85%, with the City owning 33.15%, and the County owning 25% in UPACA. UPACA is
governed by a board of trustees consisting of nine members. Board membership is comprised of three
representatives appointed by the County and six representatives appointed by the City/Agency. Each
representative has one vote and each representative's term continues until a successor is appointed.
Operation
In March 2013, an Operating Agreement was entered into by UPACA, the Agency, the City and the County
assigning responsibility for the operation and management to the County Center for the Arts (CFA) through
December 31, 2041. CFA accounts for UPACA on a calendar year. Net operating income is distributed annually
to the partners in amounts outlined in organizational agreements after required contributions to operating and
capital reserve accounts. The County is responsible for any operating deficits of the Eccles Theater. The Agency
is responsible for any operating loss of the Eccles Site.
Equity
The Agency began construction on the Theater in 2014. The Theater, which hosts national touring Broadway
shows, concerts, comedy and other entertainment events, opened its doors on October 20, 2016. The first full year
of operations for UPACA ended December 31, 2017. The Agency formally transferred all assets to UPACA as of
July 2017, for accounting purposes. The Agency's equity interest in the net position of UPACA at December 31,
2021 and 2020, was $51,017,452 and $52,371,072, respectively.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
33
Summary financial information for UPACA for 2020 and 2019 is as follows:
Utah Performing Arts Center Agency
Summary Financial Information
As of and for the Year Ended December 31, 2020
Pooled Cash and Investments $ 5,536,136
Accounts Receivable and prepaid expenses 900,131
Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation 120,302,861
Total assets 126,739,128
Accounts payable and accrued expenses 877,453
Lease payable 186,078
Show proceeds held for others 2,915,844
Payable to Salt Lake County 854,252
Total liabilities 4,833,627
Total net position $ 121,905,501
Charges for services $ 2,252,772
Contributions and other revenues 966,981
Operating expenses (3,747,883)
Depreciation (2,706,325)
Change in Net Position $ (3,234,455)
Distributions to owners $ —
Utah Performing Arts Center Agency
Summary Financial Information
As of and for the Year Ended December 31, 2019
Pooled Cash and Investments $ 8,204,109
Accounts Receivable and prepaid expenses 744,633
Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation 122,598,787
Total assets 131,547,529
Accounts payable and accrued expenses 1,487,309
Show proceeds held for others 3,993,660
Payable to Salt Lake County 926,604
Total liabilities 6,407,573
Total net position $ 125,139,956
Charges for services $ 6,258,221
Contributions and other revenues 949,200
Operating expenses (5,547,948)
Depreciation (2,684,066)
Change in Net Position $ (1,024,593)
Distributions to owners $ 724,812
Audited financial statements for UPACA may be obtained from Salt Lake County Center for the Arts, 50 West
200 South, Salt Lake City, UT 84101, or by calling 385-468-1020.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
34
9 Commitments and Contingencies
During the year ended June 30, 2008, the City issued $8,590,000 of Series 2007 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds. A
portion of the bond proceeds were used to finance the construction of the Grant Tower project. The Agency
entered into an agreement with the City in January 2008, regarding the payment obligations on the bonds. Under
the terms of the agreement, the Agency is obligated to remit funds to the City on a semi-annual basis to cover
payments the City makes on the bonds. In December 2019, the City issued a complete refunding of the bond at a
4% interest rate, saving the Agency over $18,500 in principal and interest payments. As of June 30, 2021,
anticipated cumulative payments remaining under the agreement were $275,600. Anticipated payments are
included in the table below.
During the year ended June 30, 2013, the City issued $15,000,000 of Bond Anticipation Notes (BANS) to begin
construction on the Eccles Theater. These bonds were issued in expectation of the issuance of the Tax Increment
Bonds (as discussed in Note 6) and the Sales Tax Revenue Bonds issued by the City (as discussed below). The
City received the proceeds of the BANS and paid design and pre-construction costs.
During the year ended June 30, 2014, the City issued Series 2013A Sales Tax Revenue Bonds in the amount of
$51,270,000 to aid in financing the construction of the Eccles Theater. With the proceeds of these bonds, the City
paid off the BANS and the remaining net proceeds of $34,349,587 were transferred to the Agency as a
contribution from the City. Bond issuance costs and accrued interest of $1,920,413 were recognized by the
Agency as expense. In addition, upon issuance of the bonds, the Agency used private donations of $2,596,649 and
contributed $1,104,957 of its own funds into an escrow account for capitalized interest on the bonds. In December
2019, the City completely refunded the Series 2013A bonds by issuing Series 2019 taxable sales and excise tax
revenue refunding bonds in the amount of $58,540,000, saving the Agency over $11,000,000 in principal and
interest payments. As of June 30, 2021, anticipated cumulative payments remaining under the agreement were
$81,062,807. Anticipated payments are included in the table below.
The Agency will remit principal and interest payments semi-annually to the City per the debt service schedules as
a contribution to the City (expense). Total anticipated payments are as follows:
Annual
Year ending June 30,Obligation
2022 $ 2,461,521
2023 2,187,278
2024 2,188,086
2025 2,187,723
2026 2,186,443
2027-2031 10,929,002
2032-2036 42,277,398
2037 and beyond 16,920,957
Total $ 81,338,408
As discussed previously, proceeds from the Series 2013 Agency bonds and Series 2013A City bonds provided
financing for the construction of the Eccles Theater on Block 70 within the Central Business District (CBD). The
unrefunded portion of the Agency's Series 2013 bonds are payable though fiscal year 2023. The Series 2019
taxable tax increment revenue refunding bonds issued by the Agency mature in 2031. The Series 2019 taxable
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
35
sales and excise tax revenue refunding bonds (advance refunding of Series 2013A) issued by the City are payable
through fiscal year 2038. The annual debt service will be funded by the incremental property taxes generated from
the CBD Project area, Block 70 Community Development Area (CDA) and private donations. Annual principal
and interest payments on the bonds associated with the Theater are expected to require approximately 30% of tax
increment revenues generated from CBD and Block 70, beginning in fiscal year 2016. As of June 30, 2021 and
2020, the total principal and interest remaining to be paid on all bonds for the Eccles Theater project was
$139,887,231 and $147,958,158, respectively.
The Agency has pledged future tax increment revenues to repay $103,180,000 in Series 2019 Tax Increment and
Series 2019A Sales Tax Revenue Refunding bonds issued during the year ended June 30, 2020, in addition to the
remaining Series 2013 Tax Increment Revenue bonds in the amount of $14,165,000. Through inter-local
agreements entered into with the City and Salt Lake County (the County), CBD tax increment revenue that would
have been remitted to these agencies has been pledged to the Agency through tax year 2040. In December 2011,
the Agency entered into an agreement with the City in which the Agency will retain a portion of the City's Taxing
Entity Committee (TEC) allocation, in order to pay principal and interest on the Theater bond obligations. Each
year, beginning in tax year 2015 through 2040, the City will continue to receive from the Agency a dollar amount
equal to the 2014 TEC allocation. The original inter-local agreement specified that the Agency will retain 80% of
the remaining TEC allocation. This inter-local agreement was subsequently amended in May 2013 to provide that
the Agency will retain up to 100% of the remaining TEC allocation, as is necessary to fund debt service
payments. The Agency is required to reimburse the City for any portion of this additional TEC allocation that is
utilized for debt service on the Eccles Theater, with the balance accruing interest at the City's general fund rate.
The Agency is required to commit CBD tax increment in an amount equal to the City allocation under these
agreements. Similarly, in October 2012, the Agency entered into an interlocal agreement with the County wherein
the Agency is entitled to retain the County's portion of the CBD tax increment up to a maximum of $43,000,000.
The County will continue to receive from the Agency a dollar amount equal to the 2014 TEC allocation each year
beginning in tax year 2015 through 2040, and the Agency will retain the remaining TEC allocation to fund debt
service on the Eccles Theater project. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021, the Agency transferred
$9,630,540 in CBD incremental tax revenue to Block 70 for Eccles debt service per the agreements, and
transferred an additional $2,132,122 in CBD tax increment revenue available and expended $8,075,173 to cover
the principal and interest payments due during the year. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2020, the Agency
transferred $10,961,592 in CBD incremental property taxes, and expended $8,392,678 to cover the principal and
interest payments due during the year.
In addition, the Agency entered into an inter-local agreement with the City and the Salt Lake City School District
(SLCSD) wherein the Agency is entitled to receive the City's and SLCSD's portions of the tax increment from the
Block 70 CDA for twenty-five years, beginning in the tax year 2016, for the purpose of funding debt service on
the Eccles Theater. The tax increment funds are not limited to funding debt service, but will also be used to fund
the creation of a cultural core and for debt service on the Regent Street improvement bonds. In addition, in
September 2012, the Agency entered into an agreement with the County wherein the Agency is entitled to receive
the County’s portion of the Tax Increment from the Block 70 CDA for 25 years, beginning in tax year 2016, up to
a maximum of $7,000,000 for the purposes of funding debt service on the Eccles Theater. During the year ended
June 30, 2021, the Agency received an additional $1,502,076 in incremental property taxes under these
agreements, and expended $983,787 to cover principal and interest payments due during the year. For the year
ended June 30, 2020, the Agency received an additional $1,506,050 in incremental property taxes under these
agreements, and expended $836,962 to cover the principal and interest payments due during the year.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
36
During the year ended June 30, 2002, the Agency entered into a reimbursement agreement with Gateway
Associates, a developer of a project located within the Agency’s Depot District Project Area. Under the
agreement, the Agency is obligated to repay to the developers, from the tax increment revenues received from the
respective projects, up to $16,500,000 plus accrued interest, but not in excess of the tax increment revenues
received from the individual projects. These obligations are also subject to the developers paying property taxes
on a timely basis and the receipts of certificates of project completion. For the years ended June 30, 2021 and
2020, the Agency recorded expenses of $1,371,004 and $1,228,660, respectively.
During the year ended June 30, 2007, the Agency entered into a reimbursement agreement with Rio Grande
Development, LLC, a developer of a project within the Agency’s Depot District Project Area. Tremonton
Hospitality, LLC, dba Urban Suites assumed this agreement through an assignment and assumption agreement
signed in June 2016. Under this agreement, the Agency is obligated to repay to the developers, from the tax
increment revenues received from the respective project, at the lesser of $2,020,000 or 37.5% of the Project Tax
Increment over the reimbursement term, plus accrued interest, but not in excess of the tax increment revenues
received from the individual projects. These obligations are also subject to the developers paying property taxes
on a timely basis and the receipts of certificates of project completion. For the years ended June 30, 2021 and
2020, the Agency recorded expenses of $99,247 and $102,850, respectively.
In September 2009, the Agency entered into a reimbursement agreement with Scrap, LLC (Scrap) for a mixed-use
housing project located at 850 South 400 West, in the Agency’s Granary District Project Area. The agreement
provides a tax increment reimbursement to the Developer for architectural and engineering fees associated with
LEED Gold Standard design improvements incorporated into the project. Under the agreement, the Agency is
required to pay the Developer a reimbursement cap that is the lesser of 1) a principal amount equal to 50% of the
project architectural and engineering expenses; or 2) $450,000. These obligations are subject to the Developer
paying property taxes on a timely basis, receipts of certificates of project completion, and other annual reporting
duties as defined in the reimbursement agreement. For the years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020, the Agency
recorded expenses of $0 and $33,773, respectively. The reimbursement period has expired.
During the year ended June 30, 2010, the Agency entered into a reimbursement agreement with 222 S. Main
Investments, LLC, a developer of a project within the Agency’s Central Business District Project Area. Under this
agreement, the Agency is obligated to repay to the developers 85% of the tax increment revenues received by the
Agency from the respective project up to the lesser of: 1) total developer costs less $127,300,000 or 2)
$6,000,000, plus accrued interest of 5.9%, over the reimbursement term, which expires in January 2031. These
obligations are also subject to the developers paying property taxes on a timely basis, the receipt of certificates of
project completion, and annual certificates of compliance with the other terms of the reimbursement agreement.
For the years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020, the Agency recorded expenses of $626,876 and $650,183,
respectively.
During the year ended June 30, 2015, the Agency entered into a reimbursement agreement with Liberty Gateway
Properties, L.C. (Liberty) for a mixed-use housing project located on 500 West between South Temple and 100
South, in the Agency’s Depot District Project Area. The agreement provides a tax increment reimbursement to the
Developer for costs incurred in connection with the associated parking garage component of the project from the
tax increment created from the property. Under the agreement, the Agency will pay the Developer a
reimbursement amount equal to the sum of 1) $3,000 multiplied by the actual number of eligible at-grade
structured parking stalls (up to a maximum of 48 stalls), plus 2) $6,000 multiplied by the actual number of below-
grade structured parking stalls (up to a maximum of 112), together with simple interest accrued thereon. The
maximum that will be reimbursed is $816,000. The reimbursement term is for the tax years 2015 through 2022.
The Agency will make an annual payment to the Developer during the reimbursement term in an amount equal to
72% of the tax increment for such year actually received by the Agency until the earlier to occur of 1) Developer
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
37
has received an amount equal to the reimbursement amount or 2) the expiration of the reimbursement term. These
obligations are subject to the Developer paying property taxes on a timely basis, receipts of certificates of project
completion, and other annual reporting duties as defined in the reimbursement agreement. For the years ended
June 30, 2021 and 2020, the Agency recorded expenses of $133,351 and $67,535, respectively.
During the year ended June 30, 2019, the Agency entered into a reimbursement agreement with Stadler US, Inc, a
developer of a project located within the Agency’s Stadler Rail Project Area. Under the agreement, the Agency is
obligated to reimburse the developers, from the tax increment revenues received from the respective projects, up
to $9,610,721 over a twenty (20) year term, but not in excess of the tax increment revenues received from the
individual projects. These obligations are also subject to the developers paying property taxes on a timely basis
and the receipts of certificates of project completion. For the years ended June 30, 2021 and 2020 the Agency did
not make any payments due to Stadler's failure to submit required documentation.
During the year ended June 30, 2020, the Agency entered into a reimbursement agreement with NWQ, LLC, a
developer of a project located within the Agency’s Northwest Quadrant Project Area. Under the agreement, the
Agency is obligated to reimburse the developers, from the tax increment revenues received from the respective
projects, up to $28,000,000 over a nineteen (19) year term, but not in excess of the tax increment revenues
received from the individual projects. These obligations are also subject to the developers paying property taxes
on a timely basis and the receipts of certificates of project completion. The first year of reimbursement is
anticipated to be for the 2020 tax year with the expense recorded in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. No
payment was made for the year ended June 30, 2021 due to NWQ's failure to submit documentation.
During the year ended June 30, 2020, the Agency entered into a reimbursement agreement with West Quarter
Residential I, LLC, a developer of a project located within the Agency’s Block 67 Project Area. Under the
agreement, the Agency is obligated to reimburse the developers, from the tax increment revenues received from
the respective projects, up to $15,000,000 over a twenty (20) year term as a pass-through from Salt Lake County
for transportation funds from the State of Utah, but not in excess of the tax increment revenues received from the
individual projects. These obligations are also subject to the developers paying property taxes on a timely basis
and the receipts of certificates of project completion. The first year of reimbursement is anticipated to be for the
2022 tax year.
In March, 2008, the Agency and the State of Utah (State) entered into a lease agreement for the rental by the State
of 250 parking stalls in a parking structure owned by the Agency. The lease requires monthly payments of $20
per stall, for a total of $5,000 per month. The lease term is 20 years. In addition, the lease includes a provision for
the repayment of a portion of the construction costs to be paid by the State of $350,000 over the term of the
parking rental agreement. The repayment terms requires interest of 3% and monthly payments of $2,077, in
addition to the monthly rent payments. The balance of the unpaid amount as of June 30, 2021 and 2020, was
$115,608 and $134,988, respectively, which has been recorded as a note receivable.
10 Concentrations
Operating revenues are not adequate to fund operations of the Agency. The Agency received $45,212,097 and
$42,519,849 of transfers of tax increment from various taxing entities during the years ended June 30, 2021 and
2020, respectively, which were recorded as non-operating revenues of $31,190,957 in Grants and other
contributions, and $13,754,166 in Transfers In for fiscal year 2021, and $29,274,510 in Grant and other
contributions, and $13,245,339 in Transfers In for fiscal year 2020. These funds are critical for the continuing
operations of the Agency.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Financial Statements
June 30, 2021 and 2020
38
Required Supplementary Information
June 30, 2021 and 2020
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
39
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Schedule of the Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability
December 31, 2020
Last 10 Years*
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Noncontributory System 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015
Proportion of the net pension liability 0.08%0.09%0.04%0.07%0.06%0.05%0.07%
Proportionate share of the net pension liability $ 41,780 $ 351,656 $ 285,453 $ 301,169 $ 405,107 $ 297,064 $ 317,700
Covered payroll $ 638,396 $ 743,599 $ 312,019 $ 558,845 $ 477,356 $ 432,740 $ 611,285
Proportionate share of the net pension liability
as a percentage of its covered payroll 6.54%47.29%91.49%53.89%84.86%68.65%51.97%
Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage of the
total pension liability 99.20%93.70%87.00%91.90%87.30%87.80%90.20%
Tier 2 Public Employees System 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015
Proportion of the net pension liability 0.06%0.05%0.02%0.02%0.03%0.04%0.02%
Proportionate share of the net pension liability/(asset)$ 8,666 $ 12,332 $ 9,117 $ 2,007 $ 3,445 $ (83) $ (726)
Covered payroll $ 963,382 $ 761,977 $ 248,511 $ 222,660 $ 269,084 $ 245,666 $ 117,554
Proportionate share of the net pension liability/(asset)
as a percentage of its covered payroll 0.90%1.62%3.67%0.09%1.28%(0.03)%(0.62)%
Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage of the
total pension liability 98.30%90.80%90.80%97.40%95.10%100.20%103.50%
*In accordance with paragraph 81.a of GASB 68, employers will need to disclose a ten-year history of their proportionate share of the Net
Pension Liability/(Asset) in their RSI. The ten-year schedule will need to be built prospectively. The schedule above is for the seven years
currently available.
40
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Schedule of Contributions
June 30, 2021
Last 10 Fiscal Years*
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Noncontributory System 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015
Actuarial determined contributions $ 116,519 $ 134,849 $ 56,778 $ 105,455 $ 91,614 $ 140,147 $ 175,299
Contributions in relation to the contractually required
contribution (116,519) (134,849) (56,778) (105,455) (91,614) (140,147) (175,299)
Contribution deficiency $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ —
Covered employee payroll $ 634,888 $ 734,726 $ 309,377 $ 575,011 $ 499,259 $ 432,740 $ 637,982
Contributions as a percentage of covered payroll **18.35%18.35%18.35%18.34%18.35%32.39%27.48%
Tier 2 Public Employee System ***2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015
Actuarial determined contributions $ 21,953 $ 16,191 $ 5,582 $ 5,169 $ 40,101 $ 33,041 $ 16,040
Contributions in relation to the contractually required
contribution (21,953) (16,191) (5,582) (5,169) (40,101) (33,041) (16,040)
Contribution deficiency $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ —
Covered employee payroll $ 251,098 $ 230,509 $ 276,833 $ 204,783 $ 268,954 $ 244,828 $ 122,688
Contributions as a percentage of covered payroll **8.74%7.02%2.02%2.52%14.91%13.50%13.07%
*In accordance with paragraph 81.a of GASB 68, employers will need to disclose a ten-year history of their proportionate share of the Net
Pension Liability/(Asset) in their RSI. The ten-year schedule will need to be built prospectively. The schedule above is for the seven years
currently available.
**Contributions as a percentage of covered payroll may be different than the URS Board certified rate due to rounding or other administrative
issues.
***Contributions in Tier 2 include an amortization rate to help fund the unfunded liabilities in the Tier 1 systems. Tier 2 systems were created
effective July 1, 2011.
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Notes to Required Supplementary Information
June 30, 2021 and 2020
1.Changes in Assumptions: There were a number of demographic assumptions (e.g. rates of termination, disability, retirement, as well
as an updated mortality and salary increase assumption) updated for use in the January 1, 2020 actuarial valuation. These assumption
updates were adopted by the Utah State Retirement Board as a result of an Actuarial Experience Study performed for the Utah
Retirement Systems. In aggregate, those assumption changes resulted in a $201 million increase in the Total Pension Liability, which
is about 0.50% of the Total Pension Liability of as December 31, 2019 for all systems combined. The Actuarial Experience Study
report as of December 31, 2019 provides detailed information regarding those assumption changes, which may be accessed online at
newsroom.urs.org under the “Retirement Office” column using the “Reports and Stats” tab.
41
Supplementary Information
June 30, 2021
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
42
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Combining Statement of Net Position Information by Project Area
June 30, 2021
Block 70
CDA CBD Citywide
Housing
Depot
District
Granary
District
Housing
Development
Trust
North
Temple
North
Temple
Viaduct
Northwest
Quadrant
Northwest
Quadrant
Housing
Program
Income
Fund
Project
Area
Housing
RDA
Admin
Revolving
Loan Fund Stadler Sugarhouse
Project
West
Capital
Hill
West
Temple
Gateway
Total
Assets
Cash and cash equivalent (unrestricted)$ 14,478,329 $ (2,603,175) $ 3,372,817 $ 1,902,733 $ 3,324,331 $ 2,845,080 $ 951,939 $ 34,412 $ 1,183,496 $ 409,031 $ 3,078,886 $ 2,181,547 $ 1,151,868 $ 16,018,261 $ 1,183 $ 55,327 $ (781,294) $ 241,559 $ 47,846,331
Loans receivable — — 11,618,878 — — 1,000,000 — — — — 1,105,717 — — 13,353,296 — — — — 27,077,890
Cash and cash equivalent (restricted) (2,095,258) 14,474,785 9,133,374 10,262,047 — 1,340,000 469,360 — 168,464 — 9,977,399 — 44,290 6,106,965 146,056 — 3,767,040 2,244,002 56,038,523
Land and water rights 4,790,823 16,515,447 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 21,306,270
Improvements - other than buildings — 55,022,530 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 55,022,530
Buildings — 443,533 — — — — — — — — — 576,742 — — — 90,177 — — 1,110,451
Machinery and equipment — 269,549 — — — — — — — — 49,042 — 182,245 — — — — — 500,836
Construction in process 12,683,590 665,047 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 13,348,636
Accumulated depreciation — (47,508,282) — — — — — — — — (49,042) (156,543) (116,229) — — — — — (47,830,096)
Land and buildings held for sale — 8,522,588 — 14,733,492 194,455 — 4,000,000 — — — 7,875,703 3,454,690 — — — 584,601 28,590 — 39,394,118
Investment in Joint Venture 51,017,452 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 51,017,452
Deposits and other assets — 10,572 — — 203 — — — — — 728,114 — 27,750 — — — — 1,220 767,859
Total assets 80,874,936 45,812,593 24,125,068 26,898,273 3,518,990 5,185,080 5,421,299 34,412 1,351,960 409,031 22,765,818 6,056,436 1,289,924 35,478,522 147,239 730,105 3,014,335 2,486,780 265,600,801
Deferred outflows 5,333,646 — — — — — — — — — — — 220,914 — — — — — 5,554,560
Total assets and deferred outflows $ 86,208,581 $ 45,812,593 $ 24,125,068 $ 26,898,273 $ 3,518,990 $ 5,185,080 $ 5,421,299 $ 34,412 $ 1,351,960 $ 409,031 $ 22,765,818 $ 6,056,436 $ 1,510,838 $ 35,478,522 $ 147,239 $ 730,105 $ 3,014,335 $ 2,486,780 $ 271,155,361
Liabilities
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $ 2,361,499 $ 44,540 $ — $ 110,542 $ 1,064 $ — $ 4,266 $ — $ — $ — $ 45,320 $ 5,100 $ 44,831 $ — $ — $ 63,000 $ 77,693 166,981 $ 2,924,837
Accrued compensation - current — — — — — — — — — — — — 61,384 — — — — — 61,384
Accrued interest payable - current 440,257 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 440,257
Bonds payable - current portion 5,570,000 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 5,570,000
Pension liability — — — — — — — — — — — — 50,446 — — — — — 50,446
Long term compensation liability — — — — — — — — — — — — 241,028 — — — — — 241,028
Advances from (to) other funds 1,150,000 (1,150,000) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Bonds payable, net 56,345,454 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 56,345,454
Total liabilities 65,867,210 (1,105,460) — 110,542 1,064 — 4,266 — — — 45,320 5,100 397,689 — — 63,000 77,693 166,981 65,633,406
Deferred inflows — — — — — — — — — — — — 345,471 — — — — — 345,471
Fund balance
Net position, beginning 7,881,910 56,728,003 19,721,234 25,526,763 2,705,175 2,601,635 5,068,813 31,210 198 — 22,426,630 6,054,587 484,481 33,242,352 70,419 477,067 2,392,520 2,950,905 188,363,901
Revenues 803,534 31,251,766 81,125 5,525,331 944,077 2,583,445 640,558 2,103,730 1,688,689 409,031 1,440,529 13,227 23,460 1,144,760 102,594 190,038 711,967 17,246 49,675,106
Expenses 6,114,325 16,774,390 — 2,612,615 2,076 — 123,033 2,069,020 — — 999,236 16,478 3,201,564 183,590 — — 167,845 598,351 32,862,523
Net transfers in (out) 17,770,252 (24,287,326) 4,322,710 (1,651,748) (129,250) — (169,306) (31,508) (336,927) — (147,424) — 3,461,301 1,275,000 (25,774) — — (50,000) —
Total net position, ending 20,341,372 46,918,053 24,125,068 26,787,731 3,517,926 5,185,080 5,417,033 34,412 1,351,960 409,031 22,720,498 6,051,336 767,678 35,478,522 147,239 667,105 2,936,642 2,319,799 205,176,484
Total liabilities, deferred inflows and net position $ 86,208,581 $ 45,812,593 $ 24,125,068 $ 26,898,273 $ 3,518,990 $ 5,185,080 $ 5,421,299 $ 34,412 $ 1,351,960 $ 409,031 $ 22,765,818 $ 6,056,436 $ 1,510,838 $ 35,478,522 $ 147,239 $ 730,105 $ 3,014,335 $ 2,486,780 $ 271,155,361
43
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Combining Statement of Revenues and Expenses and Changes in Net Position by Project Area
Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2021
Block 70
CDA CBD Citywide
Housing
Depot
District
Granary
District
Housing
Development
Trust
North
Temple
North
Temple
Viaduct
CDA
Northwest
Quadrant
Northwest
Quadrant
Housing
Program
Income
Fund
Project
Area
Housing
RDA
Administra
tion
Revolving
Loan
Fund
Stadler Sugarhouse
Project
West
Capital
Hill
West
Temple
Gateway
Total
Revenue
Transfers in from SLC $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 2,590,000 $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 14,037,173 $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 16,627,173
Grants and Other Contributioms 2,145,823 31,160,698 — 5,452,809 926,661 — 633,123 2,100,528 1,684,441 409,031 147,424 — (14,021,140) — 101,927 189,703 526,903 — 31,457,931
Interest on Investments 11,331 151,624 55,370 72,522 17,416 (6,555) 7,435 3,202 4,248 — 81,330 13,227 7,031 1,732 667 335 185,064 17,246 623,224
Rental & other income — 22,813 25,755 — — — — — — — 1,213,501 — — 168,019 — — — — 1,430,088
Miscellaneous revenue — — — — — — — — — — (1,727) — 396 10 — — — — (1,321)
Changes in Equity in JV (1,353,619) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — (1,353,619)
Gain/Loss on sale of capital assets — (83,370) — — — — — — — — — — — 975,000 — — — — 891,630
Total revenue $ 803,534 $ 31,251,766 $ 81,125 $ 5,525,331 $ 944,077 $ 2,583,445 $ 640,558 $ 2,103,730 $ 1,688,689 $ 409,031 $ 1,440,529 $ 13,227 $ 23,460 $ 1,144,760 $ 102,594 $ 190,038 $ 711,967 $ 17,246 $ 49,675,106
Expense
Personal Services $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 1,560,415 $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 1,560,415
O & M — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,607,423 — — — — — 1,607,423
Charges & Services 1,535,726 16,161,244 — 2,336,815 2,076 — 123,033 2,069,020 — — 995,739 — — 183,590 — — 167,845 598,351 24,173,439
Depreciation — 613,146 — — — — — — — — 3,497 16,478 33,725 — — — — — 666,847
Interest & Fiscal Charges 4,578,599 — — 275,800 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 4,854,399
Total expense 6,114,325 16,774,390 — 2,612,615 2,076 — 123,033 2,069,020 — — 999,236 16,478 3,201,564 183,590 — — 167,845 598,351 32,862,523
Changes in net position $ (5,310,790) $ 14,477,376 $ 81,125 $ 2,912,716 $ 942,001 $ 2,583,445 $ 517,525 $ 34,710 $ 1,688,689 $ 409,031 $ 441,292 $ (3,252) $ (3,178,104) $ 961,170 $ 102,594 $ 190,038 $ 544,122 $ (581,106) $ 16,812,583
44
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
Selected Financial Information by Project Area
Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2021
Block 70
CDA CBD Citywide
Housing
Depot
District
Granary
District
Housing
Development
Trust
North
Temple
North
Temple
Viaduct
CDA
Northwest
Quadrant
Northwest
Quadrant
Housing
Program
Income
Fund
Project
Area
Housing
RDA
Administrati
on
Revolving
Loan Fund Stadler Sugarhouse
Project
West
Capital
Hill
West
Temple
Gateway
Total
Grants and Other Contributions $ 2,145,823 $ 31,160,698 $ — $ 5,452,809 $ 926,661 $ — $ 633,123 $ 2,100,528 $ 1,684,441 $ 409,031 $ 147,424 $ — $ (14,021,140) $ — $ 101,927 $ 189,703 $ 526,903 $ — $ 31,457,931
Loans receivable principal received — — 27,699 — — — — — — — 35,573 — — 2,983,003 — — — — $ 3,046,275
Interest on investments 11,331 151,624 55,370 72,522 17,416 (6,555) 7,435 3,202 4,248 — 81,330 13,227 7,031 1,732 667 335 185,064 17,246 $ 623,224
Bonds payable 61,915,454 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — $ 61,915,454
Interest and fiscal charges 4,578,599 — — 275,800 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — $ 4,854,399
Debt principal paid 5,390,000 — — 255,000 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — $ 5,645,000
Origination of loans — 716,987 2,566,780 — — — — — — — — — — 4,636,570 — — — — $ 7,920,337
Refunds to taxing entities — — — — — — — — — — — — 3,245 — — — — — $ 3,245
Personal Services — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,560,415 — — — — — $ 1,560,415
Operating & Maintenance — — — — — — — — — — — — 1,607,423 — — — — — $ 1,607,423
Charges & Services 1,535,726 16,161,244 — 2,336,815 2,076 — 123,033 2,069,020 — — 995,739 — — 183,590 — — 167,845 598,351 $ 24,173,439
Budgetary transfers in (out) 17,770,252 (24,287,326) 4,322,710 (1,651,748) (129,250) — (169,306) (31,508) (336,927) — (147,424) — 3,461,301 1,275,000 (25,774) — — (50,000) $ —
Depreciation — 613,146 — — — — — — — — 3,497 16,478 33,725 — — — — — $ 666,847
45
9 LINE BUDGET REQUESTS
Mid-Block Crosswalk & Environmental Remediation
RDA BOARD MEETING –DECEMBER 14, 2021
LOCATION
•745 W. 900 South –south of RDA-funded West End development
PROJECT DETAILS
•In conjunction with 900 South reconstruction/9 Line trail project
•9 Line Trail Extension Study –recommended midblock walkway at this location
•Provide safe connection from the West End development to the 9 Line
Community Garden and Trail
BUDGET REQUEST
•Up to $70,000 (request from SLC Transportation)
•9 Line/State Street seed funds
TIMELINE
•Constructed within next phase of the 9 Line project (2022-2023)
LOCATION
•877 W. 400 South –Recently purchased commissary kitchen
PROJECT DETAILS
•RDA purchased property in July 2021
•Previously a gas station with former underground gasoline storage tank basin
•State requires completion of subsurface investigation report before
development
BUDGET REQUEST
•Up to $18,000 for investigation
•9 Line/State Street seed funds
•$26,044.25 estimated cost –former property owners will pay half
TIMELINE
•Estimated 30-60 days to complete work after contract/notice to proceed in
place
877
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY
MAYOR ERIN MENDENHALL
Executive Director
DANNY WALZ
Director
WWW.SLCGOV.COM WWW.SLCRDA.COM WWW.SALTLAKEARTS.ORG
STAFF MEMO
DATE: November 24, 2021
PREPARED BY: Lauren Parisi and Tracy Tran, RDA Project Mangers
RE: 9 Line Budget Requests
REQUESTED ACTION: Consider the appropriation of 9 Line Project Area seed funds for a
crosswalk and environmental remediation
POLICY ITEM: Budget
BUDGET IMPACTS: Program Income Fund – State Street/9 Line Seed Funds
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In the FY20 and FY21 budgets, the Board of Directors (“Board”) of
the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (“RDA”) appropriated a total of $2,181,826 as seed
funds for the State Street and 9 Line Community Reinvestment Areas (“CRA”s). The purpose of
these funds is to kickstart development projects in new project areas before tax increment collection
begins. Agency staff is requesting the Board to consider allocating a portion of the remaining funds
to two projects in the 9 Line CRA including the construction of a crosswalk at approximately 745
West and the environmental remediation of the RDA’s property at 877 West 400 South.
ANALYSIS:
9 Line Trail Mid-Block Crosswalk at Approximately 745 West
The City’s Transportation and Engineering Divisions are currently working on the next phase of the
900 South Reconstruction and 9 Line Trail Project, which focuses on completing the 9 Line Trail
from 700 West to Lincoln Street (945 East) and reconstructing the roadway from 900 West to
Lincoln Street. The project will occur in 2022 and 2023. In 2017, a 9 Line Trail Extension Study
was completed. It recommended crosswalks at each intersection and mid-block crossings at strategic
locations. As part of this 2022-23 project, crosswalks will be put in at each intersection, but not at
mid-block crossings due to budget constraints.
In 2019, the RDA Board approved a $3.1 million loan to the West End Development located at
approximately 740 West 900 South to adaptively reuse two existing commercial buildings within the
RDA’s 9 Line CRA. This development is nearing completion and the developer is working to lease
the building. Due to the RDA’s 9 Line Project Area and investments in the area with the West End
Development and the 9 Line Community Garden, the City’s Transportation Division approached the
RDA to determine the potential of funding up to $70,000 for a mid-block crossing (see Attachment
A for approximate location). The mid-block crossing would provide a safe and direct connection
across 900 South for people walking and bicycling from the West End Development to the 9 Line
Community Garden and the 9 Line Trail.
The total project cost for this next phase (2022-23) of the 900 South Reconstruction and 9 Line Trail
is approximately $11 Million and the funding sources include: Funding Our Future Roadway
Reconstruction Bond and urban trails dollars, Class C Roadway Funds, a large Salt Lake County
grant, CIP funds, and some Public Utility Storm Drain Program funding.
Environmental Remediation of 877 W. 400 South
In July of 2020, the Board approved designating $900,000 of the previously allocated seeds funds for
the purchase of property in the 9 Line CRA at 877 W. 400 South (see Attachment B for map). After
the due diligence and negotiation processes were finalized, the RDA closed on the purchase of the
property and took official ownership in August of 2021. The due diligence process revealed that the
site was a former gas station/auto repair shop from 1928 to at least 1965. Additionally, an initial
analysis completed by consulting firm Wasatch Environmental identified a former underground
gasoline storage tank basin was located on the site as well as levels petroleum hydrocarbons above
the Utah Initial Screening Levels (ISLs).
Because of this former use and levels of contamination, Utah’s Department of Environmental
Response and Remediation (DERR) requires that a subsurface investigation report be completed to
define the extent and degree of subsurface petroleum contamination and the potential risks to human
health and the environment. This investigation must be completed to determine whether any cleanup
is necessary before development can occur.
Wasatch Environmental has prepared a scope of work detailing the tasks, deliverables and estimated
costs associated with completing the subsurface investigation report as required by DERR
(Attachment C). The total cost estimate is approximately $26,044.25. As a condition of the sale, the
former property owners agreed to pay for half of all environmental remediation costs and put funds in
escrow for the RDA’s use. Thus, RDA staff is seeking authorization by the RDA Board to utilize up
to $18,000 in seeds funds to fund half the cost of the subsurface investigation report. The RDA
anticipates that this will be the largest cost of the remediation process and does not expect extensive
cleanup to be required; however, this will be determined by the report. The former property owner’s
funds in escrow can be used for half of future remediation costs as well. It is important that the RDA
assists with environmental remediation costs to remove barriers to community development.
RDA Budget Appropriation
Per FY19 Budget Amendment 4, the Board appropriated $1.5 Million as seed funds for the State
Street and 9 Line Community Reinvestment Areas. In FY20, the Board appropriated an additional
$681,826 to the seed fund bringing the balance to $2,181,826. The Board approved using $788,901
of the seed funds for the TRAX Station at 650 S. Main Street and $900,000 for the purchase of 877
W. 400 South bringing the current balance to $492,925. RDA staff is now seeking the Board’s
authorization to use up to $70,000 for the crosswalk and up to $18,000 for environmental
remediation.
Next Steps
9 Line Trail Mid-Block Crossing – If this funding allocation is approved, RDA staff will work with
the City’s Transportation and Engineering Divisions to include this mid-block crossing within this
next phase of work and the upcoming construction bid. The bidding and contract award should be
completed by early 2022, with construction at this location occurring during either 2022 or 2023.
2
3
Environmental Remediation – If this funding allocation is approved, RDA staff will execute a
professional services agreement with Wasatch Environmental to complete the subsurface
investigation report as required by DERR. It is anticipated that this work will take up to three months
to complete. The RDA does not expect that extensive cleanup of the site will be required, but this is
to be confirmed by the subsurface investigation report.
PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION:
•August 2018: The RDA Board adopted the State Street and 9 Line Community Reinvestment
Area Plans
•June 2019 and 2020: The RDA Board allocated funding in the FY20 and FY21 budgets to be
used as seed funds for the State Street and 9 Line Community Reinvestment Areas.
ATTACHMENTS:
•Attachment A: Proposed Mid-Block Crossing
•Attachment B: Property Map – 877 W. 400 South
•Attachment C: Subsurface Investigation Proposal
4
Attachment A: Proposed Mid-Block Crossing
5
Attachment B: Property Map – 877 W. 400 South
877
WASATCH ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
2410 WEST CALIFORNIA AVENUE
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84104
PHONE (801) 972-8400
FAX (801) 972-8459
e-mail: wei@wasatch-environmental.com
www.wasatch-environmental.com
PROPOSAL FOR
ADDITIONAL PHASE II LIMITED SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
COMMISSARY KITCHEN
877 WEST 400 SOUTH
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
Project No. 2102-003C
Prepared for:
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
P.O. Box 145518
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114
October 6, 2021
Prepared by:
Wasatch Environmental, Inc.
2410 West California Avenue
Salt Lake City, Utah 84104
Attachment C: Subsurface Investigation Proposal
Additional Phase II Limited Subsurface Investigation Commissary Kitchen
Wasatch Environmental, Inc. 1
PROPOSAL FOR
ADDITIONAL PHASE II LIMITED SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
COMMISSARY KITCHEN
877 WEST 400 SOUTH
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
1. INTRODUCTION
This proposal describes the tasks to be performed in relation to the Commissary Kitchen property
located at 877 West 400 South in Salt Lake City, Utah (Property). The work described herein will be
performed in accordance with a site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP).
Wasatch Environmental, Inc. (Wasatch) completed a December 23, 2020, Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment which identified that the Property was operated as two different gasoline stations and a
welding/repair shop from at least 1928 through at least 1965, at a time before regulatory oversight.
Based on the timeframe in which these gasoline stations operated, there is also a high likelihood that
automotive repair was conducted. The likelihood of releases of hazardous substances or petroleum
products from the former uses of the subject property as a gasoline service station and welding/repair
shop would be considered a recognized environmental condition.
Wasatch conducted a ground penetrating radar (GPR) survey and collected soil and groundwater
samples at the Property in January 2021. The GPR survey identified a likely former underground
storage tank (UST) basin near the center of the northern part of the Property. Soil and groundwater
analysis identified a release of petroleum hydrocarbons with concentrations above the Utah Initial
Screening Levels (ISLs) in and around this likely former UST basin.
In January and February 2021, Wasatch conducted two subsurface investigations that included
advancing a total of nine soil borings on the Property around the historical building and gasoline
station features, including within the likely former UST basin identified during the GPR survey. The
locations of the prior borings (GP-1 through GP-9) are depicted on Figure 1.
The results of these prior investigations identified total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline-range
organics (TPH-GRO) in soil at concentrations ranging from 166 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) and
812 mg/kg in boring GP-2 through GP-7, which are above the Utah Initial Screening Level (ISL) for
soil of 150 mg/kg. These boring locations were located in the northwest part of the Property, and
near the northwest and north property boundaries. The boring locations were located within or
downgradient from former gasoline station features such as possible former dispensers, and a likely
former UST basin. The majority of these soil samples were collected below the water table (which
was approximately 11 feet below ground surface) in zones with the highest field indications of
impacts. The exception was the sample from GP-3, which was collected at what appeared to be the
bottom of the former UST basin. The highest concentrations of TPH-GRO were detected within the
former UST basin and near a possible former dispenser area. Based on the close proximity of the
elevated concentrations of TPH-GRO in soil to the Property boundaries, it is possible that TPH-GRO
above the Utah ISLs is present off-site, within a grassy area between the road and the Property
boundary.
One soil sample (GP-9@12’) contained a benzene concentration of 1.2 mg/kg, which is above the
Utah ISL for benzene in soil of 0.2 mg/kg and the Utah Risk Based Corrective Action (RBCA) Tier 1
Screening Level for benzene in soil of 0.9 mg/kg. No other soil or groundwater samples contained
benzene at concentrations above the laboratory reporting limits.
Groundwater concentrations of TPH-GRO of 1.750 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and 1.460 mg/L were
detected in borings GP-3 and GP-7, respectively. These concentrations are above the Utah ISL for
TPH-GRO in groundwater of 1 mg/L. Based on the relatively low concentrations, it is possible that a
properly installed and developed groundwater monitoring well would produce samples with
Additional Phase II Limited Subsurface Investigation Commissary Kitchen
Wasatch Environmental, Inc. 2
concentrations below the Utah ISL.
2. Objectives
The objectives of the work described in this proposal are as follows:
• Evaluate the on-site areas adjacent to previous soil boring GP-9 to evaluate the extent of the
detected benzene concentration in soil;
• Evaluate the on-site groundwater to evaluate the degree and extent of TPH-GRO impacts;
• Evaluate TPH-GRO fractionation data for the on-site soils and groundwater to determine
what risks, if any, exist; and
• Evaluate off-site areas located to the west, northwest, and north of the Property for potential
TPH-GRO impacts in soil and groundwater.
3. Scope of Proposed Work
Wasatch is proposing the following tasks to accomplish the objectives stated above.
Task 1: Project Management
Task 1 includes project management and oversight of the work, preparation of the proposal and cost
estimate, requesting estimates and selecting appropriate subcontractors, preparation of the health
and safety plan, obtaining required permits from Salt Lake City, obtaining appropriate traffic control
plans (if drilling within 900 West or 400 South is required), obtaining access agreements, and
regulatory support.
Task 2: Subsurface Investigation
Task 2 includes advancing a total of 9 soil borings on the Property to a maximum depth of 15 feet
below ground surface (bgs) and in identified off-site locations. In addition to Blue Stakes notification,
the off-site locations will be pre-cleared with a private utility clearance service prior to completion of
the borings. Five of the soil borings will be completed as monitoring wells. The soil borings will be
completed using a track-mounted direct-push drill rig. One soil sample will be collected from each of
the proposed monitoring well borings (GP-14/MW-14 through GP-18/MW-18), and potentially two soil
samples will be collected from each of the proposed step-out borings (GP-10 through GP-13) based
on field indications of impacts. The depth of where each soil sample will be collected will be biased to
the depth at which the highest level of impacts is observed (i.e., soil staining, odors, and PID
readings). If no impacts are observed, the soil sample will be collected just above the vadose
zone/saturation zone interface. Wasatch will obtain the appropriate permits from Salt Lake City prior
to drilling in off-site locations between the Property boundary and 400 South and 900 West.
At least 48 hours prior to conducting any drilling activities, Wasatch will submit a Blue Stakes utility
clearance request. Wasatch will also use a private utility locator to clear all boring locations.
Soil borings will be advanced in 5-foot increments using a GeoProbe Model 7822 DT. Soil cores will
be collected from 5-foot long by 1.5-inch diameter discrete interval push samplers equipped with
disposable polybutyrate liners. Soil cores will be field screened with a with a photoionization detector
(PID). The PID is utilized to identify soils which may have been impacted by VOCs such as those
found in petroleum constituents and some chlorinated solvents. The soil cores will be field logged by
an experienced geologist. Soil samples will be collected from depth intervals indicated by field
observations (i.e., visual staining, odors, and PID readings, etc.) and submitted for laboratory
analysis. If no filed indication of contamination is observed, soil samples will be collected just above
the vadose zone and saturation zone interface. The soil samples would be collected with gloved
hands and placed into laboratory-supplied 2-ounce glass jars, and immediately placed into iced
coolers. All soil samples will be delivered under chain-of-custody protocol to American West
Analytical Laboratories (AWAL), a Utah-Certified analytical laboratory, for analysis of VOCs, TPH-
Additional Phase II Limited Subsurface Investigation Commissary Kitchen
Wasatch Environmental, Inc. 3
GRO, and TPH-GRO fractionation by U.S. EPA Method 8260D. Proposed sample locations are
shown on Figure 1.
The five groundwater monitoring wells would be installed using a combination of direct-push and
hollow stem auger drilling techniques. Proposed monitoring well locations are shown on Figure 1.
The monitoring wells would be installed to a depth of approximately 15 feet bgs and screened from 5
to 15 feet bgs. The monitoring wells would be constructed of 2-inch diameter, schedule 40 polyvinyl
chloride (PVC) well casing; and 2-inch diameter, schedule 40 PVC, 0.010-inch slotted well screen. A
sand pack consisting of 10/20 Colorado Silica sand would be installed from 4 feet to 15 feet bgs, and
a hydrated bentonite seal would be installed above the sand pack. Surface completions would
consist of flush mounted, traffic rated, well boxes set in concrete. The monitoring wells would be
developed by surging and purging with a disposable bailer, and by pumping with a submersible pump
when possible. The monitoring wells would be sampled using low-flow purging and sampling
procedures. Wasatch would wait a minimum of 72 hours following the completion of well
development before conducting the initial sampling event.
Monitoring well sampling will involve inserting ¼-inch outside diameter, low-density polyethylene
tubing into the newly installed monitoring well. The tubing will be run through a peristaltic pump, then
to a flow cell to which a multi-parameter Troll 9500 meter (or equivalent) will be attached, and finally
to a 5-gallon bucket to collect the purge water. The initial water level would be measured in the
monitoring well only and recorded prior to the initiation of pumping. Once pumping is initiated, water
levels, pumping rate, cumulative volume purged, water temperature, specific conductivity, pH, oxygen
reduction potential (ORP), dissolved oxygen (DO), and turbidity will be recorded at three to five-
minute intervals until either stabilization is achieved or the monitoring well pumps dry. Pumping rates
will be maintained at rates of 50 to 100 milliliters per minute to minimize drawdown. Stabilization is
defined as three consecutive measurement intervals where temperature and specific conductivity
were +/- 3%, pH was +/- 0.1, DO was +/-10% (or less than 0.5 mg/L), and turbidity was +/- 10% (or
less than 5 nephelometric turbidity units [NTUs]). If the monitoring well pumps dry, it will be allowed
to recharge to a minimum of at least 90% of its static water level prior to sampling. After stabilization
is achieved, the tubing would be disconnected from the flow cell and the groundwater sample would
be dispensed into appropriate laboratory prepared containers.
Groundwater samples would be collected with gloved hands into laboratory-supplied, hydrochloric
acid preserved 40-milliliter glass vials (VOAs) containing Teflon septa lids. The groundwater samples
collected in the VOAs would be poured slowly into the vials, resulting in no headspace or bubbles.
The groundwater samples would be immediately placed into iced coolers and transported under
chain-of-custody to AWAL for analysis of VOCs, TPH-GRO, and TPH-GRO fractionation using U.S.
EPA Method 8260D.
Task 3: Report Preparation
Task 3 includes the preparation of a report documenting the Phase II LSI. The report will discuss
methods and results and present conclusions based on the data derived from the site
characterization work. The report will include narrative text, a sample location map, data tables, and
copies of the laboratory analytical reports. Wasatch will provide the client with timely updates as data
become available.
4. Deliverables
Project deliverables will be a subsurface investigation report documenting the results of the
investigation.
Additional Phase II Limited Subsurface Investigation Commissary Kitchen
Wasatch Environmental, Inc. 4
5. Cost Estimate
The estimated cost to conduct the described activities would be $26,044.25, and the work would be
performed on a time and materials basis. Wasatch has assumed standard 10-business day
turnaround time for the laboratory analysis. The client may elect to have Wasatch expedite the
laboratory analysis for an additional laboratory surcharge (see attached cost estimate). Wasatch
would not perform activities outside the described scope of services without prior approval from the
Client.
6. Authorizations
Our services consist of professional opinions and recommendations made in accordance with
generally accepted environmental engineering principles and practices. This warranty is in lieu of all
other warranties either expressed or implied.
Please acknowledge your acceptance of the scope of services and terms and conditions discussed
herein by signing one copy of this letter and returning it to our office at your earliest convenience.
WASATCH ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
Michael S. Cronin, P.G. Kiel G. Keller, P.G.
Senior Project Manager/Senior Geologist Project Geologist
Attachments:
Figure 1 – Proposed Sample Location Map
Cost Estimate
2021 Schedule of Fees and Terms and Conditions
Accepted By:________________________________________ Date:_______________________
Figure
The use or reuse of this information is restricted to the referenced document unless otherwise authorized.
Wasatch Environmental Copyright 2006
COMMISSARY KITCHEN PROPERTY WEI 2102-003C
Figure 1
Approximate
Location of
Property
Approximate
Location of
Property
Poplar Grove Blvd/400 South
S 900 WestS 900 WestGas Station
(1920s-1950s)
Gas Station
(1920s-1950s)
Welding/Repair
(1940s-1950s)
Welding/Repair
(1940s-1950s)
Possible Dispensers
(1950s-1960s)
Possible Dispensers
(1950s-1960s)
Groundwater Flow
Direction (Inferred)
Gas Station
(1950s-1960s)
Gas Station
(1950s-1960s)
Natural
Gas Line
Natural
Gas Line
Linear Anomoly
Unmarked
Utility
Unmarked
Utility
Shallow
Anomaly
Shallow
Anomaly
Shallow
Anomaly
Shallow
Anomaly
Deep Anomaly
(Possible Former
UST Basin)
Deep Anomaly
(Possible Former
UST Basin)
GP-1
GP-3
GP-2
GP-9
GP-8
GP-6
GP-5
TPH-GRO: 166 mg/kg (soil)
TPH-GRO: 210 mg/kg (soil)
TPH-GRO: 659 mg/kg (soil)
1.750 mg/L (GW)
TPH-GRO: 331 mg/kg (soil)
1.460 mg/L (GW)
TPH-GRO: 812 mg/kg (soil)
TPH-GRO: 552 mg/kg (soil)
GP-4 GP-7
Benzene: 1.2 mg/kg (soil)
Proposed Sampling Location Map
Sample Location (January 2021)
Sample Location (February 2021)
Proposed Step-Out Boring
Proposed Monitoring Well
GP-10
GP-14/MW-14
GP-13
GP-12
GP-11
GP-15/MW-15
GP-18/MW-18
GP-17/MW-17
GP-16/MW-16
Cost Estimate
Project:Project No.:KK
Phase:Additional Phase II Limited Subsurface Investigation Date:Check By:MC
Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost
TASK 1 PREPARATION (work plan/project management)
Principal Environmental Manager (project review)hours 1 150.00$ 150.00$
Senior Project Geologist/Senior Geologist - Assist with work plan, cost
estimate, job setup, access agreement, Health and Safety Plan, project
management, regulatory support hours 8 134.00$ 1,072.00$
Project Geologist - Work plan and cost estimate, subcontractor
coordination, access agreement, and HASP hours 8 114.00$ 912.00$
Drafter II - Figure for work plan hours 1 74.00$ 74.00$
Word Processor - Clerical review, job setup hours 1 55.00$ 55.00$
Project Management Subtotal:2,263.00$
TASK 2 INVESTIGATION ACTIVITIES (assumes 9 soil borings/5 MWs and GPR survey)
Senior Project Geologist (project coordination/management)hours 1 134.00$ 134.00$
Project Geologist (project coordination, GPR oversight, mobe/demobe,
well development, sampling, surveying, utility clearance, and lab drops)hours 35 114.00$ 3,990.00$
Drillers (DPS)bid 1 11,068.75$ 11,068.75$
GPR (DPS) bid 1 1,092.50$ 1,092.50$
PID day 2 85.00$ 170.00$
Disposable Sampling Supplies day 3 25.00$ 75.00$
Submersible Pump day 1 50.00$ 50.00$
Water Level Indicator day 3 25.00$ 75.00$
Mileage miles 100 0.80$ 80.00$
LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Soil Samples (2x GP-10 through GP-14; 1x GP-15 through GP-18)
VOCs/TPH-GRO/GRO Fractionation - 8260D samples 14 115.00$ 1,610.00$
Groundwater Samples (1x each monitoring well)
VOCs/TPH-GRO/GRO Fractionation - 8260D samples 5 115.00$ 575.00$
Investigation Activities Subtotal:18,920.25$
TASK 3 REPORT PREPARATION
Senior Project Manager/Senior Geologist - Author report hours 22 134.00$ 2,948.00$
Project Geologist - Assist with reporting hours 6 114.00$ 684.00$
Principal Environmental Manager - Senior Review hours 1 150.00$ 150.00$
Senior Geologist (peer review)hours 2 134.00$ 268.00$
Drafter II - Maps and boring logs hours 4 74.00$ 296.00$
Data Validation estimate 1 460.00$ 460.00$
Word Processor - Clerical review, report production, mailing hours 1 55.00$ 55.00$
Report Preparation Subtotal:4,861.00$
Project Total:26,044.25$
Total:Additional Cost Options:
2,731.25$
1,638.75$
1,092.50$
764.75$
546.25$
Expedited 72-hour Laboratory Turnaround Time
Expedited 5-day Laboratory Turnaround Time
Total CostUnits
Labor Materials
Expedited 24-hour Laboratory Turnaround Time
Expedited 48-hour Laboratory Turnaround Time
Expedited 4-day Laboratory Turnaround Time
Commissarry Kitchen Property 2101-003C
10/6/2021
Estimated By:
Equipment
Work Description
10/6/2021 Delineation cost estimate Page 1of 1
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
BOARD STAFF REPORT
THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:RDA Board Members
FROM:Allison Rowland
Budget & Policy Analyst
DATE:December 14, 2021
RE: RESOLUTION: HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUNDING ALLOCATIONS
FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ISSUE-AT-A-GLANCE
The Board will review and potentially approve recommendations for allocating $5.3 million in affordable
housing funds offered through a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). This competitive process was
administered under the RDA’s Housing Development Loan Program (HDLP) using the extensive new
framework adopted by the RDA Board in several stages over the past year.
The eight applications received included requests for a total of nearly $11.5 million. This year, all eight
applications were for projects located outside “high opportunity areas,” where residents have greater chances at
upward mobility. This means that $2.7 million of the $8 million in available funds, which has been reserved
since 2017 for projects located in these areas, was not awarded. The selection committee’s specific
recommendations for allocating $5.3 million of these funds is presented in the Transmittal’s Attachment C. The
Board makes the final determination of which applications to fund and at what amount.
Board members should also note that an additional $1.8 million from the HDLP fund’s previous balance was
included in the recent NOFA. Approximately $2.0 million was designated by RDA staff as “emergency funds”
(note: RDA staff later clarified that the transmittal should have read “emergency gap funds”) to be reserved for a
potential second NOFA early in 2022. See Policy Question 1, below.
Goal of the briefing: Discuss and consider adopting the Resolution entitled Affordable Housing – Housing
Development Loan Program (HDLP) Funding Allocations.
Item Schedule:
Briefing: December 14, 2021
Set Date: N/A
Public Hearing: N/A
Potential Action: December 14, 2021
Page | 2
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
A. Background. Over the past year, the RDA Board discussed and adopted the following:
1.Housing Funds Allocation Policy. This policy establishes four housing funds based on fund
source. The revenues, expenditures, interest, and payments for each fund source are separately
accounted for to ensure the control and oversight required by statute.
2.Housing Development Loan Program (HDLP) Policy. The purpose of the HDLP is to
incentivize the development and preservation of affordable housing in Salt Lake City through
low-cost financial assistance. The HDLP provides a centralized application, underwriting, and
approval process regardless of the fund source.
3.Fiscal Year 2022 Affordable Housing Priorities. Under the recently adopted process, the
Board adopts annual priorities to provide policy direction for RDA staff for applications to City
affordable housing development support available through a NOFA (see Attachment C1). The
goal of adopting priorities on an annual basis, according to RDA staff is to “be able to direct
resources to specific policy priorities depending on current resources, community need, and
policy objectives.”
B. Selection Committee. The selection committee was drawn from members of the Housing Trust Fund
Advisory Board, the RDA Finance Committee (a subset of the Redevelopment Advisory Committee), and
City staff from RDA and the Community and Neighborhoods Department, including members of the
Division of Housing Stability.
C. Funding Priorities and Project Evaluation. As part of the application review process, RDA staff
analyzed applications according to the HDLP Policy’s eligibility requirements and funding priorities set by
the Board this year (see Transmittal Attachment B). The Board assigns weights to its annual housing
priorities to encourage development that meets its goals. Applicants also may receive an interest-rate
reduction for Board priorities that are met. See Policy Question #1 below.
RDA staff stated that the Committee considered the Board’s funding priorities along with factors related to
the feasibility and technical qualities of each application. These include developer experience, the
completeness and quality of the application, the amount of requested funding per affordable unit, the unit
mix, community impact, and the financial and regulatory readiness of the proposed project.
D. Approved FY22 Priorities. Also see Policy Question #3 below.
1. Priorities worth three points:
a. Family Housing
b. Target Populations
c. Neighborhood Safety
d. Homeownership
e. Transportation Opportunities
2. Priorities worth two points:
a. Missing Middle and Unique Housing Types
b. Expand Opportunity
c. Neighborhood Impact
d. Commercial Vitality
3. Priorities worth one point:
a. Historic Preservation /Adaptive Re-use
Page | 3
b. Public Art
4. Former Priorities removed from the list, and now considered part of NOFA application
threshold requirements:
a. Fund Leveraging
b. Sustainability
E. Funding Priority Incentives: Projects are eligible for reductions in their base interest rate if they meet
the adopted funding priorities as established annually, according to the RDA Housing Allocation Funds
Policy. For each funding priority met, a project is eligible to receive a 0.5% reduction to the Base Interest
Rate, down to a minimum of 1% (that is, four priority incentives met).
F. FY 2023 Annual Housing Priorities. In future years the process of establishing annual Board priorities
will begin around March so that it can be resolved well before broader budget discussions begin.
G. Breakdown of HDLF Funding. Council staff has asked RDA staff to provide the Board a breakdown of
the current balances for all elements of HDLF funding, including any amounts left over from previous years.
That information should be available in time for Tuesday’s discussion.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. The Board may wish to ask for additional information on the advantages and disadvantages of RDA staff’s
decision to reserve approximately $2 million in “emergency gap funds” for a second competitive, time-
limited NOFA in early 2022. RDA staff stated that this may be helpful for projects that did not find
themselves at an advantageous stage for competing in the most recent NOFA (for example, availability of tax
credits might not yet have been confirmed). Other options for the Board could include:
a. Making these funds available to affordable housing projects currently under construction that
encounter funding shortfalls due to current economic and market conditions.
b. Allocating these funds immediately, by funding the full requests for The Nest and the Schmidt
Apartments projects, which is another alternative suggested by RDA staff. This would leave
approximately $775,000 for the next round of the NOFA
c. Re-allocating these funds to different affordable housing programs, like Strategic Acquisition, or to
completely different uses.
2. The Board might also wish to ask RDA staff for its views on the potential advantages and disadvantages for a
competitive, time-limited NOFA in 2022, versus an open-ended one offered on a first-come first served
basis.
3. The Board may wish to request information about how RDA staff and the selection committee balanced the
Board’s annual priorities with the feasibility and technical qualities mentioned in item C. Funding Priorities
and Project Evaluation, above. Council staff has asked RDA staff to identify in a single chart the priorities
that each project would meet, if funded as proposed. That information should be available for Tuesday’s
discussion.
4. The Board may wish to consider the costs and benefits of continuing to reserve $2.7 million of affordable
housing funds for projects in areas of high opportunity. An initial amount of $4,500,000 was reserved for a
high opportunity area NOFA in December 2017. Two years later, the Board approved an $1,800,000 loan to
Community Development Corporation of Utah (CDCU) in a high opportunity area for its Richmond Flats
development.
Page | 4
5. The Board may wish request that RDA staff update the map of high opportunity areas to the extent new data
is available in time for the next NOFA process.
ATTACHMENT
Attachment C1. Resolution 14 of 2021 Housing Development Funding Priorities FY22.
RDA BOARD MEETING –DECEMBER 14, 2021
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
2021 NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY (NOFA)
FUNDS AVAILABLE
•Total: ~$8 million
o Citywide: $5.3 million
o High Opportunity: $2.7 million
APPLICATION PROCESS
•Competitive Application Process
•Applications Released: September 8, 2021
•Information Session: September 24, 2021
•Applications Due:
o Citywide Projects: October 29, 2021
o High Opportunity Projects: Remains open until expended
APPLICATION SUMMARY
•8 Applications
•All for Citywide Projects
•$11,476,375 Total Funding Request
BACKGROUND & OVERVIEW
FUNDING PRIORITIES
CATEGORY POLICY OBJECTIVE NOFA RANKING
WEIGHT
0.5% INTEREST RATE
REDUCTION
1. Fund Leveraging Maximize impact by leveraging funds with the private market and with other available public
resources.
Threshold N/A
2. Sustainability Achieve green building and energy conservation standards to lower housing expenses, conserve
resources, and promote resiliency.
Threshold X
3. Family Housing Provide opportunities for families to enjoy the many benefits of urban living by encouraging the
development of housing that is more conducive to larger household sizes.
3 X
4. Target Populations Expand the availability of units for extremely low-income households and special populations,
thereby providing housing options for individuals or families that are homeless or at risk of
homelessness.
3 X
5. Neighborhood Safety Utilize the development of housing as a method to remove blight, reduce crime, revitalize
neighborhoods, and stabilize communities.
3 X
6. Homeownership Create opportunities for those who have historically rented in the community to build wealth and
establish permanent roots through homeownership.
3 X
7. Transportation
Opportunities
Promote a multimodal transportation network and ensure convenient and equitable access to a
variety of transportation options.
3 X
8. Missing Middle & Unique
Housing Types
Promote an array of scale of project types to diversify the City’s housing stock/forms and provide
more affordable living options for residents.
2 X
9. Expand Opportunity Provide for Neighborhoods of Opportunity by promoting the economic diversity of the housing
stock within neighborhoods.
2 X
10. Neighborhood Impact Encourage housing that is high-quality, enduring, and that contributes to neighborhood context
and livability through architectural and urban design best practices.
2 X
11. Commercial Vitality Foster a mix of land uses and unique neighborhood business districts that adequately meet the
local community’s needs.
2 X
12. Historic Preservation
/Adaptive Reuse
Encourage the preservation and/or reuse of buildings to preserve the character of neighborhoods.1 X
13. Public Art Promote cultural expression and add to the experience and value of the built environment through
art that is publicly visible or accessible for all to experience.
1 X
THRESHOLDS
FUND LEVERAGING: Maximize impact by leveraging funds with the private
market and with other available public resources.
SUSTAINABILITY: Projects required to be designed to achieve a “Designed
to Earn Energy Star” Score of 80 or higher and participate in the City’s
Elevate Buildings program once the building is operating.
OPPORTUNITY LAND USE ASSESMENT MAP
APPLICATION CONSIDERATIONS:
•Funding priorities
•Project readiness
•Content and quality of application
•Qualifications and experience of applicant and development team
•Content, effectiveness and appropriateness of financial details
•Building and site design
HDLP REVIEW COMMITTEE
APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING:
•Meet threshold requirements and funding priorities
•Have secured financing and tax credits
•Ready to be built soon
•Cost per affordable unit
HDLP REVIEW COMMITTEE
Projects Recommended for Funding
1 -Silos
425 West 500 South
2 -144 S 500 E
144 S 500 E
3 -The Nest
382 Rio Grande
3 -Schmidt Apts
1265 S 300 W
Funding Recommendation $2,360,000 $775,000 $1,082,000 $1,082,000
Request Amount $2,360,000 $775,000 $1,800,000 $1,590,000
Project Cost $23,639,510 $32,546,991 $52,685,701 $40,926,969
RDA % of Total Project Cost 9.98%2.38%3.42%3.88%
RDA Funds per Affordable Unit $22,264 $7,045 $8,182 $10,000
Tax Credits?Yes, 9%Yes, 4%Yes, 4%Yes, 4%
Affordable Units and Breakdown
40% AMI and below 22 10
41-60% AMI 84 110 220 149
>61% AMI to 80%
Market units
Total units 106 110 220 159
Percent affordable (60% AMI and below)100%100%100%100%
Unit Mix
Studios 53 140 40
1BR 88 57 80 103
2BR 16
3BR 18
RECOMMENDATIONS
PROJECT/APPLICANT ADDRESS
FUNDING
REQUEST
FUNDING
RECOMMENDATION
FUNDING
RANKING
AMOUNT NOT
FUNDED
Silos on 5th 425 W. 500 South $2,360,000 $2,360,000 1 $0
Giv Communities
144 S. 500 East 144 S. 500 East $775,000 $775,000 2 $0
Red Gate
The Nest 382 Rio Grande $1,800,000 $1,082,500 3 $717,500
W3 Partners
Schmidt Apartments 1265 S. 300 West $1,590,000 $1,082,500 3 $507,500
Westates
University Heights 1060 E. 100 South $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000
BCG
915 W. North Temple 915 W. North Temple $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000
JF Development Group
Cleveland Court 375 E. Cleveland
Street
$1,451,375 $0 $1,451,375
Sentry Financial
ADU Financing Program Citywide $500,000 $0 $500,000
CDCU
TOTAL $11,476,375 $5,300,000 $6,176,375
Funds Available Funds Recommended
Citywide $5,300,000 $ 5,300,000 Recommended
High Opportunity $2,700,000 $0 Funds Remaining -Citywide
$8,000,000 $2,700,000 Funds Remaining –High Opportunity
Housing Development Funding
Strategy and Annual Budget
•Citywide NOFA
•Emergency NOFA
•High Opportunity NOFA
HDLP Review Committee
Recommendation if additional funds
available:
•Fund full request for The Nest and
Schmidt Apts
RDA Board Considerations:
•Approve Review Committee
Recommendation of funding the
$5.3M
•Allocate some emergency funds
towards this round of applications
CONSIDERATIONS
PROJECT/APPLICANT ADDRESS
FUNDING
REQUEST
FUNDING
RECOMMENDATION
FUNDING
RANKING
AMOUNT NOT
FUNDED
Silos on 5th 425 W. 500 South $2,360,000 $2,360,000 1 $0
Giv Communities
144 S. 500 East 144 S. 500 East $775,000 $775,000 2 $0
Red Gate
The Nest 382 Rio Grande $1,800,000 $1,082,500 3 $717,500
W3 Partners
Schmidt Apartments 1265 S. 300 West $1,590,000 $1,082,500 3 $507,500
Westates
University Heights 1060 E. 100 South $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000
BCG
915 W. North Temple 915 W. North Temple $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000
JF Development Group
Cleveland Court 375 E. Cleveland
Street
$1,451,375 $0 $1,451,375
Sentry Financial
ADU Financing Program Citywide $500,000 $0 $500,000
CDCU
TOTAL $11,476,375 $5,300,000 $6,176,375
$1,225,000
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 118 WWW.SLC.GOV · WWW.SLCRDA.COM
P.O. BOX 145518, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5518 TEL 801-535-7240 · FAX 801-535-7245
MAYOR ERIN MENDENHALL
Executive Director
DANNY WALZ
Director
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY
STAFF MEMO
DATE: November 24, 2021
PREPARED BY: Tracy Tran and Lauren Parisi, RDA Project Managers
RE: Consideration and Adoption of a Resolution Approving Funding Allocations
through the Housing Development Loan Program.
REQUESTED ACTION: Consider approving affordable housing funding allocations as selected
through a Notice of Funding Availability for the Housing Development
Loan Program.
POLICY ITEM: Affordable housing.
BUDGET IMPACTS: $8,000,000 of RDA funds set aside for affordable housing
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (“RDA”) recently
issued a Notice of Funding Availability (“NOFA”) to solicit applications for up to $8 million
available through the Housing Development Loan Program (“HDLP”) to incentivize the development
and preservation of affordable housing anywhere within Salt Lake City municipal boundaries. Of the
$8 million in available funds, $2.7 million is to be allocated to projects located within high
opportunity areas, or areas that improve a person’s chances at upward mobility. The remaining $5.3
million is to be allocated to projects located anywhere within Salt Lake City municipal boundaries.
The HLDP is being administered pursuant to the Housing Allocation Funds Policy (“Funds Policy”),
resolution R-4- 2021, and the Housing Development Loan Program Policy (“HDLP Policy”),
resolution R-7-2021. The Funds Policy establishes policies for allocating and directing resources for
the development and preservation of housing by various funding sources. Highlights of the Funds
Policy include:
•Housing Funds: The Policy establishes four housing funds based on fund source. The
revenues, expenditures, interest, and payments for each fund source shall be separately
accounted for to ensure the RDA control and oversight to comply with statutory
requirements.
•Annual Budgeting Process: The policy provides that on an annual basis, the RDA shall
present for the Board’s consideration a Housing Development Funding Strategy that projects
revenues for the upcoming fiscal year and proposes funding priorities and allocations. This
will allow the RDA to be flexible to address current needs, leverage current opportunities,
coordinate with other city resources, and allow funding priorities to align with evolving plans
and policies.
The HDLP Policy provides low-cost financial assistance to incentivize the development and
preservation of affordable housing within Salt Lake City municipal boundaries. The HDLP provides
a centralized application, underwriting, and approval process regardless of the fund source. The
HDLP policy includes:
• Funding allocations and priorities determined on an annual basis. This year’s funding
priorities set by the Board can be found in Attachment A: Project Priorities and Interest Rate
Reductions. These priorities were weighted by importance by the Board.
• The transparent administration of funds through a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)
process. Revenue from various funds may be combined into a consolidated NOFA or a
NOFA may be issued for a specific funding source. NOFAs could be offered on an annual
basis or multiple times per year and can be competitive or open-ended depending on
availability of funds, priorities, and demand.
• A standardized process for approving applications and a uniform set of underwriting policies.
Pursuant to the policies, the RDA administered a competitive and transparent application process that
resulted in eight (8) requests for funding totaling $11,476,37 - refer to Attachment A: Summary of
Applications for additional information. All eight (8) requests for funding located outside of high
opportunity neighborhoods.
The RDA has evaluated application submittals and convened a review committee (“Committee”) to
recommend applications for funding. This memorandum includes a summary of application
submittals and the Committee’s recommendations for the Board’s consideration and determination of
funding allocations.
HDLP REVIEW COMMITTEE: Pursuant to the HDLP Policy, RDA staff convened a review
committee that included members with experience relevant to the affordable housing industry. This
year’s HDLP review committee was comprised of representatives from both the Housing Trust Fund
Advisory Board (“HTFAB”) and the RDA Finance Committee/Redevelopment Advisory Committee ,
and representatives from the RDA, the City’s Division of Housing Stability, and the City’s
Department of Community and Neighborhoods (“CAN”).
HDLP REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: On November 19, 2021, the
Committee made recommendations regarding all received applications. Refer to Attachment C:
HDLP Review Committee Funding Recommendation for recommendation detail.
ANALYSIS & ISSUES:
Below is an overview of the HDLP application process:
I. Application Process
The RDA solicited applications as follows:
Citywide Funds – Applications were solicited on a time-limited basis, with a call for
applications released on September 8, 2021 and an application deadline of October 29, 2021.
On September 24, 2021, the RDA hosted a virtual informational meeting to provide an
overview of the HDLP application, requirements, and selection process. The video was
recorded and a link was provided on the RDA website for those who were unable to attend.
Other outreach formats included press releases, website and email communications, social
media, and notifications through secondary outlets.
II.Funding Priorities and Project Evaluation
As part of the application review process, RDA staff analyzed applications according to the
HDLP Policy’s eligibility requirements and funding priorities set by the Board this year,
which can be found in Attachment B. The housing priorities are weighted and include the
ability for an applicant to receive an interest-rate reduction if priorities are met.
When evaluating applications, the Committee considered funding priorities along with other
factors, including developer experience, the completeness/qualit y of the application, the
amount of requested funding per affordable unit, unit mix, community impact, and the
financial and regulatory readiness of the proposed project.
III.Funding Allocations, Conditional Commitment, and Loan Closing
Pursuant to the Policy, the Board will make the final determination of applications to fund.
Subsequently, the RDA will issue a conditional commitment letter to those applications that
are selected for funding. The conditional commitment letter between the RDA and the
applicant will contain the covenants, terms and conditions upon which the RDA will provide
financial assistance to the proposed project once financial, legal, regulatory, and design
approvals are obtained. Prior to closing on a loan, RDA staff will ensure that the project is
financially viable, underwriting standards are met, and the use of public funds is necessary
for the project to succeed.
PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION:
•August 2021: The Board adopted FY21-22 Affordable Housing Funding Priorities.
•June 2021: The Board adopted the 2021-2022 budget, which allocated a total of $3,482,627 to
Housing Development Loan Program funds included in this year’s affordable housing NOFA.
The Housing Development Loan Program fund’s previous balance of $1,840,000 was also
included in this year’s NOFA, bringing the total citywide affordable housing offering to
approximately $5,300,000. $2,700,000 was also offered for high opportunity areas.
•March 2021: The Board adopted the Housing Development Loan Program Policy
•February 2021: The Board adopted the Housing Allocation Funds Policy
•December 2019: The Board approved $1,800,000 for a loan in a high opportunity area in
2019, which leaves a balance of $2,700,000 in high opportunity area funds.
•December 2017: The Board adopted the third amendment for FY 2017-2018, which includes
$4,500,000 for a high opportunity area NOFA.
ATTACHMENTS:
A.Application Overview
B.RDA Board Housing Priorities FY21-22
C.HDLP Review Committee Funding Recommendation
D.Project Summary Sheets
E.Map of Project Locations
F.HDLP 2021 Funding Allocation Resolution
1 ‐ 915 W North Temple 915 W North Temple2 ‐ The Nest382 Rio grande3 ‐ Cleveland Court 375 E Cleveland St4 ‐ Silos425 West 500 South5 ‐ 144 S 500 E 144 S 500 E6 ‐ University Heights 1060 E 100 S7 ‐ Schmidt Apts1265 S 300 W8 ‐ CDCU ADUs$1,000,000$19,050,0005.25%$52,632$1,800,000$52,685,7013.42%$8,182$1,451,375$3,359,75443.2%$207,339$2,360,000$23,639,5109.98%$22,264$775,000$32,546,9912.77%$7,045$2,000,000$20,553,8039.73%$133,333$1,590,000$40,926,9693.88%$10,000$500,000 10/301%Hard payments with balloon payment in Y1020/401.5% interestHard payments with balloon payment in Y201% interest only construction loan; convert to soft second loan.RDA paid back upon unit sales for land. TBD for soft seconds40/401.5% Amortizing Loan No interest until stabalization40/401%Amortizing Loan35/351%Amortizing Loan30/301%Amortizing LoanRDA subsidy ‐ not paid backFor Profit ‐ LLCFor Profit ‐ LLCFor Profit ‐ LLC501 c(3)For Profit ‐ LLCFor Profit ‐ LLCFor Profit ‐ LLC501 c(3)JF Development & Strategic Builders have significant experienceW3 PartnersPeter Corroon/Principals have experience in SLC and Ogden etc.GIV est 2011 & BCG ARC Fund inc. 2018 experiencedRed Gate est. 1995Valmont est. 2010EMG est. 1985BCG Holdings has municipal leadership experience in housing and financingIn business since 2001, EMG (Mgmt.) est 1985Development would be completed by Homeowner with limited Development experienceNew ConstructionNew ConstructionNew Construction(Condominium Townhomes)New ConstructionNew ConstructionRehabilitationNew ConstructionNote Eligible Activites:Financing/LoansDemolition & New Construction Gap Financing for LIHTCConstruction & Development Soft CostsConstPredevelopment & Construction CostsConstruction CostsConstruction CostsADU ConstructionPurchase Agreement. Expected Settlement Date 12/1/21Deed of Trust with Ground Lease to Project llcQuit Claim DeedGround Lease Special Warranty Deed (100% interest)Special Warranty Deed , Applicant is joint owner of property50 year Ground LeaseN/A20% @ 50% AMI80% @ 80% AMI220 (100%) @ 60% AMIFor Sale Townhomes for families @80% AMI84 units (80%) @ 60% AMI22 units (20%) @ 40% AMI100% 60@ AMI15 unit (28%) @ 60% AMI149 units @ 60@AMI10 units @ 30% AMI10 ADU's @ 60% AMI Total 50%Studio 40 (42%) 8 (42%)1BR 55 (58%) 11(58%)Total ‐ all @ 60% Studio 140 (64%) 1BR 80 (36%) 1BR 12BR 43BR 2 Total 60% 40%1BR 88 (83%) 70 (83%) 18 (82%)3BR 18 (17%) 14 (17%) 4 (18%) Total ‐ all @ 40‐60% Studio 53 (48%)1BR 57 (52%) Total 40‐60%1BR 45 (85%) 15 (28%)2BR 8 (15%) Total 60% 30%Studio 40 (25%) 35 (23%) 5 (50%)1BR 103 (65%) 98 (66%) 5 (50%)2BR 16 (10%) 16 (11%)N/ANot AvailablePreliminary Letter for ComplianceNot CompleteNet Zero, Plan to get 80, letter from consultantAll electric, zero emissions96Developer statementN/AProject PrioritiesWeight1.Family Housing3003300 002.Target Populations3300300 003.Neighborhood Safety3330000 304.Homeownership3003000 005. Transportation Opportunities3330033 306. Missing Middle and Unique HousingTypes2002000 007. Expand Opportunity2000000 008. Neighborhood Impact2220022 209. Commercial Vitality2000002 2010. Historic Preservation/Adaptive Reuse1000001 0011.Public Art1001111 10Priority Points 1189769110APPLICATIONS OVERVIEW AND THRESHOLDS ‐ SLCRDA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LOAN PROGRAM APPLICATIONSRequest AmountProject Cost% of ProjectRDA Funds per UnitProposed Loan TermsTerm/AmortizationInterestRepayment Type Eligible Applicants: 1) For Profit,Partnersp,JV or Sole2) Private 501c33) Public Housing agency, unit of govtDevelopment Team Experience:1) Experience, Financial and technical cap.2) LT viability and complianceSustainability:1) E‐Star Score > 80Eligible Project Types:1) New Construction2) Adaptive Reuse3)Rehab: SubstantialEligible Activities: Land/Prop Acq, Hard Construction Costs, Site imp and soft costsSite Control:Ownership, option, sale agreement or LT LeaseMinimum Affordability:1) 20% @ 60 AMI Unit MixAttachment A: Application Overview
PROJECT PRIORITIES AND INTEREST RATE REDUCTIONS
The information below was included in the HDLP Guidelines. Project priority criteria will be utilized to
evaluate and rank applications as well as provide for interest rate reductions. Priority will be given to
projects that meet housing and community priorities, as follows:
CATEGORY POLICY OBJECTIVE BENCHMARK
NOFA
RANKING
WEIGHT*
0.5%
INTEREST
RATE
REDUCTION**
1 Family Housing Provide opportunities for families
to enjoy the many benefits of
urban living by encouraging the
development of housing that is
more conducive to larger
household sizes.
At least 10% of the
total units are 3+
bedroom units.
3 X
2 Target
Populations
Expand the availability of units for
extremely low-income households
and special populations, thereby
providing housing options for
individuals or families that are
homeless or at risk of
homelessness.
At least 10% of the
units are set aside for
special populations in
partnership with a
governmental or
nonprofit entity.
3 X
3 Neighborhood
Safety
Utilize the development of
housing as a method to remove
blight, reduce crime, revitalize
neighborhoods, and stabilize
communities.
Projects are located
within an active RDA
project area, refer to
Attachment B: RDA
Project Area Map and
incorporate
documented Crime
Prevention through
Environmental design
(CPTED) principals.
3 X
4 Homeownership Create opportunities for those who
have historically rented in the
community to build wealth and
establish permanent roots through
homeownership.
Project is a for-sale
product that will be
sold to income
qualified
individuals/families.
3 X
5 Transportation
Opportunities
Promote a multimodal
transportation network and ensure
convenient and equitable access
to a variety of transportation
options.
Projects must meet
two of the following:
•Includes a car
sharing, bike
sharing, or transit
pass program that is
widely available to
employees/residents
•Includes a
commercial project
that includes
employee shower,
locker, and bicycle
facilities
•Is located within 1/3
mile walking
distance of a TRAX
3 X
4
Attachment B: RDA Board Housing Priorities
station or S-Line
station
•Implements reduced
parking strategies
without negatively
impacting the
neighborhood
•Incorporates majority
of parking within a
primary structure to
minimize the need
for a surface parking
lot.
6 Missing Middle
& Unique
Housing Types
Promote an array of scale of
project types to diversify the City’s
housing stock/forms and provide
more affordable living options for
residents.
Projects are either a
missing middle
housing type (i.e.
townhomes, courtyard
apartments, small-
scale apartments) or a
housing type that is
not commonly built:
tiny homes, modular
homes, pre-fab homes,
accessory dwelling
units (ADUs)
2 X
7 Expand
Opportunity
Provide for Neighborhoods of
Opportunity by promoting the
economic diversity of the housing
stock within neighborhoods.
Projects are located
within a High
Opportunity Area,
which is defined as an
area that provides
conditions that expand
a person’s likelihood
for social mobility as
identified through an
analysis of quality-of-
life indicators. Refer to
Attachment A: High
Opportunity Area Map
and Table.
2 X
8 Neighborhood
Impact
Encourage housing that is high-
quality, enduring, and that
contributes to neighborhood
context and livability through
architectural and urban design
best practices.
Buildings shall include
an active ground floor
use, significant ground
floor glass, durable
building materials and
engaging building
entrances.
2 X
9 Commercial
Vitality
Foster a mix of land uses and
unique neighborhood business
districts that adequately meet the
local community’s needs.
Projects are mixed-use
and establish new
services, amenities, or
underrepresented
business types in the
neighborhood that the
local community
2 X
5
identifies as lacking
and desired.
10 Historic
Preservation
/Adaptive
Reuse
Encourage the preservation and/or
reuse of buildings to preserve the
character of neighborhoods.
Projects that preserve
buildings that are 50
years old or older
and/or projects that
adaptively reuse an
existing building
1 X
11 Public Art Promote cultural expression and
add to the experience and value of
the built environment through art
that is publicly visible or
accessible for all to experience.
Project contributes at
least 1.5% of the RDA
contribution towards
the installation of art
onsite or towards the
RDA art fund as
outlined in the RDA
Art Policy.
1 X
*Note: NOFA Ranking Weight: Uses a number (the weight) between 1 and 3 to assess the importance of the funding priority, with 1
being of lower importance and 3 being of the highest importance.
**Note: .05% Interest Rate Reductions: While 12 interest rate reductions will be available, the maximum a project can quality for is
four, thereby reducing the interest rate to a minimum of 1%.
6
The HDLP review committee (“Committee”) recommends the following -
*The final loan terms shall comply with the requirements, standard loan terms and conditions, interest-rate
reductions, and all other details laid out within the 2021 Housing Development Loan Program (HDLP) Guidelines
If the RDA Board would like to fund the full requests for The Nest and Schmidt Apartments, RDA
staff could allocate some of the ~$2M in “emergency funds” that the RDA plans to issue early next
year for another Notice of Funding Availability (“NOFA”). If the full amounts of The Nest and
Schmidt Apartments are funded, approximately $775,000 would be available for the next round of
the NOFA for the Housing Development Loan Program.
PROJECT/APPLICANT ADDRESS
FUNDING
REQUEST PRELIMINARY TERMS*
FUNDING
RECOMMENDATION
FUNDING
RANKING
Silos on 5th 425 W. 500 South $2,360,000 1.5% interest, 40-year term,
40-year amortization
$2,360,000 1
Giv Communities
144 S. 500 East 144 S. 500 East $775,000 1% interest, 40-year term,
40-year amortization
$775,000 2
Red Gate
The Nest 382 Rio Grande $1,800,000 1.5% interest, 20 year term,
40 year amortization,
regular payments w/ balloon
payment end of term
$1,082,500 3
W3 Partners
Schmidt Apartments 1265 S. 300 West $1,590,000 1% interest, 30 year term,
30 year amortization
$1,082,500 3
Westates
University Heights 1060 E. 100 South $2,000,000 1% interest, 35 year term,
35 year amortization
$0
BCG
915 W. North Temple 915 W. North
Temple
$1,000,000 1% interest, 10 year term,
30 year amortization,
regular payments w/ balloon
payment end of term
$0
JF Development Group
Cleveland Court 375 E. Cleveland
Street
$1,451,375 1% interest only
construction loan converted
to soft second loan(s).
RDA paid back for land
upon sale of units
$0
Sentry Financial
ADU Financing
Program
CDCU
Citywide $500,000 RDA Grant $0
TOTAL $11,476,375 $5,300,000
Attachment C: HDLP Review Committee Funding Recommendations
PROJECT NAME: #1 – 915 W North Temple
ADDRESS: 915 E North Temple
DOES THE PROJECT MEET NOFA THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS?: Yes, will need to ensure project meets Energy Star
Statement of Design Intent requirement once the project is further along.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
According to the developer: “This project is in the initial concept phase with construction expected to start in Summer 2022
and completion by Summer 2023. Our goal is to provide a high quality, affordable housing TOD project without using Section
42 LIHTC. We plan to work with other key stakeholders in our community, including Housing Connect, Intermountain
Healthcare Impact Fund, Utah Center for Neighborhood Stabilization, and others to maximize the affordability targets of this
project. The project will include a minimum of 20% of units at 50% of AMI through a LURA and the remaining units at 80% AMI
through sponsor-initiated (self imposed) affordability. We will seek to layer in deeper affordability, additional deed-restrictions,
and targeted populations through additional community partnerships. We will include robust resident services or work non -
profits to include services such as ESL, financial literacy, after-school activities, community events, and other socially-oriented
programming.”
OVERVIEW:
DEVELOPER:
Ryan Davis/JF
Development Group
REQUEST TYPE: Construction Costs
PROJECT TYPE: New Construction
EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial/Retail
HOUSING UNITS: 95 TOTAL
TOTAL MARKET
60 - 40%
AMI <40% AMI
Studio 32 ($1292) 8 ($808)
1-Bed 44 ($1384) 11($865)
TOTAL 76 19
FUNDING REQUEST:
NOFA REQUEST TOTAL PROJECT COST
$1,000,000 5.2% $19,050,000
TIMELINE:
Commence Construction June 2022
Complete Construction September 2023
TAX CREDITS:
Applying for Tax Credits (Y/N): N
Tax Credits Awarded (Y/N): n/a
SOURCES:
FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT
Cash Equity $5,665,066 29.7%
RDA HDLP Loan $1,000,000 5.2%
Bank Debt $12,385,000 65.0%
TOTAL SOURCES: $19,050,066 100%
USES:
FUNDING USES AMOUNT
Land $2,000,000 10.5%
A&E $653,462 3.4%
Hard Costs $13,069,231 68.6%
FF&E $200,000 1.0%
Soft Costs $800,000 4.2%
Financing Costs $848,750 4.5%
Developer Fee $700,051 3.7%
Contingency $778,572 4.1%
TOTAL USES: $19,050,066 100%
PROPOSED TERMS:
Interest Rate: 1%
Term: 10 yr term/ 30 yr Am
Details Hard repayments,
subordinated to senior
lender. Balloon payment due
at end of term.
Attachment D: Project Summary Sheets
8
DEVELOPER SUMMARY:
According to the developer, “JF has been actively developing multifamily housing for over a decade and has delivered over
2,000 multifamily units, including 900 deed-restricted affordable housing units. JF has developed over $200M of affordable
housing projects in Utah and has over $150M of affordable/workforce housing projects in our pipeline. We have completed
projects with 100% affordable units at 60% AMI, projects with tiered rents at 40-50-60% AMI, mixed-income projects with
affordable and market-rate, and mixed-use with ground-floor commercial space.”
SITE MAP:
PROJECT RENDERINGS:
9
PROJECT NAME: #2 – The Nest
ADDRESS: 382 S Rio Grande St
DOES THE PROJECT MEET NOFA THRESHOLD
REQUIREMENTS?: Yes, will need to ensure project meets Energy Star Statement of Design Intent requirement.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
According to developer “W3 Partners has purchased land consisting of three parcels totaling approximately 1.59 acres and
located at 358 and 382 South Rio Grande Street and 365 South 500 West in Salt Lake City, Utah.
OVERVIEW:
DEVELOPER:
Janet West/W3 Partners,
LC
REQUEST TYPE: Construction Costs
PROJECT TYPE: New Construction
EXISTING LAND USE: Office and Vacant Land
HOUSING UNITS: 220 TOTAL
TOTAL MARKET
60 - 40%
AMI <40% AMI
Studio 140 ($926)
1-Bed 80 ($988)
TOTAL 220
FUNDING REQUEST:
NOFA REQUEST TOTAL PROJECT COST
$1,800,000 3.42% $52,644,890
TIMELINE:
Commence Construction June 2022
Complete Construction November 2024
TAX CREDITS:
Applying for Tax Credits (Y/N): Y, 4%
Tax Credits Awarded (Y/N): N
SOURCES:
FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT
Perm Loan $29,600,000 56.2%
Tax Credit Equity $18,480,345 35.1%
Deferred Developer Fee $1,387,545 2.6%
Olene Walker Loan $1,000,000 1.9%
RDA Loan $1,800,000 3.4%
Investor Equity $312,000 .6%
Questar Rebate $5,000 .01%
Rocky Mountain Power
Rebate $60,000 .1%
TOTAL SOURCES: $52,644,890 100%
USES:
FUNDING USES AMOUNT
Land (demo) $90,000 .2%
Construction $41,057,255 78%
A&E $3,774,739 7.2%
Reserves $1,214,600 2.3%
Development Fee $4,427,486 8.4%
Financing Costs $1,715,166 3.3%
Bond Issuance Expenses 364,750 .7%
TOTAL USES: $52,644,890 100%
PROPOSED TERMS:
Interest Rate: 1.5%
Term/Am: 20 yr term/ 40 yr Am
Details: Hard repayments annually
with balloon payment in Y20.
The land will be leased to
the project llc and will be
based on cashflow. Land
lease payments are paid
prior to debt service.
10
Located on Parcel 1 is an existing office building consisting of approximately 27,000 rentable square feet that is 100% leased
until 2028. Parcel 2 is adjacent to, and south of, the office building and currently has a surface parking lot that parks the office
building. Parcel 3 is vacant land and is adjacent to both parcels on their west boundary. Parcels 2 and 3 can be developed
immediately (1.08 acres), and this is the land upon which the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) multi-family housing
will be built.
The LIHTC multi-family project (The Nest @ Rio Grande) will consist of six floors, with five levels of residential units totaling
220 units situated over one level of structured parking (50 stalls). Additional parking (22 stalls) will be built on the north portion
of Parcel 3 and situated behind the office building. This parking will be used by the office building during business hours
Monday through Friday and used by the tenants of the apartment building during the nights and weekends. We are
anticipating a 100% LIHTC project at 60% of the Average Median Income (AMI). We have a market study performed by
Western States Multifamily that suggests this is a great location for an affordable project, with LIHTC rents being on average
14%-29% less than the surrounding market rents.”
DEVELOPER SUMMARY:
According to the developer, “W3 Partners, LC, was founded in 2020 to continue the investment, development and
management of real estate assets that the three principals have been engaged in for many years. On a combined basis, the
three principals have been engaged in this business for over 100 years. Their previous company began as Cottonwood
Partners in 1997 and had an established record of very successfully investing over $2 billion in new development and
existing properties over its 28-year history. Founders of W3 Partners were owners of Cottonwood and/or its assets and were,
respectively, the CEO, CFO and Director of Asset Management, and Broker, Directing of Leasing and Development Officer for
Cottonwood.
The focus of W3 Partners is to invest in properties that can be significantly enhanced by development or redesign and
refurbishment. This philosophy has been successfully executed in many projects, and they include the 1 million square-foot
Cottonwood Corporate Center, the Scowcroft Office Building, the Newpark Office Buildings, and the 45-acre Forge
development. These are all in Utah and are representative of the company’s expertise and success. The capital necessary for
the these, and other projects, has been provided by wealthy individuals, private equity firms, institutional investors, banks and
insurance companies.”
SITE MAP:
11
PROJECT RENDERINGS:
12
PROJECT NAME: #3 – Cleveland Court
ADDRESS: 375 E Cleveland St
DOES THE PROJECT MEET NOFA THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS?: No, HDLP funds are limited to 10% or less of the
project’s financing sources. The RDA has not traditionally worked on homeownership projects so this concept would be new
for the RDA to undertake. Since affordable homeownership is a priority for the RDA Board, the RDA Board may want to
consider this project and waive the 10% limit.
OVERVIEW:
DEVELOPER:
Peter Corroon/Sentry
Financial
REQUEST TYPE: Construction and Soft Costs
PROJECT TYPE:
New
Construction/Homeownership
EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant
HOUSING UNITS: 7 TOTAL
TOTAL 80% AMI
1-Bed 1
2-Bed 4
3-Bed 2
TOTAL 7
FUNDING REQUEST:
NOFA REQUEST TOTAL PROJECT COST
$1,451,375 43.2% $3,359,754
TIMELINE:
Commence Construction Q4 2021
Complete Construction Q3 2022
TAX CREDITS:
Applying for Tax Credits (Y/N): N
Tax Credits Awarded (Y/N): N
SOURCES:
FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT %
Equity $1,908,379 56.8%
RDA Loan $1,451,375 43.3%
TOTAL SOURCES: $3,359,754 100%
USES:
FUNDING USES AMOUNT %
Land $500,000 14.9%
Construction $2,301,606 68.5%
Soft Costs $415,097 12.4%
Reserves $131,952 3.9%
Development Fee - 0%
Financing Costs $11,099 .3%
TOTAL USES: $3,359,754 100%
PROPOSED TERMS:
Interest Rate: 1% interest only construction
loan on $951,375 that will
convert to soft second loan
Term/Am: Construction loan that would
convert to permanent loan
for a period of at least 15
years
Details: The applicant is requesting
that the RDA purchase the
property for $500,000 in
which that amount could be
paid back to the RDA upon
the sales of the units. The
other $951,375 would be a
construction loan that would
convert to soft second loans.
The developer has stated
that alternatively, the RDA
could provide just the
$951,375 loan if we did not
want to purchase the land.
13
PROJECT SUMMARY:
From the Developer: “The project concept is to provide affordable "missing-middle" home ownership opportunities in Salt Lake
City. The units will be built and sold to persons and families at or below 80% of the area median income (AMI). The seven
condominiums are broken up into two buildings in order to provide a more neighborhood residential feel to the project. The
Cleveland Court project is environmentally sustainable (equipped with solar generation and high insulation values), is visually
attractive and appealing, and is designed with dog runs, a fire pit, patios, balconies, and an internal courtyard – all of which
encourage residents to engage with one another and with the surrounding neighborhood. The project has gone through the
city's Planned Development process which provided additional design elements to make the project more attractive on the
exterior, such as more windows and pedestrian entries with canopies.”
The RDA currently does not have specific policies related to affordable homeownership to guide the details of this request.
The details would need to be further negotiated with the developer and will require policy direction and approval from the RDA
Board. The developer has provided some flexibility in their request since the RDA currently does not have detailed policies for
affordable homeownership.
DEVELOPER SUMMARY:
According to the developer, “The principals of Cleveland Court, LLC co-own with their partners thousands of apartments in the
Intermountain West. Most recently, the firm has developed the Tower View Apartments in Ogden, Utah (144 units) and the
Downington Place Condominiums in Salt Lake City (3 units), a for-sale townhome project.
Peter Corroon, who will oversee this development, has constructed or renovated hundreds of units of affordable housing over
the last two decades. Most recently, he has completed projects in Salt Lake City, including the Casa Milagros Apartments (61
units), a senior affordable housing project serving tenants between 25% and 50% of the area median income, and Cornell
Place (146 units), a project serving tenants between 40% and 60% of the area median income.”
SITE MAP:
14
PROJECT RENDERINGS:
15
PROJECT NAME: #4 – Silos on 5th Phase 1 and 2
ADDRESS: 425 West 500 South
DOES THE PROJECT MEET NOFA THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS?: Yes, will need to ensure project meets Energy Star
Statement of Design Intent requirement.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Silos on 5th Phase 1 and 2 is a a part of a larger development plan and will be located west of the former Utah Cereal Mill
property. From Developer: “Giv Group has been building all-electric, zero-emission buildings since 2017. The project will
leverage best practices in all-electric design and assembly, including solar-ready, battery-ready, and EV charging. Per LIHTC,
units will be Enterprise Green communities certified and include Energy Star appliances.
Long-term ownership entices the ownership team to optimize for operations and maintenance (O&M) and repair &
replacement cycyles. The ownership strategy rebalances the first cost/lifecycle equation to focus on durability, efficiency, and
OVERVIEW:
DEVELOPER:
Matthew Abbot/Giv
Communities
REQUEST TYPE: Construction Costs
PROJECT TYPE: New Construction
EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial/Industrial - Vacant
HOUSING UNITS: 106 TOTAL
TOTAL
MARKET
–80%60 - 40% AMI <40% AMI
1-Bed - 70 ($716-$803) 18 ($370-$613)
2-Bed - 0 0
3-Bed - 14 ($976-$1096) 4 ($497-$832)
TOTAL - 84 22
FUNDING REQUEST:
NOFA REQUEST TOTAL PROJECT COST
$2,360,000 9.98% $23,673,260
TIMELINE:
Commence Construction August 2022
Complete Construction August 2023
TAX CREDITS:
Applying for Tax Credits (Y/N): Y, 9%
Tax Credits Awarded (Y/N):
Yes for phase
1, not yet for
phase 2
SOURCES:
FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT
LIHTC Investor $16,120,978 68.2%
RMCRC $2,639,283 11%
RDA Loan $2,360,000 10%
OWHLF $1,500,000 6.4%
Deferred Developer Fee $1,000,000 4.2%
Utility Rebates $53,000 .2%
TOTAL SOURCES: $23,673,260 100%
USES:
FUNDING USES AMOUNT
Land - -
Hard Costs $18,408,055 80.8%
Soft Costs $1,059,854 4.5%
Developer Fee $2,063,892 8.7%
Financing Expense $900,500 3.8%
Contingency $830,000 3.5%
Reserves $410,960 1.7%
TOTAL USES: $23,673,260 100%
PROPOSED TERMS:
Interest Rate: Qualify for 1.5% but asking
for 1%
Term/Am: 40 yr/40yr
Details: Hard repayments,
subordinated to senior
lender. Ground lease
16
total cost of ownership. At a minimum, apartment amenities will include: bike racks, gated parking, raised garden beds, electric
charging (L2),quartz countertops, high-efficiency water heaters, low flow fixtures, LED lighting, and washer dryers”.
DEVELOPER SUMMARY:
From Developer: “Giv has completed and manages multiple projects in Salt Lake City, Provo, and Ogden. These projects
include Citizens West, Exchange, Project Open (One & Two), North Sixth, Startup Crossing, Imagine Jefferson (One & Two)
and as a consultant on many other projects, including the Denver Apartments and Pamela’s Place. More on Give Group and
the team here: https://giv.group/
BCG holdings, the project guarantor, has been actively developing The Granary District recently completing Industry, amongst
other projects. Jonathan Hardy, part of the BCG team, was formerly the head of Housing and Community Development for the
State of Utah and a board member for Utah Housing Corporation. In this role, he managed compliance for over 500 projects.
BCG and Giv are currently collaborating on The Silos on 5th Phase 1 &2 as part of a broader redevelopment project.”
SITE MAP:
PROJECT RENDERINGS:
17
18
PROJECT NAME: #5 – 144 South
ADDRESS: 144 S. 500 East
DOES THE PROJECT MEET NOFA THRESHOLD
REQUIREMENTS?: Yes
PROJECT SUMMARY:
From Developer – The developer, 144 South Apartments, LLC, proposes to build the 144 South project, a 6-story (above-
grade), 110-unit apartment building on a 0.62-acre parcel located at 144 S 500 East in Salt Lake City. The project will include
a 420 square-foot cafe (or other retail) which is integrated into the entry lobby, an approximately 1,600 sf co-working business
center, plus an abundance of amenity spaces including a club house, exercise facility, pet wash, secure bike parking and
large outdoor deck. There will be 53 studio units and 57 one-bedroom units. The developer is seeking Low-Income Housing
Tax Credits so that building contains 110 affordable housing units (100%) with rents for tenants at or below 60% Area Median
Income.
OVERVIEW:
DEVELOPER:
Peter Corroon – 144 South
Apartments LLC
REQUEST TYPE:
Pre-Development &
Construction Costs
PROJECT TYPE: New Construction
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant Office
Building/House
HOUSING UNITS: 110 TOTAL
TOTAL MARKET
60 - 40%
AMI <40% AMI
Studio 53 ($925)
1-Bed 57 ($988)
TOTAL 110
FUNDING REQUEST:
NOFA REQUEST TOTAL PROJECT COST
$775,000 2.3% $32,547,991
TIMELINE:
Commence Construction February 2022
Complete Construction October 2023
TAX CREDITS:
Applying for Tax Credits (Y/N): Y – 4%
Tax Credits Awarded (Y/N): N
SOURCES:
FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT
Senior Lender Debt $16,900,000 51%
Seller Land Note $2,702,000 8.3%
Deferred Developer’s Fee $1,057,335 3.2%
RDA Loan $775,000 2.3%
Olene Walker $500,000 1.5%
County HOME Funds $250,000 .7%
LIHTC Equity $10,303,156 31%
Energy Rebates $65,000 2.3%
TOTAL SOURCES: $32,547,991 100%
USES:
FUNDING USES AMOUNT
Acquisition (land & demo) $4,823,000 14.8%
Site Work $1,458,954 4.4%
Construction $17,980,171 55%
Contingency $1,572,631 4.8%
Architect and Engineering Fees $423,500 1.3%
Profit and Overhead $3,047,253 9.3%
Financing $1,159,386 3.5%
Soft Costs $453,036 1.3%
Interim Proration Schedule Exp. $958,796 2.9%
Project Reserves $671,264 2%
TOTAL USES: $32,547,991 100%
PROPOSED TERMS:
Interest Rate: 1%
Term/Amortization: 40/40
Loan Details Hard Repayments
Repayment Priority: Subordinate to Senior Lender
19
The building will consist of five floors of wood frame construction over a 3-level concrete parking structure with 113 parking
spaces available for tenants. The Department of Housing and Urban Development is requiring at least one-to-one parking for
each apartment in order to obtain its funding.
DEVELOPER SUMMARY:
From Developer – 144 South Apartments, LLC consists of two partners, Red Gate Properties and Valmont Investments. Red
Gate Properties was founded in 1995 by brothers Peter and Christopher Corroon. Red Gate Properties has developed,
rehabilitated and/or managed several multi-family and commercial real estate properties in Utah, including seven multi-family
properties as well as a self-storage facility, two office buildings and two warehouses. Peter Corroon has completed three
affordable tax-credit projects. More recent affordable housing projects include the Cornell Street Apartments with 146 units
and the Casa Milagros by Centro Civico Housing with 61 apartments.
Valmont Investments, LLC invests in single-family and multi-family investment properties in the Salt Lake valley.
Once completed, the property will be professionally managed on a day-to-day basis by the EMG Management which has
many years of experience with multi-family affordable housing projects.
SITE MAP:
PROJECT RENDERINGS:
20
21
PROJECT NAME: #6 – University Heights
ADDRESS: 1060 E. 100 South
DOES THE PROJECT MEET NOFA THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS?: Yes
PROJECT SUMMARY:
From Developer: “This project proposes to adaptively reuse an existing office building for 53 apartments units and maintain
some commercial office space on the ground floor. It is proposed to be a partnership with the University of Utah incorporating
the existing transit infrastructure and elements to house incoming faculty looking to relocate to the University area and for
employees that meet the income restricted nature of the units.
Amenities will include high level amenities such as an indoor bike storage and locker area, fitness facility options, self serve
dog wash station that can be commercially utilized by the neighborhood. New green landscaping will be incorporated to soften
current concrete elements like the upper parking deck that serves the proposed commercial space.
This project is an opportunity to create affordable housing without tax credits. Rather than RDA being a minor portion of
creating affordability, this loan and the subsequent state match program grant will create affordability where market units
would otherwise exist.”
OVERVIEW:
DEVELOPER:
Jonathan Hardy/BCG
Holdings
REQUEST TYPE: Construction Costs
PROJECT TYPE: Adaptive Reuse
EXISTING LAND USE: Office Building
HOUSING UNITS: 53 TOTAL
TOTAL MARKET
60 - 40%
AMI <40% AMI
1-Bed 30 15 ($1000)
2-Bed 8
TOTAL 38 15
FUNDING REQUEST:
NOFA REQUEST TOTAL PROJECT COST
$2,000,000 9.73% $20,553,803
TIMELINE:
Commence Construction July 2022
Complete Construction September 2023
TAX CREDITS:
Applying for Tax Credits (Y/N): N
Tax Credits Awarded (Y/N): N
SOURCES:
FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT
Senior Lender Debt $14,593,455 71%
RDA Loan $2,000,000 10%
State of Utah Match Grant $1,057,335 5%
Owner Equity $775,000 4%
TOTAL SOURCES: $20,553,803 100%
USES:
FUNDING USES AMOUNT
Land/Existing Structures $6,316,000 30.7%
Hard Costs $11,495,674 55.9%
Soft Costs $545,000 2.7%
Developer Fee $768,387 3.7%
Financing Expense $1,028,742 5%
Reserves $400,000 1.9%
TOTAL USES: $20,553,803 100%
PROPOSED TERMS:
Interest Rate: 1%
Term/Amortization: 35/35
Loan Details Hard Repayments,
subordinated to senior
lender
22
DEVELOPER SUMMARY:
From Developer: “BCG Holdings is a current guarantor and co-developer of the Silos on 5th. In addition, Jonathan Hardy on
the BCG Holdings team managed the State of Utah Housing and Community Development Division (HCD) and its Olene
Walker Housing Loan Fund for over 10 years. In addition, having served on the board of the Utah Housing Corporation and
being responsible as a Trustee and in his position with HCD, Jonathan was charged with maintaining compliance over a
portfolio of 10,000 plus units as a pass through entity for HUD. BCG is committed and has the experience to meet all
objectives set forth and agreed to between the RDA and BCG.”
SITE MAP:
PROJECT RENDERINGS:
23
24
PROJECT NAME: #7 – Schmidt Apartments
ADDRESS: 1265 S. 300 West
DOES THE PROJECT MEET NOFA THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS?: Yes.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
From Developer – “This is a proposed new construction project with 159 affordable units (100% affordable) and 3,500 square
feet of commercial space on the found floor. The site is ideal for affordable housing due to its proximity to employment
opportunities and public transportation. It is located withing walking distance to the TRAX Ballpark Station.
In addition to the significant project attributes above, the projects will be designed to be a netZero project meaning it will
generate sufficient energy through on-site solar panels to offset 100% of project energy usage. All appliances and HVAC will
be electric only. The project will also meet Energy Star standards. The project will be a valuable asset to the neighborhood
and the city.”
OVERVIEW:
DEVELOPER: Corey Johnson/Westates
REQUEST TYPE: Construction Costs
PROJECT TYPE: New Construction
EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial Building
HOUSING UNITS: 159 TOTAL
TOTAL
60 - 40%
AMI <40% AMI
Studio 35 ($936) 5 ($484)
1-Bed 98 ($1,038) 5 ($519)
2-Bed 16 ($1,245)
TOTAL 149 10
FUNDING REQUEST:
NOFA REQUEST TOTAL PROJECT COST
$1,590,000 3.9% $40,950,402
TIMELINE:
Commence Construction July 2022
Complete Construction July 2024
TAX CREDITS:
Applying for Tax Credits (Y/N): Y – 4%
Tax Credits Awarded (Y/N): N
SOURCES:
FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT
Senior Lender Debt $20,100,000 49.1%
RDA Loan $1,590,000 3.9%
Tax Credit Equity $18,721,252 45.7%
Deferred Developer Fee $404,000 1.0%
Utility Rebates $135,150 .3%
TOTAL SOURCES: $40,950,402 100%
USES:
FUNDING USES AMOUNT
Demolition $75,000 .2%
Site Work & Construction $30,446,948 74.4%
Contingency $1,927,552 4.7%
Architect and Engineering Fees $425,000 1.0%
Development Fee $3,651,696 8.9%
Financing Expenses $2,406,075 5.9%
Soft Costs $213,856 .5%
Syndication Costs $163,000 .4%
Project Reserves $1,640,890 4.0%
Misc. $386 .001%
TOTAL USES: $40,950,402 100%
PROPOSED TERMS: Interest Rate: 1%
Term/Amortization: 30/30
Loan Details Hard Repayments,
Subordinate to senior
lender. Ground lease
25
DEVELOPER SUMMARY:
From Developer: “Westates Companies is the principal partner within the general partnership. Westates is a Utah construction
and development firm headquartered in Salt Lake City. It began operations in 2001. Westates is a partner in three 9% LIHTC
projects and two 4% LIHTC projects. Furthermore, they have constructed or developed over 2,000 apartments and townhome
units.”
SITE MAP:
PROJECT RENDERINGS:
26
PROJECT NAME: #8 – CDCU ADU Financing Program
ADDRESS: Citywide
DOES THE PROJECT MEET NOFA THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS?: No – This request would require an exception from
the Review Body and RDA Board.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
OVERVIEW:
DEVELOPER:
Community Development
Corporation of Utah (CDCU)
REQUEST TYPE: Construction Loan(s)
PROJECT TYPE: ADU Financing Program
EXISTING LAND USE: n/a
HOUSING UNITS: ADU rent limited to 60% AMI for at
least 3 years.
FUNDING REQUEST:
NOFA REQUEST TOTAL PROJECT COST
$500,000
Average ADU Loan -
$125,000
TIMELINE:
Commence Construction Ongoing
Complete Construction Ongoing
TAX CREDITS:
Applying for Tax Credits (Y/N): N
Tax Credits Awarded (Y/N): N
SOURCES:
FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT
RDA Subsidy $500,000
US Treasury Grant Unknown at this time
CDCU Funds Unknown at this time
USES:
FUNDING USES AMOUNT
ADU Construction Amount
(average) $150,000 each 100%
PROPOSED TERMS – See pages 14 and 15 of
project proposal for more detail.
RDA Subsidy Does not get paid back
CDCU Loan -Interest only for 12 months.
-Thereafter, interest due monthly
based on 20-year amortization until
maturity.
-Loan term of 3 years.
-When loan term expires, total loan
amount must be paid back to
CDCU or the total loan excluding
the RDA’s $30-50K subsidy. If the
latter, Deed of Trust must be
maintained to rent to lessee at
$60% AMI.
27
DEVELOPER SUMMARY:
PROJECT RENDERINGS:
(ADU Design to vary based upon owner preferences)
28
6 - University
Heights5 - 144 S 500 E
2 - The Nest
4 - The Silos
1 - 915 W
North Temple
7 - Schmidt
Apts
3 - Cleveland Court
ATTACHMENT E: Map of Project Locations
Legend
High Opportunity Area
2021 HDLP Submittals
1
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
Affordable Housing – Housing Development Loan Program (HDLP)
Funding Allocations
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF SALT LAKE CITY APPROVING CITYWIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
FUNDING ALLOCATIONS.
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (“RDA”) was created to transact the
business and exercise the powers provided for in the Utah Community Reinvestment Agency Act
(the “Act”).
WHEREAS, the Act provides that tax increment funds may be used for the purpose of
increasing the affordable housing supply within the boundaries of Salt Lake City.
WHEREAS, the RDA Board of Directors (“Board”) approved the Housing Funds Allocation
Policy (“Funds Policy”), Resolution R-4-2021, which establishes policies with respect to
dedicating and directing resources for the development and preservation of housing based on
funding source (“Housing Funds”).
WHEREAS, the Board has set aside $8,000,000 of Housing Funds for affordable housing
through the RDA’s Housing Development Loan Program (“HDLP”) including $5,300,000 in
HDLP funds and $2,700,000 in high opportunity funds. The allocation of funds is contingent
upon an application and review process administered by the RDA to facilitate funding of
qualified projects that meet the goals established by the HDLP.
WHEREAS, through a Notice of Funding Availability (“NOFA”), the RDA administered a loan
application and review process pursuant to the HDLP policy set forth in resolution R-7-2021 (the
“HDLP Policy”) and the RDA’s Housing Funding Priorities for Fiscal Year 2021-2022 (“Funding
Priorities”) that resulted in eight requests for funding totaling $11,476,375. All eight applications are
for projects located outside of high opportunity area neighborhoods.
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2021, the HDLP Review Committee (“Review Committee”)
reviewed the HDLP applications and recommended funding allocations and preliminary terms as
further described in on Exhibit A.
WHEREAS, based on the Review Committee’s recommendations, RDA staff recommend that
the Board approve the funding allocations and preliminary terms described in Exhibit A.
WHEREAS, following approval of funding allocations and preliminary terms as set forth on
Exhibit B, the RDA shall provide a conditional commitment period during which the approved
Attachment F: HDLP 2021 Funding Allocation Resolution
2
applicant shall have the opportunity to obtain needed financial, legal, and regulatory approvals,
as well as satisfy other conditions determined by the RDA, to finalize the loan terms.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the HDLP Policy, applicants that successfully meet the conditions of
the conditional commitment shall be invited to execute a Letter of Commitment to finalize the
loan terms, subject to a set of conditions precedent to closing of the loan.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD that it approves the
funding allocations and preliminary terms as further described in Exhibit B, subject to revisions
that do not materially affect the rights and obligations of the RDA hereunder. For approved
applicants that successfully meet the required conditions, the Board authorizes the Executive
Director to negotiate and execute the conditional commitment letter, the Letter of Commitment,
and the loan agreements and other relevant documents consistent with the funding allocations and
terms contained on Exhibit B and incorporating such other terms and conditions as recommended
by the City Attorney’s office.
Passed by the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City, this _______
day of December 2021.
________________________________
Ana Valdemoros, Chair
Approved as to form: __________________________________
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Sara Montoya
Date:____________________________
The Executive Director:
____ does not request reconsideration
____ requests reconsideration at the next regular Agency meeting.
________________________________
Erin Mendenhall, Executive Director
Attest:
________________________
City Recorder
November 23, 2021
3
EXHIBIT A: RDA HDLP REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED FUNDING
ALLOCATIONS
The RDA HDLP Review Committee recommends that funding be allocated to projects in order
of priority ranking.
*The final loan terms shall comply with the requirements, standard loan terms and conditions, interest-rate
reductions, and all other details laid out within the 2021 Housing Development Loan Program (HDLP) Guidelines
PROJECT/APPLICANT ADDRESS
FUNDING
REQUEST PRELIMINARY TERMS*
FUNDING
RECOMMENDATION
FUNDING
RANKING
Silos on 5th 425 W. 500 South $2,360,000 1.5% interest, 40-year term,
40-year amortization
$2,360,000 1
Giv Communities
144 S. 500 East 144 S. 500 East $775,000 1% interest, 40-year term,
40-year amortization
$775,000 2
Red Gate
The Nest 382 Rio Grande $1,800,000 1.5% interest, 20 year term,
40 year amortization,
regular payments w/ balloon
payment end of term
$1,082,500 3
W3 Partners
Schmidt Apartments 1265 S. 300 West $1,590,000 1% interest, 30 year term,
30 year amortization
$1,082,500 3
Westates
University Heights 1060 E. 100 South $2,000,000 1% interest, 35 year term,
35 year amortization
$0
BCG
915 W. North Temple 915 W. North
Temple
$1,000,000 1% interest, 10 year term,
30 year amortization,
regular payments w/ balloon
payment end of term
$0
JF Development Group
Cleveland Court 375 E. Cleveland
Street
$1,451,375 1% interest only
construction loan converted
to soft second loan(s).
RDA paid back for land
upon sale of units
$0
Sentry Financial
ADU Financing
Program
CDCU
Citywide $500,000 RDA Grant $0
TOTAL $11,476,375 $5,300,000
4
EXHIBIT B: HDLP RDA BOARD FUNDING ALLOCATIONS
(To add after Board Meeting)
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT POLICY
RDA Board of Directors –December 14, 2021
RDA TARGET -
Mayor Mendenhall’s Salt Lake City 2021 Plan
1
NO
ON-S I T E
EMISSIONS
2
BECOME LEADER IN
SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
3
MODEL COMMERCIAL
+RESIDENTIAL
CARBON -FREE
BUILDINGS
EMMISSION FREE BY 2023
Sustainable Development Policy
POLICY STRUCTURE
1.Threshold Requirements
a)ENERGY STAR score of 90 and participation in Elevate Buildings
b)All electric (no natural gas)
2.Program -Specific Requirements
a)Off-site net zero buildings –utilizing a utility tariff
b)On-site net zero buildings –utilizing on-site renewables
POLICY UPDATES
1.Threshold Requirements –
Will apply to all new construction projects and projects that receive over $400,000
$200,000 in RDA funding.
•May capture a few more rehab projects
•Excludes Granary District’s adaptive reuse program
•Allows for smaller emergency loans
•RDA Board can waive requirements
POLICY UPDATES
2. Interest Rate Flexibility –
•1% interest rate offered for off -site net zero
•2% interest offered for on -site net zero
Addition of the following language:
Projects are eligible for one sustainability -related interest rate reduction, with the ability to
reduce the interest rate to a minimum of 1%. Interest rates are subject to an adjustment, of up
to a 1% deviation, based on project cash flow and debt coverage ratio calculated at time of
application and underwriting.
2. Interest Rate Flexibility –
1. Union Pacific Hotel:
a. Total loan amount – $7,000,000
b. Loan terms – 12-year term; 20-year amortization; 2.39% interest
Original Loan (2.39%) Off-Site Net Zero
(-1% =1.39%)
On-Site Net Zero
(-2% = lowest 1%)
Total Interest Paid ($) $1,476,236 $842,878 $601,828
Savings ($) n/a $633,358 $874,408
Hotel Loan Terms:
1. Wasatch Community Gardens:
a. Total loan amount – $250,000
b. Loan terms – 30-year term; cash flow loan; 2.5% interest
*Assumes savings are applied as cash flow payments to the RDA.
Original Loan (2.5%) Off-Site Net Zero
(-1% =1.5%)
On-Site Net Zero
(-2% = lowest 1%)
Total Interest Paid ($) $100,233 $49,885 $30,642
Savings ($) n/a $50,348 $69,591
Loan Paid Off* 26 years 23 years 22 years
Community Garden Loan Terms:
POLICY UPDATES
3. On-Site Net Zero Clarification –
Supply 100% of the building’s electricity needs with as much on-site solar energy generation as the site
will reasonably/cost effectively allow.
*This requirement can be met through installation of an equivalently size solar array on another
structure on the property (carport, ground mount, etc.).
4. Application of Policy –The Threshold Requirements must be met by all projects that submit an
application to the RDA after the adoption of this policy that anticipate receiving a building permit on
or after January 1, 2023. The Program -Specific Sustainability Measures shall be effective
immediately.
4. Noncompliant Projects –Have 30 months from C of O to comply with all sustainability standards.
ADDITIONAL SUSTAINABILITY INCENTIVES
•Rocky Mountain Power: WattSmart Incentives
•Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (C -Pace)
•Energy Efficient Tax Deductions
Additional Updates
•City Department Reviews
•Cooperation with Rocky
Mountain Power
RDA PROGRAM SUSTAINABILITY MEASURES
RDA PROGRAM SUSTAINABILITY MEASURE
Tax Increment Reimbursement Program –applicable
to tax increment reimbursements over $500,000 •On-Site Net Zero building status is required
Competitively Marketed Land Dispositions (RFP)•Off-Site Net Zero is required
•On-Site Net Zero will receive higher rankings
RDA Loan Programs –applicable to any RDA loan •Off-Site Net Zero will receive interest rate reduction of 1%
•On-Site Net Zero will receive interest rate reduction of 2%
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 118 WWW.SLC.GOV · WWW.SLCRDA.COM
P.O. BOX 145518, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5518 TEL 801-535-7240 · FAX 801-535-7245
MAYOR ERIN MENDENHALL
Executive Director DANNY WALZ
Director
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY
DATE: November 24, 2021
PREPARED BY: Lauren Parisi and Cara Lindsley, RDA Project Managers
RE: RDA Sustainable Development Policy
REQUESTED ACTION: Consider Approval of Resolution to Adopt the RDA’s Sustainable Development
Policy
POLICY ITEM: Sustainability – Citywide RDA-Funded Projects
BUDGET IMPACTS: N/A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (“RDA”) recognizes the great
impact development has on local air quality and is currently working on a sustainable development policy to
promote smarter, more sustainable growth across the city. Since the policy was presented to the RDA Board in
early October (see Attachment C for October report), updates have been made to the policy to address comments
from the Board as well as the Redevelopment Advisory Committee (RAC). Agency staff presented the most-
updated sustainable development policy to the RAC at their November meeting. The RAC had no questions and
unanimously voted to forward on a positive recommendation of this policy to the RDA Board.
This memo will review the proposed updates to the policy including:
•Reducing the dollar amount that triggers “Threshold” sustainability requirements
•Providing flexibility for loan interest rate reductions
•Noncompliance Regulations
The updated sustainable development policy is provided as Attachment A for the Board’s review and potential
adoption.
ANALYSIS:
Policy Updates – A few reoccurring comments have been addressed in the updated policy document and
described in greater detail below.
1.Threshold Dollar Amount. At their October meeting, the RDA Board expressed interest in reducing
the dollar amount of RDA funding that would trigger compliance with the first Threshold Requirement
to earn a “Designed to Earn Energy Star” score of at least 90 and participate in the City Sustainability
Department’s Elevate Buildings programs. Staff initially set this trigger to $400,000 to exclude smaller,
potentially urgent gap financing requests for rehab projects that have an inherent level of sustainability
because they preserve an existing structure.
To capture even more RDA projects while still allowing flexibility for smaller adaptive reuse loans, the
2
first Threshold Requirement has been updated to apply to all projects receiving over $200,000 from the
RDA. It should be noted that all new construction projects must meet the Threshold Requirements,
regardless of the amount of RDA funding.
The updated requirement would not apply to projects participating in the Granary District’s Adaptive
Reuse Program that offers forgivable loans up to $200,000. Obtaining an ENERGY STAR score
typically requires that an energy model be completed. This additional expense could deter an applicant
from applying for a smaller amount of RDA funding and result in fewer RDA-supported adaptive reuse
projects.
Still, the RDA will work to encourage energy efficiency in all projects by highlighting other energy
incentive programs that are available for small businesses, including:
•Rocky Mountain Power: WattSmart Incentives & Programs for Businesses provides incentives
for typical energy upgrades to equipment such as lighting, HVAC, compressed air and more. In
addition, this program offers assistance on energy analysis, project manager co-funding, and
other in-depth energy management tools.
Local business Red Iguana received $3,785 from the WattSmart program to upgrade to more
efficient LED lighting in their restaurants. This lowered their annual energy bill by $1,300 a
year. Rocky Mountain’s current LED lighting incentive will pay for 75% of a lighting upgrade
project, up to $4,000 total.
•Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (C-PACE) helps property owners access private
financing to install energy efficient building improvements and increase the value of their
property. Because the long-term financing can cover up to 100% of a building’s modernization
project cost and often requires no money down, C-PACE may enable property owners to make
substantial upgrades to their buildings. The project’s energy savings may outweigh the C-PACE
payments, creating positive cash flow for the property owner whose upgraded building may be
more valuable after a C-PACE project.
Salt Lake City’s convention center hotel received $54.7 million in C-PACE financing to cover
improvements such as heating and cooling systems, interior lighting and equipment, fans, heat
rejection, pumps, and water systems. As a result, the hotel's energy performance is projected to
exceed the energy code compliance level by over 20 percent. Smaller commercial projects can
apply for this funding as well.
•Energy Efficient Tax Deductions of up to $1.80 per square foot are available to owners or
designers of commercial buildings or systems that demonstrate a 50% reduction in energy usage
accomplished solely through improvements to the heating, cooling, ventilation, hot water, and
interior lighting systems. Partial deductions of up to $.60 per square foot can be taken for
qualifying measures.
•A list of additional energy incentive programs available in Utah can be found HERE.
2.Interest Rate Reductions. Both the Board and the RAC have asked staff if the proposed interest rate
reductions are sufficient to incentivize net zero projects. Reviewing hypothetical RDA projects, a 1%-
3
2% additional interest rate reduction could provide significant cost savings for both small and large
loans as detailed in Attachment B. While there are premiums to participating in utility tariff programs to
meet off-site net zero standards, these costs should be partially offset by the energy efficiency of the
building. Rocky Mountain Power indicates that their Subscriber Solar program could potentially reduce
electric bills for some customers during the summer when solar block rates are less expensive.
There may also be a premium to installing on-site renewables such as solar. These costs vary from
project to project; however, there are existing incentives and energy rebates as discussed earlier to help
with these initial costs. In addition, reduced monthly energy costs could increase a project’s net
operating income, resulting in a higher debt coverage ratio and more favorable terms for the project’s
primary loan.
For the case that the policy’s standard interest rate reductions do not provide enough savings for a
project to be feasible, language has been added to the policy that allows the RDA to consider additional
reductions down to a minimum interest rate of 1%. This language aligns with the RDA’s Housing
Development Loan Program, which states:
Projects are eligible for one sustainability-related interest rate reduction, with the ability to reduce the
interest rate to a minimum of 1%. Interest rates are subject to an adjustment, of up to a 1% deviation,
based on project cash flow and debt coverage ratio calculated at time of application and underwriting.
To note, existing RDA loans will not be able to apply for this interest rate reduction retroactively.
Noncompliant Projects. A project’s energy model and building plans should confirm that the building
meets all applicable policy standards before it is built. Still, modifications can be made throughout the
construction process, especially if a certain building element is not required for life safety reasons.
There are many issues that could arise during construction that weren’t anticipated during planning. For
example, certain energy efficient appliances may get swapped out for others with different specs or a
project may not be to accommodate as much on-site solar as originally planned.
The policy previously dictated that projects had two years to achieve an ENERGY STAR score within 5
points of projected score and two and a half years to come into compliance with all other sustainability
requirements. The policy has since been updated to remove the latter time limitation of two and a half
years as terms of default will be detailed in all RDA agreements. However, because ENERGY STAR
requires at least a year’s worth of operational data to submit into the program, additional time has been
allocated for projects to achieve their projected score.
Additional Information –
1.Solar on Covered Parking. The RDA Board asked how this policy promotes the use of solar panels on
covered parking structures. The “On-Site Net Zero” requirement can be met by installing solar panels on
covered parking structures. Free standing solar structures could also be utilized. There are no real
limitations as to how the on-site requirement must be met in terms of the type of renewables or where
they are installed. However, projects must supply at least 50% of their annual energy needs with
4
renewables, or, install renewable infrastructure equivalent to the square footage half of the project’s roof
space on site.
2.Cooperation with Rocky Mountain Power. Agency staff met with representatives from Rocky
Mountain Power (RMP) to discuss the proposed Sustainable Development Policy and its potential
impact on RMP’s infrastructure. RAC members and industry professionals expressed concern that there
may not be sufficient infrastructure in place to support all-electric buildings. RMP indicated that this
policy should not overburden their infrastructure’s capacity as there is not a large difference between
supplying energy to traditional buildings vs. all-electric buildings.
RMP did indicate that developers should connect with them early in the development process before a
building permit is issued. If a project has a large cumulative electrical load, a system impact study may
be required that can take 30-45 days to complete. RMP is also in the process of drafting equipment
room design standards to help developers plan for infrastructure space needs on a given site. In addition
to reviewing individual project needs, RMP goes through a new infrastructure planning process at least
once a year. They indicated it would be helpful if the City informs them of areas in the city where dense
development is planned.
3.Redevelopment Advisory Committee Recommendation. Agency staff presented the most-updated
sustainable development policy to the RAC at their November meeting. The RAC had no questions and
unanimously voted to forward on a positive recommendation of this policy to the RDA Board.
Next Steps – If adopted, the Threshold Requirements must be met by all projects that submit an application to
the RDA after the policy’s adoption that anticipate receiving a building permit on or after January 1, 2023. This
may accommodate some emergency loan requests submitted in 2022 that do not meet the requirements and
allows time for the RDA to publicize the new requirements. The Program-Specific Sustainability Measures will
become effective immediately.
PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION:
Reviewed policy draft at October 12th, 2021 Board meeting.
Attachments:
•Attachment A: RDA Board Resolution/Sustainable Development Policy
•Attachment B: Sustainability Interest Rate Reduction Scenarios
•Attachment C: October Board Memo
1
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
RESOLUTION NO. _____________
Sustainable Development Policy
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF SALT LAKE CITY ADOPTING A SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT POLICY
WHEREAS, Salt Lake City adopted a joint resolution establishing renewable energy
and carbon emission reduction goals for Salt Lake City (“Joint Resolution”). The Joint
Resolution details the negative effects of climate change and commits to the reduction of
community greenhouse gas emissions by at least 50% by 2030 and at least 80% by 2040
relative to the 2009 community emissions baseline (“Sustainability Goals”).
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (“RDA”) recognizes the
great impact development has on increased greenhouse gas emissions and local air quality.
WHEREAS, in an effort to reduce emissions and help achieve the Salt Lake City’s
Sustainability Goals, the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City
(“Board”) desires to formalize a policy to promote environmentally sustainable development
projects.
WHEREAS, this Sustainable Development Policy is intended to modify existing RDA
policies including the Loan Program Policy, the Tax Increment Reimbursement Program
Policy, and the Real Property Disposition Policy.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment
Agency of Salt Lake City shall adopt the following Sustainable Development Policy:
1.PURPOSE
The purpose of the RDA Sustainable Development Policy is to promote a built
environment that incorporates sustainable building practices and technologies to reduce
building-related greenhouse gas emissions, improve local air quality, preserve natural
resources and enhance community resiliency. As detailed below, certain RDA projects
must meet the Threshold Requirements (as detailed in Section 3) as well as the applicable
Program-Specific Sustainability Measures (as detailed in Section 4).
2.APPLICATION OF POLICY
The Threshold Requirements must be met by all projects that submit an application to the
RDA after the adoption of this policy that anticipate receiving a building permit on or after
January 1, 2023. Projects receiving a loan that meet the Threshold Requirements and obtain
a building permit before January 1, 2023 shall be eligible to earn a 1% interest rate reduction.
The Program-Specific Sustainability Measures (requirements and incentives that include
meeting Threshold Requirements) shall be effective immediately.
Attachment A: RDA Board Resolution/Sustainable Development Policy
2
3. THRESHOLD REQUIREMENTS
The Threshold Requirements are as follows:
a. Enhanced Energy Performance - All new construction building projects
(including site acquisition) and building projects that receive, or are anticipated
to receive, two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) or more in RDA funding
shall be designed to achieve a “Designed to Earn ENERGY STAR” score of 90
or higher or a Design Target Site Energy Use Intensity (EUI) value
corresponding with such a score that is generated by the Designed to Earn
ENERGY STAR tool and participate in the City Sustainability Department’s
Elevate Buildings Program. The EUI target shall be based on the Designed to
Earn ENERGY STAR tool or comparable source.1
b. Emission-Free Building Operation - In addition to meeting the Threshold
Requirement for enhanced energy performance, all new construction building
projects (including site acquisition) and building projects that receive, or are
anticipated to receive, nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000) or more in
RDA funding shall also be designed to operate without on-site fossil fuel
combustion (i.e., propane, natural gas).2
4. PROGRAM-SPECIFIC SUSTAINABILITY MEASURES
In addition to the Threshold Requirements, Program-Specific Sustainability Measures are
required or incentivized as determined by the applicable program type listed in Table 1. If
an RDA program type is not listed, no further sustainability measures will be required
beyond the Threshold Requirements.
TABLE 1: Program-Specific Sustainability Measures
Program Type Sustainability Measures –
Requirement or Incentive as Indicated
Tax Increment Reimbursement
Program (TIR) over $500,000 • On-Site Net Zero building status is required
Land Dispositions
• Off-Site Net Zero is required
• On-Site Net Zero will receive higher
rankings for competitively marketed projects
RDA Loan Programs – applicable to
any RDA loan*
• Off-Site Net Zero will be eligible to receive
interest rate reduction of 1%
• On-Site Net Zero will be eligible to receive
interest rate reduction of 2%
* Projects are eligible for one sustainability-related interest rate reduction, with the ability to reduce the
1See ‘Designed to Earn ENERGY STAR’
program: https://www.energystar.gov/buildings/resources_topic/commercial_new_construction/achieve_designed_earn_e
nergy_star
2 Projects may utilize the All-Electric provisions of the New Building Institute’s Building Decarbonization Code or
comparable standard. See: https://newbuildings.org/resource/building-decarbonization-code/
3
interest rate to a minimum of 1%. Interest rates are subject to an adjustment, of up to a 1% deviation, based
on project cash flow and debt coverage ratio calculated at time of application and underwriting.
a. Net Zero Building Standards –
Projects must meet the 2021 IECC Zero Energy Appendix standards or obtain a
third-party certification to achieve Off-Site or On-Site Net Zero status.
Examples of code-based and third-party certifications for net zero buildings are
included in Table 2. Alternative code-based or third-party certifications not
listed in Table 2 will be considered by RDA staff on a case-by-case basis.
i. Off-Site Net Zero – To be eligible to purchase RDA-controlled
property or receive an RDA loan sustainability-related interest rate
reduction, projects must meet the Threshold Requirements and source
100% of the project’s total estimated annual electricity consumption by
participating in a utility-sponsored renewable electricity program/tariff
such as the Blue Sky or Subscriber Solar programs.
ii. On-Site Net Zero – To be eligible to receive the benefits of a TIR,
purchase RDA-controlled property, or receive an RDA loan
sustainability-related interest rate reduction, projects must meet the
Threshold Requirements and supply 100% of the building’s electricity
needs with renewable energy. Renewable energy must include on-site
renewable energy that:
1) Supplies at least 50% of the project’s total estimated annual
electricity consumption (measured as kWh/year); or,
2) Utilizes at least 50% of the project’s available roof space for
on-site renewable energy generation.3
Any remaining renewable energy generation that can’t be
accommodated on site must be procured through off-site renewable
energy generation, including utility-sponsored renewable electricity
programs or tariffs.
3 “Available roof space” means roof spaces that are flat or face South, East, or West, are not shaded by trees or structures,
or not obstructed by building architectural features. This requirement can be met through installation of an equivalently
size solar array on another structure on the property (carport, ground mount, etc.). Roof space is exempt from being
considered part of the “available roof space” if it is so shaded that solar panels would produce less than 70% of th e
energy they would generate without shading. For example, if 20% of a project’s roof is so shaded that solar panels would
generate less than 70% of their intended output, then a project can still meet the requirement by installing solar on half of
the other 80% that is suitable for solar, i.e. 40% of the roof total.
4
TABLE 2: Examples of Code-Based or Third-Party Certifications for Net Zero Buildings
CODE
COMPLIANCE/
CERTIFICATION
OPTIONS
OFF-SITE
NET ZERO
ON-SITE
NET ZERO
BUILDING
TYPE
INTENT
Code-Based Pathway to meet Net Zero Building Standards
2021 IECC
Appendix CC Zero
Energy Commercial
Building Provisions
(LINK)
Meets required
EUI targets
and 100% of
renewable
electricity is
supplied by
offsite sources
approved in
the 2021 IECC
Appendix CC.
Meets required
EUI targets and
includes as much
onsite solar as
defined in Section
4(a)(ii), with the
remaining
renewable
electricity
supplied by offsite
sources approved
in the 2021 IECC
Appendix CC.
Any building
subject to the
IECC
Commercial
provision
(generally 4+
stories).
This is a code-based
performance approach
to achieving net zero
energy in a project that
is determined through
compliance with the
Zero Energy
Commercial code
language rather than a
third-party
certification.
Third-Party Certification Pathways to meet Net Zero Building Standards
Passive House
(LINK)
Passive House
with 100%
offsite
renewable
energy.
Passive House
with as much
onsite solar as
defined in Section
4(a)(ii), with the
remaining
renewable
electricity
supplied by offsite
sources approved
in the 2021 IECC
Appendix CC.
Any building
type.
This approach adds a
renewable energy
requirement to a
project that uses
Passive House
strategies for ultra-low
energy use.
Enterprise Green
Communities
Certification Plus
2020 (LINK)
EGC
Standards 5.4
(Zero Energy)
with offsite
and 5.5b (Zero
Carbon).
EGC Standards
5.4 (Zero Energy)
and 5.5b (Zero
Carbon). Projects
must include as
much onsite solar
as defined in
Section 4(a)(ii),
with the
remaining
renewable
electricity
supplied by offsite
sources approved
Any affordable
housing project.
Enterprise Green
Communities is a state-
and nationally-
recognized affordable
housing sustainability
certification. The 2020
criteria awards
increased points for
projects that achieve
energy-related
innovations, including
Zero Energy status
(100% on or off-site)
and Zero Carbon status
5
in the 2021 IECC
Appendix CC.
(all-electric).
Enterprise Green
Communities is
recognized in the Utah
Housing Corporation’s
Qualified Allocation
Plan for Low Income
Housing Tax Credits.
U.S. Green Building
Council LEED Zero
(LINK)
LEED Zero
Energy
certification
(building with
100% of
source energy
supplied or
offset with
renewable
energy over
12-month
period
(LEED Zero
Carbon also
qualifies).
LEED Zero
Energy
certification
(building with
100% of source
energy supplied or
offset with
renewable energy
over 12-month
period – with at
least 50% of
renewable energy
being located on-
site)
(LEED Zero
Carbon also
qualifies).
Any building
with LEED
New
Construction
(NC) or
Existing
Buildings (EB)
certification, or
seeking these
certifications.
This approach utilizes
the U.S. Green
Building Council’s
LEED Zero program
for projects already
certified as LEED or
seeking LEED
certification.
International Living
Future Institute
N/A Zero Energy
certification.
(LINK)
Any building
type.
This standard requires
the elimination of on-
site combustion and
100% on-site
renewable energy.
Zero Carbon
certification.
(LINK)
Any building
type.
This standard allows
off-site renewable
energy in certain
situations.
6
5. COMPLIANCE
All projects must verify compliance with Threshold Requirements and Program-
Specific Sustainability Measures as follows:
a. Threshold Requirements
i. Enhanced Energy Performance – A Statement of Energy Design
Intent (SEDI)4 verifying that the project has been designed to meet a
Designed to Earn ENERGY STAR target of 90 or higher or a
corresponding EUI target must be submitted to the RDA. A year after
the building has received a certificate of occupancy (C of O), the
project must submit building operations data on an annual basis to the
RDA and the City’s Sustainability Department similar to the
benchmark reporting requirements in the City Sustainability
Department’s Elevate Buildings Program5. If the project does not meet
an ENERGY STAR score within five (5) points of what was originally
projected within two (2) years of receiving C of O, building updates
will be required aimed at achieving the target score.
ii. Emission-Free Building Operation – A letter from a licensed
architect or engineer verifying that the project has been designed and
constructed without on-site fossil fuel combustion and describing the
energy system(s) utilized must be submitted to the RDA.
b. Program-Specific Sustainability Measures
i. Net Zero Building Standards – Projects must meet the 2021 IECC
Zero Energy Appendix standards (verified in a letter by a licensed
architect or engineer) or obtain a third-party certification to submit to
the RDA as indicated within Table 2. Where certifications are not
issued until after the building has been put into service, a letter from a
licensed architect or engineer verifying that the building has been
designed to meet certification standards and noting the anticipated
certification date must be submitted to the RDA. The completed
certification checklist must also be attached to the letter.
4 An ENERGY STAR Statement of Energy Design Intent (SEDI) document includes the Design Target ENERGY STAR
Score and the Design Target Site EUI. Energy modeling will be necessary to estimate the annual energy consumption of
a building, which is required to input into the ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager and complete the SEDI. An example
SEDI document can be accessed
here: https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/tools/SEDI_Sample%281%29.pdf?f4b0-a781
5 See ‘Elevate Buildings’ Program: https://www.slc.gov/sustainability/elevate-buildings/
7
ii. Off-Site Net Zero – An energy bill verifying participation in an
available renewable energy utility tariff program must be submitted to
the RDA within three (3) months of receiving a C of O.
iii. On-Site Net Zero – A letter from a certified renewable energy system
designer illustrating that the project meets at least one of the On-Site Net
Zero renewable energy generation requirements (from 4(a)(ii)) must be
submitted for RDA approval.
c. Noncompliance – Projects that are not in compliance with applicable
Threshold Requirements and Project-Specific Sustainability Measures may
either be in default, be required to repay the RDA incentive that was granted,
or provide any other remedy as detailed in the specific terms of the agreement
between the RDA and the beneficiary (including, but not limited to, damages).
6. EXCEPTIONS
The RDA Board of Directors, by a majority vote of those present, may waive
requirements or make exceptions to the foregoing criteria and procedures with a finding
that the RDA’s mission and values will be furthered by such waiver or exception. RDA
staff will prepare a written recommendation and statement regarding the waiver or
exception. The statement will be placed in the project file.
8
Passed by the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City, this _______
day of ________________, 202 .
________________________________
Ana Valdemoros, Chair
Approved as to form: __________________________________
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Allison Parks
Date:____________________________
The Executive Director:
____ does not request reconsideration
____ requests reconsideration at the next regular Agency meeting.
________________________________
Erin Mendenhall, Executive Director
Attest:
________________________
City Recorder
11/22/2021
5
Attachment B: Sustainability Interest Rate Reduction Scenarios
The following scenarios illustrate the amount of interest a project could save over the life of an RDA loan by implementing
off-site and on-site net zero sustainability measures. These projections are approximate.
1.Hotel Project:
a.Total loan amount – $7,000,000
b.Loan terms – 12-year term; 20-year amortization; 2.39% interest
2.Local Distillery Project:
a.Total loan amount – $850,000
b.Loan terms – 10-year term; 20-year amortization; 2.87% interest
3.Community Garden Project:
a.Total loan amount – $250,000
b.Loan terms – 30-year term; cash flow loan; 2.5% interest
*Assumes savings are applied as cash flow payments to the RDA.
Original Loan (2.39%) Off-Site Net Zero
(-1% =1.39%)
On-Site Net Zero
(-2% = lowest 1%)
Total Interest Paid ($) $1,476,236 $842,878 $601,828
Savings ($) n/a $633,358 $874,408
Original Loan (2.87%) Off-Site Net Zero
(-1% =1.87%)
On-Site Net Zero
(-2% = lowest 1%)
Total Interest Paid ($) $191,927 $123,244 $65,012
Savings ($) n/a $68,683 $125,915
Original Loan (2.5%) Off-Site Net Zero
(-1% =1.5%)
On-Site Net Zero
(-2% = lowest 1%)
Total Interest Paid ($) $100,233 $49,885 $30,642
Savings ($) n/a $50,348 $69,591
Loan Paid Off* 26 years 23 years 22 years
6
4. Affordable Housing Project:
a. Total loan amount – $1,000,000
b. Loan terms – 30-year term; 30-year amortization; 2.25% interest
Original Loan (2.25%) Off-Site Net Zero
(-1% =1.25%)
On-Site Net Zero
(-2% = lowest 1%)
Total Interest Paid ($) $371,890 $198,505 $157,149
Savings ($) n/a $173,385 $214,741
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 118 WWW.SLC.GOV · WWW.SLCRDA.COM
P.O. BOX 145518, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5518 TEL 801-535-7240 · FAX 801-535-7245
MAYOR ERIN MENDENHALL
Executive Director DANNY WALZ
Director
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY
DATE: September 24, 2021
PREPARED BY: Lauren Parisi and Cara Lindsley, RDA Project Managers
RE: RDA Sustainable Development Policy
REQUESTED ACTION: Briefing and discussion on Agency’s draft Sustainable Development Policy
POLICY ITEM: N/A
BUDGET IMPACTS: N/A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (“RDA”) recognizes the great
impact development has on local air quality and is working to promote smarter, more sustainable growth across
the city and to become a model for the state. Under the current RDA loan program, projects that meet certain
sustainable building certification standards receive a .5% interest rate reduction. However, achieving City and
the RDA climate goals will require a sustainable development policy that applies to almost all RDA-funded
projects.
The RDA’s proposed sustainable development policy can be broken down into two categories:
1)Threshold Sustainability Measures that are required of all new-construction projects and other
building projects that receive a certain level of RDA funding; and,
2)RDA Program-Specific Sustainability Measures that are either required or are used to further
incentivize sustainability in projects participating in RDA loan programs, the tax increment
reimbursement program and RDA land dispositions.
Threshold Sustainability Measures require sustainable building design and efficient energy systems for projects
receiving over $400,000 in RDA funding, and emission-free operation for projects receiving over $900,000 in
RDA funding. Program-Specific Sustainability Measures require 100% of a building’s electricity to be supplied
with off-site or on-site renewable energy, depending on the RDA program, and net-zero certification.
The attached draft sustainable development policy is proposed for the RDA Board of Director’s (“Board”)
review and initial feedback. RDA staff will incorporate the information contained herein along with feedback
from the Board into a formal policy resolution for consideration at a future date.
ANALYSIS: According to 2020 U.S. Census data, Utah was the fastest-growing state in the nation from 2010
to 2020, at 18.4%. Much like the State, Salt Lake City is also experiencing record growth. This growth comes at
a time when our community continues to face air quality challenges and the detrimental impacts of climate
change including increased temperatures, changes in water systems and extreme weather events. In Salt Lake
City, electricity consumption accounts for 50.4% of greenhouse gas emissions and natural gas combustion
accounts for 26.3%. (Climate Positive 2040, 2016). Both sources are primarily consumed in buildings and
together account for three quarters of all greenhouse emissions within the city – much more than what is
produced by the transportation sector. Electricity, and building energy in general, offer the greatest opportunity
for emissions reductions (SLC Community Carbon Footprint, 2010).
Attachment C: October RDA Board Memo
2
The RDA recognizes the great impact development has on local air
quality and is working to promote smarter, more sustainable growth
across the city and become a model for the state. Under the current
RDA loan program, projects that meet certain sustainable
development certification standards receive a .5% interest rate
reduction; however, in order to meet both the City’s and the RDA’s
climate goals, sustainable development strategies must be considered
for all RDA-funded projects. Similar organizations to the RDA across
the U.S. require sustainable technology to be incorporated in all
government-funded projects. Thus, the attached draft sustainable
development policy has been proposed for the Board’s review.
City Goals – In 2016, the City passed a Mayor-Council joint resolution (updated in 2019) to achieve the
following sustainability goals derived from the Climate Positive 2040 plan:
1. 100 X 2030: 100% Renewable Energy for Community Electricity Supply by 2030
2. 80 X 2040: 80% Reduction in Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2040, Compared to 2009
Baseline (Goal includes at least 50% reduction in community footprint by 2030)
RDA Target – Additionally, as directed by Mayor Mendenhall, the RDA will target:
• Emission-Free Buildings by 2023
This means that the RDA will support the development and rehabilitation of buildings without on-site fossil fuel
combustion (i.e. propane, natural gas) that receive a building permit from 2023 onwards.
With these goals in mind, the overarching purpose of the RDA’s sustainable development policy, once adopted,
is to promote a built environment that incorporates sustainable building practices and technologies to reduce
building-related greenhouse gas emissions, improve local air quality, preserve natural resources and enhance
community resiliency.
Proposed Sustainable Development Policy – The RDA’s sustainable development policy can be broken down
into two categories, including 1) Threshold Sustainability Measures that are required of all new construction
projects and other building projects that receive a certain level of RDA funding, and 2) RDA Program-Specific
Sustainability Measures that are either required or are used to further incentivize sustainability in projects
participating in RDA loan programs, the tax increment reimbursement program, and RDA-owned land
dispositions.
To allow time for developers to meet all threshold requirements, this policy will apply to all projects receiving a
building permit on or after January 1, 2023, except for projects that receive a tax increment reimbursement
agreement for which this policy becomes effective immediately. Projects seeking an RDA loan that meet the
Threshold Sustainability Measures before January 1, 2023, shall earn a 1% interest rate reduction.
1. Threshold Sustainability Measures:
Enhanced Energy Performance –
• Applicable Projects – All new construction projects and building projects that receive over
$400,000 in RDA funds, no matter the RDA program.
• Requirement – Projects shall be designed to achieve a “Designed to Earn ENERGY STAR”
score of 90 and above or a Design Target Site EUI value corresponding with such a score that
is generated by the Designed to Earn ENERGY STAR tool. Once the building is operating,
3
projects shall also participate in Salt Lake City Sustainability’s Elevate Buildings program and
submit building operation data to the city on an annual basis.
• Goal of Standard – This first “level” of the threshold sustainability measures has been proposed
to encourage RDA-funded projects to take a step towards more sustainable building design
through the incorporation of efficient energy systems (i.e. heating, cooling, lighting, appliances,
insulation, etc.). An ENERGY STAR score and energy use intensity (EUI) are well-known
industry metrics that applicants can calculate for free with the Portfolio Manager tool from
ENERGY STAR; however, some energy modeling will be required to input into the Portfolio
Manager tool. A building with an ENERGY STAR score of 75 and above indicates that it
performs in the top 25% of similar building types nationwide, which some building codes
require. Certain building types may not qualify for the “Designed to Earn ENERGY STAR,”
which is why achieving a similar EUI target is an alternative option.
The City Sustainability Department’s Elevate Buildings program will be utilized to ensure RDA
projects maintain projected ENERGY STAR scores. This program is currently in place and
requires all qualifying commercial buildings 25,000 square feet and larger to submit ENERGY
STAR data to the city on an annual basis. Per the RDA’s proposed sustainable development
policy, if the project does not meet an ENERGY STAR score within five (5) points of what was
originally projected within two years of receiving a certificate of occupancy, building updates
will be required aimed at achieving the target score.
Emission-Free Building Operation –
• Applicable Projects – All new construction projects and building projects that receive over
$900,000 in RDA funds, no matter the RDA program.
• Requirement – Projects shall be designed to operate without on-site fossil fuel combustion (i.e.,
propane, natural gas).
• Goal of Standard – This second “level” of the threshold sustainability measures aims to hit the
RDA’s target of supporting emission-free buildings by 2023 and achieve the City’s overarching
climate goals of increasing the renewable energy supply and reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. This measure would eliminate the use of natural gas in buildings for heating and
cooking. Natural gas contributes to 26.3% of Salt Lake City’s greenhouse gas emissions
(Climate Positive 2040, 2016). While the majority of today’s electricity supply is generated
from fossil fuels, the intent of building electrification is to prepare buildings for carbon-free
operation when the electricity supply is entirely powered by renewable sources such as solar,
wind and geothermal energy.
2. RDA Program Specific Sustainability Measures: To be eligible for certain RDA incentive programs
or to receive larger incentives, “Off-Site Renewables” or “On-Site Renewables” will be required in
addition to the Threshold Sustainability Measures as follows:
4
RDA Program Sustainability Measures –
Requirement or Incentive as Indicated
Tax Increment Reimbursement
Program – applicable to tax increment
reimbursements over $500,000
• On-Site Net Zero building status is required
Land Dispositions
• Off-Site Net Zero is required
• On-Site Net Zero will receive higher rankings
for competitively marketed land dispositions
RDA Loan Programs – applicable to
any RDA loan
• Off-Site Net Zero will receive interest rate
reduction of 1%
• On-Site Net Zero will receive interest rate
reduction of 2%
Off-Site Net Zero – Because the electrical grid is not sourced by 100% renewable energy, this measure
encourages supporting or paying a premium to utilize off-site renewable sources. To meet this measure,
projects must follow the 2021 IECC Zero Energy Appendix standards or obtain a qualifying
certification for “off-site net zero” and participate in available renewable energy utility programs/tariffs.
Energy utility programs are sometimes referred to as “green tariffs.” A green tariff is a price structure,
or an electricity rate, offered by a local utility that allows eligible customers to source up to 100% of
their electricity from renewable resources. Here in Utah, the Blue Sky and Subscriber Solar green tariffs
are in place, but more programs are on the horizon, including Utah 100 Communities that aims to
increase renewable energy infrastructure for localities to utilize.
On-Site Net Zero – This measure promotes the incorporation of on-site renewable energy (such as on-
site solar) in RDA projects that receive larger incentives and requires that projects follow the 2021
IECC Zero Energy Appendix standards or obtain a qualifying certification for “on-site net zero” and
supply 100% of the building’s electricity with renewable energy. Renewable energy must include on-
site renewable energy sufficient to:
1) Supply at least 50% of the project’s total estimated annual electricity consumption; or,
2) Utilize at least 50% of the project’s available roof space for on-site renewable energy
generation.
RDA staff acknowledges that some properties may not have the capacity to supply 100% on-site
renewable energy due to lot constraints, lack of sunlight, etc. Thus, any remaining renewable energy
generation that can't be accommodated on-site must be procured through off-site renewable energy
generation, including utility-sponsored renewable electricity programs or tariffs. To support the
implementation of both RDA program measures, a limited amount of funding may be made available
for certification fees during the first year that this policy is in place.
Compliance – To meet the Threshold Enhanced Energy Performance requirement, a Statement of Energy
Design Intent shall be submitted verifying an ENERGY STAR score of 90 and above. To meet the Threshold
Emission-Free Building Operation standard, a letter shall be submitted from a licensed architect or engineer
verifying the absence of on-site fossil fuel combustion and detailing the proposed energy system to be utilized.
5
To meet the Off-Site and On-Site Net Zero requirements, a letter shall be submitted from a licensed architect or
engineer verifying compliance with the 2021 IECC Zero Energy Appendix standards or the project must obtain
one of the following third-party certifications as listed within Table 2 of the policy document: Passive House;
Enterprise Green Communities; aU.S. Green Building Council LEED Zero; or International Living Future
Institute. If participating in a utility program, the RDA will require that projects submit an energy bill from the
utility sponsor verifying participation within three months of receiving a certificate of occupancy.
Projects that are not in compliance with applicable RDA Sustainability Measures within 30 months of receiving
a certificate of occupancy may either default on the RDA agreements and/or be required to pay back all or a
portion of the RDA incentive that was granted. Terms of default shall be specified in associated contracts
between the RDA and beneficiary.
Exceptions – The RDA Board of Directors, by a majority vote of those present, may waive requirements or
make exceptions to the foregoing criteria and procedures with a finding that the RDA’s mission and values will
be furthered by such waiver or exception.
Community Engagement – Three roundtable discussions were held with local stakeholders on May 25th and
26th. Participating stakeholders had backgrounds that included engineering, architecture, development, finance,
construction management, and affordable housing. Notes and key takeaways from these meetings are provided
in Attachment B. The most substantive change to the draft policy resulting from stakeholder engagement was to
eliminate the “On-Site Net Zero” requirement or participation in utility tariffs as a threshold, and instead, make
it an optional RDA program requirement.
Redevelopment Advisory Committee (“RAC”) Review – RDA staff reviewed the proposed policy with the
RAC during their August meeting. The policy was relatively well-received, but multiple members expressed
concern regarding the lack of existing infrastructure to support all-electric buildings. They noted there can be lot
constraints when working to accommodate new electrical infrastructure on a site, which has been occurring
more often as electric vehicle (EV) chargers are being incorporated into projects. One RAC member suggested
the city be more flexible in terms of where electrical boxes can be located. In response to these concerns, RDA
staff sent Rocky Mountain Power the draft policy for review and has requested to meet with a representative to
explore ways the RDA can support changes that would facilitate the implementation of new city sustainable
development requirements.
The RAC was also in favor of applying the sustainable development requirements to all affordable housing
projects as a matter of environmental justice. All Salt Lake City residents should benefit from the positive
environmental impact of this policy, not just those within market rate housing. Due to increased building
efficiency, residents should see a decrease in their monthly energy bills. The RAC also asked what could be
done to promote other environmental benefits such as green space, water conservation, walkability and more.
The RDA’s livability benchmarks do work to promote these public benefits, but more could be done in
collaboration with other city departments. RDA staff will return to the RAC to ask for a formal recommendation
in November.
Policy Questions –
1.The Threshold Sustainability Measures (‘a’ & ‘b’) will apply to both new construction and
rehabilitation projects. Because there is some inherent sustainability associated with rehabilitation
projects, should these requirements only apply to new construction?
6
2.Should funding be made available to supplement energy modeling costs and sustainable
certification fees to facilitate compliance with this policy?
3.Because sustainable building technology is ever evolving, should the RDA be required to review
and update the policy every 2-3 years?
PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION: None.
ATTACHMENTS:
A.RDA Sustainable Development Policy Draft
B.Notes from Professional Roundtable Discussions
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 118 WWW.SLC.GOV · WWW.SLCRDA.COM
P.O. BOX 145518, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5518 TEL 801-535-7240 · FAX 801-535-7245
MAYOR ERIN MENDENHALL
Executive Director
DANNY WALZ
Director
STAFF MEMO
DATE: November 24, 2021
PREPARED BY: Kort Utley
RE: Potential Revisions to the Agency’s Guiding Framework
REQUESTED ACTION: Consideration of a resolution amending the Agency’s Guiding
Framework
POLICY ITEM: Redevelopment Agency Guiding Framework for Strategic Operations,
Resolution No. R-22-2019
BUDGET IMPACTS: Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Agency staff requests the Board of Directors (Board) consideration
of a resolution that would revise the Guiding Framework (Framework), which is a strategic,
foundational document containing the Agency’s mission statement and core values. Staff
presented potential revisions to the Framework to the Board in October and they were generally
well-received, although the Board did discuss three additional revisions. Staff has incorporated
the Board’s feedback, incorporating two of the three revisions discussed at the October Board
meeting. The resolution under consideration is included as Attachment A to this memo.
REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Staff presented
the potential revisions to the Framework to the Redevelopment Advisory Committee (RAC),
November 3rd, 2021, and the RAC unanimously supported the proposed revisions.
ANALYSIS & ISSUES: In November 2019, the Board adopted the Guiding Framework
(“Framework”), an operational document that strategically guides and prioritizes the
Redevelopment Agency’s work. The Framework includes three components:
A mission statement clarifying the Agency’s purpose;
Core values articulating the intended economic, social, and physical outcomes
expected of Agency projects; and
2
A methodology for prioritizing the Agency’s work based on a given project’s ability
to achieve certain threshold requirements, demonstrate public benefits, and comply
with the criteria in the Agency’s programs and policies.
Staff has utilized the Framework throughout the past two years to analyze requests for Agency
financial assistance. During that time, staff has noted where the Framework might be improved
to better serve its purpose. Concurrently, staff has been working on a plan for the Strategic
Alignment of Agency Values and Resources and an Equitable & Inclusive Development Work
Plan, both presented at the September 2021 Board meeting. Additionally, the Board has recently
had in-depth discussions on housing priorities. As a follow-up to these efforts and discussions,
staff has considered ways in which the Framework could be updated accordingly, with a focus on
the principles of equity & inclusion.
Staff presented potential revisions to the Framework at the October 12, 2021 Board meeting at
which time the following additional revisions were discussed:
1. Change the words “economic growth” in the mission statement to “economic
opportunity” to match the language contained in the Framework’s value statement of
Economic Opportunity. Staff has made this change and it is reflected in Attachment B:
Exhibit “A” to the Resolution: RDA Guiding Framework for Mission and Values.
2. Consider incorporating the titles of the Framework’s other value statements—Equity &
Inclusion and Neighborhood Vibrancy—into the mission statement. Staff considered
incorporating these titles but ultimately did not make this revision to the mission
statement, as it resulted in a wordier, cumbersome and lengthy mission statement. It has
been a goal to keep the mission statement as clear and concise as possible.
3. Revise the Description & Intent language for the Livability Benchmark for “Affordable
Commercial Space” to incorporate language from the Livability Benchmark for “Local
Business Opportunities,” which staff has proposed removing. Staff has made this change.
Following is a summary of the proposed revisions to the Framework discussed at the October 12,
2021, Board meeting. These revisions are also shown in Attachment C: Redline version of the
Guiding Framework showing potential revisions.
Proposed revisions to the Agency Mission: The Agency’s mission currently reads as
follows:
The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City revitalizes neighborhoods and
business districts to improve livability, spark economic growth, and foster
authentic communities, serving as a catalyst for strategic development projects
that enhance the City’s housing opportunities, commercial vitality, public spaces,
and environmental sustainability.
The following three revisions to the mission statement are proposed:
3
Replace the word “revitalizes” with “strengthens.” The word “revitalizes” may be
interpreted as a pejorative, suggesting a neighborhood has problems. The word
“strengthens” more accurately reflects the Agency’s mission to improve an area,
without making a value judgement about its current condition.
Change the phrase “spark economic growth” to “create economic opportunity.”
Add the word “equitable” to the mission statement to describe the kinds of
communities the Agency fosters.
With these revisions the Agency’s mission would read as follows:
The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City strengthens neighborhoods and
business districts to improve livability, create economic opportunity, and foster
authentic, equitable communities, serving as a catalyst for strategic development
projects that enhance the City’s housing opportunities, commercial vitality, public
spaces, and environmental sustainability.
Proposed revisions to the Agency Value: Economic Growth: The Agency’s value of
Economic Growth currently reads as follows:
Economic Growth: We act as a responsible steward of public funds, taking a
long-term view of investment, return, and property values.
Staff proposes a complete revision of this value, including its title, to broaden the
economic expectations of the Agency’s work. Rather than focusing on growth,
investment, return, and property values, the proposed revisions would expand this value
to reflect economic opportunity and prosperity for all.
The revised Economic value would reads as follows:
Economic Opportunity: We invest in the long-term prosperity and growth of
our local economy.
Proposed revisions to the Agency Value: Community Impact: The Agency’s value of
Community Impact currently read as follows:
Community Impact: We prioritize projects and programs that demonstrate
commitment to improving equity and quality of life for
residents and businesses in Salt Lake City.
Staff proposes completely revising this value to focus on the principles of equity and
inclusion. Consequently, the title of this value would change to “Equity & Inclusion” and
the supporting language would articulate the Agency’s commitment to prioritizing
projects that grow out of the community’s desires and interests and benefit the
community as a whole.
The revised Community value would read as follows:
4
Equity & Inclusion: We prioritize people-focused projects and programs that
encourage everyone to participate in and benefit from
development decisions that shape their communities.
Proposed revisions to the Agency Value: Neighborhood Vibrancy: The Agency’s value
of Neighborhood Vibrancy currently read as follows:
Neighborhood Vibrancy: We cultivate distinct and livable built environments
that are contextually sensitive, resilient, connected,
and sustainable.
Staff proposes revising two words in the value of Neighborhood Vibrancy to clarify the
Agency’s intent:
Replace the word “built environments” with “places.” The purpose of this
revision is make the language more accessible by removing development-industry
jargon.
Replace the word “resilient” with “durable.”
The revised Neighborhood Vibrancy value would read as follows:
Neighborhood Vibrancy: We cultivate distinct and livable places that are
contextually sensitive, durable, connected, and
sustainable.
These potential revisions to the Agency’s mission and values necessitate changes to the
Livability Benchmarks (“Benchmarks”), as the Benchmarks further articulate the
Agency’s values. Staff proposes a number of revisions to the Benchmarks to incorporate
the principles of equity and inclusion and to also refine and clarify language and intent.
These proposed revisions are summarized in the list below and are shown in detail in
Attachment “C” - Redline version of the Livability Benchmarks showing potential
revisions.
Staff proposes combining Benchmarks where possible to simplify and prevent
overlap:
o Combine the benchmarks for Business Districts and Local Business
Opportunities into a new benchmark titled Affordable Commercial
Space.
o Combine the benchmarks for Building Design & Architecture, Quality
Materials and Site & Urban Design into a new benchmark titled
Architecture & Urban Design.
o Combine the benchmarks for Historic Preservation and Adaptive Reuse
into a new benchmark titled Building Preservation, Rehabilitation, or
Adaptive Reuse
5
Staff proposes adding four Benchmarks to better incorporate the principles of
equity and inclusion into the Framework:
o Add a Benchmark encouraging home and business Ownership
o Add a Benchmark promoting Housing for Everyone
o Add a Benchmark addressing Displacement Mitigation
o Add a Benchmark addressing Affordable Housing Preservation
Staff proposes adding a Benchmark for Missing Middle & Unique Building
Types to foster creation of “missing middle” commercial and residential building
forms that play an important role in diversifying the City’s building stock.
Staff proposes moving the Public Space and Public Art benchmarks to the
Neighborhood Vibrancy category with the other Benchmarks that relate to the
Agency’s preferred characteristics in the built environment.
Staff proposes removing the benchmark for Targeted Resources because
redevelopment area (also known as “project area”) boundaries are sufficient to
geographically target Agency resources.
Moving forward staff envisions utilizing the Benchmarks in a number of ways. The
Agency doesn’t expect every project or recipient of Agency funding to achieve every
Benchmark. Rather, the Benchmarks are a comprehensive menu of public benefits the
Agency will pull from to identify goals when structuring projects and programs and when
evaluating developer requests for financial assistance. This helps ensure Agency projects
and programs align with the Framework and Benchmarks.
For example, future notices of funding availability will reference the Framework and
utilize select Benchmarks to evaluate and rank applications as well as provide for interest
rate reductions. It is envisioned that annual housing funding priorities, to be adopted
annually by the Board, will generally align with the Framework while allowing for
additional specificity and/or emphasis on specific focus areas. In addition, staff will
utilize the Benchmarks when redeveloping Agency-owned property, picking specific
Benchmarks from the overall menu that are most germane to the redevelopment project
and utilizing them to articulate the project’s objectives and to select the developer /
project that achieves them.
Attachments “B,” “C,” and “D” to this memo show the revisions to the Mission, Values and
Benchmarks mentioned above.
PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION: The Board adopted Resolution No. R-22-2019,
Redevelopment Agency Guiding Framework for Strategic Operations, November 12, 2019.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Resolution
B. Exhibit “A” to the Resolution: RDA Guiding Framework for Mission and Values
6
C. Redline version of the Guiding Framework showing revisions
D. Redline version of the Livability Benchmarks showing revisions
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY
RESOLUTION NO. _______
Guiding Framework for Mission and Values
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF SALT LAKE CITY REPEALING AND REPLACING THE AGENCY’S
GUIDING FRAMEWORK FOR MISSION AND VALUES
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (“Agency”) was created to
transact the business and exercise the powers provided for in the Community Reinvestment
Agency Act under Title 17C of the Utah Code; and
WHEREAS, on November 12, 2019, pursuant to Resolution R-22-2019, the Board of
Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (“Board”) adopted the Guiding
Framework for Mission and Values (“2019 Guiding Framework”); and
WHEREAS, the Agency has determined that it is important to amend the 2019 Guiding
Framework to modify and clarify the Agency’s mission and values to guide the Agency’s
decision-making on projects and expenditures; and
WHEREAS, the Board now desires to repeal and replace the 2019 Guiding Framework.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City, the 2019 Guiding Framework adopted pursuant
to Resolution R-22-2019 is repealed in its entirety and replaced with the Guiding Framework
attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A.
Passed by the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City, this
day of , 2021.
Ana Valdemoros, Chairperson
Transmitted to the Executive Director on .
The Executive Director:
does not request reconsideration
requests reconsideration at the next regular Agency meeting.
Erin Mendenhall, Executive Director
Approved as to form:
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Attest:
City Recorder
11.24.21
Guiding Framework
This Guiding Framework is a strategic operational document outlining the methodology for evaluating and prioritizing projects requesting RDA financial assistance. The RDA’s
Mission and Values form the foundation of the Guiding Framework, declaring the RDA’s purpose and the intended economic, social, and physical outcomes expected of RDA
projects and partnerships.
MISSION: The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City strengthens neighborhoods and business districts to improve livability, create economic opportunity and
foster authentic, equitable communities, serving as a catalyst for strategic development projects that enhance the City’s housing opportunities,
commercial vitality, public spaces, and environmental sustainability.
VALUES: Economic Opportunity-
We invest in the long-term prosperity and growth
of our local economy.
Equity & Inclusion-
We prioritize people-focused projects and
programs that encourage everyone to
participate in and benefit from development
decisions that shape their communities.
Neighborhood Vibrancy-
We cultivate distinct and livable places that are
contextually sensitive, durable, connected, and
sustainable.
PROJECT EVALUATION PROCESS: The RDA prioritizes projects that demonstrate a commitment to the Mission and Values, evaluating projects via three steps, which answer the
following questions: 1.) Does the project meet the minimum THRESHOLDS required for RDA participation? 2.) To what degree does the project benefit the public by achieving
defined LIVABILITY BENCHMARKS, thereby warranting RDA assistance? 3.) Does the project meet the CRITERIA outlined in existing RDA programs and policies, such as the
RDA Loan Program or Tax Increment Reimbursement Program?
*Spanning a 1-3 year time frame, Project Area Work Plans identify redevelopment objectives and strategic redevelopment projects for each project area, along with a corresponding schedule & budget for each project. The Project Area Work Plans
will be based on relevant City policies and plans and the Project Area Plans that were adopted when the project area was created and will provide direction for the annual RDA budget process.
Step 1:
THRESHOLDS
Alignment with adopted City policies & plans
Alignment with RDA Project Area Work Plans*
Financial viability with a demonstrated and reasonable need for public assistance
Step 2:
LIVABILITY
BENCHMARKS
Economic Opportunity
Leveraging
Timeliness
Return of Investment
Permanent Job Creation & Retention
Affordable Commercial Spaces
Ownership
Equity & Inclusion
Transit Opportunities
Mixed-Income Neighborhoods
Neighborhood Safety
Community Engagement & Support
Housing for Everyone
Displacement Mitigation
Affordable Housing Preservation
Neighborhood Vibrancy
Public Space
Public Art
Architecture & Urban Design
Sustainability
Walkability
Building Preservation, rehabilitation, or
adaptive reuse
Missing Middle & Unique Building Types
Step 3:
PROGRAM
CRITERIA
Evaluation of project according to respective RDA policies, programs and procedures
Guiding Framework
This Guiding Framework is a strategic operational document outlining the methodology for evaluating and prioritizing projects requesting RDA financial assistance. The RDA’s
Mission and Values form the foundation of the Guiding Framework, declaring the RDA’s purpose and the intended economic, social, and physical outcomes expected of RDA
projects and partnerships.
MISSION: The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City strengthens revitalizes neighborhoods and business districts to improve livability, spark create economic
growth,opportunity and foster authentic, equitable communities, serving as a catalyst for strategic development projects that enhance the City’s housing
opportunities, commercial vitality, public spaces, and environmental sustainability.
VALUES: Economic OpportunityGrowth-
We act as a responsible steward of public funds,
taking a long-term view of investment, return,
and property values. We invest in the long-term
prosperity and growth of our local economy.
Equity & InclusionCommunity Impact-
We prioritize projects and programs that
demonstrate commitment to improving equity
and quality of life for residents and businesses
in Salt Lake City We prioritize people-focused
projects and programs that encourage everyone
to participate in and benefit from development
decisions that shape their communities.
Neighborhood Vibrancy-
We cultivate distinct and livable places built
environments that are contextually sensitive,
durableresilient, connected, and sustainable.
PROJECT EVALUATION PROCESS: In the context of the Mission and Values, The RDA prioritizes projects that demonstrate a commitment to the Mission and Values, the RDA
evaluatesing projects via three steps, which answer the following questions: 1.) Does the project meet the minimum THRESHOLDS required for RDA participation? 2.) To what
degree does the project benefit the public by achieving defined LIVABILITY BENCHMARKS, thereby warranting RDA assistance? 3.) Does the project meet the CRITERIA outlined
in existing RDA programs and policies, such as the RDA Loan Program or Tax Increment Reimbursement Program?
Step 1:
THRESHOLDS
Alignment with adopted City policies & plans
Alignment with RDA Project Area Work Plans*
Financial viability with a demonstrated and reasonable need for public assistance
DRAFT 11.19.21
*Spanning a 1-3 year time frame, Project Area Work Plans identify redevelopment objectives and strategic redevelopment projects for each project area, along with a corresponding schedule & budget for each project. The Project Area Work Plans
will be based on relevant City policies and plans and the Project Area Plans that were adopted when the project area was created and will provide direction for the annual RDA budget process.
Step 2:
LIVABILITY
BENCHMARKS
Economic GrowthOpportunity
Leveraging
Timeliness
Return of Investment
Permanent Job Creation & Retention
Business Districts
Targeted Resources
Affordable Commercial Spaces
Ownership
Community ImpactEquity & Inclusion
Public Space
Transit Opportunities
Local Business Opportunities
Mixed-Income Neighborhoods
Neighborhood Safety
Public Art
Community Engagement & Support
Housing for Everyone
Displacement Mitigation
Affordable Housing Preservation
Neighborhood Vibrancy
Public Space
Public Art
Quality Materials
Site & Urban Design
Building Design & Architecture & Urban
Design
Sustainability
Walkability
Historic Preservation
Adaptive ReuseBuilding Preservation,
rehabilitation, or adaptive reuse
Missing Middle & Unique Building Types
Step 3:
PROGRAM
CRITERIA
Evaluation of project according to respective RDA policies, programs and procedures
LIVABILITY BENCHMARKS
November 19, 2021- DRAFT
Public Benefit Description & Intent ECONOMIC GROWTHOPPORTUNITY Leveraging To promote the leveraging of non-RDA/City sources of funding to maximize private investment.
Timeliness To support projects that have a reasonable timeframe for completion.
Return of Investment To promote the return of RDA resources, thereby enabling resources to extend further in the community.
Permanent
Job Creation
To promote neighborhoods with a balanced economy that produces quality jobs.
Affordable Commercial
Spaces
To reduce the displacement risk of existing community businesses and/or reduce barriers to entry for new,
underrepresented business and service types, particularly locally-owned and independent businesses and
non-profits that promote neighborhood identity, economic vitality, and local economic multipliers.
Ownership To encourage the creation of opportunities for residents/business owners to build wealth and/or establish
permanent roots through affordable home/commercial ownership.
Business Districts To foster unique neighborhood business districts with distinct commercial, office, retail, transportation, and
cultural aspects.
Targeted Resources To prioritize and align resources in a unified and targeted manner to maximize impacts in the community. COMMUNITY IMPACT EQUITY & INCLUSION Transportation
Opportunities
To promote a multimodal transportation network and ensure convenient and equitable access to a variety of
transportation options.
Mixed-Income
Neighborhoods
To promote mixed-income developments, economically integrated communities, and housing opportunities
for low-income residents.
Neighborhood Safety To reduce the number of vacant and distressed buildings and lots to reduce crime and return land to a
productive use.
Community
Engagement & Support
To foster projects that are supported by community councils and neighborhood organizations.To provide a
stronger platform for community members to inform and influence development projects during initial
planning stages and to preserve cultural heritage.
Housing for Everyone To promote housing for families and underserved populations
Displacement Mitigation To mitigate the displacement of current residents and residents with generational ties to the neighborhood,
or provide opportunities for those who have already been displaced to return.
Affordable Housing
Preservation
To preserve existing affordable housing
Local
Business Opportunities
To support locally-owned and independent businesses and non-profits that promote neighborhood identity,
economic vitality, and local economic multipliers. NEIGHBORHOOD VIBRANCY Public Space To promote community amenities that provide opportunity for social interaction; support cultural events;
promote neighborhood identity; and reinforce neighborhood character.
Public Art To promote cultural expression and add to the experience and value of the built environment through art that
is publically visible or accessible for all to experience.
Quality Materials To ensure that building materials provide visual character and appeal to the structure; relate to the context of
the neighborhood; are high-quality and enduring.
Site & Urban Design To support pedestrian-accessible building placement, the character of the streetscape, parking lot screening,
efficient traffic circulation, and transition of scale.
Building Design &
Architecture & Urban
Design
To support ground-level transparency, prominent entrances and signage, exclusion/treatment of blank walls,
articulation, pedestrian-scale lighting. Unique and timely architecture.
To promote high quality architecture that enhances the public realm, strengthens the neighborhood’s unique
character, and uses enduring materials.
Sustainability To promote a built environment that assists with protecting resources and promoting greater resiliency.
Walkability To promote walkable neighborhoods and connectivity, and support a safe, engaging pedestrian experience.
Historic Preservation To promote the historic character of the city's neighborhoods through preservation of existing and historic
architecture, buildings, and landmarks.
Adaptive Reuse To promote the revitalization of underutilized buildings that preserve the character of neighborhoods while
promoting new land uses.
Building Preservation,
Rehabilitation, or
Adaptive Reuse
To acknowledge a neighborhood’s history and maintain its unique character through preservation,
rehabilitation, or repurposing of historic or underutilized structures.
Missing Middle &
Unique Building Types
To promote an array of scale of project types to provide neighborhood-scale commercial, diversify the City’s
housing stock/forms, and provide more affordable living options for residents.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of SALT LAKE CITY
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 118 WWW.SLC.GOV · WWW.SLCRDA.COM
P.O. BOX 145518, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5518 TEL 801-535-7240 · FAX 801-535-7245
MAYOR ERIN MENDENHALL
Executive Director
DANNY WALZ
Director
STAFF MEMO
DATE: October 22, 2021
PREPARED BY: Jim Sirrine
RE: Redevelopment Agency Semi-Annual Property Report
REQUESTED ACTION: None. Written Briefing
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: As directed in the Land Disposition Policy, the RDA provides the Board, not
less than semi-annually per fiscal year, an inventory of all Tier 1 and Tier 2 properties.
ANALYSIS & ISSUES: The attached report contains a current inventory of all RDA owned properties.
The report includes the description, address, parcel ID, size, zoning, and tier category of each property. In
addition, the report details the approximate acquisition date, current category of disposition, interim use,
and proposed permanent use for each property.
Notable changes since the last report include the addition of a property in the Nine Line area located on the
corner of 877 West and 400 South.
ATTACHMENTS: November 2021 RDA Property Report
Semi-Annual Property Report | November 2021
Description Assessor Address Parcel ID Zoning Tier Acquired Use Status Interim Use Proposed Reuse
1 Broadway Center (Parking Garage)Parking structure with retail spaces 251 S. Floral St. 16-06-154-048-0000 0.66 0.66 D-1 T-2 1989 Permanent Use
Leased to Broadway Center
Limited N/A
Eccles Theater, retail spaces, and plaza 16-06-105-064-0000 1.7
Alley to Priority Dispatch and 111 16-06-105-065-0000 0.01
Midblock walkway connecting Main St. to Regent St.
and access to the Eccles Theater 147 S. Main St. 16-06-105-009-0000 0.08
16-06-152-072-0000 0.4
16-06-152-077-2000 3.49
Parking Structure under Gallivan Center Plaza 49 E. Gallivan Ave. 16-06-152-077-6001 3.49
Leased to Boyer-Block 57
Associates LTD
16-06-152-079-6001 0.27
16-06-152-079-2000 0.27
Arena - SE section 15-01-127-017-2000 9.18
Arena - SE section (underground) 15-01-127-017-2001 0.01
Arena - SE section (underground) 15-01-127-017-6001 9.18
Arena - NE Corner 15-01-127-018-6001 0.84
Arena - NE Corner (underground) 15-01-127-018-2000 0.84
16-06-309-001-0000 0.01
16-06-309-002-0000 0.01
Vacant land (former N. parking area of the NAC
Drivers' Lounge)167 S. Regent St. 16-06-151-003-0000 0.03
Vacant land (former NAC Drivers Lounge) 169 S. Regent St 16-06-151-004-0000 0.06
Vacant land (former E. parking area of the NAC
Drivers Lounge)167 S. Regent St. 16-06-151-018-0000 0.04
Main St. retail spaces (Twisted Roots, Ray's Barber
Shop)158 S. Main St. 15-01-229-070-0000 0.19
Utah Theater and Main St. retail spaces (Southam
Gallery, Becket & Robb)144 S. Main St. 15-01-229-068-0000 0.7
TOTAL # of Project Properties: 8 # of Acres: 31.46 # of Parcels: 21
131 S. Main St.
2003-2014D-1 T-1 Permanent Use
Project Area/Property
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
N/A
Parking stalls leased to the State
of Utah
Theater events in partnership
with County Center for the Arts
and leased retail
350 S. 200 E. D-1 T-2 1991 N/A
T-1 2010 Active Disposition
Four retail tenants and vacant
historic theater
Entered into a Purchase Agreement with Hines
Development.
Regent St. at 200 S. St.D-1 T-1 2013 Active Disposition
Gallivan Center Plaza, Parking, and
Retail (Block 57)D-1 T-1 1984-1991 Permanent Use
8
7
Land leased to Larry H. Miller
Arena Group thru 2040 N/A
Permanent Use
Entered into a Purchase Agreement with
Dakota Pacific Regent, LLC
Utah Theater and Retail Spaces
(Block 69)D-1
Acres/Total
1.79
0.89
0.13
0.02
20.05
7.92
2 Eccles Theater and Ancillary Spaces
239 S. Main St.
228 S. State St.
301 W. S. Temple
365 W. S. Temple
N/A
N/A
Land - Vivint Arena (Block 79)D-4 T-1 1989 Permanent Use
Retail Retail spaces
Metro Condos Parking
(Block 53)
Lower two levels (250 stalls) of an underground
parking structure5
4
3
Gallivan Center - plaza, event center, and
amphitheater
Event spaces, plaza, and
walkway
RDA-Owned Properties - Page 1 of 4
Semi-Annual Property Report | November 2021
Description Assessor Address Parcel ID Zoning Tier Acquired Use Status Interim Use Proposed Reuse
Project Area/Property
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
Acres/Total
9 Rio Grande Hotel, Block 62 Rio Grande Hotel - Single room occupancy housing
units 428 W. 300 S. 15-01-179-012-0000 0.3 0.3 D-3 T-2 2009 Permanent Use
Leased to Home Inn Rio Grande,
LLC N/A
243-255 S. 600 W. 15-01-151-009-0000 0.5
265 S. 600 W. 15-01-151-010-0000 0.88
245 S. 600 W. 15-01-151-011-0000 0.11
245 S. 600 W. 15-01-151-012-0000 0.26
564-566 W. 300 S. 15-01-151-013-0000 0.13
558-560 W. 300 S. 15-01-151-014-0000 0.13
235 S. 600 W. 15-01-152-012-0000 0.11
552 W. 300 S. 15-01-152-013-0000 0.13
544 W. 300 S. 15-01-152-014-0000 0.13
Vacant building (formally Serta mattress factory) 535 W. 300 S. 15-01-302-018-0000 0.6
15-01-153-010-0000 0.19
15-01-153-011-0000 0.06
Vacant land (formally owned by State of Utah) 519 W. 300 S. 15-01-153-006-0000 0.13
540 W. 400 S. 15-01-302-017-0000 0.93
346 S. 500 W. 15-01-302-021-0000 0.32
336 S. 500 W. 15-01-302-022-0000 1.25
15-01-302-019-0000 0.16
15-01-302-020-0000 0.31
Warehouse buildings 502 W. 300 S. 15-01-152-021-0000 1.65
Paved parking lot area (formally Beehive Brick
parking )250 S. 500 W. 15-01-152-025-0000 0.56
Vacant land 233 S. 600 W. 15-01-151-005-0000 0.31
Intermountain Furniture- N warehouse 235 S. 600 W. 15-01-151-008-0000 0.49
16 Sun Bar (Block 47)Vacant land 702 W. 200 S. 15-02-234-015-0000 0.31 0.31 GMU T-2 2003 Use Study N/A To be determined
Single family home (vacant) 42 S. 600 W. 15-01-104-004-0000 0.15 2015
Vacant lot 662 W. 100 S. 15-01-103-020-0000 0.1 2021
N/A
Station Center Parcel 3 Vacant land and blue warehouse D-3 T-1 2002 Use Study N/A
Station Center Parcel 110
11
To be determined
Residence/Vacant Lots (Block 49)GMU T-2 Use Study N/A
Included as part of the Salt Lake Central Station
area plan
Station Center Parcel 6 D-3 T-1 2008 Use Study
To be determined
Station Center Parcel 5 D-3 T-1 2010 Use Study
Leased to Sportswear Design
Group, SLC "A Place For Your
Stuff," Fill the Pot, and parking
for Mac. Flats
To be determined
Station Center Parcel 4 Vacant land 336 S. 500 W. D-3 T-1 2002 Use Study N/A
To be determined
To be determinedVacant land (formally Serta factory dock area) 535 W. 300 S.
Use Study Temporary public art installation To be determined
D-3 T-1 2002 Use Study N/A
Vacant land and warehouse (former Intermountain
Furniture Company)D-3 T-1 2008
12
14
15
17
13
DEPOT DISTRICT
DEPOT DISTRICT (continued on next page)
2.38
0.98
2.5
0.47
0.8
2.21
0.25
Station Center Parcel 12 & Right of
Ways
RDA-Owned Properties - Page 2 of 4
Semi-Annual Property Report | November 2021
Description Assessor Address Parcel ID Zoning Tier Acquired Use Status Interim Use Proposed Reuse
Project Area/Property
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
Acres/Total
Howa Storage Bays 648 W. 100 S. 15-01-103-022-0000 0.5
Howa Gardens, NW 636 W. 100 S. 15-01-103-021-0000 0.37
Howa Gardens, NE 624 W. 100 S. 15-01-104-013-0000 0.31
Howa Gardens, SW 632 W. 100 S. 15-01-103-023-0000 0.34
Howa Gardens, S 626 W. 100 S. 15-01-104-015-0000 0.08
Howa Gardens, SE 622 W. 100 S. 15-01-104-014-0000 0.27
Howa Offices, N 663 W. 100 S. 15-01-107-042-0000 0.25
Howa Offices, S 663 W. 100 S. 15-01-107-041-0000 0.25
Howa Yard 1 657 W. 100 S. 15-01-107-034-0000 0.2
Howa Yard 2 655 W. 100 S. 15-01-107-035-0000 0.01
Howa Yard 3 653 W. 100 S. 15-01-107-036-0000 0.16
Howa Yard 4 651 W. 100 S. 15-01-107-037-0000 0.16
Howa Yard 5 633 W. 100 S. 15-01-107-038-0000 0.34
Howa Paint Shop 633 W. 100 S. 15-01-107-039-0000 0.19
Howa Yard E 625-627 W. 100 S. 15-01-107-040-0000 0.22
TOTAL # of Project Properties: 11 # of Acres: 13.85 # of Parcels: 41
20 Gale St., Block 24 Vacant land (former Buker Properties) 901 S. Gale St. 15-12-255-001-0000 0.26 0.26 D-2 T-1 2021 Active Disposition N/A
Under contract negotiations with the Bicycle
Collective
TOTAL # of Project Properties: 1 # of Acres: 0.26 # of Parcels: 1
21 Commissary Kitchen Former gas station property 877 W. 400 S. 15-02-406-001-0000 0.32 0.32 R-MU-35 T-2 2021 Use Study Leased to Taqueria El Angel To be determined
TOTAL # of Project Properties: 1 # of Acres: 0.32 # of Parcels: 1
22 Overniter Motel Former motel, lot, and single family house(all vacant) 1500 West North Temple 08-34-476-017-0000 2.07 2.07 TSA-
MUEC-C T-1 2017 Active Disposition N/A
Entered into a purchase agreement with
Brinshore Development/HAME for a mixed use,
multi-family development.
TOTAL # of Project Properties: 1 # of Acres: 2.07 # of Parcels: 1
9 LINE
Included as part of the Salt Lake Central Station
area plan
T-2 2008
Leased: gardens - Green Team
job training; storage units -
multiple tenants
HOWA Corporate (Block 48)GMU Use Study Leased to Utah Art Alliance
Included as part of the Salt Lake Central Station
area plan
HOWA Gardens and Storage GMU T-2 2008 Use Study18
19
DEPOT DISTRICT (continued)
1.87
1.78
GRANARY
NORTH TEMPLE
RDA-Owned Properties - Page 3 of 4
Semi-Annual Property Report | November 2021
Description Assessor Address Parcel ID Zoning Tier Acquired Use Status Interim Use Proposed Reuse
Project Area/Property
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
Acres/Total
23 Street Car Traction Power
Substation Site S-Line Facility 1015 E. Sugarmont Dr. 16-20-205-021-0000 0.06 0.06 R-1-5000 T-1 2012 Permanent Use S-Line Facility N/A
24 S-Line Greenway S-Line/Parley's Trail Greenway 2211 S. 900 E 16-20-135-021-0000 0.04 0.04 FB-SE T-1 2013 Permanent Use S-Line/Parley's Trail Greenway N/A
Retail shopping center and parking (former DI) 2234 S. Highland Dr. 16-20-252-008-0000 0.85 CSHBD1 2012 N/A
Former Sugarhouse Fire Station (West) 1085 E. Simpson Ave. 16-20-252-001-0000 0.32 Temporary library location
Former Sugarhouse Fire Station (East) 1085 E. Simpson Ave. 16-20-252-002-0000 0.14 Temporary library location
SLC Facilities Maint. Bldg 1113 E. Simpson Ave. 16-20-252-003-0000 0.21 SLC Facilities
East Parking Area 1104 E. Sugarmont Dr. 16-20-252-005-0000 0.09 Temporary library parking
TOTAL # of Project Properties: 3 # of Acres: 1.71 # of Parcels: 7
26 Marmalade Development Marmalade Lot 1 - Future Park 524 N. 300 W. 08-36-205-044-0000 0.56 0.56 R-MU T-1 2005 Permanent Use N/A Future Park
27 524 N. Arctic Ct.Vacant Land 524 N. Arctic Ct. 08-36-206-011-0000 0.11 0.11 SR-1A T-1 2015 Active Disposition N/A
Single family home. Preparing RFP for
construction.
TOTAL # of Project Properties: 2 # of Acres: 0.67 # of Parcels: 2
15-12-206-013-6000 0.1
15-12-206-013-2000 0.1
Vacant land (formally A&E Generator, N. yard) 252 W. Montrose Ave. 15-12-206-015-6000 0.09
Vacant land 254 W. Montrose Ave. 15-12-206-017-0000 0.1
15-12-206-016-6000 0.09
15-12-206-016-2000 0.09
Vacant land and storage building (formally DeVroom) 753 S. 300 W. 15-12-207-001-0000 0.34
244 W. 800 S. 15-12-207-012-0000 0.1
252 W. Montrose Ave. 15-12-206-015-2000 0.09
Vacant building (formally A&E Generator) 264 W. 800 S. 15-12-207-013-0000 0.84
Vacant land (formally Zaxx Car Wash) 765 S. 300 W. 15-12-207-002-0000 0.22
TOTAL # of Project Properties: 1 # of Acres: 2.16 # of Parcels: 11
COMBINED TOTALS # of Project Properties: 28 # of Acres: 52.50 # of Parcels:85
Undergoing fit study analysis for
redevelopment.25 Sugarmont Plaza Use Study
2021
T-1
PL
1.61
Leased shop and storage to
Bulldog Sheetmetal Fabrication
W. Montrose Ave.
NA
28
RDA staff has completed due diligence and
considering options and schedule for marketing
the property
Vacant shop and apartment (formally T&G
Upholstery)745 S. 300 W.
Building (Bulldog Sheet Metal) 244-246 W. Montrose Ave.
FBUN-2 T-2 2008 Use Study
Vacant land
2.16
WEST CAPITOL HILL
WEST TEMPLE GATEWAY
SUGAR HOUSE
RDA-Owned Properties - Page 4 of 4