The URL can be used to link to this page

Transmittal - 8/15/2022Erin Mendenhall Mayor DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 P.O. BOX 145460, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5460 WWW.SLC.GOV TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ________________________ Date Received: _________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: August 15, 2022 Dan Dugan, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: PLNPCM2022-00323 – Ballpark Station Area Plan STAFF CONTACT: Nannette Larsen, Senior Planner, nannette.larsen@slcgov.com 801-535-7645 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the Council adopt the Ballpark Station Area Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Ballpark Station Area Plan is intended to capitalize on the community assets and set a framework to help guide growth related issues and pressures and to keep the neighborhood as the home of baseball in Utah. The Station Area Plan will provide guidance on how the community grows and changes, with a focus on creating a safe and welcoming neighborhood. As demand for redevelopment in the neighborhood has grown so too has the need for a small area plan specific to the Ballpark Neighborhood. The Ballpark Station Area Plan will encompass the area that runs roughly between 900 South to 1700 South, and State Street to I-15. The small area plan’s boundaries are within both the Central Community Master Plan and the Downtown Master Plan. 8/15/2022 8/15/2022 The Ballpark Station Area Plan draft recommends “Big Moves” that will help transform the Ballpark Neighborhood and guide growth in the area. These goals include: •Create and apply a Ballpark neighborhood specific Transit Supportive Zone. •Reconfigure the Ballpark TRAX station • Improve 1300 South for pedestrians • Create a sense of place at and around the Ballpark •Repurpose parking lots and underutilized properties to add activity to the Heart of the Neighborhood •Invest in community amenities and green space to balance density with livability factors. The small area plan would establish goals and strategies to enhance the livability of the area. The goals here are broad in nature and direct future development in the community. The strategies, scaled toward application, describe ways to implement the larger picture goal. Actions describe specific ways to implement the goal as development or redevelopment occur over a longer time frame. The key strategies describe strategies to improve the ballpark station community and projects that would directly affect the community to bring about a positive change. The key strategies would focus on connectivity, a safer bike and pedestrian network, parking needs in the community, alleyway safety, greenspace in the community, providing housing options and mitigate displacement, and improving safety and security in the community. Included within the Ballpark Station Area Plan is also a proposed Future Land Use Map. This proposed future land use map and accompanying land use designation describe the appropriate development pattern of the area where density, building height, land use, emphasized transportation modes, and catalyst areas are attributes. The zoning map will be amended at a future date following the adoption of this plan to better conform to needs in the neighborhood and meet the land use designations recommended in the Future Land Use Map. PUBLIC PROCESS: The Salt Lake City’s Transportation Division received a Transportation and Land Use Connection grant from the Wasatch Front Regional Council, this Transportation and Land Use Connection grant allowed for the creation of the plan starting in December 2020. A consultant was chosen, GSBS, who worked closely with City Staff and spent 9-months identifying goals and meeting with community members and stakeholders. During this time numerous presentations to the community were made during the initial phase of the project. An online survey was available to inform the creation of the plan. This survey was published in March 2020 and notices of this survey were sent to the entire ballpark community. As the draft Image 1: vicinity map of the Ballpark Station Area Plan plan was formed a steering committee, comprising of members of the Ballpark Community was established. The steering committee met throughout 2021 to discuss and make recommendations. Towards the end of November 2021, a draft of the proposed plan was finalized, and City Staff began the official public notification process. A project webpage was created with information on the draft plan and guidance on how to leave comments, City Staff also attended multiple Community Council hearings to answer questions and solicit comments. Several public comments have been received and are included in Exhibit 5. The Planning Commission met to review the small area plan first through a work session on June 8th, the Commission met again July 27th, 2022 for a recommendation to the City Council on the proposed Ballpark Station Area Plan. Planning Commission forwarded a unanimous recommendation of approval to City Council with an added condition that Staff look at increasing density on Main Street. Prior to this meeting the final draft, with additional modifications, was posted to the project webpage. Notification of the public hearing was sent through listserv to all those who signed up for updates on the project webpage. Modifications have been made to the draft Ballpark Plan in response to public comments received in throughout 2022 and during both the Planning Commission’s work session and public hearing meetings. Planning Commission (PC) Records a)PC Agenda for June 8, 2022 (Click to Access) b)PC Minutes for June 8, 2022 (Click to Access) c)PC Memo for June 8, 2022 (Click to Access) d)PC Agenda for July 27, 2022 (Click to Access) e)PC Minutes for July 27, 2022 will be Published August 11, 2022 (Click to Access Meeting Information Webpage) f)PC Staff Report for July 27, 2022 (Click to Access) EXHIBITS: 1)Chronology 2)City Council Public Hearing Notice 3)Petition Initiation Memo 4)Ballpark Station Area Plan Draft 5)Ordinance 6)Public Comments Received 1. CHRONOLOGY Ballpark Station Area Plan Project Chronology PLNPCM2022-00323 December, 2020 Consultant and City Staff identify goals and meet with community members and stakeholders. December, 2020 Consultant team’s presentation to the Ballpark Community Council February, 2021 Consultant distributed to every address within the project area a post card with information on the Ballpark project and an accompanying survey February 4, 2021 Steering Committee met to discuss goals, case studies, neighborhood needs, and draft plan. March, 2020 Month long, bilingual, online Ballpark survey conducted. Over 530 responses received. March, 2020 Consultant published online the Ballpark Station Area plan information and interactive map. March 11, 2021 Steering committee met to discuss plan. March 20, 2021 A community event was held through Zoom by the consultant team. April 8, 2021 Steering Committee met to discuss plan. May 13, 2021 Steering Committee met to discuss plan. May 22, 2021 Second community even held at Smith’s Ballpark and Watchtower Coffee and Comics by consultant team. November 23, 2021 Public comment received through email. Regarding zoning, future land use map. November 24, 2021 Salt Lake City’s Ballpark Station Area Plan webpage published. November 24, 2021 Open House posted online with information regarding the small area plan November 24, 2021 Public comment received through email. Regarding bike lanes. November 24, 2021 Ballpark, Central 9th, and Liberty Wells Community Councils officially notified of the small area plan. November 29, 2021 Public comment received through email. Regarding future land use map updates. November 29, 2021 Public comment received through email. Regarding character areas, future land use map. December 2, 2021 Public comment received through email. Regarding proposed density and main street. December 6, 2021 Public comment received through email. Regarding historic character of neighborhood. December 6, 2021 Ballpark, Central 9th, and Liberty Wells met on the Ballpark Plan. GSBS presents the draft plan, public comments recorded. December 7, 2021 Public comment received through email. Regarding concerns over building heights, housing, crime, traffic, and parking. December 9, 2021 Public comment received through email. Regarding zoning updates and extension of the South Street Overlay District. December 20, 2021 Public comment received through email. Regarding additional density and activation of neighborhood. December 31, 2021 Public comment received through email. Regarding lighting, walkability, and concern over 1300 S. December 31, 2021 Public comment received through email. Regarding walkability, vacant parking lots, mid-block walkways, viewsheds and building heights, and sidewalks. February 4, 2022 Public comment received through email. Regarding the festival street, truly active ground floor uses, and parking. February 16, 2022 1st Modifications sent to consultant April 5, 2022 Public comment received through email. Regarding South State Street Corridor Overlay District. April 8, 2022 Ballpark Plan briefing transmitted to City Council. April 12, 2022 1st Completed modifications received from consultant. May 5, 2022 Planning staff attended Ballpark Community Council to review draft plan modifications and next steps. May 26, 2022 Public comment received through email. Regarding future land use map and South Jefferson Street. June 8, 2022 Planning Commission work session held to review and discuss draft plan. July 20, 2022 2nd Modifications made to draft plan. July 12, 2022 City Council mid-point briefing and discussion. July 12, 2022 Public comment received from Ballpark Community Council Chair. Regarding visual accessibility of the plan. July 13, 2022 July 27th Planning Commission agenda emailed to those who signed up for email updates on the project webpage. July 21, 2022 Ballpark Community Council response to the draft plan received. July 22, 2022 Planning Commission staff report published online. July 27, 2022 Public comment received through email. Regarding scope and size of the plan. July 27, 2022 Public comment received through email. Regarding future land use map. July 27, 2022 Planning Commission public hearing. 2. CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2022-00323 – Ballpark Station Area Plan – A request by Mayor Erin Mendenhall to create a station area plan in the Ballpark Neighborhood. The Ballpark’s Station Area Plan is intended to capitalize on the community assets and set a framework to help guide growth related issues and pressures and to keep the neighborhood as the home of baseball in Utah. The Ballpark Station Area Plan will encompass the area that runs roughly between 900 South to 1700 South, and State Street to I-15. The small area plan's boundaries are within both the Central Community and the Downtown Master Plans. Information on the proposal can found on the City’s webpage for the proposal at the following link: https://www.slc.gov/planning/master-plans/ballparkplan/ As part of their review, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be held electronically: DATE: TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Electronic and in-person options. 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah ** This meeting will be held via electronic means, while also providing for an in-person opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, including WebEx connection information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Nannette Larsen at 801-535-7645 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail at nannette.larsen@slcgov.com. The application details can be accessed at https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/ , by selecting the “Planning” tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2022-00323. 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. (P 19-19) 3. PETITION INITIATION MEMO SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 406 WWW.SLC.GOV PO BOX 145480 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5480 TEL 801-535-7757 FAX 801-535-6174 PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Erin Mendenhall Cc: Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer; Blake Thomas, Department of Community and Neighborhoods Director; Michaela Oktay, Deputy Planning Director From: Nick Norris, Planning Director Date: October 27, 2021 Re: Initiating a petition to adopt the Ballpark Station Area Plan and associate zoning changes recommended by the plan.. The Planning Division would like to request that that a petition be initiated to adopt the Ballpark Station Area Plan and zoning changes recommended in the plan. Initiating the petition will start the adoption process for the station area plan, which has been drafted by a consultant and created through a partnership with the stakeholders in the community. Creating the Ballpark Station Area Plan has included public engagement and participation managed through a Transportation/Land Use Connection Grant awarded to the City from the Wasatch Front Regional Council. The adoption process will provide an opportunity to ensure that the community and stakeholders support the proposed plan during a 45-day engagement period with the local recognized organizations, a briefing and public hearing with the Planning Commission and a transmittal to the City Council for adoption. It is not anticipated that significant changes will be made to the proposed plan. During this 45-day period the Planning Division and Ballpark Station Area Plan team will verify support for the zoning changes recommend by the plan. The proposed zoning changes recommend by the plan will also go through a public review period. That process is anticipated to start after the level of support for the proposed plan can be determined. Ideally the proposed zoning changes will mostly consist of zoning map changes utilizing existing zoning districts. However, the Planning Division will be prepared to potentially make minor changes to the existing zoning districts to address known issues with the zoning district, which may include vague standards, missing standards necessary to fulfill the purpose of the zoning district, and to ensure that the district(s) are consistent with adopted city policies and plans found in citywide planning documents. It is anticipated that this project will be processed by the “Growth” team in the Planning Division. This memo includes a signature block to initiate the petition if that is the decided course of action. If the decided course of action is to not initiate the application, the signature block can remain blank. Please notify the Planning Division when the memo is signed or if the decision is made to not initiate the petition. Please contact me at ext. 6173 or nick.norris@slcgov.com if you have any questions. Thank you. Concurrence to initiate the zoning text amendment petition as noted above. l Page 2 _____________________________________ ______________ Erin Mendenhall, Mayor Date October 28, 2021 4. BALLPARK STATION AREA PLAN DRAFT Prepared by Salt Lake City in partnership with Wasatch Front Regional Council and the Utah Transit Authority ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS STEERING COMMITTEE Amy Hawkins, Resident, Ballpark Community Council Bryan Kinneburg, Salt Lake Bees Ciara Combs, Resident Dave Morris, Business Owner, Piper Down Pub Dennis Faris, Volunteers of America Jennifer Luft, Resident Jonathan Foulk, Utah Pride Center Marc Amicone, Salt Lake Bees Maurice “Mo” Smith, Urban Indian Center Mike Tuiasoa, Business Owner, Watchtower Coffee & Comics Paul Johnson, Resident, Central 9th Community Council Rob Dutton, Business Owner, Lucky 13 Bar & Grill Robert Loftus, Resident Ryan O’Mahoney, Resident Sach Combs, Resident Shelley Bodily, Resident Terrell Bodily, Resident, Ballpark Community Council TECHNICAL TEAM Susan Lundmark, Project Manager, Salt Lake City Transportation Division * Megan Townsend, Wasatch Front Regional Council * Jordan Swain, Utah Transit Authority, Real Estate and TOD * Kevin Leo, former UTA Real Estate and TOD * Jeff Gulden, Salt Lake City Transportation Division John Anderson, Salt Lake City Planning Division Sean Fyfe, Salt Lake City Engineering Division Corey Rushton, Salt Lake City Public Services Department Corinne Piazza, Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency Julianne Sabula, Salt Lake City Transportation Division Jennifer Schumann, Salt Lake City Housing Stability Division Tony Milner, Salt Lake City Housing Stability Division Dillon Hase, Salt Lake City Housing Stability Division Paul Drake, UTA Real Estate and TOD Laura Hanson, former UTA Director of Planning Manjeet Ranu, former UTA Director of Capital Projects Eric Callison, UTA Manager of Service Planning Kayla Kinkead, UTA Strategic Planning Lauren Victor, Wasatch Front Regional Council * Project Management Team CONSULTING TEAM Christine C. Richman, AICP, GSBS Consulting Annaka Egan, AICP, GSBS Consulting Jason Claunch, Catalyst Commercial Reid Cleeter, Catalyst Commercial Jacob Farnsworth, P.E., RSP1 , Kimley-Horn Steven Chester, AICP, Kimley-Horn TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 The Station Area, Ballpark Community Council and Heart of the Neighborhood Boundaries .....1 Figure 1.2: Building Age Map ...............................................................................................................................................2 Figure 2.1: Aerial View of “Heart of the Neighborhood” Concept .....................................................................6 Figure 2.2: East Side Platform Access - North Concept ........................................................................................7 Figure 2.3: West Side Platform Access - North Concept ......................................................................................8 Figure 2.4: 1300 South Improved Pedestrian Realm ...............................................................................................9 Figure 2.5: Festival Street Concept ................................................................................................................................10 Figure 2.6: Ballpark Character Areas..............................................................................................................................13 Figure 2.7: Connectivity Map .............................................................................................................................................14 Figure 2.8: Connectivity Map-Regional Context .....................................................................................................16 Figure 2.9: Future Land Use Map .....................................................................................................................................17 Figure 2.10: Existing 1300 South Street Section for the Heart of the Neighborhood .......................................20 Figure 2.11: Proposed 1300 South Street Section for the Heart of the Neighborhood ......................................20 Figure 2.12: Ten “Big Ideas” for the Future of Green Space In SLC .................................................................23 Figure 2.13: Community Services and Non-Profit Organizations Map .........................................................24 Figure 3.1: Ballpark Regional Context Map ................................................................................................................26 Figure 3.2: Catalytic Project: Connecting Central Ninth to Ballpark .............................................................28 Figure 3.3: State Street Project Area Map .................................................................................................................29 Figure 3.4: Sidewalk and Transit Map .............................................................................................................................31 Figure 3.5: Information Page on the Project Website and Interactive Map ...............................................39 Figure 3.6: Project Post Card ...........................................................................................................................................40 Figure 3.7: Survey Results Showing What the Ballpark Community Likes in their Neighborhood .............................................................................................41 TABLE OF TABLES Table 1.1: Household Demographics for the Ballpark Station Area and Surrounding Region ..............3 Table 1.2: 2019 Estimated Annual Income for the Ballpark Station Area .......................................................3 Table 3.1: Race and Ethnicity in the Ballpark Station Area and Salt Lake City ..........................................27 Table 3.2: Ownership and Rentership Rates in the Ballpark Station Area and Surrounding Region ...................................................................27 Table 3.3: Income in the Ballpark Station Area and Surrounding Region ...................................................27 Table 3.4: Summary of Ballpark Case Studies .........................................................................................................33 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................i 1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................................................1 2. The Plan ....................................................................................................................................................................................5 3. Community Exploration & Analysis .......................................................................................................................25 4. Implementation Plan .......................................................................................................................................................43 Appendix A . Existing Conditions ..................................................................................................................................................48 B . Highest & Best Analysis ........................................................................................................................................XX C . Transportation Analysis ........................................................................................................................................XX D. Moderate Income Housing Plan ........................................................................................................................XX E . Case Study Analysis ................................................................................................................................................XX F. Community Engagement Materials .................................................................................................................XX EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Salt Lake City’s Ballpark Neighborhood is home to several community assets including the Smith’s Ballpark, home to the Los Angeles Angels AAA ballclub – the Salt Lake Bees, the Ballpark light rail station, several social service agencies, and the nearby Salt Lake Community College downtown campus. Throughout its history, the neighborhood has been home to the Ballpark at the corner of Main Street and 1300 South. Baseball has been a cornerstone for this area for more than 100 years. In 1993, Salt Lake City partnered with Salt Lake County and private entities to construct a new field and ballpark stadium to replace the structure that was originally built in 1915 and reconstructed in 1947 after a fire. The 1993 rebuild provided a state-of-the-art minor league stadium. A refresh and update of the stadium to current standards is now required. The Ballpark Neighborhood is adjacent to downtown, diverse, and growing. The area, which until recent years, was characterized by older, affordable single-family neighborhoods, light industrial uses, and big box stores is experiencing considerable development pressure. The pressure is expected to increase as Salt Lake City’s population and employment base continue to grow. The neighborhood includes several major transportation, transit, and emerging trail corridors that connect the area to downtown, the rest of the city, and the region. The area benefits from proximity to downtown. Because of development pressure and the presence of regionally significant transportation infrastructure, Salt Lake City’s Transportation Division sought and received a Transportation and Land Use Connection grant from the Wasatch Front Regional Council in partnership with Utah Transit Authority, to complete this station area plan. The planning area, referred to throughout the plan as the “Station Area,” is between 900 South and 1700 South and State Street and I-15. The purpose of the plan is to explore options to further integrate the Ballpark with the neighborhood, evaluate the transportation network and identify opportunities to improve transportation choices for the community, and take advantage of existing amenities and current development pressure to position the neighborhood for the future. Improved transportation choices include improved bus operations and circulation at and near the Ballpark TRAX station. The plan also recommends improved pedestrian and bicycle connections near the TRAX station, the Ballpark, and throughout the surrounding neighborhood to further improve the transportation network, better integrate the Ballpark and station into the neighborhood, and enhance livability as new development occurs. Plan goals, strategies and recommended actions were identified through a nine-month process that began in December 2020 with the launch of a website and interactive map in English and Spanish to generate input and ideas from the neighborhood and other stakeholders. Community engagement was ongoing throughout the planning process and included in-person, small group, and stakeholder meetings. The process also included the following studies: • Existing conditions analysis • Highest & best use analysis • Case study analysis The planning team and steering committee identified several key areas of focus for the plan. GROWTH & TRANSFORMATION New residential development in the Station Area has increased significantly and is occurring throughout the area. Former industrial, commercial, or low-density residential parcels are quickly becoming mid- to high-density residential developments. This new development has increased the density of the area and added hundreds of new housing units without adding additional services and amenities to the neighborhood. This is particularly pronounced west of the TRAX line where previous land uses – light industrial, flex uses, and big box retail did not attract investment in sidewalks, trails, or neighborhood level retail and services. This is also true along 1300 South where auto-oriented uses are transitioning to higher density uses to take advantage of the TRAX station and easy connections to West Temple and major arterials. These areas are difficult to navigate without a car and provide little pedestrian-level interest or comfort. This creates a disconnection between the existing neighborhood and new development. CONNECTIVITY & PEDESTRIAN/BIKING ENVIRONMENT The neighborhood has significant transportation infrastructure – a TRAX stop, two I-15 offramps (1300 South and 900 South), and several major and minor arterials. There are also offramps directly to the north and south of the project area on 2100 South and 600 South. These same transportation facilities create a challenging active transportation environment. The quickly redeveloping area west of the TRAX lines has limited access across the TRAX line to access the station, neighborhood amenities and services east of the rail line. PARKS, GREENSPACE & COMMUNITY FACILITIES Salt Lake City Public Services launched Reimagine Nature SLC Public Lands Master Plan process in April 2019 with the publication of the Salt Lake City Public Lands Needs Assessment. The assessment evaluated the level of parks, open space, and trails service in each of the city’s planning areas. The Station Area is in the Central City planning area. According to the 2019 assessment, Central City’s level of service is 2.8 park acres per 1,000 population, as compared to a city-wide level of service of 3.5 city-owned and managed park acres per 1,000 population. Much of the Station Area is identified as a High Need area according to the Needs Assessment. This means that additional park acres are needed in the neighborhood to serve current and future residents and visitors. The need for community amenities including parks, open space, and other community facilities such as a library or community center was identified during the community engagement process. The community also identified a lack of service and proper maintenance in current parks, such as missing trash receptacles and benches. They indicated that expanding park amenities and maintenance is a priority for creating clean and welcoming green spaces in the neighborhood. SAFETY & SECURITY Although addressing policing and safety is not part of the scope of this plan, the success of many of the recommendations in this plan depend on perceived and actual safety of pedestrian and bicycle connections, public open space and plazas, and community events and activities. Many of the recommendations to improve connectivity and pedestrian and biking safety can also improve overall perceived and actual safety in the Station Area through improved streetscapes and placemaking. The plan recommends goals and strategies to address the key areas identified in the planning process. The recommendations are summarized as six Big Moves. • Create and apply a Ballpark Station Area Transit Station Area zone in the area identified as the “Heart of the Neighborhood” • Reconfigure the Ballpark TRAX Station to improve access from the west • Improve 1300 South for pedestrians by creating new crossing and expanding and upgrading the pedestrian realm • Create a sense of place at and around the stadium • Repurpose parking lots and underutilized properties to add activity to the Heart of the Neighborhood • Invest in community amenities and green space to balance density with livability factors The plan identifies several tools to implement the recommendations. These tools include zoning changes and infrastructure and amenity investments. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYi ii View of the Smith’s Ballpark / Google Maps EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION This plan focuses on the Ballpark Station Area, defined as the area between 900 South and 1700 South and State Street and I-15. The Station Area is part of the Ballpark Community Council area, and part of Salt Lake’s Central City planning area. Figure 1.1 is a map of the Station Area within the Ballpark Community Council. In addition, the plan identifies opportunities and recommendations for the area immediately around the station and stadium. This is an area identified by the community as the “Heart of the Neighborhood” and is a ¼ mile radius around the Ballpark TRAX Station. BALLPARK AREA 1 I-80 I-15 I-15 I-80 Salt Lake City, UTSalt Lake City, UT Ballpark Regional Extent 0 10.5 Miles ballpark station 900 S 1700 S ST A T E S T 1300 S 2100 S I-80 I-15 I-15 I-80 Salt Lake City, UTSalt Lake City, UT Ballpark Regional Extent 0 10.5 Miles ballpark station 900 S 1700 S ST A T E S T 1300 S 2100 S Heart of the Neighborhood Ballpark Station Area Ballpark Neighborhood Boundary LEGEND FIGURE 1.1: THE STATION AREA, BALLPARK COMMUNITY COUNCIL AND HEART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARIES 0 600 1,200300Feet I-15 TEERTS ETATS 900 SOUTH 1700 SOUTH I-15 Legend Building Age Null pre 1950 1951-1960 1961-1970 1970-1980 1981-present FIGURE 1.2: BUILDING AGE MAP INTRODUCTION 2 The neighborhood is characterized by older buildings – both residential and commercial structures built before 1970 – and is unique in its composition of small businesses and residents of all backgrounds. Nearly 77 percent of structures in the Station Area are 50 years or older at the time of this plan. Figure 1.2, illustrates the age and lot size for the Station Area. Older structures – pink, yellow, and light green – are generally on small lots. Newer structures – medium and darker green – are on larger lots, generally consolidated from original small lots or on former rail-served industrial properties. In the single-family residential areas, the homes open onto the street and include front yards and stoops. In the 300 West area, newer commercial structures are primarily big box retail stores with large parking lots. Some of the newer development in the Station Area include higher density residential and office uses. This transition to higher density housing and office is expected to continue. INTRODUCTION 3 The Station Area has a higher rate of renter occupied units than Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County and the State of Utah, Table 1.1. The Station Area has, historically, been one of the more affordable neighborhoods in the city. As a result, current households reflect diverse backgrounds and a range of incomes. The median income for the Station Area is significantly lower than median income for the city and surrounding region as seen in Table 1.2. Continued affordability in the neighborhood is a challenge as new development occurs in this rapidly transitioning area. photo credit / caption Ballpark station Area Salt Lake City Salt Lake County Utah Total Households 1,854 82,259 397,918 1,050,542 Owner Households 15.3%41.3%61.8%63.1% Renter Households 78.6%51.7%33.2%27.0% Vacant Households 6.1%7.0%5.0%9.9% Families*768 41,258 277,473 781,973 Household Size 2.20 2.41 2.99 3.13 Source: ESRI TABLE 1.1: HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHICS FOR THE BALLPARK STATION AREA AND SURROUNDING REGION Ballpark station Area Salt Lake County Salt Lake MSA*Utah Median Household Income $26,047 $76,410 $76,256 $73,015 Average Household Income $44,498 $99,988 $99,114 $92,612 Per Capita Income $19,992 $33,095 $32,666 $29,227 Source: ESRI *Metropolitan Statistical Area TABLE 1.2: 2019 ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME FOR THE BALLPARK STATION AREA *The U.S. Census Bureau defines family is a group of two people or more (one of whom is the householder) related by birth, marriage, or adoption and residing together. INTRODUCTION This plan is organized to focus on the recommended goals, strategies, and actions in Section I – The Plan with supporting analysis and information in Section II – Community Exploration & Analysis. Section II includes summaries of the public engagement process and Existing Conditions and Case Study Analyses completed as part of the planning process. Section III – Implementation Plan consolidates all goals, strategies, and actions identified in the plan with implementation time frame. A complete set of survey responses and public comments as well as the complete Existing Conditions, Case Study, and Highest and Best Use analyses, Transportation Analysis and other documents used to complete this plan are found in the Appendix. SECTION I THE PLAN IDENTIFIES: • The Big Moves contemplated in the plan • Goals, Strategies and Actions to implement the plan • A Future Land Use Map for the Station Area • Key Strategies & Projects to: +Improve the pedestrian experience +Address transit and transportation needs including »Connectivity »Transit »Parking strategy +Safety and security including »Street and pedestrian-level lighting »Building design »Landscape design +Enhancing neighborhood greenspace +Maximizing housing opportunity and mitigating displacement SECTION II COMMUNITY EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS INCLUDES: • Overview of the planning process • Study area demographics • Summary of existing conditions including +Prior planning efforts +Connectivity and the pedestrian and biking environment • Summary of Station Area Case Studies including +Ballparks studied +Key Takeaways • Summary of public engagement SECTION III IMPLEMENTATION PLAN • Appendix +Existing Conditions +Highest and Best Analysis +Transportation Analysis +Moderate Income Housing Plan +Case Study Analysis +Community Engagement Materials 4 People’s Freeway Park / Google Maps 5 THE PLAN The Ballpark neighborhood is the home of the Salt Lake Bees, the Los Angeles Angels AAA club. The Bees and their home field are a community-wide asset that attracts visitors from throughout the state to attend annual home games. The Ballpark and neighborhood are supported by the Ballpark TRAX Station, and a regional transportation system. The area directly around the Ballpark includes, a plaza at the corner of 1300 South and West Temple, Fire Station 8, and parking fields on Salt Lake City-, and privately-owned lots on and around 1300 South and Main Street. The Plan recommends additional investment in the immediate Ballpark area and supporting infrastructure to create a “Heart of the Neighborhood,” increase livability factors, and support continued growth in residential, office, restaurant, and retail uses. The neighborhood is in transition from a downtown “support” neighborhood, providing housing and services outside of the core, to a more distinct urban center. The area has undergone several transformations in its history and the latest has the potential to be the most dramatic yet.. Recent development projects have added new multi- family housing in the area with densities ranging from 15 units to 60 units per acre. The neighborhood is expected to continue to play a role in meeting Salt Lake City’s demand for new housing. Preserving neighborhood livability becomes increasingly important as density and development occur. Livability factors identified by the neighborhood during the planning process include access to services and retail, walkability and connectivity, safety and security, and open space and community amenities. This Plan recommends policies, projects, and improvements to: • Accommodate growth, • Expand on current community investments and assets, and • Enhance livability throughout the neighborhood. THE PLAN THE PLAN FIGURE 2.1: AERIAL VIEW OF “HEART OF NEIGHBORHOOD” CONCEPT THE BIG MOVES The plan contemplates several “Big Moves” that will help transform the neighborhood. These include: Create and apply a Ballpark neighborhood specific Transit Supportive Zone to the area around the Ballpark TRAX station along 1300 South from Main Street to 300 West that allows heights up to 8-10 stories with required enhancements to the public realm. Eligible enhancements may include pedestrian street lighting, street trees and public ground level uses such as restaurants or grocery space, retail or services. Figure 2.1 illustrates the opportunity to add density to the Ballpark site as well as the blocks to the north and west of the Ballpark. The concept also illustrates the importance of improvements, such as street lighting and wide sidewalks, to the public realm as density is added to the neighborhood. Current UTA parking lot at the Ballpark TRAX station / GSBS Consulting 6 THE PLAN7 Reconfigure the Ballpark TRAX station from a “suburban” park and ride to an “urban” neighborhood integrated format. This requires a new pedestrian/transit rider connection from the platform to 200 West/Lucy Avenue on the north end of the platform and loading areas on both the east and west side of the rail line allowing for an opportunity to increase passenger access. Figure 2.2 illustrates improved platform connectivity to the west. FIGURE 2.2: EAST SIDE PLATFORM ACCESS - NORTH CONCEPT Current view of west-side access to the TRAX platform / GSBS Consulting THE PLAN Improve 1300 South for pedestrians by creating new pedestrian crossings across 1300 South in addition to expanding and upgrading pedestrian ways to create a safe and comfortable walking environment. Figure 2.3 shows the potential for pedestrian crossings across 1300 South. Figure 2.4 shows improving sidewalks, street furniture, trees. In addition to improving sidewalks and adding pedestrian level lighting, the plan recommends the addition of street furniture, and trees. The concept contemplates the return of buses to 1300 South in accordance with the City’s Transit Master Plan. The plan recommends the 1300 South bus provide service to the Ballpark Station through an “in-line” bus stop. This means that riders making the transfer to or from the bus to TRAX would embark and disembark at stops on 1300 South and then access the platform either directly from the sidewalk for westbound buses or by crossing 1300 South for eastbound buses. Accommodating in-line bus service for riders of all abilities through a pedestrian crossing adjacent to the rail crossing arms likely requires some reconstruction on 1300 South to create a curb-less environment at the crossing. FIGURE 2.3: WEST SIDE PLATFORM ACCESS - SOUTH CONCEPT Current north access to the Ballpark TRAX Station / GSBS Consulting 8 THE PLAN9 Create a sense of place at and around the Ballpark. Create a sense of place through investment in community gathering spaces, streetscapes, and uses that encourage activity and interaction. The Ballpark is surrounded by wide sidewalks and an entry plaza. As any upcoming renovation and upgrades take place, the Ballpark itself could be reconfigured with active uses on the plaza and 1300 South frontage if possible. In addition, the plan recommends extending the opportunity for events on the sidewalk area on the west side of the Ballpark, along West Temple by investing in a “Festival Street” on West Temple from 1300 South to approximately Albermarle Avenue on the south. Figure 2.5 is a detail of the festival street concept. The festival street could be closed for special events, redirecting the traffic around the neighborhood. Such a festival street should embrace the Ballpark’s history though community art, historical interpretive fixtures, and programming. FIGURE 2.4: 1300 SOUTH IMPROVED PEDESTRIAN REALM Current east-facing view of 1300 South / GSBS Consulting THE PLAN FIGURE 2.5: FESTIVAL STREET CONCEPT Repurpose parking lots and underutilized properties to add activity to the Heart of the Neighborhood. Salt Lake City and UTA own large properties on the north side of 1300 South between Main Street and the TRAX line, currently used for surface parking, which are ideally located for redevelopment into dense housing, a community amenity or service, or office space with ground floor activating uses and an improved public realm. Buildings with up to 10 stories will create an urban context for 1300 South adjacent to the TRAX station and ballpark. The 1300 South, Main Street and West Temple street frontages should be activated with uses such as restaurants, bars, coffee shops, and similar uses that build on the success of existing businesses that currently call the neighborhood home. In addition to the City- and UTA- owned lots there are underutilized parcels in the immediate vicinity of the Ballpark and station that are appropriate for higher density development and enhancement of the public realm. The newly identified State Street Project Area , created by the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (RDA), has tools to help create the level of investment contemplated for the neighborhood. Invest in community amenities and green space to balance density with livability factors. The Ballpark neighborhood has limited green spaces and community amenities within its boundaries. As the neighborhood grows, additional parks and open spaces are needed to serve both current and future residents and employees in the area. In addition, the neighborhood lacks community spaces for indoor and outdoor community gatherings. The Ballpark plaza and festival street can address the need for outdoor community gatherings, but space for indoor community gatherings is needed. The Station Area is undeserved for community facilities such as a library or community center. As redevelopment occurs in the Heart of the Neighborhood and at the current Public Utilities facility, a location for parks, open space, a library, community center, or combined facility should be identified and pursued. Proposed festival street location on West Temple / GSBS Consulting 10 THE PLAN | GOALS, STRATEGIES & ACTIONS11 GOALS, STRATEGIES & ACTIONS Members of the Ballpark Station Area have participated in several planning projects over the last several years that included neighborhood-wide conversations about goals for the future of the area. The goals and ideas identified in the prior planning processes were confirmed during this Ballpark Neighborhood Station Area planning process. The neighborhood identified the following goals to enhance livability and accommodate anticipated growth. GOAL: Take advantage of current development opportunities, existing services, and amenities to enhance neighborhood livability. The Ballpark and its supporting infrastructure are at the geographic and emotional “heart” of the neighborhood. The neighborhood accommodates and enjoys the vibrancy of game days and would like to see game day vibrancy on more days of the calendar and in all seasons. Several strategies are recommended to enhance vibrancy and leverage the community’s investment in the neighborhood. STRATEGIES: • Implement the goals and strategies identified in: »Life on State Implementation Plan (not adopted) »Central 9th Chapter of the Downtown Master Plan »300 West Reconstruction »Homeless Resource Centers Neighborhood Action Strategies »State Street Project Area Plan »Salt Lake City Moderate Income Housing Plan »Salt Lake City Parks & Public Lands Needs Assessment »Citywide Gentrification Assessment & Displacement Mitigation Plan »Growing SLC »The Salt Lake City Street Lighting Master Plan • Update the city’s zoning code and map, as appropriate to implement the provisions of this plan: ACTIONS: +Amend Section 21A.26.078: TSA Transit Station Area District of the Salt Lake City Municipal Code to include the Ballpark Station Area as one of the existing TSA districts or create a new one if needed. • Require activation of the 1300 South frontage with restaurants, shops, street furniture and trees. • Implement streetscape improvements to accommodate pedestrian volumes. • Allow heights comparable to heights in other Urban Station Areas. • Protect the viewshed of the Wasatch Range from inside Smith’s Ballpark. +Evaluate and amend the City’s zoning code and map, as appropriate to include the urban design considerations identified in each of the character areas in this plan. +Evaluate and amend the City’s zoning code and map, as appropriate, to ensure compatible building scale and configuration on the east and west sides of Main Street. +Evaluate and amend the City’s zoning code and map, as appropriate to implement the following priorities for the 300 West Character Areas: • Ensure that amenities, connections, and services needed to support higher density development are included in development plans for the area. • Require development proposals to include mid-block and other connections to break down current large commercial blocks into smaller, more walkable blocks. • Where appropriate, development proposals incorporate access to existing and planned TRAX crossings. • Identify opportunities to provide community amenities, shops, and services within the heart for year-round activation. • Provide enhanced street and pedestrian lighting to improve safety and visibility. GOAL: Create a dense urban environment and entertainment zone around the Ballpark. STRATEGIES: • Invest in the station area and around the Ballpark to improve the overall neighborhood and enhance the opportunities in the Heart of the Ballpark. ACTIONS: +Improve east-west connectivity across TRAX to the north and the south of 1300 South. At a minimum, pedestrian/bicycle crossings should be identified to allow pedestrians and cyclists to move east to west without having to go to 1300 or 1700 South. +Install side-loading platforms at the Ballpark TRAX Station. +Consider redeveloping the TRAX station parking lot and bus turnaround for higher density uses and to provide neighborhood amenities. +Install pedestrian crossings east and west of TRAX on 1300 South on either side of the UTA crossing barrier. +Consider redevelopment opportunities for the City-owned parking lot at 1300 South and West Temple, while still allowing public parking land uses in the vicinity, to potentially increase density and improve the urban environment. +Install a festival street on West Temple and plazas adjacent to the stadium. +Invest in a public library within the station area that can serve as a neighborhood anchor and public amenity space. +Integrate greenspace and “green” elements into the urban landscape. • Enhance public space surrounding the Ballpark and include public art and references to historical elements. THE PLAN | GOALS, STRATEGIES & ACTIONS • Designate West Temple between 1300 South and Albemarle Avenue as a Festival Street for non-gameday and gameday activation including: • Farmers Markets • Community Celebrations • Food Truck festivals • Neighborhood Concerts • Implement a district-parking strategy that utilizes unused area parking and parking garages for game days to minimize the need for parking fields in the area. • Enhance the Ballpark’s relationship with the neighborhood by identifying opportunities to activate the West Temple and 1300 South facades of the stadium on non-game days and incorporate public green space, non- motorized connections, plazas, and similar public spaces around the stadium. • If feasible, identify a strategy to bury power lines as development in the Ballpark Neighborhood occurs. GOAL: Increase connectivity in the station area. The neighborhood is well-connected to the regional transportation and transit networks; however, the infrastructure for that regional network also acts as a barrier to internal connectivity, which limit easy multi-modal access to the Ballpark TRAX Station, schools, and parks, and separates newly developing residential uses west of the TRAX line from the rest of the neighborhood. Strategies recommended to improve connectivity within the neighborhood and the pedestrian and biking environment are listed below. Opportunities to improve connectivity include new connections, improvement of existing connections and reconfiguration of the TRAX station platform. Figure 2.7 is a map of opportunities to create new connections within the neighborhood. As of the writing of this Plan the new connection across the TRAX rails to the north of the Ballpark Station platform at Paxton Avenue is planned for near-term construction by UTA. The concept includes improved connection from the existing TRAX platform to the west to improve connectivity to the new residential developments along the 300 West corridor. STRATEGIES • Improve overall connectivity and walkability in the area. ACTIONS: +Study the potential future lane reconfiguration of 1300 South to eliminate or narrow traffic lanes and expand and improve the sidewalk. +Utilize existing alleyways, midblock, and truncated connections to create a system of bike and pedestrian pathways through the neighborhood. +Implement the planned TRAX line pedestrian crossings to the north of the current Ballpark Station. +Widen and enhance sidewalks to improve pedestrian comfort through the addition of street furnishings, pedestrian lighting and a buffer from moving traffic. +Implement pedestrian level lighting to improve safety and visibility. +Establish specific bicycle routes through the neighborhood according to the Salt Lake City Pedestrian & Bicycle Master Plan. +Reconfigure Ballpark TRAX Station to change from a suburban-style station that has northern platform access only from the east parking lot into an urban-style station that allows access from both the east and west sides of the station. This would include new access at the north end of the platform from Lucy Avenue/200 West on the west side of the TRAX rails +Redevelop part of the current surface parking lots to transit supportive uses that include retail, shops, and service near the Ballpark Station platform. +Establish a pedestrian crossing to the east and west of the UTA crossing barrier across 1300 South. +Study future crossings south of the 1300 South crossing at the TRAX line. GOAL: Increase urban design quality. Neighborhood identity refers to the ability of residents and visitors to distinguish a place by unique and distinct characteristics. Supporting the neighborhood as a distinguishable place involves consideration for creating a balanced mix of uses, ensuring architectural and landscape character, embracing historic character and elements, spotlighting neighborhood, and regional amenities, and considering the surrounding land use and transportation context of the area. The Ballpark Station Area is made up of several distinct areas that have their own character as expressed by building massing, use, streetscape elements and overall design. This plan supports the distinctly different areas within the neighborhood through recommendations to preserve some elements and enhance others. The character areas are illustrated in Figure 2.6. Photo: GSBS Consulting 12 THE PLAN | GOALS, STRATEGIES & ACTIONS13 0 600 1,200300Feet 30 0 W E S T 900 S 1300 S 1700 S ST A T E S T MA I N S T Main street character area 300 West transitional area central ninth corridor plan life on state street improvements west temple character area “heart” of the neighborhood FIGURE 2.6: BALLPARK CHARACTER AREAS Main Street Character Area The Main Street Character Area is defined by the presence of small local businesses, a generally pleasant pedestrian and bike environment, and medium-density residential buildings. New development should focus on maintaining the scale, walkability, and bikability of the neighborhood. West Temple Character Area The West Temple Character Area has a mix of residential and small businesses along the corridor. It is also home to the Public Utilities facility, the Ballpark Neighborhood park, and Jefferson Park. New development should maintain the current character and scale of the area. New development adjacent to the stadium should support the installation festival street improvements adjacent to the Ballpark from 1300 South to Albemarle Avenue. This can help expand the existing plaza area, create new plaza areas, and allow for temporary closure for community and gameday events, while also providing opportunities for art and historical elements. New development should also enhance the biking and walking environment on West Temple and consider traffic calming measures in the more residential sections. State Street Character Area The State Street Character Area is defined primarily by small businesses running the length of the station area. This area is undergoing several changes guided by the Salt Lake City Transportation Division’s Life on State Bikeway Implementation project and the RDA State Street Project Area Plan. Central Ninth Character Area The Central Ninth Character Area is defined by several small businesses and larger multifamily structures. This area is transitioning into a node with various entertainment options and services. New development in the area should maintain the current scale and massing of new development along the 900 South Corridor and implement the recommendations and strategies identified in the Downtown Master Plan – Central 9th Chapter including the 9th South Viaduct Catalytic Project. 300 West Character Areas The entire corridor is transitioning from an industrial/major commercial to higher density mixed use. However, there are several sub areas with the 300 West corridor that are transitioning at different rates. East of 300 West and North of 1300 South This area is historically characterized by smaller industrial and residential uses. Property consolidation has occurred and will continue to occur as demand for housing continues. There are large multifamily developments proposed or recently approved for the area. This area also includes an unused rail spur that is proposed for a light rail extension into the Granary District and the possibility of an adjacent trail, which is also being evaluated. Connectivity within this area and to the south to the Ballpark TRAX Station is a key consideration for this area. In addition, opportunities to add open space, public amenities, and neighborhood serving commercial should be pursued. West of 300 West and North of 1300 South This area currently has a mix of big box commercial, and newer office and residential uses. The transition of smaller parcels to low- and mid- density office and higher density residential is expected to continue as is the continuation of existing big box uses. East of 300 West and South of 1300 South This area is experiencing transition around several large scale, long-term uses. Lowes Home Improvement, the Gail Miller Homeless Resource Center, and the Utah State Liquor Store are expected to remain as the area transitions to include several new multi-family developments. As with the area north of 1300 South connectivity within the area and to the east across the TRAX line is a key consideration. Public amenities and neighborhood serving commercial should also be added to this area. West of 300 West and South of 1300 South The Walmart big box store is in this area as well as small lot light industrial and warehouse uses. This area is expected to transition in the future. The considerations identified for the areas already transitioning should inform zoning and development considerations in this area. “Heart” of the Neighborhood This area is characterized by its proximity to the Ballpark Station, Smith’s Ballpark, and several community organizations and businesses. This is the central hub of the neighborhood which will continue to densify as mixed- use development occurs. This area is appropriate for the highest densities allowed in Urban Station Areas. This level of density must be balanced with improvements to the public realm including an expanded sidewalk, pedestrian-focused amenities, plazas, street lighting, and street trees. A high level of visual interest and design quality is needed to balance the increased density in the area and require street activating uses on the ground floor. Illustrated in Figure 2.4. BALLPARK CHARACTER AREA DESCRIPTIONS Character areas are descriptions of existing conditions within each area. Character areas are generally defined by existing land uses, built scale, street corridors, density, and transit. proposed future connections *Potential Public Space at Ballpark Proposed Bike Routes *Multi-Modal Access Proposed Crossings Festival Street Proposed Future TRAX with Possible Adjacent Trail TRAX Line *Pedestrian Connection Through Future Development *Dependent on owner agreement Green Space TRAX Line Bikeway Festival Street Connection through Future Development 1300 SOUTH 30 0 W E S T WE S T T E M P L E MA I N S T R E E T ST A T E S T R E E T 0 100 200 400 FEET PAXTON AVE LUCY AVE 1400 SOUTH 1 2 A b c d FIGURE 2.7: CONNECTIVITY MAP RECOMMENDED CONNECTIONS IN THE “HEART” OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD Festival Street This street will allow temporary closure to vehicle traffic and host neighborhood and ballpark events. Proposed Bike Routes Several bike routes are in various stages of implementation through the heart of the neighborhood at the time of this document’s adoption. • The 300 West Reconstruction is funded and undergoing construction from 900 South to 2100 South with expected completion in 2022. • The existing designated bikeway on Main Street is undergoing an evaluation as part of the Salt Lake City Transportation Division’s Life on State Bikeway Implementation project. • The Paxton bikeway will connect State Street to 300 West. Multimodal Access This opportunity is recommended to connect the bikeway on Main Street to the TRAX Platform on Lucy Avenue. Pedestrian Connection Through Future Development This recommendation occurs in two locations: 1. This recommendation links the 1300 South station to the Ballpark and moves pedestrians through a private pedestrian-oriented development directly onto the proposed festival street on West Temple. 2. This recommendation connects West Temple to 300 West. This connection is dependent on a future agreement with UTA to provide a TRAX crossing on or near 1400 South. Potential for Future Public Space at Ballpark Additional public space through the addition of a ballpark perimeter trail, additional plazas, and activating public uses are recommended for this area. This recommendation would help connect the greater neighborhood to the Ballpark, but should not interfere with its daily operation and events. Proposed Crossings Additional crossings are recommended: a. directly east and west of the UTA crossings barriers on 1300 South. b. directly north of the 1300 South TRAX platform onto Lucy Avenue c. across the TRAX line at Paxton Avenue and the existing rail spur. d. An additional future crossing is recommended at or near 1400 South and should be evaluated for future opportunities in partnership with UTA. An enhanced crossing is also recommended at the intersection of 1300 South and West Temple. This crossing should show clear delineation, possibly through community art or a painted crossing. Proposed Future TRAX with Adjacent Trail This area is being evaluated by UTA for operating TRAX service with a possible adjacent trail. Opportunities for additional green spaces and greenery should be considered as this area is developed. 14 THE PLAN | GOALS, STRATEGIES & ACTIONS15 GOAL: Improve safety. Throughout the planning process safety was consistently identified as a current concern and goal for the future. This plan focuses on measures taken in the built environment to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety. STRATEGIES • Improve pedestrian experience and safety. ACTIONS: +Install pedestrian-level street lighting. +Require ground level uses in new buildings to incorporate pedestrian-level strategies. +Ensure adequate sidewalk width and park strips on primary walk routes, particularly around the TRAX station. +Improve ADA accessibility though sidewalk repair and removal of obstacles. +Ensure ongoing maintenance of all facilities to repair uneven sidewalks, functioning signals and frequent trash receptacles. • Identify and implement best practices in urban design to improve neighborhood safety, including: ACTIONS: +Identify opportunities for interaction, +Elimination of “blind corners” or areas, +Appropriate lighting for safety GOAL: Enhance social vibrancy. STRATEGIES • Support events and placemaking efforts including community art, pop-up events, and temporary food vendors. • Find creative solutions to enhance greenspace in the neighborhood. ACTIONS: +Explore creative options for additional greenspace in the heart of the neighborhood in and around the Ballpark. +Evaluate the opportunity for future green space on the current Public Utilities site if and when Salt Lake Department of Public Utilities moves offices to a new location. +Enhance the urban tree canopy in underserved areas of the neighborhood and require additional street trees and urban greenery with new development. +Maintain all green spaces with: • Trash receptacles • Pedestrian lighting • Pedestrian furniture • Improve the quality of current and future greenspace. ACTIONS: +Ensure funding for additional maintenance and staffing as additional greenspace is added. GOAL: Increase affordability and attainability of housing for current and future residents. STRATEGIES • Provide a diversity of housing types and options for different incomes, familial status, age, and needs. ACTIONS: +Promote a diversity in the size of new units in the neighborhood to accommodate residents in different stages of life, including families with children. • Utilize the RDA State Street Project Area as a tool to capture reinvestment in the neighborhood and help encourage a diversity of housing types. • Increase opportunities for home ownership in the neighborhood. ACTIONS: +Explore alternative options for ownership strategies including land trusts and co-ops. +Provide down-payment assistance or other programs for qualifying residents • Mitigate the negative impacts of gentrification as development occurs. ACTIONS: +Continue to provide and market home repair programs for qualifying residents. +Provide education and renter legal assistance to help current renters stay in place. +Support development assistance and financing programs to maintain affordability. +Preserve existing social services and provide additional services as development occurs to support housing options and access to opportunity at a variety of income levels. proposed future connections *Potential Public Space at Ballpark Proposed Bike Routes *Multi-Modal Access Proposed Crossings Festival Street Proposed Future TRAX with Possible Adjacent Trail TRAX Line Proposed Future Alleyway Connections *Pedestrian Connection Through Future Development *Dependent on owner agreement Green Space TRAX Line Bikeway Festival Street Connection through Future Development proposed future connections *Potential Public Space at Ballpark Proposed Bike Routes *Multi-Modal Access Proposed Crossings Festival Street Proposed Future TRAX with Possible Adjacent Trail TRAX Line Proposed Future Alleyway Connections *Pedestrian Connection Through Future Development *Dependent on owner agreement Green Space TRAX Line Bikeway Festival Street Connection through Future Development 1700 SOUTH I-15 I-15 0 600 1,200300Feet 1300 SOUTH 30 0 W E S T WE S T T E M P L E MA I N S T R E E T ST A T E S T R E E T PAXTON AVE LUCY AVE 1400 SOUTH 900 SOUTH FIGURE 2.8: CONNECTIVITY MAP - REGIONAL CONTEXT THE PLAN | CONNECTIONS 16 RECOMMENDED PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES • Wide enough to provide 4 distinct zones: +THE EDGE ZONE separates the roadway from the sidewalk. +THE FURNISHINGS ZONE provides space for street furnishings and vertical elements such as trees, benches, etc. +THE THROUGHWAY ZONE provides a minimum of five – eight feet clear continuous pathway for ADA accessibility. +THE FRONTAGE ZONE provides a “shy distance” between the throughway zone and building frontage/property line and entrances. • ADA accessible • Street trees to provide a shaded pedestrian way • Human scaled building frontages • Pedestrian level street lighting • Store fronts, office windows, and windows on homes facing the street. • Encourage and allow outdoor retail displays while maintaining ADA compliant throughway zone. • Use of plazas, courtyards, and squares to provide pedestrian amenities. THE PLAN | FUTURE LAND USE17 FUTURE LAND USE MAP The Future Land Use Map (Figure 2.9) guides future development and land use decisions. This is a broad conceptual map. The map identifies areas for continuation of current land use, scale, and density and areas for transformation. 0 600 1,200300Feet 30 0 W E S T LUCY AVE PAXTON AVE 900 S ANDREW AVE 1700 S PARAMOUNT AVE ST A T E S T MA I N S T streetscape/festival street improvements opportunity for community space ballpark station public utilities site proposed future 1700 S TRAX station* kensington ave byway project 900 s station central ninth connectivity project FIGURE 2.9: FUTURE LAND USE MAP Site Boundary Future Land Use Concept Areas with Opportunity to Integrate Additional Green Space 300 West Transitional Area Heart of the Neighborhood / Ballpark Entertainment Zone Main Street Area State Street Corridor Neighborhood Areas Medium Density Transitional Area Central Ninth Corridor Area Community Recommended Future Public Space Incorporated into the Ballpark Jefferson Park Mixed-Use Area Connections* Proposed Bike Routes Festival Street Pedestrian Connection Through Future Development Proposed Crossings Crossing Under Construction Proposed Future TRAX Line with Adjacent Trail UTA Station UTA Light Rail Gateway Areas Places of Interest Adopted Project Catalyst Area Community Recommended Catalyst Area Community Recommended Gateway Area Future Community Amenity 1/4 Mile Station Radius *DEPENDENT ON OWNER AGREEMENTS LEGEND Enhanced Crossing BALLPARK FUTURE LAND USE THE PLAN | FUTURE LAND USE 18 FUTURE LAND USE AREA DESCRIPTIONS Central Ninth Corridor Area This area is included in the Central Ninth chapter of the Downtown Master Plan. The corridor is experiencing new development and investment consistent with that plan. The Ballpark Station Area Plan assumes continued implementation of the Central Ninth chapter. The Central Ninth neighborhood should have direct connections to the Ballpark Station Area neighborhoods where possible. State Street Corridor This area presents opportunities to transform the State Street corridor into a mixed use, pedestrian, and bicycle friendly area through the introduction of a mix of uses, improvements to the bike and pedestrian environment and improved pedestrian crosswalks. Investments in east-west bicycle connections should be made to allow connectivity across State Street. 300 West Transitional Area The area between the TRAX lines and I-15 from 900 South to 1700 South was, until a few years ago, characterized by big box retail, auto-oriented services, storage, and flex space. The area is transitioning, primarily with new residential development. Medium to high density housing and office uses are appropriate in this area when balanced with sidewalk, connectivity, and other pedestrian improvements. As new households are added to the area, amenities, and services to support residents will create a mixed-use space and are needed to maintain quality of life and reduce reliance on automobile travel. The 300 West Reconstruction will improve multi-modal opportunities along 300 West and will encourage growth in the area. Opportunities to add pedestrian friendly retail and services as well as connect the 300 West area to the rest of the “Heart” of the neighborhood east of the TRAX line should be identified. These mixed-use areas should maintain a high-quality pedestrian environment to connect residents, businesses, and services. The character of long-standing local businesses should be considered for pedestrians as new development occurs to acknowledge the history of the area. Medium Density Transitional Area The area between the TRAX lines and West Temple south of 1400 South, which includes the current Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities site, is appropriate for redevelopment into medium density uses. The area is characterized by a mix of housing and commercial uses that back to the TRAX line. Redevelopment of this area should include medium density housing and commercial buildings with reduced height along the West Temple frontage adjacent to the neighborhood character area. The area also includes the Public Utilities Department offices and yard which is identified as a potential future catalytic area for community uses and open space to help support the existing neighborhood and potential future mid-density development. Neighborhood Areas The primarily single-family neighborhood south of 1300 South was “down-zoned” to preserve the housing stock, street grid pattern, and neighborhood. The scale and density of this area should be maintained with targeted redevelopment of vacant abandoned structures with new or rehabilitated structures at a comparable scale and character as the existing housing stock. Appropriate buffers between existing single-family areas and future higher-density uses should be maintained. The system of publicly-owned alleyways through the neighborhood character areas should be evaluated for improvement to enhance overall connectivity in the area. Main Street Area Main Street is an alternative to the heavy auto-traveled State Street to the east. Main Street from 900 to 1700 South is lower and slower than State Street making it a better pedestrian and biking environment. Main Street between 900 and 1300 South has developed into larger format commercial uses including car dealerships. Redevelopment of the automobile dealerships in this area is not likely in the next 5-10 years. Available parcels between State Street and Richards Street between 900 and 1300 South should be considered for redevelopment into a mix of market-rate and affordable housing at densities that would support growing business opportunities and a walkable Main Street, realizing that this may require taller buildings than what currently exists. Main Street at 1300 South is part of the Heart of the Neighborhood identified for transit supportive densities. As redevelopment of this section of Main Street occurs the viewshed of the Wasatch Range from inside of the Ballpark should be preserved by limiting the position and heights of buildings directly east and southeast of the ballpark to 3-4 stroies along Main Street with a gradual increase in building height towards State Street. Main Street between the current Utah Pride Center (1380 S. Main Street) and 1700 South has retained its original scale and includes several locally owned restaurants, bakeries, and shops. The east side of Main Street is included in the State Street overlay zone which addresses the scale and placement of buildings in the area. Future development on Main Street should include compatible building scale and configuration on the east and west sides of Main Street. Building heights of 3-4 stories would be appropriate between the Utah Pride Center and Kensington Avenue along Main Street. Main Street between Kesington Avenue and 1700 South should be considered for redevelopment into a medium density area that utilizes current building scale and massing to guide future development. New buildings in the area should be considered for redevelopment no taller than 3 stories with front doors on Main Street, stoops, and yards. Parking should be setback from the street and located to the side or rear of buildings, or in garages. The Heart of the Neighborhood / Ballpark Station Entertainment Zone The area between just north of Paxton Avenue on the north and 1400 South on the south, Main Street on the east and 400 West on the west is the Heart of the Ballpark Neighborhood. This area includes Smith’s Ballpark, the Ballpark TRAX station, and several businesses and community organizations. This area is appropriate for Transit Station Area District Zoning as an Urban Station. The area is appropriate for higher densities. There are significant redevelopment opportunities in this area to enhance gameday and non-gameday activities in the area. In addition to the Ballpark and the station, the area already boasts some of the most popular local restaurants in the city. Building on this success there is an opportunity to create a vibrant entertainment zone centered on the Ballpark and serving the surrounding neighborhood as a community hub. This area could also be considered for the addition of a public service anchor such as a library with opportunity for public space. This area can support the highest intensity of use because of the transportation grid and available transit. It is recommended that streetscape elements should include additional art and interpretive historical elements, shaded pedestrian way, and visual elements directly related to the Ballpark. Community Recommended Future Public Space at the Ballpark This area is identified by the community as having opportunity for future public space around the Ballpark facility to create year-round activation. Some examples include additional plaza space, perimeter trail or other green space. This will help activate the area but should not interfere with game day and day-to-day operations. Jefferson Park Mixed-Use Area The area encompassing approximately east of the 200 West TRAX line to the West Temple corridor and Paxton Avenue to Mead Avenue to the north is characterized by a mix of housing types and commercial uses. Redevelopment of the area should support a live/work/play community by providing a mix of uses and building scales. Larger building forms are appropriate along corridors where large building forms are already present or where it is abutting the TRAX line on 200 West or along the West Temple corridor. These larger building forms should consist of approximately 5-7 stories and provide some commercial spaces/residential amenities. Smaller building scales should be focused on areas adjoining Jefferson Street and avenue streets; smaller building scales should generally consist of 2-3 stories and almost entirely comprised of medium-density residential uses. THE PLAN | FUTURE LAND USE19 Adopted Catalytic Areas These are areas of planned and adopted new investment that have been approved and are awaiting implementation. KENSINGTON AVENUE NEIGHBORHOOD BYWAY PROJECT Kensington Avenue Byway Improvements including bicycle and pedestrian crossing improvements, traffic calming, wayfinding signage, and connectivity enhancements to existing bicycle and pedestrian routes. CENTRAL NINTH CATALYTIC CONNECTIVITY The Downtown Plan recommends several improvements to this area. Phase I underpass improvements include amenities on both sides of the 900 South viaduct such as public art, pedestrian lighting, street tress, and other comfort amenities. The Downtown Plan also proposes a Central Ninth Catalytic Connectivity Phase II TRAX extension which would run from 400 West to 900 South with adjacent active transportation trail if approved, as well as a Central Ninth Catalytic Connectivity Long Term 900 South viaduct demolition and shortening which would occur at the end of the viaduct’s structural life and be replaced with community amenities and new connections. Community Recommended Catalytic Areas These are areas of planned or potential new investment that can leverage transformative private investment, improve neighborhood livability, and create a new, vibrant Ballpark District. BALLPARK ENTERTAINMENT/STATION AREA IMPROVEMENTS The Ballpark is an anchor for both gameday and non-gameday improvements and activities. Ballparks around the country have increasingly become the centerpiece for broader entertainment areas including restaurants, bars, theaters, plazas, and community gathering spaces. Smith’s Ballpark is located in a neighborhood that already offers many of these amenities. There are also vacant and underutilized parcels around the Ballpark that can be redeveloped into housing, offices, stores, and restaurants to add vibrancy. The existing public realm can be rethought to provide opportunities for community activities. Opportunities include: • Transit supportive development in the existing Ballpark TRAX Station parking lot • High-density mixed-use development, with public parking spaces, in the City- owned parking lot north of the Ballpark • Redevelopment of the area west of the Ballpark into a high-density mixed-use concept with pedestrian-oriented features and amenities • Improvement of the pedestrian areas along 1300 South to address capacity and safety issues • Creation of a Festival Street on West Temple that can be closed to traffic for special events including community farmers market, concerts, etc. • Improved “permeability” of the Ballpark to allow non-gameday access to the team store and possibly ground level restaurants • Expansion of the Ballpark plaza to extend to the south and east to maximize special event and gameday activity areas. • Develop a transit supportive zone for this area that includes maximum height requirements to allow roof top decks with a view of the mountains and ballpark and minimum height requirements to create an urban experience for residents and visitors. • Addition of an anchoring community amenity which may include options like a library with opportunities for public space. Transit station upgrades in this area may include: • Pedestrian crossings directly to the east and west of the UTA crossing barriers, and to the north and south of 1300 South. • Elimination of the bus drop off loop • Station-adjacent transit-supportive development of the UTA surface parking lot and to the west of the station and improve overall performance of the station in the neighborhood. • Pedestrian/bikeways improvements to access the Ballpark Station. PUBLIC UTILITIES SITE The Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities is located at 1530 South West Temple. The Public Utilities offices and yards may relocate at some point in the future. If Salt Lake City makes an operational change, the current Public Utilities site would be a good location to add much needed community amenities to the neighborhood. Possible future uses include: • Expanded park space to supplement the “Ballpark Playground” currently on the site • Relocation of Fire Station #8 from next to the Ballpark, and reuse of the existing fire station location for an activating use with frontage consistent with a walkable and comfortable public space • A community center to provide community meeting and education space, and/or recreation facilities. COMMUNITY RECOMMENDED 1700 SOUTH TRANSIT HUB Long-range transportation plans recommend a future transit hub at 1700 South serving light rail and east-west bus service. This area should adopt an “urban form” including extensive “last mile” connections to surrounding neighborhoods and uses, and implementation of appropriate Transit Supportive Zoning. Community Recommended Gateways These are areas recommended by the community to announce arrival into the Ballpark neighborhood. Future Community Amenity Proposed locations for community amenities which may include opportunity for parks, libraries, and supportive services. Ballpark TRAX Station / GSBS Consulting THE PLAN | KEY STRATEGIES & PROJECTS CONNECTIVITY STRATEGIES Enhancing the pedestrian environment is a priority for the Ballpark Neighborhood. The ability to efficiently and comfortably access the area will benefit residents, current and future businesses, and will improve both gameday and non-gameday experiences for visitors. Movement throughout the neighborhood can be enhanced by the widening of sidewalks and pedestrian space and the enhancement of these public spaces to include street furniture, street trees and plants, and additional pedestrian-level street lighting. The pedestrian environment should be suitable and safe for all ages and abilities to ensure equitable access. This includes the improvement of existing street crossings to elevate the visibility of pedestrians and the addition of new street crossings where current options are limited. Figure 2.10 depicts the existing street sections for 1300 South. This plan recommends an updated street profile to improve walkability within the heart of the neighborhood. Figure 2.11 shows the recommended profile for 1300 South, which includes five feet of pedestrian space within a private encroachment to occur as properties redevelop, five feet of pedestrian space with street trees and pedestrian level lighting, and a center median. Recommendations for a safer bike and pedestrian network include: • Fill gaps in the sidewalk network and increase sidewalk width and buffers, prioritizing 1300 South, 300 West, 900 South, and 1700 South. The combined public sidewalk and private encroachment should have a minimum width of ten feet to allow for street trees and street lighting. • Provide and maintain pedestrian amenities including street furniture and trash receptacles • Improve bike lane marking, especially at major intersections • Enhance pedestrian-level lighting and prioritize underserved areas • Support pedestrian-level street activation including food, retail and entertainment options • Enhance existing crossings to prioritize pedestrians • Support mid-block crossings and alleyways to improve connectivity CONNECTIVITY There are several opportunities to enhance connectivity and improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the neighborhood. Navigating the Ballpark Neighborhood by foot and bicycle is supported by the surrounding grid system which historically provided easy connectivity in the area. Preserving connections and enhancing and adding new midblock connections will help people move throughout the neighborhood and provide alternatives to navigating along high-volume arterials. Figure 2.8 on page 16 identifies several recommended connections to navigate through the neighborhood. In addition to improved connectivity, additional upgrades to bike and pedestrian facilities are recommended. These include: • Upgraded bike parking facilities that are highly visible to decrease the risk of theft and provide a secure area to lock onto • Traffic signaling which recognizes the presence of bicycles along designated bikeways • Improve pedestrian crossings to highlight the pedestrian while calming traffic on high volume roads PARKING STRATEGY Parking needs in the Ballpark Neighborhood vary between game days and non-game days. On game days, landowners adjacent to the Ballpark provide paid parking, and several on-street parking options are available on a first-come-first-serve basis. However, on non-game days the surrounding properties sit as vacant lots and lack activating uses. Optimizing a balance of parking for year-round activation helps create a pedestrian environment with opportunity for different land use strategies. Future considerations for parking in the heart of the neighborhood include: • Reduce overall parking requirements through a shared parking system between different uses • Identify surrounding businesses as potential partners in a shared parking agreement for game day events • Increase bicycle parking options surrounding the Ballpark and at the Ballpark. • Allow developers to substitute a predetermined percentage of automobile parking for bicycle parking • Evaluate the need for a parking garage serving the 1300 South area as development occurs • Include standards for parking garages and their interaction with the neighborhood in the Transit Supportive Zone • Provide free transit access with Ballpark ticket sales • Encourage subsidization of transit passes by businesses for employees and residents. ALLEYWAY SAFETY Designated alleyways can provide connectivity options for pedestrians and bicyclists as they move throughout the Station Area. Maintaining a high level of perceived safety is important to the activation and success of these alternate routes and can be achieved by considering several activating urban design strategies to improve the health and quality of these public spaces. Tactics for creating safe and well-used alleyways include: • Enhance alleyway identity by naming designated alleyways. • Implement new paving, materials, and colors to indicate well caredfor places. • Maintain the alleyways and provide space for art and activities to show that they are cared for. • Provide frequent and lowglare pedestrian level lightning. Private Encroach. Private Encroach.Sdwlk Sdwlk 2. 5 ’ C u r b / G u t t e r 2. 5 ’ C u r b / G u t t e r 71.5’ 71.5’ Existing Proposed 2. 5 ’ C u r b / G u t t e r 2. 5 ’ C u r b / G u t t e r Sdwlk SdwlkCenter Median Center Lane (TWLTL) Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane 5’5’5’ 5’5’ 5’11’ 11’ 11’ 11’ 11’ 11’ 11.5’ 11.5’ 12’ 12’ FIGURE 2.10: EXISTING 1300 SOUTH STREET SECTION FOR THE HEART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD Private Encroach. Private Encroach.Sdwlk Sdwlk 2. 5 ’ C u r b / G u t t e r 2. 5 ’ C u r b / G u t t e r 71.5’ 71.5’ Existing Proposed 2. 5 ’ C u r b / G u t t e r 2. 5 ’ C u r b / G u t t e r Sdwlk SdwlkCenter Median Center Lane (TWLTL) Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane 5’5’5’ 5’5’ 5’11’ 11’ 11’ 11’ 11’ 11’ 11.5’ 11.5’ 12’ 12’ FIGURE 2.11: PROPOSED 1300 SOUTH STREET SECTION FOR THE HEART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD 20 STREET LIGHTING Pedestrian-level street lighting is key to making a place feel comfortable and safe for people navigating the neighborhood by foot and bicycle. The Salt Lake City Street Lighting Master Plan identifies the Ballpark neighborhood as a high priority area for future street lighting because it is currently underserved and has several high potential conflict areas and schools. In addition to requiring new street lighting with new development, the neighborhood can request enhanced pedestrian-level street lighting through a process coordinated with the Salt Lake Department of Public Utilities by: 1. Submitting an initial request though the community council to Public Utilities for additional street lighting with specific locations and reasons. 2. Reviewing the surrounding street and land use character with Public Utilities to determine appropriate lighting type 3. Gather a cost estimate for the additional lighting and seek funding approval in partnership with the department. 4. Design, schedule and implement preferred option in partnership with the department. • Add plants and greenery, like green walls, to provide public green space while maintaining a level of transparency from private lots into the alleyway. • Embrace alleyways as part of the city network rather than “backside” spaces hidden from sight. SAFETY & SECURITY Safety is a priority to the Ballpark community. While this plan does not directly address crime, there are measures that can be integrated into the physical elements of the neighborhood to improve perceived safety. Appropriate Lighting Appropriate pedestrian level lighting should directly light the pedestrian-way at a height that maintains a pedestrian-scaled walkway. It is recommended that future development include pedestrian-scale lighting with a priority on underserved areas, street crossings, and transit stops. A definition of priority areas can be found in the Salt Lake City Street Lighting Masterplan. Appropriate pedestrian lighting should: • Be pedestrian scaled • Have a lighting pole height of 13-16 feet • Maintain color accuracy • Be coordinated according to surrounding land use and context This lighting option has significant glare and prioritizes the vehicle right of way, creating visibility and perceived safety issues. (Source: SLC Street Lighting Masterplan) Lights with low glare provide more comfortable streets and public spaces, providing light where it is needed without annoying nearby residents. Source: (SLC Street Lighting Master Plan) THE PLAN | KEY STRATEGIES & PROJECTS21 Transparent Building Fronts and Visibility Aside from adding visual interest to a street, transparent building fronts increase the number of ”eyes on the street” by allowing people inside buildings to have direct view of what is happening outside. This increased interaction between the inside and outside decreases the likelihood for crime in these areas, especially when well lit. Landscaping and Visibility Visually permeable landscaping provides another opportunity to improve the perceived safety of an area. Tall, view-obstructing fences and landscaping inhibit visibility of what is happening in an area. Areas with little visibility often experience criminal activity which can be hidden behind visual barriers. Prioritizing good visibility, especially in and around public spaces, inhibits the ability to conduct crime out of sight. ENHANCING NEIGHBORHOOD GREENSPACE The station area is served by two parks, Jefferson Park and the Ballpark Playground. Jefferson Park includes a playground and a multi-use field, and also acts as a stormwater retention area for the City. Jefferson Park is maintained by the City and offers 3 acres of green space. The Ballpark Playground, which was recently renamed from Peoples Freeway Park in 2020, is 0.4 acres and is maintained by the Salt Lake Department of Public Utilities. The Salt Lake City Parks & Public Lands Needs Assessment identifies the neighborhood as an area of greater need for green space. This area is likely to receive much of the City’s future growth, yet has the lowest level of service for parks in the city at 2.8 park acres per 1,000 population compared to a city-wide level of service of 3.5 city-owned and managed park acres per 1,000 population. This Plan’s recommendations for future opportunities for green space, identified in the Future Land Use Map, include the area just south of the 900 South freeway access ramp and the current Public Utilities site. As the Public Utilities department outgrows this location, the site should be evaluated for additional community green space. The proposed festival street, identified on the Future Land Use Map, should also incorporate green landscaping elements such as planters, street trees and landscaped areas. This example of Regent Street shows transparency between the street and inside the adjacent building help increase the perceived safety of an area. THE PLAN | KEY STRATEGIES & PROJECTS 22 The Ballpark Playground provides a greenspace oasis within the neighborhood The Salt Lake City Parks & Public Lands Needs Assessment identifies ten “big ideas” for the future of green space in the City, shown in figure 2.12. These ideas were developed through an extensive community outreach effort to identify what residents want to see in the future city-wide green space. Another opportunity for additional greenspace arises in future development of the neighborhood. This plan recommends that the City require additional green space as a requirement for new private development outlined in the recommended Transit Supportive Zoning for the heart of the neighborhood. New development should incorporate “green” features including additional street trees, planted medians and park strips, and strategic landscaping to provide pinpricks for greenery throughout the neighborhood. Drought resistant landscaping is recommended to support the city’s overall goal of creating an urban ecosystem the integrates parks, plazas and the urban forestry identified in the Downtown Plan. Creating successful public open space in the neighborhood can be achieved through several urban design recommendations. These include: • Treating public space as an object to work towards rather than “leftover space” • Integrating public space into community facilities like schools, libraries, and service centers • Lining public spaces with public uses to improve safety and accessibility • Considering the design of adjacent streets and their use of bulb outs, furniture, paving, and improvements to create a pleasant and desirable place • Creating pedestrian and bicycle routes which serve both transportation and recreational purposes. HOUSING OPPORTUNITY & MITIGATING DISPLACEMENT The Ballpark’s identity as an affordable area is quickly changing. While there are strong residential pockets within the neighborhood, a majority of new residential development has been mid-rise apartment style rental units. The community has identified three priorities to assist current and future residents in finding attainable and affordable housing regardless of their income, age, familial status, and background. These priorities include: • Providing clean, safe, and equitable housing options for all residents. • Providing opportunities for home ownership for a diversity of income levels • Mitigating the negative effects of gentrification as development occurs Anti-Displacement Strategies As this area continues to grow and change, households that spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing are at a greater risk for getting priced out of the neighborhood and being involuntarily displaced. The city is required by the state and WFRC to submit an annual report which highlights an estimate of moderate-income housing needs and review moderate income housing implementation progress outlined in Growing SLC, Salt Lake’s 5-year housing plan. In addition, at the time of writing, the City is conducting a Gentrification Assessment & Displacement Mitigation Study, which will include models of current and future gentrification pressures and provide recommendations to avoid involuntary displacement. Recommendations from that study should be followed in the Ballpark neighborhood as applicable. FUTURE PUBLIC SPACE SHOULD: 1. INCLUDE A WAYFINDING AND SIGNAGE CAMPAIGN THAT MAKES IT EASIER TO EXPLORE NEARBY PARKS, TRAILS AND PUBLIC SPACES 2. COMPLETE MISSING LINKS IN REGIONAL TRAILS AND INVEST IN GREENWAYS TO ENHANCE NATURE And CREEKS WITHIN THE CITY 3. TRANSFORM PARKS INTO VIBRANT COMMUNITY SPACES THAT EMPOWER RESIDENTS TO CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD IDENTITY 4. HELP OUR PARKS, LARGE AND SMALL, COME ALIVE WITH ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR 5. INVEST IN PROJECTS AND MAINTENANCE ALONG THE JORDAN RIVER PARKWAY THAT WILL PROMOTE EQUITY, ACCESS, SCENIC BEAUTY, DIVERSE RECREATION, AND HEALTHY ECOLOGY ALONG THE PARKWAY 6. REVEAL PAST AND PRESENT STORIES FROM OUR DIVERSITY OF EXPERIENCES THAT HAVE SHAPED THIS VALLEY, GIVING FOCUS TO UNDERREPRESENTED AND INDIGENOUS PEOPLE. EXPRESS THESE STORIES THROUGH LANDSCAPES, STRUCTURE, AND PLACEMAKING 7. INCREASE THE PROVISION OF GREEN AND ACTIVE SPACES DOWNTOWN THAT WILL CONTRIBUTE TO LIVABILITY AND ECONOMIC VITALITY 8. BUILD PUBLIC AWARENESS TO SUPPORT NEW TREES STEWARDSHIP THAT ALLOWS URBAN FORESTRY TO PLANT TREES IN ALL PUBLICLYOWNED LANDSCAPES 9. INVITE APPROPRIATE ALTERNATIVE USE OF OUR PUBLIC GOLFCOURSES FOR GREATER BENEFIT 10. CULTIVATE MORE BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY IN PARKS AND NATURAL AREAS Source: Salt Lake City Public Lands TEN “BIG IDEAS” FOR THE FUTURE OF GREEN SPACE IN SLC FIGURE 2.12: TEN “BIG IDEAS” FOR THE FUTURE OF GREEN SPACE IN SLC THE PLAN | KEY STRATEGIES & PROJECTS23 To reduce the negative impact of gentrification in the primarily renter occupied neighborhood, the city should work with local organizations and services to provide legal support, education, and outreach to residents. Existing community-based organizations can provide tenant services and homeowner assistance to support residents. Educating the community is an immediate step to mitigate displacement and includes education on tenants’ rights, understanding lease agreements, financial literacy, the risks of predation on vulnerable homeowners, and relocation assistance to help stabilize changing housing situations. The city should also support development assistance and financing to offer technical assistance to help low-income renters and owners in the area to identify increased rental opportunities for ADUs and financing strategies. Since the neighborhood is also home to a large number of the city’s unhoused residents, prioritizing the retention of outreach social services and case managers to help support the existing unhoused population in the neighborhood will likely improve health and safety outcomes for all residents. In addition, the equitable distribution of social services, case managers and housing options for individuals making under 30 percent of the area median income should be coordinated on a county-wide/regional level. Figure 2.13 shows a map of existing services and nonprofit organizations which provide support to much of Salt Lake County. Focus should be placed on connecting these county-wide services with improved public transit to improve overall access. 0 600 1,200300Feet TEERTS ETATS 900 SOUTH 1700 SOUTH VOA Detox Center Palmer Court Permanent Supportive Housing Fresh Start Behavioral Health UTAH DEPARTMENT oF CORRECTIONS ADULT PROHBATION AND PAROLE URBAN INDIAN CENTER OF SALT LAKE THE ROAD HOME HOUSING AND SERVICES GAIL MILLER RESOURCE CENTER UTAH PRIDE CENTER FIGURE 2.13: COMMUNITY SERVICES AND NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS MAP HOUSING RESOURCES AND OPPORTUNITIES Condo-Based Community Land Trust How it works: This program allows development of owner-occupied condos on appropriate private and public owned land through an ongoing lease. This reduces the purchase price of each unit and requires resale at an affordable price with a limit to appreciation to maintain affordability. Examples of where this has worked: Burlington, VT, Austin TX, Oakland, CA Target Outcomes: Increases opportunity for ownership, increases affordability SLC Home Repair Program How it works: The program allows owner-occupied households with moderate income to obtain either a no interest loan or a low interest loan to address health, safety and structural issues in their homes. https://www.slc.gov/hand/city-housing-programs/home-repair-program/ SLC Targeted Repair Program How it works: Very Low-Income households (50% and below AMI) can apply for a lifetime maximum grant of up to $50,000 to repair major structural and/or mechanical component deficiencies in their home. This grant will allow homeowners, who have no other funding options, access the funds needed to keep their homes accessible, habitable and safe. https://www.slc.gov/hand/city-housing-programs/salt-lake-city-hand-targeted-repair-program/ THE PLAN | KEY STRATEGIES & PROJECTS 24 COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS PLANNING PROCESS The planning process began by working with the community to establish an understanding of current and planned assets and challenges in the neighborhood, followed by the study of transformational changes that can be made to enhance livability and opportunities in the area. At each step in the planning process, the ideas, information, and recommendation were reviewed and improved by the community through online and in-person outreach. The process began with an analysis of existing conditions that identified: • Current and projected population, employment, and other development in the area • Current and projected socio-economic factors • Current and planned transportation, transit, and multi-modal infrastructure • Prior plans and initiatives • Planned Ballpark improvements In addition to analysis of existing conditions the plan includes the findings of a Ballpark Area Case Study analysis and an economic Highest and Best Use Analysis. Those complete reports can be found in the appendices. COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS 25 Neighborhood playground in at Jefferson Park / GSBS Consulting COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS STUDY AREA The Ballpark neighborhood in Salt Lake City is directly south of downtown and has, over its history, transitioned from a first ring suburb characterized by single family residential development to a downtown support area characterized by industrial, distribution and similar uses to the southern boundary of Salt Lake City’s downtown with bars and restaurants. The neighborhood retains evidence of all these roles resulting in an eclectic and diverse mix of land uses. The study area for this plan does not include the entire Ballpark Community Council area. The southern boundary of the study area is 1700 South. The Ballpark neighborhood is characterized by a mix of uses near downtown Salt Lake and is easily accessible via TRAX light rail and major transportation corridors including I-15 and I-80, Figure 3.1. One of the key benefits identified by residents of the neighborhood is proximity to downtown. However, the transportation corridors also pose barriers to connectivity within the neighborhood. The presence of both I-15 and the UTA light rail lines inhibit east-west movement by acting as physical barriers and posing several safety issues for pedestrians and bicyclists navigating the area. 0 1.5 30.75 Miles I-15 I-80 I-15 Site Area Highways Roads City Boundary FIGURE 3.1: BALLPARK REGIONAL CONTEXT MAP Smith’s Ballpark / GSBS Consulting 26 COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS27 Demographics Ballpark neighborhood households are: • smaller, • younger, and • more likely to rent than households in the rest of Salt Lake City, the County, and the State of Utah. There are an estimated 4,131 people living in 1,854 households within the study area boundaries. WFRC projects an increase to approximately 10,021 people by 2040. At current household sizes this is an additional 1,100 dwelling units in the next 20 years. Based on availability of developable land and the mix of land uses, actual growth could be even higher. Ballpark residents have a median age of 32.6 years with a larger population of young children (0 – 14) compared to Salt Lake City. However, study area has a smaller portion of the population ages 15 – 25, as well as elderly population (65+). The Ballpark area is diverse, with some similarities to Salt Lake City, with a greater percentage of Caucasian population, and those residents who identified as Some Other Race. The study area is also home to a high percentage of Hispanic residents, Table 3.1. The diverse population in the Ballpark area can prove to be an asset in terms of employment, as oftentimes employers will seek a diverse workforce to fill roles. Having a diverse population and skills available to employers can be leveraged as an asset for the community. To further understand the diversity of the Ballpark area, an analysis of Simpson’s Diversity Index was conducted to measure the diversity of a population in which members belong to a unique group. The analysis measures the racial and ethnic homogeneity of an area. The Ballpark area has Diversity Index scores of 0.38 and 0.34, respectively. Compared to the other block groups in vicinity of the study area, the Ballpark area has a higher level of diversity. This also means that while there aren’t large ratios of diverse populations in the study area, there are a high number of unique races and ethnicities within the community. An analysis of spoken languages was conducted and shows an increased level of languages spoken throughout the study area compared to Salt Lake City . Data provided by Liberty and Whittier Elementary, which includes languages of families, indicate that the majority of alternate languages spoken in the schools in the area include Spanish, Arabic, Burmese, Karen, Somali. The average size of households in the study area is significantly smaller at 2.2 people per household compared to the average household size of 3.13 observed throughout Salt Lake City and Utah. The Ballpark study area consists primarily of renter-occupied housing (78.6%) much higher than in surrounding multiplicities, Salt Lake County and in Utah, Table 3.2. More information on housing in Salt Lake City can be found in the Moderate Income Housing Plan. As shown in Table 3.3, the incomes within the study area are significantly lower than the incomes throughout Salt Lake City or the state of Utah. According to the 2019 U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year estimates, over 32 percent of households in the study area make less than $15,000 annually. In contrast, only 6.3 percent of households throughout the state earn less than $15,000. A large portion (22 percent) of households within the study area make between $50,000 and $75,000 annually, but only 12 percent of total households make more than $75,000. Race Ballpark station Area %Salt Lake City % Caucasian 72.6%70.9% African American 2.4%3.5% American Indian & Alaska Native 0.0%1.3% Asian 4.6%6.2% Native Hawaiian & Other Pacific Islander 0.6%2.1% Some Other Race 18.2%11.7% Two or More Races 1.5%4.3% TOTAL 99.9%100.0% Ethnicity Hispanic Origin 22.2%24.0% Source: 2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, ESRI Ballpark station Area Salt Lake City Salt Lake County Utah Total Households 1,854 82,259 397,918 1,050,542 Owner Households 15.3%41.3%61.8%63.1% Renter Households 78.6%51.7%33.2%27.0% Vacant Households 6.1%7.0%5.0%9.9% Families 768 41,258 277,473 781,973 Household Size 2.20 2.41 2.99 3.13 Source: 2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, ESRI Ballpark station Area Salt Lake County Salt Lake MSA Utah Median Household Income $26,047 $76,410 $76,256 $73,015 Average Household Income $44,498 $99,988 $99,114 $92,612 Per Capita Income $19,992 $33,095 $32,666 $29,227 Source: 2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, ESRI TABLE 3.1 RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE BALLPARK STATION AREA AND SALT LAKE CITY TABLE 3.2: OWNERSHIP AND RENTERSHIP RATES IN THE BALLPARK STATION AREA AND SURROUNDING REGION TABLE 3.3: INCOME IN THE BALLPARK STATION AREA AND SURROUNDING REGION SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Prior Planning Efforts Several plans have been completed on areas adjacent too or within the Ballpark Neighborhood over the past decade. Many of the recommendations from these prior plans are incorporated into this Station Area Plan. Existing Plans for the Area Include: Adopted City Plans: • Downtown Master Plan / Central 9th • Central Community Plan • State Street Reinvestment Plan • Growing SLC • Plan Salt Lake • Salt Lake City Street Lighting Master Plan (undergoing adoption) Not Adopted: • Life on State 2010 • Life on State Implementation • Student Ballpark Master Plan Project • Homeless Resource Centers Neighborhood Action Strategies • Salt Lake City Parks & Public Lands Needs Assessment CENTRAL COMMUNITY PLAN – 2005 The most recent official plan for the Ballpark Neighborhood is the Central Community Plan adopted in 2005. The plan identified goals, strategies, and future land use for each of the neighborhoods within the Central Community Planning District. The plan identified four fundamental goals for the Central Community: • Livable communities and neighborhoods • Vital and sustainable commerce • Unique and active places • Pedestrian mobility and accessibility LIFE ON STATE - 2010 Life on State is a multi-jurisdictional vision document sponsored by Wasatch Front Regional Council that identified several goals for State Street/Highway 89 as it passes through the Salt Lake Valley. LIFE ON STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN - 2018 In April 2018, Salt Lake City and South Salt Lake City completed a Life on State Implementation Plan that built on the vision and goals of the Life on State Vision plan to identify the specific elements and strategies to transform State Street to a “Signature Street.” DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN/CENTRAL NINTH NEIGHBORHOOD - 2016 The Central Ninth neighborhood immediately to the north of the Ballpark Neighborhood is part of the Downtown Planning District. The Downtown Master Plan identified a catalytic project to connect the Central Ninth Neighborhood to the Ballpark Neighborhood through the area occupied by the I-15 900 South viaduct, Figure 3.2. This initiative identifies improvement of existing underpasses to enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety and experience, improve unused right-of-way for community greenspace, and eventually remove the viaduct to add community space to the neighborhood. HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTERS NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION STRATEGIES – 2020 Salt Lake City completed a plan to assess the impacts of two new Homeless Resource Centers in the Central Community. The Gail Miller Homeless Resource Center is located within the study area and provides beds for 200 unhoused men and women. The Geraldine King Resource Center is located two blocks north of the study area and provides beds for 200 unhoused women. The plan identified the following key strategies: 1. Commit to long-term investments in the physical and social infrastructure in neighborhoods around the new homeless resource centers. 2. Lead efforts to secure funding support from other non-City sources for investments in HRC neighborhoods. 3. Prioritize and fast-track planned City projects in the Capital Facilities Plan in neighborhoods supporting the HRC facilities. 4. Foster community driven efforts to improve quality of life in neighborhoods near resource centers. 126 STORY FROM TOMORROW the 900 south Viaduct separates the central Ninth neighborhood and the Ballpark neighborhood to the south. The two neighborhoods should be better connected to provide both neighborhoods with housing options, access to open space, and provide opportunities to walk to transit, shops, dining, etc. The connections could be improved by addressing the West temple and 900 south viaduct. as the viaduct ages and comes closer to the end of its structural life, city hall should work with area residents and business owners, uDot, and uta (who owns the abandoned rail corridor that passes under the viaduct) to study alternatives that improves the connectivity between the neighborhoods. Improving underpasses and adding amenities on both sides of the viaduct will help improve the connectivity and desirability of both neighborhoods. This may include the addition of public art, pedestrian lighting, street trees, and other pedestrian comfort amenities along the north-south streets. cATALY TIc pROjecT: cOnnecTIng cenTRAL nInTh TO bALLpARK 900 S 800 S 1300 S 30 0 W 20 0 W W T E M P L E REIMAGINE UNDERPASSLIGHTING REIMAGINE UNDERPASSLIGHTING CREATE GATEWAYGARDEN SMITH BALL PARK SOFTEN HIGHWAYEDGES CONNECT TO 9LINE SOFTEN HIGHWAYEDGES Source: Salt Lake City Downtown Masterplan FIGURE 3.2: CATALYTIC PROJECT: CONNECTING CENTRAL NINTH TO BALLPARK COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | EXISTING CONDITIONS 28 COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | EXISTING CONDITIONS29 The plan also identified near-, mid-, and long-term projects in the neighborhoods surrounding each of the HRCs in the Central Community to help mitigate the impacts of the centers. Many of the projects identified are City-wide projects such as improvements to transit access and housing policies and investments. The infrastructure improvement projects identified for the Ballpark Neighborhood, within ½ mile of the Gail Miller HRC include: • Near Term +300 West rebuild and ADA-accessibility improvements +Construction of a pedestrian crossing on 1300 to the Ballpark TRAX +Main Street Cycle Track +Street Lighting updates +Greenbike station at Ballpark TRAX Station • Mid Term +Construction of a neighborhood byway • Long Term +Multi-modal transportation improvements on State Street +Protected bike lanes on 300 West, 1700 South, 200 West, and West Temple +Improved bus facilities STATE STREET PROJECT AREA PLAN– 2019 The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City created the State Street Project Area Plan to further the economic development goals of the City and community, including land use and connectivity. The Plan includes the Ballpark Station Area Planning boundaries with the exception of a “carve out” for the Ballpark property and the City- owned parking lot to the north, incorporates the community vision and land use plans established by the Downtown Master Plan and the Central Community Master Plan, and provides funding and investment tools to help leverage private investment in the neighborhood. As seen in Figure 3.3, the project area extends along State Street from 300 South on the north to 2100 South on the south. FIGURE 3.3: STATE STREET PROJECT AREA MAP SALT LAKE CITY PUBLIC LANDS NEEDS ASSESSMENT - 2019 In 2019 the city identified existing natural lands needs for urban and non-urban areas of Salt Lake City. The plan identifies level of service for the city’s seven planning areas and identifies community goals for the Parks & Public lands system as it grows. SALT LAKE CITY GENTRIFICATION ASSESSMENT AND DISPLACEMENT MITIGATION PLAN (EXPECTED COMPLETION 2022) A plan to assess gentrification pressures and risk of involuntary displacement in Salt Lake City’s neighborhoods is expected to be completed in 2022. The effort will involve extensive community engagement, address inequities in the community, and provide recommendations for programs, policies and strategies to help residents stay in place and benefit from neighborhood investments. SALT LAKE CITY STREET LIGHTING MASTER PLAN (MOVING THROUGH ADOPTION PROCESS) The Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities created a Street Lighting Master Plan to identify areas of high priority for additional street lighting through out the city and to define proper placement and light levels for all city street lighting. The Street Lighting Master Plan The Master Plan archives all existing light poles and provides design and placement recommendations according to surrounding land use and ecological health. GROWING SALT LAKE CITY – A FIVE YEAR HOUSING PLAN Growing Salt Lake City is a five-year housing plan for the city from 2018 to 2022 and was published in January 2018 by the Department of Community and Neighborhoods. The Plan contains several topics including updates to zoning code, preservation of affordable housing, and equitability, fair housing, and transportation. Another key point of the plan is the close relationship of transportation, transit-oriented development, affordable housing. The plan focuses on how to make the city affordable so that more individuals and families can find housing there. With the anticipated increase in population comes transportation strains. The plan states that the need to create viable pedestrian, bicycle, and transit options is paramount as the City’s population grows. The Ballpark neighborhood has seen a large share of this growth since the adoption of this plan in 2018, primarily in new multifamily development. PLAN SALT LAKE Plan Salt Lake was adopted in December 2015 and gives a vision for the city through the year 2040. The plan gives a framework to prepare the city for the growth that is anticipated to come in future years. STUDENT PROJECT BALLPARK NEIGHBORHOOD MASTER PLAN, UNIVERSITY OF UTAH – 2020 A group of students from the University of Utah’s Department of City and Metropolitan Planning worked with members of the Ballpark Neighborhood Council to complete a neighborhood master plan. The plan identified a vision statement for the neighborhood: The Ballpark Neighborhood is a safe, vibrant, diverse, connected, and accessible neighborhood that welcomes new growth while preserving the existing sense of community. Safe – Residents will feel safe in their homes and throughout their community, and the neighborhood will be perceived as a safe area of the city. Vibrant – The Ballpark Neighborhood will be a destination for culture, arts, and entertainment that will be economically thriving and attractive to new businesses and visitors. Diverse – The neighborhood will include a wide variety of land uses, amenities, and housing types to serve the needs of its diverse residents. Connected and Accessible – The Ballpark Neighborhood will be a “gateway to the City” that feels both physically and socially connected to the rest of the City as well as a internally. Balanced – The neighborhood will welcome new growth while preserving the existing sense of community. In addition, the plan identified five focus areas to help guide the future of the area.: • Reimagining Main Street • Creating Housing Opportunities for Current and Future Neighbors • Increasing Mobility Options • Greening Ballpark • Creating Vibrant Transit Station Areas Ballpark Neighborhood condominiums / GSBS Consulting COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | EXISTING CONDITIONS 30 LEGEND Site Boundary Sidewalks Ballpark Station CONNECTIVITY AND THE PEDESTRIAN & BIKING ENVIRONMENT The Ballpark’s central location along several major regional transportation routes, proximity to transit, and transitioning urban landscape offer opportunities for enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. Figure 3.4 shows the existing location of bike, pedestrian and transit facilities in the neighborhood. As the area continues to develop, enhancing multimodal connectivity should be a priority to preserve existing connections and create a safe and efficient area to navigate for all ages and abilities. The Ballpark neighborhood has several high-volume roadways. 1300 South serves a high volume of east-west traffic from State Street to I-15, with 900 South and 1700 South also carrying notable traffic volumes. State Street and 300 West carry high volumes of vehicles moving north-south. The neighborhood is served by three TRAX light rail lines which run through the heart of the neighborhood, Figure 3.4. The area is also served by two frequent bus lines, the 9 (900 South) and the 200 (State Street) as well as the 17 (1700 South) which runs at a 30 minute frequency. The area has several existing bike routes connecting though the area. Main Street is identified as a bikeway and has a designated striped bike lane. The section of 900 South from I-15 to 300 West will have a buffered bike lane, and a marked shared roadway is planned to connect Paxton Avenue to the 1300 South underpass. I-15 I-15 0 600 1,200300Feet 1700 SOUTH ST A T E S T R E E T 900 SOUTH route 17 route 200 route 9 trax line FIGURE 3.4: SIDEWALK AND TRANSIT MAP photo credit / caption COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS 31 Sidewalks are mostly complete in the study area although there are large gaps south of 1300 South between 300 West and West Temple, and in the north- west area of the project area. The existing sidewalk network needs repair along many of the major roadways and often provides limited width and space for movement alongside fast-moving vehicle traffic. Other obstacles, like light poles and uneven surfaces, present barriers for those using mobility devices and force pedestrians to navigate around them. Overall, east-west connectivity for pedestrians and bicycles is limited due to several roadways and rail lines which inhibit ease of movement through the area. Pedestrians and bicycles within the neighborhood must cross the TRAX line at either 900 South, 1300 South or 1700 South resulting in frequent illegal and dangerous crossings at points along the rail line. Several roadways with infrequent signalized crossings also act as barriers for navigating the neighborhood, such as 1300 South and 300 West, which have infrequent crossings and require pedestrians to extend their travel distance to cross at the nearest stoplight or cross illegally. Local business in the Ballpark Station Area. COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS 32 SUMMARY OF STATION AREA CASE STUDIES Creating thriving and inclusive neighborhoods in areas surrounding major and minor league ballparks is a goal that cities strive to achieve through a variety of infrastructure and non-infrastructure investments. However, achieving this goal is often a challenge. Ballpark architecture and design plays a role in how well it integrates and enhances the surrounding community, and there are several other factors extending beyond the Ballpark itself that could help accelerate or facilitate economic and community vibrancy and integrate these otherwise disparate land uses. This exploration of case studies from ballpark areas across the country provides the planning team and the community examples of ballpark design and ballpark district activation strategies and outcomes to understand and identify lessons learned from similar ballparks that might support the vision and goals for the Smith’s Ballpark area. An initial list of case studies were selected based on those ballpark areas that are similar in urban scale and context to Smith’s Ballpark, including proximity to high quality transit, and community activation/integration. The full case study summary can be found in Appendix x. The selected case studies included: Major League Baseball Ballparks • Boston, MA • Chicago, IL Minor League Ballparks • Memphis, TN • Oklahoma City, OK • El Paso, TX The Major League examples informed decision making by providing examples of ballparks with longstanding success. The Minor League case studies provide a comparison of areas facing similar opportunities and challenges as Salt Lake City. Table 3.4 shows a comparison between the three Minor League case studies in comparison to Smith’s Ballpark. TABLE 3.4: SUMMARY OF BALLPARK CASE STUDIES Case Studies Salt Lake City Ballpark neighborhood Chickasaw Bricktown Ballpark Southwest University Park AutoZone Park Location Salt Lake City, UT Oklahoma City, OK El Paso, TX Memphis, TN Opening Date -April 1998 April 2014 April 2000 Stadium Capacity -13,066 9,500 14,320 Surrounding Area (1 mi) Facts Population (2020)15,587 4,532 14,994 12,210 Population Growth (2010 to 2020)+15%+60%+11%+1% Median Household Income (2020)$43,166 $56,927 $16,713 $25,195 Occupied Housing Units (2020)64% Rented/36% Owned 90% Rented/10% Owned 84% Rented/16% Owned 89% Rented/11% Owned Ballpark Area Features Identified in an area plan or Comprehensive Plan Pedestrian-only infrastructure Multimodal Connectivity (bike share, bike lanes, shared mobility) Accessible by high quality transit Parks/green spaces within the area Diverse surrounding land uses Adaptive reuse of existing buildings Special zoning regulations for the area Ballpark hosts other events (sporting and non-sporting) Supports community events within the Ballpark area COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | CASE STUDIES33 Case Studies Salt Lake City Ballpark neighborhoodChickasaw Bricktown BallparkSouthwest University ParkAutoZone Park LocationSalt Lake City, UTOklahoma City, OKEl Paso, TXMemphis, TN Opening Date-April 1998April 2014April 2000 Stadium Capacity-13,0669,50014,320 Surrounding Area (1 mi) Facts Population (2020)15,5874,53214,99412,210 Population Growth (2010 to 2020)+15%+60%+11%+1% Median Household Income (2020)$43,166$56,927$16,713$25,195 Occupied Housing Units (2020)64% Rented/36% Owned90% Rented/10% Owned84% Rented/16% Owned89% Rented/11% Owned Ballpark Area Features Identified in an area plan or Comprehensive Plan Pedestrian-only infrastructure Multimodal Connectivity (bike share, bike lanes, shared mobility) Accessible by high quality transit Parks/green spaces within the area Diverse surrounding land uses Adaptive reuse of existing buildings Special zoning regulations for the area Ballpark hosts other events (sporting and non-sporting) Supports community events within the Ballpark area CASE STUDY | MAJOR LEAGUE EXAMPLES BOSTON – FENWAY PARK LOCATION: Boston, MA CITY POPULATION: 694,583 STADIUM CAPACITY: 37,305 OPENING DATE: April 1912 Key Takeaways Fenway Park is one of the most iconic ballparks and ballpark areas in the MLB because of its history, design, and the activity and draw of the surrounding neighborhood. Some of these themes are hard to replicate, mainly because the neighborhood has grown up around the ballpark. Additionally, in the past 10 years, the neighborhood has seen millions of dollars in new development, creating an area that attracts students, young professionals, and families alike to both live and visit. However, there are some strategies that could be implemented to help recreate some of Fenway’s success, including: • Celebrate what makes a ballpark and its surrounding area unique. Some of Fenway’s most memorable elements have been engineered away in other more modern ballparks. Irregularities in design and layout should be celebrated to foster a unique sense of place. • Extend the ballpark atmosphere beyond the ballpark. Fenway Park’s gameday atmosphere spills out into the surrounding streets for multiple blocks, partly due to the limited space inside the ballpark. While that may be hard for other ballparks to replicate, the ballpark atmosphere is possible to foster and create outside the ballpark by creative use of right of way (closing/reusing streets) and special building regulations (zoning and design guidelines) CHICAGO – WRIGLEY FIELD LOCATION: Chicago, IL CITY POPULATION: 2,693,976 STADIUM CAPACITY: 41,649 OPENING DATE: April 1914 Key Takeaways Like Fenway, Wrigley’s age and history play a huge role in elevating the ballpark to one of the most beloved in all of baseball. However, there are some applicable strategies that can be applied to the SLC Ballpark area to help recreate some of what makes Wrigley so special including: • Having an open dialogue between ballpark and neighborhood. The incredibly close integration of ballpark and neighborhood has created several challenges through the years. The partnership between the two has been rocky at times but having both an open dialogue through a neighborhood council, along with a formalized agreement in place, have helped the two navigate disputes and thrive together. • Blur lines between ballpark and neighborhood. There is perhaps no better example of this takeaway than Wrigley Field. Surrounding businesses have taken advantage of the low walls in the outfield and built bleachers that can see into the stadium, becoming some of the most iconic elements of the stadium experience. While there are logistical challenges to implementing some of these elements at modern ballparks, creative ideas should be explored to help create a more permeable relationship between the ballpark and its surroundings. • The Chicago Cubs established a Neighborhood Preservation Fund in 2021 to invest in the surrounding neighborhood through street lighting, paving and infrastructure work around the ballpark. © Yards of Summer © Twitter (@BobVorwald) COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | CASE STUDIES 34 COMMUNITY PROFILE CASE STUDY | MINOR LEAGUE EXAMPLES OKLAHOMA CITY – CHICKASAW BRICKTOWN BALLPARK LOCATION: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma CITY POPULATION: 551,789 *Table 3.4 shows comparison to Salt Lake Ballpark Neighborhood Viewed as one of the most successful ballparks in the minor league, Bricktown Ballpark was part of the larger Bricktown redevelopment plan that helped energize the surrounding area while generating $238 million dollars in housing and mixed-use development. This case study highlights practices and lessons learned in supporting economic development, community-driven design and activation, and how the ballpark and surrounding area have blended development and culture. Key Takeaways • Look to create additional drivers beyond the ballpark. While a ballpark can help define an area and be the primary attractor, other community serving destinations can help create a more year-round destination and help to activate the area on non-gamedays. • Make multimodal connectivity safe and efficient, on gamedays and non- gamedays. While most visitors may still drive to the game, providing safe and convenient options for people to walk, bike, and take transit can benefit both gameday traffic operations and the neighborhood on non-gamedays. • Adaptative Reuse of existing infrastructure. Thinking creatively about existing infrastructure can help add to an area’s sense of place by adding an element of originality to an area. Projects can include the reuse of existing ROW or other urban utility infrastructure. © TripAdvisor OKC Dodgers Baseball Game (© nbykzs168.com)Winter Festival at Bricktown Ballpark COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | CASE STUDIES35 COMMUNITY PROFILE © TripAdvisor EL PASO – SOUTHWEST UNIVERSITY PARK LOCATION: El Paso, Texas CITY POPULATION: 682,669 *Table 3.4 shows comparison to Salt Lake Ballpark Neighborhood Opened on the edge of the Downtown area, El Paso’s ballpark case study highlights successes in integrating and celebrating the community’s culture through public art and activated public spaces. The ballpark is also on a challenging site, segregated from the surrounding neighborhoods by a freeway and heavy rail lines, causing the City and its partners to think creatively how they enhance the gameday experience of getting to the stadium, while also improving neighborhood mobility. Key Takeaways • A ballpark is not enough. From an economic development and redevelopment perspective, Southwest University Park confirms what many other Cities have encountered when building a new sports facility: that while it can help kick start or accelerate economic development, in and of itself the ballpark is not enough to be the sole driver for an area’s revitalization. • Strategic connectivity investments can go a long way. The connectivity of the area surrounding Southwest University Park suffers from a range of transportation barriers such as freight rail tracks and a major freeway. The City has focused on improving a few strategic connections to the ballpark, rather than improving every street in the area. The Durango Street overpass and the Missouri Road shared street are two examples of those strategic investments to enhance immediate ballpark connectivity. COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | CASE STUDIES 36 COMMUNITY PROFILE MEMPHIS – AUTOZONE PARK LOCATION: Memphis, Tennessee CITY POPULATION: 650,618 POPULATION RACE & ETHNICITY: *Table 3.4 shows comparison to Salt Lake Ballpark Neighborhood Home of the Memphis Redbirds, the AutoZone ballpark is renowned for its retro design, borrowing design elements from the surrounding historic architecture, and the efforts to integrate with and enhance the surrounding neighborhood. The ballpark won a Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU) Charter Award for the way in which the ballpark laid the groundwork for kickstarting community revitalization and the creation of a ballpark district. The Ballpark District was a recipient of an Urban Land Institute (ULI) Award for Excellence in 2002 as Downtown Memphis developed into an enhanced neighborhood. Key Takeaways • Not a ballpark, a ballpark district. What makes AutoZone Park a standout is that it was not designed simply as a ballpark. The ballpark was conceived as a “Ballpark District” including dense multifamily development, new office buildings, a minor league baseball museum, a public elementary school (important for attracting families with children to downtown), and the adaptive reuse of the upper stories of an old YMCA building to lofts, along with the reuse of other historic buildings. • Ballpark as public space. The entry plaza, diagonally across an intersection from the landmark Peabody Hotel, provides a place for people to enjoy music, food, and entertainment before and after baseball games, and it functions as a gathering place at other times. The baseball team and the city both work to activate these spaces on gamedays and non-gamedays alike. • Parking as an activator. Rather than rely on a massive parking structure/lot, fans can find about 6,000 parking spaces within four blocks of the ballpark. The parking strategy works well as people can find less expensive parking further from the ballpark and as they stroll to and from the game they help to animate the streets. Memphis AutoZone Park (© Stadium Journey) COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | CASE STUDIES37 SUMMARY The three case studies highlight different design, policy, and program initiatives that have helped activate, connect, and integrate ballpark areas and the neighborhoods and communities that surround them. The following key takeaways were inferred from the case studies research: • Strategically interconnecting diverse forms of transportation, including “first and last mile” options, is important in creating an accessible ballpark and surrounding neighborhood for both gameday mobility, and neighborhood connectivity on non-gamedays. • Establishing connected, accessible, and pedestrian-oriented land uses and facilities creates a vibrant and engaging experience for visitors and residents in the area. • Holding multiple types of events, including community-driven events within a ballpark area, such as community movie nights, concerts, or festivals can help engage the surrounding community and enhance surrounding neighborhoods. • Reusing existing buildings and infrastructure can reduce infrastructure costs, enhance the sense of place, maintain neighborhood history, and character, and integrate ballpark design and uses with a surrounding neighborhood. • Establishing unique goals, policies, and regulations can help develop a ballpark neighborhood that complements the area’s desired character. While a ballpark can help spur initial development and investment in an area, development or redevelopment efforts will often require additional supportive policies, financing, programs, and initiatives in order to truly maximize the investment in the Ballpark itself. Mural outside of the Urban Indian Center on 1300 South / GSBS Consulting COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | CASE STUDIES 38 Overview Over the course of nine months, the Ballpark Community developed the Ballpark Station Area plan through a consultant-guided process. Because of the constraints of the COVID-19 pandemic, the process was completely virtual except for the final community event. The process included engagement on several levels through live virtual events, one-on-one Stakeholder meetings, small group Steering Committee meetings and online outreach including an interactive map and a bilingual survey. The Community gave input on a future land use strategy and design considerations. The project area is centered on Smith’s Ballpark and the Ballpark TRAX station, an area considered the “Heart” of the Ballpark Neighborhood. The Plan includes guidelines and a vision for the future of the Ballpark neighborhood from I-15 to State Street, 900 South to 1700 South and into the surrounding community. Community Council The public-facing part of the process began in December 2020 with a presentation about the Ballpark Station Area Planning process to the Ballpark Community Council and Ballpark Community. The Consulting team shared the schedule and engagement tools with the community and answered questions, addressed concerns, and provided information to promote community involvement throughout the process. Members from the project team attended the monthly community council meetings to better understand what community members in the Ballpark neighborhood experience and to gain a better understanding of the needs of the area. The draft Station Area Plan and supporting strategies were then presented to the Community during the December 2, 2021 Community Council Meeting for review and before finalizing the project recommendations and concepts. Steering Committee A steering committee was formed to help guide the process, review material, and to act as ambassadors for the Station Area Plan. The four Steering Committee meetings occurred on the evenings of February 4th, March 11th, April 8th, and May 13th, 2021. Steering Committee members were invited from a diverse list of community members provided by the Community Council leadership as well as individuals recommended by other Steering Committee members and the project management group. The Steering Committee included residents, business owners, representatives from Smith’s Ballpark, and local non-profit and community organization leaders. The Steering Committee was responsible for: • Refining the goals and vision for the area • Reviewing case studies for other ballparks • Reviewing existing conditions and help identifying neighborhood needs • Reviewing draft material before Community events and plan finalization Online Outreach PROJECT WEBSITE Several online outreach efforts accompanied the small group Steering Committee meetings, Stakeholder meetings, and community events during the process. A bilingual project website was created as a platform to provide information, alert the community of upcoming events, and to guide participants to an interactive map and idea board, Figure 3.5. The interactive map and idea board encouraged community members to share what they like, dislike, and specific ideas about their neighborhood on a collaborative discussion-based format, Figure x. Comments posted on the interactive map were included in the development of the neighborhood vision and goals as well as in the recommendations developed during the process. SUMMARY OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT FIGURE 3.5: INFORMATION PAGE ON THE PROJECT WEBSITE AND INTERACTIVE MAP COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT39 COMMUNITY POSTCARD AND SURVEY A bilingual community survey was distributed online to gather values, emerging ideas, and identify the needs of the community. A postcard was sent in February 2021 to every address within the project area and to every address within three blocks outside the project area boundary advertising the Ballpark project and survey, Figure 3.6. The postcard invited community members to the website and provided a call to action to help guide future development in the neighborhood. The City promoted the survey on their social media platforms in addition to the post card. The Ballpark survey received more than 530 responses in the month that it was active. All survey respondents were over the age of 21 with the largest group of participants being between 31 and 40, which is representative of the largest age group in the project area. Demographics for the area show a high number of young children ages 0-14 in the neighborhood, but this number significantly drops in the 15-19 cohort which may account for the lack of response from that group. Figure 3.7 illustrates how residents responded when asked what they like about they neighborhood. FIGURE 3.6: PROJECT POST CARD FIGURE 3.7: SURVEY RESULTS SHOWING WHAT THE BALLPARK COMMUNITY LIKES IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 40 Area Stakeholders Several stakeholders were identified during the process and invited to two one-on-one meetings to review their experience in the neighborhood, their vision for the area, and to review the draft Plan. Stakeholders included: • The Utah Transit Authority (UTA) • The Salt Lake Bees • An educator small group session • Colmena Group • Nate Wade Subaru • The Housing Authority of Salt Lake City • The Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City • CW Urban and Defy Colab • Salt Lake City Parks and Public Lands Department • The Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities • The Salt Lake City Planning Division • Salt Lake City Housing Stability Division • Salt Lake City Transportation Division Community Events The Community was invited to two Community Events during the process. COMMUNITY EVENT 1 DATE: March 20, 2021 LOCATION: Zoom The first event explored Growth & Economic Development opportunities for the neighborhood, case studies of other ballparks identified in the Case Study element of this document, and barriers and big ideas for transportation and connectivity for the neighborhood. Participants were invited to interact with the Consulting team to develop key ideas and terms for the vision for the future of the Ballpark Area and to identify key public and private actions to achieve the vision. COMMUNITY EVENT 2 DATE: May 22, 2021 LOCATION: Smith’s Ballpark and Watchtower Coffee and Comics The second community event was an in-person open house and provided an opportunity for the community to review and comment on the draft future land use vision. Screenshot from the first virtual community event. Second community event at Watchtower Coffee & Comics. COMMUNITY EXPLORATION & ANALYSIS | PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT41 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK IMPLEMENTATIONPLAN 43 Implementation Period strategies Immediate 2-5 Years 5+ Years Ongoing Take advantage of current development opportunities, existing services, and amenities to enhance neighborhood livability. Implement the goals and strategies identified in the Central 9th Chapter of the Downtown Master Plan, 300 West Corridor Redesign, State Street Project Area Plan, Homeless Resource Centers Neighborhood Action Strategies, Salt Lake City Moderate Income Housing Plan, Salt Lake City Parks & Public Lands Needs Assessment, Citywide Gentrification Assessment & Displacement Mitigation Plan, Growing SLC and the Salt Lake City Street Lighting Master Plan. Update the city’s zoning code and map, as appropriate to implement the provisions of this plan. Amend Section 21A.26.078: TSA Transit Station Area District of the Salt Lake City Municipal Code to include the Ballpark Station Area as one of the existing TSA districts or create a new one if needed. This may include requiring activation of the 1300 South frontage with restaurants, shops, street furniture and trees, implementing streetscape improvements to accommodate pedestrian volumes, allowing heights comparable to heights in other Urban Station Areas, and protect the viewshed of the Wasatch Range from inside Smith’s Ballpark. Evaluate and amend the City’s zoning code and map, as appropriate to include the urban design considerations identified in each of the character areas in this plan. Evaluate and amend the City’s zoning code and map, as appropriate to implement the priorities for the 300 West Character Areas by ensuring that amenities, connections, and services needed to support higher density development are included in development plans for the area, that development proposals include mid-block and other connections to break down current large commercial blocks into smaller, more walkable blocks and that where appropriate, development proposals incorporate access to existing and planned TRAX crossings. Identify opportunities to provide community amenities, shops, and services within the heart for year-round activation. Provide enhanced street and pedestrian lighting to improve safety and visibility. Create a dense urban environment and entertainment zone around the Ballpark. Invest in the station area and around the Ballpark to improve the overall neighborhood and enhance the opportunities in the Heart of the Ballpark. Improve east-west connectivity across TRAX to the north and the south of 1300 South. At a minimum, pedestrian/bicycle crossings should be identified to allow pedestrians and cyclists to move east to west without having to go to 1300 or 1700 South. Install side-loading platforms at the Ballpark TRAX Station. Consider redeveloping the TRAX station parking lot and bus turnaround for higher density uses and to provide neighborhood amenities. Install pedestrian crossings east and west of TRAX on 1300 South on either side of the UTA crossing barrier. Consider redevelopment opportunities for the City-owned parking lot at 1300 South and West Temple, while still allowing public parking land uses, to potentially increase density and improve the urban environment. Install a festival street on West Temple and plazas adjacent to the stadium. Invest in a community amenity which may include a library with the opportunity of additional public space. Integrate greenspace and “green” elements into the urban landscape. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 44 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN45 Enhance public space surrounding the ballpark and include public art and references to historical elements. Designate West Temple between 1300 South and Albemarle Avenue as a Festival Street for non-gameday and gameday activation including farmers markets, community celebrations, food truck festivals and neighborhood concerts. Implement a district-parking strategy that utilizes un-used area parking and parking garages for game days to minimize the need for parking fields in the area. Enhance the ballpark’s relationship with the neighborhood by identifying opportunities to activate the West Temple and 1300 South facades of the stadium on non-game days and incorporate public green space, non-motorized connections, plazas, and similar public spaces around the stadium. If feasible, identify a strategy to bury power lines as development in the Ballpark Neighborhood occurs. Increase connectivity of the neighborhood. Improve overall connectivity and walkability in the area. Study the potential future lane reconfiguration of 1300 South to eliminate or narrow traffic lanes. Conduct: • A safety analysis based on existing conditions that includes any recommended changes to readway. • A traffic analysis. This includes traffic countes, signal analysis, and traffic modeling of how narrowning or eliminating lanes may impact safety, future roadway operations, and access to and from I-15. Utilize existing alleyways, midblock, and truncated connections to create a system of bike and pedestrian pathways through the neighborhood. Implement the planned TRAX line pedestrian crossings to the north of the current Ballpark Station. Widen and enhance sidewalks to improve pedestrian comfort through the addition of street furnishings, pedestrian lighting and a buffer from moving traffic. Implement pedestrian level lighting to improve safety and visibility. Establish specific bicycle routes through the neighborhood according to the Salt Lake City Pedestrian & Bicycle Master Plan. Reconfigure Ballpark TRAX Station to change from a suburban-style station that has northern platform access only from the east parking lot into an urban-style station that allows access from both the east and west sides of the station. This would include new access at the north end of the platform from Lucy Avenue/200 West on the west side of the TRAX rails. Redevelop part of the current surface parking lots to transit supportive uses. Establish a pedestrian crossing to the east and west of the UTA crossing barrier across 1300 South. Study future crossings south of the 1300 South crossing at the TRAX line. Implementation Period Action Immediate 2-5 Years 5+ Years Ongoing Increase urban design quality. Improve safety. Improve pedestrian experience and safety. Install pedestrian-level street lighting. Require ground level uses in new buildings to incorporate pedestrian-level strategies. Ensure adequate sidewalk width and protection strips on primary walk routes, particularly around the TRAX station. Ensure ongoing maintenance of all facilities to repair uneven sidewalks, functioning signals and frequent trash receptacles. Improve ADA accessibility though sidewalk repair and removal of obstacles. Identify and implement best practices in urban design to improve neighborhood safety. Identify opportunities for interaction. Eliminate “blind corners” or areas. Implement appropriate lighting for safety. Enhance social vibrancy. Support events and placemaking efforts including community art, pop-up events, and temporary food vendors. Enhance greenspace in the neighborhood. Evaluate the opportunity for future green space on the current Public Utilities site if and when Salt Lake Department of Public Utilities moves offices to a new location. Explore options for additional greenspace in the heart of the neighborhood in and around the ballpark. Enhance the urban tree canopy in underserved areas of the neighborhood and require additional street trees and urban greenery with new development. Maintain all green spaces with trash receptacles, pedestrian lighting and pedestrian furniture. Improve the quality of current and future greenspace. Ensure funding for additional maintenance and staffing as additional greenspace is added. Implementation Period Action Immediate 2-5 Years 5+ Years Ongoing IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 46 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN47 Increase affordability and attainability of housing for current and future residents. Provide a diversity of housing types and options for different incomes, familial status, age, and needs. Promote a diversity in the size of new units in the neighborhood to accommodate residents in different stages of life, including families with children. Utilize the RDA State Street Project Area as a tool to capture reinvestment in the neighborhood and help encourage a diversity of housing types. Increase opportunities for home ownership in the neighborhood. Explore alternative options for ownership strategies including land trusts and co-ops . Provide down-payment assistance or other programs for qualifying residents. Mitigate the negative impacts of gentrification as development occurs. Continue to provide and market home repair programs for qualifying residents. Provide education and renter legal assistance to help current renters stay in place. Support development assistance and financing programs to maintain affordability. Preserve existing social services and provide additional services as development occurs to support housing options and access to opportunity at a variety of income levels. Implementation Period Action Immediate 2-5 Years 5+ Years Ongoing APPENDIX AEXISTINGCONDITIONS APPENDIX 50 The Built Environment and Urban Design Land Use The Ballpark neighborhood hosts several uses within the boundaries of the study area, Figure A-1. The area around the Ballpark Stadium includes commercial, single family and multifamily residential, and several industrial parcels. The area has limited options for greenfield development within the project area but has several vacant lots which may support commercial, mixed use, or residential uses. Figure A-1 Current Land Uses Commercial The study area has several types of commercial activity. Commercial activity directly around the Ballpark Stadium includes several convenience stores, a car dealership, a carwash, and a full-service bar and restaurant. Commercial services transition from smaller local businesses on the eastern side of the study area to big box retail along the 300 West corridor. State Street, Main Street, 300 West, 900 South, 1300 South, and 1700 South are important commercial corridors. Each corridor has a unique character. State Street is primarily auto-serving and regional uses, Main Street between 1300 South and 1700 South includes a number of smaller scale local businesses mixed with residential uses. 300 West includes big box stores, light industrial uses, and other auto-serving uses. 900 South, 1300 South, and 1700 South are important east west corridors through the area with a mix of local and auto serving uses. Residential The study area hosts pockets of residential development with varying densities and housing types. The area adjacent to the Ballpark Stadium is a mixture of single family lots directly to the south and high-density low-income housing south of the stadium along West Temple. Single Family Much of the single-family housing stock in the area was built prior to 1950. The housing is primarily masonry structures on small lots. Most of the single family lots are located between Main Street and 200 West. The area directly south of Ballpark Stadium is a mixture of single-family lots. Multifamily Multifamily residential is found throughout the study area. Older multi-family units are interspersed with the single- family developments east of the TRAX line. Newer multi-family units, at higher densities, are found in the existing residential areas but also, increasingly, along the 300 West corridor. Newer multi-family structures are generally of two types: · Four/five stories with structured or surface parking and some amenities. · Townhomes or row homes with a parking garage and multiple living levels. Industrial Many of the industrial properties found in the neighborhood just 10 years ago have transitioned to retail or multi- family residential. The study area retains some industrial uses primarily in the area west of the TRAX line along the 300 West corridor. There are a handful of industrial uses remaining along the State Street corridor. As demand for housing and office space in Salt Lake City continues into the next decade, many of the existing industrial properties are expected to transition to housing, retail, or office uses. Parks, Trails and Open Space The study area includes Jefferson Park and Ballpark Neighborhood Park. Jefferson Park, located in the northern half of the study area east of the TRAX line, includes a detention basin and playground. Ballpark Neighborhood Park, located in the southern half of the study area east of the TRAX line, is a playground and grassy area in front of the Salt Lake Public Utilities facility on West Temple. According to the city’s recent parks planning effort. The neighborhood is underserved for parks and open space. Vacant There is limited vacant property in the study area. New development opportunities focus on redevelopment of underutilized parcels including parking lots and industrial properties. Community and Non-Profit There are several community and non-profit uses in the study area including the Gail Miller Homeless Resource Center, the Urban Indian Resource Center, the Pride Center, Horizonte alternative high school, Challenger private school, a fire station, Smith’s Ballfield, and the Salt Lake Public Utilities facility. Although the study area includes several community and non-profit uses, there are no community gathering facilities such as a community center or library. APPENDIX BHIGHEST & BEST USE ANALYSIS APPENDIX 52 Introduction This Market Analysis was conducted to explore the existing conditions regarding the Salt Lake City Ballpark Station Area neighborhood and to understand future projections to help inform the neighborhood planning process. This chapter identifies existing conditions and demographics, describes current physical, social, and economic conditions; and highlights key assets, challenges, and opportunities. Exhibit A APPENDIX53 Population Ballpark neighborhood households are: · More diverse, · Smaller, · Younger, and · More likely to rent than households in the rest of Salt Lake City, the County, and the State of Utah. There are an estimated 4,137 people living in 1,854 households within the study area boundaries. The population is projected to increase by approximately 2,400 people by 2040. At current household sizes this is an additional 1,100 dwelling units in the next 20 years. Based on availability of developable land and the mix of land uses, actual growth could be even higher. The State of Utah has been one of the fastest growing states since the 2010 Census in terms of percent growth, as evidenced by the roughly 1.5% annual population growth from 2010 to 2019. According to the Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute at the University of Utah (Gardner Institute), the 2019 population of Utah has reached 3,220,262 residents. Net migration to Utah has been accelerated by international and national interests in the economy, quality of life, availability of jobs, and educated workforce. The Gardner Institute projects the population in Utah to experience sustained growth at a similar rate over the coming years. Projections have the state reaching an estimated 2020 population of 3,325,425 and growing to a 2030 population of 3,889,310. Ultimately, the State could grow to a population of 4,463,950 by 2040 and 5,017,232 by 2050. The Salt Lake City Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) was home to 1,236,178 residents in 2019 according to the Gardner Institute. The MSA contains both Salt Lake and Tooele Counties. The 1.6% growth experienced throughout the Salt Lake City MSA from 2019 to 2020 brings the current population to 1,255,764, while future growth is anticipated to match or remain just under that trajectory, according to Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) data. Within the MSA, Tooele County is anticipated to grow at a more rapid rate than Salt Lake County, although Salt Lake County’s denser population is anticipated to receive the lion’s share of the population growth. Exhibit B According to the Salt Lake City Department of Economic Development, there are several key drivers that bring business and new residents to the Salt Lake area, including quality of life, business friendly environment, accessibility, low-cost of living, and access to job opportunities. As a result of the aforementioned drivers, amongst other factors; Salt Lake County makes up roughly 36% of the state’s population. The University of Utah estimates Salt Lake County’s 2020 population is 1,181,471 and projects a compound annual growth rate of around 1.5% for the next 15 years. This substantial growth throughout the county will have to be accommodated through an increasingly context-sensitive framework as the available developable land dwindles, and in-fill development starts to take precedence over greenfield development. The study area consists of ~575-acres of fairly dense, mostly built-out commercial and residential development. According to ESRI, the 2020 Study Area population is 4,131. In 2000 the study area had a population of 1,775. Over the next ten years, the study area grew a staggering 74.5% to a population of 3,098. From 2010 to 2020 the accelerated growth continued throughout the neighborhood, but at lower rate of growth of 33.3%, compared to the previous decade. Population projections for the study area encompassing a variety of scenarios and sources are included below. Following a modest 2% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) from the 2020 population of 4,131 yields a 2040 population of 6,138, while the Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) projects a 2040 population of more than 10,000 residents. Chart A 2000 2010 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Historical Data 1,775 3,098 4,131 ESRI Projection 4,131 4,734 5,337 5,940 6,543 2% CAGR 4,131 4,561 5,036 5,560 6,138 2.5% CAGR 4,131 4,674 5,288 5,983 6,769 3% CAGR 4,131 4,789 5,552 6,436 7,461 WFRC Projection 4,131 6,504 7,809 9,068 10,021 5,036 6,138 7,461 4,131 7,809 10,021 - 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 Po p u l a t i o n Ballpark Study Area Population Projections Exhibit B below illustrates the projected 5-year growth percentage by block group of the study area, and larger influence area. The majority of the study area has been built-out, leaving few greenfield sites remaining to develop. Therefore, it will be critical for future growth to be accounted for in an environmentally, socially, and fiscally sustainable manner to ensure quality growth through creative and adaptive redevelopment. The resulting development will need to accommodate infill. In addition, the continued accommodation of high-density walkable development can allow for responsible growth and increase the population potential. APPENDIX 54 Exhibit C Age The median age of residents throughout the United States continues to grow older, reaching a 2020 median age of 38.2 compared to 37.2 in 2010. Similar trends related to aging populations can be observed throughout Salt Lake City and even the ballpark study area, as communities continue to age and mature through their lifecycles. The median age grew throughout the study area from 28.9 in 2010 to 32.6 in 2020, while Salt Lake City registered a median age of 32.9 Although median age is an important indicator of the demographics of a community, it’s critical to understand the population makeup through a more detailed perspective. A population pyramid provides an avenue to analyze the population in smaller, more digestible chunks. The population pyramid below shows a comparison of gender and age between the Study Area and the City of Salt Lake. This chart reflects a smaller proportion of children within Salt Lake City compared to the Study Area. Chart B Specifically, the ballpark study area has a larger population of young children (0 – 14) compared to Salt Lake City. However, study area has a smaller portion of the population ages 15 – 25, as well as elderly population (65+). In comparison, the chart below compares the ballpark study area, Salt Lake City, and Utah by age. The ballpark study area is closely aligned with both larger regions, differing with a smaller percentage of high school and college aged residents (15 – 24), but possessing a larger number of prime labor force (25 – 44) and older labor force (45 – 64) residents. APPENDIX55 Chart C 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Young (0-14)High School (15-19) College, New Family (20-24) Prime Labor Force (25- 44) Older Labor Force (45- 64) Elderly (65+) Age Cohorts Age Cohort Comparison Ballpark Study Area Salt Lake City Utah Exhibit D Race and Ethnicity According to the U.S. Census, racial and ethnic composition continues to diversify throughout the United States due to net immigration. According to Pew Research, immigrants and their descendants will account for up to 88% of future population growth. Increased diversity contributes to neighborhood culture and character and can even drive merchandising and development patterns. The Ballpark area is diverse, with some similarities to Salt Lake City, with a greater percentage of Caucasian population, and those residents who identified as Some Other Race. The study area is also home to a high percentage of Hispanic residents. The diverse population in the Ballpark area can prove to be an asset in terms of employment, as oftentimes employers will seek a diverse workforce to fill roles. Having a diverse population and skills available to employers can be leveraged as an asset for the community. APPENDIX 56 Race/Ethnicity Ballpark Study Area Salt Lake City Percentage Difference Percent Percent Caucasian 72.6%70.9%-1.7% African American 2.4%3.5%1.1% American Indian & Alaska Native 0.0%1.3%1.3% Asian 4.6%6.2%1.6% Native Hawaiian & Other Pacific Island- er 0.6%2.1%1.5% Some Other Race 18.2%11.7%-6.5% Two or More Races 1.5%4.3%2.8% Total 99.9%100.0% Hispanic Origin 22.2%24.0%1.8% Source: 2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, ESRI Table A To further understand the diversity of the Ballpark area, an analysis of Simpson’s Diversity Index was conducted. Simpson’s Diversity Index measures the diversity of a population in which members belong to a unique group. The analysis measures the racial and ethnic homogeneity of a Census block group. The diversity index does not report which race is dominant in a block group; but these data can be overlayed with the racial makeup in Table A above to get a true understanding. The diversity index includes Hispanic ethnicity as a separate class in its determination. The two block groups of the Ballpark area have Diversity Index scores of 0.38 and 0.34, respectively. Compared to the other block groups in vicinity of the study area, the Ballpark area has a higher level of diversity. The Northwest corner of I-15 and 2100 Fwy is the only area that registers as more diverse but is likely a result of lack of residents and the presence of large commercial/industrial development. Exhibit E - Each of the five race’s percent of the total estimate is squared, and all the percentages are added together. The total of the sum of the square of each percentage forms the Diversity Index (DI). The index values range from 0.2 (most diverse) to 1 (least diverse). For example, a value of 1 indicates there is only one race represented in that block group. The results of the analysis indicate there is an elevated level of diversity within the Ballpark study area, compared to the surrounding area. As a component of the diversity evaluation within the Ballpark study area, an analysis of spoken languages was conducted. The results show an increased level of languages spoken throughout the study area compared to Salt Lake City (STI PopStats). Data provided by Liberty and Whittier Elementary, which includes languages of families, indicate that the majority of alternate languages spoken in the school district include Spanish, Arabic, Burmese, Karen, Somali. Households The Ballpark study area consists of 1,854 total households (ESRI). The average size of households in the study area is significantly smaller at 2.2 people per household compared to the average household size of 3.13 observed throughout APPENDIX57 Salt Lake City and Utah. Throughout the state, 74% of households are considered families, while only 41% of households in the study area identify as families. The average family size of 3.25 is smaller within the study area compared to the average family size of 3.62 throughout the state. Ballpark Study Area Salt Lake City Salt Lake County Utah Total Households 1,854 82,259 397,918 1,050,542 Owner Households 15.3%41.3%61.8%63.1% Renter Households 78.6%51.7%33.2%27.0% Vacant Households 6.1%7.0%5.0%9.9% Families 768 41,258 277,473 781,973 Household Size 2.20 2.41 2.99 3.13 Table B The Ballpark study area consists primarily of renter-occupied housing (78.6%) that is more affordable compared to households observed throughout Salt Lake City and the greater region. For comparative purposes, the average rate of household ownership across the United States is 56%, and across Utah the rate of ownership is even greater at 63% (ESRI). The study area has less vacancy than the state at 6.1% and 9.9%, respectively. The ballpark study area has a disproportionately large number of renter-occupied properties in contrast. A spatial analysis of rental properties was conducted through rental registration data provided by Salt Lake City. The results reveal a high concentration of rental properties amongst the residential development east of 300 W. This data was overlayed on parcel data provided by the County Tax Assessor, illustrating the year that a structure was built on a parcel-by-parcel basis. The results illustrate a correlation between the structures built before 1950 and rental properties. Exhibit F A number of properties have been developed within the study area over the last few years, almost all of which are apartment dwellings, townhomes, or rowhomes. The lack of available land for single-family residential development will likely perpetuate the development cycle, focusing new product deliveries on highly amenitized residential development. Increased opportunities for ownership product would help to balance the existing concentration of rental units and increase investment from both a community perspective, as well as an investor perspective. A review of residential product types including single family residential, townhouse, condo/co-op, and duplex/quadplex (2-4 unit) sold within the ballpark study area over the last 3-years reveals the following (Redfin): · Median Sold Price: $375,000 · Median Square Footage: 1,603 · Median Days on Market: 331 APPENDIX 58 · $/Square Foot: $240 · Over 56% of homes sold were built after 2007 Compared to the same metrics across the greater Salt Lake City market, the homes sold within the ballpark study area sold for a median price that is lower and spent more days on the market. However, the cost per square foot was comparable to the greater Salt Lake City market as a result of the smaller homes in the Ballpark area. The study area is an established community with a defined residential base, yet there is significant opportunity to bolster neighborhood sustainability through infill development. Infill development should optimize existing infrastructure investments and explore strategies to employ efficiencies in land utilization to create greater economies in cost of service and economic impact. There are several areas of the study area that are prime for infill development including along the Main St Corridor, as well as adjacent tracts near established neighborhoods. A significant opportunity exists in redeveloping older industrial type properties near the 300 West corridor. Many of these older properties are underutilized in relation to the value of the land. Aligning new residential development with broader housing choices and amenities will help increase the diversity of existing housing stock in the study area. New development will help stabilize and improve the values of existing housing stock and expand the housing options available to groups of people including first-time homebuyers, young families, and seniors. While single-family units have historically been the preferred housing type for generations, housing preferences continue to undergo a dramatic shift. Increasingly more people are now looking for varied product types in both suburban and urban communities including, townhouses, apartments, age-restricted communities, rowhomes, and brownstones that meet a greater diversity of needs, including lifestyle and financial situations. Educational Attainment According to ESRI, the levels of educational attainment achieved throughout the study area are lower than the City, County, or State. A disproportionate amount of the qualified population (ages 25+) has not completed high school, or only have a high school diploma. Only 15.9% of the population has a bachelor’s degree or graduate degree compared to 48.3% of the Salt Lake City population. Educational Attainment Ballpark Study Area Salt Lake City Number Percent Number Percent Population 25 years and over 2,677 135,589 No High School 115 4.3%6,644 4.9% Some High School 493 18.4%7,729 5.7% High School Graduate 667 24.9%22,779 16.8% Some College 669 25.0%23,050 17.0% Associate’s 308 11.5%9,898 7.3% Bachelor’s 308 11.5%36,067 26.6% Graduate 118 4.4%29,423 21.7% Percent High School Graduate or Higher 77.3%89.4% Percent Bachelor’s Degree or Higher 15.9%48.3% Source: 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, ESRI Table C Income and Employment The incomes observed within the study area are significantly lower than the incomes observed throughout Salt Lake City or the state of Utah. According to ESRI, over 32% of households in the study area make less than $15,000 annually. In contrast, only 6.3% of households throughout the state earn less than $15,000. A large portion (22%) of households within the study area make between $50,000 and $75,000 annually, but only 12% of total households make more than $75,000. Below is a breakdown of incomes observed throughout the study area and comparative geographies. It is important to note that although household income is low, the mean size per household within the study area is small. Therefore, per capita incomes compare somewhat more favorably to the Salt Lake City averages but are still far below. Ballpark Study Area Salt Lake County Salt Lake MSA Utah Median Household Income $26,047 $76,410 $76,256 $73,015 Average Household Income $44,498 $99,988 $99,114 $92,612 Per Capita Income $19,992 $33,095 $32,666 $29,227 Table D Exhibit G APPENDIX59 Throughout the ballpark study area, the primary employment industries are the service industry, retail, and finance/ insurance/real estate (FIRE). While the service industry provides critical services to the public, wages tend to be lower, and less predictable. An analysis of inflow/outflow from the U.S. Census revealed that as of 2018, only 56 residents were employed and living in the study area. An estimated 99% of people employed in the study area live outside the study area and travel in for work, and 96% of residents who live in the study area travel outside for work. 2020 Employed Population 16+ by Industry Ballpark Study Area Salt Lake City Total 1,792 108,869 Agriculture/Mining 2.0%0.5% Construction 5.6%5.3% Manufacturing 9.7%8.3% Wholesale Trade 1.4%1.6% Retail Trade 11.9%8.8% Transportation/Utilities 4.9%4.3% Information 2.6%2.0% Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 7.9%7.2% Services 52.2%58.3% Public Administration 2.0%3.6% Table E The type of employment observed through the built environment of the ballpark study area consists almost exclusively of traditional big-box retail and industrial/commercial to the west of 200 W, and traditional boulevard retail between Main St and State St. The middle portion between 200 W and Main St is characterized by a mix of residential and commercial development. To preserve and elevate employment in the study area, measures should be taken to attract businesses with higher tax bases, such as workforce development areas, business management consultants, or a small business in the FIRE industry to supplement and reinforce the existing workforce. Psychographics Psychographics are critical in understanding a population’s attitudes and interests rather than being limited by “objective” demographics. While demographics can tell us about a household’s size and average income, psychographics can help to paint a picture of why that family may purchase a particular item, or have preferences related to technology. These sorts of insights enable people to find similar-interest households, linking those with similar interests and attitudes, even if they’re from a different community. Below is a summation of the top psychographic segments based upon the percentage of households in the ballpark study area. The full description of each segment can be found in the appendix.1. Set to Impress households consist of nearly one in three residents being age 20 to 34 years old, and over half of the homes are single person and nonfamily households. Income levels are low; many works in food service while they are attending college. Set to Impress residents are tapped into popular music and the local music scene.2. Metro Fusion households can be characterized as a young, diverse market. They speak a variety of languages, are ethnically diverse, and can be primarily characterized as renters. Many households have young children, work blue-collar jobs, and have lower incomes than average. Challenges and Opportunities Demographics Within the study area there are approximately 4,131 people and 1,854 households. The study area has experienced consistent growth and is expected to continue to grow at an average annual rate of around 2.5%. The average household size within the study area is relatively small, 2.2, especially compared to the household size observed throughout Salt Lake City. The study area population is a good bit younger than the metro-wide population. Given the higher ratio of young residents near the station, the area has a surprisingly high proportion of children (14 and younger). Children make up 23% of the study area, slightly larger than the citywide makeup of 19%. The residents of the study area are predominately white but are more diverse than the City or State makeup. Within the study area, 11% of the population is African American compared to just 3.5% across Salt Lake City. The study area has a significant portion of Hispanic residents, 38%. In contrast, Hispanics make up 24% of the Salt Lake City population. By any measure, incomes throughout the study area are very low. Over 62% of the households earn less than $15,000, well above the citywide proportion of 11%. Assuming households spend one-third of their income on housing before they are cost burdened, the median affordable rent for the area is around $700 per month. It is important to note that although household income is low, the average size per household throughout the study area is small. Commercial and Residential Development The neighborhood fabric – with its proportion of underutilized parcels, non-conforming uses, and older residential and commercial buildings – presents a challenge for the neighborhood. Many underutilized sites have large-footprint commercial buildings or large surface lots that lack street presence and pedestrian experience. These conditions contribute to the lack of identity in the area and discourage walking distances between destinations. However, with participation from property owners, some of these parcels and structures may provide opportunities for redevelopment or net new development. While parking availability is limited throughout the study area, especially on game days, the problem could compound as additional commercial development begins to occur. One solution to this issue could result from shared parking opportunities. Construction of structured parking would serve visitors on the weekend, and as a result, could potentially generate income while the ballpark is closed. For commercial developments that have few employees or peak hours that differ from their neighbors’, smaller shared parking lots could also be utilized. Additionally, adequate signage should be used to direct drivers to public parking lots so that they are not circulating unnecessarily around the ballpark in search of a parking spot. Current uses throughout the study area could better target the needs of residents, transit riders, visitors, and the surrounding community. Nearby commercial and retail development tends to be large-scale, underutilized, and over- parked with large setbacks. Generally speaking, building types should complement each other while providing the rich diversity that is needed for a vibrant community. While these types may vary, the standard of quality can be set and maintained as consistently high by establishing those parameters and following through as the District grows. Southwest of the ballpark, several underutilized parcels present major redevelopment opportunities to incorporate mixed-use development with housing, retail and community amenities. New development and redevelopment will benefit the neighborhood by creating greater community context and pedestrian-oriented design. By filling the gaps in the streetscape and providing destinations that better support community needs, the neighborhood can become a more active and desirable place, not only on gameday. One significant factor in determining whether a site will develop or redevelop is the total assessed value of a parcel – both building and land value combined. The Assessed Value map shows the areas of lowest value by square foot based on parcel-level tax assessor data. The parcels with the lowest value are identified by lighter coloring. Underutilized parcels throughout the study area should focus on incorporating a variety of product types and densities of development to increase the tax base and overall utilization or the parcels. Increased retail offerings should be utilized along key corridors to mitigate retail leakage, while also creating a more defined transition between the commercial and residential uses. A focused approach to incorporate retail in the appropriate locations will protect residents and their homes from undesirable adjacency, while providing an amenity. APPENDIX 60 Exhibit H Residential Market The study area is dominated by rental housing, only 15% of homes are owner-occupied, far lower than local, state, and national home ownership rates. An analysis of previously sold homes in the study area identified 150 sales of multi-family properties in the area over the last three years. The trend shows that the average sale price over the three-year period saw a slight increase and indicates that the majority of homes sold were recently built (constructed 2007 or later). Key Neighborhood Drivers The following assets should be leveraged in future development efforts of the neighborhood: · Smith’s Ballpark – The ballpark is located at the corner of West Temple and 1300 S in downtown Salt Lake City. The ballpark is home to the Salt Lake Bees, who play roughly 70 home games a year. · TRAX Ballpark Station · Salt Lake Community College · Schools Demand Market Supply and Demand The supply and demand analysis focused on identifying market opportunities for various land use typologies within the respective trade areas, and ultimately informed the Ballpark study area. Demand represents the willingness and ability of consumers to purchase a set amount of a good or service at a given price. Supply is the willingness of sellers to offer a given quantity of a good or service for a given price. The delta of supply and demand is the opportunity, or “leakage”. The analysis outlined below included analyses for residential, retail, office, and industrial land uses. Trade Area Development The boundaries of each trade area are influenced by the following factors, which were analyzed in the trade area creation process: · Market Factors are economic conditions that affect the amount (square footage) of existing product, sale and rental rate price, quality, and variety of product types within a defined market. · Physical Barriers include both natural and manmade obstacles that affect access to customers/supplies. Natural barriers in the case of the Ballpark study area could include mountains, lakes, or other natural geographic features. Man-made obstacles include highways, thoroughfares, and the built environment (buildings, drainage, etc.) which can deter customers and, in some cases, prevent access entirely. · Proximity to Population and Job Concentrations can affect the potential number of customers, talent pool, and overall synergies between end users. In most cases, access to population is the most critical component of a business or service and plays the largest role in any type of market implicated decision. · Spending Patterns include the amount, frequency, and distribution of spending that occurs within a trade area. The amount of disposable income, population characteristics, presence of existing users, and general attitudes all affect the way dollars get spent, and where they go. Residential Demand The residential trade area for the ballpark was determined to include the two-county Salt Lake City metropolitan area consisting of Salt Lake and Toole Counties. Residential demand was analyzed through two lenses as part of this effort: renter and owner-occupied units. Demand for residential units in the ballpark area is a function of regional demand being distributed and absorbed across the trade area. The ballpark area is nicely positioned within regional context to capture a portion of this potential based on existing gravity, access to jobs/population, and a variety of other factors. The ballpark area is hindered by physical constraints, a lack of available land, and the existing residential fabric. The number of households in the MSA is projected to grow over 5,850 units a year from a current stock of 397,918 households to 427,192 by 2025. Demand for both owner and renter-occupied units were calculated by accounting for the propensity of existing renters and owners to purchase or rent, as well as net new development from net migration. Based on current and anticipated home ownership and rental rates, there is demand for 62 rental units and 81 owner- occupied housing units that the ballpark area can capture on an annual basis. The total demand for units is broken down further by income-qualified rent and home prices by age groups. The analysis assumes a moderate capture rate of the potential trade area demand, designed to reflect the ballpark area’s potential portion of capture. To calibrate and understand demand at a more nuanced level, growth was anticipated by age groups, as well as APPENDIX61 corresponding income to home value/rent ratios. The tables below illustrate the relationship of income to home value and monthly rental rate. Home Value less than $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $350,000 $450,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $350,000 $450,000 and above Qualifying Income less than $35,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $35,000 $50,000 $75,000 $99,999 $149,000 $200,000 and above Monthly Rent $500 $750 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $750 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 And Up Qualifying Income Less Than $35,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 $35,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 And Up The analysis of renter-occupied demand shows the majority of demand (56%) is anticipated to accommodate units that support the market rate of $1,500 + monthly rent. The age group anticipated to generate the most demand is the 35 – 54-year-old age group (34%). The second largest amount of renter-occupied demand is generated by the 65+ age group (20%). The product typology for each of these age groups and price points can vary, based on context. Infill opportunities are well-suited for the denser, established neighborhood context. Garden-style units or even detached units are a logical fit, especially near Smith’s ballpark or the TRAX station. The analysis of owner-occupied demand shows the majority of demand (59%) is anticipated to fall within the $250,000+ range. Similarly, the majority of demand is anticipated to be generated by the 35 – 54-year-old age group (50%). There is also moderate demand (22%) for the age 65+ group. Residential Trends The prevailing residential development trend of the post-World War II era has typically been characterized by the development of center-city neighborhoods and suburbs. These neighborhoods have blossomed into attractive places to live and even raise families for the majority of residents. However, in recent years there has been a paradigm shift towards experiences and amenities over possessions. This includes a shift towards smaller homes with elevated finishes and amenities opposed to livable area. In addition to the growing “quality-over-quantity” mindset, an observable increase in home values when connections to trails, walkability, or access to alternative forms of transportation is present. Additional factors effecting the current (re)development of neighborhoods include the integration of communal gathering spaces, and greater connection to non-residential uses like retail, office, and mixed-use developments. The desire for Increased housing options (typology) and amenities can be observed through an industry shift towards a consumer and market-based response to supplying residential developments with smaller and diversified footprints of residential units. Apartments that have developed through the form of urban, walkable, and high-end vertical development over the past several years have reaped the rewards of having been in the right place at the right time. Fundamental demand for new apartment development is molding the new geography of opportunity as demographics shift and rent-by-choice cohorts expand. An RCLCO study found that nearly 15 percent of renters earning over $100,000 are turning to rental products for lifestyle and convenience. The same study indicated that a growing portion of the population ages 55+ is choosing to rent as well, likely looking to downsize, unlock equity from their homes, as well as the convenience of low maintenance and social freedom. The ballpark neighborhood is an established community with a diversified distribution of land uses, yet there is still significant opportunity to bolster economic sustainability by taking advantage of infill development, especially within the urban context. In terms of economic development, urban/downtown environments including the Ballpark study area offer some of the greatest opportunity in Salt Lake City. A key advantage is the increased operational efficiencies compared to traditional suburban development, which can leverage existing infrastructure to enhance a vibrant, mixed- use destination for the community at large. Office Demand The greater Salt Lake office market was benefiting from the metro’s consistent job and population growth over the past several years prior to the onset of COVID-19. In review of market trends set forth by CoStar, it appears as though the market has fared better than many metros due in part to its well-diversified economy. Targeted employment has continued to develop in recent years from regional efforts to attract advanced manufacturing, aerospace and defense, energy, financial services, life and health sciences, and software & IT sectors. Regional growth in employment can be attributed the locally educated population, low cost of business, regional connectivity, and overall quality of life. Tech companies continue to be an important driver of not just employment but also office leasing, with several signing leases at new developments in the southern submarkets. Submarkets in this area of the metro are seeing major office- using employment gains from the tech sector. Online education company Pluralsight signed a lease for nearly 350,000 SF at the Gardner Company building under construction in Draper. Software companies InMoment and Lucid leased spaces in the south tower of the SoJo Station development. The ballpark study area falls within the midsized Interchange office submarket (CoStar), that contains around 1.6 million SF of office space. The submarket is generally bound between State Street and one block west of I-15 from the northern boundary of 1300 S, and a southern boundary of 3900 S. The vacancy rate has risen significantly over the past 12 months, reaching 6.6%, yet remains in line with the long-term average. There is 150,000 SF of office product under construction at 2200 S Main St, representing the most space under construction in the submarket for more than a decade. This represents a turnabout from the recent trend, as the last office building constructed here delivered more than five years ago. Some of the largest buildings in the submarket include Timesquare 5, Ikon building, Plaza 2100 and the Main St building. Average rents remain on the lower end of the market at a rate of $18.85/SF, mainly due to older construction. The analysis below uncovers that the ballpark can harness demand for over 15,000 SF of additional office development based on a conservative capture rate of the greater Salt Lake market. The majority of demand is anticipated to be generated from turnover of existing corporate users. Creating a corporate destination within the ballpark area would take advantage of accessibility, visibility, and adjacency to the TRAX station from a regional perspective, while providing workers with an amenity in the form of sports and an active neighborhood. APPENDIX 62 Ballpark Area Office Demand Analysis Firms Employees Employees/Firm Finance & Insurance 2,345 26,642 11 Real Estate 2,012 15,017 7 Professional, Scientific & Tech Services 3,721 47,717 13 Management of Companies & Enterprises 84 342 4 Health Services 3,469 98,560 28 Arts & Entertainment 661 11,643 18 Total 12,292 199,921 16 Avg. SF per Employee 150 Total Office SF 76,039,052 Avg. Submarket SF Absorption (10-year Average) (88,694) Potential Office SF Absorption -88,694 Estimated Subject Site Capture Rt.1% Potential Capture SF from Absorption -887 Potential Turnover 1% Potential Turnover SF 380,195 Avg. Vacancy Rate 7% Total Occupancy from Turnover 355,102 Estimated Subject Site Capture Rt.5% Potential Capture SF from Turnover 17,755 Total Potential Demand SF 16,868 Source: ESRI, CoStar, Catalyst Table F In review of various corporate/office developments throughout the Salt Lake market, several successful developments were identified and examined to understand the components of success. One of these developments is Cottonwood Corporate Center, located at the mouth of Big Cottonwood Canyon, one of Salt Lake City’s most prestigious office locations. Designed by GSBS Architects, the property boasts spectacular views of both the canyon and the Salt Lake Valley. Nestled at the foot of the Wasatch Mountains, the four-building, Class A suburban office campus offers views of nearly the entire Salt Lake Valley. With easy access to the I-215 freeway, the campus is just 20-minutes away from downtown Salt Lake City, Park City and the Salt Lake International Airport. Cottonwood Corporate Center’s proximity to four ski resorts, several premier hotels, and many popular dining options makes it an ideal location for work and play. The development is buffered from the surrounding residential development on all sides by a pedestrian path and a tree- liner that serves both as an amenity and buffer to the increased density of development. Similar to Cottonwood Corporate Center, River Park Corporate Center is a suburban Class A master-planned development with over 1.7 million square feet of office. Access via I-215 in the southern portion of the valley allows access to downtown, Salt Lake International Airport, and several recreation destinations. One of the defining characteristics of the River Park development is the integration of the natural environment to the east. The Jordan River flows by parallel to the development as serves as a natural amenity to workers, as well as a buffer to the residential development to the east. Irvine Office Park in Draper represents another marquee development in the south valley, with over 540,000 SF of Class A office space under development. “Irvine Office Park offers unmatched access to major freeway and arterial systems in the heart of Silicon Slopes,” said Brandon Fugal, chairman of Colliers International in Utah. “This world-class facility not only provides prominent visibility along Utah’s major transportation corridor but also offers easy access to key amenities and services.” The Park is ideally positioned at the intersection of I-15 and Bangerter Highway, creating one of the most accessible developments along the Wasatch Front. Retail Primary Trade Area Understanding the characteristics and context of a trade area enables city leaders, planners, and developers to understand the purchasing power for the ballpark study area retail market and further understand the customer base for the region. A trade area will be impacted by competing trade areas and other shopping substitution options, and be impacted by access and mobility and barriers such as lakes, highways, railroads, airports, etc. In January 2021, Catalyst conducted a customer intercept study that included nearly 8,500 unique samples. These samples were collected from Smith’s Ballpark and Common Evening Locations (C.E.L) were derived from the samples and geocoded to statistically construct the Primary Trade Area. Catalyst utilized a conservative 63.9% capture rate of the total samples to define the Primary Trade Area. Due to the regionality of Smith’s ballpark, the resulting trade area is reflective of a large destination- based population, served by an area covering much of the metro area. The population of the PTA is greater than 1.175 million residents, and some of the key statistics of the PTA are reflected below: · Population – 1,175,340 · Households – 394,894 o Owner-occupied – 61% o Renter-occupied – 34% o Vacant – 4.5% · Median Household Income - $74,743 · Average Household Income - $96,702 · Median Home Value - $334,229 · Per Capita Income - $32,519 · Median Age – 32.8 · % Population 18+ - 71% Exhibit I APPENDIX63 Retail Demand The ballpark area is positioned in the heart of the increasingly competitive Salt Lake valley retail market. The more immediate market is observable halfway between Salt Lake City’s CBD and I-80. The ballpark’s competitive edge within the market is derived from the physical location, access to transit, and the established surrounding neighborhood. A key advantage of the neighborhood is the position within the regional population being served by the ballpark’s goods and services. It’s vital that future economic development efforts continue to leverage and provide not only for the local population, but the larger regional population being served by the study area. To calculate potential demand in square footage, Catalyst analyzed leakage within the PTA (potential demand in dollars less the existing supply in dollars.) The result is retail gap or “leakage”, the amount of dollars being spent on retail categories outside of the community. To calculate demand in square footage, Catalyst analyzed retail leakage within the PTA including the estimated individual demand generated from the regional student population, local workforce, commuter traffic, visitor, and residential drivers, and converted the amounts to square footage based on extensive industry knowledge and experience. The regional population of the PTA represents one of the largest drivers of retail demand for communities, especially. Based upon the growing population and high median household income within the PTA, there is a total retail Purchasing Power of over $82T. Purchasing power is the populations ability to purchase goods and services based on income and population. Research from the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC) found that on average people spend 24% of their total income on retail goods and services. While the amount of retail leakage within the PTA indicates oversaturation in a number of categories, there are a number of categories that are underserved, and some that are more resilient towards market factors and oversaturation. Destination-oriented retail developments tend to be more resilient to oversupply, due to the regional population they serve, opposed to depending on neighborhood residents. The Ballpark study area is positioned to capture a large percentage of commuters passing by, especially on game-day. With the ample connectivity to the rest of the region via I-15, State Street, 1300 S, and TRAX, the ballpark study area is uniquely positioned to funnel and capture retail gravity along these transportation routes as the metro population continues to expand. Gateway features can be an integral part of a community which help define boundaries and celebrate its identity. Several key intersections and locations in the Ballpark area should be targeted as gateway opportunities and can be enhanced through theming, branding, wayfinding, and landscaping. These locations primarily exist when entering the study area along 1300 S, State St, and Main St, but also at major intersections, and where 1300 S and the TRAX station intersect. The perception of the community, its ability to attract and retain interest, and establish a unique and vibrant place, is often shaped by the quality and experience of key thoroughfares. Currently, commuter demand is responsible for generating more than 50,000 square feet of retail demand alone. Workforce generated demand represents a strong opportunity and existing component of the overall retail demand, especially with regards to daytime population and goods and services that facilitate the workers’ life. Increased corporate presence will allow the study area to remain active throughout the day, supporting goods and services, while creating partnerships between the community and employer. The regional and local workforce surrounding the ballpark area has generated more than 44,000 square feet of unmet demand. Typical goods and services that are driven by workforce and commuters generally include: Grocery stores, Health and beauty stores, Gas stations, General Merchandise stores, Office Supply stores, Sporting Goods stores, and Restaurants and eating establishments. Based on the categorical demand generated by the residential, commuter, and workforce components, there is nearly 232,000 square feet of unmet retail demand. To harness this demand, several key categories have been identified in the following bullets, while the whole analysis can be observed below: ● Department Stores ● Grocery Stores ● General Merchandise Stores ● Health and Personal Care Stores ● Full and Limited-Service Restaurants The table below summarizes the overall demand to be taken advantage of throughout the trade area. Potential Supportable Retail Square Footage by Retail Category Category NAICS Student Workforce Commuter Residential Total Auto Parts, Accessories & Tire Stores 4413 584 - 1,299 - 1,883 Furniture Stores 4421 - - - - - Home Furnishings Stores 4422 - - - - - Electronics & Appliance Stores 4431 108 1,885 1,635 457 4,085 Bldg Material & Supplies Dealers 4441 - - - - - Lawn & Garden Equip & Sup- ply Stores 4442 - - - 6,009 6,009 Grocery Stores 4451 718 3,941 4,647 85,387 94,694 Specialty Food Stores 4452 - - - - - Beer, Wine & Liquor Stores 4453 - - - - - Health & Personal Care Stores 446,4461 476 7,605 1,635 - 9,716 Gasoline Stations 447,4471 - - 21,642 18,743 40,385 Clothing Stores 4481 204 1,418 1,784 - 3,406 Shoe Stores 4482 374 1,950 3,270 - 5,594 Jewelry, Luggage & Leather Goods Stores 4483 178 1,486 1,557 - 3,221 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Musi- cal Instr Stores 4511 - 845 1,635 - 2,480 Book, Periodical & Music Stores 4512 - - - - - Department Stores Excluding Leased Depts.4521 - 2,535 1,635 - 4,170 Other General Merchandise Stores 4529 - 11,700 2,453 - 14,153 Florists 4531 - - - - - Office Supplies, Stationery & Gift Stores 4532 - 2,860 1,635 - 4,495 Used Merchandise Stores 4533 - - - - - Other Miscellaneous Store Retailers 4539 - - - 21,253 21,253 Full-Service Restaurants 7221 450 3,716 2,750 - 6,916 Limited-Service Eating Places 7222 407 5,005 3,896 9,308 Special Food Services 7223 - - - - - Drinking Places - Alcoholic Beverages 7224 - - - - - Total Demand (SF) 3,499 44,946 51,473 83,061 231,768 Table G APPENDIX 64 Retail Trends The ballpark study area falls within the midsized Interchange retail submarket (CoStar), that contains over 4.3 million SF of retail space. The submarket is generally bound between State Street and one block west of I-15 from the northern boundary of 1300 S, and a southern boundary of 3900 S. Although the submarket is home to a fairly dense amount of retail development, it only constitutes a small percentage of the metro area’s 70.8 million SF of retail. Although retail developments have experienced increased vacancy over the past 12 months, the Interchange submarket has a vacancy rate of 3.2%, remaining under the long-term average of 5.2%. Some of the largest developments in the submarket include the RC Willey building, Wal-Mart Supercenter, Sam’s Club, I-15 marketplace, and Lowe’s. Average rents remain steady on the lower end of the market at a rate of $16.28/SF, mainly due to older construction and lack of construction. Example Destination Districts in the Region In reviewing various retail developments throughout the Salt Lake market, several successful developments were identified and examined to understand the components of success. One of these developments is commonly referred to as 9th & 9th, located at the intersection of 900 S and 900 E, just 2 miles from Smith’s Ballpark. This area represents a quality example of merchandising, and appropriate neighborhood integration. The unique merchandising creates gravity for both neighborhood-serving and destination-based customers. Unique concepts represent a thoughtful approach to serving the immediate community, while simultaneously enticing residents from miles away to come shop and spend their energy within the district. Another key to success for this development is the integration to the existing neighborhoods on all corners. Appropriate building scale, urban form, and connectivity make it approachable, and create a seamless transition from surrounding the residential fabric. Downtown South Salt Lake is characterized by the land stretching from State Street to I-15 and I-80 to 2100 South as the neighborhood’s boundaries. Similar to Sugar House, Downtown South Salt Lake offers a mix of living, dining, drinking, and shopping that differentiates the neighborhood from other districts, and serves both a local and regional population. Downtown South Salt Lake is served by TRAX and the S-Line streetcar, as well as highway access and via State St. As Downtown South Salt Lake continues to grow and develop it will become even more destination based, serving a large regional population. Perhaps one of the most notable developments in the entire Salt Lake valley is Sugar House. Teaming with life and opportunities for living, shopping, dining, drinking, and trail-running, Sugar House represents one of the premier destinations in Salt Lake City. Sugar House has unmatched merchandising that appeals to both neighborhood residents, and residents of the greater Metro. Local shops, restaurants, and bars provide neighborhood hangouts for locals, and unique experiences for residents traveling up to an hour. Sugar House’s integration of parks and open space as well as residential fabric is a key component of the livability, connectivity, and quality of life that makes it such a destination. Program Justification Owner-Occu- pied Residential Renter-Occu- pied Residential Retail Office Demand High High Moderate Moderate Opportunities Strong popu- lation growth and regional job market create high demand for quality housing. Owner-occu- pied would be a deviation from existing neighborhood conditions. Infill. Mixed-use. Quality product that connects and accentuates the existing neighborhood fabric. Connec- tivity and open space are highly desirable ame- nities. Access to a largely regional population, as well as neigh- borhood. Grow- ing population and incomes will create demand for additional retail. Gameday programming and destination uses. Access to dense, regional population. Access to airport and Interstate. Es- tablished industries. Challenges Maintaining the integrity and quality of existing neigh- borhoods. Affordable mid- rate housing to accommodate local workforce Creating bal- anced neigh- borhoods and placement of strategic higher density product so that the mar- ket is not over built Changing retail desires and e-commerce will impact retail development. Merchandising needs to serve a regional popu- lation as well as neighborhood. Smaller market size. Constrained growth opportunities for larger corporate. Less connection to natural environment when compared to other Class A corpo- rate campus. Target Market rate. In- fill. High-density High quality projects of ~10 units. Regional retail, entertainment, restaurants. Midrise, garden, corporate campus. Planned SF XX Units under construction XX Units under construction 140,000 SF under construc- tion, but 0 SF in submarket 150,000 SF under construction in sub- market Target Market Values $200K +$1,500 +/month +/- $16/SF in submarket and +/- $19 in market +/- $19/SF in sub- market and +/- $23 in market Absorption Demand for 81 units annually Demand for 62 units annually Demand for nearly 230,000 SF across all categories Demand for 17,000 SF annually APPENDIX CTRANSPORTATIONANALYSIS APPENDIX 66 May 2021 093684000 Copyright © Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. !!""##$$%%&&&& !!""##$$%%##""&&''%%(())$$**%%++""####,,""--&&%% !!$$""$$))..//%%""--''""%%,,##""//%% %%""##''(())**""%%##%%++**''&&'',,%%--**""..&&##''##//00((++((&& ,,11++((%%++''22&&33**''!!++%%++**''((&&&&&& && && && && !!""##$$%%""##&&''(())""**'' '' !!""##$$%%""##&&''++,,**'''' 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 && !!""##$$%%&&&& && && && && !!""##$$%%##""&&''%%(())$$**%%++""####,,""--&&%%!!$$""$$))..//%%""--''""%% ,,##""//%% && %%""##''(())**""%%##%%++**''&&'',,%%--**""..&&##''##//00((++((&& ,,11++((%%++''22&&33**''!!++%%++**''((&& %% %% %% !!""##$$%%""##&&''(())""**'' !!""##$$%%""##&&''++,,**'' Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 111 East Broadway Suite 600 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 385 212 3176 APPENDIX67 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Ó May 2021 093684000 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS --.. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1 //.. EXISTING PLANS AND STUDIES ................................................................................................ 2 /.-. State Street CRA Plan .................................................................................................... 2 /./. WFRC RTP 2019 – 2050 ............................................................................................... 3 /./.-. Active Transportation Projects ............................................................................. 3 /././. Transit Projects .................................................................................................... 4 /./.0. Roadway Projects ................................................................................................ 5 /.0. Growing Salt Lake City – A Five Year Housing Plan ...................................................... 5 /.1. Salt Lake City Transit Master Plan ................................................................................. 5 /.1.-. Active Transportation ........................................................................................... 6 /.1./. Transit .................................................................................................................. 7 /.2. Salt Lake City Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan ....................................................... 7 /.2.-. Pedestrians ........................................................................................................ 10 /.2./. Bicycling ............................................................................................................ 10 /.3. Plan Salt Lake .............................................................................................................. 13 /.4. Salt Lake City Central Community Master Plan ........................................................... 14 /.5. Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan ................................................................... 16 00.. EXISTING CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................... 18 0.-. Annual Average Daily Traffic ........................................................................................ 18 0./. Speed Limits ................................................................................................................. 20 0.1. Crash Analysis ............................................................................................................. 21 0.2. Transit Analysis ............................................................................................................ 25 0.4. Active Transportation Facilities .................................................................................... 26 0.6. Recommended Future Projects .................................................................................... 28 0.--. Field Visits ................................................................................................................ 30 APPENDIX 68 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page ii 0.-/. Network Deficiencies and Gaps ................................................................................ 34 11.. KEY TAKEAWAYS .................................................................................................................. 35 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - SAP Study Area ........................................................................................................... 1 Figure 2 - State Street CRA Plan Study Area ............................................................................... 2 Figure 3 - WFRC RTP 2019-2050 Active Transportation Projects ............................................... 3 Figure 4 - WFRC RTP 2019-2050 Transit Projects ...................................................................... 4 Figure 5 - WFRC RTP 2019-2050 Roadway Projects .................................................................. 5 Figure 6 - Future Transit Network ................................................................................................. 7 Figure 7 - Bus Stop Amenities ...................................................................................................... 7 Figure 8 - Pedestrian and Bicyclist Preferences ........................................................................... 9 Figure 9 - Pedestrian Recommendations ................................................................................... 10 Figure 10 - Existing Bicycle Network .......................................................................................... 11 Figure 11 - Short Term Bicycle Recommendations .................................................................... 12 Figure 13 - Central Community Future Land Uses ..................................................................... 15 Figure 14 - People's Freeway Neighborhood ............................................................................. 16 Figure 15 - 2017 Historical AADT Volumes ................................................................................ 18 Figure 16 – 20-Year AADT Growth ............................................................................................. 19 Figure 17 - Speed Limits ............................................................................................................. 20 Figure 18 - Overall Crashes (2015-2020) ................................................................................... 22 Figure 19 - Pedestrian Crashes (2015-2020) ............................................................................. 23 Figure 20 - Bike Crashes (2015-2020) ....................................................................................... 24 Figure 21 - Existing Transit Network ........................................................................................... 25 Figure 22 - Existing Pedestrian Network .................................................................................... 26 Figure 23 - Existing Bike Facilities .............................................................................................. 27 Figure 24 - WFRC Planned Active Transportation and Transit Projects .................................... 28 Figure 25 - Other Future Recommended Projects ...................................................................... 29 Figure 26 - Improper Bike Racks as Ballpark Station ................................................................. 30 Figure 27 - Illegal Midblock Crossings of 1300 South ................................................................ 31 Figure 28 - Poor Sidewalk Conditions along 300 West .............................................................. 32 Figure 29 - Narrow Sidewalk with Obstructions along 300 West ................................................ 33 APPENDIX69 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1 - Ballpark SAP Crash Analysis ...................................................................................... 21 Table 2 - Ballpark Station Ridership Data ................................................................................... 25 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Crash Data Summary Report LIST OF ACRONYMS AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic ADA Americans with Disabilities Act CRA Community Reinvestment Area SAP Station Area Plan TDM Travel Demand Model UDOT Utah Department of Transportation UTA Utah Transit Authority WFRC Wasatch Front Regional Council 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 1 !!"" INTRODUCTION An important aspect of developing a Station Area Plan (SAP) is understanding the existing conditions around the transit station. This document provides a detail analysis of the existing conditions of the transportation network for the Salt Lake City Ballpark SAP. The SAP study area is bounded by I-15 on the west, 900 South on the north, State Street (US 89) on the east, and 1700 South on the south, as shown in Figure 1. This chapter of the Ballpark SAP includes a review of existing plans and previous studies, an overview of the existing mobility landscape and connectivity, crash analysis and safety, and identifies deficiencies and gaps within the transportation network of the neighborhood. All modes of transportation were considered as part of the analysis including vehicles, transit, bicyclists, pedestrians, mobility assistance devices and micromobility which accounts for modes like motorized scooters and skateboards. Figure 1 - SAP Study Area APPENDIX 70 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 2 ##"" EXISTING PLANS AND STUDIES This section of the document presents a brief overview of known plans and studies related to the Ballpark SAP study area. The overviews are focused on how the particular plans and studies relate to the transportation network. Understanding what has be accomplished in other plans and studies ensures that the Ballpark SAP fits into the greater context of Salt Lake City (The City) and doesn’t create friction with the overarching goals and plans of the City. Summaries are provided for the following plans and studies: § State Street Community Reinvestment Area (CRA) Plan (Draft) § Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) 2019-2050 (2019) § Growing SLC: A Five-Year Housing Plan 2018-2022 (January 2018) § Salt Lake City Transit Master Plan (2017) § Salt Lake City Pedestrian & Bicycle Master Plan (December 2015) § Plan Salt Lake (December 2015) § Salt Lake City Central Community Master Plan (November 2005) § Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan (April 1996) 44556655 State Street CRA Plan The State Street CRA Plan encompasses the area shown in Figure 2. The plan focuses on how to use funding to invest in State Street and the surrounding areas. The SAP study area falls within the State Street CRA Plan study area. They key takeaway from the State Street CRA Plan related to the Ballpark SAP is to promote high-quality transit-oriented development near Ballpark Station. Figure 2 - State Street CRA Plan Study Area 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 3 44554455 WFRC RTP 2019 – 2050 The WFRC 2019-2050 RTP outlines recommended upgrades to highway, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation facilities. These recommended upgrades are identified for 2019 through 2050. The study area for the WFRC RTP is the urbanized areas of the City, West Valley City, Layton, and Ogden. Projects that are part of the WFRC RTP that fall within the ballpark station area are outlined in the following subsections. //..//..--.. Active Transportation Projects Figure 3 shows the recommended active transportation projects planned for the SAP study area from the WFRC RTP. Figure 3 - WFRC RTP 2019-2050 Active Transportation Projects APPENDIX71 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 4 //..//..//.. Transit Projects Figure 4 shows the recommended transit projects planned for the Ballpark SAP study area from the WFRC RTP. Figure 4 - WFRC RTP 2019-2050 Transit Projects 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 5 //..//..00.. Roadway Projects Figure 5 shows the recommended roadway projects planned for the Ballpark SAP study area from the WFRC RTP. Figure 5 - WFRC RTP 2019-2050 Roadway Projects 44557755 Growing Salt Lake City – A Five Year Housing Plan Growing Salt Lake City is a five-year housing plan for the City from 2018 to 2022 and was published in January 2018 by the Department of Community and Neighborhoods. The plan contains several topics including updates to zoning code, preservation of affordable housing, and equitability, fair housing, and transportation. This plan talks about the close relationship of transportation, transit-oriented development, affordable housing. The plan focuses on how to make the City affordable so that more individuals and families can find housing there. With the anticipated increase in population comes transportation strains. The plan states that the need to create viable pedestrian, bicycle, and transit options is paramount as the City’s population grows. 44558855 Salt Lake City Transit Master Plan The Salt Lake City Transit Master Plan was adopted in 2017. The plan outlines the history of transit in the City, presents the goals for the transit network in the City, and summarizes actions that can be taken to achieve those goals. The major goals of the plan are to implement a frequent transit network, develop on-demand and employee shuttle programs, develop improved bus corridors, and implement a variety of transit-supportive programs and transit access improvements. APPENDIX 72 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 6 //..11..--.. Active Transportation One of the keys to building a complete transit system, as stated in the plan, is to have a safe and convenient active transportation system connecting people to transit stops and key destinations. Because every transit trip begins and ends with an active transportation trip it is important to have good access to transit. Characteristics of good active transportation access to transit are identified as follows: § Well-marked intersections and mid-block crossings § Traffic calming measures § Exclusive pedestrian phases at intersections § Pedestrian-scale lighting § Wayfinding § Designing for disabilities § Protected bicycle lanes § Protected intersections § Bicycle lanes and boxes § Neighborhood byways § GREENbike § Smart placement of transit stops near bike facilities § Bicycle amenities and parking 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 7 //..11..//.. Transit The identified future transit network from the plan is shown in Figure 6. Existing bus stop amenities are shown in Figure 7. Figure 6 - Future Transit Network Figure 7 - Bus Stop Amenities 44559955 Salt Lake City Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan The Salt Lake City Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan was adopted in December 2015. Major goals of the plan include: § INTEGRATION: Integrate walking and bicycling into community planning to enhance livability, health, transportation, the environment, and economic development. § NETWORK: Develop a safe, comfortable, and attractive walking and bicycling network that connects people of all ages, abilities, and neighborhoods to the places they want to go. § MAINTENANCE: Maintain the walking and bicycling system year-round. APPENDIX73 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 8 § PROGRAMS: Promote the safety and attractiveness of walking and bicycling through education, encouragement, and enforcement programs. § TRANSIT CONNECTIONS: Integrate pedestrian and bicycle facilities with transit routes, stations, and stops. Figure 8 shows results of public outreach surveys on the topic of pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities conducted during the creation on the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 9 Figure 8 - Pedestrian and Bicyclist Preferences APPENDIX 74 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 10 //..22..--.. Pedestrians Recommended pedestrian improvements from the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan that are planned for the Ballpark SAP study area are shown in Figure 9. These recommended improvements include the following: § 1300 South – East-West Pedestrian Priority Corridors § 1700 South – East-West Pedestrian Priority Corridors § Paxton Avenue – Neighborhood Byway (0-10 Yrs) § Paxton Avenue / West Temple Intersection – Crossing Improvements § Kelsey Avenue / Main Street Intersection – Crossing Improvements § Kelsey Avenue / State Street Intersection – Crossing Improvements § Kelsey Avenue – Neighborhood Byway (0-10 Yrs) § Andrews Avenue – Neighborhood Byway (0-10 Yrs) § Andrews Avenue / Main Street Intersection – Crossing Improvements § Andrews Avenue / State Street Intersection – Crossing Improvements § West Temple – Neighborhood Byway (10-20 Yrs) § Multi-Use Trail (10-20 Yrs) from Paxton Avenue to 900 South to the side of railroad Figure 9 - Pedestrian Recommendations //..22..//.. Bicycling The existing bicycle network identified in the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan within the Ballpark SAP study area is shown in Figure 10. Short term (0-10 years in the future) and long term (10-20 years in the future) bicycle network improvement recommendations are shown in Figure 11 and Figure 12, respectively. 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 11 Figure 10 - Existing Bicycle Network Short term (0-10 years in the future) bicycle network improvement recommendations include the following: § 900 South – Protected or Buffered Bike Lanes as part of Transvalley Corridor § 1300 South – Bike Lanes § Paxton Avenue – Shared Roadway § Paxton Avenue / West Temple Intersection – Crossing Improvements § Kelsey Avenue / Main Street Intersection – Crossing Improvements § Kelsey Avenue / State Street Intersection – Crossing Improvements § Kelsey Avenue – Neighborhood Byway § Andrews Avenue – Neighborhood Byway § Andrews Avenue / Main Street Intersection – Crossing Improvements § Andrews Avenue / State Street Intersection – Crossing Improvements APPENDIX75 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 12 Figure 11 - Short Term Bicycle Recommendations Long term (10-20 years in the future) bicycle network improvement recommendations include the following: § 1700 South – Protected or Buffered Bike Lanes § West Temple – Part Protected or Buffered Bike Lanes, part Shared Roadway § Multi-Use Trail from Paxton Avenue to 900 South to the side of railroad 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 13 Figure 12 - Long Term Bicycle Recommendations 4455::55 Plan Salt Lake Plan Salt Lake was adopted in December 2015 and gives a vision for the City through the year 2040. The plan gives a framework to prepare the city for the growth that is anticipated to come in future years. The plan includes the following 13 guiding principles: 1. Neighborhoods that provide a safe environment, opportunity for social interaction, and services needed for the wellbeing of the community therein. 2. Growing responsibly while providing people with choices about where they live, how they live, and how they get around. 3. Access to a wide variety of housing types for all income levels throughout the City, providing the basic human need for safety and responding to changing demographics. 4. A transportation and mobility network that is safe, accessible, reliable, affordable, and sustainable, providing real choices and connecting people with places. 5. Air that is healthy and clean. 6. Minimize our impact on the natural environment 7. Protecting the natural environment while providing access and opportunities to recreate and enjoy nature. 8. A beautiful city that is people focused. 9. Maintaining places that provide a foundation for the City to affirm our past. 10. Vibrant, diverse, and accessible artistic and cultural resources that showcase the community’s long-standing commitment to a strong creative culture. 11. Ensure access to all City amenities for all citizens while treating everyone equitably with fairness, justice, and respect. APPENDIX 76 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 14 12. A balanced economy that produces quality jobs and fosters an environment for commerce, local business, and industry to thrive. 13. A local government that is collaborative, responsive, and transparent. Each guiding principal contains targets to be reached by 2040 and several initiatives that can be implemented to help reach the stated targets. Several of these targets and initiatives involve goals related to pedestrian, bicycling, and transit. The 2040 targets related to transportation and mobility are as follows: § Public transit within ¼ mile of all homes § Reduce single occupancy auto trips § Decrease pedestrian, bike, and auto accidents To reach the 2040 targets the following initiatives have been identified: § Create a complete circulation network and ensure convenient equitable access to a variety of transportation options by: § Having a public transit stop within ¼ mile of all residents. § Expanding pedestrian and bicycle networks and facilities in all areas of the City. § Providing incentives for the use of transit. § Increase the frequency and service hours of transit in neighborhoods. § Enhancing the regional transportation networks. § Creating a system of connections so that residents may easily access employment, goods and services, neighborhood amenities, and housing. § Prioritize connecting residents to neighborhood, community, regional, and recreation nodes by improved routes for walking, biking, and transit. § Reduce automobile dependency and single occupancy vehicle trips. § Make walking and cycling viable, safe, and convenient transportation options in all areas of the City. § Prioritize maintenance of existing infrastructure. § Encourage transit-oriented development. § Support and enhance the Salt Lake International Airport as a regional and international amenity. § Collaborate with regional partners to relieve congestion and enhance rights-of-way for alternative modes of transportation. § Enhance rights-of-ways to join, rather than segregate, adjacent neighborhoods. § Incorporate green infrastructure into our rights-of-way and transportation network. § Incorporate pedestrian oriented elements, including street trees, pedestrian scale lighting, signage, and embedded art, into our rights-of-way and transportation networks. 4455;;55 Salt Lake City Central Community Master Plan The City is split up into different planning areas. The central community plan outlines the future plan for one of those areas and was adopted in November 2005. The nine goals of the plan are as follows: 1. Protect and improve the quality of life for everyone living in the community, regardless of age or ability. 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 15 2. Improve and support community involvement, public participation, and neighborhood activism in the Central Community. 3. Provide a basis for funding specific programs that assist housing, capital improvement programs, and public services. 4. Provide opportunities for smarter and more creative development practices to better serve the community. 5. Prevent inappropriate growth in specific parts of the community. 6. Encourage specific types of growth in designated parts of the community. 7. Establish financial incentives to support alternative modes of mobility. 8. Preserve historic structures and residential neighborhoods. 9. Establish recommendations for better coordination and administrative review of construction projects and city applications. Future land uses as laid out in the central community plan are shown in Figure 13. Figure 13 - Central Community Future Land Uses The Ballpark SAP study area falls within a smaller area within the central community plan, the people’s freeway neighborhood, as shown in Figure 14. APPENDIX77 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 16 Figure 14 - People's Freeway Neighborhood Some identified issues facing the People’s Freeway Neighborhood as outlined in the plan include the following: § Address ways of transitioning the northern portion of the neighborhood from the historic character of low-density residential development to one of transit-oriented development. § Improve circulation so it is safe for residents and children who must cross busy roadways to get to school or other public services. § Develop ways to address the isolation between major roadways and improve pedestrian orientation. 4455<<55 Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan The Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan was adopted in April 1996. The plan has an accompanying Transportation Action Plan that was updated in January 2000. The guiding principles set forth in the Transportation Master Plan are as follows: § The City's transportation system will support and encourage the viability and quality of life of its residential and business neighborhoods. § The City will encourage a multi-modal transportation system. Dependence on the automobile as our primary mode of transportation will be reduced by emphasizing other modes. The transportation system will be designed to move people, not just automobiles. § The City will take a leading role in addressing regional land use issues affecting Salt Lake City and their link to transportation impacts along the Wasatch Front. 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 17 § The City will consider the impact of various transportation modes on the environment and the community. § The City will develop funding mechanisms which are equitable and adequate to meet the capital and operational needs of the transportation system. § The City will educate citizens about transportation issues and impacts, and encourage public involvement in the decision-making processes. There are twelve major topics that are covered in the Transportation Master Plan. Each of the twelve topics contains action steps located in the Transportation Action Plan. The twelve topics are as follows: 1. Regional Planning 2. Land Use Planning 3. Street System 4. Transportation Demand Management 5. Parking 6. Public Transportation 7. Bicycles 8. Pedestrians 9. Freight Rail 10. Funding 11. Air Quality 12. Education It should be noted that a new Transportation Master Plan for Salt Lake City is currently being developed. Most of the action steps contained within this current plan have already been achieved or are outdated. No specific items related to the Ballpark SAP study area applicable from the Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan. APPENDIX 78 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 18 $$"" EXISTING CONDITIONS An analysis was performed on the existing conditions of the transportation network within the study area of the Ballpark SAP. This analysis includes an overview of traffic volumes, crashes, speed limits, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, connectivity, transit facilities and ridership, future projects, and know deficiencies and gaps in the network. 77556655 Annual Average Daily Traffic WFRC uses a sophisticated transportation and land use model to predict future traffic volumes along roadway segments. This model is known as the Wasatch Front Travel Demand Model (TDM). Using the model, future annual average daily traffic (AADT) volumes are forecasted along roadway segments in the Ballpark SAP study area. Figure 15 shows the historical 2017 AADT volumes for the study area. The anticipated growth in AADT over the 20-year period, based on the TDM is shown in Figure 16. Figure 15 - 2017 Historical AADT Volumes 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 19 Figure 16 – 20-Year AADT Growth APPENDIX79 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 20 77554455 Speed Limits Speed limits for the Ballpark SAP study area and surrounding areas are displayed in Figure 17. Figure 17 - Speed Limits 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 21 77558855 Crash Analysis A crash analysis was conducted for the Ballpark SAP study area for the six-year period from 2015 to 2020. Crash data was taken from the Utah Department of Transportation’s (UDOT) Numetric website. The crash analysis looks at total vehicle crash, pedestrian involved crash, and bicycle crashes as seen in Table 1. Crash by severity for total crash, pedestrian crashes, and bicycle crashes are seen in Figure 18, Figure 19, and Figure 20, respectively. The Numetric crash data summary report is included in Appendix A. Table 1 - Ballpark SAP Crash Analysis Crash Type Year Total Crashes Crash Severity Property Damage Only Injury Fatal # % # % # % Pedestrian Crashes 2015 6 0 0% 5 83% 1 17% 2016 18 0 0% 17 94% 1 6% 2017 10 1 10% 9 90% 0 0% 2018 11 0 0% 11 100% 0 0% 2019 17 1 6% 16 94% 0 0% 2020 13 0 0% 13 100% 0 0% Total 75 2 3% 71 95% 2 3% Bicycle Crashes 2015 8 0 0% 8 100% 0 0% 2016 12 0 0% 12 100% 0 0% 2017 8 0 0% 8 100% 0 0% 2018 9 0 0% 9 100% 0 0% 2019 10 0 0% 10 100% 0 0% 2020 5 0 0% 4 80% 1 20% Total 52 0 0% 51 98% 1 2% All Crashes 2015 182 95 52% 86 47% 1 1% 2016 281 142 51% 137 49% 2 1% 2017 229 134 59% 95 41% 0 0% 2018 196 103 53% 92 47% 1 1% 2019 242 133 55% 108 45% 1 0% 2020 176 96 55% 79 45% 1 1% Total 1,306 703 54% 597 46% 6 0% Crash data an associated analysis may be protected under 23 USC 409 APPENDIX 80 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 22 Figure 18 - Overall Crashes (2015-2020) 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 23 Figure 19 - Pedestrian Crashes (2015-2020) APPENDIX81 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 24 Figure 20 - Bike Crashes (2015-2020) 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 25 77559955 Transit Analysis An overview of the existing transit network in and around the Ballpark SAP study area is provided in Figure 21. The overview includes the location of all know UTA transit facilities including bus routes, bus stop locations, light rail tracks, and frontrunner tracks. Table 2 displays the Ballpark Trax Station ridership data for the 3-year period from 2017 to 2019. Figure 21 - Existing Transit Network Table 2 - Ballpark Station Ridership Data Year Average Boardings Average Departures Weekday Saturday Sunday Weekday Saturday Sunday 2017 2,196 1,413 365 1,905 1,372 350 2018 2,071 1,270 377 1,760 1,160 345 2019 1,860 1,620 356 1,533 1,548 313 Average 2,042 1,434 366 1,733 1,360 336 APPENDIX 82 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 26 7755;;55 Active Transportation Facilities The existing conditions analysis identified active transportation facilities within the Ballpark SAP study area. Figure 22 displays the identified sidewalks and marked crosswalks in the study area. Marked crosswalks include both signalized crossings and unsignalized crossings. Figure 23 identifies the various types of bike facilities within the study area. It should be noted that no existing pedestrian count data was available for this area. Figure 22 - Existing Pedestrian Network 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 27 Figure 23 - Existing Bike Facilities APPENDIX83 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 28 7755==55 Recommended Future Projects As documented in Section 2, future active transportation and transit projects were identified in the study area. Figure 24 outlines future recommended projects as identified in the WFRC 2050 RTP. Figure 25 summarizes other recommended future projects as identified in Salt Lake City’s Transit Master Plan and Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. Figure 24 - WFRC Planned Active Transportation and Transit Projects 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 29 Figure 25 - Other Future Recommended Projects APPENDIX 84 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 30 7755666655 Field Visits Multiple field visits of the Ballpark SAP study area were conducted in an effort to better understand existing conditions. These field visits included walks around the study area to gain a pedestrian’s perspective and driving the roadways to gain a driver’s perspective. The main purpose of field visits was to identify issues that weren’t apparent from a general overview of existing data and studies. The main observation is that the study area is not favorable to active transportation as a transportation mode. Observations included improper bike parking facilities (Figure 26) and the overall lack of bike parking locations, pedestrians crossing midblock without a midblock crosswalk (Figure 27), and narrow sidewalks with obstructions within the walking path (Figure 28 and Figure 29). Figure 26 - Improper Bike Racks as Ballpark Station 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 31 Figure 27 - Illegal Midblock Crossings of 1300 South APPENDIX85 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 32 Figure 28 - Poor Sidewalk Conditions along 300 West 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 33 Figure 29 - Narrow Sidewalk with Obstructions along 300 West APPENDIX 86 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 34 7755664455 Network Deficiencies and Gaps Based on the information collected in the existing conditions analysis, the follow network deficiencies and gaps in the Ballpark SAP study area were identified. § Bicycle § Lack of East-West Bicycle Routes § Lack of Bicycle Parking Racks § Improper Bicycle Parking Options § 1300 South § 300 West § Maintenance of Existing Bicycle Lanes § Bicycle Safety § Pedestrian § Lack of Pedestrian Pathways and Sidewalks Connecting Neighborhoods § Narrow Sidewalks § Sidewalk Obstructions § Pedestrian Lighting § Pedestrians Crossing 1300 South at Unsafe Locations § ADA Issues § Pedestrian Safety § Vehicle § Lack of Shoulder on 1300 South § Vehicle Safety 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 Page 35 %%"" KEY TAKEAWAYS The existing conditions analysis for the Ballpark SAP study area included a review of existing plans and previous studies, an overview of existing facilities, crash analysis, and identifying deficiencies and gaps in the network. All modes of transportation were considered as part of the analysis including vehicles, transit, bicyclists, pedestrians, and micromobility. The SAP study area is bounded by I-15 on the west, 900 South on the north, State Street (US 89) on the east, and 1700 South on the south. The following key takeaways were identified based on the existing conditions analysis. § Look for opportunities to reduce overall vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle crashes § Look for opportunities to improve safety for all road users § Improve the overall pedestrian and bicycling environment. This can be done through a variety of strategies including: § Pedestrian lighting § Wider sidewalks § Remove sidewalk obstructions § Install mid-block crossing on 1300 South west of the Trax Station § Implement additional bicycle lanes § Improve existing bicycle lanes § Provide neighborhood connections § Install bicycle parking racks § Implement applicable items from the existing plans and studies for the study area § Improve accessibility to public transit options in the area APPENDIX87 093684000 Transportation Network Analysis - Existing Conditions 2021-05-26 Existing Conditions Analysis.docx May 2021 APPENDIX &&''''(())**++,,--&&-- CRASH DATA SUMMARY REPORT CRASH SUM M ARY REPORT Ballpark Statio n A rea Crashes (2015-2020) Created on May 25, 2021 Created by Jacob Farns w orth D ata extents: January 1, 2015 to December 29, 2020 Appl ied Fi l te rs Total Cr ashes 1,306 Fatal Cras hes 6 UDOT Cra sh Summa ry Cra sh es 1,306 10 0.00 % 764 5 8.50 % 163 1 2.48 % 153 1 1.72 % 134 1 0.26% 80 6.13% 77 5.90% 73 5.59% 116 8.8 9% Cra sh Severity Crashes 70 3 53.8 3% 32 4 24.8 1% 23 9 18.3 0% 3 4 2.6 0% 6 0.4 6% Inju ry L evel P eop le Sh a pe: Polygon Yea r ≤≥2015 - 2 020 Tota l Cra sh es In tersection Related Roa dwa y Depa rture Sp eed Rela ted Distra cted Driving DUI Pedestria n Involved CMV In volved + 5 m ore N o in jury/P DO Possible in jury Su spected Min or Inju ry Su spected Seriou s Inju ry F a ta l © Mapbox © Open StreetMa p Im prov e th is m a p APPENDIX 88 2 ,6 23 76 .23% 4 71 13 .69% 3 03 8 .81% 37 1 .08% 6 0 .17% 1 0 .03% M ann er of Collisio n Cra sh es 4 36 33 .38% 329 25.19% 285 21.82 % 106 8.12 % 70 5.36 % 27 2.07 % 25 1.91 % 18 1.38 % 10 0.76 % Cra sh Da te Time (Yea r)Cra sh es 176 1 3.48% 242 18.53% 196 15.0 1% 229 17.5 3% 281 21.5 2% 18 2 13.9 4% 0 0% Roa dwa y Surface Condition Crashes 1,12 0 85.7 6% 13 0 9.95% 2 7 2.07% 1 7 1.30% 7 0.54% 4 0.31% 1 0.08% 0 0% W ea th er Con dition Cra sh es 9 97 76 .34% N o inju ry P ossible in ju ry Su sp ected Min or Inju ry Su sp ected Seriou s In jury Fa ta l U nknown Angle Fron t to Rea r N ot Ap plica ble/Sin g le V eh icle Sideswipe Sa m e Direction P a rked V eh icle H ea d On (fron t-to-fron t) U nknown Sideswipe Opposite Direction + 3 m ore 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 + 6 m ore Dry W et Sn ow Ice/Frost Slu sh U nknown (retired) Sa nd, Dirt, Gravel + 8 m ore C lear 197 15.08 % 63 4.82 % 40 3.06 % 6 0.46 % 1 0.08 % 1 0.08 % 1 0.08 % 0 0% Most H a rmful E ven t V eh icle 2,051 8 1.94% 111 4.43% 70 2.8 0% 69 2.7 6% 50 2.0 0% 31 1.2 4% 2 0 0.8 0% 1 9 0.7 6% 8 2 3.2 8% Ligh t Condition Crashes 96 4 73.81% 24 4 18.68% 42 3.22% 30 2.30% 16 1.23% 5 0 .38% 5 0 .38% Clou dy Rain Snowing Un kn own F og, Sm og Severe Crosswin ds Sleet, H a il + 3 m ore Collision With Oth er Motor Veh icle in Transport Collision W ith Pa rked Motor V eh icle Con crete Barrier Pedestria n Peda cycle Other Fixed Object* Collision Between Motor Veh icle in Transport a n d Vehicle Ca rgo/P art or Ob ject Set in Motion by Motor Veh icle Overturn/Rollover + 47 more Da ylig ht Da rk - Ligh ted Da rk - N ot Lig hted Du sk Da rk - Unkn own Lig hting Da wn Un kn own Oth er 0 0.00 % APPENDIX DCASE STUDYANALYSIS APPENDIX 90 Salt Lake City Ballpark Station Area Plan Case Study Analysis Stadium Area Activation & Mobility Best Practices January 2020 Prepared By: Page | 1 TT aa bb llee ooff CCoonntt eenntt ss II nnttrroodduuccttiioonn .............................................................................................................................. 2 MMaajjoorr LLeeaa gguuee EExxaammpplleess:: ............................................................................................................. 3 Boston – Fenway Park ............................................................................................................. 3 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 3 Design Features .................................................................................................................. 3 Neighborhood Integration .................................................................................................... 3 Gameday / Non-Gameday Activation ..................................................................................... 4 Chicago – Wrigley Field............................................................................................................ 4 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 4 Design Features .................................................................................................................. 5 Neighborhood Integration .................................................................................................... 5 Gameday / Non-Gameday Activation ..................................................................................... 5 MMiinnoorr LLeeaagguuee EExxaammpplleess:: ............................................................................................................. 6 Oklahoma City – Chickasaw Bricktown Ballpark ........................................................................... 6 Ball Park Facts .................................................................................................................... 6 Development of Downtown .................................................................................................. 7 Gameday/Non-Gameday Activation ...................................................................................... 8 Interconnected Transportation.............................................................................................. 8 Key Takeaways .......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. El Paso – Southwest University Park..........................................................................................11 Ball Park Facts ...................................................................................................................11 Neighborhood Revitalization ...............................................................................................12 Transportation ..................................................................................................................14 Key Takeaways .......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Memphis – AutoZone Park ......................................................................................................16 Ball Park Facts ...................................................................................................................16 Neighborhood Integration ...................................................................................................17 Transportation ..................................................................................................................17 Community Integration.......................................................................................................18 Key Takeaways .......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Summary.................................................................................................................................19 APPENDIX91 Page | 2 II nn tt rroodd uuccttii oonn Creating thriving and inclusive neighborhoods in areas surrounding major and minor league ballparks is a goal that cities strive to achieve through a variety of infrastructure and non-infrastructure investments . However, achieving this goal is often a challenge. Ballpark architecture and design plays a role in how well it integrates and enhances the surrounding community, but there are a number of other factors extending beyond the ballpark itself that has the ability to help accelerate or facilitate economic and community vibrancy and integrate these otherwise disparate land uses . This exploration of case studies from ballpark areas across the country provides the planning team and the community examples of ballpark design and ballpark district activation strategies and outcomes to understand and identify lessons learned from similar ballparks that might support the vision and goals for the Smith’s Ballpark area . Case studies were selected based on those ballpark areas that are similar in urban scale and context to Smith’s Ballpark, including proximity to high quality transit, and community activation/integration. The initial list of case studies included: • Denver, CO • Toronto, ON • Ogden, UT • Kansas City, MO • St Louis, MO • St. Paul, MN • Minneapolis, MN • Atlanta, GA • Memphis, TN • Boston, MA • Oklahoma City, OK The initial list was paired down and refined with input from the plan technical committee to focus on those case studies that have some of the most valuable lessons learned from similar challenges faced by Smith’s Ballpark neighborhood in Salt Lake City. The technical committee specifically wanted to focus the selection and exploration on ballpark and ballpark areas that • Are experiencing similar challenges to the SLC Ballpark area • Have a mixture of surrounding land uses • Have existing high quality transit connections The final set of detailed case studies explored below are a combination of major league and minor league ballpark areas and consider the challenges faced by these ballparks and their surrounding neighborhoods and the unique strategies employed by these communities to overcome those challenges. Page | 3 MM aa jj oorr LL eeaa gguuee EE xxaammpp lleess:: Boston – Fenway Park Location: Boston, MA City Population : 694,583 Stadium Capacity: 37,305 Opening Date: April 1912 Introduction Fenway Park, located in Boston, Massachusetts, near Kenmore Square has been the home of the Boston Red Sox Since 1912. The stadium has undergone many renovations and transformations through the years but remains the oldest active ballpark in Major League Baseball (MLB ). Its constrained location in the dense Fenway–Kenmore neighborhood has necessitated the park to be been renovated or expanded many times, resulting in quirky features including "The Triangle", Pesky's Pole, and the Green Monster in left field. The ballpa rk is known for providing an intimate fan experience and is the fifth smallest among MLB ballparks by seating capacity, second smallest by total capacity, and one of eight that cannot accommodate at least 40,000 spectators. The Fenway Neighborhood grew up around the stadium and today is one of Boston’s most thriving and walkable urban neighborhoods today. Design Features The irregular shaped city block forced the original ballpark designers to get creative in how they aligned the playing field, grandstands , and concourses. The ballpark’s irregularities coupled with the ballpark’s principles of jewel box architecture has created a memorable design that cannot be recreated. Fenway Park is one of the two remaining “jewel box” ballparks still in use in MLB (the other being Wrigley Field). Jewel box is a term used in reference to ballparks built (or re -built) primarily between 1909 and 1915 that feature a two-tier grandstand design and are often squeezed inside a city block. The jewel box design and context results in significant number of obstructed view seats at the ballpark, due to pillars supporting the upper deck. Fenway’s integration into the irregular city block created the need to incorporate some unique design features such as the “green mons ter”, the 37-foot wall in left field, to compensate for the short outfield dimensions, and the “triangle” – a point where the outfield walls meet in centerfield at an extreme angle, creating a triangle section of seats. These unique features that could be challenges or drawbacks, are what make the stadium so beloved. Neighborhood Integration Fenway Park is located along Lansdowne Street and Jersey Street in the Kenmore Square area of Boston. After the ballpark was built, the neighborhood began to grow rapidly and there were intentional efforts to create buildings around the stadium that meshed with the architecture and height datum that was already created. This created a tight knit relations hip between the park and community, something that is noticeably lacking in most other ballparks throughout the country. The ballpark is the primary draw in the neighborhood, but the character of the area is far more nuanced with myriad of trails , quiet pa rks, museums, academic institutions and retail opportunities . Additionally, in the past 10 years, the neighborhood has seen millions of dollars in new development, creating a n area that attracts students, young professionals, and families alike to live and visit . APPENDIX 92 Page | 4 Gameday / Non -Gameday Activation The ballpark has existed for so long that the immediate surrounding area has evolved over time to almost serve as an extension of the ballpark. This is illustrated prominently on Lansdowne Street. The area surrounding Lansdowne Street is famous for its music venues and nightlife, and the street comes alive with outdoor vendors on Red Sox game days , with the surrounding bars and restaurants spilling into the street. During the 2020 season, that blur between ballpark and neighborhood was enhanced when Lansdowne Street was temporarily closed to allow the surrounding dining establishments to expand their outdoor space for social distancing and to attempt to recreate the gameday experience while no fans were allowed into the stadium. The ballpark hosts a number of different events throughout the year , though the focus is clearly baseball. Other events semiregular hosted at Fenway include a handful of concerts and special sporting events, such as international soccer or professional hockey exhibitions. Key Takeaways Fenway Park is one of the most iconic ballparks and ballpark areas in the major leagues because its history, its design, and the activity and draw of the surrounding neighborhood. Some of these themes are hard to be replicated, mainly because the neighborhoods has grown up around the ballpark. However as mentioned, there are a some strategies that other ballpark and ballpark areas can implement to help recreate some of Fenway’s success including: • Celebrate what makes a ballpark and its surrounding area unique. Some of Fenway’s most memorable elements have been engineered away in other more modern ballparks. Irregularities in design and layout should be celebrated to foster a unique sense of place. • Extend the ballpark atmosphere beyond the ballpark. Fenway Park’s gameday atmosphere spills out into the surrounding streets for multiple blocks, par tly due to the limited space inside the ballpark. While that may be hard for other ballparks to replicate, the ballpark atmosphere is possible to foster and create outside the ballpark by creative use of right of way (closing /reusing streets) and special building regulations (zoning and design guidelines) Chicago – Wrigley Field Location: Chicago, IL City Population : 2,693,976 Stadium Capacity: 41,649 Opening Date: April 1914 Introduction First opened in 1914, Wrigley Field is the oldest stadium in the National League, and second oldest behind Fenway Park. With its iconic ivy-covered outfield walls, the hand turned scoreboard, and the distinctive main entry marquee, there is no shortage of design elements which make the ballpark unique and beloved. These unique elements are not contained strictly to the ballpark itself but are also found throughout the surrounding neighborhood. The attempt to blend the ballpark and adjacent neighborhood required establishment of multiple “good neighbor agreements ” and other policies negotiated between the ballpark and the surrounding communities to help resolves gameday conflicts over time. Conflicts aside, Wrigley is one of the best examples of a stadium as an anchor for stadium urbanism that results a thriving, walkable area. Page | 5 Design Features Wrigley Field has several unique elements that contribute to the park’s allure. The most iconic elements of the stadium’s design include its core building materials – steel-and-concrete with exposed bricks and steel beams – to reflect the C ity’s modern, industrial character. Inside the stadium there are a number of design features unique to Wrigley, such as the ivy-covered outfield walls, hand operated scoreboard, and main entrance marquee. The seating arrangement within the park is also very intimate, with very little foul territory separating fans from the field of play. The two recessed wall areas, or "wells", located in left and right field, give those areas a little more length than if the wall were to follow the contour from center field. These dimensional irregularities create strange bounces and swirling winds that the ballpark is famous for. While these design elements contribute to what makes it so special, it is the ballparks location and integration with its surroundings that make it so special, yet impossible to replicate. Neighborhood Integration The park’s integration with its surroundings is a product mainly of the timing of its construction. Built in 1914, the area leaned on public transportation instead of cars do get people to and from the stadium, making it critical for the stadium to be in a walkable and connected neighborhood. The neighborhood around the stadium—known as Wrigleyville— has become more desirable and developed over time, especially since the 1990s. Although home to numerous bars and restaurants, the area is largely residential, which added to the stadium’s appeal but also resulted in resistance to some proposed changes. Notably, it took until 1988, and the threat of moving the Cubs baseball team to a different stadium, for lights to be installed at Wrigley Field, allowing night games to be played. After the Cubs and Wrigley were purchased in 2009, a major renovation was proposed that drew strong objections from some residents. Ultimately, much of the plan was approved, which include a redefined clubhouse, adjacent hotel, front office, and outdoor plaza . The neighborhood and the Cubs organization have gone as far as to create a “Neighborhood Protection Agreement” which primarily addresses parking, traffics, and public safety. The ballpark and surrounding neighborhood exist in a symbiotic relationship in which enhancements to the ballpark have driven demand for the surrounding neighborhood and vis versa. While close integration of the ballpark with the surrounding residential neighborhood has created conflicts over the years, the benefits have outweighed the consequences and resulted in one of the greatest ballpark districts in the entire country. Gameday / Non -Gameday Activation Located in the North Chicago community area of Lakeview, within the Wrigleyville Neighborhood, the ba llpark and surrounding neighborhood have grown-up with each other. Wrigley has stood the test of time because it is sewn into the surrounding urban fabric. Hours before the game, fans will stream into the Wrigleyville neighborhood, packing local bars and restaurants. Those arriving by public transportation will step onto the platform at the Addison Red Line stop and look down on bustling streets and a view of the field. An exceptional unique gameday feature is the neighboring bars and restaurants that overlook the field. Nearby buildings are so close to the field that owners have even converted their rooftops to bleacher seating they sell to fans , which is sometimes a harder ticket to get than one to the actual game. APPENDIX93 Page | 6 Minimal extra attention is needed within the ballpark area during gamedays to create the memorable scene found in and around the stadium. The walkable location closely knit urban form, and the intentional and unintentional blending of neighborhood and ballpark create an exceptional gameday atmos phere. Key Takeaways Like Fenway, Wrigley’s age and history play a huge role in elevating the ballpark to one of the most beloved in all of baseball. However, there are some applicable strategies that can be applied in the SLC Ballpark area to help recreate some of what makes Wrigley so special including: • Having an open dialogue between ballpark and neighborhood. The incredibly close integration of ballpark and neighborhood has created several challenges through the years . The partnership between the two has been rocky at times but having both an open dialoged through a neighborhood council, along with a formalized agreement in place, have helped the two navigate disputes and thrive together. • Blur lines between ballpark and neighborhood. There is perhaps no better example of this takeaway Wrigley Field. Surrounding businesses have taken advantage of the low walls in the outfield and built belchers that can see into the stadium, becoming some of the most iconic elements of the stadium experience. While there are logistical challenges to implementing some of these elements at modern ballparks, creative ideas should be explored to help create a more permeable relationship between the ballpark and its surroundings. MM ii nn oo rr LLeeaagguuee EExx aammpplleess:: Oklahoma City – Chickasaw Bricktown Ballpark Ball Park Facts Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Population : 551,789 Capacity: 13,066 Opening Date: April 1998 Construction Cost: $34 million Funding Source: Voter approved one-cent sales tax increase in 1993 to fund the Metropolitan Area Projects Plan (MAPS). Events: Oklahoma City Dodgers Minor League games, meeting space, private events, convention events, concerts, on- field events, walks and runs, and festivals. Surrounding Area Facts (1-Mile Radius) 2020 Population: 4,532 Population Growth (2010 to 2020): +60% 2020 Median Income: $56,927 2020 Occupied Housing Units: 90% Rented/10% Owned Population Race & Ethnicity: Page | 7 Viewed as one of the most successful ballparks in the minor league, Bricktown ballpark was part of the larger Bricktown redevelopment plan that helped energize the surrounding area while generating $238 million dollars in housing and mixed-use development. This case study highlights practices and lessons learned in supporting economic development , community-driven design and activation, and how the ballpark and surround area have blended development and culture. Development of Downtown The Bricktown Ballpark was constructed after voter approval of dedicating sales tax as a part of the Metropolitan Area Projects (MAPS) initiative. MAPS outlines the development of major capital improvements in the core area of Oklahoma City to spur urban community redevelopment , such as implementing a trolley service and developing a paved canal system, convention center, and music hall, among other projects . The total investment for nine projects funded by MAPS, including the construction of the Chickasaw Brickyard Ballpark, was $360 million. Since the construction of the ballpark, the area has spring up as an “play, work, live” destination with various mixed-use buildings, multi-family housing developments, hotels, restaurants, shops, a movie theater, and more. As a result of the initial capital investments, by 2005, 3,400 projects worth $1.3 billion in capital White Population , 57.37% Black/African American Population , 25.62% American Indian/Alaska Native Population , 4.19% Asian Population , 2.89% Other Race Population, 5.89% Population of Two or More Races , 4.06% OKC Dodgers Baseball Game Hispanic Ethnicity 13% Non Hispanic 87% APPENDIX 94 Page | 8 investments were completed or in progress in the area 1. Gameday/Non-Gameday Activation The ballpark and surrounding Downtown Bricktown district have become an entertainment attraction and a community for residents and tourist alike. The ballpark attracts thousands of visitors during baseball games and other community events. The Chickasaw Bricktown Ballpark hosts a variety of events including: • Oklahoma City Dodgers games; • Fundraising runs/walks; • Snow tubing in winter months; • An annual Winter Festival; • High s chool baseball series; • Concerts; and • Meetings and s eminars . I n 2017, the ballpark hosted 451,033 visitor s for baseball games and 146,778 visit or s attending other events hosted at the ballpark 2. The Bricktown district also features various retail stores, dining options, bars, clubs, hotels and other attractions which have become a destination feature for ballpark visitors. Interconnected Transportation The Bricktown ballpark is accessible by various interconnected transportation options that go beyond personal automobiles, including : • Oklahoma City Streetcar; • Oklahoma River Water Taxi; • Spookies bicycle sharing; • Embark bus service; and • Exclusive pedestrian streets. The diversity in transportation modes makes it easy for visitors and residents to access the ballpark and surrounding areas in Bricktown. Pedestrian Connectivity Various pedestrian friendly amenties accommodate the thousands of visitors in Bricktown. These include spacious sidewalks, green spaces, walkwa ys along the canal, connectivity to parking areas , and access signage. The pedestrian facilities provide accessibility between Bricktown area attractions, parking, and the Chickasaw Bricktown Ballpark and enhances the experience by providing visitors a with comfortable and aesthetically pleasant walking experience to the ballpark. 1 Impact Analysis of Oklahoma’s MAPS and Other Significant Central City Investments (2009). 2 Oklahoma City MAPS Project Economic Impact Study (2019). Winter Festival at Bricktown Ballpark Water Taxi at Bricktown Page | 9 Wanda Jackson Way Wanda Jackson Way is a 0.15-mile long activated alleyway that provides access from the east area parking facilities directly to the main entrance on the southwest corner of the ballpark. Along the pedestrian- friendly alley are: • A restaurant; • A bar; • Mini g olf; • Water taxi guided tours; • Brickopolis Entertainment; • Walkways along the canal; and • Outdoor seating areas . California Avenue California Avenue is a scenic pedestrian walkway along the Bricktown canal. The walkway connects parking facilities , a streetcar stop on Sheridan Avenue, and the entrance on the northwest corner of the ballpark. The walkway features restaurants with outdoor seating , landscaped sidewalks , pedestrian bridges across the canal, and access to Wanda Jackson Way. Summary • The Chickasaw Bricktown Ballpark, and other MAPS projects, initiated the investment in the area by private developers. • The ballpark hosts baseball games and other events that attract hundreds of thousands of visitors to the Downtown area . • Interconnected and diverse transportation options create an accessible and inviting experience for visitors arriving at the ballpark area and navigating around the ballpark area and surrounding neighborhood. • Pedestrian friendly areas provide connectivity between the ballpark and parking facilities and help integrate entertainment and other visitor amenities . Technical Committee Success Measures • Transit Connection- o OKC Streetcar Stop directly next to stadium • Surrounding Land Use o Mixed Use; Multifamily Residential; Other Entertainment • Similar Challenges o Non-gameday activation Wanda Jackson Way Restaurants along California Avenue APPENDIX95 Page | 10 o Growing g entrification concerns o Maintaining momentum of new ballpark and proactively enhancing gameday experience Key Takeaways • Look to create additional drivers beyond the ballpark. While a ballpark can help define an area and be the primary attractor, other community serving destinations can help create a more year-round destination and help to activate the area on non-gamedays • Make mult imodal connectivity safe and efficient, on game days and non-gamedays. While most still may drive to the game, providing safe and convenient options for people to walk, bike, and take transit can benefit both gameday traffic operations, but also benefit the neighborhood on non-gamedays. • Adaptative Reuse of existing infrastructure . Thinking creatively about existing infrastructure can help add to an area’s sense of place by adding an element of originality to an area. Projects can include the reuse of existing ROW or other urban utility infrastructure. Page | 11 El Paso – Southwest University Park Ball Park Facts Location: El Paso, Texas City Population : 682,669 Stadium Capacity: 9,500 Opening Date: April 2014 Construction Cost: $72 million Funding Source: General fund subsidies from the City of El Paso through hotel and sales tax, rent and parking revenues. Events: El Paso Chihuahuas Minor League games, soccer games, music festivals, food festivals, marathons, and concerts. Surrounding Area Facts (1-Mile Radius) 2020 Population: 14,994 Population Growth (2010 to 2020): +11% 2020 Median Income: $16,713 2020 Occupied Housing Units: 84% Rented/16% Owned Population Race & Ethnicity: Opened on the edge of the Downtown area, El Paso’s ballpark case study highlights successes in integrat ing and celebrat ing the community’s culture through public art and activated public spaces. The ballpark is also on a challenging site, segregated from the surrounding neighborhoods by a freeway and White Population , 72.25% Other Race Population, 19.15% Black/African American Population , 4.99% Population of Two or More Races , 2.33% Asian Population , 1.29% Hispanic Ethnicity 87% Non Hispanic 13% APPENDIX 96 Page | 12 heavy rail lines, causing the City and its partners to think creatively how they enhance the gameday experience of getting to the stadium, while also improving neighborhood mobility. Neighborhood Revitalization Southwest University Park emerged from the desire to revitalize the Downtown area of El Paso. In 2006, the City of El Paso published El Paso Downtown 2015 Plan which introduced strategic planning efforts in redeveloping Downtown. The plan identified a D owntown arena as a catalyst for spurring investment in entertainment and hotels in the district and investment in amenities for local neighborhoods . The Downtown neighborhood would be accessible by expanded existing transportation networks , including transit options and connected, accessible pedestrian facilities . Ballpark as a Catalyst for Development In the C ity’s Comprehensive Plan, Plan El Paso (2012), the City laid the foundations for the Downtown 2015 Plan and provides regulations and policies to guide the growth of the C ity. This included an evaluation of El Paso’s outdated City Hall site to determine best use of the land to help the C ity achieve its D owntown goals . Part of the results from the evaluation spurred discussions about constructing a stadium on the site. In 2012, the plan was adopted, and the City built the Southwest University Park Baseball Stadium. The ballpark integrates into the Downtown area’s historical character and reflects the history and culture of El Paso through commissioned public artwork. The City of El Paso identified the buildout of a stadium as a catalyst for economic development in the Downtown area. Since the opening of the ballpark, millions of dollars’ worth of private development has been constructed, including new hotels, apartment building s, and renovations of historic buildings . While investment in the stadium has helped spark development, Plan El Paso also identifies a set of policies and initiatives to continue to help with the Downtown revitalization efforts. These include: • Evaluating rezoning for future land use plans based on a SmartCode to encourage development by private investors; • Reus ing and repurpos ing Downtown buildings as office, retail, entertainment, and residential space; and • Completing a connected pedestrian network of greens, plazas, comfortable streetscapes, and pedestrian passages connecting Downtown area neighborhoods; and • Improving the provision of on-street parking, public parking lots and garages, and shared private parking spaces. Gameday/Non-Gameday Activation Plan El Paso Future Land Use Framework for Downtown Page | 13 The Southwestern University Ballpark offers its venue for a variety of events, including : • El Paso Chihuahua Minor League games; • Marathons; • Music festivals; • El Paso Locomotive FC soccer games; • High school baseball games; • Boxing exhibitions; • Sports expos; • Job fairs; and • Graduation ceremonies. According to El Paso Downtown Management District’s (DMD) Annual Report (2017), a survey identified that 55% of Downtown El Paso visitors visited the area for “Events”. Of those visitors , 38% attended sporting events. Las Plazas (Art District) Southwest University Park is situated within the Las Plazas Art District, which is a hub for arts and community events, including street festivals . Destinations in the arts district include: • El Paso Museum of Art; • The Plaza Theater; • San Jacinto Plaza; • El Paso Museum of History; • Convention Center; and • Abraham Chavez Theater . According to the DMD’s Annual Report, 26% of Downtown visitors attend street festivals while 2% attended museum events. Union Plaza District South and west of the ballpark is Union Plaza , which is a center for entertainment and nightlife. The plaza is centered around a repurposed industrial building that now houses restaurants and bars in a small area bounded by Durango Street, San Francisco Avenue, Overland Avenue and Anthony Street. Repurposing the historical buildings helps keep the historical character of the area while providing new, attractive uses. Western Street bisects the plaza and provides walkable, shaded paths, and outdoor. A wide pedestrian walkway painted by a local artist exists along Durango Street and provides connectivity between Union Plaza and direct access to the main entrance of Southwest Pedestrian Amenities along Western Street San Jacinto Plaza APPENDIX97 Page | 14 University Park. If development in the area continues, as planned, the district will become a diverse entertainment and dining area activated by ballpark visitors due to ease of access. Transportation Downtown El Paso and accessibility to the ballpark is limited, however a few critical strategic connections have been created. While t here are gaps in pedestrian connectivity, and minimal bicycle infrastructure, the City has taken steps to improve connectivity such as the creation of the pedestrian walkway along Dur ango Street bridge. Rather than focusing on every street in the stadium area, resources and investment have been focused on creating a few vibrant and efficient connections. As the Downtown area is expected to grow, the transportation infrastructure and options are planned to expand as well to create a connected area. El Paso Streetcar The ballpark initiated the revitalization of Downtown El Paso and incentivized the expansion of transportation alternatives. While the ballpark itself is located on a segregated site surrounded by a freeway and heavy rail lines, the City has begun making Downtown more accessible. On major investment is the integrated a streetcar transit system, the El Paso Streetcar, which is a 4.8-mile system with 27 stops that connects the City’s Downtown and uptown neighborhoods . The streetcar creates a reliable method of travel for the community and visitors to access key destinations in Downtown such as businesses and restaurants, the ballpark stadium, government buildings, and the art districts. The s treetcar experiences the highest ridership on weekends, during baseball games, and for special events in Downtown. Summary • Downtown El Paso is activated by community and sporting events in and around the stadium. It hosts its largest crowds during sporting games at Southwest University Park and during events in the arts district. • While the ballpark helped spur initial development and investment in the area, the C ity has put into place additional policies to help continue revitalization efforts . • Repurposing and reusing existing historical buildings for a variety of future developments reduces infrastructure costs , enhances existing buildings , and maintains the historical character of an area. • Expanding transportation alternatives is an important component in creating a n accessible Downtown area . Pedestrian Walkway along Durango Street El Paso Streetcar Page | 15 • Strategically focus resources and investments to create efficient connectivity between the ballpark and surrounding D owntown neighborhood. Technical Committee Success Measures • Transit Connection o El Paso Streetcar Stop ~500’ from stadium entrance • Surrounding Land Use o Civic; Office; Commercial; limited residential • Similar Challenges o Lack of Ballpark related redevelopment o Challenging connectivity barriers Key Takeaways A ballpark is not enough. From an economic development and redevelopment perspective, Southwest University Park confirms what many other Cities have encountered when building a new sports facility. While it can help kick start or accelerate economic development, in of itself is not enough to be the sole driver for an area’s revitalization. Strategic connectivity investments can go a long way. The connectivity of the area surrounding Southwest University Park suffers from a range of transportation barriers such as freight rail tracks and a major freeway. The City has focused on improving a few strategic connections to the ballpark, rather than improving every single street in the areas. The Durango Street overpass and the Missouri Rd Woonerf are two examples of those strategic investments to enhance immediate ballpark connectivity. APPENDIX 98 Page | 16 Memphis – AutoZone Park Ball Park Facts Location: Memphis, Tennessee City Population : 650,618 Stadium Capacity: 14,320 Opening Date: April 2000 Construction Cost: $80.5 million Funding Source: The Memphis Redbirds privately financed construction of the ballpark ($46 million) and the renovation of the Moore Building (now called the Toyota Center ) next to it through the issuance of $72 million in tax-exempt bonds by the Center City Revenue Finance Corp. Events: Memphis Redbirds Minor League games, soccer games , races, corporate outings, wedding events, and concerts. Surrounding Area Facts (1-Mile Radius) 2020 Population: 12,210 Population Growth (2010 to 2020): +1% 2020 Median Income: $25,195 2020 Occupied Housing Units: 89% Rented/11% Owned Population Race & Ethnicity: Home of the Memphis Red Birds, the AutoZ one ballpark is renowned for its historic design and the efforts to integrat e with and enhance the surrounding neighborhood. The ballpark won a Congress for the New Urbanism Charter Award for the way in which the ballpark enhanced the surrounding neighborhood and helped kickstart community revitalization. Black/African American Population , 74.26% White Population , 21.43% Population of Two or More Races , 1.79% Asian Population , 1.51% Other Race Population, 1.02% Memphis AutoZone Park Hispanic Ethnicity 2% Non Hispanic 98% Page | 17 AutoZone Parks hosts a variety of events including: • Memphis Redbirds minor league baseball games; • USL Memphis 901 FC s occer games; • Concerts; • Meetings and corporate outings; and • Community movie events. The ballpark was opened in 2000 and was identified as a part of the Memphis/Shelby C ounty South Central Business Improvement District Comprehensive Plan to aid in diversifying and revitalizing the D owntown Memphis area. Prior to construction of the ballpark, the area was filled with abandoned buildings and empty lots . Neighborhood Integration The completion of the ballpark sparked an urban renaissance in the Downtown Memphis area. The area was developed strategically by establishing a special land use zone known as the “Sport and Entertainment District”. The special dis trict is governed by zoning regulations that uniquely compliment the area’s character. The AutoZone Park now blends historical building with a sports facility to offer a unique entertainment area . Other uses for the entertainment district to complement the ballpark include apartment buildings , an elementary school, a law school, office buildings , and commercial developments . All new developments are integrated into the area to create a livable entertainment district. The Ballpark District was a recipient of an Urban Land Institute (ULI) Award for Excellence in 2002 as Downtown Memphis developed into an enhanced neighborhood. There is both a residential and visitor community in the ballpark area, and in addition to the sporting events held at the stadium, there are also regular community events , such as free fitness classes at the park, festivals , and live music. Ballpark Features The Memphis ballpark was designed with brick and exposed steel truss work to symbolize and integrate into the C ity’s historic area. The area was once a warehouse and distribution center as well as a railroad center for Memphis. The historical, abandoned building s around the ballpa rk have been refurbished to provide modern amenities. Transportation The Downtown Memphis area features walkable streets , parks and open spaces, a bike sharing program, electric scooters, and trolley service which contribute to creating an engaging and connected neighborhood. The City has been active in providing “first and last mile” transportation options. AutoZone Park can be accessed by: • Bicycles – bike lanes surround the ballpark and there are there are three bike share stations accessible from its entrance. • Main Street Trolley Service – wide paved sidewalks connect the trolley stops on Main Street and the ballpark. • Vehicles – parking for vehicles is provided in proximity to the ballpark, and a network of pedestrian facilities connect parking to the ballpark entrance . APPENDIX99 Page | 18 Transportation Options along Main Street Community Integration AutoZone Park is home to the Memphis Redbirds franchise, a Minor League Triple-A team. The Memphis Redbirds in the only nonprofit team in minor league baseball. The team has not only invested to revitalize D owntown Memphis but has also invested in the community by giving back to the residents of Memphis. The Memphis Redbirds B aseball Foundation, run by a volunteer board of 20 Memphis citizens , supports a variety of philanthropic activities, including : • Donat ing thousands of dollars to inner-C ity charities; • Awarding more than $600,000 a year for youth baseball and softball programs in City schools or summer leagues; • Refurbishing area facilities for youth activities; and • Providing opportunities for children to attend professional baseball games . Summary • A “live, work, play, and shop” neighborhood can be developed strategically around a ballpark by establishing unique zoning districts and regulations to complement the area’s character. • Community events within a ballpark area, such as community movie nights , concerts or festivals can help engage the surrounding community and enhance surrounding neighborhoods. • Providing walkable streets and “first and last mile” options are important in creating an accessible ballpark and surrounding neighborhood. Technical Committee Success Measures • Transit Connection o Streetcar stop on Main Street ~1,000’ from entrance • Surrounding Land Use o Downtown context; mixed use; office; limited residential • Similar Challenges o Neighborhood revitalization and activation Page | 19 Key Takeaways Not a ballpark, a ballpark district. What makes AutoZone Park a standout is that it was not designed simply as a ballpark. The ballpark was conceived as a “Ballpark District” including dense multifamily development , new office building s , a minor league baseball museum, a public elementary school (important for attracting families with children to downtown), and the adaptive reuse of the upper stories of an old YMCA building to lofts, along with the reuse of other historic buildings. Ballpark as public space. The entry plaza, diagonally across an intersection from the landmark Peabody Hotel, provides a place for people to enjoy music, food, and amusements before and after baseball games, and it functions as a gathering place at other times. The baseball team, and the city work to activate these spaces on gamedays and non-gamedays alike. Parking as an activator. Rather than rely on a massive parking structure/lot, fans can find about 6,000 parking spaces within four blocks of the ballpark. The parking strategy works well as people can find less expensive parking further from the ballpark and as they stroll to and from the game they help to animate the streets. SS uu mm mmaarryy The three case studies highlight different design, policy, and program initiatives that have helped activate, connect, and integrate ballpark areas and the neighborhoods and communities that surround them. The following key takeaways were inferred from the case studies research: • Strategically interconnecting diverse forms of transportation, including “first and last mile” options , is important in creating an accessible ballpark and surrounding neighborhood for both for game day mobility, and neighborhood connectivity on non-gamedays. • Establishing connected, accessible, and pedestrian-oriented land uses and facilities creates a vibrant and engaging experience for visitors and residents in the area . • Holding multiple types of events, including community-driven events within a ballpark area, such as community movie nights, concerts or festivals , can help engage the surrounding community and enhance surrounding neighborhoods. • Reusing existing buildings and infrastructure can reduce infrastructure costs, enhance an areas sense of place, maintain neighborhood history and character , and integrate ballpark design and uses with a surrounding neighborhood. • Establishing unique goals, policies , and regulations can help develop a ballpark neighborhood that complements the area’s desired character. • While a ballpark can help spur initial development and investment in an area, development or redevelopment effort will often require additional supportive policies, financing, programs, and initiatives in order to truly maximize the investment in the ballpark itself. The table below provides a summary of features for each case study that has helped the respective ballpark area activate and integrate with surrounding neighborhood. The table also includes surrounding area facts within a one-mile radius of each stadium. The pie graphs below help visualize the surrounding area population’s race and ethnicity. APPENDIX 100 Summary of Case Studies Ballpark Features Case Studies Salt Lake City Ballpark Chickasaw Bricktown Ballpark Southwest University Park AutoZone Park Location Salt Lake City, UT Oklahoma City, OK El Paso, TX Memphis, TN Opening Date - April 1998 April 2014 April 2000 Stadium Capacity - 13,066 9,500 14,320 Su r r o u n d i n g A r e a (1 m i ) Fa c t s Population (2020) 15,587 4,532 14,994 12,210 Population Growth (2010 to 2020) +15% +60% +11% +1% Median Household Income (2020) $43,166 $56,927 $16,713 $25,195 Occupied Housing Units (2020) 64% Rented/36% Owned 90% Rented/1 0% Owned 84% Rented/1 6% Owned 89% Rented/11% Owned Ba l l p a r k A r e a F e a t u r e s Identified in an area plan or Comprehensive Plan x x x Pedestrian-only infrastructure x X Multimodal Connectivity (bike share, bike lanes, shared mobility) x x Accessible by high quality transit x x x Parks/green spaces within the area x x x Diverse surrounding land uses x x x Adaptive reuse of existing buildings X x Special zoning regulations for the area x x x Ballpark hosts other events (sporting and non-sporting) x x x Supports community events within the ballpark area x x x APPENDIX101 APPENDIX ECOMMUNITYENGAGEMENT MATERIALS APPENDIX 102 Ballpark Neighborhood Station Area Plan Community Event #1 March 20, 2021 10:00 AM - NOON A G E N D A Time Description Responsible 10:00 – 10:05 Welcome & Introduction of team Susan Lundmark Christine Richman 10:05 – 10:10 Meeting norms & expectations Annaka Egan 10:10 – 10:20 Introduction to Process and Review and Input: · Roles & responsibilities · Public Engagement Schedule · Tools · Study Area · Getting to know you poll · Key ideas and terms for the vision for the Future of the Ballpark area (Review key statements/terms from prior documents) · Emerging Key Public Actions · Emerging Key Private Actions Christine Richman 10:20 – 10:50 Breakout Session #1 · Growth & Economic Development o Opportunities o Big Ideas for Growth & Economic Development · The Ballpark o Review of key take-aways from case studies o Big Ideas for the Ballpark · The Station, Transportation & Connectivity o Review of barriers/benefits of current infrastructure o Big ideas for the Station, Transportation and Connectivity Jason Claunch Steven Chester Jacob Farnsworth 10:50 – 11:20 Breakout Session #2 · Growth & Economic Development o Opportunities o Big Ideas for Growth & Economic Development · The Ballpark o Review of key take-aways from case studies o Big Ideas for the Ballpark · The Station, Transportation & Connectivity o Review of barriers/benefits of current infrastructure o Big ideas for the Station, Transportation and Connectivity Jason Claunch Steven Chester Jacob Farnsworth 11:20 – 11:50 Breakout Session #3 · Growth & Economic Development o Opportunities o Big Ideas for Growth & Economic Development · The Ballpark o Review of key take-aways from case studies o Big Ideas for the Ballpark · The Station, Transportation & Connectivity o Review of barriers/benefits of current infrastructure o Big ideas for the Station, Transportation and Connectivity Jason Claunch Steven Chester Jacob Farnsworth 11:50 - Noon Polling · Key ideas and terms for the vision for the Future of the Ballpark area (Review key statements/terms from prior documents) · Emerging Key Public Actions · Emerging Key Private Actions Christine Richman Noon Adjourn APPENDIX103 Ballpark Station Area Plan Steering Committee Meeting #1 February 11, 2021 6:00 – 8:00 PM A G E N D A # Time Description Responsible ͳ͸ǣͲͲ–͸ǣͲͷʹ͸ǣͲͷ–͸ǣͳͲƬƬ͵͸ǣͳͲ–͸ǣ͵ͷƬͶ͸ǣ͵ͷ–͸ǣͶͷWhy have we asked you here tonight? • What is a Station Area Plan • How will it be used? • Role of the Steering Committee • Process & schedule ͷ͸ǣͶͷ–͹ǣͳͲƬ • Phase 1 – Public Engagement launch o Logo o Website o Outreach o Survey – Survey review and practice • Tutorial on Social Pinpoint • Stakeholder & small group interviews • Who is missing from the conversation? • How can we reach them? ͸͹ǣͳͲǦ͹ǣʹͷ͹͹ǣʹͷ–͹ǣͷͷ • Economic & market analysis • Transportation & connectivity ͺ͹ǣͷͷ–ͺǣͲͲͻͺǣͲͲ APPENDIX 104 Ballpark Station Area Plan Steering Committee Meeting #2 March 11, 2021 6:00 – 8:00 PM A G E N D A # Time Description Responsible ͳ͸ǣͲͲ–͸ǣͲͷʹ͸ǣͲͷ–͸ǣͳͲƬƬ͵͸ǣͳͲ–͸ǣͳͷͶ͸ǣʹͲ–͸ǣʹͷͷ͸ǣʹͷ–͸ǣͶͷ Ƭ • Opportunities • Big Ideas for Growth & Economic Development Discussion ͸͸ǣͶͷ–͹ǣͲͷǡƬ • Review of barriers/benefits of current infrastructure • Big ideas for the Station, Transportation & Connectivity ͹͹ǣͲͷǦ͹ǣʹͷ • Review key take-aways from case studies • Big ideas for the Ballpark ͺ͹ǣʹͷ–͹ǣͶͷƬ • Guiding principles • Key terms ͻ͹ǣͶͷ–͹ǣͷͷ͓ͳʹͲǡʹͲʹͳƬ͹ǣͷͷ–ͺǣͲͲͺǣͲͲ Ballpark Station Area Plan Steering Committee Meeting #3 April 8, 2021 6:00 – 8:00 PM A G E N D A # Time Description Responsible ͳ͸ǣͲͲ–͸ǣͲͷʹ͸ǣͲͷ–͸ǣͳͲƬƬ͵͸ǣͳͲ–͸ǣʹͲ • Community Event debrief • Preliminary survey results • Stakeholder update Ͷ͸ǣʹͲ–͸ǣͶͷƬ • Growth & economic development • Transportation & connectivity • Ballpark/Station area ͷ͸ǣͶͷ–͹ǣͲͲ Ƭ͸͹ǣͲͲ–͹ǣ͵Ͳ • Density & growth • Connectivity • Focus areas ͹͹ǣ͵Ͳ–͹ǣͷͷ ͺ͹ǣͷͷ–ͺǣͲͲͺǣͲͲ APPENDIX105 Ballpark Station Area Plan Steering Committee Meeting #4 May 13, 2021 6:00 – 8:00 PM A G E N D A # Time Description Responsible ͳ͸ǣͲͲ–͸ǣͲͷʹ͸ǣͳͲ–͸ǣͳͷ͵͸ǣͳͷ–͸ǣ͵Ͳ Ͷ͸ǣ͵Ͳ–͸ǣͶͷ ͷ͸ǣͶͷ–͹ͳͷ͸͹ǣͳͷ–͹ǣͶͷ ͹͹ǣͶͷ–͹ǣͷͷʹͳƬʹʹͺ͹ǣͷͷ–ͺǣͲͲͺǣͲͲ APPENDIX 106 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 5. ORDINANCE SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2022 (Adopting the Ballpark Station Area Plan) An ordinance adopting the Ballpark Station Area Plan as part of Salt Lake City’s general plan. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a hearing on July 27, 2022 on a petition by Mayor Erin Mendenhall to adopt the Ballpark Station Area Plan as a geographically-specific part of Salt Lake City’s general plan required by Part 4 of Utah Code Chapter 10-9a; and WHEREAS, at its July 27, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said petition; and WHEREAS, after holding a public hearing on this matter, the City Council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Adopting the Ballpark Station Area Plan. That Ballpark Station Area Plan provided in Exhibit “A” attached hereto is adopted as part of Salt Lake City’s general plan as required by Part 4 of Utah Code Chapter 10-9a. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________, 2022. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2022. Published: ______________. Ordinance adopting the Ballpark Station Area Plan APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney August 11, 2022 EXHIBIT “A” Ballpark Station Area Plan 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED 1 July 21, 2022 To Nanette Larsen and Members of the Planning Commission: On behalf of the Board of the Ballpark Community Council, I am writing to respond to several of the points within the current draft of the Ballpark Station Area Plan, posted to https://www.slc.gov/planning/master-plans/ballparkplan/ on April 13, 2022. First, we applaud many of the “Big Moves” identified in the Plan that will help transform the Ballpark neighborhood and guide growth in the area, including reconfiguring the Ballpark TRAX station, improving 1300 South for pedestrians, creating a sense of place at and around the Ballpark, and investing in community amenities and green space to balance density with livability factors. However, this letter asks for two major revisions in the Ballpark Station Area Plan. First and foremost is that (1) public safety be made into a major criterion moving forward for all building proposals within the Ballpark neighborhood. Using public safety as a major criterion for building proposals will have implications for directing how space may be used in the Ballpark neighborhood. We call upon the city to use planning tools to address the disproportionate crime in the Ballpark community by, for example, incentivizing a mixture of establishments to that will draw people during all times of the day and enhance what Jane Jacobs referred to as “social control.” For example, staggered business hours will help maximize the amount of surveillance for neighboring business properties—Jacobs’ concept of “constant succession of eyes.” Using public safety as a lens through which to view planning decisions, it may behoove the city to evaluate the current property division among renters, owners, businesses, and public space in the Ballpark neighborhood. The second major revision (2) is asking for an acknowledgement of “tree equity”, that the Ballpark Station Area Plan explicitly note the current discrepancy for the Ballpark neighborhood in Salt Lake City’s Urban Forestry canopy and propose plans to remedy that inequity. (1) We believe that in its current iteration, this plan is fundamentally flawed in that it fails to address public safety. We acknowledge the statement on page 4 in the Plan’s Executive Summary: 2 “Although addressing policing and safety is not part of the scope of this plan, the success of many of the recommendations in this plan depend on perceived and actual safety of pedestrian and bicycle connections, public open space and plazas, and community events and activities.” While it’s useful to define the scope and purpose of any given document, that cannot be a pretext for avoiding crucial issues. Crime and public safety are the most critical issues facing the Ballpark neighborhood. A planning document should, by definition, make these primary considerations in guiding development choices and land use in the Ballpark community. We strongly request that the plan be revised, and that addressing public safety become an integral part of this plan prior to approval by the Planning Commission or City Council. Members of the Planning Commission may already be familiar with Ballpark’s crime statistics, but we encourage you to view the interactive google map Ballpark Homicides, 2018 – 2022: Tracking homicides in and adjacent to the Ballpark neighborhood in Salt Lake City, Utah. https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1xudbo- Q0dOLtXW_AK1wTyPIpN--fOjU&usp=sharing Analysis: The Homicide Rate in the Ballpark Neighborhood is 9 Times Higher Than in Salt Lake City According to Salt Lake City Police Department CompStat reports, Salt Lake City experienced 18 criminal homicides in both 2020 and 2021 (http://www.slcpd.com/ass3ts/uploads/2022/02/2021-CompStat-Annual-Summary.pdf). With a population of approximately 200,000 residents, Salt Lake City’s 2020 and 2021 homicide rate of 1 homicide per 11,111 residents is low for that of a mid-sized city. However, the homicide rate of the Ballpark neighborhood is not low. The homicide rate in Ballpark Homicides, 2018 – 2022 3 the Ballpark neighborhood is disproportionately high compared to the rest of Salt Lake City. In both 2020 and 2021, 5 (28%) of Salt Lake City’s 18 homicides occurred in or within a block of the Ballpark neighborhood. The residential population of the Ballpark neighborhood is approximately 6,000 residents, or 3% of the residential population of Salt Lake City (6,130 residents according to the Kem Gardner Institute report from 2019). This means that a neighborhood with approximately 3% of the residential population is carrying 28% of the burden of the homicides in Salt Lake City. Per capita, the Ballpark neighborhood experiences 9 times the rate of homicides compared with the whole of Salt Lake City. Put another way, if the rest of Salt Lake City experienced homicides at the same per capita rate as the Ballpark neighborhood—approximately 1 homicide per 1,200 residents1—Salt Lake City would experience approximately 162 homicides a year, 9 times the number of homicides that the city presently experiences now. This is not a new problem for the Ballpark community, although it has become worse in recent years. In 2019, after four homicides took place within a two-block radius of 1300 South in the Ballpark neighborhood in less than a year, we wrote a letter asking for then- Salt Lake City Mayor Biskupski and Salt Lake City Police Chief Mike Brown to meet with Ballpark community representatives to propose practical, measurable solutions to our neighborhood’s problems with homicide and violence. We suggested that the city use nuisance ordinances and other policy mechanisms to change practices in our neighborhood’s crime-ridden businesses. Sixty-three community leaders signed the letter, including then-Council Member Erin Mendenhall, now Mayor. We circulated the letter to the local press before holding an Anti-Violence Forum in September 2019, attracting further media attention. (After 4 homicides in a year, Salt Lake neighborhood asks city, police to ‘do something’. September 5, 2019). It is now 2022, and the community’s efforts to bring attention to the Ballpark neighborhood’s significant inequity in violent crime have not been sufficient to address the issue. Disproportionate violent crime in the Ballpark community has not been a one- or two-year anomaly, it has become a consistent pattern. It is clear that merely reframing Salt Lake City’s current public safety resources or making small adjustments to deploying those resources has not been sufficient to correct these inequities. Significant additional and 1 As a note for larger context, this is a rate comparable to that of Washington, DC at the height of the crack epidemic, when it was labeled the nation's "murder capital." In 1990, Washington, DC had a population of about 606,900 people and had 472 homicides. That’s approximately 1 homicide for every 1,286 residents. This is remarkably similar to the current rate of homicides in the Ballpark neighborhood. 4 targeted resources and policy changes will be necessary to address Ballpark’s public safety issues. Therefore, we strongly request that the Ballpark Station Area Plan be revised, and that addressing public safety become an integral part of this plan prior to approval by the Planning Commission or City Council. Using public safety as a criterion in evaluating future planning proposals could be a very important tool for the Ballpark community moving forward. We therefore ask that it be included and be made available in the toolbox of methods to address crime in the community. For a recent scholarly publication on how zoning and placemaking pertain directly to crime in communities like the Ballpark neighborhood, we recommend and will subsequently quote extensively from a recent publication: Whose 'Eyes on the Street' Control Crime?: Expanding Place Management into Neighborhoods by Shannon J. Lining and Jock E. Eck, from Cambridge University Press, December 2021. (Particular thanks to Professor Alessandro Rigolon for this recommendation.) “Place functioning is the foundation for understanding crime in larger areas. Deliberate choices of property owners, government agents, and private decision- makers influence many of the crime opportunities. Owners receive the legal powers to control properties, including deciding what the property will be used for and dictating what behaviors they will allow by those who use it. (Eck, 1994, 2018). Deliberate choices about places influences activity at those places. What owners do with their properties will have some influence on crime. It will either suppress or encourage crime (Eck & Madensen, 2018). We must look to the incentives that place managers have for their properties. We challenge the city to consider what incentives could Salt Lake City create so that property owners in Ballpark, particularly those who manage properties around 1300 South, would be encouraged to run safe, law-abiding businesses? Furthermore, we look to Jane Jacobs’ insights when we ask planners to consider a Ballpark Station Area Plan that, rather than valuing mere housing density around fixed rail transit, looks for opportunities to create more neighborhood stakeholders. According to the demographic analysis in the Ballpark Station Area Plan, 79% of the households in Ballpark are renter-occupied, 15% owner-occupied, and 6% vacant. Could these demographics be contributing to Ballpark’s disproportionate crime rates? “Criminologists viewed Jacobs as having an ecologically rooted, resident-focused view of crime control. The evidence suggests otherwise. Jacobs argues that shopkeepers and property owners are the primary source of informal social control. While residents appear in Jacobs’ work, she highlights their 5 limitations and puts far more emphasis on the role of shopkeepers and property owners. [emphasis added] … Nowhere in Jacobs’ writings do we find any declarations that she believed that social control is created by mutual trust and expectations among residents. Jacobs contended that, “The high-rent tenants, most of whom are so transient we cannot even keep track of their faces, have not the remotest idea of who takes care of their street, or how.” (Jacobs, 1961, p. 39) Blocks consisting solely of residential buildings create dead spaces with little surveillance… The store, and with it the storekeeper, is the missing link in urban redevelopment… In summary, to cite Jacobs as an advocate of residents being the primary source of order on city streets is mistaken. Residents have a role, but for Jacobs the small business, namely its owners and employees, was far more important. Today we would call the owners and proprietors of these businesses place managers (Eck, 1994). In Jacobs’ theory, they are the “eyes on the street.” They produce order on the street. And in contrast to renters and visitors to an area, shopkeepers have difficulty picking up their stakes and moving elsewhere. They have skin in the game. In a neighborhood without a multi-year, disproportionate violent crime problem, community leaders might be uncomplicatedly supportive of a Ballpark Station Transit Supportive Zone near the Ballpark TRAX station that would allow building heights up to 120 feet. However, because the Ballpark neighborhood has such serious and now long-standing, disproportionate issues with violent crime, we do not believe this is an appropriate location to add density without additional and deliberate crime mitigation strategies, such as increasing the percentage of owner-occupancy residences and small business owners in the neighborhood. As Jane Jacobs might say, there is substantial evidence to suggest that Ballpark needs stakeholders with skin in the game. We welcome proposals that address the need to add density that also include deliberate crime mitigation strategies. But to ignore Ballpark’s crime mitigation needs would do our community a profound disservice and fail to acknowledge the victims of violent crime. Due to the high level of renter-occupied properties in the Ballpark neighborhood (79% compared to 15% of owner-occupied properties), there is a high degree resident turnover and forming long-lasting social bonds between neighbors can be challenging. Given that renters are significantly less likely to vote than homeowners (https://www.apartmentlist.com/research/renter-voting-preferences), continuing to fill 6 the Ballpark neighborhood with a disproportionate amount of rental housing units will in turn continue to politically disenfranchise the neighborhood. Perhaps the Ballpark Station Area Plan could be revised to suggest policies and resources to help buffer the effects of a renter-majority neighborhood and bolster local political participation. Additionally, we would like the Ballpark Station Area Plan to more robustly address issues of tree equity. While westside inequities in the tree canopy have been noted in the public discourse, the Ballpark neighborhood has been curiously absent from those discussions (although it is clear to see from the city maps, the Ballpark neighborhood is not left out of the inequity). The Urban Forestry map clearly shows that 300 West, 400 West, 1300 South, and 1700 South are some of the most tree-less, barren areas of the city (see streets highlighted in yellow on the adjacent map). While the 300 West plan that is currently being implemented includes trees, it's not just 300 West itself. It's the entire corridor, including cross streets. We need more plans to correct this inequity. 7 We wish to emphasize that we are continuing to seek additional solutions to Ballpark’s issues with disproportionate violent crime. We have aggressively engaged with other strategies such as communicating our concerns to our city administration, local media, and partnering with the Salt Lake City Police Department with neighborhood watch groups to target hot spot policing solutions towards specific locations in the neighborhood. Given Jane Jacobs’ theories and the experience of criminologists in other cities, we believe aggressive planning solutions that overtly invest in shopkeeper and property owner stakeholders and take Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles into account may also be key strategies in reducing our neighborhood’s disproportionate crime statistics. These strategies could be important for bringing families back to the Ballpark neighborhood. In the meantime, we hope that other stakeholders, including the current city administration, will acknowledge and address the situation by proposing additional measurable solutions to our neighborhood’s problems with homicide and violence. These comments are not comprehensive. Another issue of great concern in the Ballpark community revolves around the relationship between alleyways and safety. The Ballpark Station Area Plan’s suggestion to utilize the alleyways is very forward-thinking, however, it has been unofficial policy that the City has ceased to maintain alleyways Citywide primarily due to a gap in funding. The City has a long track record of alley closures as a means of eliminating this burden. If the City wants to take advantage of Ballpark alleyways and realize them as the valuable assets that they could become, the City will need to look at a 8 broader policy for the alleyways and make certain that funding is in place to maintain them. At the present time, multiple alleyways in the Ballpark community pose far more of a crime burden than any kind of a benefit on the surrounding community. Finally, we are grateful to the many city staff members and staff from the private sector who dedicated their time and resources to developing this plan during an unusual time. We are also thankful for community members, both residents and business owners, who volunteered their time, beginning in Fall 2020, to serve on the Ballpark Station Area Plan Steering Committee, engage the surrounding community during a pandemic, and to provide feedback. During this time, our community experienced significant challenges that have prevented some of us from fully and effectively engaging with the Ballpark Station Area Plan, most notably (1) serious and disproportionate levels of violent crime and (2) the related attrition of our fellow dedicated community members. It is particularly notable and deeply sad that the majority of Ballpark residents who served on the Ballpark Station Area Plan Steering Committee have moved away from the neighborhood because they no longer felt safe enough to remain as residents in the neighborhood, particularly those who are parents of younger children. Of the nine residents who served on the Steering Committee, five have moved away, and another formally resigned from public service from the Central 9th Community Council as of January 2022. We again thank them for their dedicated public service, their companionship, and while they could, for fighting with us to transform a neighborhood they believe in. We miss them terribly and look forward to a future when everyone perceives our Ballpark neighborhood to be a safe and welcoming residential community for people of all ages. Thank you for including the Ballpark Community Council’s input on this proposal. Please contact us with any questions. Sincerely, Amy J. Hawkins, PhD Chair of the Ballpark Community Council From George Chapman to Everyone 06:52 PM so is colony b on 1300S going to be changed to recognize lack of pedestrian access (minimal sidewalk) 228w needs a sidewalk not a building next to the sidewalk (RDA approved loan) From Patrick Quinn to Everyone 06:59 PM The report says we need more single family homes, along with green space. That seems inconsistent with 10 story buildings. You have mentioned "current scale", but doesn't a 120 foot building go against this stated scale goal? Will all ‘upgrades’ be south of 1300? What are the plans for the Horizonte lot? Please elaborate on these topics. From Jessa Tuminez to Everyone 07:02 PM Parking is a huge issue already in the 'heart of the neighborhood' area, how does future zoning help with this? I'm particularly concerned with the 'replacement' of current parking by TRAX as show in the image shown earlier with a six story building From Amy J. Hawkins, Chair to Everyone 07:04 PM Here are some details about Colony B, but not the address: https://www.defycolabs.com/communities/project-one-b7jry From Jesse Hulse to Everyone 07:05 PM The heart of the neighborhood zone appears to incorporate single family home areas just south of the stadium on Richards St. and the Paxton & Lucy Ave NW of the stadium. Is it anticipated that they will be zoned for high density 10 story buildings as well or will there be some nuance applied to this diagram? From Annette & Mike Wheeler to Everyone 07:05 PM So if the city will be removng existing parking in the heart of Ballpark, it seems prudent to restrict parking around Ballpark to residents only, esepcilly on game days. Otherwise, residents will be negatively impacted by non-residents coming to games. Those non-residents would be encouraged to take public transportation rather than using their cars if permit parking is enforced. They can park at TRAX stations and commute in a more environmental and neighborhood friendly way. From Anthony W to Everyone 07:06 PM What is the current character and scale of the west temple character district? There are parking lots, multi family, business, and just a hand full of single family homes. How do you maintain the scale and character when it has no cohesive identity? The plan talks about a potentially 120-foot building on the east side of west temple in the parking lot. Is that the same scale and density? Will the single family homes on west temple across the street be locked in as low intensity forever while high intensity is built all around it? Even on side streets like Lucy and Paxon? It seems like the city wants to add extreme density on SLC owned parking lot on 1300s and the UTA parcel by trax while parts of the neighborhood are just stuck in a low intensity zone. From Amy J. Hawkins, Chair to Everyone 07:07 PM The plan does state that an action we should take to increase attainability of housing for current and future residents is “Increase opportunities for home ownership in the neighborhood.” I’m not sure it specifies single family. From George Chapman to Everyone 07:07 PM we complained to rda about the minimization of the sidewalk on the project at 228w 1300s so how are the pedestrians going to be helped with a minimouse sidewalk. how does SLC suggest improving the sidewalk at 228w???!! There is an RDA approved building limiting the sidewalk From lucy cabrera to Everyone 07:08 PM That green space is now full of rocks bcuz of all the people laying down and using their drugs From George Chapman to Everyone 07:13 PM but parking is needed at Ballpark Station. UTA keeps removing parking at rail and it discourages ridership. plus security at 1300S station is not effective I thought that we were in a drought/desert. why put in medians when a wider sidewalk would be better. SLC stopped watering medians a few years ago in another drought why didn't 228W require 10 ft wide sidewalks From George Chapman to Everyone 07:15 PM Amy - RDA was told that their loan would hurt pedestrian access on 1300S and we asked for wider sidewalks. City Council was told but they ignored it. sorry goodbye From Jessa Tuminez to Everyone 07:18 PM A few weeks back, I provided comments / change recommendations on the boundaries of 'Heart of the Neighborhood' to improve conformity of use, reactivate the neighborhood and increase safety between Paxton and Jefferson Park...have the comments been considered ? I provided the comments to Nannette Amazing, thank you! From George Hauser to Everyone 07:19 PM S Washington south of the I15 ramp should be included in the connectivity map. what about including a tunnel under the I15 ramp at S Washington? From Marcus Lonardo to Everyone 07:20 PM George, I agree! Jessa, great comment! When will the revised plan be finalized? From George Hauser to Everyone 07:22 PM Also, there could be a mid-block connector between the south end of S Washington just south of Brooklyn to 200 W. This would require the property owner to dedicate a portion of their property, but it would enhance the value of their property and add a valuable public connection. From Jessa Tuminez to Everyone 07:26 PM Any reason why the heart of neighborhood is not just blue all across all the way to the yellow line on this map? From Amy J. Hawkins, Chair to Everyone 07:26 PM Is 120 feet allowed anywhere outside of the current downtown zoning? Unless I really don’t understand Form Based II zoning, 120 is not what’s currently permitted around the Central 9th station. From Jessa Tuminez to Everyone 07:27 PM LOTs of opportunity to revitalize these areas which are, right now, ridden with crime AND under-utilized lots From Marcus Lonardo to Everyone 07:29 PM Amen, Jessa!! At minimum, put the TSA zoning along the trax line and all the way to the park. From Anthony W to Everyone 07:29 PM The west temple character zone does not make sense. it bisects the heart. West temple is a mix of use. your talking about putting a 120 ft building on the east side and then expecting the other parcels on west temple to stay the same? or what is meant by maintain the character? From Jessa Tuminez to Everyone 07:31 PM TSA zoning along the trax line and all the way to the park would be a great idea and I think contributes to the overeall goals of this initiative From Reed Sherman to Everyone 07:32 PM Yes! Power lines in the ground is a great idea. Good luck in getting RMP to comply. From Annette & Mike Wheeler to Everyone 07:35 PM Can you please be more specific about how you will mitigate the parking issues on game days? Have you considered requiring suburban attendees use public transportation instead of their cars. I my opinion, that would require zero parking for suburbanites to preserve parking for urban residents. From Andre to Everyone 07:39 PM I do think TSA zoning as it's currently drawn is not enough. Along 200 W trax line extending the to the TSA zone makes more sense and more conducive to the goals of the plan zoning which encourages development but no/minimum parking is what I'd like to see to encourage trax ridership and biking / pedestrian activities From Danielle Hildebrand to Everyone 07:39 PM A TSA zone should absolutely be extended all of the way along the train line on 200 West. This specific whole street is commercial on the West side mixed with 6 story buildings on the east (this is between 1300 South and 900 South). There are a handful of homes next to 6-story buildings that have been termed "flawed urban planning" at the moment. These homes have not been included in the TSA zone & I strongly believe were missed. From Jesse Hulse to Everyone 07:39 PM Planning team, it’s concerning that problems we are seeing with FB-UN2 aren’t being addressed and FB- UN3 seems poised to repeat them. It would be disappointing to say the least if we don’t address these things now with FB-UN2&3 and before new Ballpark zoning which may follow in the footsteps of those FB zones, can you please add that to the notes and could we follow up on that? From Andre to Everyone 07:40 PM also, encouraging and protecting resident only parking Iin the heart of the neighborhood is a good idea. Can we also see EV parking to encourage environment friendly modes of transportation? From John Anderson to Everyone 07:41 PM Thanks Jesse, I have those notes. As mentioned the City Council is considering creating the FB-UN3 and is still accepting public information. Here's a link with more information: https://fleet-block-rezone- slcgov.hub.arcgis.com/ From Marcus Lonardo to Everyone 07:42 PM Andre- great comment on resident only parking. From Jesse Hulse to Everyone 07:43 PM Thanks John, we will revisit and resubmit and follow up with our city council reps From Jessa Tuminez to Everyone 07:45 PM to mitigate gentrification, the answer is to encourage development competition. Having zoning the encourages that in the ballpark area from trax line and all the way across Jefferson park would do this sadly, just having a couple streets 'high density' would just encourage these high-priced townhomes and push current residents out From Amy J. Hawkins, Chair to Everyone 07:45 PM I’m glad to see “increase opportunities for home ownership” make the final document. According to the findings of this plan, only 15% of the homes in our neighborhood are owner-occupied. Continuing to fill the neighborhood with rentals will, I believe, continue to politically-disenfranchise the neighborhood. From Jeff Sandstrom to Everyone 07:47 PM Thank you for addressing the need for opportunities for home ownership in the neighborhood. Home ownership, I feel, is an important part of improving the quality of the neighborhood through increased engagement and involvement in the community. From Jessa Tuminez to Everyone 07:48 PM home ownership needs to evolve as concept. Median income is 23K in Ballpark! So we need to make sure people have a 'home' even if it's not in the traditional sense of owning a home From Andre to Everyone 07:49 PM Increasing the supply of housing is the best way to decrease the cost. From Jessa Tuminez to Everyone 07:49 PM HUGE thank you Christine!! You did an amazing job From Marcus Lonardo to Everyone 07:50 PM I'll second that! GSBS did an incredible job on this first draft. From Jessa Tuminez to Everyone 07:50 PM I am so so SO excited about the Ballpark transformation plan. LONG overdue. Just please listen to us who have been in this community and who own and have lived here and seen it for all its ups and downs From Amy J. Hawkins, Chair to Everyone 07:50 PM Folks on this call may be interested in Salt Lake City’s citywide Gentrification Assessment and Displacement Mitigation Study. The lead consultant for the study, Baird+Driskell Community Planning, will be presenting an overview of the project team and process to date to the Human Rights Commission on Tuesday night at 5:30. The Zoom info and link to agenda are below. Please feel free to share with anyone else that might be interested. https://www.utah.gov/pmn/sitemap/publicbody/1270.html https://www.slc.gov/boards/human-rights-commission-agendas-minutes/ From Jeff Sandstrom to Everyone 07:51 PM A second thank you for adding significant consideration to the current character and scale of the existing areas before approving new zoning. It is very important to maintain the existing scope, scale and historic nature of the area while welcoming new, appropriate development. From Marcus Lonardo to Everyone 07:52 PM Also- big shout out to everyone involved in community outreach! Such a distinction from the homeless center fiasco. Thank you for allowing our feedback in this process. From Jessa Tuminez to Everyone 07:52 PM Agree, Marcus! From Marcus Lonardo to Everyone 07:53 PM Which areas of this plan have FB-UN2 or 3? From Patrick Quinn to Everyone 07:53 PM What was the reasoning/justification behind specifically preserving views for the Ballpark? Aren't these same views important to residents? The Ballpark is only used half of the year and for a couple of days a week at the height of the season. Why would the city and Planning Commission ignore (overlook) those same concerns for community homeowners? If the views you speak of are important to baseball fans who visit the Ballpark for a two or three hours, shouldn't the same consideration be applied to people who live in the neighborhood every day of the year? From Marcus Lonardo to Everyone 07:53 PM I thought heart of the neighborhood was TSA. From Susan Lundmark to Everyone 07:53 PM Thank you for participating and giving us such great feedback and all these comments! From Annette & Mike Wheeler to Everyone 07:53 PM those of us living in an urban neighborhood are more likely to take public transportation. A study is not necessary in the short term to realize that those living in the suburbs could be a more productive target group to require public transportation into our community. If there is not place for them to park, they will be forced to take public transportation. From Jessa Tuminez to Everyone 07:58 PM I'm excited to see the plan evolve. When will we see the next draft taking comments into account? Open dialogue is super important. Can we schedule next session with the public? From Marcus Lonardo to Everyone 07:59 PM Great comment- Jessa I would also like to review a modified plan From Reed Sherman to Everyone 08:02 PM Great plan. I’m all for more trees and less power lines. Love the idea of turning ally ways into pedestrian and bike ways. From:Jim Grisley To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ball park upgrade. Date:Thursday, December 16, 2021 1:55:53 PM Attachments:image001.jpg Hello Nannette, I would like to comment on the Ballpark/Party street upgrade. I was at the opening meeting at the site at which Erin gave an outline of the project. As far as I’m concerned this project would be a complete waste of time and money unless the Gail Miller HRC is moved to a more suitable location. The homeless and assorted nefarious characters come from miles around to be near the homeless center and the neighborhood around it ( Ballpark) and the increase in murder, crime and drug use is out of control ! I have personally witnessed drug use right on the HRC property on numerous occasions. The Ballpark proper is inundated with many of these individuals and SLC can’t currently handle it so how would a project like this be any different ? Look at the Police reports as they reflect the dire situation the Ballpark is in. The proposed Library would just become a restroom and loitering area for these folks and the local neighbors would actually see an increase of in crime, vandalism, trespassing ,drug use and prostitution. As far as the Trax station relocation is concerned, it will do absolutely nothing to remedy the pervasive jay walking on 1300 So and 300 W which daily poses a threat to pedestrians and drivers alike. Also, why weren’t there any businesses from 300 West on the planning committee? Seems like the committee was hand picked to avoid any negative comments. I would like to invite you to visit us and I can show you first hand the negative impact the HRC is having on the Ballpark neighborhood and those of us that live and work in it. Please call to discuss at your convenience. Regards, Jim Grisley J.M. Grisley Machine Tools, Inc. 1485 South 300 West Salt Lake City, Ut 84115 From:Danielle Hildebrand To:Larsen Nannette Cc:Anderson John; Lundmark Susan Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Area Plan Feedback Date:Monday, January 17, 2022 1 53:59 PM Attachments:image.png image png image.png b8011a30-ee64-4aa4-8fb5-7dffc020bdd1.png image.png image.png image.png image.png image.png Hello all! Thank you so much for all of your help & choosing my neighborhood as a focal point this year. I purchased in this neighborhood in 2015 and have since brought many friends and family members into this neighborhood. We have been dedicated homeowners and neighbors who have continued to look after each other while our neighborhood was severely impacted on multiple fronts during this past couple years. We have been active on the community council and have many meetings with the superhero city officials who care deeply about our neighborhood. As our city prepares for our population to double over the next 20-40 years and with our air quality being one of the worst universe-wide, we know that housing near the transit stations is an urgent need. Nearly all of the homes in this neighborhood are hitting the 100-year-old (+) mark and many were built with poor building standards PRIOR to there even being cars here on our SLC streets. Most of the homes in the ballpark are single family homes and consist of 1-2 bedrooms in total. As a homeowner, I completely understand that my 2 bedroom home on the train line is NOT the highest & best use for this property currently OR long term. I absolute LOVE what you all have been working towards and think the whole plan is absolutely brilliant. I do think there are 3 properties that were accidently missed in the plan that I would like to outline below. We have met with these 4 city officials: DIANA MARTINEZ, KATIA PACE, TREVOR OVENDEN & MEAGAN BOOTH who all agreed that "moderate density" is not the appropriate zoning for these 3 properties that sit IN BETWEEN 2 high rise apartment buildings (one to the north and one to the south). For example, our house is less than 5 feet from a 6 story building and the 4 city officials we met with agreed that this is absolutely terrible urban planning to keep these properties "as-as." We know that long-term, zoning dictates everything and are extremely hopeful that you would agree that these 3 parcels that are DIRECTLY on the trainline were missed during the preplanning and should be changed to be TSA zoning. 1055 S. 200 W. Salt Lake City, UT 84101 (Parcel ID: 1512408008) 1049 S. 200 W. Salt Lake City, UT 84101 (Parcel ID: 1512408007) 1039 S. 200 W. Salt Lake City, UT 84101 (Parcel ID: 1512408006) If you are familiar with the children's movie "UP," these 3 parcels on 200 West already look like these first 2 photos below from the movie. Additionally, there is a gigantic abandoned warehouse directly across the street that is slated to become an enormous skyrise of apartment building soon. Zoning dictates everything so we are extremely hopeful to not be left to the outcome below. A couple properties down the street, this has already happened. We do not want to become this house. ACTUAL PHOTOS OF THE 3 PARCELS WE ARE REQUESTING A ZONING CHANGE OF: From:Ryan Esmay To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Master Plan Date:Friday, December 31, 2021 11:49:22 AM Hi! I'm writing as a homeowner in the heart of the ballpark neighborhood (right next to the trax station), and I just had a few thoughts about the Ballpark master plan that I thought I'd share. I'm thrilled by the idea of this neighborhood getting more attention since I've always felt it could be lovely if it was just given a bit more care! Some things here are truly beautiful- and convenient, like the ballpark, and the trax station, but other things definitely need more attention. The sidewalks on my street (Lucy Ave) are not extremely well-lit, nor is 1300 South, which is a bummer if we want to go out at night and feel safe. In addition to the lighting problems, 1300 south feels like it belongs to the cars at times, with thin, often obstructed sidewalks. I'd love it if my small neighborhood area could start to feel a bit more walkable- I think that would really boost the connectivity of the area. Another issue, far more complicated to solve, is the huge homelessness problem we have in our neighborhood. Many of my neighbors have had break-ins, as have we... and it's too bad! We always want to help them however we can, but it's hard to be empathetic when they leave trash (and worse things) all over our street and lawn, break into homes, and camp out in the alley behind our backyard. Don't know how to solve the problem exactly, but it's not hard to see that something needs to be done. I'm absolutely thrilled about the idea of bringing a new library to the ballpark area, might I suggest the large, scarcely used parking lot on West Temple and 1300 S? It's a bit of an eyesore now, and doesn't seem to even be used much, outside of ballgame nights! Anyway, I'm very excited. I'm just one person living here, but if there's anything I can do to help at all, I'd love to be involved however I can be. We love our neighborhood and want to see it improve and grow, not get neglected. Thanks! All the best, Ryan Esmay P.O. BOX 520697 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84152-0697 Dear Councilmember Mano, Mr. Norris and Ms. Larsen, We are reaching out to comment on the Ballpark Station Area Plan Draft that was recently released by the Salt Lake City Planning and Zoning Department. We here at TAG SLC are very much interested in the neighborhood and have made significant investments in what we view as one of the most vibrant and exciting areas of Salt Lake City. Overall, we felt that the plan will contribute towards making the neighborhood a more positive place to live. The plans around creating a more engaging West Temple Corridor on both game days and year-round were especially exciting. However, we are concerned that the plan neglects a section of the People’s Freeway area, on Goltz Avenue, where we own several properties. Our concerns regarding the proposed Station Area Plan are centered on an area we feel is being left out. We believe that lack of attention to this location will be detrimental for future development and create a lack of clarity for those seeking to invest in the neighborhood. For example, the Goltz Avenue area is within roughly a quarter mile of both the Ballpark and 200 W TRAX stations but is not included in any character areas or land use map changes intended to facilitate the reimagining of the neighborhood by bringing new amenities and mixed-uses. The plan contradicts itself by showing this area as the “heart of the neighborhood” in Figure 1.1 on the first page of the plan, but then failing to include it in the Character Areas seen in Figure 2.6 and listing it as Medium Density in the Future Land Use Map in Figure 2.9. Aside from the contradictions present in the maps, the absence of details on Goltz Avenue and surrounding streets in the Character Areas leaves many questions as to what exactly the City’s vision for the area is. Moreover, there are no details on types of development appropriate in Medium Density areas on the land use area descriptions on page 18, making this the only land use not described. This land use is present in older documents, are we to assume that definitions carry over or does the city have a different vision for medium density in the Ballpark area? Recent years have seen successful development in this pocket of the Ballpark neighborhood, with the C9 building adding over 90 units in close proximity to TRAX stations and local businesses such as Blue Copper, Laziz and Publik Coffee. We feel that this area is particularly well suited to development according to the statements of the plan as it is close to transit and other public amenities, most notably Jefferson Park. Jefferson Park is the largest established park in the neighborhood 2.79 acres. However, the park is currently viewed by a blight by area residents as demonstrated by multiple news stories over the last year (see attached). Page 23 of the plan advises on ways to create successful public space through urban design, including a recommendation to line public spaces with public uses to improve accessibility and safety. We feel that including Goltz Avenue and surrounding streets in the “Heart of the Neighborhood” Character Area and Future Land Uses will facilitate this by encouraging mixed-uses that create ground level activation next to the largest existing public space in the neighborhood. We hope that the concerns that we raised are taken seriously as we believe that the location of Goltz Avenue and surrounding streets will fit well within the purpose statements of Salt Lake City Transit Areas and that their inclusion will facilitate mixed-use development that will enhance precious Ballpark neighborhood public land and accommodate a growing population in a place that is close to transit as well as other amenities. Best regards, Jake Billitteri & the TAG SLC Team https://www.abc4.com/news/local-news/residents-question-crime-at-slc-parks/ https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-news/slc-park-has-become-nightmare-with- dangerous-crime-neighbors-say From:Roo To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) ballpark plan Date:Friday, February 4, 2022 7:38:06 PM Hi Nannette - these are purely my opinions as a resident. 1. festival street. I don’t think we need another festival street, at least not yet. we have yet to see how 300 S (500-600 W) plays out; we already have Edison St.; and our true festival street is between the City & County Building and the Library. 2. My primary destinations in this area. First, in order of frequency: Lowes Target Lucky 13 Ballpark TRAX station (usually alighting rather than boarding) Second, in order of preference: Lucky 13 Lowes (they have better garden section than Home Depot) Ballpark TRAX Target 3. West Temple is valuable to me because when I get off TRAX at 1300 South, it is the nicest road to ride my bicycle south to connect to Parley’s Trail. I appreciate the trees. I don’t ride on Main Street, despite the bike lanes, because it is too wide, too barren, and, in the summer, too hot. I hope any festival street action will not disrupt this. Although Central Pointe Station is closer to Parley’s Trail, the connection is more clunky. 4. Apartment buildings need PUBLIC ACCESS ground level retail or restaurants, not just activity centers and gyms for residents. If Ballpark needs destinations, these are the destinations. 5. Walmart and Lowes, in true cities, can be those ground level retail establishments, with parking garages and apartments above. I know this is not their preferred building form, but they can and will do it in locations (or countries) that demand it. It might sound weird, but I hope we can keep Lowes in Salt Lake. I like shopping in Salt Lake because I know that a percentage of sales tax goes to Salt Lake City. I try to shop in Salt Lake City instead of Millcreek or South Salt Lake. Thanks for considering my comments. Becka Roolf 563 E Elm Ave From:Kelsey Maas To:City Council Liaisons; Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Resident Comments Date:Tuesday, December 14, 2021 9:37:58 AM Attachments:image.png image.png Hello, My partner and I live in District 5 on South Jefferson. The other day on a walk we clocked how truly odd this pedestrian crossing thing is on South Jefferson & Goltz (I put a screenshot). I got an email today about the Ballpark Plan which I'll be reading more on, but what jumped out to me was the 'pinpricks' of green. My partner and I thought wouldn't it be fun if this odd traffic-island-triangle thing was a tiny park instead of more pavement on top of existing pavement. I'm not sure if you are familiar with Mill Ends Park in Portland - its the smallest park in the world - so a bigger than that, but something that is fun. Also, as a side note I wanted to say that we love Ballpark. There are hidden gems of restaurants, global groceries, bakeries and breweries that would be tragic if they got pushed out due to rising rents. On that same note, we love living here, because we actually have a porch and small back garden - access to the outside - which we can't afford really elsewhere in the city. In short, we don't live in a studio or one bedroom 'luxury apartment' that crams you in small space with little to no access to being able to sit outside for a lot of money. Please, please be thoughtful in how density is added. We understand its needed, but let's not build future slums, but future homes. Thanks for your time!image.png nnage.png Kelsey Kelsey Maas World Heritage Studies, M.A. Preservation Utah I Salt Lake City, UT Ljnkedln I Pronouns: she, her, hers From:jody ellis To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Station and Planning Date:Thursday, December 30, 2021 8:12:27 AM Hello Nannette, I have some questions and concerns regarding changes around the ballpark trax station. I understand change is needed. We need better and safer pedestrian access. I live on Lucy Ave between 200W and W Temple. It's a nice quiet street with good neighbors that watch out for each other. I'm not sure if I misunderstand that the plan is to have more access from trax to Lucy Ave. I can see access from Lucy from the west but please not more pedestrian traffic east of the trax. This is a residential area. I have used public transportation in many cities and we don't leave the station and walk through a neighborhood. There needs to be a safe walkway from the station to W Temple. The 1300 South sidewalk is too narrow. Could a sidewalk large enough for 2 way pedestrian traffic and bike lanes be placed along the north side of the trax parking lot and behind the Indian center and the 7Eleven. With a nice crosswalk across W Temple. Then eliminate the crosswalk by Lucy and pedestrian traffic down Lucy. With the homeless and Horizante traffic walking down our street many of us don't feel safe in our front yards. They walk down the street dropping trash, swearing... the dogs in the neighborhood bark at them, as they should because they are protecting their property. One of my neighbors said he thought there was something mentioned about using the alleys for pedestrian and bike traffic. I have a 2 car garage in the alley that we use daily. When I'm driving down the alley and there is someone walking I have to wait for them to move over so it is safe for me to pass them. My neighbor and I feel the alley is way to narrow for any type of pedestrian traffic. Besides at this time I wouldn't feel safe walking down the alley. All summer we had a homeless man camped by our neighbors garage. Many times when I leave or come home I need to ask people to move off my garage apron. Other neighbors have the same problem. Our alley is a mess and not a safe place. I look forward to making our neighborhood a better place. Sincerely, Jody Ellis From:Kirk Huffaker To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Station Area Plan Comments Date:Monday, December 6, 2021 7:40:06 PM Hi Nannette, Please include the following as a public comment on the draft BSAP. I was surprised to read through the entire report and see a small single mention of the historic character of the district. In addition, the citywide Historic PreservationPlan is not referenced once as one of the guiding documents that was or should beconsidered. I believe both of these are very negative omissions for the plan and thecity at large. While the area has not been formally surveyed, approximately 343 buildings have been identified within the neighborhood boundary and are documented in the Utah SHPO database. There is one National Register Historic District, Boulevard Gardens, and zero individually listed structures in the NRHP. However, approximately 105 structures have been documented to be eligible for listing in the NRHP, includingmany within the station plan boundary. So there is definitely potential fordocumentation and preservation of historic character throughout the neighborhood. In addition, there are already strong historic preservation financial incentives in placefor preservation, including several from the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake Citythat can be used in addition to state and federal incentives. The public, property owners, and developers are missing opportunities if city plans do not highlight these available options. Without foresight within plans such as Ballpark, more significant buildings will meetthe same fate as the Sarah Quayle Cook House at 1706 S. West Temple - demolition.It is my sincere hope that the plan team will revisit the plan to incorporate morehistoric preservation information by utilizing historic building data and the SLCHistoric Preservation Plan to integrate these allied planning programs andphilosophies into this community plan. Best Regards, Kirk Kirk Huffaker, Principal Kirk Huffaker Preservation Strategies Salt Lake City, Utah www.kirkhuffaker.com- Pronouns: He / His / Him / Mr. - *Please note my new email address: From:James Alfandre To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Station Area Plan Date:Monday, December 20, 2021 6:55:06 PM Nannette, I would like to submit a comment of support for the Ballpark Station Area Plan. My company has one completed project and three more projects in this neighborhood and are very active in creating urban, vibrant, well-designed projects that add missing-middle and other needed housing. I like the vision of more density and activation around the Ballpark and TRAX stop and throughout the neighborhood in appropriate locations such as the main corridors of Main Street. This plan will set the tone for future growth and activation in this neighborhood that will create a more liveable, vibrant and safe place to be. I would add that the proper zoning should be implemented as soon as possible to help the Plan's vision become a reality, incentive developers to design great urbanism that creates walkable, vibrant streets, and reduces the amount of application workload on the Planning Staff. Best, James Alfandre -- James Alfandre Managing Partner | Urban Alfandre www.urbanalfandre.com From:Meredith Bunsawat To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Station Area Plan Date:Thursday, December 2, 2021 2:11:56 PM Hello, Just wanted to say that as residents and homeowners in the Ballpark neighborhood, my partner and I are excited about this plan! The neighborhood is very central located to many locally owned businesses and I think it would boost their businesses to add more types of housing and attractions to the neighborhood. We also think it would be best if the Main Street Motel were bought out and transformed into something that has a positive impact on the neighborhood. As you probably know, it has long been known for being a major source of crime in the neighborhood. Thank you for your efforts! Best, Meredith From:Paul Svendsen To:Larsen, Nannette Cc:Ballpark; Stephen Alfandre; James Alfandre; Oktay, Michaela Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Station Area Plan Date:Thursday, December 9, 2021 10:39:49 AM Attachments:image001.png Hi Nannette, I would like to submit comments regarding the proposed Ballpark Station Area Plan. I have done several developments in the project area and currently own 5 properties that will be impacted by the proposed changes. I am very interested in seeing how the plan is implemented. One of the Plan’s strategies is to “update the City’s zoning code and map, as appropriate, to implement the provisions of this plan.” I really hope SLC takes this seriously and is willing to experiment with some changes to see if they encourage desirable development. To that end, I strongly support the proposal to expand the South Stare Street Corridor Overlay to include the west side of Main Street. The character of the street is the same on both sides and there is no reason they should be subject to different zoning regulations. The west side of Main Street has incredible potential that is being constrained by the current zoning and expanding the SSSC would help a lot. I would also suggest the following modifications to properties zoned CC within the South State Street Corridor Overlay: No minimum lot area (to encourage missing middle and affordable housing development like tiny houses, townhouses, etc.). No minimum lot width (same reason). Clarify that structures within the SSSC and the CC zone are exempted from the minimum front yard and corner side yard requirements. Currently the ordinance is unclear and the ordinance seems to be applied differently depending on which staffer is assigned to the project. Increase maximum height to 35’ to permit taller ceilings, roof decks, and even 4 stories with one partially sub-grade garden level (as was done at the Row 17 development with great results). Allow more than one principal building per lot regardless of street frontage. This will permit desirable types of residential development that are well established in other locations, such as two homes on a single lot. Allow the following uses: ** Single family attached (so that townhomes can be built without going through the condominium process, which makes obtaining financing more difficult and costly for prospective homeowners) From:Matt Haydon To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Station Plan Date:Tuesday, December 7, 2021 10:45:17 AM Nannette, You mentioned in the email to me that this was a 20 year plan. But this goes against what is said on page 44 of the plan. "Amend Section 21A.26.078: TSA Transit Station Area District of the Salt Lake City Municipal Code to include the Ballpark Station Area as one of the existing TSA districts or create a new one if needed. This may include requiring activation of the 1300 South frontage with restaurants, shops, street furniture and trees, implementing streetscape improvements to accommodate pedestrian volumes, allowing heights comparable to heights in other Urban Station Areas, and protect the views of the Wasatch Range from inside Smith’s Ballpark.” Doesn’t this mean that once you get the code changed, that 10-12 story buildings would be approved immediately? This would be a major change in the community and have a significant impact on the infrastructure and living conditions. Where are these other “Urban Station Areas?” Are you referring to downtown? Where are these shops and restaurants going to be placed? From State St to 3rd West is pretty full. Moreover, you did not address the inconsistencies of the plan when it states there is a need for single family homes. You did not address my infrastructure concerns. I noticed while driving my daughter to school today that there was an RV and two cars that look as if people were living in them on one of our streets. Nothing has been done to either move these people along or ticket them. The local park is not safe enough for people to bring their kids or dogs. I have had several neighbors stalked by people from the park. The driveway on our property in a throughway for people, we have had multiple incidents with the homeless here; theft, human excrement, and threats to people. We have begged the city to allow us to fence our driveway, but we have had NO support from our city councilman. He actually said in a meeting with our community that he would fight against it. He also claims the quality of life issues should be accepted because that is part of the urban lifestyle. NO, he is wrong and it is this attitude by the city government that is causing the issue. We should be able to walk to our mailbox without being accosted by the homeless. You mention that you want to encourage ridership on Trax. But also mention that you have had negative experiences, isn’t that an indication of an issue? Why would riders want to put their safety at risk? Would you want your children, if you have them, exposed to these risks? You mentioned nothing about the parking issue. So many of the recent projects have used the carveout allowing for few parking spaces, is this going to be the same? What about all the other projects that are scheduled for this area? Does the 20 year plan accommodate for these projects? What about security for the neighborhood? We have the highest crime rate in the city and the highest murder rate. What is going to be done about the drugs in our neighborhood? These concerns need to be addressed. Finally, these meetings should not take place on Zoom anymore. We are at a point that anyone who wants the vaccine can get it or have natural immunities. People can wear masks if they are uncomfortable. Zoom does not allow for real interaction. People can be muted and ignored. Matt Haydon From:Matt To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Station Area Plan Date:Monday, December 6, 2021 2:06:28 PM Ms. Larsen, I live in the Ballpark community and I am against a manor part of the plan. While I am happy to see this area being targeted for revitalization, I am against the idea of a 120 foot variance. In the plan it says that there is a need for single family homes the solution is to build apartments? That sounds like an error, you can have one or the other, but not both. This community is constantly having high density housing built within its boarders. The rest of the city needs to help with the density issue. Another issue I have is the anti-car stance that city projects are adapting. The public transit system is not good enough. It is unrealistic to assume that people will use Trax to take kids to school, go grocery shopping, or other daily shopping. There is a serious issue with safety on Trax, the stations are not safe and riding on the trains is not safe. This is the exact reason we have stopped taking Trax. My wife used to take it everyday, but the station was being used as a homeless camp/shelter and she was being harassed on a daily basis. Trax police officers tried their best but since the homeless are allowed to ride for free in areas it seems like a lost cause. We had to buy an additional car as a result. The idea of taking my daughter on Trax and possibly exposing her to this is unthinkable. Based on our experience I don’t think it is reasonable to ask people to take Trax with kids and groceries. Finally, I have a serious issues with infrastructure. The local infrastructure cannot handle an additional four or five hundred people and their cars. Traffic on game day is terrible and our community is overwhelmed with cars. We lose all of our street parking and when we call parking enforcement, nothing is done. Our community already has people living out of their cars and rvs, and the city government does nothing to help. Are these structures going to have enough parking? Or are they going to take advantage of the the carve out the city council and planning commission gives if the building is close to a trax station? If they are the streets will be even more crowded, creating a parking and safety issue. And let’s not forget the potential for crime. We are already being told to leave nothing in our cars, now our trash cans are being emptied out by the homeless on a daily basis. What about security? Is there going to be a police sub-station? We were promised an increase in patrols and security when the homeless resource center was opened and we have to fight to get a cop out here. Many in my community and neighborhood are against the idea of a 120 foot tall building. If you want to build single family homes, go for it. Keep additional apartment buildings out of Ballpark, we have done our fair share, it is time other areas in the city do theirs. If you would like to discuss this issue further and with members of our community (Rowhaus) please contact me. Best, Matt Haydon Sent from my iPhone From:george chapman To:Larsen, Nannette Cc:Norris, Nick Subject:(EXTERNAL) Comments on Ballpark Station Area Plan Draft Date:Friday, December 31, 2021 6:12:19 PM The Draft Plan suggests increasing the density of 1300 South (a street that is already maxed out) and allow buildings 120 feet high. But it also recommends pedestrian amenities to encourage walkability. But SLC RDA/Council approved a loan to a development on 1300 South that restricts the sidewalk to a micro sidewalk next to 35MPH traffic! Any building higher that 2 stories should provide 10 foot sidewalks! Lights, trees and other obstacles that may restrict safe bicycling and pedestrian travel should be minimized. It also, appropriately recommends opening up the street just north and west of the 1300 South TRAX Station (Lucy Ave) to allow access to 300 West. But it may take years to open up and the Plan also suggests using the UTA parking lots, which are usually full and have been a crime magnet, for building Transit Oriented Development buildings. In other areas where parking lots are used for TODs, parking garages are proposed. Parking garages in Utah have a complicated reputation. Ogden's parking garages were so uncomfortable that they led to the downfall of the Downtown Ogden Mall. The proposal also suggests putting several pedestrian crossings on 1300 South (so the proposed 1300 South eastbound bus doesn't have to cross the street). But that would slow traffic and increase pollution. It is also very unsafe. Putting a pedestrian crossing close to a crossing arm for a train crossing is complicated. If there is room for a couple of cars before the arm, the pedestrian crossing becomes a threat to pedestrians. One pedestrian crossing is necessary now since the RDA approved project on 1300 South destroys walkability on the north side of 1300 South going to 300 West. The crossing should be next to and west of the TRAX crossing arms and coordinated with that system. The plan appears to put in bicycle sharrows in two of the four lanes of 1300 South which also will increase pollution since the 1300 South road traffic is already maxed out with four lanes. It suggests studying eliminating 1300 South traffic lanes! The City plan also proposes a center median which doesn't make sense in a desert and drought area. Several years ago, the City stopped watering medians. The sidewalks need widening more than the median. The proposal also recommends high density apartments in the parking lots of UTA and City owned Ballpark. The City RDA is recommended to force the changes and increased development. The proposal does recommend more green space and parks but the City is ignoring the best potential for park, the Fleet Block. A library is recommended and is a good idea. The Plan recommends changing the 1300 South TRAX area to TSA Station Area with a result of no parking requirements. Although it recommends protecting the "viewshed of the Wasatch Range from inside Smith's Ballpark". But the priority should be to protect the viewshed of residents! The Plan suggests much higher density development but refuses to require wider sidewalks that can accomodate bicycles and pedestrians and does not decrease vehicle availability. It also recommends mid-block crossings that will increase pollution and probably require 20MPH like downtown. The goal is to: "Create a dense urban environment and entertainment zone around the Ballpark." I do not think that it will increase safety for bicyclists and pedestrians. Sugar House supergentrification significantly reduced pedestrian and bicycle safety despite many new crossing lights on 2100 South. The plan suggests burying power lines which historically has been very expensive (but necessary with high rises next to the lines). The City should not pay for the burying. Private developers should pay. Personally, I believe that the money could be better spent on wider sidewalks which would place the buildings appropriately further away from the power lines. Central 9th RDA project spent millions on burying lines with minimal effect. The Plan recommends "Implement a district-parking strategy that utilizes unused area parking and parking garages for game days to minimize the need for parking fields in the area." That could include paid parking in the area that already does not have enough parking. The 1400 South TRAX crossing is a problem for UTA. It would be costly and a safety nightmare. These are high speed trains and the area has too many homeless who are supposed to stay off the tracks. Allowing a crossing at 1400 South makes it too easy to be on the tracks. UTA should deny it. The same with the Paramount Ave crossing. Pedestrian furniture, although nice to have, especially at bus stops, would create obstacles for shared pedestrian and bicycle use on sidewalks and attract so called undesirables loitering. Homeless have a tendency of hanging out in the area. Trees should not decrease the sidewalk width. Wider sidewalks are better than trees in park strips. Trees belong where they will be watered, in yards. The Plan recommends "Elimination of “blind corners” or areas" but the City and Plan recommends building to the corner next to skinny sidewalks which are perfect for blind corners. (see construction on 2100 South). Buildings at corners should be well set back for wider sidewalks. The rail line from 1300 South to 400 West should be a linear park, not a TRAX. The local taxpayer cost would be better invested in a linear park and Fleet Block Park. The local cost of the proposed TRAX to 400 West is $100 million. What does the community want for that $100 million? The 1700 South TRAX station would completely change TRAX (with the 650S station) into a milkrun. That is not conducive to increasing transit use. More attention should be focused on eliminating car dealerships which destroy any walkability. The 9th South Viaduct is an important traffic corridor, which if eliminated, would increase pollution in the area. The area around 900 South and to the north is increasing density significantly. George Chapman 1186S 1100E SLC I am in support of increased density in the entire heart of the neighborhood; however, I do have concerns and problems with the proposed language for the West Temple Character Zone. I go into more detail on this below. West Temple Character District: “New development should maintain the current character and scale of the area” This yellow line defined as the “West Temple Character Zone” bisects the heart of the neighborhood proposed area. It makes no sense and I do not know what character they are even talking about preserving. This stretch of west temple It’s a hodgepodge of uses and scale (pictures and examples below) where the very few single family homes look out of place. As the owner of one of those 6 houses (corner of Lucy and West Temple), I say forget that. Let this whole area be included in a higher and better density proposed for the heart of the neighborhood. The way the plan currently reads is that potentially 120 foot buildings could go into the blue areas defined as the heart of the neighborhood, while the property I own would be stuck as a small single family home with a back yard all in the name of preserving some kind of undefined character. My property could potentially be surrounded by new uses and density while these old homes are just left in some arbitrary lower density assignment. I am all for added density, my concern is that everyone else will get the benefit of added density while my property which has an existing front door facing west temple (entire south side of property is on lucy) will be forced to stay low density. The plan would basically exclude a handful of property owners from the added benefits while the city builds a huge building across the street. Let us be included in the upzoning, and don’t leave us in the early 1900s when these houses were built as kit homes. I think my property would be a great spot in the urban core for higher density housing options. Its proximity to Trax, and 1300 south makes it a prime candidate. It would be a shame and not make sense if this must stay a small 2-bedroom single-family home, where many new units could be placed in an urban core, in the name of preserving some perceived character zone while the adjacent properties get the benefit and best use of the heart of the neighborhood zone. I think it would be a great spot for infill of duplex/twin homes, micro units, row housing, or even someday a commercial space to support the area (like a bike and coffee shop). This home is unreinforced masonry and adds no significant character to the neighborhood. It will most likely be torn down regardless of zoning changes in the near future. Would the city like to see higher density with multiple living units or commercial, or just keep a small house with a backyard. Again, as an owner of one of the few single-family homes on this stretch, I say forget that. Let them be included in a higher and better density. Pictures of West Temple with notes Is this the character that the plan wants to preserve? Half of the homes around here are in disrepair and don’t add any real significant historical importance to the area. They could be incorporated into the up- zoning and in my opinion are not even close to a best use for an area that is right nest to mass transit, is easily bikeable, close to amenities, and is perfect for higher and better density and use. From:Jessa Tuminez To:Larsen, Nannette Cc:Lindquist, Kelsey Subject:Re: (EXTERNAL) Request for Ballpark Station Area Plan Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 4:55:12 PM Attachments:image003.png image004.png Thanks Nannette! Let me know once you have reviewed and discussed my comments with relevant parties. Would you be the final decision maker or would that be the GSBS consultants? I do feel strongly that my proposed change is more in line with the broad goals outlined in the Ballpark Station Area Plan and would serve to re-activate the area better, but I'm open to hearing and understanding the other side if there's disagreement or we choose not to modify the plan. Appreciate any updates you can give me. Thanks, Jessa Tuminez Jessa On Mon, Nov 22, 2021, 11:11 PM Jessa Tuminez <tuminez.j@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Nanette, I appreciate your clarification, thank you! I have a couple questions/comments: 1.Was there a particular reason the city chose to draw the line between Paxton rather than keeping the street uniformed in zoning? 2. I’d like to propose a change in the draft plan to include the north end of Paxton in the high density zoning. I think this makes sense given: The north and south side share many characteristics currently (ex. both streets have rental properties) and will share characteristics in the future such as the proposed bike route, being transit oriented, and having significant redevelopment opportunities Additionally, with the very under-utilized alleyway just north of Paxton street (boxed red in attached screenshot), I feel that this alley or Fremont Ave (with the park in front of it) would be the least intrusive to the neighborhood and would be a better line to delineate medium density from high density zoning I appreciate you taking my comments. I'm happy to talk through this in person or on the phone, if helpful. Just let me know. Thanks, Jessa Tuminez Proposed Future Land Use Map Incompatible with Surrounding Uses: Highlighted area has 3 older SFH's in between two large, high density apartment complexes. My house awkwardly sits 5 feet from a 6 story apartment complex. 1/2 block to the east, apartment complexes being developed on small lots that are the same size as mine. Directly across the street is the future home of an approved 500+ unit affordable/market housing project. The land in front of the 500+ unit development is currently being marketed for sale as another multi- family development site. A few months ago I had a DRC meeting with the planning department about this very issue. They agreed with my assessment that the current zoning and layout was "poor urban planning" and that the neighborhood would benefit from a change. However, they explained that the process to change the current future land use map would likely take 18+months. I was told that TSA or FB-UNC 2 zoning would be more appropriate and would better conform to the surrounding uses. I am hopeful that this small neighborhood plan offers a quicker path to updating the future land use map to a more neighborhood compatible zoning designation. Here is the info on my property: Property Address: Current Zoning: RM-35 Proposed Plan Zoning: Medium Density Neighbor's addresses: What are your thoughts on my proposal to update the plan to address this oversight? I'd love to hear your feedback/concerns. I would also be curious to hear what you would recommend for next steps. Is it possible to loop in the planning department as they are already aware of this situation? Thanks, Amy! On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 9:13 AM Marcus Lonardo <marcuslonardo10@gmail.com> wrote: From: Marcus Lonardo <marcuslonardo10@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2021 11:48 PM To: Anderson, John <John.Anderson@slcgov.com>; Lundmark, Susan <Susan.Lundmark@slcgov.com> Subject: (EXTERNAL) Fwd: Ballpark Improvement Plan Hello John and Susan, I was referred to you both by Amy Hawkins. (See forwarded email thread). I understand that you are managing the creation of the Ballpark Station Area Plan. I have reviewed the draft plan in detail and am very impressed with your forward thinking vision for the neighborhood. I believe there are a few small, but important, tweaks that can be made to improve the plan. Is there still time for changes to be made? I would like have a discussion with the team responsible for ultimately finalizing the plan. Would either of you, or anyone on the plan creation team, be free for a 15 minute phone call? If helpful, I can detail my notes in a concise email. Please advise me on the best way to make mine and my neighbor's voice's heard. There are so many parties involved in the creation of the plan that it is difficult to identify the best people to speak with. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! -Marcus ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Amy J. Hawkins <amy.j hawkins@gmail.com> Date: Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 2:02 PM Subject: Re: Ballpark Improvement Plan To: Marcus Lonardo <marcuslonardo10@gmail.com> Cc: Paul Johnson <pjslc@yahoo.com>, Jesse Hulse <jesse@atlasarchitects.com> Sure, Marcus. I reached out to Susan Lundmark for her advice and this is what she suggested: To: Lundmark, Susan <Susan.Lundmark@slcgov.com>; Annaka Egan <aegan@gsbsconsulting.com>; Christine Richman <crichman@gsbsconsulting.com>; Anderson, John <John.Anderson@slcgov.com> Subject: (EXTERNAL) Re: Ballpark Improvement Plan Hi Susan, Folks like Marcus are starting to send me their feedback on the Ballpark Area Plan. How should I best direct their comments? I don't want considered feedback like this to be lost. According to what I see on the area plan website, it doesn't seem like the public comment period has officially begun yet. Is that right? "The Planning Division of the City will set up community discussions with the focus on gauging community support for the plan. Where there is not support, let’s have a meaningful conversation about why and what can be done about it. The official 45-day public comment period for the plan will happen during this timeframe; check back on this website soon to make comment and/or sign up with your email address to receive notification of the public comment period." *** Hi Amy, Thanks very much for reaching out and I’m glad to hear that community members are reading through the Plan and considering their feedback. My understanding is the 45-day comment period is not open quite yet. Until that time, I think it would probably be helpful to suggest that community members consider documenting their feedback in one location (as Marcus has done in his email below) and enter their email address at the Plan website: https://www.slc.gov/planning/master-plans/ballparkplan/ With their email entered on that website, those community members will be notified directly when the comment period opens, and they can send their documented feedback directly to SLC Planning Division as part of the official Plan adoption process. Or, if they prefer, they can email their comments to John Anderson at john.anderson@slcgov.com John’s team will be managing the Plan adoption process and John can forward those emails to the appropriate planner once the official comment period opens. I hope that helps! Please let me know if you have other questions or if I can help in other ways. Thanks, Susan On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 1:23 PM Marcus Lonardo <marcuslonardo10@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you all for your feedback! I am in no rush but want to get my feedback incorporated in the Ballpark Area Masterplan, if possible. Is there a point of contact, who is heading up community outreach for the plan, I can be put in contact with? I saw that GSBS was contracted to advise on the plan. Can I be put in contact with their representative? Thank you, Marcus On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 3:44 PM Marcus Lonardo <marcuslonardo10@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you all for your feedback! I am in no rush but want to get my feedback incorporated in the Ballpark Area Masterplan, if possible. Is there a point of contact, who is heading up community outreach for the plan, I can be put in contact with? I saw that GSBS was contracted to advise on the plan. Can I be put in contact with their representative? Thank you, Marcus On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 7:46 PM <pjslc@yahoo.com> wrote: I must defer to Jesse’s professional expertise. The lot owners who wish for the change may do so on their own but there will be a financial cost. Planning (zoning@slcgov.com) can give you the specifics. The Ballpark plan may include some rezoning, but it certainly won’t move forward at a quick pace if that’s what you’re looking for. Though it’s unlikely you need to be concerned about zoning becoming less friendly to density in your neighborhood, so you might want to do a little wait and see. Personally I would only pursue a zoning change if I was planning to attempt a development on my own. Regards, Paul Paul Johnson Chair, Central 9th Community Council From: Jesse Hulse <jesse@atlasarchitects.com> Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 3:40 PM To: Marcus Lonardo <marcuslonardo10@gmail.com> Cc: Amy J. Hawkins <amy.j hawkins@gmail.com>; Paul Johnson <pjslc@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Ballpark Improvement Plan I think whether you pursue a rezone along the traditional route, or you hope the city does as part of their ballpark plan, the process will be the same, but it could take a lot longer if you wait for the City. If you want to pursue it for all 3 lots, you would need your neighbors to participate and just work with Planning to go through the process. The other option is to lobby the Administration, City Council, Planning Dept to make it part of the Ballpark plan to rezone Jesse J Hulse Principal, Atlas Architects Inc Vice Chair, Central 9th Community Council From: Marcus Lonardo <marcuslonardo10@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, November 4, 2021 at 4:45 PM To: Jesse Hulse <jesse@atlasarchitects.com> Cc: Amy J. Hawkins <amy.j hawkins@gmail.com>, Paul Johnson <pjslc@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Ballpark Improvement Plan Hi Jesse, Thank you for your feedback and thoughts. I'm glad to hear that you think a change in designation to something along the lines of TSA or FBUNC makes sense given the circumstances. Paul, I would be curious to hear your feedback as well. What do you all recommend as the next step? I want to do my best to push this concept to the neighborhood/planning department so that it can be incorporated into the final plan. I am not very familiar with the small area plan process and want to make sure I follow the proper steps and speak to the right people. Thank you all for your help and guidance. -Marcus On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 1:31 PM Jesse Hulse <jesse@atlasarchitects.com> wrote: In that case then yes, I would agree that even with their inherent faults, (which C9CC is pushing to correct) TSA or FB would make sense to allow for larger multi-family projects here. The existing RMF-35 isn’t bad though, it would allow for 3 story town home development like Rowhaus to the South which would also feel in character and scale or 3 story multifamily apartment. Some variation in height along a street is nice so that the street face doesn’t feel relentless and offers some extra opportunity for view and daylight to residents or passersby. My two cents. Jesse J Hulse Principal, Atlas Architects Inc Vice Chair, Central 9th Community Council From: Marcus Lonardo <marcuslonardo10@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, November 4, 2021 at 11:54 AM To: Jesse Hulse <jesse@atlasarchitects.com> Cc: Amy J. Hawkins <amy.j.hawkins@gmail.com>, Paul Johnson <pjslc@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Ballpark Improvement Plan Hi Jesse, Please let me know how I can be of help in applying pressure to make sure they follow through on the zoning changes. I strongly oppose preserving the existing character of the 3 parcels in question on the proposed Ballpark small area plan. My house is literally 5ft from a 6 story apartment complex. (have you seen the movie Up? ha!) I am in favor of amending the proposed plan for these parcels to a future land use zoning designation that better conforms to the sun-ounding uses. S1mounding uses: 2 Large high density apartments on either side. 500+ units going in directly across the street +additional land across the street being marketed for sale as another high density apartment site. We are literally swrnunded. We are a forgotten small island of SFH's in a sea of high density multi family-yet we still only have RMF-35 zoning and fall into the "medium density" designation on the proposed plan. TSA zoning is suggested one block south. I think the medium zoning designation for these three parcels ( or whole block) ,on the proposed plan, is an oversight. I had a DRC meeting with the city a few months back. They strongly agreed the cwTent layout is an example of poor urban planning. They recollllllended I pursue a rezone to FB-UNC 2 or TSA. They also recollllllended I reach out to the community council for fe.edback. They said a rezone process would take 18+ months and that you essentially need to be a RE developer. I am hopeful this small area plan can provide a quicker path to a more reasonable future land use designation. I only own one of the homes. My neighbors and I have serious concems about our long term property values being dramatically impared by the lack of conformity with the neighborhood. Do you see where I'm coming from? What are your thoughts/concems? Thank you, All! -Marcus On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 11:25 AM Jesse Hulse <jesse@atlasarchitects.com> wrote: Hi Marcus, Nice to meet you, I’m really glad that our efforts appeared to pay off – however we are going to have to keep after them to make sure they follow through on the zoning changes. What are you hoping to accomplish with a rezone, are you wanting to get your property and maybe the two neighbors rezoned, so they can be redeveloped into something denser like the two apartments on either side, or are you trying to preserve the character of those 3 existing properties? Jesse J Hulse Principal, Atlas Architects Inc Vice Chair, Central 9th Community Council From: Marcus Lonardo <marcuslonardo10@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, November 4, 2021 at 10:51 AM To: Amy J. Hawkins <amy.j hawkins@gmail.com> Cc: Paul Johnson <pjslc@yahoo.com>, Jesse Hulse <jesse@atlasarchitects.com> Subject: Re: Ballpark Improvement Plan Amy, thank you for the introduction and excellent synopsis. Hi Paul and Jesse, See my initial email to Amy for greater context. I look forward to connecting and identifying an appropriate future land use zone for the identified strip of land. On another note- you all were incredible in helping voice our neighborhood's concerns with the proposed homeless shelter around the corner. Great work! I I Thank you! -Marcus Lonardo Hi Amy, Thank you for sharing. I generally really like the plan and think it will help accommodate the necessa1y growth and changes our neighborhood will experience over the next 1 O+ years. I would like to point out one po1tion of the proposed map that I think could be improved upon. I I own a home at 1055 S 200 W that sits in between two large apartment complexes. My house is awkwardly 5 feet from C9 Flats, a six story apartment complex. There is another large apartment complex a few doors down. See image below: The proposed plan does not materially change the zoning designation for this awkward strip of highlighted land that includes my home (see above in yellow). I think this is because the homes in this strip barely fall outside of the 1/4 mile trax diameter. These homes are roughly 0.3 miles from both trax stops and still idea for a transit oriented development. Proposed Future Land Use Map Incompatible with Surrounding Uses: · Highlighted area has 3 older SFH's in between two large, high density apartment complexes. · My house awkwardly sits 5 feet from a 6 story apartment complex. · 1/2 block to the east, apartment complexes being developed on small lots that are the same size as mine. · Directly across the street is the future home of an approved 500+ unit affordable/market housing project. · The land in front of the 500+ unit development is currently being marketed for sale as another multi-family development site. A few months ago I had a DRC meeting with the planning department about this very issue. They agreed with my assessment that the current zoning and layout was "poor urban planning" and that the neighborhood would benefit from a change. However, they explained that the process to change the current future land use map would likely take 18+months. I was told that TSA or FB-UNC 2 zoning would be more appropriate and would better conform to the surrounding uses. I am hopeful that this small neighborhood plan offers a quicker path to updating the future land use map to a more neighborhood compatible zoning designation. Here is the info on my property: Property Address: 1055 South 200 West Current Zoning: RM-35 Proposed Plan Zoning: Medium Density Neighbor's addresses: 1049 S 200 W and 1039-1045 S W What are your thoughts on my proposal to update the plan to address this oversight? I'd love to hear your feedback/concerns. I would also be curious to hear what you would recommend for next steps. Is it possible to loop in the planning department as they are already aware of this situation? Thanks, Amy! On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 10:34 AM Amy J. Hawkins <amy.j.hawkins@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Paul and Jesse, Marcus Lonardo reached out to me because he lives about a block south of Central 9th in a home at 1055 South 200 West. He's looking to change the zoning of his property (currently his block includes 3 100+ year old homes adjacent to high density apartments on three sides) and thinks that this could be meaningful feedback to include in the Ballpark Area Plan. I agree! However, he's been advised that Form-Based 2 zoning or TSA zoning would be good options for his home. By both of our limited understanding this would match the "heart of the neighborhood" zoning designation that is proposed one block away. Could we help give him some feedback about how Form-Based Zoning has worked out for the Central 9th neighborhood and what kinds of zoning might make sense for his block? Best regards, Amy On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 3:13 PM Marcus Lonardo <marcuslonardo10@gmail.com> wrote: From:Lundmark, Susan To:mcgonigle.julia@gmail.com Cc:Lyons, Amy; Larsen, Nannette Subject:RE: (EXTERNAL) SLC Bikeways Date:Wednesday, November 24, 2021 2:53:28 PM Hi Julia, I apologize for the delayed reply and thank you for the suggestion you sent to SLC Transportation Division. I was sent your email because I have been the City’s project manager for creating the Ballpark Station Area Plan, which is a transportation and land use plan in the direct vicinity of the Ballpark TRAX station and Smith’s Ballpark (where the Bees play). If you are interested, a public review draft of the Plan is available here, and there is also a place to enter your email to receive updates: https://www.slc.gov/planning/master-plans/ballparkplan/ The Plan is now going through the City’s official plan adoption process, including a public outreach and comment period. This step is being led by Nannette Larsen in SLC Planning Division, who is copied here so she can include your comment in the consideration of the draft plan. Just so you know, right now there is a recommendation in the draft Plan to further study the possibility re-allocating roadway space and/or reducing the number of vehicle travel lanes on 1300 South between State Street and 300 West to allow better bicycle and sidewalk options on this stretch. We are not promising that we would be able to do that, but we are recommending that we study it further to see what the options may be. I hope this helps! Please reach out to me or Nannette with any other questions. Thank you, Susan SUSAN LUNDMARK (pronouns: she/her) Project Manager, Transportation Planner Transportation Division DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION TEL 801-535-6112 EMAIL susan.lundmark@slcgov.com www.slc.gov/transportation www.ourneighborhoodscan.com From: Julia McGonigle <mcgonigle.julia@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:10 AM To: Transportation <transportation@slcgov.com> Subject: (EXTERNAL) SLC Bikeways I see SLC is undergoing a lot of bike infrastructure planning for the next few years. Awesome! Happy to pay taxes to make that happen. I wish you would, in the meantime, connect the bike lane on 1300S between State and ~3rd/4th west. Currently the bike lane on 13th south just dumps you onto State Street with no bike friendly option other than diverting up to 900S or down to 1700S, which is a pretty far jump on the traffic heavy State Street. 1300S needs the bike lane extended to at least Main Street ASAP, but preferably just connect it all the way through as it is on 9th and 17th. This would be wonderful and cheap....just a little paint on the road. Your constituents would appreciate this immensely. From:Roo To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) ballpark plan Date:Friday, February 4, 2022 7:38:06 PM Hi Nannette - these are purely my opinions as a resident. 1. festival street. I don’t think we need another festival street, at least not yet. we have yet to see how 300 S (500-600 W) plays out; we already have Edison St.; and our true festival street is between the City & County Building and the Library. 2. My primary destinations in this area. First, in order of frequency: Lowes Target Lucky 13 Ballpark TRAX station (usually alighting rather than boarding) Second, in order of preference: Lucky 13 Lowes (they have better garden section than Home Depot) Ballpark TRAX Target 3. West Temple is valuable to me because when I get off TRAX at 1300 South, it is the nicest road to ride my bicycle south to connect to Parley’s Trail. I appreciate the trees. I don’t ride on Main Street, despite the bike lanes, because it is too wide, too barren, and, in the summer, too hot. I hope any festival street action will not disrupt this. Although Central Pointe Station is closer to Parley’s Trail, the connection is more clunky. 4. Apartment buildings need PUBLIC ACCESS ground level retail or restaurants, not just activity centers and gyms for residents. If Ballpark needs destinations, these are the destinations. 5. Walmart and Lowes, in true cities, can be those ground level retail establishments, with parking garages and apartments above. I know this is not their preferred building form, but they can and will do it in locations (or countries) that demand it. It might sound weird, but I hope we can keep Lowes in Salt Lake. I like shopping in Salt Lake because I know that a percentage of sales tax goes to Salt Lake City. I try to shop in Salt Lake City instead of Millcreek or South Salt Lake. Thanks for considering my comments. Becka Roolf 563 E Elm Ave From:jody ellis To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Station and Planning Date:Thursday, December 30, 2021 8:12:27 AM Hello Nannette, I have some questions and concerns regarding changes around the ballpark trax station. I understand change is needed. We need better and safer pedestrian access. I live on Lucy Ave between 200W and W Temple. It's a nice quiet street with good neighbors that watch out for each other. I'm not sure if I misunderstand that the plan is to have more access from trax to Lucy Ave. I can see access from Lucy from the west but please not more pedestrian traffic east of the trax. This is a residential area. I have used public transportation in many cities and we don't leave the station and walk through a neighborhood. There needs to be a safe walkway from the station to W Temple. The 1300 South sidewalk is too narrow. Could a sidewalk large enough for 2 way pedestrian traffic and bike lanes be placed along the north side of the trax parking lot and behind the Indian center and the 7Eleven. With a nice crosswalk across W Temple. Then eliminate the crosswalk by Lucy and pedestrian traffic down Lucy. With the homeless and Horizante traffic walking down our street many of us don't feel safe in our front yards. They walk down the street dropping trash, swearing... the dogs in the neighborhood bark at them, as they should because they are protecting their property. One of my neighbors said he thought there was something mentioned about using the alleys for pedestrian and bike traffic. I have a 2 car garage in the alley that we use daily. When I'm driving down the alley and there is someone walking I have to wait for them to move over so it is safe for me to pass them. My neighbor and I feel the alley is way to narrow for any type of pedestrian traffic. Besides at this time I wouldn't feel safe walking down the alley. All summer we had a homeless man camped by our neighbors garage. Many times when I leave or come home I need to ask people to move off my garage apron. Other neighbors have the same problem. Our alley is a mess and not a safe place. I look forward to making our neighborhood a better place. Sincerely, Jody Ellis From:Ciara C To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Station Area Plan-recommendation of concern Date:Tuesday, April 5, 2022 9:40:31 AM Dear Ms Larsen, I am writing to you as a long time resident of Ballpark and homeowner on West Temple for nearly 20 years. My husband and I have been very involved in the community and are excited for the plans and future growth of the area. We appreciate all the hard work that has gone into creating the Ballpark Station Area Plan. Recently I reread the Ballpark Station Area Plan and noticed a recommendation of great concern. You can find the paragraph and recommendation of concern on page 18, paragraph "Main Street Area". I have also put the paragraph below for your convenience. "Main Street between the current Utah Pride Center (1380 S. Main Street) and 1700 South has retained its original scale and includes several locally owned restaurants, bakeries, and shops. The east side of Main Street is included in the State Street overlay zone which addresses the scale and placement of buildings in the area. To ensure compatible development on both sides of Main Street the overlay zone should be extended to include the properties on the west side of Main Street." I am very much opposed to extending the State Street overlay zone to the west side of Main Street in the area from 1300 South and 2100 South. In reviewing the current overlay map it appears that city planners intentionally omitted the west section of Main Street beginning at 1300 South. I assume this was an effort to keep the character and charm of that section of Main Street. It is my understanding that all the properties on the west side, currently zoned Commercial Corridor could and would in the future be exempt from any setback if this layover is in fact extended. This type of overlay zoning would be absolutely devastating for that specific area where developers are already chomping at the bit to purchase and build right up to the sidewalk. As you may know the Ballpark area is in desperate need of greenspace and this overlay would greatly reduce what small amount we do have. This recommendation is contradictory to the rest of the area plan that often states an intention for landscape design and enhanced neighborhood greenspace. Furthermore in the paragraph it states that the two sides of Main Street should be compatible. Developers are already interpreting this to mean that the two sides of the street should “mirror” and suggesting west side setbacks be eliminated to match the east side. I can not imagine concrete walls are the goal for our lovely Main Street. Please please reconsider this recommendation. The west side of Main Street (between 1300 South to 2100 South) is where many of the local residents walk and serves as a transition into the residential community west of Main. It also provides a pleasant walk to the stadium. The properties are green, lovely and yes, setback from the street. This area has so much character and charm. It would be a shame to see it go. Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience. Ciara Combs From:Kelsey Maas To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Ballpark Area Plan - Resident Comments Date:Thursday, May 26, 2022 5:31:43 PM Dear Nannette, I'm a resident of this area. I live on South Jefferson. I sat in on the Ballpark Community Council meeting and heard the city updates. I'd like to see South Jefferson also see the same protections that the "Avenue" streets will see. While there is one massive development on Goltz - it doesn't fit well with the rest of the street. I heard a developer argue that because 200 W will be developed, then we might as well build up Goltz and South Jefferson, which I don't understand this logic. I welcome development on 200 W. The trax line serves as a natural divide between the areas. Central Ninth has many areas where there are street enclaves of similar residential forms (homes, duplexes, small multiplexes) (S. Jefferson between 800-900S, Washington between 800-900S) that are great! Please don't allow developers to demo these affordable historic homes with unsustainable zoning. Thanks for your time, Kelsey (84101) From:Amy J. Hawkins To:Larsen, Nannette Cc:sarah.reale@gmail.com; danthomas801@gmail.com; Jeffs2123@yahoo.com; dougflagler@gmail.com Subject:(EXTERNAL) more accessible version of the Station Area Plan? Date:Tuesday, July 12, 2022 6:17:37 PM Hi Nannette, Several of the Ballpark Community Council Board Members and community members would like to engage with the Ballpark Station Area Plan and review the draft document, but they are finding it very challenging due to the size of the text in both the body of the document (most of which is in 9-point font) and the text in the figures. I have to admit that even for someone familiar with the zoom features on a pdf viewer and with a large computer monitor, it can be quite challenging to view the document. Not all of the Ballpark Community Council board members, and certainly the vast majority of Ballpark community members have access to that level of digital literacy or equipment. Is there a way that we could be provided with a more visually-accessible version of the Station Area Plan? I apologize for not getting back to you about this issue earlier. I know it is important to allow community members the opportunity to view and respond to this plan. When it comes to issues of access, digital literacy, and even squinting at smaller fonts, I should have tried to communicate with others with more nuance about potential barriers to viewing the Station Area Plan. You might be able to imagine how some of these conversations went--I think most people can get embarrassed, frustrated, and defensive when they don't have access or ease of use with technology that they perceive others do. It wasn't immediately obvious to me that even though I was struggling with zooming in and out, for others in our neighborhood, this was presenting some impossible barriers to entry to engaging with the details in the drafts of the plan. (This could be one reason why the city may have received relatively little community response thus far.) I would appreciate any help with getting a more visually-accessible version of the plan. Thank you for your time, Amy J. Hawkins, PhD Chair, Ballpark Community Council facebook.com/BallparkCC/ --- As per official University of Utah guidance, please note: I am Amy J. Hawkins; I am a Ph.D.-trained researcher and full-time faculty member at the University of Utah School of Medicine in the Department of Biochemistry, but I am writing on my personal behalf and not on behalf of the university. From:cindy cromer To:Larsen, Nannette Subject:(EXTERNAL) Fw: Station Area Plan TONIGHT Date:Wednesday, July 27, 2022 3:13:06 PM draft of comments for tonight; probably similar but could change See you tonight. cindy c. I have extensive history with Small Area plans, beginning in the 1980's with the East Central Neighborhood Plan, adopted in 1984. I have worked on almost all of the small area plans in the Central Community since that time and am a huge fan of the planning tool to solve complex land use issues facing the neighborhoods in the Central Community, especially East Central. Relative to the plans I have worked on, the scope of this small area plan is actually large. Frequently the plans have been a single block or a commercial node. The proposal covers a much larger area. It could more appropriately be called a large, small area plan. Small area plans in my experience have been initiated by challenging issues facing a defined area, for example the Smith's loading dock at 9th and 9th. This plan does NOT begin where other plans begin. It doesn't start where the neighborhood is. The pressing issues are crime, personal safety, and displacement of business people and residents. This is where the plan has to start because moving the conversation to a Festival Street is a long way from where we are. And a starting point regarding the perceptions of the neighborhood is essential to engaging in the kind of designs which would reduce crime and make the neighborhood safer. Connectivity, the darling concept of planners, is a bad idea for the foreseeable future. Increasing home ownership substantially would be helpful. Additional public spaces where people who are not law abiding can gather are NOT a good idea. I was very concerned when I heard that the City, in top-down fashion, was suggesting a branch of the library. Not now...not in this budget cycle or the next one. So the plan needs to start where the neighborhood is. That is what all of the small area plans I have worked on have done. This one should not be any different. P.O. BOX 520697 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84152-0697 Dear Planning Commission We are reaching out to comment on the Ballpark Station Area Plan that is on the agenda for July 27, 2022. We here at TAG SLC are very interested in the neighborhood and have made significant investments in what we view as one of the most vibrant and exciting areas of Salt Lake City. Overall, we felt that the plan will contribute towards making the neighborhood a more positive place to live. The plans around creating a more engaging West Temple Corridor on both game days and year-round were especially exciting. However, we are concerned with the proposed Jefferson Park Mixed-Use Area. Our core concern is the proposed height limited for “Jefferson and avenues streets” which is called out to be 2-3 stories. The vast majority of this area is being proposed to allow more height and density than what is allowed today. Yet, this section of Jefferson Mixed-Use Area seems to be being down zoned, as these streets are currently zoned to allow 35 ft height (3 stories) This area is directly between the 900 S and Ballpark Trax Stops, making it a great place to add density. There is precedence within the Jefferson Mixed Use as the most recent projects completed in this area were rezoned from RMF-35 to R-MU. (which allows 75 ft by right). The proximity to open space @ Jefferson Park is another reason that this area is well suited for additional density. We ask the planning commission and staff to consider allowing more height and density across the Jefferson Park Mixed Use Area. Best regards, The TAG SLC Team