The URL can be used to link to this page

Transmittal - 1/9/2023ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC LANDS MAYOR KRISTIN RIKER DIRECTOR SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION WWW.SLCGOV.COM 1965 WEST 500 SOUTH TEL: 801-972-7800 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84104 FAX: 801-972-7847 PAGE 1 OF 2 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ____________________________ Date Received: _______________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 4, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Kristin Riker, Director, Department of Public Lands ______________________ SUBJECT: Adoption of Glendale Regional Park Plan STAFF CONTACTS: Kat Maus Public Lands Planner Katherine.maus@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the Glendale Regional Park Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: N/A BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Salt Lake City Public Lands Department has been working with a consultant, Design Workshop, to develop a plan to guide development of the 17-acre Glendale Regional Park site, formerly known as Raging Waters. Demolition is substantially complete, and a portion of the park must be open to public recreation by April 2024 to meet the requirements of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (https://www.nps.gov/subjects/lwcf/index.html). The project team has been working to develop the Glendale Regional Park Plan since Summer of 2021, which will provide the guiding vision and design for the future of the old water park site and establish a framework to guide development and programming of the site into the fu ture. The plan relies heavily on Glendale community input and is aimed at representing the unique and diverse culture of the Glendale Community while also including amenities that will create a regional draw Lisa Shaffer (Jan 9, 2023 09:38 MST)01/09/2023 01/09/2023 Page 2 of 4 for residents of Salt Lake City. The project team has worked closely with project stakeholders, neighborhood residents, community partners and students at Glendale Middle and Mountain View Elementary Schools to create goals and objectives for the site, and a community -supported vision that reflects the Glendale neighborhood’s rich heritage and identity. Over 1,300 people responded to an online city-wide survey, bringing the total participant count for the project to nearly 1,700. Key elements of the plan were informed by public input and at full build out include: • Community Gathering and Event Spaces – a promenade/community plaza spanning the north central gateway, an event stage and lawn, smaller pavilions and picnic lawns and a riverside beach and boardwalk. • Play Places for Everyone - hiking, walking and paved trails, an all-ages and abilities playground, climbing features, multi-use sport courts, dog park, and sledding hill. • Places to Enjoy the Water – a kayak rental, access to the Jordan River for recreation, boat dock and ramp, and an outdoor pool. • Places to Wheel Around - an ice/roller skating ribbon, skateboarding area, and bike trails. The draft plan also looks at specific metrics, based on the original park goals, that measure the plan’s success in addressing improvements in ecological function o f the site, improvements in access to and within the site, and in creating community spaces for gathering and events. Gauging elements of the final concept plan, through performance-based evaluation, provides a measure to determine if goals set during the beginning of the park planning process are being attained. The Glendale Regional Park Plan draft provides recommendations for site management and restoration during construction, and after, including programming and partnership needs, operations, maintenance, and staffing are also included in the plan draft document. Programming and management will be key to fulfill the park goal of creating a safe community asset. Potential opportunities for addressing management needs include expanding internal Public Lan ds staff by recommending additional staff to support and activate the park to enhance safety and enjoyment of the space. The plan recommends a full time, on-site programming manager, two part time, seasonal park attendants and allocating associated budget to ensure programming on the site is robust and effective, consisting of programming funds for arts, culture, fitness, entertainment, markets and community festival events. The plan also emphasizes continuing to create and build upon key community partners and stakeholders, engaging with community organizations that promote inclusivity, equity, and partnerships, and working with local and minority-owned businesses to program elements of the site. More information about programming, operations and management recommendations within the plan can be found on page 71 of the draft Master Plan document. PUBLIC PROCESS: Community engagement for the plan process and for the development of the preferred plan used a multi-pronged approach including youth and stakeholder engagement, development of a community advisory committee, online survey and public open house, along with in-person engagement events. The public process began with robust engagement with the Glendale Community and then broadened to a citywide engagement effort. A detailed description of the public engagement efforts can be found at https://www.slc.gov/parks/parks-division/glendale-waterpark/. In brief, the engagement process consisted of three engagement windows: Page 3 of 4 Public Engagement Window 1: The first public engagement window prioritized neighborhood and community stakeholder engagement to ensure the community voice was the guide in establishing the initial vision. Considering the predominately younger population in this area, the project team focused on Glendale Middle School and Mountain View Elementary School students and families, while also engaging community leaders and the Glendale Neighborhood Council. The project team met multiple times with the students, engaged in design charettes and used the direction we received from these 130 students to guide initial plan alternative design. The project team also attended and held several in - person events with the Glendale community and created a Community Advisory Commi ttee (CAC) specifically for this plan creation. The CAC was comprised of members who are considered leaders in the Glendale community and represented a variety of community organizations, businesses and affiliations specifically in the Glendale community. The members of the CAC provided key feedback on the project mission, goals, engagement process and vision for the park and shared information about the planning process with their community. The engagement from Window 1 drove the development of two concept alternatives. Public Engagement Window 2: The two concept alternatives were shared with the public and with City Council. The project team kicked-off broad, citywide public engagement with an open house hosted at the Glendale and Parkview Community Learning Center to open a survey. Residents of Glendale, members of the CAC and the city at large attended the event to orient themselves to the plans. Over 1360 people citywide participated in the survey which informed the development of the final preferred plan for the site. The preferred plan includes community-prioritized features from each of the two concept plans. The project team met again with the CAC to review engagement results and get feedback before moving forward with the final preferred plan. Public Engagement Window 3: The third and final window included sharing out of the final preferred plan and final draft plan for the site with the Parks, Natural Lands, Urban Forestry and Trails Advisory Board (PNUT Board), the CAC and Glendale Neighborhood Council. The final preferred plan was available to the public in July 2022, with the draft plan document becoming available August 25, 2022, initiating the 45 day public noticing period required for Planning Commission. Please see Exhibit B for additional details on engagement events, descriptions, and participation. Additional public comments and responses can be found in the Planning Commission Staff Report of November 9, 2022. Please see Exhibit D for letters of support from the Parks, Natural Lands, Urban Forestry and Trails Advisory Board and Transportation Advisory Board. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Following the presentation of the Glendale Regional Park Plan to the Planning Commission, the public hearing was opened where the following comments were made: After discussion of the plan and public comments by the Planning Commission and staff, Planning Commissioner Brenda Scheer moved to recommend approval of the plan with the following statement: “Based on the information presented and discussion, I move that the Commission forward a POSITIVE recommendation to the City Council on the fabulous Glendale Regional Park Master Page 4 of 4 Plan with the PROVISO that the City Council pay special attention to operations, maintenance, security, and staffing for the park as it goes into use.” The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) PC Agenda of November 9, 2022 (Click to Access) b) PC Minutes of November 9, 2022 (Click to Access) c) Planning Commission Staff Report of November 9, 2022 (Click to Access Report) EXHIBITS: A. Salt Lake City Ordinance B. Public Engagement Chronology C. Glendale Regional Park Plan D. Public Comments Received & Letters of Support EXHIBIT A Salt Lake City Ordinance SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2023 (Adopting the Glendale Regional Park Plan to be part of the city’s general plan as a specific plan found in the Westside Master Plan) An ordinance adopting the Glendale Regional Park Plan pertaining to property located at 1131 West 1700 South, 1181 West 1700 South, and portions of properties with a certified address of 1375 West 1700 South and 1220 West 2100 South. The Glendale Regional Park Plan will be part of the Westside Master Plan, which is a component of the city’s general plan. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) held a public hearing on November 9, 2022 on the proposal prepared by the Salt Lake City Parks and Public Lands Department to adopt a new Glendale Regional Park Plan as part of the city’s Westside Master Plan; and WHEREAS, at its November 9, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) to adopt the Glendale Regional Park Plan, and WHEREAS, after 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 Glendale Park Regional Park Plan. The Glendale Regional Park Plan (Exhibit A) shall be and hereby is adopted to be part of the Westside Master Plan, a component of the city’s general plan as required by Chapter 10-9a of the Utah Code. 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 ______________, 2023. ______________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on _______________________. Mayor's Action: _______Approved. _______Vetoed. ______________________________ MAYOR ______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. ________ of 2023. Published: ______________. APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Paul C. Nielson, Senior City Attorney November 21, 2022 EXHIBIT B Public Engagement Chronology ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor PUBLIC LANDS DEPARTMENT 1965 W 500 S SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84104 www.slc.gov/parks/ PHONE 801-972-7800 FAX 801-972-7847 Project Event Notes Time Period Community and Neighborhood Department Survey 3,500 Respondents-- Public Survey through the department of Community and Neighborhoods to gauge public interest in the future of the park https://www.slc.gov/can/cares/waterpark/ 2020 SLC Waterpark Commemoration Survey Report 3841 Respondents—Public Survey to gauge interest in demolition and re-development of the park. https://www.slc.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Water-Park- Survey-Report-Nov-2020.pdf 2020 Glendale Community Council Visioning Exercise 11 Participants and 3 Community Council Members visioning a potential future for the site 2021 Initiation of Formal Planning Process by Public Lands department Public Lands initiates a formal city engagement and planning process for the Glendale Regional Park Master Plan supported by Design Workshop as project consultant. Spring/ Summer 2021 External Stakeholder Engagement: Community Events Parents and students were asked at three community events which elements from past surveys should be included in the park. Events included: Morning Coffee with 20 respondents; Glendale Scare Fair with around 50 respondents; Hartland 4 Youth and Family Event with 40 respondents Fall 2021 External Stakeholder Engagement: Glendale Middle School and Mountain View Elementary Design exercises were led with 88 middle school and 40 fifth grade students to gather feedback and input on the future design of the site. The process included on-site meetings with 88 Glendale Middle School, “Place-It” activity with University Neighborhood Partners, and collage creation. https://multicultural.utah.gov/glendale-youth-as-placemakers/ Fall 2021 Community Advisory Committee Meeting 1 A CAC was created to ensure neighborhood representation in the preferred plan and final master plan documents. These stakeholder meetings ensured engagement with westside communities. The first meeting oriented participants to the project and asked for general impressions on the project. January 2022 Community Advisory Committee Engagement Meeting 2 This meeting presented two conceptual ideas for the park and sought specific feedback on the ideas and amenities for the future site. February 2022 “Plan Your Park” in-person Open House and engagement event at Community Learning Center Project team worked with Glendale Community Council to host an event with over 100 attendees to share with the community the concepts that have been generated so far and to launch a public survey. March 16, 2022 Online Survey Public survey to gather broader feedback on amenities and concept alternatives receiving 1361 responses. March 16, 2022- April 16, 2022 ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor PUBLIC LANDS DEPARTMENT 1965 W 500 S SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84104 www.slc.gov/parks/ PHONE 801-972-7800 FAX 801-972-7847 Community Advisory Committee Engagement Meeting 3 This meeting shared the results of the broader survey with the Committee and solicit feedback and impressions on the data. April 12, 2022 Community Advisory Committee Engagement Meeting 4 Final preferred plan sharing and feedback from the CAC, as well as explanation of Phase 1 May 31, 2022 Presentation to Glendale Neighborhood Council Sharing of public process and phase 1 implementation projects, timeline, and budget Jun 15, 2022 Preferred Plan Confirmation Confirm final preferred plan and share with the public. August- October 2022 Presentation of final plan draft to PNUT Board Share final plan document and phasing plan to PNUT Board and request endorsement September 1, 2022 Presentation of final plan to Glendale Neighborhood Council and public Share final plan document, preferred plan and phasing strategy to the Glendale Community Council and Public; solicit public comment and question September 21, 2022 Presentation of final plan to Transportation Advisory Board Share final plan document and phasing plan to TAB and request endorsement October 1, 2022 City Council Plan Briefing and Process Summary Share final plan document, preferred plan and phasing strategy to City Council as a briefing, and to address comments or questions October 4, 2022 Public Hearing and Planning Commission Presentation and Recommendation Presentation to Planning Commission for plan recommendation to City Council for formal adoption November 9, 2022 FUTURE ENGAGEMENT: Master Plan presentation and adoption Presentation of preferred plan and Master Plan document to City Council for adoption. Projected: Late 2022- Early 2023 EXHIBIT C Glendale Regional Park Plan Salt Lake City, Utah May 2022 ii | | iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VI INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SITE CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 THE VISION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Contents iv | Acknowledgement Acknowledgements Salt Lake City: Nancy Monteith, Kat Maus, Kristin Riker, Susan Lundmark, Jonathan Goates, Rocio De Maria Torres Mora Community Advisory Committee: Paulo Aguilera, Melanie Pehrson - Noyce, Teresa Molina, Dane Hess, Ivis Garcia, Shay Nieser, Elizabeth Montoya, Amy May, Inoke Hafoka, Abdirizak Ibrahim, Marci Bender, Ifa Motuliki, Edward Castro Bennett, Laura Manycattle Design Workshop: Claire Hempel, Anna Laybourn, Mary Oliver, Ishita Ghosh, Conners Ladner, Di Yang David Evans & Associates: Leah Jaramillo , Molly Wireman Agora Partners: Howard Kozloff, Rodrigo Rodarte River Restoration: Eric McCulley Acknowledgement | v Team Intro Design Workshop Planning, Design& Storytelling Community Outreach Operations, Maintenance & Programming Ecology and Restoration Agora Partners David Evans + Assoc . River Restoration UTAH MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY TITLETOWN, GREEN BAY, WI PIONEER PARK: YOUR DOWNTOWN PARK OGDEN RIVER RESTORATION vi | Executive Summary Image caption Executive Summary Glendale Regional Park Process Overview Project Background Salt Lake City Public Lands (SLC Public Lands) has been presented with the opportunity to redevelop the former Raging Waters/Seven Peaks water park site to better serve the community by providing needed park space and amenities. The water park, defunct and in a state of decay, has no prospective operators and it has become unfeasible to revitalize the once-loved space. Public Lands needs to fulfill a directive, established by the requirements of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, to provide publicly accessible outdoor recreation to the community by 2024. The chance to develop the park is significant as the Salt Lake City Public Land’s Master Plan identifies a need for investment in Westside parks and enhancing park spaces along the Jordan River. The master plan specifically calls for the Glendale Regional Park to be improved to create a regional attraction with characteristics that celebrate and preserve community culture and diversity and make water recreation accessible to more people. This document, the Glendale Regional Park Master Plan, shares the planning process, research and analysis, community engagement and resulting recommendations to achieve these goals. Site Context Glendale Regional Park is a part of Salt Lake City’s Westside neighborhoods. The park is a major link in a long chain of parks and open space which are all connected by the Jordan River Parkway, which positions the park to become a key recreation destination along the Jordan River Parkway Trail along with the nearby Glendale Golf Course, 1700 S Park and Glendale Neighborhood Park. The park location also presents an opportunity to increase access to water recreation and improve essential riparian habitat along the Jordan River. Executive Summary | vii Engagement A top goal for SLC Public Lands was to create a park that is a community park first, and a regional destination as well. The planning team wanted to be sure they received robust input on community needs and desires from members of the local neighborhood and also gather insights on park needs from the larger pool of city-wide residents. A series of engagement activities were conducted from October 2021 to May 2022 including: • Neighborhood and Stakeholder Engagement: • Glendale Neighborhood Events: 3 events, 110 participants • Youth Engagement: Glendale Middle School and Mountain View Elementary School, 128 participants • Community Advisory Committee Meetings: 3 meetings including 14 participating members • “Plan Sharing” Glendale Community Council: 15 participants • Citywide Engagement: • “Plan Your Park” Open House: 100 attendees • Public Online Survey: 1361 participants Key takeaways from public input included the need for a neighborhood park-like experience with lots of amenities, the need for increased safety, and opportunities for free and affordable activities. Other themes included the desire to have water play in the park in the form of a water feature or outdoor pool, a preference for bright and colorful park features and a desire for inclusive play features that all ages and all abilities can enjoy. Community gathering with opportunities for food and local performances was also important feedback that was shared. The Vision The Glendale Park Master Plan was created through a process of verifying park features and design concepts with the community. Park ideas were refined from initial ideas down to two concept plan alternatives, which were then refined into a final park plan. The final design strategy seeks to create an park that celebrates community gathering and active recreation with programs and activities that are community-driven. The park will be a hub for sharing local food, art and culture with family, friends and neighbors. The park will also be a place to explore nature through hillside trails, along the restored riparian landscapes and through enhanced access to the Jordan River. The park design strengthens regional connectivity, connecting Glendale Park to the larger park system with a proposed bridge connection to the Jordan River Parkway Trail, improved connections to 1700 South Park such as road narrowing and an at-grade pedestrian crossing, and a recommended multi-use trail connection to the future Surplus Canal Trail. To view the final park plan and park features see pages 42-43. Park Goals • Community-Led • Community Services & Programming • Park Activation & Safety • Regional Connection • Access to Nature • Environmental Quality • Environmental Justice Implementation The park will be constructed in a series of phases. According to the requirements set by the Land and Water Conservation Fund, outdoor recreation amenities in the park must be available to the public by spring of 2024. This expedited schedule requires that Phase I park features are easily implemented, meet a rapid construction timeline and fit within the current budget allocated for the park. Park features that are most desired by the community and can meet this criteria are being given top priority for inclusion in Phase I. Next Steps To meet the rapid timeline required to open the park with publicly accessible recreation, Phase I design will proceed concurrent to Master Plan adoption. Programming opportunities with community partners will continue to be developed to ensure that the park remains an active space upon opening. The project team will also begin to rehabilitate the site with riparian and native vegetation to fulfill the park goals of enhancing environmental quality and improving environmental justice for the Glendale neighborhood. To support these goals, it is recommended that the project team pursue certification in a sustainability program such as SITES or another comparable program. This would ensure sustainable practices are adhered to and would highlight the City’s investment in restorative landscapes, climate resiliency and equitable environmental investment. During the master planning process, a Park Mission Statement: Glendale Regional Park will be an iconic neighborhood park that celebrates and preserves community, culture, and diversity . It will also be a regional destination connecting to the Jordan River and Salt Lake City’s park network . Making nature and recreation within an arm’s reach, the park will improve the natural resources and quality of lives for current and future generations of Westside residents . SITES pre-score assessment, confirmed that the Glendale Park project meets the qualifications to pursue SITES certification. Details of the SITES prescore can be found on pages 69-70 and in Appendix A. Park Mission Statement & Goals Throughout the process, a Community Advisory Committee comprised of local community members and leaders helped guide the plan to align with the needs and desires of the Glendale community. This committee helped to form a mission statement and goals for the park. For full goal statements, see page 4. Introduction | 2 Introduction 3 | Introduction A New Park for the Glendale Neighborhood Salt Lake City Public Lands has been presented with the opportunity to redevelop the former Raging Waters/Seven Peaks water park site to better serve the community by providing needed park space and amenities. The water park, defunct and in a state of decay, has no prospective operators and it has become unfeasible to revitalize the once-loved space. Public Lands needs to fulfill a directive, established by the site funding requirements of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, to provide publicly accessible outdoor recreation to the community by 2024. The chance to develop the park is significant for several reasons. The Salt Lake City Public Land’s Master Plan identifies a need for investment in Westside parks and enhancing park spaces along the Jordan River. The master plan specifically calls for the Glendale Regional Park to be improved to create a regional attraction and event space with characteristics that celebrate and preserve community culture and diversity and make water recreation accessible to more people. The Glendale neighborhood is also identified by the Public Lands Needs Assessment as being a high needs area for park investment with a lower frequency of park visitation than parks on the east side of the city. The park site is also significant as it presents an opportunity to increase access to water recreation and improve essential riparian habitat along the Jordan River, one of the city’s greatest natural assets in need of restoration efforts and care. In addition, activating the park will enhance regional connectivity by creating a key recreation destination along the Jordan River Parkway Trail along with the nearby Glendale Golf Course, 1700 S Park and Glendale Neighborhood Park. Goals for the new park include creating a safe, active and communal space that embodies natural elements of the Jordan River and provides new opportunities for recreation, activities and events. This document, the Glendale Regional Park Master Plan shares the planning process, research and analysis, community engagement and resulting recommendations to achieve these goals. It outlines the Master Plan for the development of the former Glendale Water Park; a 17-acre site, to guide capital improvements, site programming, and operations and maintenance recommendations. Image caption Introduction Goals for the park include creating an active and communal space that embodies natural elements of the Jordan River and provides new opportunities for recreation, activities and events. Introduction | 4 Community-Led The vision is community-led and reflects Glendale’s culture and history. The park will offer space for social connections, features, and services that interest the Westside community. Park Goals Community Services & Programming The park provides equitable access to nature and outdoor recreation. The community can enjoy free and affordable classes, events, and entertainment at the neighborhood’s central park. Park Activation & Safety The park is a dynamic destination activated by daily use. What happens in the park is an organic expression of Westside culture. Local community members, organizations, and businesses together will create a safe and welcoming environment. Regional Connection The park is a regional destination combining and connecting to multiple neighboring parks. As a gathering place along the Jordan River, the park serves as a recreational gateway between Westside and the larger park systems. Access to Nature The park is a space to build a meaningful relationship with nature. Attractive and accessible features and free recreational activities provided in the neighborhood’s backyard will combat Nature Deficit Disorder in the community. Environmental Quality The park builds upon existing natural assets and enhances the ecological health of the Westside. Features of the park will work to improve the Jordan River’s water quality and Salt Lake City’s air pollution for the community. Environmental Justice The park celebrates the Jordan River, integral to the community’s identity, and enhances local environmental quality. The community-led vision will prioritize the quality of life for the Glendale neighborhood and Westside community. Glendale Regional Park will be an iconic neighborhood park that celebrates and preserves community, culture, and diversity. It will also be a regional destination connecting to the Jordan River and Salt Lake City’s park network. Making nature and recreation within an arm’s reach, the park will improve the natural resources and quality of lives for current and future generations of Westside residents. Park Mission Statement Site Context & Analysis | 6 Site Context + Analysis 7 | Site Context & Analysis Project Context Watershed NeighborhoodCity-Regional UtahUtah LakeLake 201201 GlendaleGlendale Water ParkWater Park Industrial AreasIndustrial Areas Industrial Industrial AreasAreas Great Salt Great Salt LakeLake I-15I-15 I-215I-215 I-80I-80 1700 S1700 S NeighborhoodNeighborhood Glendale Glendale Water ParkWater Park Glendale Glendale Water ParkWater Park JordanJordan RiverRiver Salt Lake CitySalt Lake City JordanJordan RiverRiver Site Context & Analysis | 8 Project Context Watershed Glendale Regional Park is a centerpiece along the Jordan River, a culmination of seven major tributaries flowing out of the Wasatch Mountain Range to the east and the final conduit in the Jordan River Watershed. The Jordan River is the city’s largest river and flows south to north, for 51 miles beginning at Utah Lake and draining into the Great Salt Lake. The river’s riparian habitat is a rarity in the high desert environment of the Salt Lake valley and supports a variety of wildlife as well as many migratory birds along the Pacific Flyway. City-Regional The park is a part of Salt Lake City’s Westside neighborhoods. Despite proximity to the natural spaces along the Jordan River, these neighborhoods are sandwiched between the congested I-15 corridor and the city’s industrial districts. According to the 2014 Westside Master Plan, “compared to other communities within the city (excepting the industrial districts west of I-215), the Westside carries an inequitable share of land dedicated to manufacturing uses.” As measured by the EPA’s environmental justice indexes, the neighborhoods surrounding Glendale Regional Park are disproportionately exposed to environmental hazards such as air pollution that settles in the valley and increases risk of health complications. However, the park’s proximity to the Jordan River offers an opportunity to build upon existing natural assets, creating an ecological park of vegetation and green infrastructure to mitigate local pollutants and improve water quality in the river. The park is a major link in a long chain of parks and open space which are all connected by the Jordan River Parkway. This network of public spaces positions the park to become the centerpiece of an oasis of trees in an arid urban environment, absorbing carbon, mitigating Salt Lake City’s challenging air pollution, and reducing urban heat island effect. When park improvements and features are complete, the park will be a major recreational node in the city’s park system. Neighborhood Glendale Regional Park will immediately serve the Glendale neighborhood. Park enhancements will create direct and significant access to the nature that exists directly in the neighborhood’s backyard, providing opportunities for free recreational activities that are nearby and accessible to all. The park presents an opportunity to strengthen connections between the adjacent 1700 South Park to the north, Glendale Neighborhood Park to the west, and Jordan River Parkway to the east. The addition of an enhanced crosswalk across 1700 South, bridge connections to the parkway and potential future trail connections to the proposed Surplus Canal Trail will be key to providing enhanced park access for the Glendale neighborhood. 9 | Site Context & Analysis Glendale Regional Park - Neighborhood Context Site Context & Analysis | 10 Glendale Regional Park- Site Context 1 7 0 0 S Glendale Neighborhood Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Regional Park Site 1700 S Park Jordan River Trail 11 | Site Context & Analysis Views A City Set in Nature Salt Lake City is known for its spectacular mountain setting. Being surrounded by nature is a point of pride that contributes to the City’s quality of life. A hike to the top of the hill built to support the former water park’s slides offers views of the surrounding golf course, downtown SLC, the emerald ribbon of the Jordan River and the Wasatch and Oquirrh Mountains beyond. FLAT TOP MOUNTAIN LOWE PEAK CLIPPER PEAK NELSON PEAK KESTLER PEAK FARNSWORTH PEAK TO STANSBURY ISLAND GRANDVIEW PEAK LOOKOUT PEAK GRANDEUR PEAK GOBBLER’S KNOB MT. OLYMPUS O’SULLIVAN PEAK LONE PEAK ENSIGN PEAK DOWNTOWN SLC Northeast Views Southwest Views Southeast Views West Views GLENDALE REGIONAL PARK Site Context & Analysis | 12 Park Views Northeast Views ENSIGN PEAK DOWNTOWN SLC GRANDVIEW PEAK LOOKOUT PEAK GRANDEUR PEAK West Views FARNSWORTH PEAK STANSBURY ISLAND NELSON PEAK KESTLER PEAK Southeast Views GRANDEUR PEAK MT. OLYMPUS GOBBLER’S KNOB O’SULLIVAN PEAK LONE PEAK Southwest Views NELSON PEAKLOWE PEAK FARNSWORTH PEAKFLAT TOP MTN.CLIPPER PEAK S E S E N ENE SWSW WW Key Map 13 | Site Context & Analysis 9 217 509 RIVER TRAIL STATION 15 min. service 1.3 Mile Walk to Park 217 9 509 513 Transportation - Regional Rail & Bus Connections There is a lack of regional public transit connectivity between Glendale Park and other parts of the City. The closest rail connection to Glendale Regional Park is the River Trail Station along the Green Line (2340 South 1070 West), which is a 1.3 mile walk away. Nearby bus routes include the 9 and 217 which run every 15 minutes, and the 509 which runs every 30 minutes. The 513 has limited service and only runs during rush hour. Yet, as shown on the following page, these routes do not have stops that are within a comfortable walking distance of Glendale Park. Additional connections to Trax and bus lines, as well as other modes of public transportation should be explored in order to enhance park access and sustainable transportation options. Increased public transit connectivity is also an important consideration for facilitating park activities and events.PUBLIC TRANSIT NEAR PARK 15 Minute UTA Bus Routes 30 Minute UTA Bus Routes Limited Service UTA Bus Routes 15 Minute UTA TRAX Line Chapter Two | 14 Route 50930 min. service1/2 mile walk Route 50930 min. serviceAdjacent to Golf Course Entrance Route 217 15 min. service 1/3 mile walk Transportation - Neighborhood Neighborhood Transit Access There is a gap in public transportation access for both the Glendale neighborhood and Glendale Regional Park. In contrast to most other Westside parks which are within walking distance of public transit, the majority of the area is not within a 1/4 mile walk of a bus stop or transit station. The nearest bus stops are located 1/3 to 1/2 a mile away from park entrances. A bus stop along the 509 sits near the golf course entrance. It will be important to support enhanced public transit connectivity between the park and surrounding neighborhoods. While the majority of the population commutes by private vehicle, 8.5% of households in the Glendale neighborhood and up to 13.2% of households in the study area do not own a personal vehicle. This is significant, as only 3% of households in Salt Lake City do not own a personal vehicle.1 1 United States Census Bureau, 2020 American Community Survey 15 | Site Context & Analysis 1 7 0 0 S1700 S Crosswalk to Jordan River Parkway and 1700 S River Park Crosswalk from Glendale Park to Neighborhood Walkability - Site Analysis Pedestrian Connectivity 1700 South is comparable in width to Redwood Road, yet by 2108 counts, experienced only 35% of Redwood Road’s traffic along a nearby stretch of the Redwood Road corridor. Near Glendale Regional Park, 1700 South’s traffic counts are very low for its width, indicating that the road width could be reduced to create safe and comfortable access for pedestrians and cyclists. There are currently only two crosswalks along 1700 South to connect the neighborhood to Glendale Regional Park: one located near 1300 West, and one at the Jordan River Parkway Trail. The crossings are over 1/4 mile apart and the distance between existing signals coupled with the wide street makes pedestrian crossing and access difficult. To create safer crossings and enhanced connectivity between 1700 S Park and Glendale Park, the Glendale Regional Park Plan recommends an additional pedestrian crossing between the two existing crossings (see page 54). Additionally, the Salt Lake City Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan identifies 1700 South as an east-west pedestrian priority corridor,1 and the City’s Transportation Division is currently evaluating the potential for improvements here related to active transportation. 1 SLC_PBMPCompleteDocument(Dec2015)Clickable. pdf (slcdocs.com) .28 miles Glendale Neighborhood Park Glendale Regional Park Site 1700 S Park Glendale Golf Course Jordan River Trail 2-Way Average Daily Traffic Counts 1700 S. TRAFFIC COUNTS REDWOOD RD. TRAFFIC COUNTS 2018: 12,172 2018: 34,566 2017: 12,000 2017: 35,000 2014: 9,980 2014: 27,600 Source: 2022 Kalibrate Technologies (Q1 2022), ESRI Business Analyst Chapter Two | 16 Nearest Trailhead: 1700 S River Park Future Trail Connection Surplus Canal Trail Trails and Recreation Regional Recreation Connectivity Glendale Regional Park is the southern anchor along the SLC portion of the Jordan River Parkway. Trailhead access and parking is currently located at the 1700 S River park. The proposed Surplus Canal Trail will be an important addition, providing a direct connection between the park and residents of western Glendale who currently do not live within a 10 minute walk from a park. 17 | Site Context & Analysis First put-in to access easy-level paddling. Surplus Canal dam hazard. 2.1 miles 2.1 miles 3.3 miles Surplus Canal Dam Hazard Last take-out easy-level paddling. Water-based Recreation The Jordan River Water Trail The Jordan River flows from South to North, beginning at Utah Lake and emptying into the Great Salt Lake. The boat ramp at Glendale Regional Park is a major access point along the Jordan River Water Trail. This section of river allows paddlers access to 3.3 miles of beginner- level flatwater floating (about 1-2 hours). For a quicker trip, boaters can take out at the Modesto Park ramp, 1.2 miles downstream. Paddlers who are willing to brave a short section of intermediate obstacles can continue on for another 3.8 miles of beginner floating until reaching the Riverview takeout at 1800 N. River access can be enhanced by creating easier entry for canoes and kayaks. The water quality is an issue, so swimming should be discouraged, but as the water quality may improve in the future, water access should not be completely cut off. Additional small boat access locations should be evaluated to create a more local scale river recreation circulation pattern. The Jordan River also has potential for urban fishing. According to the Utah Department of Natural Resources, the river “provides great opportunities for catfish, bullhead, carp, white bass and walleye.”1 However, according to the report Fishes of the Jordan River, “recent findings of various pollutants common to highly urbanized areas like the Salt Lake Valley suggest that it may not be safe to eat any fish from the river, especially in downstream areas.”2 1 https://wildlife.utah.gov/news/utah-wildlife- news/743-4-utah-rivers-that-offer-great- fishing-in-august.html 2 http://jordanrivercommission.com/wp-content/ uploads/2011/04/Fish-Species-of-the-Jordan- River-2011.pdf Jordan River Boater Amenities, Study Area Boat Access Restrooms Parking 1700 South - Exchange Club Marina (Glendale Regional Park) 1700 South River Park Limited at Ramp. Additional Parking at 1700 South River Park. Modesto Park At Nearby Jordan Park Limited Parking Alzheimers Park No Limited Parking Fisher Mansion No On-street Parking Site Context & Analysis | 18 Site Ecology Local and Regional Connections The Glendale Regional Park is in a central part of Salt Lake City but is also centrally located along the riparian corridor of the Jordan River, which provides a key connection of riparian habitats for resident and migratory birds. The site is located along the flyway between Utah Lake and Great Salt Lake and provides a potential stopover location for resting migratory birds. There is potential for increased areas of higher quality riparian habitat along the Jordan River with the creation of an enhanced multi-canopy layer structure. Robust riparian habitats consist of canopies that could have several layers of complexity including large trees, small trees and shrubs, grasses, and forbs [flowers]. This multi-layer structure is beneficial for creating a diverse ecosystem that will be more resilient to future changes in climate and ecosystem processes. Surrounding regional areas that are owned by SLC adjacent to the golf course and in other open areas offer great opportunity to be enhanced for riparian functioning and flood capacity. See Appendix B for a full site ecological assessment. B u f f l e H e a d Duck C r o w n C r a nes M e r g a n s e r R u s s i a n O l i v e El m H o n e y L o c u s t S y c a m o r e Migratory Birds - Pacific Flyway Existing Site Trees A n d e a n G e e se 19 | Site Context & Analysis condition Uncomfortable Comfortable C -39.43 -31.83 -24.22 -16.62 -9.01 -1.41 6.20 13.80 21.41 29.01 36.62 12 AM 6 AM 12 PM 6 PM 12 AM Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thermal Comfort (condition) 1/1 to 12/31 between 0 and 23 @1 city: Salt Lake City country: USA source: TMY--24127 12 AM 6 AM 12 PM 6 PM 12 AM Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Universal Thermal Climate Index (C) 1/1 to 12/31 between 0 and 23 @1 city: Salt Lake City country: USA source: TMY--24127 Climate Considerations Weather Averages • Average High = July 90 degrees • Average Low = January 26 degrees • 88 days per year with precipitation • 3059 hours of sunshine • 8.57 inches precipitation • 47 inches annual snowfall1 Additional Site Considerations • North to South moderate winds • Overall weather patterns moving in from West to East2 • Little shade/tree cover • Shade/ice in winter due to aspect • Cooler temps by Jordan River Drought Conditions Glendale Park lies within a high desert environment, receiving only 8.5 inches of water each year. Water is becoming increasingly scarce, with Utah’s Governor declaring a State of Emergency due to extreme drought. Recommendations from Utah’s Department of Natural Resources to reduce water usage include implementing water-wise landscaping, a practice that should be applied at Glendale Regional Park to the greatest extent possible.3 1 https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/salt- lake-city/utah/united-states/usut0225 2 https://nhmu.utah.edu/sites/ default/files/attachments/ SaltLakeValleyWeatherPatterns.pdf 3 https://water.utah.gov/water-data/drought/ drought-declaration/#:~:text=on%20 April%2021%2C%202022%2C%20 Spencer,to%20state%20or%20federal%20 resources. 29 %Salt Lake City is comfortable of the year . . . . . . . . 7% too hot and 64% too cold . Chapter Two | 20 Site Impervious Surfaces Site Surfaces Asphalt - 24% Concrete: 24% Pool Features: 6% Total Impervious Surfaces: 54% Pervious Landscape: 46% Impervious Surfaces Impervious surfaces such as roads, pavement, and buildings are often increased during development. These surfaces contribute to higher runoff, polluting waterways and depleting groundwater. The site has a high level of impervious surfaces, with 54% of the site being covered in asphalt and concrete. The redevelopment of the park provides an opportunity to reduce these surfaces through low impact development practices, utilizing green infrastructure to absorb stormwater on site and create ecological benefits. The future park design will reduce the current amount of impervious surfaces by 50%. See page 56 for the final park plan’s site surface percentages. 21 | Site Context & Analysis Floodplain - Site Scale * Buildings on site have been demolished Natural Assets Floodplain preservation directly enhances the local environment. According to FEMA, floodplain benefits include: • Fish and wildlife habitat protection • Natural flood and erosion control • Surface water quality maintenance • Groundwater recharge • Biological productivity • Higher quality recreational opportunities (fishing, bird watching, boating, etc.)1 To protect critical riparian habitat within the floodplain, Salt Lake City has implemented a Riparian Corridor Overlay District (RCO) which regulates development within 100 feet of a natural waterway’s Annual High Water Line. All improvements within 100’ of the annual high water line of the Jordan River will follow guidelines outlined in the RCO. Development near the river corridor will seek to enhance floodplain functions through riparian restoration. Structures, such as boat ramps or docks, will be built in accordance with RCO zoning ordinances.2 1 https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/ wildlife-conservation/benefits-natural 2 http://www.slcdocs.com/building/b-riparian- corridor.pdf Chapter Two | 22 Floodplain - Regional Scale Resilient Communities FEMA Floodmaps highlight areas that are more likely to experience flooding. The 100 year floodplain shows areas that are likely to flood at least one out of every 100 years (a 1% or higher chance of flooding) while the 500 year floodplain shows areas likely to flood at least once every 500 years. Floodplain maps help to create resilient communities by highlighting which areas are higher and safer ground for structures. Restoration of the floodplain along the Jordan River at Glendale Regional park will remove a few storage and office buildings from the 100 year floodplain, which will mitigate costs that would have been associated if current structures were damaged. It will also prevent impairments to water quality that would be caused by a compromised structure in the event of a flood. Floodplain restoration including planting along the river’s edge will also slow stormwater runoff, reducing water pollutants trapped in runoff from flowing into the Jordan River, reducing erosion and improving groundwater retention on the site. 23 | Site Context & Analysis 0 5 10 15 20 % o f P o p u l a t i o n Age Group Study Area 0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 Salt Lake City Salt Lake County 19.78% Percent Population Under 19 Years Old 63.48%over 19 years old 36.52%under 19 years old 21.77% in SLC 27.85% in County 2010 186,399 204,380 222,029 +8.65% +9.65% +4.07%+3.54% 28,369 29,525 30,571 2021 2026 Community Demographics Population Growth The planning team analyzed demographics traits of likely park users. This assessment was broken down into a local assessment, called the primary market area, shown on page 24, and a city-wide assessment, called the secondary market area. See Appendix D for the full demographic and market study. Over the next five years (2021-2026) population in the primary market area is expected to grow by 3.54 percent, reaching a total population of 30,571 in 2026. The population in the secondary market area is expected to see slightly higher growth over the next five years, growing by 8.65 percent to reach a total population of 222,029 in 2026. Level of service measures the amount of parkland available to the community and is often measured by park acreage per population. As the population grows, Glendale Regional Park will be an important addition to the City’s park system, ensuring that the current level of service is maintained and that the community has adequate access to outdoor recreation and open space. Age The high ratio of children in the primary market area indicates a high concentration of families in the region. The largest age cohort in the secondary market area is between 20 and 29, indicating that there is an overall younger demographic in this region that may enter family formation years (30-39) within the next decade. While park features and activities seek to accommodate all ages, Glendale Regional Park will feature a variety of activities that are targeted to families and young people such as an all-ages playground, a swimming pool, a water play feature and a skating ribbon. Age Group Demographics of Primary Market Population and Projected Population Growth Percent of Primary Market Under 19 Years Old Primary Market Population Secondary Market/SLC Population Primary Market Ages Secondary Market/SLC Ages Salt Lake County Ages 0 5 10 15 20 % o f P o p u l a t i o n Median Income ($) < 15,000 15,000-24,999 25,000-34,999 50,000-74,99935,000-49,999 75,000-99,999 100,000-149,999 150,000-199,999 200,000+ Study Area Salt Lake City Salt Lake County Community Demographics Household Income and Wealth The 2021 median household income in the primary market area is $50,508, which is less than that of the secondary market area ($63,364) and that of Salt Lake County ($80,897). The primary market area is also expected to see less growth in median household income (12.18 percent) than in the secondary market area (19.14 percent) and Salt Lake County (13.59 percent) between 2021 and 2026. The Wealth Index is a metric used to compare overall wealth of communities to the national level. The index compares the wealth calculated for selected areas to the average national wealth levels. Wealth indexes above 100 indicate wealth levels above the national average. The wealth index in the primary market area is 47, indicating that the area has lower amounts of wealth when compared to the national average. Income distributions for both median and disposable income levels are skewed towards lower income levels in the primary market area while those in the secondary market area and Salt Lake County form a more normal distribution around the median income level. This, in addition to a lower primary market Wealth Index, indicates that income levels are lower in the primary market area than the secondary market area or the county. Given this distinction, the park will best serve the primary market through low or no cost activities for both adults and children. There is a need for the implementation of programming such as free fitness classes or facilities that can supplement recreational demands of the community for little to no cost. If concessions are implemented, then they should be priced appropriately.Primary Market Median Income Secondary Market/SLC Median Income Salt Lake County Median Income Median Household Income of Primary Market Primary Market Study Area 2021 ESRI Wealth Index 47Study Area 85SLC 105County 125 100 50 25 ESRI Wealth Index Score Score of 100 = National Average Recommendation: Low & No-Cost Activities The park will best serve the primary market through low or no cost activities for both adults and children. Primary Market Primary Market SLC/Secondary Market County Community Engagement | 26 Community Engagement 27 | Community Engagement Engagement Overview A top goal for SLC Public Lands was to create a park that is a community park first, and a regional destination as well. The planning team wanted to be sure they received robust input on community needs and desires from members of the local neighborhood and also gather insights on park needs from the larger pool of city-wide residents. A series of engagement activities were conducted from October 2021 to May 2022 including: »Neighborhood and Stakeholder Engagement: • Glendale Neighborhood Events: 3 events, 110 participants • Youth Engagement: Glendale Middle School and Mountain View Elementary School, 128 participants • Community Advisory Committee Meetings: 3 meetings including 14 participating members »Citywide Engagement: • “Plan Your Park” Open House: 100 attendees • Public Online Survey: 1361 participants • “Plan Sharing” Glendale Community Council: 15 participants Engagement for the park site began prior to this project’s planning process. Previous public engagement included a City survey and a visioning process led by the Glendale Community Council in 2020-2021, which generated initial ideas about possible amenities and programming options to consider for the site. These ideas were used as a starting point for the engagement activities described in the following pages. Glendale Neighborhood Events The Glendale Regional Park engagement team participated in three community events in early October 2021. The goals for these engagements were to: 1. Share the public feedback being incorporated by the project team to date; 2. Engage the community in adding ideas for amenities and programming not already shown; 3. Engage the community in thinking about the site in relation to existing adjacent open space; and 4. Envision ideas about how existing site features could be repurposed. Participants were invited to share where they go to recreate, in or outside the neighborhood and to consider how the old water park site could interface with the larger open space network around it. Image caption Neighborhood Planning A top goal was to create a park that is community-led and reflects Glendale’s culture and history, offering spaces for social connections, features, and activities that interest the Westside community. Community Engagement | 28 Key Takeaways Need for a neighborhood park-like experience Most participants acknowledged that there were not a lot of amenities in the immediate area and that they were leaving the neighborhood to recreate with families. Some said they use the Jordan River Trail, playground(s) at neighboring schools and the soccer fields at 1700 S Park. Predominantly, people use other existing SLC Parks, including the International Peace Gardens, Jordan Park and Liberty Park for an outside “park experience.” For play amenities like splash pads, playgrounds and dog parks respondents noted they would drive as far as Kearns, Sandy and Bountiful to use those amenities. Safety is a top priority Safety was a priority for most of the adults we spoke with. Many mentioned better street crossings, lighting at the site and other improvements designed to make it an attractive place for people to spend time. This extended to recreation along the Jordan River and the cleanliness of the water. Many people expressed interest in water activities, but not necessarily from the Jordan River in its current state. Even people who mentioned fishing thought a separate pond would be more desirable than the river. Include lots of amenities Across all three engagements, people felt that adding any public amenity would be better than what exists currently. While most identified preferences from the boards, and added a few, most suggested that any or all of the amenities would be a benefit. Free and affordable Cost is important. Some participants were surprised to learn that there would be no entrance fee to use the site. Others suggested that boat/equipment rental and a café/concessions would need to be accessibly priced. Preferred Amenities The amenities provided on the boards were very popular and are listed in priority order from all three events. • Splash Pad/Water feature • Playground • Public Art • Green Open Space/Trail • Sports courts • Community Gathering Space • Skate/Bike park • Boat rental • Fishing (pond) • Performance Venue 128 Students Youth Engagement Glendale Neighborhood Events 3 Events, 110 Participants Community Advisory Committee 4 Meetings - 14 members Public Online Survey 1361 Participants Plan Your Park Open House 100 Participants Glendale Community Council 15 Participants Engagement Activities Community Members at the Plan Your Park Open House (top and bottom) and a Glendale Neighborhod Event (middle). October 2021 December 2021 March - April 2022 November 2021 - June 2022 March 2022 June 2022 29 | Community Engagement Youth Engagement Student Engagement Students participated in a variety of engagement activities, including an asset mapping workshops with Saia Langi (City Library) and with Jarred Martinez who runs Truth Cypher, a storytelling/arts collective. Students also furthered their knowledge of city planning by participating in PlaceIt! Activities with Claudia Loayza who is a graduate student at the University of Utah in City & Metropolitan Planning and the Community Engagement Coordinator with the Utah Division of Multicultural Affairs. As part of PlaceIt! activities, students built environments from found objects that reflect their life-experiences. Students also participated in a soundscape exercise where they listened to park sounds from around the world. Then, they imagined themselves at the new park and wrote poems on leaves which formed collages, displayed in the image to the left. These activities captured a lot of the sounds, sights, smells, tastes, feelings, thoughts and community experiences the students would like to have at the new park. As one of the central engagement activities, students put collages together individually using images of parks. The individual collages were deconstructed and categorized into themes identified by the students. The deconstructed collages were then reorganized into a collective collage. Character images of amenities and features to be used in the park were counted and helped to determine the types of amenities to include in the preferred plan. Students gathered data about what values should be most present in the park. As a result, 38% of the students prioritized safety, 23% said creating a welcoming feeling at the park was most important, and 9% felt like fun was their top value. Other top values mentioned include good vibes, home, loving and open. These values were numerically represented in the collage tree with orange leaves representing safety, purple symbolizing welcoming, yellow symbolizing fun, pink being good vibes, green being home and blue being loving and open. Key Takeaways The collective collage represents the importance of inclusion, unity, diversity and creativity when thinking of park design. We hope the design of the park fosters these values. Black and white photos mixed with color ask us to consider the importance of history (both of the space and the people with roots in the neighborhood) while looking forward with fresh ideas for the future. Creativity in addressing the desires/needs of a wide variety of ages, abilities, interests, species is also represented by the multi-layered project. Put into the shape of a tree, the collage asks us to consider the natural assets that are present such as the Jordan River, birds, insects, mammals and existing trees. Nature is emphasized throughout with flowers and stenciled images of butterflies and aquatic animals, highlighting students’ desires to have water and pollinator friendly spaces be major parts of the park. The tree design also communicates the desire for staying true to the roots of Students display thier collages which represent sights, sounds, features and values they would like to see at Glendale Regional Park. Community Engagement | 30 Variety for all Ages & Abilities Water Feature or Outdoor Pool Food Trucks w/ Global Foods that Represent the Neighborhood Sports & Games Bike & Skate Parks Boat Ramp Pollinator & Animal Friendly Nature Play Youth Engagement 38% of students rated safety as the number 1 value 23% said having the park feel welcoming was their number 1 value VALUES & TO P P A R K F E A T U R E S 9% said fun was their top value. Need lighting and better street crossings Access to the Jordan River our neighborhood while being willing to grow into new forms in the future. This also suggests that priority for input for the new design should be given to those who have established roots in the neighborhood and have helped/are helping to build it. Stenciled flowers are of a tropical variety, suggesting that honoring the knowledge, experiences and cultures who come from around the globe is important as well. The multi-layered approach of the process also asks planners to take their time to listen to a variety of voices. The unique handcrafted 3D structures underline some of the elements that students find most important to have in the park design. The sculpture of the pair of glasses requests the audience to observe deeply and take unconventional perspectives into account with the planning process. Students tallied the numbers of collage images that represent the themes they identified to be included in the park. Sports/games - 112 images: Emphasis was on variety in order to offer something of interest to everyone. Students also highlighted the desire to have activities available in each season with perhaps a space that could be converted to ice skating rink in the winter while functioning as something else in warmer months. Students found it important to have activities available at all times of day so lighting at night is important to them. Bike park, basketball courts, skate park, petting zoo and dog park seem to be popular ideas. A running/walking loop around the park is also valued. Water - 112 images : Students were strong in their opinion that some water elements need to be maintained at the park while also increasing access to water activities on the Jordan River. They prefer to have a pool and made the argument that a pool is much more inclusive and accessible to a wider variety of abilities and ages than a splashpad. They contend that splashpads will only be used by young kids while a pool will be used by their younger siblings, themselves, their parents and grandparents. They would like to have at least a couple slides in the pool. Nature - 74 images: Students would like the landscaping to provide shade, picnic space and natural play areas. They would also prefer a pollinator friendly design to attract butterflies (especially monarchs), bees and birds. Spaces for animals (domestic and wild) are important to foster. They also find it important to have trees that provide food for humans. Adventure - 66 images: Student ideas for adventure included bike and skate parks, ropes courses, zip lines, and a trampoline park. Gathering (seating, picnic, etc .) - 49 images: Students had a lot of ideas about food trucks being a regular presence at the park. They mentioned that food will bring more people to the park and a food truck presence can highlight global foods that are representative of our neighborhood. Picnic & Shade 31 | Community Engagement Community Open House Community Open House The Glendale Regional Park Master Plan Team held an in-person open house at the Glendale Community Learning Center. The purpose of the event was to share park concept plans, which had been created through previous public input. The Glendale community was invited to provide their feedback on different programming elements, amenities and style characteristics while learning more about the project. Concept plans shared at the meeting are shown on pages 37-38. Approximately 150 people participated in the open house, the majority of whom live and/ or work in the Glendale community. Attendees were able to move freely around the event space to talk with their neighbors, the project team, and view concepts plans for the site. Attendees were given stickers as they entered the room which allowed them to identify their preferences on activities, amenities and stylistic themes they would enjoy. Key Takeaways The concept plan with the most votes was the “The Glendale Green”, a concept alternative that was filled with many park features facilitating active recreation and community gathering. The most popular amenities included a water feature such as a pool, a hiking hill/overlook, river access with a kayak rental and boat launch, biking, skating, and skateboarding areas, and a food truck court. Public Online Survey The public online survey was promoted city-wide and was available from March 16 to April 16. It was offered in both English and Spanish and widely advertised. Approximately 1361 people responded to the survey. Who We Heard From Most survey participants (1,102 out of 1,361 participants, or 81%) live or work near Glendale Regional Park. Responses from the Glendale neighborhood were much higher (30% of participants) than any other neighborhood, indicating that we truly are hearing the voice of the local community. The second-largest group of participants (4% of responses) came from the Northwest Salt Lake/Rose Park neighborhood, a community that was also in the primary market area. The largest percentage of responses were from participants between the ages of 31-40 (28% of participants). This was followed by a large number of responses from youth ages 18 and under (22% of participants). This likely reflects substantial participation Glendale Middle School students, who had participated in previous engagement activities and were encouraged to take the survey.The greatest percentage of feedback came from the white, Latino and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander communities, which aligns with the demographic makeup of the Glendale neighborhood. Community members vote for their favorite park features at the Plan Your Park Open House Community Engagement | 32 Q 7- How close do you live or work to Glendale Park? Q 23-What is your age? Q26- What is your ethnicity? Public Survey Feedback 30% of survey respondentslive in the Glendale Neigborhood (84104) Lots of Youth Feedback 30% = 18 and younger. Glendale Middle School participation! Majority of Feedback from white, Hispanic/ Latino & Pacific Islander communities 81% of survey respondentslive or work nearby Who We Heard From 33 | Community Engagement Q3- How satisfied are you with these draft goals? Q1- How satisfied are you with the draft project mission statement? Key Takeaways Overall Support for the Park Overall, there was support for the park Mission statement (68% of participants were satisfied and 25% were very satisfied). Survey participants were also happy with the project goals (64% were satisfied and 30% were very satisfied). Top themes and preferred features from survey participants reflected the desire for a park space that offers a large variety of options for active and passive recreation and places to host community gathering and local events. Bright and Playful While many participants expressed disappointment that the water park could not be revived, there was a desire to include park features and thematic styles that are reminiscent of the former water park. Bright, colorful and playful park features were consistently top choices. Water elements such as an outdoor pool and a water-play plaza or fountain were deemed essential to include in the park design. A “colorful and industrial playground” was the number two playground choice, behind the number one choice “play for all ages” (which also has playful imagery) and the most popular water feature was a colorful, artful fountain. There was less interest in nature play or playgrounds with a natural theme, with less than 12% of respondents choosing either of these features. There is also less interest in natural water features over bright and active elements, with only 17% choosing water play with sand and moveable features, and a natural water feature being lower on the list of preferred park elements. Adaptive and Inclusive Play Inclusive Playgrounds accessible to all skill levels and abilities were important to survey respondents, with an “adaptive and inclusive playground” being the number two choice for playgrounds. Playgrounds at the park should incorporate accessible design with assistive technologies. Gathering & Local Events There was a strong desire to create places that would provide opportunities for community gathering, events, and local performances. Amenities such as food trucks or concessions were also deemed an important component to draw the community in and activate the park. It was important to the local community that the scale of events be appropriate for the neighborhood. Most survey respondents wanted event sizes to host between 500- 5,000 people and did not want to host larger-scale events such as regional concerts. Public Survey Feedback 93% Satisfied or Very Satisfied with Park Mission Statement 94% Satisfied with Project Goals Online Survey Results Community Engagement | 34 Gathering & Local Events Places for gathering, food, & local events were top choices. Inclusive Inclusive Playgrounds accessible to all skill levels and abilities were important to survey respondents. All-Ages Activities All ages activities were very popular and were some of the most-selected items. Bright & Playful Respondents were drawn to bright, colorful features reminiscent of local cultures and the colorful water park. #1 Ev e n t S i z e C h o i ce #1 G at h e r i n g C h oice #2 Play g r o u n d C h oice All-ages activities are popular All ages activities were also very popular and were some of the most-selected items. “Play for all ages, including grown-ups” was the top choice for playground types and “Climbing and bouldering features for all ages” was the second choice for fitness features, just behind multi-use sports courts, which also serve a variety of age groups. Themes: Online Survey Feedback #1 Fitn e s s / S p o r t s C hoice Multi-use Sports Court #1 Play g r o u n d C h o i c e All-ages Play (For adults too!) #1 Wate r F e a t u r e C h oice Artful Interactive Fountain #3 Play g r o u n d C h o i ce Colorful / Industrial Playground #2 Fitn e s s / S p o r t s C hoice All-ages Bouldering & Climbing Plaza for Food Trucks, Concessions & Festivals 1,000-5,000 Person Event (Like Friendly Island Tongan Festival) Adaptive/ Inclusive Playground 35 | Community Engagement *Top Choice in Both Public Online Survey and Engagement Events Food Trucks Hiking & Biking Trails *Hiking & Hilltop Overlook *Swimming/Outdoor Pool Food Truck Court Ice & Roller Skating Ribbon Water Play Feature & Plaza * Flex Lawn, Community Event & Performance Space *Community Plaza with Concessions* Skateboarding Features*Riverside Features Sledding Hill *Community Pavilion*Enhanced Boat Dock/Kayak Rental*Dog Park *Multi-Use Sports Court* High Interest Features Community Engagement | 36 Top Features Hiking & biking trails with a hill- top overlook, swimming and an outdoor pool were consistently top choices of survey respondents. Skateboarding features, sledding, riverside features (boardwalk, enhanced boat dock, kayak rental) and a community plaza with concessions or food trucks were popular as well. Another top feature was a multi-use sports court and a water play feature. Middle-ground and mixed feedback features Climbing features had mixed feedback. Images of children’s climbing features and interest in rock climbing were lower on the list of selected choices, however the all- ages bouldering feature received a very high number of selections (728). Ice and roller skating features also had mixed feedback. A skating ribbon was the number two choice out of 10 in Concept A but the seventh choice out of 12 in Concept B. Both ice and roller skating were rated in the center of activity interests on a scale of one to seven. Low-Interest Features Least-selected park features included a community garden, bird hides, a fitness station anda community clubhouse. Kid’s drawings of desired park features from the Plan Your Park Open House Community members voted for their preferred park features using stickers and comments at the Plan Your Park Open House Park Feature Feedback Le a s t P o p u l a r Le a s t P o p u l a r Mo s t P o p u l a r Mo s t P o p u l a r Po p u l a r Po p u l a r • Hiking/Biking Trails & Overlook • Outdoor Pool • Multi-use Sports Court • Sledding • Food Truck Court • Ice & Roller Skating Ribbon • Skateboarding Features • Community Plaza with Concessions • Riverside Boardwalk • Water Play Feature & Plaza • Community Pavilion w/Grills or Warming Kitchen • Enhanced Boat Dock • Flex Lawn, Community Event & Performance Space • Riverside Beach • Kayak Rental Station • Dog Park • Playgrounds • Bouldering Features • Naturalistic Water Feature • Nature Play Playground • Meadow “Lawn” & Natural Planting • Community Garden • Fitness Features • Bird Hides/River Overlook • Volleyball • Community Clubhouse 37 | Chapter Two The Great Outdoors Park Features Park Concept A 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 3 2 1 1 14 13 12 11 Shade Pergola Community Gardens Entry Gateway Nature Play Skating Ribbon Walking / Biking Tower & Trails Parking Lot1 7 2 Kayak Rental and Boat Launch9 Picnic & Seating Lawn 8 3 “Meadow” Lawn and Natural Planting 10 4 Naturalistic Water Feature 11 5 Riverside Boardwalk 12 Water Play Feature 13 6 Bridge14 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r Jor d a n R i v e r P a r k w a y T r a i l Nature in your backyard Building on the natural assets of the Jordan River, this option celebrates nature through restoration, education and play while bringing the adventure of the great outdoors to the neighborhood’s backyard. Chapter Two | 38 *Concept with the highest amount of popular features in both public online survey and engagement events The Glendale Green Park Features Outdoor Pool 13 Food Truck Court 2 Parking1 Entry / Main Pavilion 3 Playgrounds4 Skate Area11 Skating Ribbon 7 Dock 14 Riverside Beach 15 Climbing Features 8 Fitness Features 6 Picnic Pavilion and Plaza9 Flex Lawn & Small Performance Stage 12 Dog Park 16 Bridge17 Overlook & Sledding Hill, Hiking & Biking Paths 10 5 Adventure Playgrounds Community connections The hub of the community, this option creates gathering spaces to connect with neighbors and generates vibrant play, exploration and activity for adults and kids alike. Park Concept B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Nature Play 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r Jor d a n R i v e r P a r k w a y T r a i l The Vision | 40 The Vision 41 | The Vision Design Strategy Keeping the memory of the water park alive, the park design is bright, colorful and active. It celebrates community gathering and active recreation with an array of park features that generate vibrant play, exploration and activity for adults and kids alike. Bright playground, plaza spaces and pavilions feature art, lighting and styles both reminiscent of the former water park and reflecting the cultures of the local community. The park is active and community-driven. The many park plazas, picnic areas, pavilions and event lawns offer opportunities for local performances and festivals, family gatherings and community classes. The park is a hub for sharing local food, art and culture with family, friends and neighbors. Glendale Regional Park is first a neighborhood park, creating spaces for community gatherings and daily park experiences. A water play feature and outdoor pool create spaces for splashing, swimming and cooling off in the summer heat. Daily trips to the park can bring a game of basketball, family time at the all-ages and abilities playground, or activities with furry friends at the dog park. The park also offers new regional attractions unique to the City’s park system such as a skating ribbon, kayak rental, riverside beach and an event lawn and plaza for local festivals. The park is a place to explore nature through hillside trails and along the restored riparian landscapes of the Jordan River. A circuit of multi-use trails lead to hilltop views of the city or to shaded riverside seating. A kayak rental station and enhanced access to the Jordan River creates a gateway to paddling adventures. Restoration and planting improves the local environment, creating an urban oasis that shades the park with newly planted trees, restores riverside habitat, and blankets the park with a garden of native and climate resilient plants. The park design strengthens regional connectivity, connecting Glendale Park to the larger park system with a proposed bridge connection to the Jordan River Parkway Trail, a recommended pedestrian crossing to 1700 South Park and a recommended multi-use trail connection to the future Surplus Canal Trail. A Community & Regional Park Glendale Regional Park is bright, colorful and active. It celebrates community gathering and active recreation . The Vision | 42 Glendale Regional Park Master Plan Trail Connection Picnic Lawn All Ages & Abilities Playground Pavilion/Shade Structure Full-Court Basketball Ice & Roller Skating Ribbon Kid’s Climbing Feature All Ages Climbing Feature Pavilion Community Plaza / Promendade Parking Lot Hiking & Sledding Hill ADA Accessible, Multi-Use Trail Hilltop Overlook Skateboarding Area Water Feature/Plaza Outdoor Pool Flex Lawn & Performance Space Flex Stage/Plaza Bridge Connection to Jordan River Parkway Dog Park Picnic Areas Riparian Restoration Riverside Boardwalk Riverside Beach & Sand Volleyball Kayak Rental Station Boat Dock Boat Ramp Boat Drop-off Pickleball Courts Park Features 1 2 3 9 14 15 16 17 18 21 20 22 19 24 25 28 29 26 27 23 5 4 10 7 11 8 12 6 13 * * 1 2 3 9 14 15 16 17 18 21 20 22 19 24 25 28 29 26 27 23 5 4 10 7 11 8 12 6 13 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r Pickleball Courts Jor d a n R i v e r P a r k w a y T r a i l 43 | The Vision Park Features Trail Connection Picnic Lawn All Ages Playground Shade Structure Full-Court Basketball Ice and Roller Skating Kid’s Climbing Feature Adult Climbing Feature Pavillion Community Plaza Parking Lot Hiking & Sledding Hill ADA Accessible, Multi Use Trail Hilltop Overlook Skate Boarding Area Water Play Feature Outdoor Pool Flex Lawn & Performance Space Flex Stage/ Plaza Bridge Connection Dog Park Picnic Area Riparian Restoration Board Walk Pickleball CourtsRiverside Beach & Sand Volleyball Kayak Rental Station Boat Dock Boat Ramp Boat Drop Off 2 3 9 14 15 16 17 18 2120 2219 24 *25 28 292627 23 54 107 118 12 6 13 1 The Vision | 44 Programming & Activation: Creating Memorable Community Experiences Programming and activation at Glendale Regional Park will seek to capitalize not only on the scale and amenity mix in the new park, but most importantly on the surrounding neighborhood’s character and in-place assets. Glendale is a culturally rich neighborhood with a variety of stories to tell and experiences to share with each other and with Salt Lake City as a whole. While the park’s design and landscape will define the “look,” outdoor programming will define how it feels. Public programming will differentiate it from parks throughout Salt Lake City by providing an environment where residents and visitors want to spend time, and will use amenities and activities to create memorable experiences and emotional connections to Glendale. Today, Salt Lake City residents and visitors don’t necessarily expect robust programming of public spaces. Many parks and plazas have failed to maintain a positive visitor experience because they have not programmed and managed their public realm to exceed local precedents. Visitors to Glendale Regional Park will have expectations for a safe and clean place that provides some sort of basic amenities. Our aim should be to exceed those expectations and surprise them with offerings they can’t find anywhere else in Salt Lake City. There is an innate human desire for a feeling of community, and programming should provide some of this, especially in a rich and diverse multicultural environment like Glendale. Bright and colorful, the playground is filled with features for all abilities and all ages to enjoy - even adults! Glendale Regional Park Vision - Playground for All Ages & Abilities 45 | The Vision Phase 1 Programming Opportunities Children/family Family fitness activities All-ability movement Music / literary education Organized play activities Animal education events Arts / culture / community Art cart Arts and crafts Small music / performance Literary events Lectures Board games Fitness / recreation / events Low impact fitness Organized recreation / workshops Community cultural events Outdoor hobbyist activities River Programming Safety and awareness Skills workshops Habitat education Volunteer events Outdoor / environmental Nature / meditative walks Birding / wildlife workshops Gardens / horticulture Public art Arts / culture / community Audience area Outdoor movies Lawn games Sports courts Clinics / lessons All-ability skills training Undeveloped Hillside Undeveloped Hillside with Native Landscapewith Native Landscape Fenced / Fenced / Restoration AreaRestoration Area Fenced / Fenced / Restoration AreaRestoration Area Protective Fencing Phase 1 Temporary Hillside Restoration Area 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r Jor d a n Rive r P a r k T r a i l *See Phasing Strategies Pg x for full Phase I description . The diagram highlights possibilities for park programming , activities and events. Community partnerships along with City programming will be essential to activating the park. The Vision | 46 Future Phasing Opportunities for Programming Arts/ culture/ community Expanded arts programming Artist talks and performance Artists in residence Concession Dog Park Owner socials Training workshops Mobile grooming Bark bar concession Performance/ events Concerts Theater and dance Community festivals Workshops (stage) Fitness (Stage) Aquatic Programming Swim lessons Safety/ CPR Parent/ child program Senior fitness classes Skate park Lessons Demonstrations Skateboard repair Deck art workshops River Programming Boating recreation Boat skills Bait and tackle Concession River recreation Swim lessons/ safety Tubing Restoration/ cleanup River education events 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r Jor d a n R i v e r P a r k T r a i l The diagram highlights possibilities for park programming , activities and events. Community partnerships along with City programming will be essential to activating the park. Programming Will: »Define how the park feels »Differentiate it from other parks and destinations - “the competition” »Provide and active and appealing neighborhood anchor »Provide a safe and clean place »Capitalize on Glendale’s rich and diverse multicultural environment »Capitalize on Salt Lake City’s outdoors orientation 47 | The Vision Programming / Activation Weekends 450 People Special Events 2,ooo People Weekdays 353 People Market Potential Study: Visitation Potential Park Programming Calendar of Events Matrix Example Morning Afternoon EveningNight Weekdays Young families with small children Preteens and teens Young adults without kids Seniors and older adults without kids Young adults without kids High Use Before work Population total: 13,800 Moderate Use Lunch hour Population total: 7,650 High Use After work Population total: 13,800 Primary audience:What appeals to them: Families with small children Young adults without kids Seniors and older adults without kids Preteens and teens Multiple activities to do in one visit and things that may be interesting for both child and adult Shorter activities that can be done before or after another obligation where they can meet other people their age, network, learn a new skill or keep active physically All ages and community-oriented events, hobby and special interest programs, longer activities Can be a dicult group to aract because of packed schedules, but programs through school clubs, sports, and arts departments can be successsful Lower Use Mid-Afternoon Lower Use Mid-Morning Weekday Visitation Potential Before Work 138 People Mid-Morning Lower Use Mid-Afternoon Lower Use After Work 138 People Lunch Hour 77 People The diagrams above display estimated park visitation collected from the planning team’s market analysis. Park Activation for All Seasons and Times of Day Programming, such as depicted in the hypothetical matrices, is broadly categorized as: Arts & Culture, Fitness, Hobbies & Niche Interests, and Live Entertainment. Each category provides a range of options that vary by time of day, seasons, intensity of activity, and, of course, demographic cohort. We consider programming categories across the zones of Glendale Regional Park, establishing a coherent pedestrian experience as one moves from one area to another, while creating distinct environments throughout the park, coordinated with the landscape architecture. The over arching goal is for Glendale Regional Park to feel busy and active and to give all user groups a multitude of reasons to visit at different times through the year, a season, and even their day. While Glendale Regional Park can’t be all things to all people, it can certainly provide a range of experiences. ARTS & CULTURE SPRING SUMMER FALL WINTER DAY/ NIGHT DAY PART FREQUENCY Art supplies / art cart X X X X Both All Daily Dance lessons X X Night Peak Weekly Figure drawing classes X X Night Peak Weekly Folk art / crafts X X X Day Off-Peak Weekly Instrument petting zoo X X X Day Weekend Monthly Local author readings X Day Peak Weekly Toddler art program X X X Day Off-Peak Monthly HOBBIES & NICHE INTERESTS Board games cart X X X Daily Book club X X Monthly Bird-watching club X X X X Weekly Kayak / river education activities X X X Monthly Cooking classes X X Monthly Salsa dancing X X Weekly Makers workshops X X X Monthly FITNESS & WELLNESS Biking club X X X Weekly Capoeira X Weekly Family yoga X X X Weekly Walking club X X X X Weekly Hula hoop X Weekly Kickboxing X Weekly Zumba X Weekly LIVE ENTERTAINMENT A cappella X X X Weekly Brass bands X X Monthly Dance performance X X X Monthly Emerging musician series X X Weekly Outdoor movies X Weekly Theater X X Monthly Silent disco X X Monthly The Vision | 48 The hill creates opportunities for seasonal sledding and year-round hiking or biking. A trip to the hilltop overlook offers views of the city, mountains and vibrant Salt Lake sunsets. ARTS & CULTURESPRINGSUMMERFALLWINTERDAY/ NIGHT DAY PART FREQUENCY Art supplies / art cartXXXXBothAllDaily Dance lessonsXXNightPeakWeekly Figure drawing classesXXNightPeakWeekly Folk art / craftsXXXDayOff-PeakWeekly Instrument petting zooXXXDayWeekendMonthly Local author readingsXDayPeakWeekly Toddler art programXXXDayOff-PeakMonthly HOBBIES & NICHE INTERESTS Board games cartXXXDaily Book clubXXMonthly Bird-watching clubXXXXWeekly Kayak / river education activities XXXMonthly Cooking classesXXMonthly Salsa dancingXXWeekly Makers workshopsXXXMonthly FITNESS & WELLNESS Biking clubXXXWeekly CapoeiraXWeekly Family yogaXXXWeekly Walking clubXXXXWeekly Hula hoopXWeekly KickboxingXWeekly ZumbaXWeekly LIVE ENTERTAINMENT A cappellaXXXWeekly Brass bandsXXMonthly Dance performanceXXXMonthly Emerging musician seriesXXWeekly Outdoor moviesXWeekly TheaterXXMonthly Silent discoX XMonthly Glendale Regional Park Vision - Hillside Sledding & Mountain Views 49 | The Vision Partnerships / Activation Market & Festival Diagram The diagram below shows a possible layout for market and event tents along the community plaza. Space for food trucks is stationed along the plaza edge. 20 x 20 Market Tent 10 x 10 Market Tent Food Truck Court Partnerships: Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Opportunities Glendale Regional Park is poised to become the Westside’s “central park,” with the goal of building a loyal base of regular visitors from all corners of the city. While Glendale Regional Park will be a public park that gets used by nearby residents for everyday recreation, it will also become a citywide amenity and driver of tourism and economic development. The efforts to create a new Glendale Regional Park coincides with a national trend where downtowns and neighborhoods are seen as competing over a scarce pool of resources after the economic benefits from downtown development did not reach those neighborhoods in many cities; whereas the political consensus in the 1990s and 2000s was that strong downtowns helped create strong neighborhoods, today it is far more common to hear elected officials emphasize their commitment to neighborhood-based community development and lament that too many public resources have been spent in central business districts. Given the sensitivities of the neighborhood relative to gentrification and public resources, the discussion around park equity must be reframed. The planning team has identified three planks of an overall program for Glendale Regional Park to help the City promote equity and ensure the new park is inclusive of all residents: growing minority-owned businesses through concessions and contracts, supporting existing organizations that promote inclusivity and equity through programming partnerships, and partnering with local organizations through internships and job training. Growing Minority-Owned Businesses Food & Beverage Entrepreneurship Proposed future food and beverage opportunities are an opportunity to support budding entrepreneurs with limited access to capital. An entire program can be formulated with movable structures that come equipped with sinks, small refrigerators, and countertops, so concessionaires only need to purchase electrical appliances, signage, and whatever supplemental FF&E they desire (subject to City approval). This would make the concessions affordable opportunities for new food businesses. A park- or City-focused director of hospitality, or community partner organization, would be qualified to guide these concessionaires with respect to menu design, kitchen operations, merchandising, signage, and the other aspects of running a successful food business that are usually learned through a lot of experience. The City should provide, or work with a community partner to provide, this service/consulting for free. Glendale Regional Park (via the City) would need to establish an application process that would identify the entrepreneurs who would be likely to succeed in the park based on their proposals. Applicants would need to be new business owners. The applicant pool could also include women-owned and immigrant-owned businesses. The Vision | 50 The community plaza is a brightly lit, vibrant promenade that hosts events and festivals as well as food trucks, market booths and community-led activities. Glendale Regional Park Communty Plaza & Promenade Rendering 51 | The Vision Concession Contracting A mobile concession program (which is different than the food program above) should also be addressed. While such a program would not involve the City offering any financial assistance to these concessionaires, the scoring system in an application or request for proposal (RFP) process could take into account whether a business is minority- or woman-owned. Recommendations include adding this component to scoring proposals as part of a larger change that would seek to qualify concessionaires prior to their launch in the park and institute minimum standards for operation. Programming Vendor Contracting There are a variety of types of programming partnerships, but the most straightforward partnership involves the City hiring an individual or business to perform a service (as opposed to a partner providing in-kind services or the City and the partner having a cost-sharing relationship). Common examples are fitness classes, art classes, and the vendors who provide equipment or furnishings for larger events. Similar to the mobile concessions RFP process, the City can make an explicit commitment to prioritizing people of color when it hires artists to teach a watercolor class, fitness instructors to lead classes and other vendors. Programming Partnerships Targeting Underrepresented Audiences In addition to establishing and expanding fee-based programming, the City should create a wide variety of new free programming at Glendale Regional Park that can eventually be sponsored. To launch these programs, the park will need to partner with cultural institutions, small businesses, and nonprofit service providers. The most desirable and reliable partners for Glendale Regional Park will be established organizations with existing constituencies. The loyal followers of these businesses and nonprofits will show up to activities they produce in the park, diminishing the need to promote them and helping to seed a base level of activity. The City can specifically target organizations who primarily work with constituencies that are usually underrepresented at parks, specifically in Glendale. A successful strategy will build these relationships systematically and incrementally; it’s important to be realistic about how many of and how often their audience will travel to the park, and for partnerships to develop organically. A programming partnership might start with one or a few events each year, and grow through successful participation. Building Capacity in Partner Organizations Programming partnerships can also benefit third-party organizations by helping them better fulfill their missions (in the case of nonprofits), exposing them to new audiences, and building their in-house capacity. By working with the City at Glendale Regional Park, nonprofit organizations may be more likely to secure grants or be able to pursue grant opportunities that they may not have otherwise been eligible for. Cost-sharing arrangements make it affordable for some to take on new full-time staff to help grow their businesses or service offerings. The City can identify which organizations are positioned to take advantage of the possible benefits of a programming partnership. Many partners will enter into a discussion at Glendale Regional Park already cognizant of how the partnership fits into their strategic plans, and this should be part of the criteria used when selecting partners. Workforce Development The third part of a strategy for Glendale Regional Park to succeed in community engagement goals of partnering with the City to combat park inequity and advance park inclusivity, is to partner explicitly with a workforce development program and leverage the program as a resource for Glendale. Paid Internships Glendale Regional Park can offer paid internships for in-school youth in a variety of areas. Programming and marketing are two likely sectors where there will be a need for interns and reciprocal interest on the part of students. Work in these two areas can often be broken into discrete, seasonal efforts (i.e., helping to launch or manage specific programs, creating content for specific social media campaigns or events, etc.). In addition, internships could focus on special projects such as building an historic photo archive of Raging Waters that could get incorporated into a future augmented reality component of a mobile app, targeted donor/grant research, or administering and helping to analyze a survey of park visitors. Occupational Training and Employment Glendale Regional Park can also work with a workforce development program to provide work experience for program participants and employment for graduates of their program. For out-of-school youth, Glendale can offer occupational training in grounds maintenance and skilled landscaping and gardening. This could create mutually beneficial opportunities for Glendale, the City, and citywide residents, providing Glendale Regional Park with extra help at a reduced cost and creating a new source of education and job opportunities for emerging gardeners. Whether or not occupational training is a possibility, the City can create pathways to employment for workforce development program graduates, such as prioritizing graduates in the hiring process. An exclusive hiring window should be created for prospective employees referred by a workforce development partner with a commitment on the City’s part to hire qualified applicants from the pool of graduates. Prioritized job opportunities could include positions in sanitation, maintenance, landscaping, hospitality, and customer service. Graduates of workforce development programs typically perform better and are retained by employers at a higher rate than people recruited from public job postings. The Vision | 52 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 53 | The Vision Goals & Metrics How will we know that we achieved what we set out to do? Measuring Progress Gauging elements of the final concept plan through performance-based evaluation provides a measure to determine if goals set during the beginning of the park planning process are being attained. The following metrics evaluate the park design according to original park goals. The Vision | 54 1700 street access Glendale Park trails Jordan river parkway trail Trails Recommendation: Enhanced Public Transit As shown in the analysis on pages 13-14, there is a need for enhanced public transit access to Glendale Park. Partnerships and conversations with UTA and other transit organizations will be required in order to provide equitable and regional access to the site. Park Goa l Hiking Trail New Connections Trails & Connectivity Regional Connection 5 Public Lands spaces connected after all associated trail and crossing recommendations are implemented . 2 New Connections: A new crossing linking to 1700 South Park and a bridge linking to the Jordan River Parkway will connect with the future Surplus Canal Trail and a proposed multi-use path along 1700 South to create a Glendale Trail Triangle . 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r Jor d a n R i v e r P a r k w a y T r a i l 55 | The Vision Active Play - High Programming Community Gathering - High Programming Community Spaces Park Goal Park Goal 29 Activities & amenities added to the site . Community Services & Programming 1,713 Community members involved in the planning process . Community-Led Park Goa l 8 new and unique recreation opportunities introduced to the citywide Public Lands’ system . Regional Connection Park Goal 100% Individual elements in the park are ADA accessible Park Activation & Safety Community Spaces - Plan Metrics 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r Jor d a n R i v e r P a r k w a y T r a i l The Vision | 56 Environmental - Plan Metrics Native/Water Wise Planting & Turf Riparian Native Grass & Shrubland Hardscape** Soft & Hardscape * See page 20 for previous site surface calculations ** Hardscape includes some impervious crushed granite pathways Park Goal 4 .5 Acres of natural areas added that provide public access Access to Nature Park Goal 1 .7 Acres riparian habitat restored Environmental Quality Park Goal 10 .9 Acres of native & waterwise planting reduces water use Environmental Justice Park Goal Impervious surfaces reduced by 50%, improving water quality and replenishing groundwater* Environmental Quality Site Surfaces Asphalt - 8% Concrete - 13% Park Features/Structures - 6% Site Impervious Surfaces: 27% Planted Landscape - 64% Crushed Granite Paths - 6% Dog Park/Sand Beach - 3% Site Impervious Surfaces: 73% 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r Jor d a n R i v e r P a r k w a y T r a i l Implementation | 58 Implementation 59 | Implementation Implementation Phase I The park will be implemented in a series of phases. Many factors are contributing to the decision-making process examining which elements will be included in phase one of park implementation. Most notably, according to the requirements set by the Land and Water Conservation Fund, outdoor recreation amenities in the park must be available to the public by spring of 2024. This expedited schedule requires consideration for park features that are easily implementable, can meet a rapid construction timeline and that fit within the current budget allocated for the park. Other phase one considerations include the need to group park features and improvements into a consolidated area, creating a fully functioning park with a variety of activities and amenities prior to the completion of future phases. Consolidating developed areas of the park allows the remaining undeveloped areas to be strategically fenced, limiting access to hazards left from previous water park infrastructure. The fencing plan also facilitates phasing strategies for vegetative restoration, weed abatement and site preparation for future phases while mitigating exposure to visually unattractive, undeveloped areas. Public input is another consideration shaping phase one features. Some of the top park features that are desired by the neighborhood, such as an outdoor pool, cannot be accommodated in the first phase due to cost, a lengthier construction time frame, and the time required to work through possible partnership logistics. However, park features that are most desired by the community and can meet the criteria mentioned above are being given top priority for inclusion in phase one. This includes a multi-use sports court and an all-ages and abilities playground. Other desired features will be filled by interim elements, such as food trucks being stationed in the parking lot before a formal community plaza is fully built out, access to hiking on the hill before formal trails are installed, and a kayak rental locker included next to the existing boat ramp prior to full enhancements being completed along the Jordan River. Future phases of the park will be implemented as quickly as funding and logistics can be navigated. Grant, donation and partnership opportunities which align with park goals and proposed features and programming will be expeditiously explored to realize the full site design and potential for a regional-quality park in the Westside. Callout text over images, ad quam harum ne maiorpor accum fuga. Et officip saniatas eius reperspernat quiae. Uptate eris nos molorum featured content. Phasing Strategy Phasing strategies ensure safety from site hazards and begin restoring nature to the site while also considering the creative potential of elements from the previous water park. Implementation | 60 Phasing Diagram Segmented Phasing Zones The diagram highlights phase one elements, which will be completed by spring of 2024. All other portions of the park will be completed in future phases. Anticipated future phase elements are segmented into park feature zones for flexible implementation. These smaller zones may be implemented simultaneously or phased incrementally as park funding and partnerships become feasible. The diagram suggests a possible phasing sequence to prioritize park features that are popular with the community while also utilizing park space to the greatest possible extent. This phasing order should be flexible in response to partnership and funding opportunities as well as available funding and the cost to develop each phasing zone. Phase 1Phase 1 Skating Skating Ribbon & Ribbon & PavilionPavilion Parking & Parking & Community Community PlazaPlaza Hill with Hill with Overlook & Overlook & Trails/ Dog Trails/ Dog ParkPark Skateboarding Skateboarding Area Area Water Feature Water Feature Plaza, Flex Plaza, Flex Lawn & Lawn & Performance Performance Space Space Riverside Riverside Beach & Beach & BoardwalkBoardwalk BridgeBridge Outdoor Outdoor Swimming Swimming PoolPool Boat Ramp, Boat Ramp, Dock, Dock, Drop-off, Drop-off, & Rental & Rental StationStation Phasing Considerations • Cost • Potential partnerships • Community input / popular features • Hazards & Safety • Consolidating developed park areas to maximize park functionality and use • Sequencing development for maximized park use and access throughout the construction and development process • Sequencing revegetation and restoration efforts $ $ 1 2 3 3b 3a 456 7 8 $ $ Park Feature Zones Zones to be developed concurrently Higher Cost Features Popular Features Possible Phasing Sequence Phase I Future Phase $ 1 61 | Implementation Phase 1 Park Features Park Amenities and Publicly Accessible Areas Trail Connection Picnic Lawn All Ages & Abilities Playground Pavilion/Shade Structure Full-Court Basketball Community Plaza Parking Lot Parking/Interim Food Truck Area Undeveloped Hill with: • Native Landscape Restoration • Informal Hiking Opportunities • Possible Art Installations Existing Parking Lot Kayak Rental Locker Existing Boat Ramp Phase 1 Elements 1 2 3 5 4 10 9 7 11 8 12 6 Undeveloped Undeveloped Hillside Hillside with Native with Native LandscapeLandscape Maintain Maintain Access to Access to Existing Boat Existing Boat RampRamp Fenced / Fenced / Restoration Restoration AreaArea Fenced / Fenced / Restoration Restoration AreaArea Circulation through Circulation through Existing Parking LotExisting Parking Lot Protective Fencing Phase 1 Temporary Hillside Restoration Area 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 5 3 Jor d a n R i v e r P a r k w a y T r a i l Implementation | 62 Phase 1 Programming Opportunities Children/family Family fitness activities All-ability movement Music / literary education Organized play activities Animal education events Arts / culture / community Art cart Arts and crafts Small music / performance Literary events Lectures Board games Fitness / recreation / events Low impact fitness Organized recreation / workshops Community cultural events Outdoor hobbyist activities River Programming Safety and awareness Skills workshops Habitat education Volunteer events Outdoor / environmental Nature / meditative walks Birding / wildlife workshops Gardens / horticulture Public art Arts / culture / community Audience area Outdoor movies Lawn games Sports courts Clinics / lessons All-ability skills training Undeveloped Hillside Undeveloped Hillside with Native Landscapewith Native Landscape Fenced / Fenced / Restoration AreaRestoration Area Fenced / Fenced / Restoration AreaRestoration Area Protective Fencing Phase 1 Temporary Hillside Restoration Area 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r Jor d a n Rive r P a r k T r a i l 63 | Implementation Opinion of Probable Cost Phase 1 Costs The project team developed phase one to propose a set of amenities that could be implemented, pending contractor bids, with current funding. These elements include an ambitious set of improvements that can be accomplished for 3.5 to 5.5 million dollars. Phase one was designed to maximize usable park features and efficiently utilize funding as it comprises only approximately 10% of the total park cost yet completes 30% of the full park buildout. Further design and cost estimating is needed to understand the true costs of the proposed amenities. This proposal is based on current construction costs and contracting pricing is likely to be much higher two years from now. Phasing Zone Costs As detailed design is completed for each phase, a true understanding of cost will be established. Some park elements have much higher costs associated with them such as the pool and the skating ribbon and will vary in range of cost depending on the length of time it takes to implement them. See the phasing diagram on page 60 for the recommended phasing approach. Full Park Build Out Costs Full build out of all park elements could range in cost from 30 to 50 million dollars depending on how long it takes to fully implement all park features. The sooner the site is redeveloped and the fewer the phases of development, the more cost efficient it is to construct the park. Phase 1 Opinion of Probable Cost: $3,400,000 - $5,500000 Full Park Build Out Opinion of Probable Cost: $30,000,000 - $55,000,000 Undeveloped Undeveloped Hillside Hillside with Native with Native LandscapeLandscape Maintain Maintain Access to Access to Existing Boat Existing Boat RampRamp Fenced / Fenced / Restoration Restoration AreaArea Fenced / Fenced / Restoration Restoration AreaArea Circulation through Circulation through Existing Parking LotExisting Parking Lot * Protective Fencing Phase 1 Temporary Hillside Restoration Area Phase 1 Full Park Build Out 1 2 3 9 14 15 16 17 18 21 20 22 19 24 25 28 29 26 27 23 5 4 10 7 11 8 12 6 13 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r 1700 S. 1700 South Park Glendale Golf Course Glendale Park Jor d a n R i v e r 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 11 124 5 3 Pickleball Courts Jor d a n R i v e r P a r k w a y T r a i l Jor d a n R i v e r P a r k w a y T r a i l Implementation | 64 Implementation Phase 1 Restoration Strategy Phase I Ecological Recommendations Phase one ecological improvements include riparian and planting enhancement along the riverside. With exception of consideration for future riverside improvements such as a new boat ramp and boardwalk, these areas will remain largely undeveloped and initial efforts toward a permanent, long-term restoration plan should take place. Public Lands will prioritize restoration efforts based on recommendations to the greatest extent possible, but will also evaluate capacity, management and staffing considerations for prioritization of areas. In the western, developed portions of the park, ornamental plants will be included as part of the park design. The planting selection should consist of native, water- wise and climate adaptive plants that will utilize less water, tolerate heat in a changing climate and provide ecological benefits for birds and pollinators. The remaining portions of the site will be prepared for future phases with transitional restoration efforts. These areas will be seeded with native grasses and wildflowers as an intermediate restoration step, providing a solution for weed mitigation, soil retention, and providing ecological benefits until further site development and restoration efforts are completed. See the full restoration strategy on the following pages for further recommendations on preserving tree canopy. Permanent Habitat/Restoration Russian Olives Removed High Restoration Priority Transitional Restoration Disturbed Areas, Restoration Priority Ornamental Landscape Russian Olives Removed Restoration Priority 65 | Implementation Ecological Recommendations The planning team’s ecological expert, River Restoration, conducted a site visit of the Glendale Regional Park on August 23, 2021, to evaluate the current ecological conditions of the project area and to determine what features should be retained for ecological reasons. This assessment, included in Appendix B, resulted in the identification of trees and habitats that should be retained as possible. Areas for potential enhancement were also identified and include all existing riparian forest and a buffer of 50-300’ from the river. See the restoration diagrams on the following page for recommended restoration areas. Riparian Restoration and Tree Canopy The current state of the riparian forest in and around the project area is in a degraded condition. Some of the existing large trees within the project area have a high value, since they are well established and seem to be healthy. The sycamore trees are of high value and should be considered to protect in place, since they are mature, well-established, and healthy. The existing trees along the park strip at the north of the project area should also be preserved to maintain this important buffer from 1700 South. The remaining groves of trees can be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for phased removal or replacement with planted and irrigated multi-layer riparian areas. The diagram on the next page shows areas of existing riparian trees that could be retained. Habitat improvements are a key goal of the Project and phasing the project’s construction will reduce potential impacts to the site’s current wildlife population by limiting the amount of area that will be disturbed at any one time while leaving undisturbed portions to provide habitat. This applies particularly to habitat for migratory song birds. Partners working along the Jordan River Corridor have recommended a phased approach for removal of Russian olives, which serve as habitat for migratory and resident bird species. Russian olive should be left on portions of the site that are not part of the initial phases and riparian plants should be planted into Russian olive stands, where the shade from the existing invasive trees will help with establishment of new forests. Areas where Russian olive was removed should be the top priority for restoration of riparian forests to return the multi-layer canopy for nesting and migratory birds. Site Restoration Treatments See the Phase I Restoration Diagram on page 64 for restoration treatment priority areas. Full recommendations can be found in Appendix C, Restoration Plan. Treatments proposed for summer and fall of 2022 include: • Aggressive chemical control of noxious weeds to follow up on areas treated in 2021. • Aggressive chemical treatment of hoary cress and phragmites in areas along the riverbanks where Russian olive was cut down. • Chemical control of noxious weeds in all disturbance areas. • Seeding of all disturbed areas with an inexpensive grass/forb mix. The park presents an opportunity to enhance important riparian habitat, which is a rarity in the high desert environment of the Salt Lake Valley and is a critical resource to migratory birds along the Pacific Flyway. Restoration Strategy Implementation | 66 Site Preparation Aggressive chemical control of noxious weeds adjacent to all disturbance areas should be a high priority. These are the most likely places for spread of noxious and invasive plants. These areas should also be seeded soon after the disturbance ceases (generally within 2 weeks any time of the year) with an inexpensive grass and forb mix. This should be done any time disturbances occur throughout the project lifecycle to reduce the opportunity for noxious plants to dominate. This is cheap insurance and will reduce the potential need for chemicals to be used on the site in the future. 12” of topsoil for the disturbed area will be needed for grasses to establish while “planting pockets” that have soil depths up to 36” will be needed to allow small trees and shrubs to be established. It would be good to add terraces on the hill with up to 3’ of topsoil, allowing for larger shrubs and trees to establish. Ecological Stewardship The local and regional context was evaluated to discover opportunities for ecological enhancement and stewardship. Students from Glendale Middle School have previously provided stewardship for areas just downstream of the project and Jordan River Park. The future stewardship of the natural areas in the vicinity of the project should involve local schools and community partners. There are also opportunities for a broader connection to the river both up and downstream. Development of on- water recreation opportunities is one of the highest values of the site from a stewardship perspective. Site Restoration Strategy Riparian Restoration Native Meadow Restoration Ornamental Landscape Trees to Potentially Retain 67 | Implementation Planting Palette Water-Wise Planting The planting palette shows examples of possible plants for Glendale Park. The plant selection should include native, water-wise and climate adaptive species which use less water and provide habitat for pollinators and wildlife. Riverside Plants Saltgrass, Inland Distichlis spicata Western wheatgrass Pascopyrum smithii Fescue, Sheep Festuca ovina Freemont Cottonwood Populus fremontii Apache Plume Fallugia paradoxa Skunkbush sumac Rhus trilobata Wood’s rose Rosa woodsii Golden currant Ribes aureum Green rabbitbrush Crysothamnus viscidiflorus Marsh milkweed Asclepsia incarnata Solidago canadensis Canada goldenrod Wooly sedge Carex pellita Hillside/Meadow Plants Sand Dropseed Sporobolus cryptandrus Blanket Flower Gaillardia Aristata Lewis Blue Flax Linum lewisii Western Wheatgrass Pascopyrum smithii Rocky Mountain Bee Plant Cleome serrulata Bluegrass, Sandberg Poa Sandbergii Scarlet Globemallow Sphaeralcea coccinea Alkali sacaton Sporobolus airoides Sporo b o l u s c y p t a n drus Sand Dropseed Pasco p y r u m s m i t h i i Western Wheatgrass Distichlis s p i c a t a Inland Saltgrass Gaillar d i a A r i s t a t a Blanket Flower Cleo m e s e r r u l a t a Rocky Mountain Bee Plant Populu s f r e m o n t i i Freemont Cottonwood Linu m le w i s i i Lewis Blue Flax Sphaera l c e a c o c c i n ea Scarlet Globemallow Fallugia p a r a d o x a Apache Plume Implementation | 68 Climate Adaptive Trees Japanese Tree Lilac Syringa reticulata Shademaster Honeylocust Gleditsia triacanthos inermis Gambel Oak Quercus gambelii Catalpa Catalpa speciosa Fairmount Ginkgo Ginkgo biloba ‘Fairmount’ Golden Candle Rain Tree Koelreuteria paniculata ‘Golden Candle’ Bristlecone Pine Pinus aristata Pinyon Pine Pinus edulis Utah Juniper Juniperus osteosperma Water-Wise Shurbs Alderleaf Mountain Mahogany Cercocarpus montanus Apache Plume Fallugia paradoxa New Mexico Privet Forestiera neomexicana Native & Water-Wise Ornamental Plants Ivory Tower Yucca Yucca flacida ‘Ivory Tower’ Desert Four O’Clock Mirabilis multiflora Fire Chalice Zauschneria (Epilobium) californica Palmer’s Penstemon Penstemon palmeri Prairie Winecups Callirhoe involucrata Coneflower Echinacea Hummingbird Mint Agastache ‘Desert Sunrise’ Little Bluestem Schizachyrium scoparium Blonde Ambition Blue Grama Grass Bouteloua gracilis ‘Blonde Ambition’ Shenandoah Switch Grass Panicum virgatum ‘Shenandoah’ Ravenna Grass Saccharum ravennae Graziella Maiden Grass Miscanthus sinensis ‘Graziella’ Mirabilis m u l t i f l o r a Desert Four O-Clock Quercu s g a m b e l i i Gambel Oak Panicu m v i r g a t u m Shenandoah Switch Grass Penste m o n p a l m e r i Palmer’s Penstemon Gleditsia t r i a c a n t h os inermis Shademaster Honeylocust Miscant h u s s i n e n s i s Graziella Maiden Grass Echinac e a Coneflower Syring a r e t i c u l a t a Japanese Tree Lilac Boutelo u a g r a c i l i s Blue Gramma Grass 69 | Chapter Two SITES Certification To support goals for ecological restoration and sustainable park development, it is recommended that the project team pursue certification in a sustainability program such as SITES or another comparable program. The project team has been exploring certification through the Sustainable Sites Initiative (SITES) for the future Glendale Regional Park. SITES (sustainablesites.org/) is a sustainability-focused program based on the understanding that any project has the ability to protect, improve and even regenerate healthy ecosystems by reducing water use, filtering stormwater runoff, providing wildlife habitat, and improving air quality and human health. The SITES certification is managed by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC), the same agency that manages the LEED rating system for buildings. Where LEED addresses buildings and vertical construction, the SITES rating system is used for everything related to the landscape. Projects pursuing certification often incur higher costs in design and construction, however, they consistently return significant long term cost savings related to ongoing operations and maintenance costs. During the master planning process, a SITES pre-score assessment, shown in Table 1, confirmed that the Glendale Park project meets the qualifications to pursue SITES certification. Upon scoring the project, the Glendale Regional Park Site has the potential to certify on the Platinum level if the City elects to pursue certification to the greatest extent. The project team recommends pre-certifying the entire park master plan for the 17-acre site during the design and construction process to ensure that sustainable practices are adhered to and that the proper documentation is collected to pursue certification. The full SITES prescore worksheet for Glendale Regional Park in Appendix A. Pursuing SITES certification at Glendale Regional Park would demonstrate a tangible commitment to environmental quality and justice. With historic underinvestment, lower levels of service and evidence of environmental injustices present in this community in the past, having a SITES certified landscape in the Glendale neighborhood would not only highlight the City’s investment in restorative landscapes and climate resiliency but would also set a standard for site development in the future and begin to show tangible effort towards equitable environmental investment across the City. With SITES certification, Glendale Regional Park would be a model of best practices and environmental achievement both locally and nationwide. Sustainable Practices SITES Certification would guide sustainable development practices, an important consideration that would help improve environmental health in areas such as the riparian habitat along the Jordan River. Chapter Two | 70 SITES Scorecard Summary YES ?NO YES ?NO 1: SITE CONTEXT Possible Points: 13 6: SITE DESIGN - HUMAN HEALTH + WELL-BEING Possible Points: 30 Y CONTEXT P1.1 Limit development on farmland HHWB C6.1 Protect and maintain cultural and historic places 2 to 3 Y CONTEXT P1.2 Protect floodplain functions HHWB C6.2 Provide optimum site accessibility, safety, and wayfinding 2 Y CONTEXT P1.3 Conserve aquatic ecosystems HHWB C6.3 Promote equitable site use 2 Y CONTEXT P1.4 Conserve habitats for threatened and endangered species HHWB C6.4 Support mental restoration 2 CONTEXT C1.5 Redevelop degraded sites 3 to 6 HHWB C6.5 Support physical activity 2 CONTEXT C1.6 Locate projects within existing developed areas 4 HHWB C6.6 Support social connection 2 CONTEXT C1.7 Connect to multi-modal transit networks 2 to 3 HHWB C6.7 Provide on-site food production 3 to 4 HHWB C6.8 Reduce light pollution 4 2: PRE-DESIGN ASSESSMENT + PLANNING Possible Points: 3 HHWB C6.9 Encourage fuel efficient and multi-modal transportation 4 Y PRE-DESIGN P2.1 Use an integrative design process HHWB C6.10 Minimize exposure to environmental tobacco smoke 1 to 2 Y PRE-DESIGN P2.2 Conduct a pre-design site assessment HHWB C6.11 Support local economy 3 Y PRE-DESIGN P2.3 Designate and communicate VSPZs PRE-DESIGN C2.4 Engage users and stakeholders 3 7: CONSTRUCTION Possible Points: 17 Y CONSTRUCTION P7.1 Communicate and verify sustainable construction practices 3: SITE DESIGN - WATER Possible Points: 23 Y CONSTRUCTION P7.2 Control and retain construction pollutants Y WATER P3.1 Manage precipitation on site Y CONSTRUCTION P7.3 Restore soils disturbed during construction Y WATER P3.2 Reduce water use for landscape irrigation CONSTRUCTION C7.4 Restore soils disturbed by previous development 3 to 5 WATER C3.3 Manage precipitation beyond baseline 4 to 6 CONSTRUCTION C7.5 Divert construction and demolition materials from disposal 3 to 4 WATER C3.4 Reduce outdoor water use 4 to 6 CONSTRUCTION C7.6 Divert reusable vegetation, rocks, and soil from disposal 3 to 4 WATER C3.5 Design functional stormwater features as amenities 4 to 5 CONSTRUCTION C7.7 Protect air quality during construction 2 to 4 WATER C3.6 Restore aquatic ecosystems 4 to 6 8. OPERATIONS + MAINTENANCE Possible Points: 22 4: SITE DESIGN - SOIL + VEGETATION Possible Points: 40 Y O+M P8.1 Plan for sustainable site maintenance Y SOIL+VEG P4.1 Create and communicate a soil management plan Y O+M P8.2 Provide for storage and collection of recyclables Y SOIL+VEG P4.2 Control and manage invasive plants O+M C8.3 Recycle organic matter 3 to 5 Y SOIL+VEG P4.3 Use appropriate plants O+M C8.4 Minimize pesticide and fertilizer use 4 to 5 SOIL+VEG C4.4 Conserve healthy soils and appropriate vegetation 4 to 6 O+M C8.5 Reduce outdoor energy consumption 2 to 4 SOIL+VEG C4.5 Conserve special status vegetation 4 O+M C8.6 Use renewable sources for landscape electricity needs 3 to 4 SOIL+VEG C4.6 Conserve and use native plants 3 to 6 O+M C8.7 Protect air quality during landscape maintenance 2 to 4 SOIL+VEG C4.7 Conserve and restore native plant communities 4 to 6 SOIL+VEG C4.8 Optimize biomass 1 to 6 9. EDUCATION + PERFORMANCE MONITORING Possible Points: 11 SOIL+VEG C4.9 Reduce urban heat island effects 4 EDUCATION C9.1 Promote sustainability awareness and education 3 to 4 SOIL+VEG C4.10 Use vegetation to minimize building energy use 1 to 4 EDUCATION C9.2 Develop and communicate a case study 3 SOIL+VEG C4.11 Reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire 4 EDUCATION C9.3 Plan to monitor and report site performance 4 5: SITE DESIGN - MATERIALS SELECTION Possible Points: 41 10. INNOVATION OR EXEMPLARY PERFORMANCE Bonus Points: 9 Y MATERIALS P5.1 Eliminate the use of wood from threatened tree species INNOVATION C10.1 Innovation or exemplary performance 3 to 9 MATERIALS C5.2 Maintain on-site structures and paving 2 to 4 MATERIALS C5.3 Design for adaptability and disassembly 3 to 4 YES ?NO MATERIALS C5.4 Use salvaged materials and plants 3 to 4 TOTAL ESTIMATED POINTS Total Possible Points: 200 MATERIALS C5.5 Use recycled content materials 3 to 4 MATERIALS C5.6 Use regional materials 3 to 5 KEY SITES Certification levels Points MATERIALS C5.7 Support responsible extraction of raw materials 1 to 5 YES Project confident points are achievable CERTIFIED 70 MATERIALS C5.8 Support transparency and safer chemistry 1 to 5 ?Project striving to achieve points, not 100% confident SILVER 85 MATERIALS C5.9 Support sustainability in materials manufacturing 5 NO Project is unable to achieve these credit points GOLD 100 MATERIALS C5.10 Support sustainability in plant production 1 to 5 PLATINUM 135 Table 1: SITES Certification Pre-Score 71 | Implementation Policies, Operations & Maintenance In order to ensure the new Glendale Regional Park stays clean, active, safe and well-loved by the greater Salt Lake City community, it must be maintained and staffed accordingly along with the many amenities, natural features, and programming elements being designed. To achieve this high standard, the City will need to make special considerations for Glendale Park’s operations staffing required to support the appropriate levels of security, sanitation, public realm maintenance, landscaping, programmatic operations, event needs, park concession leasing, and marketing as described below. Security A strong perception and reality of safety in the park will greatly enhance the park’s ability to attract visitors, particularly families, and increase an overall sense of civic pride and support for the park. In keeping with many long established precedents for increasing the “eyes and ears” in the park, it will be important to create many positive reasons for the public to be active in the park throughout the day to dispel any would be antisocial behavior, and actively patrol the park with appropriate levels of official park staff – whether they be City park rangers or, when necessary, police. The “right” levels and types of staff will depend greatly on several design decisions including potential building/concession uses, recreation and aquatic uses, degrees of programming and events, and real time security concerns/ conditions in the neighborhood when the park opens. Many decisions around types and levels of security (and other operations) staff will depend on the ultimate physical plan and associated decisions around park management and governance – i.e., whether the City alone will manage and program the park or whether that it will happen in partnership or coordination with a private management entity (or several). Park rules Because of the many unique features and activities planned, a set of rules should be specifically developed for Glendale Park, incorporating the City’s existing rules and regulations for all public parks. An abbreviated version of those rules should be posted visibly around the park to help regulate the public use and provide clear expectations as to which activities and behaviors are acceptable and which are not. Setting these expectations and messaging them the right way will add to the public’s perception of safety in the park and help park staff to enforce appropriate behavior. PoliciesPolicies, Operations & Maintenance Implementation | 72 During larger events (festivals, musical performances, larger markets) the event producer, park management entity, or the City may need to employ additional, contracted security staff and parking attendants. Janitorial Janitorial and sanitation issues in the public realm are often caused by a shortage of staff, having only one shift of staff, lack of resources/staff that are spread too thin over multiple parks, or a cumbersome and bureaucratic process for addressing issues as they arise. By appropriately staffing the janitorial crew and having more than one shift in the day as necessary (fewer shifts on slow days and more/overlapping shifts on peak days), restrooms can be checked, cleaned, and resupplied often, trash cans can be emptied multiple times a day, litter can be picked up regularly by hand, graffiti can be removed immediately, and other small issues can be addressed in a timely manner before snowballing into more significant, more costly problems. If the park is maintained with a high standard of cleanliness, expectations will be raised and perceptions of care will spread to the public - visitors will treat the park with respect. Park cleanliness will also impact perceptions of safety to the community. Concession staff, if applicable, should augment janitorial staff in the immediate area of the concessions. When there is a slower moment, concession staff should regularly wipe tables, pick up trash, empty trash cans, straighten tables and chairs, and even service restrooms. Concession areas have heavy use and require special attention, which should be provided by the concession workers. These types of services can often be negotiated as part of the operator agreements depending on the specific concession. Giving an operator the option to custom brand the tables, seats, trash cans, or umbrellas within the vicinity of their space (and charging them for the right to do so) will motivate them to keep these areas and the associated furnishings clean. Trash and recycling cans should be located at regular intervals throughout the park, and especially at areas of anticipated heavy traffic such as play areas and picnic areas, so that visitors do not have any trouble finding the receptacle. Trash and recycling should be emptied from cans multiple times a day and taken to a designated collection point, and trash and recycling should be moved off-site at least once a day. Trash and recycling cans should be paired and kept together (or split between one receptacle but clearly distinguished), otherwise park patrons will throw whatever they are disposing into whichever receptacle is closest, regardless of its intended contents. The janitorial staff should take care of minor repairs such as repainting over graffiti, tightening a leaky faucet, or patching a hole in the concrete. Larger maintenance and repair projects will be tasked to the capital projects staff and contractors. Janitorial staff should also be tasked with everyday landscape upkeep including weeding, sweeping up excess leaf litter and plant debris, and reporting irrigation leaks, irrigation malfunction, or poor plant health to a supervisor. Large events may incur the need for additional janitorial staff to clean restrooms, pick up trash, and empty trash and recycling. Repairs/Maintenance There should be a streamlined process to address maintenance issues, one that is not burdened with moving through many chains of command or requiring excess paperwork whenever possible. Staff specifically assigned to Glendale Park, either from the City or contracted through a park management entity, should be empowered to fix smaller problems under a pre-determined threshold promptly without the need for higher levels of approval. Furnishings and other items need to be checked frequently and repaired upon the first sign of an issue. This will ensure broken items do not get worse and more difficult to fix and avoid potential injury/ liability concerns. Fixing them right away also shows the public that furnishings and facilities in the park are cared for and looked after. If visitors observe a well- maintained park, they are more likely to follow suit and take good care of the furnishings and facilities themselves. The janitorial staff will address smaller issues such as replacing broken trash cans, cleaning out the drains of drinking fountains, screwing in a door hinge, replacing light bulbs, and painting over graffiti. An Operations Manager or similar position should oversee capital projects, major repairs, and landscape maintenance. This manager will also oversee third-party contractors who would take care of larger 73 | Implementation within the park. The leasing agents should focus on an operator mix that supports Glendale Park’s overall programming/ activity goals, focuses on local businesses, has a quality/healthful product, delivers on financial objectives, and supports the needs of the surrounding neighborhood. Partnerships or City programs that work independently and/or with leasing agents to support no or low-cost activities will be important to include as regular options for Glendale Park programming. Marketing for Glendale Park offerings should start with a dedicated website and social media accounts (primarily Instagram and Facebook) that are frequently updated with news and happenings. A dedicated online presence is the best way for visitors to find out about programs and events happening in the park and nearby public/ City affairs. The website will also serve as a tool for customer service, a guide for private event permitting, a place to receive inquiries, comments, and complaints. It’s important for these outlets to be the dedicated responsibility of one staff member or contractor, rather than spread to several undefined staff so this important element doesn’t become neglected in favor of staff’s primary responsibilities. and more specialized maintenance and repair needs such as fixing plumbing issues, repairing broken stairs, electrical repairs, building maintenance, etc. Ideally this would be a dedicated person to Glendale Park, or someone who oversees multiple parks with appropriate support staff. During major repairs, trees and plant materials should be protected with fences or other barriers to prevent damage. Heavy equipment should not be left or stored under the branches of trees, as this can cause root damage, or for extended periods on lawn. Landscape/Tree Maintenance and Management Trees and understory require attention on a consistent and on-going basis. The landscape maintenance crew should have demonstrated experience in maintenance of public landscape projects of similar size and scope with owner references, and demonstrated experience with integrated pest management, pest control, soils, fertilizers, and plant identification. Assuming proper installation, trees and understory will need regular inspection by Public Land’s Urban Forestry Division to ensure proper growth. Pruning weak branches and shaping tree crowns will help sustain long-term health, growth, and appearance. As trees and plant material are put in the ground, flow meters should be installed that monitor all irrigation hydrazones for appropriate water application across the site. Tree root ball moisture and shrub and groundcover surrounding soil moisture should be checked weekly and watering cycles adjusted accordingly. Watering records should be kept for all site trees and a yearly water audit should be performed to track the amount of water applied. With this information, Public Lands can determine appropriate water application for site trees after the three-year establishment period ends, in consultation with Urban Forestry’s review of tree health on the site. Irrigation systems will need frequent inspection and cleaning to ensure the system is running properly. Crews should weed planted areas frequently, maintain the depth of mulch to reduce evaporation and inhibit weed growth, and apply fertilizers as needed. Crews will employ principles of Integrated Pest Management to prevent plant pests and diseases. Landscape maintenance should be performed during regular work hours to not disturb the nearby residents with noise. An important part of a maintenance plan for Glendale Park will be a landscape feature/materials inventory with suggested maintenance and a working checklist than can be provided as for the landscape maintenance crew. Leasing/Marketing Leasing and partnership agreements, either through the relevant City agency or through a park management entity, will select the appropriate tenants for any kiosks, café space, river concessions, and any other commercially operable spaces Implementation | 74 Programming & Activation Table 2: Programming & Activation Budget Recommended Minimum DIRECT STAFFING COSTS YEAR 1 On site programming manager $76,000 Base starting salary of $60,000 annually. Budget includes fringe benefits. Park attendants $18,200 16 hrs/wk year round, $17.50 wage plus 25% fully loaded. Overtime allowance $4,550 May also be used for discretionary bonuses Administration / insurance -Assumes covered by City poliices Equipment / supplies $10,000 Laptop for manager, smartphones/tablets for attendant use, general supplies Dedicated staffing subtotal $108,750 HYPOTHETICAL DIRECT PROGRAMMING COSTS YEAR 1 Arts & culture $80,000 Two-thirds of this cost is annual, cutting edge interactive art installations Fitness $30,000 Mostly provided by free businesses seeking to market their classes Hobbies & niche interests $45,000 Includes outdoor dancing, which is about one- third of the total budget Live entertainment $100,000 Does not include production costs, which will be minimal Markets & festivals $100,000 Allowance for self-produced events Direct programming subtotal $355,000 SUPPLEMENTAL PROGRAMMING COSTS YEAR 1 Marketing $50,000 Limited to promotion surrounding public space programs and events Holiday decorations $100,000 Allowance Supplemental programming subtotal $150,000 Programming Budget and Staffing To support a vibrant and dynamic Glendale Regional Park, a dedicated park programming manager should be put in place, as well as a dedicated and predictable budget that grows over time through revenue development. The park should be viewed as a business, with profits and losses, except that all profits should be made with the public interest in mind and, thus, reinvested back into the park for the benefit of local residents and visitors. The park programming manager would be an on-site Public Lands employee, but assigned specifically to Glendale Regional Park on a day-to-day basis with a flexible schedule that likely includes a five-day, Wednesday to Sunday schedule to complement active times in the park. The programming manager will be dedicated to coordinating with programming partners, interacting with park visitors, overseeing day-to-day management of facilities maintenance, and managing vendors and contractors. The park programming manager is the park’s “mayor.” The ideal manager will have experience in events management, and/or marketing, communications, urban planning, and business. The programming manager should also have access to park attendants on a part-time, as needed basis during busier times in the park and special events. As a baseline, the park should also have a dedicated programming budget that allows for a varied experience. Programming budgets are used to provide equipment, marketing, outreach, and supplies. Where budgets fall short, the park programming manager will be able to leverage programming partners and interested groups to provide in-kind donations of time and materials, sponsorships, and other sources that reduce capital outlays. Providing a baseline budget of some amount allows the programming manager to plan accordingly and approach potential partners more efficiently. Over time, the budget hopefully grows, with revenue sources coming from a variety of potential sources: philanthropy, sponsorships, event rentals, food and beverage, programming, and government support. 75 | Implementation Governing Partnership & Management Activation and programming strategies, specifically around revenue development and sponsorship opportunities, benefit greatly by the management structure that is in place. Public agencies will be able to do things the private sector can’t, and vice versa. Exploring existing frameworks and establishing programming and activation guidelines within those constraints will inform optimal programming strategies. Governing Partnerships and ManagementSpectrum of Private/Public Partnership Structures Implementation | 76 Next Steps Creating engaging art, forming partnerships, promoting sustainability, and enhancing the environment are some of the next actions that will take place for Glendale Regional Park. Next Steps To meet the rapid timeline required to open the park with publicly accessible recreation, detailed design and construction of Phase I elements will begin in August of 2022, concurrent to the adoption of the master plan. This process will entail refining specific park features and styles, as well as forming a strategy to re-purpose the old water slides into park features or artwork. Programming opportunities with community partners will continue to be developed to ensure that the park remains an active space upon opening and throughout the development and construction process. The project team will also begin to rehabilitate the site with riparian and native vegetation to fulfill the park goals of enhancing environmental quality and improving environmental justice for the Glendale neighborhood. To support this goal, it is recommended that the project team pursue certification in a sustainability program such as SITES or another comparable program. During the master planning process, a SITES prescore assessment confirmed that the Glendale Park project meets the qualifications to pursue SITES certification. As the project consultant moves into the next design phase, this consideration should be integrated into the process to ensure that sustainable practices are adhered to and that the proper documentation is collected to pursue certification. The full SITES prescore worksheet for Glendale Regional Park is in Appendix A. Appendix | 78 Appendices APPENDIX A | Sites pre-score APPENDIX B | Ecological Assessment APPENDIX C | Restoration Plan APPENDIX D | Market Study Contents Appendix ASITES Pre-Score SITES Certification & Prescore Assessment Glendale Regional Park goals include enhancing environmental quality and improving environmental justice for the Glendale neighborhood. To support this goal, it is recommended that the project team pursue certiﬁcation in a sustainability program such as SITES or another comparable program. SITES, the landscape equivalent of LEED certiﬁcation, is a sustainability framework and program that ensures best practices are adhered to during land development projects, resulting in enhanced ecosystems and landscape beneﬁts such as “climate regulation, carbon storage and ﬂood mitigation.”1 During the master planning process, a SITES prescore assessment conﬁrmed that the Glendale Park project meets the qualiﬁcations to pursue SITES certiﬁcation. As the project consultant moves into the next design phase, this consideration should be integrated into the process to ensure that sustainable practices are adhered to and that the proper documentation is collected to pursue certiﬁcation. Appendix A includes the full SITES prescore worksheet and assessment for Glendale Regional Park. 1 hps://sustainablesites.org/certiﬁcation-guide YE S ?N O YE S ?N O 0 0 0 P ossib le P oints: 1 3 0 0 0 P ossib le P oints: 3 0 Y C O N T E X T P 1 . 1 HHW B C 6 . 1 2 to 3 Y C O N T E X T P 1 . 2 HHW B C 6 . 2 2 Y C O N T E X T P 1 . 3 HHW B C 6 . 3 2 Y C O N T E X T P 1 . 4 HHW B C 6 . 4 2 C O N T E X T C 1 . 5 3 to 6 HHW B C 6 . 5 2 C O N T E X T C 1 . 6 4 HHW B C 6 . 6 2 C O N T E X T C 1 . 7 2 to 3 HHW B C 6 . 7 3 to 4 HHW B C 6 . 8 4 0 0 0 P ossib le P oints: 3 HHW B C 6 . 9 4 Y P R E - DE S I G N P 2 . 1 HHW B C 6 . 1 0 1 to 2 Y P R E - DE S I G N P 2 . 2 HHW B C 6 . 1 1 3 Y P R E - DE S I G N P 2 . 3 P R E - DE S I G N C 2 . 4 3 0 0 0 P ossib le P oints: 1 7 Y C O N S T R UC T I O N P 7 . 1 0 0 0 P ossib le P oints: 2 3 Y C O N S T R UC T I O N P 7 . 2 Y W A T E R P 3 . 1 Y C O N S T R UC T I O N P 7 . 3 Y W A T E R P 3 . 2 C O N S T R UC T I O N C 7 . 4 3 to 5 W A T E R C 3 . 3 4 to 6 C O N S T R UC T I O N C 7 . 5 3 to 4 W A T E R C 3 . 4 4 to 6 C O N S T R UC T I O N C 7 . 6 3 to 4 W A T E R C 3 . 5 4 to 5 C O N S T R UC T I O N C 7 . 7 2 to 4 W A T E R C 3 . 6 4 to 6 0 0 0 P ossib le P oints: 2 2 0 0 0 P ossib le P oints: 4 0 Y O + M P 8 . 1 Y S O I L + V E G P 4 . 1 Y O + M P 8 . 2 Y S O I L + V E G P 4 . 2 O + M C 8 . 3 3 to 5 Y S O I L + V E G P 4 . 3 O + M C 8 . 4 4 to 5 S O I L + V E G C 4 . 4 4 to 6 O + M C 8 . 5 2 to 4 S O I L + V E G C 4 . 5 4 O + M C 8 . 6 3 to 4 S O I L + V E G C 4 . 6 3 to 6 O + M C 8 . 7 2 to 4 S O I L + V E G C 4 . 7 4 to 6 S O I L + V E G C 4 . 8 1 to 6 0 0 0 P ossib le P oints: 1 1 S O I L + V E G C 4 . 9 4 E DUC A T I O N C 9 . 1 3 to 4 S O I L + V E G C 4 . 1 0 1 to 4 E DUC A T I O N C 9 . 2 3 S O I L + V E G C 4 . 1 1 4 E DUC A T I O N C 9 . 3 4 0 0 0 P ossib le P oints: 4 1 0 0 0 B onus P oints: 9 Y M A T E R I A L S P 5 . 1 I N N O V A T I O N C 1 0 . 1 3 to 9 M A T E R I A L S C 5 . 2 2 to 4 M A T E R I A L S C 5 . 3 3 to 4 YE S ?N O M A T E R I A L S C 5 . 4 3 to 4 0 0 0 T otal P ossib le P oints: 2 0 0 M A T E R I A L S C 5 . 5 3 to 4 M A T E R I A L S C 5 . 6 3 to 5 K E Y S I T E S C ertif ic ation levels P oints M A T E R I A L S C 5 . 7 1 to 5 YE S C E R T I F I E D 70 M A T E R I A L S C 5 . 8 1 to 5 ?S I L V E R 85 C ontrol and retain construction p ollutants 6 : S I T E DE S I G N - HUM A N HE A L T H + W E L L - B E I N G 7 : C O N S T R UC T I O N R educe outdoor water use D esig n f unctional stormwater f eatures as amenities C onnect to multi-modal transit network s U se an integ rativ e desig n p rocess Eng ag e users and stak eholders 1 : S I T E C O N T E X T Manag e p recip itation on site U se ap p rop riate p lants C onserv e healthy soils and ap p rop riate v eg etation C reate and communicate a soil manag ement p lan C ontrol and manag e inv asiv e p lants R estore aq uatic ecosy stems Manag e p recip itation b ey ond b aseline R educe water use f or landscap e irrig ation Limit dev elop ment on f armland P rotect f loodp lain f unctions C onserv e aq uatic ecosy stems C onserv e hab itats f or threatened and endang ered sp ecies R edev elop deg raded sites C onserv e and use nativ e p lants C onserv e sp ecial status v eg etation D esig nate and communicate V SP Z s 3 : S I T E DE S I G N - W A T E R 4 : S I T E DE S I G N - S O I L + V E G E T A T I O N R estore soils disturb ed during construction 9 . E DUC A T I O N + P E R F O R M A N C E M O N I T O R I N G P lan f or sustainab le site maintenance U se renewab le sources f or landscap e electricity needs R educe outdoor energ y consump tion P rov ide f or storag e and collection of recy clab les R ecy cle org anic matter Minimiz e p esticide and f ertiliz er use P rotect air q uality during landscap e maintenance 8 . O P E R A T I O N S + M A I N T E N A N C E C ommunicate and v erif y sustainab le construction p ractices Locate p roj ects within ex isting dev elop ed areas 2 : P R E - DE S I G N A S S E S S M E N T + P L A N N I N G R educe lig ht p ollution C onduct a p re-desig n site assessment Encourag e f uel ef f icient and multi-modal transp ortation Minimiz e ex p osure to env ironmental tob acco smok e P rov ide on-site f ood p roduction Sup p ort social connection P rotect and maintain cultural and historic p laces Sup p ort p hy sical activ ity Sup p ort local economy P rov ide op timum site accessib ility , saf ety , and way f inding P romote eq uitab le site use Sup p ort mental restoration 5 : S I T E DE S I G N - M A T E R I A L S S E L E C T I O N R educe the risk of catastrop hic wildf ire D ev elop and communicate a case study 1 0 . I N N O V A T I O N O R E X E M P L A R Y P E R F O R M A N C E P romote sustainab ility awareness and education SITES v2 Scorecard Summary R estore soils disturb ed b y p rev ious dev elop ment D iv ert construction and demolition materials f rom disp osal D iv ert reusab le v eg etation, rock s, and soil f rom disp osal P rotect air q uality during construction Sup p ort transp arency and saf er chemistry Maintain on-site structures and p av ing O p timiz e b iomass P roj ect conf ident p oints are achiev ab le P lan to monitor and rep ort site p erf ormance Innov ation or ex emp lary p erf ormance T O T A L E S T I M A T E D P O I N T S U se v eg etation to minimiz e b uilding energ y use Eliminate the use of wood f rom threatened tree sp ecies P roj ect striv ing to achiev e p oints, not 100% conf ident R educe urb an heat island ef f ects C onserv e and restore nativ e p lant communities D esig n f or adap tab ility and disassemb ly U se salv ag ed materials and p lants U se recy cled content materials U se reg ional materials Sup p ort resp onsib le ex traction of raw materials 7/ 27/ 2022 P ag e 1 of 7 C op y rig ht © 2014 Project Name: _____________________________________________________________________ Project ID#:_______________ Date: __________________ SITES v2 Scorecard Summary MATERIALS C5.9 5 NO GOLD 100 MATERIALS C5.10 1 to 5 PLATINUM 135 Support sustainability in materials manufacturing Project is unable to achieve these credit points Support sustainability in plant production 7/27/2022 Page 2 of 7 Copyright © 2014 YE S ?N O 7 3 0 P ossib le P oints: 1 3 C ase 1: Sites without f armland soils C ase 2: Sites with f armland soils - V SP Z C ase 3: Sites with f armland soils - Mitig ation C ase 1: Sites without f loodp lain C ase 2: P rev iously dev elop ed and b rownf ield sites within f loodp lain C ase 3: Greenf ield sites within f loodp lain C ase 1: Sites without aq uatic ecosy stems C ase 2: Sites with naturally occurring aq uatic ecosy stems C ase 3: Sites with naturally occurring p oor q uality aq uatic ecosy stems C ase 1: Brownf ields and p rev iously dev elop ed sites C ase 2: Greenf ield sites C ase 1: P rev iously dev elop ed sites 3 C ase 2: Brownf ield sites 6 4 C O N T E X T C 1 . 6 Locate p roj ects within ex isting dev elop ed areas 4 4 O p tion 1: P edestrian and b icy cle network 2 O p tion 2: T ransit network 3 3 0 0 P ossib le P oints: 3 Y P R E - DE S I G N P 2 . 1 U se an integ rativ e desig n p rocess Y P R E - DE S I G N P 2 . 2 C onduct a p re-desig n site assessment Y P R E - DE S I G N P 2 . 3 D esig nate and communicate V eg etation and Soil P rotection Z ones 3 P R E - DE S I G N C 2 . 4 Eng ag e users and stak eholders 3 3 0 12 11 P ossib le P oints: 2 3 Y W A T E R P 3 . 1 Manag e p recip itation on site Y W A T E R P 3 . 2 R educe water use f or landscap e irrig ation 80th p ercentile p recip itation ev ent 4 90th p ercentile p recip itation ev ent 5 95th p ercentile p recip itation ev ent 6 O p tion 1: R educe outdoor water use 4 O p tion 2: Sig nif icantly reduce outdoor water use 5 O p tion 3: Eliminate outdoor water use 6 50% of stormwater f eatures 4 100% of stormwater f eatures 5 N o aq uatic ecosy stems p resent on site 30% of the g eog rap hic ex tent 4 60% of the g eog rap hic ex tent 5 C O N T E X T P 1 . 2 P rotect f loodp lain f unctions SITES v 2 Sc o r ec ar d 1 : S I T E C O N T E X T 2 : P R E - DE S I G N A S S E S S M E N T + P L A N N I N G 3 : S I T E DE S I G N - W A T E R 3 6 3 Y C O N T E X T P 1 . 4Y Estimate p oints b elow ( k ey at b ottom) Y Y 5 W A T E R C 3 . 5 D esig n f unctional stormwater f eatures as amenities W A T E R C 3 . 66 C O N T E X T C 1 . 7 R estore aq uatic ecosy stems ( p roj ect must hav e ex isting f eature) C O N T E X T P 1 . 3 C O N T E X T C 1 . 5 W A T E R C 3 . 3 C onserv e hab itats f or threatened and endang ered sp ecies R edev elop deg raded sites 6 W A T E R C 3 . 4 2 to 3 4 to 6 4 to 6 4 to 5 4 to 6 3 to 6 R educe outdoor water use C onserv e aq uatic ecosy stems C O N T E X T P 1 . 1 Limit dev elop ment on f armland C onnect to multi-modal transit network s Manag e p recip itation b ey ond b aseline P R E R E Q UI S I T E O R C R E DI T #T I T L E C A S E / O P T I O N / T HR E S HO L D P O I N T S P O S S I B L E P O I N T S P E R C R E D I T 7/ 27/ 2022 P ag e 3 of 7 © Sustainab le Sites Initiativ e™ Project Name: _____________________________________________________________________ Project ID#:_______________ Date: __________________ YES ?NO SITES v2 Scorecard Estimate points below (key at bottom) PREREQUISITE OR CREDIT #TITLE CASE / OPTION / THRESHOLD PO I N T S PO S S I B L E P O I N T S PE R C R E D I T 90% of the geographic extent 6 0 34 6 Possible Points: 40 Y SOIL+VEG P4.1 Create and communicate a soil management plan Case 1: No invasive plants found on site Case 2: Invasive plants identified on site Y SOIL+VEG P4.3 Use appropriate plants No healthy soils and/or appropriate vegetation present on site 50% of the site's existing vegetated area 4 75% of the site's existing vegetated area 5 95% of the site's existing vegetated area 6 4 SOIL+VEG C4.5 Conserve special status vegetation (project must have existing feature) 4 4 20% total native plant score 3 40% total native plant score 4 60% total native plant score 6 20% total native plant community score 4 40% total native plant community score 5 60% total native plant community score 6 minimal point score 1 low point score 3 mid point score 5 high point score 6 4 SOIL+VEG C4.9 Reduce urban heat island effects 4 4 No buildings present on site Option 1: Reduce energy use - 5% reduction 2 Option 1: Reduce energy use - 7% reduction 4 Option 2: Provide shade structures - 30% shaded 1 Option 2: Provide shade structures - 60% shaded 2 Option 3: Provide a windbreak - one row 1 Option 3: Provide a windbreak - two or more rows 2 Project not in a fire-prone area Project is in a fire-prone area 4 4 0 41 0 Possible Points: 41 Y MATERIALS P5.1 Eliminate the use of wood from threatened tree species No structures or paving present on site 10% of the total existing built surface area 2 20% of the total existing built surface area 3 30% of the total existing built surface area 4 4: SITE DESIGN - SOIL + VEGETATION 5: SITE DESIGN - MATERIALS SELECTION Y 6 6 SOIL+VEG C4.104 SOIL+VEG C4.11 SOIL+VEG C4.6 Conserve and use native plants 6 SOIL+VEG C4.7 Conserve and restore native plant communities SOIL+VEG P4.2 Control and manage invasive plants 6 SOIL+VEG C4.4 Conserve healthy soils and appropriate vegetation (project must have existing feature) SOIL+VEG C4.8 4 Use vegetation to minimize building energy use (project must have building on site) 4 Reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire (project must be located in fire-prone area) Optimize biomass Maintain on-site structures and paving (project must have existing feature) 1 to 4 MATERIALS C5.2 1 to 6 4 to 6 2 to 4 4 to 6 3 to 6 7/27/2022 Page 4 of 7 © Sustainable Sites Initiative™ Project Name: _____________________________________________________________________ Project ID#:_______________ Date: __________________ YES ?NO SITES v2 Scorecard Estimate points below (key at bottom) PREREQUISITE OR CREDIT #TITLE CASE / OPTION / THRESHOLD PO I N T S PO S S I B L E P O I N T S PE R C R E D I T 30% of total materials cost, excluding plants, rocks, and soils 3 60% of total materials cost, excluding plants, rocks, and soils 4 10% of total materials cost, excluding soils 3 20% of total materials cost, excluding soils 4 20% of total materials cost, excluding plants and soils 3 40% of total materials cost, excluding plants and soils 4 30% of total materials cost 3 60% of total materials cost 4 90% of total materials cost 5 Option 1: Advocate for sustainable extraction of raw materials 1 Option 2: Support suppliers that disclose environmental data 3 Option 3: Support suppliers that meet extraction standards 5 Option 1: Advocate for transparency and safer chemistry 1 Option 2: Support manufacturers that disclose chemical data 3 Option 3: Support manufacturers with chemical hazard assessments 5 Option 1: Advocate for sustainable materials manufacturing 1 Option 2: Support manufacturers that disclose data on sustainable practices 3 Option 3: Support manufacturers that achieve sustainable practices 5 Option 1: Advocate for sustainable plant production 1 Option 2: Support producers that disclose data on sustainable practices 3 Option 3: Support producers that achieve sustainable practices 5 2 23 4 Possible Points: 30 No cultural or historic places present on site Option 1: Historic buildings, structures, or objects 2 Option 2: Historic or cultural landscapes 3 2 HHWB C6.2 Provide optimum site accessibility, safety, and wayfinding 2 2 2 HHWB C6.3 Promote equitable site use 2 2 2 HHWB C6.4 Support mental restoration 2 2 2 HHWB C6.5 Support physical activity 2 2 2 HHWB C6.6 Support social connection 2 2 Option 1: Food production 3 Option 2: Food production and regular distribution 4 4 HHWB C6.8 Reduce light pollution 4 4 4 HHWB C6.9 Encourage fuel efficient and multi-modal transportation 4 4 Option 1: Designate smoke-free zones 1 Option 2: Prohibit smoking on site 2 3 HHWB C6.11 Support local economy 3 3 Design for adaptability and disassembly 3 to 4 1 to 2 2 to 3 4 MATERIALS C5.3 MATERIALS C5.4 4 MATERIALS C5.5 MATERIALS C5.7 Support responsible extraction of raw materials 4 5 MATERIALS C5.6 5 Protect and maintain cultural and historic places (project must have existing feature) 5 MATERIALS C5.8 5 MATERIALS C5.9 Support sustainability in materials manufacturing 5 MATERIALS C5.10 2 HHWB C6.1 6: SITE DESIGN - HUMAN HEALTH + WELL-BEING 0 4 HHWB C6.7 2 HHWB C6.10 Minimize exposure to environmental tobacco smoke Support sustainability in plant production Use regional materials 1 to 5 1 to 5 Provide on-site food production Support transparency and safer chemistry Use salvaged materials and plants 3 to 5 1 to 5 Use recycled content materials 3 to 4 3 to 4 3 to 4 1 to 5 7/27/2022 Page 5 of 7 © Sustainable Sites Initiative™ Project Name: _____________________________________________________________________ Project ID#:_______________ Date: __________________ YES ?NO SITES v2 Scorecard Estimate points below (key at bottom) PREREQUISITE OR CREDIT #TITLE CASE / OPTION / THRESHOLD PO I N T S PO S S I B L E P O I N T S PE R C R E D I T 0 17 0 Possible Points: 17 Y CONSTRUCTION P7.1 Communicate and verify sustainable construction practices Y CONSTRUCTION P7.2 Control and retain construction pollutants Y CONSTRUCTION P7.3 Restore soils disturbed during construction low point score 3 mid point score 4 high point score 5 50% of structural materials + 95% of roads / infrastructure materials 3 75% of structural materials + 95% of roads / infrastructure materials 4 100% of land-clearing materials retained for use within 50 miles 3 100% of land-clearing materials retained on site 4 50% total run-time hours from Tier 2 or higher engines 2 50% total run-time hours from Tier 3 or higher engines 3 50% total run-time hours from Tier 4 or higher engines 4 0 22 0 Possible Points: 22 Y O+M P8.1 Plan for sustainable site maintenance Y O+M P8.2 Provide for storage and collection of recyclables 100% of vegetation trimmings recycled / composted off site within 50 miles 3 100% of vegetation trimmings recycled / composted on site 4 100% of vegetation trimmings + food waste recycled / composted on site 5 Option 1: Plant health care plan 4 Option 2: Best management practices for plant health care 5 30% reduction from baseline energy use for outdoor equipment 2 60% reduction from baseline energy use for outdoor equipment 3 90% reduction from baseline energy use for outdoor equipment 4 Option 1: On-site - 50% annual outdoor site electricity 3 Option 1: On-site - 100% annual outdoor site electricity 4 Option 2: Green power - 50% annual outdoor site electricity 3 Option 2: Green power - 100% annual outdoor site electricity 4 Option 1: Scheduled maintenance 2 Option 2: Low-emitting equipment 3 Option 3: Manual or electric powered maintenance equipment 4 0 11 0 Possible Points: 11 Option 1: Educational and interpretive elements 3 Option 2: Additional education 4 3 EDUCATION C9.2 Develop and communicate a case study 3 3 3 to 5 7: CONSTRUCTION 3 to 4 2 to 4 3 to 5 4 to 5 2 to 4 3 to 4 8. OPERATIONS + MAINTENANCE 9. EDUCATION + PERFORMANCE MONITORING 2 to 4 Divert construction and demolition materials from disposal CONSTRUCTION C7.7 5 CONSTRUCTION C7.4 4 CONSTRUCTION C7.5 O+M C8.4 Minimize pesticide and fertilizer use 4 CONSTRUCTION C7.6 4 4 O+M C8.6 Use renewable sources for landscape electricity needs 5 O+M C8.3 5 4 EDUCATION C9.1 Promote sustainability awareness and education Protect air quality during landscape maintenance 4 O+M C8.5 4 O+M C8.7 Protect air quality during construction Divert reusable vegetation, rocks, and soil from disposal Reduce outdoor energy consumption Recycle organic matter Restore soils disturbed by previous development 3 to 4 3 to 4 7/27/2022 Page 6 of 7 © Sustainable Sites Initiative™ Project Name: _____________________________________________________________________ Project ID#:_______________ Date: __________________ YES ?NO SITES v2 Scorecard Estimate points below (key at bottom) PREREQUISITE OR CREDIT #TITLE CASE / OPTION / THRESHOLD PO I N T S PO S S I B L E P O I N T S PE R C R E D I T 4 EDUCATION C9.3 Plan to monitor and report site performance 4 4 0 9 0 Possible Bonus Points: 9 Option 1: Exemplary performance 3 Option 2: Innovation outside the SITES v2 Rating System 3 YES ?NO 12 172 21 Total Possible Points: KEY SITES Certification levels YES CERTIFIED ?SILVER NO GOLD PLATINUM 3 to 9 Points 70 85 100 135 10. INNOVATION OR EXEMPLARY PERFORMANCE 200 TOTAL ESTIMATED POINTS Project is unable to achieve these credit points Project confident points are achievable Project striving to achieve points, not 100% confident 9 INNOVATION C10.1 (BONUS POINTS)Innovation or exemplary performance 7/27/2022 Page 7 of 7 © Sustainable Sites Initiative™ Appendix BEcological Assessment 1 | P a g e Glendale Regional Park – Ecological Assessment Glendale Regional Park Master Plan Ecological Assessment September 21, 2021 RiverRestoration conducted a site visit of the Glendale Regional Park on August 23, 2021, to evaluate the current ecological conditions of the project area and to determine what features should be retained for ecological reasons. This inventory resulted in the identification of mature sycamore within the park, other mature trees along 1700 South, and river edge habitats that should be retained. Areas for potential enhancement were also identified and include all existing riparian forest and a buffer of 50-300’ from the river. Areas closer to the river are likely to be closer to the groundwater, thus representing opportunities for riparian enhancement with less long-term need for irrigation. The irrigation system was tested and determined to be mostly out of commission and in need of replacement. The connection to service was identified in the northeast corner of the project area for future irrigation infrastructure. City staff will evaluate and install a temporary system to existing trees along the park strip on 1700 South. The sycamores and river edge trees are likely to be in contact with the shallow groundwater and it is recommended that a few shallow groundwater monitoring wells be installed when machinery is on site. The local and regional context was evaluated to determine if there are any adjacent City properties that would enhance the ecological functioning of this area and several local enhancement projects were identified. Additionally, students from Glendale Middle School have previously provided stewardship for areas just downstream of the project and Jordan River Park. The future stewardship of the natural areas in the vicinity of the project should involve local schools and community partners. The Jordan River upstream of the project was also observed to identify opportunities for a broader connection to the river both up and downstream. Development of on-water opportunities is one of the highest values of the site from a stewardship perspective. Locations up and downstream of the project were mapped and are provided as a KML file. Photos were taken of the site and noxious weeds were identified for treatment and control. City Natural Open Space staff committed to aggressive treatment of puncturevine across the site and stated they would deploy these resources in August. Plans for the trimming of vegetation and removal of garbage and debris stuck in the Russian olive along the river edge were also discussed and will be completed over the winter by City staff. 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City, UT 84150 | 970.947.9568 2 | P a g e Glendale Regional Park – Ecological Assessment Current Ecological Conditions The current state of the riparian forest in and around the project area is in a degraded condition. Some of the existing large trees within the project area have a high value, since they are well established and seem to be healthy. The trees along the Jordan River are mostly pioneer invasive trees and shrubs, primarily Russian olives. While these trees are considered invasive, complete removal of these trees would adversely impact riparian birds in the area due to loss of habitat and cover. We propose that the Russian olives along the riverbank be retained until an irrigation system and native riparian forest can be planned and implemented. Any removal of trees should occur outside the nesting season for resident and migratory birds [preferably September through February]. Map 1 shows areas of existing riparian tress that could be retained. Only the sycamore trees should be considered to absolutely protect in place, since they are mature, well-established, and healthy. The remaining groves of trees can be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for phased removal or replacement with planted and irrigated multi-layer riparian areas. The demo of existing infrastructure provides opportunity to repurpose the low-lying areas with riparian vegetation, improving the riparian buffer and enhancing ecological education opportunities. We propose that the old wave pool (east side of the project) be repurposed into a wetland/riparian zone. Further opportunities exist to connect the east of the wave pool to the current boat launch/take out with native plant species and interactive and educational signs. The existing trees along the park strip at the north of the project area should be preserved, with the irrigation system re-established to maintain this important buffer from 1700 south. Map 1. Local ecological areas of importance. 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City, UT 84150 | 970.947.9568 3 | P a g e Glendale Regional Park – Ecological Assessment Local and Regional Connections The Glendale Regional Park is in a central part of Salt Lake City but is also centrally located along the riparian corridor of the Jordan River, which provides a key connection of riparian habitats for resident and migratory birds. The site is located along the flyway between Utah Lake and Great Salt Lake and provides a potential stopover location for resting migratory birds. There is also potential for increased areas of higher quality riparian habitat with a multi-canopy layer structure. Robust riparian habitats consist of canopy’s that could have several layers of complexity including large trees, small trees and shrubs, grasses, and forbs [flowers]. This multi-layer structure is beneficial for creating a diverse ecosystem that will be more resilient to future changes in climate and ecosystem processes. Surrounding regional areas that are owned by SLC adjacent to the golf course and in other open areas offer great opportunity to be enhanced for riparian functioning and flood capacity. Map 2. Regional ecologically important areas 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City, UT 84150 | 970.947.9568 4 | P a g e Glendale Regional Park – Ecological Assessment Site Preparation We recommend that treatments are conducted on invasive species in preparation for future disturbances. The main focal species for control include puncturevine and Russian olive. Use the proper herbicide to control puncturevine across the hillside. Much of the puncturevine is located up on the hill with the slides. Treatments should occur 2-3 times a year, starting in August 2021 [stated verbally on site with meeting], follow up treatments should be conducted starting in June/July 2022, depending on the weather and phenology of the plants. An initial trimming of the Russian olive along the river should be conducted from a boat in fall 2021 to free up garbage and debris that have become stuck in the low-hanging branches. A floating oil boom or turbidity curtain can be installed across the river at the existing boat ramp to gather and remove floating garbage and debris. Potential Access Areas River access can be developed by creating easier entry for canoes and kayaks. The water quality is an issue, so swimming should be discouraged, but as the water quality may be better in the future, water access should not be completely cut off. Additional small boat access locations should be evaluated to create a more local scale river recreation circulation pattern. The figures below provide some ideas for river access that does not encourage swimming. Figure 1. Jordan River access steps at Big Bend Habitat in West Jordan, UT 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City, UT 84150 | 970.947.9568 5 | P a g e Glendale Regional Park – Ecological Assessment Figure 2. Jordan River Big Bend Habitat canoe access in West Jordan, UT Figure 3. Price River in Helper, UT river access beach 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City, UT 84150 | 970.947.9568 6 | P a g e Glendale Regional Park – Ecological Assessment Figure 4. Price River access steps in Helper, UT Figure 5. Ogden River ADA fishing access pier in Ogden, UT 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City, UT 84150 | 970.947.9568 7 | P a g e Glendale Regional Park – Ecological Assessment Figure 6. Ogden River ADA access ramp in Ogden, UT Figure 6. River overlook in the Pacific Northwest 1234 South 900 East Salt Lake City, UT 84150 | 970.947.9568 8 | P a g e Glendale Regional Park – Ecological Assessment Figure 7. Colorado River overlook in Glendale Springs, CO Conclusion The main conclusions of the site visit provide direction for the near-term management of invasive species on the site in preparation for future disturbance of the project site for development of the regional park. Managing invasive species on the site for 2-3 years before the site disturbance will reduce the number and pervasiveness of invasive species and will also begin to develop a human presence in the area doing maintenance, thus reducing the perception of the area as abandoned. The Glendale Regional Park offers great opportunity to improve and expand the ecological function of the riparian habitat along the Jordan River. Mature vegetation should be protected, irrigation throughout the site reinitiated, and a process to phase out nonnative trees should be implemented in conjunction with planting native riparian plants. The central location of the project site offers great opportunity to connect with the surrounding environment, provide the community areas to recreate in nature, and provide high quality habitat for resident and migratory birds. Appendix CRestortation Plan Glendale Regional Park Restoration & Noxious Weed Management Plan Developed as part of the Jordan River Commission Best Practices for Riverfront Communities Primary Focus Area Glendale Regional Park Project PURPOSE: This document was created to provide guidance for an Adaptive Management Strategy to control noxious and invasive plant species at the Glendale Regional Park Project in Salt Lake City, Utah. This document represents a template that can be used on other sites along the Jordan River in Salt Lake City, where site specific data on noxious weed locations can be used to develop site specific action plans. Overall, our goal is to improve the management of these lands for the benefit of people and wildlife by reducing the cover of noxious and invasive plants and increasing the cover of native and desirable plants. The following recommendations may need to be changed based upon site specific needs and resources that are available. Any and all use of herbicides must be done by licensed applicators and those applicators must read, understand, and follow label requirements for the use of herbicides. Weed Control Instructions and Best Practices: 1. Always use the proper methods to deal with the plant species on your project; 2. Always read the label for any herbicides that will be used and follow specific requirements; 3. Be familiar with the target species, control methods, and appropriate follow up methods to ensure success; 4. Take proper precautions in protecting your personal health and safety and the health of the environment; 5. Ensure weather conditions are appropriate for the use of any herbicides; 6. Post signs were appropriate to alert the public about the use of any herbicides; 7. Collect as much information as possible on treatment areas such as: location of treatments, timing of treatments, follow up actions required to ensure success; 8. AND only use herbicides where you have obtained express consent from the land owner to conduct treatments. HOW TO - Five Step Approach: Prevention Prioritize invasive species control where recent or future land disturbance is anticipated Identify pathways or “vectors” of invasive species introduction and spread and try to understand the potential impact of those species on native ecosystems Work with surrounding land owners to reduce spread from surrounding properties Early detection and rapid response Use this guidance document to improve detection and identification of invasive plant species Document occurrence of new species not included in this plan yearly using EDDMaps Coordinate response efforts to eradicate species before establishment and spread with all stakeholders working within and adjacent to the Big Bend Control and management Follow both short- and long-term recommendations in this Big Bend Restoration Plan to restore and enhance native and desirable plants that will withstand future changes in weather and climate Limit spread of existing infestations by targeted eradication or population suppression (using mechanical, biological, and chemical methods) Implement a variety of methods to improve the outcomes of treatments (i.e. Integrated Pest Management Approach) Work with surrounding land owners to control surrounding invasive species populations Revegetation Select site adapted species of plants that can compete against invasive weeds once established Develop site specific plans for installation of “habitat patches” of riparian plants based upon local soils and access to surface and groundwater Seed any disturbed areas soon after disturbance has ceased and make sure to properly prepare soils for seeding Follow up on any revegetation actions for at least five years to ensure establishment of new plants Monitoring Monitor before and after control methods to ensure progress is being made on controlling existing infestations and new infestations are not becoming established Site Specific Indications for the Glendale Regional Park Based upon site assessments completed in the late summer of 2021 and spring of 2022, it appears that there are only a few areas that need aggressive weed control for hoary cress, Scotch thistle, and puncturevine. The treatments that occurred in 2021 appear to have been effective at reducing the cover and seed production of the puncturevine on the big hill. Additional work was done along the riverbanks to reduce the cover of Russian olives. Treatments proposed for summer and fall of 2022 include follow up on the work completed in 2021 and aggressive treatment of secondary invasion of hoary cress and phragmites in areas along the riverbanks where Russian olive was cut down. The remaining material left from the Russian olive cutting should be retained on site to protect any new plants from wind and sun. The branches remaining can be piled into small windrows and hoary cress and phragmites should be treated as soon as possible. Areas identified for future riparian forests should be planted with container plants with drip irrigation this fall (November 2022). Areas where Russian olive was removed should be the top priority for restoration of riparian forests to return the multi-layer canopy for nesting and migratory birds, while considering issues with transient camps in the area. Aggressive chemical control of noxious weeds adjacent to all disturbance areas should also be a high priority. These are the most likely places for spread of noxious and invasive plants. These areas should also be seeded soon after the disturbance ceases (generally within 2 weeks any time of the year). Seeding with an inexpensive grass and forb mix should be done any time disturbances occur throughout the project lifecycle to reduce the opportunity for noxious and invasive plants to take over and dominate. This is cheap insurance and will reduce the potential need for chemicals to be used on the site in the future. Habitat improvements are a key goal of the Project and phasing the project’s construction will reduce potential impacts to the site’s current wildlife population. Phasing the project will limit the amount of area that will be disturbed at any one time. Portions of the site will be left undisturbed during the initial phases of construction to provide habitat. This applies particularly to habitat for migratory song birds. Partners working along the Jordan River Corridor have recommended a phased approach for removal of Russian olives, which serve as habitat for migratory and resident bird species. Russian olive should be left on portions of the site that are not part of the initial phases and riparian plants should be planted into Russian olive stands, where the shade from the existing invasive trees will help with establishment of new forests. As native plants mature, the remainder of the Russian olives can be removed and replaced with the appropriate native species. There will be an ongoing need for maintenance of the site to prevent Russian olives (and other noxious species) from re-establishing in areas where they have been removed. Secondary invasion of hoary cress and phragmites should also be monitored and treated in these areas. The following noxious and invasive weed species have been observed on or adjacent to the Glendale Regional Park:  Hoary cress  Scotch thistle  Poison hemlock  Houndstongue  Russian olive  Dyer’s woad  Perennial pepperweed  Dalmatian toadflax  Common reed  Tamarisk  Russian knapweed  Puncturevine The primary objective of noxious weed control is to selectively reduce the cover and abundance of noxious and invasive plants across the site. This work is being accomplished mostly by mechanical and chemical control of herbaceous plants and through physical removal of invasive Russian olive and tamarisk trees. Site management should focus on phasing the removal of these trees over several years and installation of native and desirable plant species to retain the beneficial aspects of the riparian cover, i.e. a multi-story canopy. The main objective of this Plan is to reduce the cover of invasive species over time so that the entire site does not have to be treated at the time of major construction. Removal of invasive trees can be conducted at the same time as crews and volunteers are installing native riparian trees, shrubs, forbs, and grasses in small patches. The installation of new plants will reduce the “temporal loss” of riparian habitat in the area during major construction activity phases. The major challenge with this phase is providing sufficient water to the plants to make sure they become established. Another objective of this Plan is to reduce the number of seeds and propagules of noxious plants such as thistle, whitetop, Russian olive, and puncturevine. The following matrix provides some guidance for treatments and timing for each noxious and invasive weed species found on the Glendale Regional Park or along the Jordan River corridor close to the site. Status Responsibility Ja n Fe b Ma r Ap r Ma y Ju n Ju l Au g Se p Oc t No v De c Ja n Fe b Ma r Ap r Ma y Ju n Ju l Au g Se p Oc t No v De c Monitoring Vegetation Monitor weedy upland areas X X X X Monitor riparian areas X X X X Count planting success X X Management Water Initial watering of plants X X X X X Irrigation of plants X X X X X X X Vegetation Fencing and Protecting installed vegetation X X X X X Installation of Habitat Patches X X X X X Seeding of areas adjacent to disturbances X X X X X X X X X X Mow annual weeds and thistles X X X X X X X X X X Field meeting with herbicide applicator X X X X X Herbicide use in upland areas X X X X X X X X Herbicide use in riparian areas X X X X X X X X Chemical control hoary cress X X X X X X Chemical control poison hemlock X X X X X X Chemical control thistle X X X X X X X X Chemical control phragmites X X X X Chemical control perennial pepperweed X X Wildlife No removal of trees to protect nesting birds X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Herbivory check on any planted vegetation X X X X X X 2023Glendale Regional Park Action Plan Summary 2022-2023 2022 Restoration Plants The following species have been selected for seeding or planting in small patches. These species were derived from observations of native riparian habitats by Ty Harrison over the last half- century. Irrigation is needed regularly for successful establishment of these plants. Common Name Scientific Name Fremont Cottonwood Populus fremontii Box Elder Acre negundo Peachleaf Willow Salilx amigdaloides Black Hawthorn Crataegus douglasi Coyote Willow Salix exigua Woods Rose Rosa woodsii Oakleaf Sumac Rhus aromatica var. trilobata Golden Currant Ribes aureum Big Sagebrush Artemisia tridentata var. tridentata Rubber Rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus nauseosus Greasewood Sarcobatus vermiculatus Fourwing Saltbush Atriplex canescens Gardner's Saltbush Atriplex gardneri RIPARIAN TREES AND SHRUBS UPLAND SHRUBS Species Scientific Name Species Common Name Percent desired cover at maturity Typha latifolia Common cattail 40 Scirpus acutis Hardstem or Roundstem bullrush 40 S. americanus American threesquare 10 S. pungens Common threesquare 10 S. maritimus Alkali bullrush 5 Senecio hydrophilus Water groundsel 2 Triglochin sp Arrowgrass 2 Eleocharis palustris Creeping spikerush 20 Juncus torreyi Torrey rush 20 Carex nebrascensis Nebraska sedge 20 C. lanuginosa Wooly sedge 20 Distichlis spicata Inland saltgrass 10 Juncus arcticus Wiregrass or Arctic rush 30 Distichlis spicata Inland saltgrass 10 Pascopyrum smithii Western wheatgrass 30 Sporobolus airoides Alkali saccaton 10 Puccinellia nuttalliana Nuttall's alkaligrass 10 C. praegracilis Black creeper sedge 10 Solidago occidentalis Western goldenrod 10 Pascopyrum smithii Western wheatgrass 30 Leymus cinereus Great Basin wildrye 20 Distichlis spicata Inland saltgrass 10 Poa secunda (sandbergii)Sandberg bluegrass 10 Festuca ovina ‘Covar’Sheep fescue 10 Cleome serrulata Rocky Mountain beeweed 5 Sphaeralcea coccinea Scarlet globemallow 5 Linium lewisii Lewis blue flax 5 Recommended Seed Mixes Emergent Wetland Mix Wet Meadow Mesic Meadow Upland Mix Weed treatment tracking form: OBSERVER LOCATION DATE TREATMENT FOLLOW UP NEEDED WEATHER ACRES DENSITY PHENOLOGY NOTES Appendix DMarket Study This study assesses and analyzes demographic characteristics of the areas surrounding the Glendale Regional Park project site. As part of the process, primary and secondary market areas were defined and confirmed with project stakeholders. These market areas served as the geographic focus area of the analysis and were compared to demographic trends at the County level. Key questions answered through the analysis include: •What is the primary and secondary market area that the Park could expect to draw visitor from? •What are the demographic and populations trends within the primary and secondary market areas? •What is the population that the Park could be serving? •What does recreational trends data inform regarding potential gaps or opportunities? Primary and Secondary Market Area Primary Market Area The primary market area, depicted in Figure 1, is where 60 to 80 percent of all park users are anticipated to be drawn from and includes users who will frequent the Park on a near weekly basis. The primary market area identified for this analysis lies between Interstate 215 and Interstate 15 and extends south of West South Temple Street and north of West 2900 Street. Neighborhoods that fall in the primary market area include Chesterfield, Western Pacific Addition, Redwood Gardens, Klenkes Addition, Wenco Acres, Albert Place, Whaldons Addition, Poplar Grove and Wright Circle. Other parks and public outdoor spaces located in the primary market area include Decker Lake Park, Redwood Nature Area, Redwood Trailhead Park,17th South River Park, Weseman Park, Modesto Park, 9th South River Park, Post Street Tot Lot, Bend-In-The-River, Jordan Park and Peace Gardens, Jordan River Parkway, Poplar Grove Park and Sherwood Park. Figure 1: Primary Market Area. Source: ESRI Business Analyst Glendale Regional Park Demographic and Market Study September, 2021 Page 2 Secondary Market Area The secondary market area, illustrated in Figure 2, is where 20 to 40 percent of all park users are anticipated to be drawn from and includes users who treat the Park as a destination, going there for a specific purpose or activities.Salt Lake City was identified as the secondary market area and was analyzed as a buffer zone to encompass a broader reach of the region and capture residents who may visit the Park less frequently than those in the primary market area. The area north of 2100 South Freeway within the primary market area lies within the Salt Lake City boundary. As a result, data extracted for the secondary market area also includes data within the section of the primary market area north of 2100 South Freeway. The primary and secondary markets were compared to Salt Lake County to better understand the relative demographic differences of the market area in the context of the region. Figure 2: Secondary Market Area. Source ESRI Business Analyst Population and Households Table 1 shows the total population estimates for each area of study in 2010,2021, and 2026 extracted from ESRI Business Analyst. The 2021 total population in the primary market area is 29,525 and the population in the secondary market area is 204,380. Between 2010 and 2021,the population within the primary market area has grown by 4.07 percent while the population in the secondary market area grew by 9.65 percent. Growth within both primary and secondary market areas was less than that of the County, which grew by 17.3 percent since 2010.Over the next five years (2021-2026)population in the primary market area is expected to grow by 3.54 percent, reaching a total population of 30,571 in 2026. The population in the secondary market area is expected to see slightly higher growth over the next five years, growing by 8.65 percent to reach a total population of 222,029 in 2026. Table 1. Total Population Estimates. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Total household estimates, household size, and family statistics are depicted in Table 2. Between 2010 and 2021 households in the primary market area have grown by 3.7 percent, increasing from 7,982 to 8,277. The growth in households in the primary market area is less than that of the secondary market area (11.68 percent) and that of Salt Lake County (17.1 percent). Household growth between 2021 and 2026 is expected to slow to 3.2 percent in the primary market area, 9.51 percent in the secondary market area and 7.5 percent in Salt Lake County. In 2026 there is projected to be 8,542 total households in the primary market area and 91,106 households in the secondary market area. Current average household size in the primary market area (3.54 persons) is larger than that in the secondary market area (2.4 persons) and that of Salt Lake County (2.97 persons). This is consistent with a higher number of family household within the primary market area (70.63 percent) than in both the secondary market area (49.47 percent) and Population Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT 2010 Total Population 28,369 186,399 1,029,655 2021 Total Population 29,525 204,380 1,207,807 2026 Total Population 30,571 222,029 1,298,444 Page 3 in Salt Lake County (69.66 percent). Of the families within each area of study, average family sizes are larger in the primary market area (4.1 persons) than the secondary market area (3.27 persons) and Salt Lake County (3.55 persons). The primary market area’s high concentration of families has several implications the future of Glendale Regional Park, including ensuring that park programming, both physical and event, is appropriate for children of varying ages. Table 2. Household and Family Estimates. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Age The 2021 median age and the distribution of ages for the primary market area, secondar market area, and Salt Lake County is depicted in Table 3. The median age in the primary market area is 29, slightly younger than that of the secondary market area (33) and that of Salt Lake County (33). Median ages in 2026 are expected to be roughly the same as 2021 across all areas of study. The primary market area is significantly younger than the secondary market area and Salt Lake County, with residents 19 and under comprising 36.52 percent of the population. The proportion of the total population that is under 19 in the secondary market area is 21.77 percent, which is lower than the primary market area and Salt Lake County (27.85 percent). The largest age group in the primary market area is between 0 and 9, which consists of 19.78 percent of the total population, followed by age groups between 10 and 19 and between 30 and 39, which consist of 16.74 percent and 16.33 percent of the population, respectively. The high ratio of children in the primary market area indicates a high concentration of families in the region. The largest age cohort in the secondary market area is between 20 and 29, indicating that there is an overall younger demographic in this region that may enter family formation years (30-39) within the next decade. Table 3. Population by Age Group. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Household Income and Wealth The 2021 median household income, projected median household income growth, and concentration of specific household income brackets are shown in Table 4. The 2021 median household income in the primary market area is $50,508, which is less than that of the secondary market area ($63,364) and that of Salt Lake County ($80,897). The primary market area is also expected to see less growth in median household income (12.18 percent) than in the secondary market area (19.14 percent) and Salt Lake County (13.59 percent) between 2021 and 2026. Table 5 delineates the median disposable income and the percent of the total households in each area of study corresponding to specific disposable income ranges as of 2021. The median disposable income in the primary market area is Households & Families Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT Total Households 2010 Total Households 7,982 74,493 342,622 2021 Total Households 8,277 83,197 401,195 2026 Total Households 8,542 91,106 431,279 Household Size 2021 Average Household Size 3.54 2.40 2.97 Families 2021 Total Family Households 5,846 41,157 279,462 2021 Total Family Households (%)70.63%49.47%69.66% 2021 Average Family Size 4.10 3.27 3.55 Total Population Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT 0-9 19.78%12.93%16.17% 10-19 16.74%11.91%14.40% 20-29 15.29%19.05%14.45% 30-39 16.33%17.60%16.72% 40-49 11.40%11.63%12.47% 50-59 8.81%9.80%9.72% 60-69 6.44%8.84%8.60% 70-79 3.54%5.25%4.99% 80+1.67%2.99%2.46% Median Age 28.9 33.1 32.9 Page 4 $42,262, which less than that of the secondary market area ($52,690) and that of Salt Lake County ($63,344). Income distributions for both median and disposable income levels are skewed towards lower income levels in the primary market area while those in the secondary market area and Salt Lake County form a more normal distribution around the median income level. This indicates that income levels are lower in the primary market area than the secondary market area or the county. Given this distinction, the Park will better suit the primary market through low or no cost activities for both adults and children. There is a need for the implementation of programming such as free fitness classes or facilities that can supplement recreational demands of the community for little to no cost. If concessions are implemented, then they should be priced appropriately. Table 4. Household Income Concentrations. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Table 5. Disposable Income Concentrations. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Depicted in Table 5 is the Wealth Index for the primary market area, secondary market area, and Salt Lake County. The Wealth Index is a metric used to compare overall wealth of communities to the national level. Esri Business Analyst measures wealth by compiling a variety of metrics that contribute to affluence, including income, average net worth, and material possessions and resources. The index compares the wealth calculated for selected areas to the average national wealth levels. Wealth indexes above 100 indicate wealth levels above the national average, while those below 100 indicate wealth levels below the national average. The wealth index in the primary market area is 47, indicating that the area has lower amounts of wealth when compared to the national average. The secondary market area has a wealth index of 85, which is slightly lower than the national average, while Salt Lake County has a wealth index of 105, which is higher than the national average. This indicates that in terms of income and personal assets, the primary market area holds the lowest level of wealth out of the three areas studied. Given the low wealth index of the primary market area, it is likely that the majority of the population in this region do not have adequate resources to pay for, or use, the same recreational facilities as those of a higher wealth index community. For this reason, programs should not be priced at a level suitable to the other areas of study, instead low cost or free programs should be offered so that those with lower incomes have access to desired recreational facilities and programs. Table 5. Wealth Index. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. 2021 Household Income Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT Median Household Income $50,508 $63,364 $80,897 2021 to 2026 Median Household Income Growth 12.18%19.14%13.59% $200,000 or greater 1.98%8.43%8.49% $150,000-$199,999 3.25%6.88%10.09% $100,000-$149,999 9.70%15.94%20.91% $75,000-$99,999 15.05%12.51%14.92% $50,000-$74,999 20.67%16.50%17.58% $35,000-$49,999 15.43%11.11%9.96% $25,000-$34,999 11.33%8.39%6.17% $15,000-$24,999 11.31%7.94%5.40% Less than $15,000 11.27%12.29%6.49% 2021 Disposable Income Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT Median Disposable Income $42,262 $52,690 $63,344 $200,000 or greater 0.85%3.76%3.73% $150,000-$199,999 1.15%4.58%4.75% $100,000-$149,999 7.20%13.30%18.24% $75,000-$99,999 8.13%11.51%15.04% $50,000-$74,999 24.80%20.00%22.57% $35,000-$49,999 18.46%14.23%14.04% $25,000-$34,999 12.50%9.10%7.37% $15,000-$24,999 13.64%9.88%6.82% Less than $15,000 13.27%13.64%7.44% Wealth Index Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT 2021 Wealth Index 47 85 105 Page 5 Housing Table 6 illustrates the composition of housing units that are either renter or owner occupied as of 2021. Currently there are 8,277 occupied housing units in the primary market area, of which 4,560 (55.09 percent) are owner occupied and 3,717 (44.91 percent) are renter occupied. Compared to the primary market area, there is a higher concentration of renter occupied units in the secondary market area (54.08 percent) and a smaller concentration of renter occupied units in Salt Lake County (33.78 percent). Table 7 depicts the concentration of housing type and number of units in the housing structure within each area of study as of 2019. The majority of housing units in all areas of study are single unit detached structures. Unlike the that of the primary market area and Salt Lake County, the second largest concentration of housing types, making up 14.05 percent of total housing in the secondary market area, consists of buildings that hold 50 or more units. Table 6. Tenure of occupied housing. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Table 7. Tenure of occupied housing. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Table 8 delineates the proportion of all housing units as of 2019 by year built. The median year built of housing units within the primary market area is 1968, which is newer than the median home age in the secondary market and older than that of Salt Lake County. The majority of housing units in the primary market (16.89 percent) were built between 1950 and 1959 while the majority of the households within the secondary market (29.08 percent) were built in 1939 or earlier. Salt Lake County holds a higher concentration of buildings built in 1970 or later. Table 8. Tenure of occupied housing. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Illustrated in Table 9, the median contract rent in the primary market area is $900, which is greater than that of the secondary market area ($889), and less than that of Salt Lake County ($993). Monthly ownership costs as of 2019 for households that pay a mortgage are depicted in Table 10. Of the households with a mortgage, most ownership costs typically lie within 10 to 30 percent of household income. Ownership costs that exceed 50 percent of household income within the primary market area consist of 8.38 percent of total households with a mortgage, which is greater than that Tenure 2021 Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT Total Occupied 8,277 83,197 401,195 Owner Occupied Housing Units 4,560 38,203 265,687 Renter Occupied Housing Units 3,717 44,994 135,508 2021 Owner Occupied Housing Units (%)55.09%45.92%66.22% 2021 Renter Occupied Housing Units (%)44.91%54.08%33.78% 2019 Housing Type (Percent) Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT 1 Detached Unit in Structure 60.42%46.42%62.62% 1 Attached Unit in Structure 5.55%3.24%7.19% 2 Units in Structure 7.16%6.57%2.94% 3 or 4 Units in Structure 5.19%6.62%3.91% 5 to 9 Units in Structure 4.35%5.06%4.23% 10 to 19 Units in Structure 8.10%6.90%5.81% 20 to 49 Units in Structure 4.01%9.91%5.31% 50 or More Units in Structure 1.59%14.05%5.99% Housing: Mobile Homes 3.63%0.95%1.94% Housing: Boat/RV/Van/etc.0.00%0.28%0.07% Housing Unit Development Year Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT Median Year Structure was Built 1968 1959 1981 2014 or Later 0.31%2.98%4.47% 2010-2013 0.41%2.30%4.24% 2000-2009 10.93%6.65%14.92% 1990-1999 12.57%7.36%15.20% 1980-1989 10.39%7.69%12.95% 1970-1979 13.04%12.06%18.90% 1960-1969 12.96%9.97%8.88% 1950-1959 16.89%13.22%8.88% 1940-1949 8.15%8.70%3.55% 1939 or Earlier 14.36%29.08%8.01% Page 6 of the secondary market area (5.56 percent) and that of Salt Lake County (5.75 percent). This indicates that the primary market area is faced with higher housing cost burdens than other areas. Glendale Park can assist households in the primary market area by offering low cost or free programming, thereby eliminating, or reducing recreation related expenses. Table 9. Median Contract Rent. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Table 10. Housing Costs for Households Owning Property. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Table 11 displays the 2021 and 2026 median home values for the areas studied. The 2021 median home value in the primary market area is $282,245, which is 34 percent less than that of the secondary market area and 30.6 percent less than that of Salt Lake County. Median home values are expected to grow by 53 percent in the primary market area, 30 percent in the secondary market area and 25 percent in Salt Lake County. Table 11. Median Home Values. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Race & Ethnicity The distribution of race and ethnicity within the selected areas of study are delineated in Table 12. The highest concentration of race within the primary market area is white, consisting of 48.2 percent of the population. The Hispanic population makes up 53.44 percent of the primary market area population, 24.3 percent of the secondary market area population and 18.36 percent of the Salt Lake County population. Table 12. Race Concentrations. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Hispanic and White population numbers are not mutually exclusive. Spending Habits Entertainment and recreational spending in 2021 is depicted in Table 13. Spending per household on entertainment and recreation is approximately $2,084, which is 33.57 percent less than that of the secondary market area ($3,137) and 40.34 percent less than that of Salt Lake County ($3,493). The primary market area spends 39.65 percent less on membership fees for social, recreational and health clubs than the secondary market area and 46.57 percent less on Contract Rent Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT 2019 Median Contract Rent $900 $889 $993 2019 Monthly Ownership Costs of Households with a Mortgage (Percent) Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT Monthly Owner Costs < 10% of HH Income 4.89%6.34%5.32% Monthly Owner Costs 10-14.9% of HH Income 11.40%12.61%12.69% Monthly Owner Costs 15-19.9% of HH Income 11.51%14.57%16.18% Monthly Owner Costs 20-24.9% of HH Income 11.81%11.54%12.39% Monthly Owner Costs 25-29.9% of HH Income 9.42%6.56%8.49% Monthly Owner Costs 30-34.9% of HH Income 4.48%4.27%4.87% Monthly Owner Costs 35-39.9% of HH Income 6.11%3.92%3.34% Monthly Owner Costs 40-49.9% of HH Income 2.68%3.12%3.47% Monthly Owner Costs 50+% of HH Income 8.38%5.56%5.75% Monthly Owner Costs % of HH Inc Not Computed 0.00%0.15%0.20% Median Home Values Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT 2021 Median Home Value $282,245 $427,693 $406,810 2026 Median Home Value $431,591 $554,870 $509,442 Race (2021)Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT White Population 48.20%70.58%78.16% Black/African American Population 4.64%3.67%2.06% American Indian/Alaska Native Population 1.86%1.35%0.93% Asian Population 4.92%6.05%4.51% Pacific Islander Population 6.34%2.14%1.61% Other Race Population 28.45%11.86%8.97% Population of Two or More Races 5.59%4.36%3.76% Ethnicity (2021) Hispanic Population 53.44%24.30%18.36% Non-Hispanic Population 46.56%75.70%81.64% Page 7 those services than Salt Lake County. Given the lower spending habits of individuals within the primary market area on entertainment and recreation, there is an implied lower willingness to pay for this category of products and services. As a result, facilities and programs within the Glendale Regional Park will likely see higher use if programming prices are reduced or eliminated. Table 13. Household Expenditures. Source: ESRI Business Analyst. Per household spending data was calculated from dividing aggregate spending values by the total number of households. Conclusion With a population of 29,525 in the primary market area and 204,380 in the secondary market area, Glendale Regional Park services an urban community which requires outdoor space and recreational opportunities for all residents. The population in the surrounding region is also growing at a rapid rate, which furthers the need for additional park and recreation opportunities. Many of the households within the primary market are families with an average family size that is greater than the surrounding regions. Due to the large family demographic, there is likely a desire for safe public spaces with a variety of programs that can accommodate both the demands of children and adults. As 19.78 percent of the population in the primary market area is children, facilities in the park should tailor to the types of activities that youth desire. Since both the median household income and median disposable income within the primary market area is lower than that of Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County, the primary market may be less capable of spending on recreation as other areas of higher affluence. Housing costs also present a larger financial burden for the primary market than other areas of study. For this reason, recreational programs in the park should be offered free of charge or at low- or no-cost rates to accommodate the primary market’s population, and to provide outdoor opportunities for those that may not have access to those opportunities elsewhere. Household Expenditures (2021)Primary Market Area Secondary Market Area Salt Lake County, UT Entertainment/Recreation $2,084 $3,137 $3,493 Fees for Participant Sports Excluding Trips $72 $111 $134 Fees for Recreational Lessons $87 $131 $160 Sports/Rec/Exercise Equipment $127 $182 $202 Membership Fees for Social/Recreation/Health Clubs $148 $246 $278 EXHIBIT D Public Comments Received & Letters of Support ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor PUBLIC LANDS DEPARTMENT 1965 W 500 S SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84104 www.slc.gov/parks/ PHONE 801-972-7800 FAX 801-972-7847 Public Comments, meeting minutes and responses can be found in the Planning Commission Staff Report of November 9, 2022 and in the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of November 9, 2022. Please see below for relevant letters of support, which have also been sent directly to the Planning Commission and City Council. TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD Salt Lake City Transportation Division Office ‐ 349 South 200 East, Suite 150 - P.O. Box 145502 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-5502 October 28, 2022 Salt Lake City Planning Commission & Salt Lake City Council RE: Letter of Support – Glendale Regional Park Master Plan On behalf of the Salt Lake City Transportation Advisory Board, I write in support of Salt Lake City’s initiative to construct a regional park in the location of the old Raging Waters site. Detailed plans of the proposed park were presented to the Transportation Advisory Board at their October meeting with a great deal of discussion and unquestionable support and enthusiasm, including the proposed three crosswalks along 1700 South. The discussion stressed that planners should work with the SLC Transportation Division to ensure the safety of all visitors and users. Issues to be addressed regarding 1700 South included access by family bicyclists, pedestrian activated stop signs at crosswalks, traffic calming to reduce speed and the issue of on-street parking in case there are not sufficient off-street stalls. The Transportation Division is aware of the proposed plan and already has a project manager assigned to look at 1700 South and has allocated some funds to start a low-cost project to address some these concerns. The park planners should also coordinate with UTA on providing transit service to the park. As the project progresses, the Transportation Advisory Board will provide comments and feedback to ensure that these issues and concerns are addressed. This park would provide a place to recreate for residents of the Glendale community, as well as other westside neighborhoods. It will be constructed in a location that has long been an eyesore for the community, which will improve the neighborhood quality and allow for more access to healthy recreation. The current plans show that the regional park can be accessed using many modes of transportations. This allows for all types of users to be able to enjoy the amenities that this park would provide. The Transportation Advisory Board supports the recommendations in the Glendale Regional Park Master Plan with commitment to addressing the safety issues and concerns presented with the development of this new park. This plan is an opportunity to provide a more equitable distribution of recreation to the residents of Salt Lake City. Sincerely, Greg Sanchez, Chair Transportation Advisory Board