The URL can be used to link to this page

Transmittal - 1/31/2023Erin Mendenhall DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS Blake Thomas Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 445 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145487, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5487 TEL 801.535.7712 FAX 801.535.6269 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ________________________ Date Received: _________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 17, 2023 Darin Mano, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods __________________________ SUBJECT: PLNPCM2022-00687 – Northpoint Small Area Plan STAFF CONTACT: Krissy Gilmore, Senior Planner, kristina.gilmore@slcgov.com 801-535-7780 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: That the Council adopt the Northpoint Small Area Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Northpoint Small Area Plan is a land use plan for the land that is generally located between the Salt Lake City International Airport and the northern boundary of the city along the 2200 West corridor. The Northpoint Small Area Plan was adopted in April 2000. The update of the plan was funded to provide guidance on anticipated development in the area and to address annexation-related issues in the area. The Northpoint Small Area Plan adopted in 2000 includes the following goal: The purpose of the Northpoint Small Area Plan is to eliminate potential land use conflicts with the Salt Lake International Airport while preserving and enhancing the existing agricultural lifestyle. The original plan identifies land use issues related to the airport, agriculture, business park development, the environment, and infrastructure. The plan includes a land use map that identifies most of the land west of 2200 West as Business Park and the majority of the land east of 2200 01-31-2023 01-31-2023 West as Agriculture. The plan includes land that is located outside of the city boundaries for the purpose of future annexations. A 2019 development proposal to develop land in unincorporated portions of Salt Lake County along 2200 West for residential purposes was submitted to Salt Lake County. This proposal triggered an annexation proposal for the land to be annexed into North Salt Lake City because both the county and city land use regulations prohibited residential development so close in proximity to the airport. In response to the proposed annexation, the City Council funded an update to the Northpoint Small Area Plan. The purpose of funding the update was to address development pressure in the plan area and to address potential annexations of unincorporated land. The RFP process started in December 2019. The RFP was scheduled to be published at the end of March 2020. Due to uncertainty related to the pandemic, the RFP was paused and not released to the public. The money was reallocated to the 2020-2021 budget cycle. The RFP process was relaunched in January 2021 utilizing the same RFP document that was produced in 2020. The RFP selection team included representatives from the Planning Division, the Airport, Transportation Division, Engineering Division, and a member of the Westpointe Community Council. After interviews, the selection committee chose Logan Simpson. The contract with the consultant was finalized in May 2021. A transmittal was sent to the City Council in July 2021, to satisfy the process identified in Resolution 14 of 2020. That briefing included the scope of work, timeline, and public engagement plan. SMALL AREA PLAN KEY CONCEPTS: The Northpoint Small Area Plan will guide the future development of the area by presenting a vision map, design standards and guidelines for private development throughout the area. The plan provides action steps the city can implement to mitigate the impact of new development on the surrounding natural habitat and existing residential properties. Key concepts of the draft plan include: • Identifies appropriate future land use and development characteristics for the area that can coexist with the wildlife habitat and natural environment of the Great Salt Lake, and the operations of the Salt Lake City International Airport. • Identifies appropriate buffering, building design, and development characteristics to reduce the impacts on residential and agricultural uses, important wildlife habitats, and other uses within the area. • Recommends design standards to reduce the negative impacts that future land uses may have on air quality, water quality, noise, and light. Image 1: Northpoint general vicinity • Updates future annexation potential for unincorporated land within Salt Lake County. • Amends the Major Streets Plan for the area to include a new north-south collector (2900 W), a future airport road going east to west connecting to 2100 North, and to indicate that 3200 West is to remain an unimproved roadway. • Recommends a Northpoint-specific development code that codifies the recommended design standards and includes incentive-based tools for open space preservation. PROCESS: The plan update process began in 2021 with a series of one-on-one engagement sessions with residents, developers, environmental groups, and city and county-specific staff. The goal of these engagement sessions was to provide attendees with a forum to identify the assets and weaknesses of the plan area and to explore the future of the area. A Steering Committee was also formed to provide specific guidance on the area and to review draft recommendations for the plan. The Steering Committee was comprised of representatives from government agencies, landowners, environmental groups, etc. In addition, the engagement process included a public open house, two community event pop-up tables, Westpointe Community Council presentations, two public questionnaires, and a property owner-specific questionnaire. The Planning Commission met to review the small area plan first through a work session on July 27, 2022, and then again on October 26th, 2022 for a recommendation to the City Council. The Planning Commission tabled the draft plan at that meeting with direction to allow additional time for public input and to consider revisions to the recommended wetland buffer. In response, Planning Staff met with the Westpointe Community Council at their November 9th meeting and engaged with stakeholders through email and one-on-one meetings. Modifications were made to the draft in response to the direction received from the Planning Commission and additional public input. Key changes included the addition of an action item to develop a Northpoint -specific development code, revisions to the wetland buffers that would allow some flexibility in buffer width in exchange for mitigation measures, and the addition of language that would limit distribution and logistical land use and promote manufacturing land uses. The Planning Commission reopened the Public Hearing at their December 14, 2022 meeting. During the meeting, the Planning Commission discussed the proposed limit on distribution land uses, if this limitation was necessary, and if there is a market for the area to be primarily manufacturing land uses. While there was some disagreement among members on this subject, they ultimately voted to remove the limitation on distribution land uses. The Commission also discussed wetland buffers and emphasized that open space preservation around wetlands is of high priority and recommended a 300-foot buffer rather than 200 feet. Planning Staff also recommended some minor changes to the draft in the Staff Report that were brought up in public comments. The Commission did not report concern with these changes, and the conversation generally indicated support. The Commission voted to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council (7-2) with the following modifications: - The limit on distribution land uses be removed. - The wetland buffer is expanded to up to 300 feet instead of up to 200 feet. Based on the conversation, the Commissioners who voted no did so because one would like to see more open space preserved and does not support the vision for light -industrial development, and the other indicated that they were not in support of removing the limitation on distribution uses. PROPOSED DRAFT: The draft forwarded to the City Council includes modifications to the draft plan that address the conditions of approval by the Planning Commission, as well as the recommended changes proposed by Planning Staff based on public comment: - Page 10: “The Plan Area…is nestled between wetland spillover from the Great Salt Lake…” o Deleted the word “spillover” as it implies excess, wasted, low value, and is not an ecological term. - Page 24: Added "and other contrast mitigation building and landscape features" to the sentence addressing building color and materials. While colors that blend in with the natural surroundings are essential, there may be additional contrast mitigation techniques that are necessary and appropriate in specific areas such as the land close to 3200 West. - Page 32: Evaluate the Feasibility of Acquiring Sensitive Lands as City-Owned Open Space o In addition to lands adjacent to the Jordan River mentioned in the text, open land and wetlands along 3200 W was also added as an area for priority open space preservation. - Included the notation on the vision map regarding wetland applicability (jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional) on page 35 as well. Planning Commission (PC) Records a) PC Agenda for July 27, 2022 (Click to Access) b) PC Minutes for July 27, 2022 (Click to Access) c) PC Staff Report for July 27, 2022 (Click to Access) d) PC Agenda for October 26, 2022 (Click to Access) e) PC Minutes for October 26, 2022 (Click to Access) f) PC Staff Report for October 26, 2022 (Click to Access) g) PC Agenda for December 14, 2022 (Click to Access) h) PC Minutes for December 14, 2022 (Click to Access) i) PC Staff Report for December 14, 2022 (Click to Access) EXHIBITS: 1) Chronology 2) City Council Public Hearing Notice 3) Northpoint Small Area Plan Draft 4) Public Comments Received ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 January 30, 2022 Dear City Councilmembers: As you consider adoption of the Northpoint Small Area Plan, per City Code section 2.06.035.C.2, I am submitting a letter for your consideration. Section2.06.035 allows the city administration to provide a different recommendation than the Planning Commission by submitting a letter outlining the mayor’s position as part of the administrative transmittal. The Northpoint Small Area Plan is such a case. On December 14, 2022, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve the Northpoint Small Area Plan with two modifications. First, to remove Planning Staff’s recommendation to limit distribution land uses in the plan area; and second, to increase the development buffer from wetlands from 200 feet to 300 feet. I applaud the Planning Commission for their dedication to preserving and protecting wetland areas by increasing the buffer width; however, I am concerned that removing the limit on distribution land uses will negatively impact the existing rural characteristics of the area, potentially increase the amount of air pollution generated by the future use of land in the area, and expand the amount of land in the City that is available for warehouse and distribution uses. The Northpoint plan boundary is unique within Salt Lake City and any future planning should be sensitive to the existing context and rural nature of the area. While development of the area is ongoing and that pressure will likely continue in the future, planning should promote an appropriate transition of land uses that can coexist with the existing rural residential and agricultural uses, as well as minimize impacts to the environment and natural habitat. Planning must also consider appropriate land uses to reduce exposure to air pollution created by airplanes taking off and landing from the Salt Lake City International Airport, especially as the airport considers lengthening existing runways that will further impact the Northpoint area. There are nearly 17,000 acres of land in Salt Lake City that are currently zoned M-1 Light Industrial Zoning District. It is the largest zoning district in the city in terms of acreage, while also one of the least restrictive in permitted and conditional land uses. There are no limitations on warehousing or distribution uses. If more area is allowed to develop with these uses it likely increases the amount of air pollution generated in the city through an increase in semi-truck traffic and requires more resources to maintain city streets. I recommend that the City Council consider Planning Staff’s recommendation to limit distribution land uses to prevent the area from becoming primarily a warehouse and distribution center. This could be achieved by limiting the development of such uses where they are not currently allowed by zoning. This is a vital step to implementing the city’s vision – one that respects the existing residential and agriculture properties, the environment, and wildlife, while allowing for appropriate light-manufacturing development. This vision can be achieved through prioritizing and expanding the recommended Northpoint specific development code, which is identified as a critical action item in the plan. Expansion of ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 the code recommendation could include limiting building footprints, lot coverage, and building height to encourage a greater mix of land uses and prevent large scale buildings that are only suitable for distribution. Additionally, the Council could consider restricting or limiting the uses in the land use tables within the Northpoint development code. In addition to my recommendation above, please consider the Northpoint Small Area Plan guidance for zoning assignment of annexation in the area. In future review of annexation petitions, I request that the Council also consider the recommended Northpoint Small Area Plan policies and development code in any development agreement to ensure the vision for the area is respected and realized. Thank you for your consideration, Erin Mendenhall Mayor SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. _____ of 2023 (Adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan) An ordinance adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan as part of Salt Lake City’s general plan. WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held a hearing on December 14, 2022 on a petition by the City Council to adopt an update to the Northpoint Small Area Plan as a geographically-specific part of Salt Lake City’s general plan required by Part 4 of Utah Code Chapter 10-9a; and WHEREAS, at its December 14, 2022 meeting, the Planning Commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the Salt Lake City Council (“City Council”) on said petition; and WHEREAS, after holding a public hearing on this matter, the City Council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the city’s best interests. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan. That the Northpoint Small Area Plan provided in Exhibit “A” attached hereto is adopted as part of Salt Lake City’s general plan as required by Part 4 of Utah Code Chapter 10-9a. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of ______________, 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: ______________. Ordinance adopting the Northpoint Small Area Plan APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Date:__________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Katherine D. Pasker, Senior City Attorney December 16, 2022 EXHIBIT “A” Northpoint Small Area Plan 1. CHRONOLOGY Northpoint Small Area Plan Project Chronology PLNPCM2022-00687 May 2021: Contract with the consultant, Logan Simpson, finalized July 22, 2021: City Council briefing August 2021: An informational postcard was mailed to property owners within the study area informing them of the project and stakeholder interview opportunities August 2021: Logan Simpson (consultant) held one-on-one meetings August 2021: Logan Simpson and Salt Lake City Planning Staff attended the Westpointe Night Out event. August 12, 2021: Steering Committee meeting November 10, 2021: Westpointe Community Council presentation February 17, 2022: Steering Committee meeting April 4, 2022: Steering Committee meeting April 29, 2022: An informational postcard was mailed to property owners within the study area informing them of the upcoming workshop and providing them with a QR code to obtain more information and take a property owner questionnaire. March 2 – 30, 2022: Property Owner Questionnaire March 9, 2022: Westpointe Community Council presentation May 16, 2022: Draft Concepts public workshop May 17 – June 30: Draft Concepts Online Questionnaire was available to the public June 27, 2022: Steering Committee meeting July 22, 2022: Draft Plan published and noticed for public review July 27, 2022: Planning Commission briefing August 2, 2022: Logan Simpson and Salt Lake City Planning Staff attended the Westpointe Night Out event. September 20, 2022: City Council briefing on the draft plan October 18, 2022: Revised Draft Plan published for Planning Commission public hearing October 26, 2022: Planning Commission Public Hearing November 9, 2022: Westpointe Community Council presentation November 16, 2022: Revised Draft Plan published for Planning Commission public hearing December 14, 2022: Planning Commission Public Hearing and Recommendation December 15, 2022: Ordinance request sent to City Attorney’s Office December 16, 2022: Signed ordinance received from City Attorney’s Office 2. CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Salt Lake City Council is considering Petition PLNPCM2022-00687 – Northpoint Small Area Plan – A request by the City Council to revise and complete an update to the Northpoint Small Area Plan. The Northpoint Small Area Plan is a land use plan for the land that is generally located between the Salt Lake City International Airport and the northern boundary of the city along the 2200 West corridor. The Northpoint Small Area Plan was adopted in April 2000. The updated plan will provide guidance on existing and anticipated development in the area, as well as annexation-related issues. As part of the plan update, the Salt Lake City Major Streets Plan will be amended to reflect recommended roadway alignments. Information on the proposal can found on the City’s webpage for the proposal at the following link: https://www.slc.gov/planning/2022/10/13/northpoint-small-area-plan/ As part of their review, the City Council is holding an advertised public hearing to receive comments regarding the petition. During this hearing, anyone desiring to address the City Council concerning this issue will be given an opportunity to speak. The hearing will be held electronically: DATE: TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: Electronic and in-person options. 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah ** This meeting will be held via electronic means, while also providing for an in-person opportunity to attend or participate in the hearing at the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah. For more information, including WebEx connection information, please visit www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meetings. Comments may also be provided by calling the 24-Hour comment line at (801) 535-7654 or sending an email to council.comments@slcgov.com. All comments received through any source are shared with the Council and added to the public record. If you have any questions relating to this proposal or would like to review the file, please call Krissy Gilmore at 801-535-7780 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or via e-mail at Kristina.Gilmore@slcgov.com. The application details can be accessed at https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/ , by selecting the “Planning” tab and entering the petition number PLNPCM2022-00687. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. (P 19-19) 4. NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN DRAFT NORTHPOINT Small Area Plan Salt Lake City Adoption Draft, January 2023 DRAFT 2 CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction ....................................................4 Location .................................................................................................................6 Plan Context and Purpose .....................................................................................7 Guide to this Plan ...................................................................................................8 Executive Summary .............................................................................................10 Chapter 2 The Vision ....................................................12 Constraints to the Vision .....................................................................................14 Land Use Categories ............................................................................................15 Vision Map ...........................................................................................................16 Design Standards ................................................................................................18 Chapter 3 Implementation ...........................................30 Critical Path Implementation Items ....................................................................32 Additional Implementation Items ........................................................................34 Chapter 4 The Toolkit ....................................................36 Using the Toolkit ..................................................................................................38 Land Preservation Tools .......................................................................................40 Financial Implementation Tools ..........................................................................46 DRAFT Appendix A Existing Conditions Appendix B Public Input Appendix C Constraints Analysis Appendix D Full Financial Analysis Appendix E Major Streets Plan Amendment DRAFT CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 6 Location The Northpoint Plan Area is located just north of Downtown Salt Lake City, near Farmington Bay and the Great Salt Lake. The Plan Area is bounded to the east by Interstate 215 and is comprised of mainly agricultural, industrial and residential uses. Northpoint lies within the northwest quadrant of Salt Lake City, adjacent to vital environmental resources including the Jordan River and playas and wetlands associated with the Great Salt Lake. Over half of the property in Northpoint is currently under the jurisdiction of Salt Lake County and consists of agricultural uses, business park development, industrial and commercial zoning. Environmental considerations greatly influence the future growth and development of the area. Directly south of Northpoint is Salt Lake City International Airport, which provides opportunities for and constraints to the potential development within Northpoint. The airport continues to expand through ongoing renovations and is currently being guided by the 2022 Salt Lake International Airport Master Plan. Its proximity is a defining factor of the Plan Area. Northpoint is also adjacent to several recreational areas including the Wasatch Mountain Range, with its many trails, the Jordan River OHV State Recreation Area, and the Salt Lake City Regional Athletic Complex. Introduction Overview Graphic 1.1 | Northpoint Plan Area DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 7 Esri,H ERE,Garmin,(c)OpenStreetMapc ontributors,andt he GISu serc ommunity Jurisdiction Plan Context and Purpose In 2000, a Northpoint Small Area Plan was adopted with goals to eliminate potential land use conflicts between the Salt Lake International Airport, future development, and the existing agricultural lifestyle. Other notable planning efforts for this region include the 1992 Northwest and the Jordan River/Airport Plan which address the Northpoint Plan Area, the Great Salt Lake wetlands and Jordan River, the Salt Lake Airport, and surrounding land; the 2020 Blueprint Jordan River Plan which illustrates a cohesive vision for the River as it stretches through multiple jurisdictions; the 2021 Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan; and the 2021 Salt Lake County West General Plan. The northwest portion of Salt Lake City is limited by multiple layers of constraints, mostly environmental, but also due to airport activity, connectivity, and social equity issues. It is one of the largest growth areas for the City, but quite possibly, the most difficult to develop. This Plan addresses the natural environment, built environment, and community attributes. Many factors contribute to constraints facing the area, however many attributes act as opportunities. The Northpoint Small Area Plan Update is a response to the rapid pace of growth and change in the northwest portion of Salt Lake City and the anticipated new business park and light industrial uses in the area. The key goals of this Plan are to: »Identify appropriate future land use and development characteristics for the area that can coexist with the wildlife habitat and natural environment of the Great Salt Lake, and the operations of the Salt Lake City International Airport. »Update future annexation potential for unincorporated land within Salt Lake County. »Identify appropriate infrastructure requirements, including utilities and roadways, to support the future land use in the area. »Identify appropriate buffering, building design, and development characteristics to reduce the impacts to residential and agricultural uses, important wildlife habitat, and other uses within the plan area. »Recommend methods to reduce the negative impacts that future land uses may have on air quality, water quality, noise, and light. Graphic 1.2 | Northpoint Jurisdictions Salt Lake City Salt Lake County DRAFT 8 Guide to This Plan Plan Salt Lake Northpoint Small Area Plan Land Use Code and Zoning Ordinances Design Standards Incentives Tools and Actions Introduction This document is intended to support Salt Lake City’s overarching vision established in Plan Salt Lake while also providing tailored tools to help the Plan Area grow appropriately. Once the Northpoint Small Area Plan is adopted, its supplemental recommendations will guide applicants to develop within the scope of the Community’s Vision. This plan should be referenced when discretionary land use decisions are being made. These recommendations include, design standards, land acquisition tools, regulatory tools, and incentive based tools. Master plans detail the vision, policy, and framework of the community that will guide growth and development over time. As the plan area transitions from greenfield and rural residential to industrial and business park, this plan outlines specific design standards and action steps the City can implement to mitigate the impact of new development on the surrounding natural habitat and existing residential properties. DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 9 Public Process This planning process included one- on-one interviews with residents, developers, environmental groups, and City and ounty staff, a public open house, two public questionnaires, and a property owner- specific questionnaire. With several applications active in the Plan Area at the time this project started, it became apparent early on that habitat preservation and residential quality of life were primary concerns. This shaped the Plan, shifting focus from land use recommendations to tools available to the City to preserve habitat, mitigate impacts of new development on residents, water and air quality, and wildlife, and determine appropriate improvements to existing infrastructure. 195 820 DRAFT 10 Executive Summary The Northpoint Small Area Plan is a detailed master plan for the Northwestern Community of Salt Lake City. The Plan Area contains large amounts of underdeveloped land, nestled between wetlands from the Great Salt Lake to the west and urban growth to the east. Additionally, parts of the Plan Area are fragmented with unincorporated County land and airport-owned property. A clear plan is needed to address the development pressures in the Plan Area, which continue to increase despite natural constraints. The Northpoint Small Area Plan aims to guide future development based on the previously adopted community plans and future land uses that the City has identified as appropriate to the area. While many property owners intend to retain their property as agricultural land, redevelopment and new development is anticipated to be primarily light industrial and manufacturing. The Plan contains three elements to guide growth into the future: Vision Map The Northpoint area has experienced growth that can conflict; industrial development adjacent to agriculture and residential uses, and developments adjacent to or abutting critical habitat areas (i.e. wetlands and upland). Industrial development has begun, and is expected to continue, to creep into this area of Salt Lake City. Understanding this reality, the Northpoint Vision is to balance the anticipated growth of light industrial and manufacturing uses with the existing and continued residential and agricultural uses of the area. This will be accomplished through outlining mitigation strategies for high-impact development directed at preserving quality of life for residents and the natural environment. Design Standards The design standards are directly connected to the anticipated future development in the area. Building and site design have the ability to affect built environments in impactful ways. When applied with a clear vision in mind, design standards can shape development that reduces visual and physical land use conflicts. The standards touch on each land use designation and provide clear direction as to how the area should be built. Although the standards are separately outlined in the plan, they are implied to be implemented with the other action items. Implementation What separates the plan from a design standards manual, is the comprehensive action items that are addressed in the implementation chapter. The action items range from strategies to best preserve open space and critical habitats, recommends further study for service and infrastructure needs, annexation of unincorporated properties within the Plan Area, and funding tools that will help the Plan Area grow responsibly. These elements can be applied to the area as a whole and provide different initiatives aside from traditional zoning regulation guidance. There are three action items identified as “critical path”, being the most critical to complete once this plan is adopted. These action items are: »Services and Infrastructure | Evaluate Funding Solutions to Redesign 2200 W and Construct 2900 W »Built Environment and Design | Adopt Development Code Updates and Codify the Design Standards Herein »Natural Environment and Preservation | Evaluate the Feasibility of Acquiring Sensitive Lands as City-Owned Open Space DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 11 Goals of this Plan »Identify appropriate future land use and development characteristics for the area that can coexist with the wildlife habitat and natural environment of the Great Salt Lake, and the operations of the Salt Lake City International Airport. »Update future annexation potential for unincorporated land within Salt Lake County. »Identify appropriate infrastructure requirements, including utilities and roadways, to support the future land use in the area. »Identify appropriate buffering, building design, and development characteristics to reduce the impacts to residential and agricultural uses, important wildlife habitat, and other uses within the corridor. »Recommend methods to reduce the negative impacts that future land uses may have on air quality, water quality, noise, and light. Vision Map Categories See more on page 16 Key Design Standards See more on page 20 Critical Implementation See more on page 32 NATURAL OPEN SPACE Areas where development is limited to passive recreational amenities TRANSITIONAL Areas that are currently residential. New development will be subject to impact mitigation measures BUSINESS PARK/INDUSTRIAL Areas anticipated to develop as Business Park and Light Industrial AIRPORT Areas owned by the Salt Lake City International Airport Limit maximum building frontage along 2200 W Maintain buffers between new development and existing wetlands, canals, drains, and the Jordan River Maintain a 65-foot buffer between new development and existing residential Allow clustering of buildings to maximize buffers Emphasize appropriate building materials and encourage native landscaping Services and Infrastructure Evaluate funding solutions to redesign 2200 W and construct 2900 W Built Environment and Design Create a Northpoint specific development code and codify the Design Standards Natural Environment/Preservation Evaluate the feasibility of acquiring sensitive lands as city-owned open space How Will We Get There?DRAFT CHAPTER 2 THE VISION 14 Constraints to the Vision As discussed in Chapter 1, the Plan Area consists of several development constraints ranging from sensitive wetland habitat to airport influence zone regulations. Mapping these constraints is a crucial first step in determining the areas most suitable for new development and identifying areas that should be preserved as habitat and open space. The Constraints Map illustrates the results of this analysis and may be used to prioritize sensitive lands for preservation or acquisition. For a detailed analysis of development constraints and opportunities used in this analysis, see Appendix C. Constraints reviewed in this analysis included: »Designated Wetlands »Salt Lake City International Airport-Owned Properties »Utility and Open Space Easements »Airport Influence Zones (A, B, C) »Viable Agriculture »Airport Noise Contours Using the Vision Map and Design Standards The Vision Map in this chapter is intended to show where additional standards are necessary to ensure future development is compatible with existing residential, agricultural, and sensitive habitats. To use this chapter, review the Vision Map and accompanying Design Standards. It is intended that the following design standards be incorporated into Salt Lake City Zoning and Development Code to apply to new development in the Plan Area. The Northpoint Vision Overview Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community ¯ Most suitable for development Least suitable for development NORTHPOINT CONSTRAINTS MAP Graphic 2.1 | Constraints Analysis for Northpoint DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 15 Natural Open Space Purpose: Natural Open Space areas are those that should be preserved as natural open space and prohibit development. The Natural Open Space district aims to connect critical habitats in the least fragmented way possible considering development trends in the Plan Area. Applicability: These areas include designated wetlands, uplands, existing recreational amenities, and areas connecting them. All designated wetlands, uplands, and other sensitive lands fall under the Natural Open Space district. Use Standards: Development in these areas should be limited to passive recreational opportunities, trailheads, and small parking areas to serve recreational uses. Adjacent land uses will be subject to mitigation. Transitional Purpose: The purpose of this zone is to mitigate the impacts of Business Park/Industrial development on residential and agricultural properties. Applicability: New development is anticipated to be primarily light industrial with a focus on manufacturing land uses. There are no properties in the Plan Area that are identified for new residential development. Use Standards: Residential properties shall be subject to natural habitat impact mitigation standards such as buffering critical areas from all development. Should any residential properties transition to BP/Industrial, all BP/Industrial standards will apply. Business Park/Industrial Purpose: Business and light industrial development is anticipated in the Plan Area. The majority of the Plan Area will convert to light industrial, manufacturing, or business properties. Applicability: The BP/I district applies to properties that do not contain significant constraints such as wetlands, uplands, existing residential, or other major limitations. Use Standards: Development in these areas will be reviewed closely for impact to existing residents and sensitive lands and may require additional mitigation designs focused on protecting the natural environment and quality of life of existing residents. Airport Purpose: These areas are owned by the Salt Lake International Airport, though there are no plans currently to develop these areas. Applicability: The Airport district applies to properties that are owned by the Salt Lake International Airport. Use Standards: Development in these areas should be limited to passive recreational opportunities, natural open space, and utility and infrastructure needed for the Salt Lake International Airport. Land Use Categories DRAFT 16 Protected Open Space 22 0 0 W 29 0 0 W W Center St 32 0 0 W ( u n p a v e d ) 3200N 2670N 2100N 1700N 3130N J o r d a n R i v e r R u d y C a n a l Recla i m a t i o n D i t c h Ci t y D r a i n W e s t B r a n c h Le g a c y P k w y Rocky M o u n t a i n Power E a s e m e n t Roc k y M o u n t a i n Pow e r E a s e m e n t 215 215 Graphic 2.2 | Northpoint Vision Map NORTHPOINT VISION MAP Water Designated Wetland* Natural Open Space Business Park / Industrial Transitional Land UsesProtected Open Space 22 0 0 W 29 0 0 W W Center St 32 0 0 W ( u n p a v e d ) 3200N 2670N 2100N 1700N 3130N J o r d a n R i v e r R u d y C a n a l Recla i m a t i o n D i t c h Ci t y D r a i n W e s t B r a n c h Le g a c y P k w y Rocky M o u n t a i n Power E a s e m e n t Roc k y M o u n t a i n Pow e r E a s e m e n t 215 215 Airport *Wetlands include both jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands. The Vision Map is intended as a general guide for wetland areas, but specific wetland delineation should be done when land is developed. Identification of wetlands primarily involves the determination of three factors: the predominance of wetland vegetation, hydric (wetland) soils, and signs of hydrology. DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 17 Without Design Standards With Design Standards Smaller buildings facing existing residential and major roadways, largest buildings in the middle of development. Greater attention to building design (i.e. building materials, lighting, landscaping, etc.). Allow clustering of buildings in favor of preserving connected habitat and critical open space. No restrictions on building size near/facing existing residential. Typical industrial development styles can disturb natural habitat with disruptive materials, lighting, hazardous landscaping and fencing, etc. Minimum lot sizes and open space requirements force buildings to be oriented in an inefficient way, taking up more native land than needed. EFFECT OF DESIGN STANDARDS DRAFT 18 Design Standards Land Use Business Park/ Industrial Transitional Minimum Setback of New Development Designated Wetlands up to 300 ft1, 2 75 ft1, 2 Canals and Drains 75 ft 75 ft Jordan River 100 ft1, 2 75 ft1, 2 Existing Residential 65 ft 65 ft Maximum Continuous Building Frontage on 2200 W 400 ft 250 ft 1 | Should preserve uninterrupted connection between wetlands and uplands 2 | Should include and maintain a planted stormwater mitigation element such as a bioswale Setbacks and Buffers Buffers and setbacks are intended to reduce the adverse impacts of adjacent land uses and provide important habitats for wildlife that utilize buffer areas. While setbacks shown in this document are intended to extend from the natural feature (i.e., designated wetland or canal) to any impervious built surface of new development (i.e., sidewalks, parking lots), specific details will be determined when the setback is adopted into code. Setbacks from natural features may include landscaping and stormwater management. Required setbacks for new development adjacent to existing residential are intended to extend from new structure to existing residential structure(s). Setbacks from residential structures may include sidewalks, parking lots, etc. A maximum building length along 2200 West is recommended to reduce the impact of large-scale industrial development on longstanding agricultural and residential uses, as well as maintain habitat connections. Smaller setbacks in the transition area are intended to allow flexibility for residential development under the existing zoning. As development intensity increases with the development of business park or light industrial land uses, the greater setbacks apply. DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 19 Preferred Buffer for Development Adjacent to Wetlands/Uplands * When buffer is applied during development of a property the City must consider the potential for a regulatory taking of property. DRAFT 20 Design Standards 1 | Habitat Mitigation Standards 1.1 | Grading Limitations Considering limitations to grading can help minimize impacts to native vegetation. It is important for only areas planned for development to be cleared and graded as it can allow for natural drainage courses to be maintained and reduces the need to manage stormwater flows. ◊ Soil cover or ramps shall be included to allow for movement of wildlife through the drainages. ◊ Excavation methods such as installation of underdrains should be considered. ◊ Vertical drop structures and concrete lined channels should be avoided. ◊ Use of large angular rip-rap for erosion control should be limited. ◊ Non-structural features that also provide riparian habitat should be considered. ◊ Where possible, development should relate the building to the natural site by stepping buildings and avoiding mass leveling of the site. 1.2 | Fencing and Walls Fences and walls can be barriers to wildlife and impede the movement of wildlife between habitat areas. Although fencing can be used to exclude wildlife, it should be applied in very specific areas that do not restrict larger wildlife movement and migration patterns or access to food, water, shelter, or potential mates. ◊ Fencing shall be permeable to allow for the safe passage of animals and facilitate wildlife movement through existing or constructed wildlife corridors. ◊ Natural barriers for privacy purposes shall consist of natural materials where possible, such as boulders, densely-planted vegetation, or rip-rap. ◊ Decorative fencing features that could be hazardous to wildlife shall be prohibited including: »Pointed or narrow extensions at the top of fences. »Wires that may entangle animals. »Hollow fence posts that are open at the top when birds or other small animals may become entrapped in an open cavity. Standards for All New Development Graphic 2.3 | Native Landscaping DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 21 1.3 | Dark Sky Lighting Lighting is an important element in built environments that allows for a perceived sense of safety at night. However, without appropriate design and placement, outdoor light fixtures can sometimes be inefficient. Outdoor lighting in the Plan Area should be designed in a way that benefits the built environment without negatively impacting the natural environment. Artificial lighting can disrupt wildlife’s natural patterns and behaviors. Graphic 2.4 | Dark Sky Friendly Lighting ◊ Lighting in non-functional spaces is prohibited (i.e. architectural and landscape lighting is not necessary for function of built environments). ◊ Light fixtures with motion or heat sensor may be used to keep lights off when lighting is not required. ◊ Lighting should consist of International Dark Sky Association (IDA) approved fixtures. ◊ Electronic message centers (EMC) shall be switched off completely after 11pm (or 30 minutes after the close of business for on-premises signs, whichever is later), and remain off until one hour before sunrise. ◊ EMCs applications for traffic and safety information shall be exempt from curfew. ◊ Light fixtures shall be selectively placed and fully shielded (i.e. light shall only be emitted downward and not above an imaginary horizontal plane passing through the light source). ◊ Lights shall be directed away from natural areas. ◊ Lighting shall use timers to automatically turnoff outside of hours of operation. ◊ Outdoor lighting shall be a color temperature of 3,000 kelvin or less.DRAFT 22 Design Standards 2 | Water Conscious Development 2.1 | Landscaping Regulating native species in landscape design can lead to low-maintenance and water-wise environments that reflect the natural environment in the built environment. Additionally, habitat value can be increased when landscaping isn’t overly manicured. However, weeds and invasive species should be controlled so that they do not compete with native species for necessary water and nutrients. ◊ Landscaped areas shall follow Low Impact Develpoment (LID) principles. ◊ Landscaping shall consist of native, adaptive, and drought-tolerant plantings. ◊ New construction shall follow the Salt Lake City Tree Protection and Preservation Policy. ◊ Landscaping shall not require modifications to the native soil. ◊ Minimize irrigated landscape areas and utilize naturalized swales. ◊ Fertilizers and herbicides shall be prohibited. ◊ Development adjacent to wetlands and uplands shall adhere to the buffer requirements herein and include on-site stormwater management. Graphic 2.5 | Stormwater Runoff Design 2.2 | Stormwater Management As undeveloped land becomes developed with hard surface materials, loss of permeable surfaces will have a direct affect on stormwater runoff. It is essential to avoid stormwater contact with industrial materials and activities and to avoid point-source pollution and degradation of the wetlands, uplands, and other natural habitat. There are comprehensive best management practice guides that can help applicant navigate the best solution for the specific use. ◊ Significant new development resulting in a change of land use shall include environmental impact mitigation measures and align them with current executive orders and master plans. ◊ Embankments and spillways shall be designed and approved by engineers that specialize in stormwater management and ecologically friendly design. ◊ Stormwater systems shall not diminish water flow to wetlands. ◊ Sedimentation systems may be used. »Sediment systems are more efficient with pollutants associated with metals, organic compounds, and other oxygen-demanding substances. There are limitations with sediment systems as small particles do not always settle therefore the substances in the industrial stormwater discharge should be evaluated prior to implementation. ◊ Detention ponds may be utilized with an underdrain to outlet to allow water to slowly release into proper stormwater systems. ◊ Retention ponds may be utilized to regularly contain water on site and via infiltration. ◊ Infiltration systems may be utilized to capture and infiltrate runoff in order to reduce runoff volume. »i.e. Infiltration Trenches, basins, bio-retention systems and underground infiltration tanks. DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 23 Graphic 2.9 | Porous Surface Street Edge Graphic 2.8 | Native Landscaping Graphic 2.7 | Bioswale Graphic 2.6 | Bioswale 3 | Airport Conflict Mitigation Aviation adjacent to the Plan Area has been around for many years. Similarly to the rest of Salt Lake Valley, the Airport, too, has grown and anticipates further growth into the future. It is important to account for current and future impacts. 3.1 | Noise Regulation programs like Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 150 Noise, should be implemented on airport owned properties as to mitigate the impacts of noise. This program was established by the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 and sets forth the measure that a specific airport operator has taken to reduce the impacts of noise. 3.2 | Land Use Compatibility Local land use planning such as this plan can better prepare for the implications of planning around airports, and other airport- related development. Land use decisions around the airport properties should account for the impacts and determine whether the proposed use is appropriate. This can be hindered when multiple jurisdictions regulate the surrounding lands, however, there are tools such as annexation to consolidate regulatory authority and ensure that only appropriate land use decisions are made.DRAFT 24 Graphic 2.10 | Natural Design Elements Graphic 2.11| Natural Building Materials Graphic 2.12 | Interior Courtyard 4 | Visual Design Conscious design can help enhance compatibility between various uses and ensure that development fits in with the surrounding natural environment as best as possible. ◊ Units (and open space required by code) shall be organized or “clustered” in an efficient manner on properties where doing so will allow for larger habitat buffers. ◊ Building frontages along 2200 W shall not exceed 400 ft in length. ◊ Uninterrupted horizontal expanses of 100 ft in length of any opaque material, including opaque glass, shall be prohibited on building frontages visible from public streets. ◊ Natural building materials, colors, and other contrast mitigation building and landscape features shall be included in the exterior of buildings to mitigate the contrast of the built and natural environment. ◊ Mirrored or highly reflective glass is prohibited. ◊ Mechanical systems/equipment shall be shielded with barriers such as foliage and fences. ◊ Common design elements shall be included in Business Park-zoned development. »Designs should have a variety of unit sizes to accommodate different uses and the structural layout should also allow for flexibility.DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 25 Standards for Transitional Areas Development within Transitional Areas will be held to the standards previously mentioned with the following additional standards. 1 | Industrial Land Use Mitigation As industrial developments increase in the Plan Area, it is essential to recognize the compatibility issues associated with industrial land uses and be able to mitigate issues through building and site design. Industrial developments intrinsically contain issues with noise, odor, dust, traffic, light, air quality, and visual/design elements, therefore mitigation is necessary. 1.1 | Noise Industrial uses can have implications on noise that can affect adjacent land uses and also the natural environment. Noise can be classified into two different types: airborne and structure borne. Airborne is from the source to the receiver and can travel in all directions whereas structure-borne is vibrations through materials. Regardless of noise type, mitigation efforts should be in place prior, during, and after development. The following strategies are ways to mitigate the unwanted and unnecessary noise impacts due to industrial development. ◊ Noise impacts shall be mitigated by absorption, barriers, and/or damping. »Absorption works towards dissipating airborne acoustic sound waves. The best sound-absorbing materials are acoustic foam, fabric panels, or underlayment. Common building materials do not absorb most sound whereas softer materials, such as carpet, foam padding, and fiberglass insulation are more efficient in dissipating noise. »Physical barriers such as a berm or spatial separation that account for height, distance, thickness, and material type can contribute to the extent of mitigation. »Damping reduces acoustic vibration within a structure or wall. ◊ Building masses such as U or L shaped forms are preferred as they can contribute to noise mitigation through spatial separation. ◊ Interior courtyards or garden spaces should be incorporated as they can be an effective noise mitigation strategy by providing quiet and light-filled spaces. ◊ Vegetation should be high and dense when used for noise mitigation for significant effectiveness. ◊ Air-conditioning units should be substituted for pressurized plenum space where possible. A plenum is a separate interior space provided for air circulation for heating, ventilation, and air- conditioning. Graphic 2.13 | Existing Residential in the Plan AreaDRAFT 26 Design Standards 1.2 | Odor Unlike other externalities of industrial uses, odor can be difficult to measure due to its subjective nature. However, there are some measures that can be taken to address the duration, frequency, intensity, and location of noxious odors. ◊ Mitigating odor should start at the source of the emitter, such as food operations, traffic emissions, chemical facilities, mechanical equipment pollution, and material handling. Operational and engineering best practices can mitigate odors prior to being released in the environment. ◊ If emissions cannot be prevented, various solutions can be applied such as: »Plantings and trees to absorb and mask unpleasant smells as well as act as visual screening. Additionally, plantings can act as ozone generator which eliminates odorous substances through oxidation and are low maintenance. (Odor mitigation foliage include field maples, peace lily, serviceberry, sansevieria). »Dispersion to reduce consolidated emissions. Dispersion can look like increased separation between odor source and receivers to allow for dilution or contain the dispersion in an enclosure to prevent odors dispersing. »Location of open tanks and storage piles. Limit the presence of smells such as locating open tanks and storage piles away from residential and high-occupancy areas. »Structure design elements. The operability and placement of windows and doors can also prevent intrusion of odors. 1.3 | Air Quality Encouraging and supporting occupants that engage in sustainable processes and produce minimal emissions is the most effective way to mitigate air quality issues. In circumstances where this is unavoidable, exhausting air with ventilation can be effective and dilution can be used to mitigate the impacts ventilation can have on the surroundings. ◊ Apply in-room air cleaners and vegetation barriers to help mitigate localized air pollution. ◊ Use air filters and electronic air cleaners such as ionizers in duct-mounted and portable cleaners. »i.e. activated carbon is an adsorbent media air filter. ◊ Green roofs may be incorporated to address on-site and off-site disturbances. ◊ Extensive venting should be used when possible. ◊ Operable windows should be used to provide direct ventilation where they do not conflict with noise mitigation strategies. DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 27 1.4 | Traffic and Loading Industrial development brings different vehicular traffic expectations. The challenge lies in balancing street level, building, and occupant needs. It is essential that industrial land uses contain loading and unloading infrastructure as the traffic associated with the use can have compatibility issues with adjacent non-industrial uses. Certain elements such as parking, loading bays, elevators, access points, noise, and aesthetic can have implications on the area. Establishing design standards can allow for the mitigation of incompatibilities between the movement of people, vehicles, and goods. ◊ Spatial Separation: Land uses that produce heavier traffic scenarios shall be placed away from residential units. ◊ Vertical Stacking: Flat-roof style structures may be implemented for upper-floor parking and loading. ◊ Access: Access shall be allowed from more than one side of a site to allow for better separation of pedestrian, cycling, and vehicle access to reduce the risk of collisions and large distribution vehicles. ◊ Laneways: Laneways shall be sensitive to pedestrian spaces by carving out walkable space in the building mass. This includes vegetation, dark sky-friendly lighting, and amenities for pedestrian use. ◊ Shared lobbies: Mixed-use buildings (including industrial and/or office spaces) may require shared lobbies to foster community and interaction among tenants. »It is important to ensure that there are not substantial conflicts between uses that have safety implications. ◊ Location: Additional considerations for industrial and non-industrial compatibilities includes proximity to future public transit which can reduce parking demands and activate streets for more complete neighborhoods. These locations should be evaluated if public transit plans are implemented in the Plan Area. Graphic 2.14 | SLC Air Quality DRAFT 28 Design Standards Standards for Natural Open Space Natural open space consists of critical habitat, regionally significant agriculture, and connecting open spaces. Development in these areas is restricted to passive recreational amenities. 1 | Wetland Design Standards 1.1 | Planting Wetlands are home to very beneficial habitats that can support carbon sequestration and improve water quality. As development increases, mitigating the impacts on wetlands is essential for the area. Plant species is an example of a simple design standard that can be incorporated into properties in a close proximity to this critical habitat. ◊ Encouraging and/or requiring native plant species can promote healthy wetland habitat in the face of increasing development. ◊ Non-native/invasive species mitigation: Upkeep of vegetated areas should be a continuous effort of property owners. This includes proper management of invasive and non-native plant species that may have a negative impact on the natural wetland habitat. »Utilizing natural mitigation techniques should be encouraged as to avoid run-off from herbicide and pesticide product. Graphic 2.15 | Outdoor Pavilion Graphic 2.16 | Natural Landscaping Graphic 2.17 | Nature-Inspired Design Graphic 2.18 | Birds at the Great Salt Lake Graphic 2.19 | Education Center DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 29 1.2 | Trails and Boardwalks Integrating boardwalks and trails adjacent and into wetlands can provide educational and leisure activities for the community in and beyond the Plan Area. Access to these critical areas must be designed in a way that protects the natural habitat while also providing experiences that are otherwise experienced by only a few individuals. It is important to take inventory of the wetland and partner with ecologists before implementing a trail system. ◊ Working group: Educational and recreational programming is a welcomed amenity, however, start up can be difficult without willing partners and active volunteers. Establishing a working group can help implement a well-rounded, comprehensive wetland program. ◊ Trail Kiosk and Parking: Integrating educational and recreational opportunities with the wetlands can benefit those beyond the Plan Area. Therefore, establishing a trail kiosk and parking area will provide more convenient access to this amenity area. ◊ Connectivity: Connecting the wetlands to the upland environment can help the user experience the relationship between the two environments. ◊ Signage: Creating a recognizable sign program can help users identify the trails and remain on trail. The program can also include interpretive signage that indicates points of interest, or educational information about the wetlands and uplands. ◊ Trail type: It is important to evaluate what type of trails are appropriate in and around the wetland to mitigate the impacts on the natural environment. Purposeful design can also help mitigate unnecessary costs for development and maintenance. »Trails rather than boardwalks are appropriate in areas where there is raised ground through the wetland or around the wetland. Soft-surface trails require little investment. »Boardwalks are needed where adjacent lands are flat (vegetation is tall) and allows for the ground beneath to remain somewhat natural. Graphic 2.23 | Wildlife Viewing and Fishing Access Graphic 2.22 | Informational Signage Graphic 2.21 | Boardwalk-Style Trail Graphic 2.20 | Natural Multiuse Trail DRAFT CHAPTER 3 IMPLEMENTATION 32 Implementing the Vision Implementation refers to the actions Salt Lake City should take to ensure the Plan Area develops in a way that is consistent with the community’s vision. The most time-sensitive implementation actions are included as critical path items. Following the critical path items is a list of additional action items recommended to achieve the vision of this Plan. A critical element in planning for any area is considering water sources and needs. Any development in this area must adhere to Salt Lake City water-related plans and policies. Critical Path Items Critical path items are actions that should be abided by the City prior to and as development occurs. Each critical path item will fall into at least one of the following categories: built environment/design, services and infrastructure, and natural environment/preservation. These categories were identified throughout the planning process and are integrated into the various sections of the Plan. The following items are classified as an immediate need, as development pressures area already present in the Plan Area. Services and Infrastructure Evaluate Funding Solutions to Redesign 2200 W and Construct 2900 W Timeframe: Immediate Responsibility: Various City Departments 2900 W is intended to be developed with the Scannell-Swaner Subdivision and will serve as an additional major arterial road in this Plan Area. The redevelopment of 2200 W and the construction of 2900 W should consider increased vehicle volumes and incorporate pedestrian and biking infrastructure. Below is a list of potential funding opportunities for this action. For a detailed analysis of these tools and their applicability in the Plan Area, see the Financial Implementation Analysis in Appendix D. »Tax Increment Areas »Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs) »Special Assessment Areas (SAAs) »Impact Fees »Municipal Energy Tax Natural Environment/Preservation Evaluate the Feasibility of Acquiring Sensitive Lands as City-Owned Open Space Timeframe: Immediate Responsibility: Salt Lake City Council There has been a large amount of support for the preservation of open space in the Plan Area, as it serves as a cultural and historical landmark for the region and critical habitat for wildlife. Acquiring and preserving available open space in this area for passive recreation is a high priority. Land adjacent to the Jordan River and open land and wetlands adjacent to 3200 West should be a high priority for preservation. For a list of recommended land acquisition tools, see Chapter 4. Implementation Overview DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 33 Built Environment/Design Adopt Development Code Updates Timeframe: Immediate Responsibility: Salt Lake City Council There are several zoning designations within the Plan Area including Light Manufacturing (M- 1), Business Park (BP), and Agricultural/Rural Residential (AG-2, AG-5, and Salt Lake County A-2). Although some properties will likely remain agricultural or rural residential, it is anticipated that this area will slowly redevelop into primarily light manufacturing with some preserved open space areas. General Development Code Updates The simplest way to encourage development consistent with the City’s vision for the Plan Area is to adopt minor edits to these zoning categories. While the City Council may eventually adopt an overlay for the Plan Area, the following Zoning Code updates are “low-hanging fruit” the City can quickly implement. »Review landscape requirements to prohibit turf lawns and encourage native plantings in keeping with wetland preservation, particularly in interface areas. »Consider a reduction in minimum lot size if clustering for preservation areas. »Reconsider setbacks in the zoning code if preserving native habitat, allow more flexibility of the building envelope. »In the BP zone, eliminate the requirement of an agricultural buffer in favor of an environmental buffer (keep residential proximity protections when agriculture is a residential use). »Amend the Riparian Corridor Overlay zone to include wetland protection buffers. »Amend the Lowland Conservancy Overlay zone to include canals and drains in the Plan Area. Northpoint Specific Development Code The preferred approach to implement the vision for the Plan Area is a Northpoint-specific development code. A Northpoint-specific code should include: »Adopting the Design Standards from Chapter 2 of this document, which includes the recommended setbacks and buffer areas, landscape requirements, building materials and design standards, etc. »Incentive-based tools for preserving open and sensitive lands, such as allowing an increase in the maximum building façade length if preserving a larger amount of open space or buffer area than required. DRAFT 34 Create a local area utility plan Timeframe: Immediate Responsibility: Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities Require a local area utility plan to determine future Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities (SLCDPU) service availability and to ensure utility services can be provided based on the anticipated future land use associated with new development. City policy is that upon the development of a property, the developer will be required to identify and provide all utilities necessary to serve their development, including water, sewer, and stormwater. A local area utility plan shall be provided to SLCDPU for review to support any development application, to ensure adequate service availability, and to identify impacts on existing systems. Amend the Major Streets Plan Timeframe: Immediate Responsibility: Salt Lake City Planning Department and Transportation Division Amend the Major Streets Plan to reflect the removal of 3200 W as a major road. While shown as a local road on the proposed amended map, it is anticipated that 3200 W will remain an unimproved dirt road and barrier for adjacent wetlands to the west. New development should be prohibited from facing 3200 West. Additionally, the amended map includes the proposed roadway alignment of 2900 W and the realignment of 2100 North to access the airport. See Appendix E for the recommended amendments. Develop environmental impact standards and align them with current executive orders and master plans. Timeframe: Short Term Responsibility: Salt Lake City Planning Department Create standards for new development that mitigate the impact of said development on nearby habitat and sensitive areas. These standards may include elements such as water saving best practices, dark sky ordinances, landscaping requirements, etc. Additional Implementation Items The following list includes recommended key action items to achieve the vision for the Northpoint Plan Area. DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 35 Require a buffer of at least 75 feet between wetlands/uplands and any site development (e.g. buildings, parking, site features, and amenities) within the Northpoint Plan Area. Timeframe: Short Term Responsibility: Salt Lake City Planning Department The Great Salt Lake is a complex and delicate ecosystem and impact to this habitat area by new development should be carefully mitigated. A critical part of this mitigation is ensuring there is an adequate buffer between development and the wetland/upland ecosystem. Wetlands include both jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands. The Plan identifies up to a 300 foot buffer from wetland areas. This should be implemented through either an update to the City’s existing Riparian Overlay Zone or a new Northpoint specific development code. In developing the updated code, the City should consider identifying priority wetland areas and applying the maximum buffer to the highest priority wetlands. Reduced buffer widths may be appropriate based on the condition, function, and goal of the specific wetland buffer. Additionally, the City should allow flexibility of wetland buffers through incentive based tools. For example, the buffer width could be reduced through mitigation measures that include native vegetation restoration. Coordinate with Salt Lake County to provide efficient police and fire services in the Plan Area. Timeframe: Short Term Responsibility: City Council To provide adequate emergency services to this area, the development of a joint Police/Fire station may be required in the Plan Area. Coordinate with the Police and Fire Department to acquire funding and land in the Plan Area for a new shared facility. Support the annexation of contiguous parcels within the Plan Area. Timeframe: Ongoing Responsibility: Salt Lake City Planning Department The City supports the annexation of contiguous parcels in this Plan Area for future development and redevelopment. DRAFT CHAPTER 4 TOOLKIT 38 Using the Toolkit The Northpoint Small Area Master Plan process spanned fifteen months and included one-on-one interviews, workshops, and other public events. As expressed by project participants, key desired outcomes for the future of the Plan Area include: »Create a program to support a variety of incentives to maintain or improve property values while preserving open space. »Identify a future land use plan that allows industrial and business development while maintaining quality of life for existing residential areas and preserving natural habitat. »Locate future development in a manner that can support the efficient provision of city services. »Identify appropriate buffering, building design, and development characteristics to reduce impacts to the environmental features and wildlife habitat associated with the Great Salt Lake. »Recommend methods to reduce the negative impacts that future land uses may have on air quality, water quality, noise, and light. »Recommend tools to acquire and/or preserve open space. »Recommend strategies to improve traffic flow and safety on 2200 W. These desired outcomes suggest that while development in the Plan Area is in high demand, policies and strategies need to ensure that development is designed and arranged in a manner that respects the area’s sensitive landscape. Toolkit Overview DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 39 A variety of tools have been developed to protect natural open space and locate, configure, and design new development in a manner that protects both existing habitat and natural open spaces. The preservation tools described and analyzed in this Chapter represent existing and potential strategies for the protection of habitat and open space in the Plan Area. Tools have been categorized as regulatory, incentive, or land acquisition. This is not an all-inclusive listing of tools, but an inventory that details each potential tool, and provides examples. In addition to land preservation tools, this chapter covers financial tools available to fund improvements to or reconstruction of 2900 W. The benefits and limitations of each tool have been compiled from a number of sources, including university research, other localities’ experiences, practical knowledge, and reports by individuals who have made their own evaluations. The implementation tools presented in this Chapter constitute a menu of options that can be considered to achieve the objectives of this Plan.DRAFT 40 Land Preservation Tools Regulatory based tools may be used to protect sensitive lands and agricultural areas within the Plan Area. These tools could be implemented by Salt Lake City through adoption of new zoning and subdivision ordinances. Development Code Updates Code updates establish supplemental land development requirements within a specific area requiring special attention, such as an environmentally sensitive area. Clustering of Lots and Open Space/Cluster Development Clustering is defined as a development pattern typically for residential use, in which homes are grouped together rather than evenly dispersed over the land as in a conventional development. Benefits Limitations »Easily implemented »Allows flexibility in design for developers »Can apply to multiple areas within a city »Time and cost effective »Additional zoning requirements »Not a permanent solution to protect land from development pressures Benefits Limitations »Protects the natural resources of an area »Creates wider wildlife buffers »Creates opportunity for greater profits by consolidating required open space into larger, more impactful sizes »Reduces impact of development on watersheds »Reduces cost to provide municipal public services depending on how clustering is accomplished »Additional zoning requirements »Not a permanent solution to protect land from development pressures »May not be a mandatory tool; thus there may not be assurance that desired project designs will be implemented by developersDRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 41 Special Standards and Design Guidelines Additional regulations in new development or redevelopment projects can include standards for elements like lighting, landscaping, building materials, noise, and landscape buffers. Benefits Limitations »Helps mitigate impacts of new development on existing habitat and wildlife »Easily implemented »Allows flexibility in site design while preserving area character and sensitive lands »Additional zoning requirements »May not be a mandatory tool; thus there may not be assurance that desired project designs will be implemented by developers »Can be difficult for local officials to enforce unless bonus criteria are clearly spelled out in an ordinance or policy document Sensitive Landscape Studies Studies can determine additional steps that should be taken to mitigate impact of new development to existing habitat. Benefits Limitations »Helps mitigate impacts of new development on existing habitat and wildlife »Easily implemented »Offers insight into specific site requirements for mitigation »Additional zoning requirements »Can be difficult for local officials to enforce because requirements and study results may vary based on specific sites of participants were in support of clustering lots and open space of participants were in support of development code updates of participants were in support of sensitive landscape studies of participants were in support of special standards 47% 30% 62% 37% Regulatory Based Tools DRAFT 42 Incentive Based Tools Conservation Easements Conservation easements are voluntary and legally binding agreements between a landowner (public or private) and a qualifying organization (also public or private), in which permanent limitations are placed on a property’s use and development. Conservation easements limit land to uses identified in the easement, and thus protect it from development. Benefits Limitations »Permanently protects land from development »Landowners may receive income, estate, and/ or property tax benefits »Land remains in private ownership and on the tax rolls »Tax incentives may not provide enough compensation for many landowners »Since program is voluntary, it can be challenging to preserve large tracts of contiguous land or specific areas to be protected Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) TDRs are tools that establish areas within a community for preservation (sending zones), and additional growth (receiving zones). Sending zones can be areas of agricultural land, open space, or other properties important to preserve. Receiving zones are areas that the community has designated as appropriate for additional or increased development. Benefits Limitations »Permanently protects land from development pressures »Landowner is paid to protect their land »Local government can target locations effectively »Utilizes free market mechanisms »Land remains in private ownership and on tax rolls »Can be complex to administer »Receiving area must be willing to accept higher densities »Can be a difficult program to establish, especially in areas without city zoning »May require cooperative agreements among several local governments to establish sending and receiving zones Incentive based tools are voluntary and mostly based on the willingness of the landowner to sell title or an easement on their property. Where public access and use are desired, fee- simple ownership control is preferred through donation, purchase, or bargain sale of land to a government entity, conservation organization, or public charity. DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 43 Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) PDRs refer to the purchase of development rights on certain parcels of land by a unit of government or a non-profit entity. Once purchased, a conservation easement is placed on the property. Benefits Limitations »Permanently protects land from development »Landowner is paid to protect their land, while allowing for ongoing use »Local government can target desirable locations effectively »Land remains in private ownership and on the tax rolls »Program is voluntary »Can be costly for local unit of government, therefore land is generally protected at a slower rate »Land remains in private ownership, typically with no public access »Because the program is voluntary, it can be challenging to preserve large tracts of contiguous land Preferred Development Sites Also known as priority or target development areas, these are locations that have been identified by a local government as favored for residential, commercial, and office growth based on adopted growth management policies and plans. Development can involve new construction, redevelopment, and/or adaptive reuse of buildings. Local governments may offer incentives, such as reduced fees or increased housing density to developments in these areas in order to make them more attractive to developers. Benefits Limitations »Land remains in private ownership and on the tax rolls »Local government can target locations effectively »Can be low cost to local unit of government »Can be a difficult program to establish and administer »Not a permanent solution, delays development in sensitive areas »Tax incentives may not provide enough compensation for many landowners of participants were in support of conservation easements of participants were in support of TDR Programs of participants were in support of PDR Programs of participants were in support of Preferred Development Sites 56% 30% 47% 25% DRAFT 44 Land Acquisition Tools Mutual Covenant A mutual covenant is an agreement between adjoining landowners to control future land uses through mutually agreed upon restrictions. Lease A lease is an agreement between agency and landowner to rent the land in order to protect and manage sensitive resources. Benefits Limitations »Permanent covenants can be enforced by any of the landowners or future landowners of the involved properties »Significant incentive to comply with restrictions, since all parties are aware of use controls »Can reduce property taxes »Loss in market value from mutual covenants does not qualify as a charitable deduction for income tax purposes »High cost Benefits Limitations »Low cost approach to site protection »Landowner receives income and retains control of property »An alternative for preservation-minded landowners not ready to commit to sale of permanent easement »Restrictions can be included in the lease to direct the activities of the conservation agency on the land »Short-term protection strategy »Leases are not permanent Acquisition and management of open space can be combined with regulatory measures to broaden the effectiveness of a preservation program. These tools preserve open space and their functions in the long-term. Although typically the most expensive solution, acquisition is the strongest and surest means of protection. DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 45 Land Exchange Land exchange is the process by which land sought to be protected may be exchanged for another parcel that is more suitable for development Benefits Limitations »Lower acquisition costs »Scattered properties can be exchanged for a single, larger parcel »Complicated process »Not widely known and rarely used »Subject to IRS regulations »Property owners must be willing to participate, and properties must be of equal value »High cost Land Banking/Land Purchase Land banking occurs when land is purchased and reserved for later use or development. Land could be leased for immediate use (e.g. agriculture or athletic fields) or held for eventual resale with restrictions. The local government functions as a land trust. Benefits Limitations »Local government proactively identifies and purchases resource land »Lowers future preservation costs by working as a defense against future increases in land prices, speculation, and inappropriate development »High cost »Requires large upfront expenditures »Public agency must have staff to handle land trust functions of acquisition, management, lease, or resale of participants were in support of Lease Agreements of participants were in support of Mutual Covenants of participants were in support of Land Banking of participants were in support of Land Exchange 29% 31% 27% 38% DRAFT 46 Financial Tools Overview Northpoint represents an opportunity for Salt Lake City to encourage economic development that is compatible with the unique natural and built environment of the area, including proximity to the Salt Lake City International Airport. This area is best suited for business park and industrial development yet is hampered by the lack of significant infrastructure including transportation options and high-quality fiber broadband to the area. To realize its potential, the area requires substantial infrastructure improvements. Funding options for these improvements are discussed in this section of the report. It is a challenging time to fund infrastructure as construction costs are rising rapidly, along with interest rates. Infrastructure is generally needed before development can occur, which means that revenues generated by the project are not available for funding at the time they are most needed. Rather, other funding means must be identified, with revenue streams generated from development used later as a payback mechanism. Economic development is a key component of generating new revenue streams and is addressed in the full Financial Implementation Report in Appendix D. This chapter contains with the potential funding mechanisms that such development could enable. Market Analysis Northpoint is suitable for industrial and agricultural use, with limited residential. The area is proximate to the Salt Lake City International Airport and, as such, experiences high noise levels that make residential development difficult. The industrial market is strong in Salt Lake County, with a vacancy rate of only 2.2 percent and rising lease rates which have increased from an average (NNN) rate of $0.53 in 4th quarter 2020 to $0.63 in 4th quarter 2021. Total Salt Lake County inventory approximates 135 million square feet, with 9 million square feet of space under construction. In the northwest quadrant of Salt Lake County, the vacancy rate is 2.65 percent, with year-to-date (YTD) absorption of 7.5 million square feet and an average asking rate of $0.60 (NNN). Based on vacant acreage in the Plan Area that the Salt Lake County Assessor’s Office currently classifies as industrial, the area could absorb an additional 650,000 to 1,000,000 square feet of industrial space. This appears reasonable given current absorption patterns and the shortage of industrial space in the market. The biggest obstacles to industrial development appear to be supply chain shortages, rising construction costs and rapidly escalating interest rates.DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 47 Financial Tool | Tax Increment Areas Through the creation of a tax increment area, tax revenues generated within the designated Plan Area are split into two components: »(i)Base Revenues | The amount available before the tax increment area is established. Base revenues are shared among a mix of local governments that have the power to assess taxes such as schools, cities, counties, and special districts; and »(ii)Incremental Revenues | These are tax revenues in excess of the base revenues that are generated by new growth in the Plan Area. If a Plan Area is created, the incremental tax revenues can flow to the Plan Area for a period of time to encourage economic development. Some states, including Utah, allow incremental local sales tax revenues, as well as property taxes, to flow to a Plan Area for a period of time. By giving exclusive use of incremental revenues to the Plan Area, the creation of a successful tax increment area generates a new revenue stream that can be used to pay for projects, provide incentives to developers, or collateralize tax increment bonds. The most common uses of tax increment have been for infrastructure such as roads, utilities, telecommunications, electrical upgrades and burying power lines, and parking structures. Tax increment has also been used for demolition, tenant improvements, land acquisitions, environmental cleanup, trails, lighting, signage, playgrounds, incentives to developers, economic development activities and housing. Utah currently allows for the enactment of three types of tax increment areas: »Community Reinvestment Areas (CRAs) »Transportation Reinvestment Zones (TRZs) »Housing & Transit Reinvestment Zones (HTRZs) Of these three types of tax increment areas, CRAs and TRZs could be used as financing tools for the Plan Area. HTRZs rely on density of housing and this type of development is not suitable for Northpoint. DRAFT 48 Community Reinvestment Areas (CRA) In Utah, tax increment areas have been known by a wide variety of names over time – RDAs, URAs, EDAs, CDAs, and now as CRAs or Community Reinvestment Areas. As of 2016, the Legislature combined all types of Plan Areas—urban renewal, economic development, and community development into a new single “Community Reinvestment Plan Area” (CRA). Existing Plan Areas will be allowed to continue, but all new Plan Areas will be known as CRAs. The CRA Budget may either be approved by a Taxing Entity Committee (TEC) or through Interlocal Agreement with taxing entities, except where the Agency chooses to conduct a blight study to determine the existence of blight and to utilize limited eminent domain powers, which requires the approval of the TEC of both blight and the budget. If there is a finding of blight, 20 percent of the tax increment must be set aside for affordable housing. For all other projects, 10 percent of the tax increment is required to be set aside for affordable housing, if the annual increment is over $100,000. However, housing funds may be spent for affordable housing statewide and are not limited to being spent within a Plan Area. Noticing and hearing requirements apply with the CRA designation. After the tax increment collection period has expired, the tax increment dollars that previously flowed to the CRA will flow to the taxing entities that levy the property taxes within the Plan Area. In most cases, taxing entities receive more property tax revenues annually following expiration of the tax increment collection period than before, as property values are likely to have increased significantly through the redevelopment process. Benefits Limitations »Creates a new revenue stream. »Requires cooperation of other taxing entities. »Relatively easy to create. »10% of revenues must be directed to affordable housing. »Flexible uses of funds. »Revenues may take years to build up as development occurs over time. DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 49 Transportation Reinvestment Zone (TRZ) A TRZ is one type of area that can be formed where tax increment can be used to accelerate development within the defined Plan Area. According to Utah Code §11-13-103(22), “Transportation Reinvestment Zone” means an area created by two or more public agencies by interlocal agreement to capture increased property or sales tax revenue generated by a transportation infrastructure project. TRZs are ideal for projects such as Frontrunner, light rail, or major arterials that span multiple jurisdictions. Any two or more public agencies may enter into an agreement to create a transportation reinvestment zone but one of these entities must have land use authority over the TRZ area – in other words, Salt Lake City must be a partner in this endeavor. Benefits Limitations »Creates a new revenue stream. »Revenue directed to transportation projects will not be available to provide other services. »Relatively easy to create. »Requires cooperation between at least two entities. »Projected to produce substantial revenue stream over time. »Must find a nexus with transportation projects to justify use of the increment. »No affordable housing requirement. »Revenues may take years to build up as development occurs over time. DRAFT 50 Tax Increment Bonds Tax Increment Bonds were developed in California in 1952 as an innovative way of raising local matching funds for federal grants. They became increasingly popular in the 1980s and 1990s, when there were declines in subsidies for local economic development from federal grants, state grants, and federal tax subsidies (especially industrial development bonds). Tax Increment Bonds are collateralized by the incremental growth in property taxes within a given Plan Area. They capture the future tax benefits of real estate improvements to pay the present cost of those improvements. It is a financing strategy designed to make improvements to a targeted Plan Area or district without drawing on general fund revenue or creating a new tax. Benefits Limitations »Create a new revenue stream that can fund capital improvements and economic development. »Tend to carry higher interest and costs of issuance. »Creating entity does not have to bear financial burden alone but can share it with other taxing entities within a Plan Area. »Often require the cooperation and agreement of multiple taxing entities to generate sufficient incremental revenues to finance the desired infrastructure. »Tax increment revenues can be used to pay for administrative expenses. »Bonds can’t be sold unless the tax increment is already flowing or is imminent and nearly certain to flow or is enhanced by a government’s credit or other mechanism. »Financial and legal liability is limited by having a redevelopment agency. »Typically take longer from start to finish than other financing types. »Creating entity may gift tax revenues or property to provide incentives for development. »Critics of Tax Increment Bonds sometimes assert that tax increment is just a reallocation of tax revenues by which some municipalities win, and others lose. »Creating entity may be able to encourage or accelerate the timeframe of desired development types through offering tax increment incentives to the developer. »Mortgage on the property can also be given as bond security under Utah law in addition to incremental revenue. DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 51 Financial Tool | Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs) PIDs are generally most successful in larger, undeveloped areas where there are significant infrastructure needs. Because the unanimous consent of all property owners is required for the creation of a PID, it is difficult to establish PIDs in areas with numerous property owners. However, portions of the study area could be included – especially those areas with larger parcels, fewer property owners, and significant infrastructure needs. If created, a PID can be combined with other revenue sources such as tax increment and those revenues could be used to pay the PID bonds. These funding tools may further facilitate development and increase property values, which may in turn provide for more opportunities to fund basic infrastructure (through tax increment financing or general tax collection). The PID tool allows for creation of a separate taxing entity in order to fund public infrastructure. Ultimate users of the property pay for the improvements via the taxing entity through property assessments. These assessments permit for bonding, allowing for covering upfront infrastructure expenses that are repaid over periods typically near 30 years. This tool results in higher property taxes for property owners/users in the defined district. Benefits Limitations »Create a new revenue stream that can fund capital improvements and economic development. »Tend to carry higher interest and costs of issuance. »Any debt issued is not on the books of the local government entity. »Cities may feel it limits public support for future tax rate increases or bond elections due to the perception of already-high rates. »Can raise a significant amount of revenue with legally-allowed tax rates of up to 15 mils. »Requires unanimous support of all taxing entities to put in place. »Accelerates development timeframe through upfront funding for capital costs. »Ongoing PID governance »Can reduce the need for impact fees. »Competitiveness of site with other sites given higher tax rates »Mortgage on the property can also be given as bond security under Utah law in addition to incremental revenue. »Cost is much lower than other development financing. DRAFT 52 Special Investment Areas (SAAs) Special Assessment Areas (“SAAs”), formerly known as Special Improvement Districts or “SID”s, are a financing mechanism that allows governmental entities to designate a specific area for the purpose of financing the costs of improvements, operation and maintenance, or economic promotion activities that benefit property within a specified area. Entities can then levy a special assessment, on parity with a tax lien, to pay for those improvements or ongoing maintenance. The special assessment can be pledged to retire bonds, known as Special Assessment Bonds, if issued to finance construction of a project. Utah Code §11-42 deals with the requirements of special assessment areas. The underlying rationale of an SAA is that only those property owners who benefit from the public improvements and ongoing maintenance of the properties will be assessed for the associated costs as opposed to other financing structures in which all City residents pay either through property taxes or increased service fees. While more information about SAAs is included below, it could be difficult politically for the City to obtain support from a large number of property owners. Benefits Limitations »Bonds are tax-exempt although the interest cost is not as low as a GO or revenue bond »Forty percent of the assessed liability, be it one property owner or many could defeat the effort to create the SAA if they do not want to pay the assessment »No requirement to hold a bond election but the City must hold a meeting for property owners to be assessed before the SAA can be created »Some increased administrative burden for the City although State law permits an additional amount to be included in each assessment to either pay the City’s increased administrative costs or permit the City to hire an outside SAA administrator »Only benefited property owners pay for the improvements or ongoing maintenance »The City cannot assess government-owned property within the SAA »Limited risk to the City as there is no general tax or revenue pledge »Flexibility since property owners may pre-pay their assessment prior to bond issuance or annually thereafter as the bond documents dictate – if bonds are issued DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 53 Impact Fees Impact fees are one-time fees paid by new development to offset the capital costs associated with new development for basic utilities such as water, sewer, storm water, public safety, roads and parks/ trails. In order to collect impact fees, cities must carefully follow the requirements of Utah Code 11- 36a which includes the following major steps. »Prepare and pass a resolution authorizing study of an impact fee »Conduct an impact fee study to determine the appropriate amount of such a fee »Provide public notice of the possible fee 14 days prior to the public hearing »Hold a public hearing to take comment regarding the proposed fee Salt Lake City has already established impact fees that could be used to generate revenues on projects developed within its City boundaries. However, Salt Lake County would need to charge impact fees on the unincorporated areas of North Point. Impact fees collected would need to be spent on capital projects listed in each respective entity’s Impact Fee Facilities Plans (IFFPs). Therefore, careful coordination would need to take place between Salt Lake City and the County to ensure that the costs of needed projects are fairly allocated between the two entities. Benefits Limitations »New development pays for its fair share of the costs incurred by new development »Adds additional costs to development »Impact fees are generally paid when building permits are issued; therefore, funds are often not available upfront when infrastructure needs are greatest »Impact fees cannot be used to cure existing deficienciesDRAFT APPENDIX A EXISTING CONDITIONS 56 Water and Air Quality Air Quality Salt Lake City is often faced with some of the worst air quality in the world. Major declines in air quality typically occur during the summer or winter due to the Salt Lake Valley’s unique geographical makeup and position. In the summer, wildfire smoke often travels east from California, Oregon, and the region’s mountain ranges adding to pollution from cars, industry, and other elements leading to harmful ozone levels. In the winter, close proximity to the Wasatch Mountains leads to temperature inversions in which cold air gets trapped under a layer of warm air, acting like a lid keeping pollutants from escaping. During the winter, air pollution sources are transportation (50%); area sources (e.g. gas stations, auto-body shops, etc.) (35%); and industry (15%). The Plan Area experiences these same seasonal issues with air quality, as well as consistent impacts due to proximity of both the Salt Lake City International Airport, and I-215. I-215 limits connectivity to residential neighborhoods and services in both Salt Lake City and North Salt Lake City. With few daily services, such as grocery stores, within the expanded area, residents contribute to higher trips and higher mile traveled, exacerbating air quality issues. Graphic 1.3 | Regional Air Quality | Source: AirNow.Gov Graphic 1.4 | SLC Air Quality | Source: Scott Winterton Deseret News Existing Conditions DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 57 Water and Wetlands The presence of wetlands adjacent to the Jordan River Delta and at the edge of the Great Salt Lake is the most pertinent environmental issue in the area. Roughly 75% of Utah’s wetlands surround the Great Salt Lake, providing environmental and socioeconomic benefit. The wetlands surrounding the Northpoint Subarea are part of an intricate and diverse ecosystem. Wetlands benefit the environment by acting as sponges to capture, store, and slowly release water, storm buffers, groundwater and aquifer recharge, and sediment traps. Wetlands also serve as critical habitat areas by providing food, shelter, and resting places. Wetland benefits extend to provide recreational and agricultural opportunities. Graphic 1.5 | Wetlands Surrounding Northpoint | Source: National Wetlands Inventory A portion of these wetlands are designated playas, categorized by their dry, hollowed-out form that fill with water during rainstorms and by underlying aquifers. The Great Salt Lake is the largest saltwater lake in the Northern Hemisphere, meaning as the playas fill and eventually evaporate, they leave large salt deposits behind. Freshwater forested and shrub wetlands are found adjacent to the area, and are typically associated with woody plants such as willows. The current historic high water elevation for the Great Salt Lake is 4,211 feet last reached in 1986, and causing dramatic flooding. As of November 2021, the Lake’s water level has dropped to the lowest in recorded history at 4,190 feet, likely due to the extreme drought conditions the state is facing. In response to the unpredictability of the Lake, most planning agencies identify the contour of 4,217 feet, as the limit of safe development. There are no sites within the Plan Area that fall below this elevation. DRAFT 58 Soil Types The soil types within Northpoint vary and provide considerations for the types of development that can be accommodated in the Plan Area. The soil types dominating the area are fine sandy loam, silt loam and silty clay loam. Most of these soils have a water table depth between zero and fifty inches and are subject to the effects of frost. These high water table depths affect drainage and compressibility which impact new development potential. In addition, the soil types that dominate the area can cause problems for septic systems and filter fields, making it harder to maintain water quality. Natural Environment Graphic 1.6 | Recreational and Natural Landmarks Near Northpoint Graphic 1.6 | Prime Agricultural Soil | Source: National Resource Conservation Service DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 59 Hazards The greater Salt Lake City area faces natural hazards that impact rate and location of development. As climate change continues to exacerbate extreme weather events, planning with these common hazards in mind can help maintain the safety and comfort of the community. Clean air and water supply are among the top concerns of Salt Lake residents. In August of 2021, Salt Lake City was ranked the worst air quality of any major city in the world by IQAir.com, prompting residents to take extra precautions. The Salt Lake County Health Department released tips to stay safe during extreme air conditions such as staying indoors with windows shut, avoiding exercise, and wearing masks outdoors. The area, along with many other parts of the state, is currently under exceptional drought conditions, with fire restrictions and irrigation allotment reductions in place. Salt Lake City also experiences threats of extreme heat, wildfire, debris flows, flooding and earthquakes. Graphic 1.7 | Utah Drought Conditions | Source: National Drought Mitigation Center at University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2021. Summer 2021 Drought Conditions The City of Salt Lake has proposed land use amendments to prevent large water users from being located within The City that may have a significant impact on The City’s water resources. The new limit for industrial and commercial land uses is 300,000 GPD (based on an annual average) of potable/culinary water. The limit applies to existing and new uses on a temporary basis until January 2022. DRAFT 60 Wildlife and Habitat The Great Salt Lake and surrounding wetlands are a crucial habitat for many species of animals. With 400,000 acres of wetlands, birds of regional and national importance are drawn to the area as a sanctuary for breeding and eating. Every year, millions of birds from 338 different species stop here to feed during migrations. Among the most common species observed in the Plan Area are the European Starling, Red-winged Blackbird, Yellow-headed Blackbird, Northern Pintail, and Canada Goose. Although the Farmington Bay area is classified as freshwater, the northern-most regions of the Great Salt Lake can be composed of nearly 28% salt. This creates a wide diversity of habitats for many different plants, invertebrates, reptiles, amphibians, mammals, birds, and insects such as the Monarch Butterfly which is now on the endangered species list. European Starling DOMINANT BIRD TYPES IN NORTHPOINT Canada Goose. Red-winged Blackbird Yellow-headed Blackbird Northern Pintail DWR Bird Habitat Boundaries Graphic 1.8 | Dominant Bird Species in Northpoint Graphic 1.9 | Bird Habitat | Source: Department of Wildlife Resources GIS Data DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 61 Organizations There are many organizations with interest in the Plan and surrounding areas, including the Duck Clubs, Salt Lake City International Airport, and Friends of the Great Salt Lake. The Friends of Great Salt Lake is a nonprofit organization founded in 1994 to protect the Great Salt Lake ecosystem and increase public awareness and appreciation. The Rudy Duck Club, founded in 1909 and named after the original land owner Frank Rudy, acquired land and associated water rights in the early 1900s to preserve the ecosystem for private duck hunting. Agriculture The top producing crops in Salt Lake City, according to the 2017 Census of Agriculture, are wheat, hay, vegetables, pumpkins, and sweet corn. Within the Plan Area, current residents also own a variety of livestock. The majority of the housing stock supports the agricultural uses surrounding them. Within these lots there has been a pattern of subdividing larger lots into small lots for family members. There is a rich history of the agricultural lifestyle within Northpoint that the community desires to be preserved. According to the State Soil Conservation Service, the Plan Area contains prime farmland located north of 2800 North on the eastern side of 2200 West. Water Related Land Uses Graphic 1.10 | Water-Related Land Uses | Source: ESRI Living Atlas DRAFT 62 Built Environment Airport The Salt Lake International Airport, located just south of the Plan Area, is one of the busiest airports in North America. The airport is also a major hub for Delta airlines and provides approximately 370 flights per day from its location. As the airport inherently produces high noise volumes and air quality issues, it has a significant impact on the surrounding areas and determining appropriate land uses in Northpoint. The Salt Lake Airport recently adopted a new Master Planing process, the first since 1998, to provide guidelines for future airport development and to optimize existing facilities for future aviation demand and increase airport capacity. The resulting strategic vision illustrates locations for a third parallel runway and Concourse C which are not anticipated to be built within the next twenty years. The City has formally regulated the land uses surrounding the airport to protect the greater community and reduce negative impact. In 1971, zoning ordinances were adopted allowed within Northpoint and in 1983, the zoning ordinances were supplemented with regulations that prohibited incompatible uses like residential housing. Development Constraints Existing development within Northpoint experience consequences from their proximity to the airport and overhead flights. Some existing residences face increased risk for airplane crashes and high noise levels from the consistent flights. The Department of Airports recommends limiting the number of new residences allowed in Northpoint to reduce harm for the community in the future. The Federal Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) does not provide any assistance, subsidy or insurance for projects located in Runway Clear Zones, Clear Zones and Accident Potential Zones. As a result, this Plan considers alternative uses within those zones. The Salt Lake International Airport and Salt Lake City own several parcels surrounding the airport that were purchased to preserve as undeveloped. This, along with noise contours and influence zones limits development potential in the Plan Area. Northpoint lies within Influence Zone A/B meaning, the aircraft noise from overhead flights can interfere with daily living activities including sleep, conversations and listening to media. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires that each airport study the noise impacts and create a Noise Compatibility Program associated with alleviating noise issues. The Salt Lake City Noise Compatibility Program has implemented measures to increase compatibility with surrounding land uses Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community NORTHPOINT BOUNDARY SLC Airport-Owned Parcels Graphic 1.11 | Parcels Owned by the Salt Lake City International Airport | Source: Assessors Parcel Data DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 63 including maximization of flight times between 7am and 10pm. It has also implemented adjusted flight routes in pursuit of reduced disruption. As residential uses should be limited in Northpoint because of these constraints, there are other uses and opportunities for development that are more compatible with the airport. Economic Contribution The Salt Lake City International Airport, is a key driver of the local and regional economy. Through protecting airport infrastructure and facilities from adjacent land uses that reduce or eliminate its ability to function at the highest capacity, the Salt Lake City International Airport can continue to act as an asset to the greater community. SLC Airport Noise Contours SLC Airport Protection Overlays Graphic 1.12 | SLC Airport Noise Contours | Source: SLC GIS Data Graphic 1.13 | SLC Airport Overlays | Source: SLC GIS Data DRAFT 64 Land Use Industrial and Business Uses Within the Plan Area, there lies existing manufacturing zoning (M-1) that serves as a buffer between the airport and Interstate 215 (I-215). In July 2016, the City Council changed the zoning of properties located along 2200 W between 2100N and North Temple Street to Light Manufacturing (M-1) to implement area master plans and maximize economic development potential. Light Manufacturing (M-1) allows for light industrial uses that produce little to no impact on neighboring properties and results in a clean, attractive industrial setting. This use is compatible with the adjacent airport and is less impacted by the negative aspects of nearby I-215 than residential uses. The M-1 designation allows more types of business than the Business Park (BP) designations. The more significant differences between the two zoning districts are related to open space and building location requirements. The BP designation requires 15% open space, while M-1 requires no open space. M-1 also has reduced setback requirements. Approximately half of the Plan Area is designated BP. The intent of the BP designation is to provide an attractive environment for modern offices, light assembly and warehouse development, and to create employment and economic development opportunities in a campus-like setting. Graphic 1.14 | SLC and SLCo Zoning | Source: SLC, SLCo, and North Salt Lake GIS Data DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 65 Agricultural and Residential Uses The Plan Area contains several agricultural zones under both City and County jurisdiction, including Salt Lake City’s (SLC) AG-5 and AG-2, and Salt Lake County’s (SLCo) A-2 zone preserves agricultural uses on lots no less than two acres and, similarly, AG-5 provides for agricultural uses on no less than five acres. The A-2 zone allows for low-density residential and supporting agriculture as a conditional use, on a minimum lot size of one acre. Zone Minimum Lot Area Front Setback Primary Uses M-1 (SLC) 10,000 sq.ft.15 ft.Light Manufacturing BP (SLC) 20,000 sq.ft.30 ft.Business/ Office AG-2 (SLC)2 acres 30 ft.Agriculture/ Single-Family AG-5 (SLC)5 acres 30 ft.Agriculture/ Single-Family A-2 (SLCo)1 acre 30 ft.Single-Family Graphic 1.15 | Residential in the Plan Area DRAFT 66 Utilities Broadband The Plan Area is serviced by a mix of fixed wireless and wireline (cable, dsl and fiber)broadband internet. Within the census tract that Northpoint occupies, 10.60% of households are without internet access. The companies serving the area are Centurylink for local exchange, Rocky Mountain Power for electric utility territory and Dominion Energy for natural gas. The Utah Broadband Plan adopted in January 2020 set a goal to “Utilize best practices to encourage continued expansion of broadband deployment and increase speeds for everyone to 25 Mbps or better in communities throughout Utah”. The Plan Area currently has network speeds of 90.47/28.05 Mbps and its max advertised consumer download speeds are 10,000.00 Mbps. Active Building Permits and Recent Development There are currently a few active building permits within Northpoint that congregate along the 2200 W roadway and fall under the M-1 and BP zoning designations. A new development called Moonlake Farms has an active engineering permit and is among one of ten active permits for growing cannabis in Utah. There is also a new Industrial Building being built just north of the Sherwin Williams. Along the 2100N roadway, two new multi-tenant warehouse building have active permits as well. A key development proposal currently is the Swaner Subdivision, a 434-acre master planned development with about 5 million square feet of industrial on the C shaped parcel shown to the right currently zoned BP. This development would likely be cause for improvements on 2200 West to account for new increase in traffic. Another development conversation in this area is an proposed annexation petition for the land in the northeast section of the plan area. This proposed annexation was initiated by the landowners who wish to annex their land into Salt Lake City for the purpose of light industrial. A prior annexation conversation contemplated residential, however, that annexation was not pursued since Salt Lake City has determined that new residential would not be supported in the Plan Area. Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Ut a h I n l a n d Po r t A u t h o r i t y Proposed Swaner Subdivision Proposed North Salt Lake Annexation 22 0 0 W 2100 N 3200 N Graphic 1.16 | Active Applications DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 67 Industrial Wastewater The Salt Lake City Corporation’s pretreatment program oversees industrial wastewater discharged into the City’s sanitary sewer system. Industrial wastewater treatment, to reduce or eliminate conventional and toxic pollutants, prior to discharge into to the POTW (publicly owned treatment works) is required and regulated under the Clean Water Act. Salt Lake City is also undergoing redevelopment of its Water Reclamation Facility. The wastewater system will address new regulation from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Utah’s Department of Water Quality to reduce pollution and transform aging infrastructures. The Water Reclamation Center is located about a mile to the east of Northpoint and is replacing the old structure, which was 55 years old. Service Areas The Salt Lake City Public Utilities service area covers most of Northpoint with the exception of a portion to the north, just south of the Jordan River and a portion on the southern boundary. The remaining area is considered unincorporated territory. Though there are few sewer lines to this area, development is encroaching from the southeast and slowly extending utilities with it. Many residential and agricultural properties in this area rely on septic sewer systems. Street Lighting Public Utilities within Salt Lake manages and maintains more than 15,000 street lights, including those in Northpoint. The few residences and commercial customers within the area support street lighting through a monthly user fee, included in the bill for drinking water, wastewater, stormwater and sanitation services. The initial capital improvement program for street lighting in 2012 included a metric of converting the City’s entire inventory to high-energy efficiency LED lamps by the end of 2021. The continuous lighting maps do not extend into the Plan Area likely due to the lack of development in the area and the irregular Salt Lake City boundary. Irrigation Canals There are several irrigation canals running through Northpoint that serve the greater Salt Lake City area. The Rudy Drain runs diagonally across the study area from its connection to the Greater Salt Lake in the upper northwest quadrant to the lower southeast quadrant. Running along the western boundary is the Salt Lake City Canal Sewage. The southern boundary has a Reclamation ditch just north of the international airport. Graphic 1.17 | Utilities in Northpoint | Source: SLC GIS Data DRAFT 68 Transportation The eastern edge of the Plan Area runs along I-215, which acts as the main transportation route for the larger area. As Northpoint currently has little development beyond a small portion of residential housing to the northwest and light industrial to the south, the transportation routes within the Plan Area consist mainly of gravel roads. 2200 W divides the area into clear sections which suggest an informal development boundary along the roadway. Recent development in the area has almost exclusively been, between the roadway and I-215. Other roads in the 2019 Average Annual Daily Traffic Counts Plan Area include 3200W, a gravel road with minimal traffic that serves as the western boundary of the Plan Area, 3500N at the northern boundary, 2100N at the southern boundary, and several gravel and paved residential and commercial driveways. The main entries to the Plan Area are the exit from I-215 to 2100N from the south, and Center Street/3500N from the north. With increasing development pressure in the Plan Area, it will become increasingly important to make improvements to these interchanges and enhancements to 2200 W. Public Transportation The public transportation options that connect the Plan Area are limited. The 454 Green bus line extends to Airport Station on the south side of Salt Lake City International Airport but does not reach the Plan Area. The closest bus line to the area is the F522 Line running north/south on 2200 W. This bus line reaches the southern boundary and its final stop is near the Boeing warehouse. This bus line offers access to the light industrial and commercial businesses. This accessibility suggests that increasing the amount of industrial and commercial centers within the southern half of Northpoint would be supported by public transportation. Route 200 extends along Redwood Road to the southeast of Northpoint. However, this adjacent route is not Graphic 1.18 | Average Annual Daily Trips | Source: UDOT DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 69 accessible within a 15-minute walk of current homes of businesses within Northpoint. Bike Accessibility The major bikeways extending through the Plan Area are the Jordan River Trail, Parkway Trail, and a bike lane along 2200 W and 2100N. The bikeways along 2200 W and 2100N are designated medium comfort by Bike SLC. The painted bike lane disappears as the surroundings become more rural moving northbound through the Plan Area. These routes do not have high traffic but bikers must share the roads with vehicles in the same lanes. Economic Impact of Transportation Limited access to public transportation and the barrier of I-215 require households in the Plan Area to rely on personal vehicles or rideshare options to commute to and from work, errands, and schools. The Center for Neighborhood Technology recommends a household spend no more than 15% of their annual income on transportation. For a regional-typical household in this area, that means no more than $9,329. Households in this census block spend an average of $16,167- 175% higher than this benchmark. This is also higher than the Salt Lake City average of $13,211. Graphic 1.19 | Annual Driving Costs per Household | Source: Center for Neighborhood Technology Graphic 1.20 | Utah Transit Authority Bus DRAFT 70 Less ResidentsM ore Residents 70 Northpoint Community Demographics Over the last decade, Salt Lake City has grown by roughly 14,000 new residents. Most of this growth has been concentrated in downtown Salt Lake City, Central City, and Sugarhouse, each of which grew by over 2,000 residents between 2010 and 2020. Northpoint falls within the Westpointe Community Council area, which saw a population decrease (-1.6%) over the last decade. Approximately 140 people live within the Plan Area in roughly 60 households. City Council District 1, which encompasses the Plan Area boasts the largest share of Hispanic or Latino Population (48%) of all Council Districts. Economy 105 people are employed within the Plan Area but live elsewhere, and 74 Northpoint residents commute out of the area for work. No residents both live and work within the Plan Area. Of the jobs within the Plan Area boundary, Wholesale Trade (30% of the jobs) and Transportation and Warehousing (22%) are the most common industries. In 2018, about 54% of those jobs within the Plan Area boundary provided less than $40,000 per year in salary, roughly 63% of the median household income for overall Salt Lake City residents at $63,971. 105 People Commute IN for work 74 People Commute OUT for work 0 People Live and Work in the Area Population by TAZ Graphic 1.21 | Commuting Patterns and Population | Source: U.S. Census 2019 Less Residents More Residents DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 71 Within and immediately outside of the Plan Area, major employers include the Salt Lake City International Airport, Amazon, and the Salt Lake Mosquito Abatement Center. Those who live in the Plan Area have a higher median household income than the City as a whole at $75,791 and tend to work in the service industry, transportation and utilities, or manufacturing. Housing There are about 60 homes within the Plan Area and 1,487 housing units in the associated census tract. Housing is concentrated east of 2200 W due to environmental constraints and airport impacts. Housing within the Plan Area is comprised entirely single-family housing units, some of which are agricultural properties. The Plan Area has a high rate of owner-occupied units at 85.4% and an average home value of $438,000. This is higher than the median price for the zip code as a whole at $346,900. The zip code saw a 24% increase in home prices between 2020 and 2021. The Center for Neighborhood Technology estimates that households within the Plan Area are spending on average, 47% of their income on housing and transportation costs every month. As Salt Lake County grows and expands west, combining housing and transportation costs into one number offers an expanded view of affordability by showing the impacts of a longer daily commute on the affordability of a community. The Center for Neighborhood Technology sets a housing and transportation spending benchmark of no more than 45% of a household’s income, rather than using the traditional rule of no more than 30% on housing alone. Funding the Future Salt Lake City Council approved a 0.5% sales tax increase in May 2018. This increase will typically generate about $34 million a year in ongoing funding and is the first part of a funding strategy to address street conditions, affordable housing, public transit, and neighborhood safety. The Plan Area could benefit from funding for an affordable housing program and increased neighborhood safety. 47% Housing: 23% Transportation: 24% Graphic 1.22 | Housing and Transportation Costs as Percent of Income Per Household | Source: Center for Neighborhood Technology DRAFT 72 Community Amenities The Plan Area is bordered by the Jordan River connecting Utah Lake to the Great Salt Lake, and passing through three counties. Many sections of the Jordan River have access trails running parallel to the river and connect nearby parks. Although the Plan Area lies adjacent to the River, the formal trail stops to the to the east of I-215. Directly east of the Plan Area are the Regional Athletic Complex, Jordan River OHV State Recreation Area, Westpointe Park, Northstar Elementary School, and Northwest Middle School. Only one crossing of I-215 allows for access to these areas. As shown below, I-215 severely limits access to community resources like schools, religious organizations, recreation, and other gathering areas. JORDAN RIVER OHV STATE RECREATION AREA JORDA N RIVER CENTER STREET TRAILHEAD COLISEUM FITNESS SPECTRUM ACADEMY FOXBORO ELEMENTARY NORTHWEST MIDDLE SCHOOL NORTHSTAR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ROSEWOOD PARK GUADALUPE SCHOOL SALT LAKE CENTER FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION REGIONAL ATHLETIC COMPLEX UNITY BAPTIST CHURCHWESTPOINTE PARK Graphic 1.23 | Amenities near the Plan Area I 2 1 5 B A R R I E R DRAFT SALT LAKE CITY NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN 73 Graphic 1.24 | Trailhead map of the Jordan River DRAFT APPENDIX B PUBLIC INPUT Appendix B: Public Input The public input process included various opportunities for engagement. One-on-one interviews with residents, developers, environmental groups, and city and county staff were conducted throughout the summer of 2021. Over 30 people attended a public open house in the spring of 2022, and two public questionnaires and a property owner-specific questionnaire were distributed over the course of the Northpoint Small Area project. The following is a record of the engagement and materials from the open house and survey results. Open House and Questionnaire Comments Report for Northpoint Property Owner Questionnaire Completion Rate:85.7% Complete 18 Partial 3 Totals: 21 Response Counts 1. What is your relationship with the Northpoint area? (select all that apply) Percent I own property here I live here I own a business here I work here 0 20 40 60 80 100 Value Percent Responses I own property here 100.0%17 I live here 70.6%12 I own a business here 17.6%3 I work here 11.8%2 2. In the Northpoint area how important is the conservation of habitat and ecosystems to you? 77% Highly Important77% Highly Important 6% Somewhat Important6% Somewhat Important 12% Neutral12% Neutral 6% Somewhat Not Important6% Somewhat Not Important Value Percent Responses Highly Important 76.5%13 Somewhat Important 5.9%1 Neutral 11.8%2 Somewhat Not Important 5.9%1 Totals: 17 3. In the Northpoint area how important is commercial and residential development to you? 41% Highly Important41% Highly Important 6% Somewhat Important6% Somewhat Important18% Somewhat Not Important18% Somewhat Not Important 35% Highly Not Important35% Highly Not Important Value Percent Responses Highly Important 41.2%7 Somewhat Important 5.9%1 Somewhat Not Important 17.6%3 Highly Not Important 35.3%6 Totals: 17 4. Would you support conservation methods and tools that could provide financial compensation to landowners for the preservation of natural lands and habitats instead of development? 59% Highly Support59% Highly Support 6% Somewhat Support6% Somewhat Support 24% Neutral24% Neutral 12% Highly Not Support12% Highly Not Support Value Percent Responses Highly Support 58.8%10 Somewhat Support 5.9%1 Neutral 23.5%4 Highly Not Support 11.8%2 Totals: 17 5. Would you support the continuation of existing land uses such as grazing, agriculture, habitat conservation, rural residential, and wildlife? 77% Highly Support77% Highly Support 6% Somewhat Support6% Somewhat Support 12% Neutral12% Neutral 6% Highly Not Support6% Highly Not Support Value Percent Responses Highly Support 76.5%13 Somewhat Support 5.9%1 Neutral 11.8%2 Highly Not Support 5.9%1 Totals: 17 ResponseID Response 4 No. 7 I am highly against any further building on the agricultural land out here. 8 The area is too close to the airport not to take advantage of this proximity to lessen the burden on existing infrastructure and lessen pollution. This can be done preserving habitat closer to the Great Salt Lake. 10 We need clean air and less big heavy trucks in this tiny road. We can't handle it. We pay our taxes just like everyone eon the east side we deserve more from the city. 13 Just because land in the area has always been zoned Business Park, it does not mean it should stay that way. I don't see how it was ever zoned BP or anything other than conservation when it is directly next to ecosystems that will be negatively impacted by development. I appreciate you asking for our opinions and for keeping the survey short, but I am somewhat disappointed in this survey as it feels lacking. It's not ideal to ask double barreled questions in surveys if you want honest answers. For example, my answer to supporting residential development is different than my answer to commercial development, but this survey can't reflect that. 14 I operate a recording studio off of 2200w and construction of anything will shut me down during construction and possibly forever. 15 Construction on 2200w is dangerous without some sort of alternate construction road in place before construction begins. 16 The area of 2200 west to 3200 west and 2100 north to 3300 north is a bird and wildlife refuge and one of the last open spaces in SL county. It needs to be preserved and not just overdeveloped like the rest of the valley is becoming. Thank you for your time. Robert Taylor 17 It would be the advantage of the area and ecology to think about NOT developing every lat inch of open space. This is a sensitive area. There is a high saturation of wildlife, migration and nesting areas here. It's a wetland. In a meet the committee was surprised to hear about the existence of wildlife. We see and experience it everyday. The delineation of preexisting residential areas should be recognized. This area was settled by ranchers and farmers who understood the doom of development. This area is a treasure and should be left alone OR very thoughtfully and carefully developed. The rate with which it is occurring now is always met with contempt and disagreement. There is another way and we should make a plan of best outcomes. 6. Is there anything you'd like to add? 20 I think the area can do both commercial and have some open space.. This area is not for residential? My opinion. I have seen residential next to airports and it's not nice at all.. 21 My family has been here for over 100 years. A lot of the older homes were built by family. Now with the restrictions of building and septic use. You can't let your children build a house on a 1/4 acre lot. I have had to have children move to wood cross to have there own home. The current restrictions render the ground useless for building anything. Yet keeping some space still for AG use. The bigger lots have all ready been sold to developers, the people left will be left with your open space weed patch and no money to move any where. ResponseID Response 7. Are you interested in recieving further information about this project and ways to get involved? 78% Yes please78% Yes please 22% No, thank you22% No, thank you Value Percent Responses Yes please 77.8%14 No, thank you 22.2%4 Totals: 18 Report for Northpoint Small Area Plan Questionnaire Completion Rate:54.7% Complete 41 Partial 34 Totals: 75 Response Counts 1. What is your affiliation with the Northpoint area? Percent I am a resident I work in the area I own property I am interested in owning property I am a business owner I visit the area Other - Write In 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Value Percent Responses I am a resident 29.7%19 I work in the area 17.2%11 I own property 31.3%20 I am interested in owning property 18.8%12 I am a business owner 9.4%6 I visit the area 25.0%16 Other - Write In 14.1%9 2. What is your level of support for special standards and design guidelines as a regulatory conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 3. What is your level of support for requiring sensitive landscape studies as a regulatory conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 10 20 30 40 4. What is your level of support for development code updates as a regulatory conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 5. What is your level of support for the clustering of lots and open space as a regulatory conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 6. What is your level of support for conservation easements as an incentive-based conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 7. What is your level of support for purchase of development rights (PDR) as an incentive-based conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 8. What is your level of support for transfer of development rights as an incentive-based conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 9. What is your level of support for preferred development sites as an incentive-based conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 10 20 30 40 10. What is your level of support for lease agreements as a land acquisition conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 10 20 30 40 50 11. What is your level of support for mutual covenants as a land acquisition conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 10 20 30 40 50 12. What is your level of support for land banking as a land acquisition conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 10 20 30 40 13. What is your level of support for land exchange as a land acquisition conservation tool? Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 14. What open space interaction elements would you like to see in the Northpoint Area? (select all that apply) 22% amenitizedtrailheads2.jpg22% amenitizedtrailheads2.jpg 49% Multi-Purpose Natural Trails49% Multi-Purpose Natural Trails 59% Fishing Access Along the River 59% Fishing Access Along the River 37% Wildlife Viewing Areas37% Wildlife Viewing Areas 49% Trails Along Natural Resources 49% Trails Along Natural Resources 22% Interpretive/Education Center22% Interpretive/Education Center 27% Interpretive/Educational Signage 27% Interpretive/Educational Signage 29% Boardwalks29% Boardwalks Value Percent Responses amenitizedtrailheads2.jpg 22.0%9 Multi-Purpose Natural Trails 48.8%20 Fishing Access Along the River 58.5%24 Wildlife Viewing Areas 36.6%15 Trails Along Natural Resources 48.8%20 Interpretive/Education Center 22.0%9 Interpretive/Educational Signage 26.8%11 Boardwalks 29.3%12 ResponseID Response My emphasis on maintaining open-space natural area rather than developing a park-like area. None Great ideas for the community. This is such a treasure that is Salt Lake City. The land needs to be preserved for future generations, plus people are not having children there may not be the need for more development such as empty commercial buildings. Once you destroy land for development, you cant reverse the damage. All of the above amenities are wonderful. However, who maintains them and fronts the development costs? The land being discussed does not naturally produce any of the above items pictured. We are old salt flats that grow things with a lot of encouragement. We have been trying to improve the ground for 50 years and have done a lot of good. However, one year of not planting and working hard takes away 50 years of work. The farms out here would not be successful if all of the farmers did not have other larger farms somewhere else or other businesses that help support the farm. I support whatever developments come to this area that give the land owners the best benefits of their property. I know everyone wants what improves their community but don't forget the land owners and the work they have done for lifetimes and they need their rights reserved as well. This ground work for homes and businesses family like the Rudy's .Drechsel's.Swaner's Hinkley's family farmed this ground but it's no longer feasible for making a living and the ground is there retirement you want to take it from them shame on you None - not appropriate in industrial areas. none - not appropriate in industrial areas None. Not applicable for an industrial area. Restrooms. Solar panels on roof. Art. Shade none, not appropriate for industrial area none, not appropriate for industrial area none not appropriate on my land no water or for industrial area Most of these are not appropriate for an industrial area. 15. What open space interaction elements would you like to see in the Northpoint Area? (select all that apply) - comments None, not appropriate for industrial area none-not appropriate for industrial area ResponseID Response 16. When imagining the future of the Northpoint area, how do you want to see 2200 WEST improved or enhanced? Which do you think may be most appropriate to the Northpoint area? (select all that apply) 15% Painted Bike Lane15% Painted Bike Lane 12% Buffered Bike Lane12% Buffered Bike Lane 17% Roundabout with Integrated Trail Alignments 17% Roundabout with Integrated Trail Alignments 22% Street with Flat Drain Pan Edge 22% Street with Flat Drain Pan Edge 49% Street with Porous Surface Edge 49% Street with Porous Surface Edge 29% Parkways Planted with Native and Low-Water Species 29% Parkways Planted with Native and Low-Water Species 5% Crosswalks with Striping and Planters 5% Crosswalks with Striping and Planters 20% Typical Curb and Gutter Street 20% Typical Curb and Gutter Street Value Percent Responses Painted Bike Lane 14.6%6 Buffered Bike Lane 12.2%5 Roundabout with Integrated Trail Alignments 17.1%7 Street with Flat Drain Pan Edge 22.0%9 Street with Porous Surface Edge 48.8%20 Parkways Planted with Native and Low-Water Species 29.3%12 Crosswalks with Striping and Planters 4.9%2 Typical Curb and Gutter Street 19.5%8 ResponseID Response Most of these options do not seem appropriate for 2200 West. What ever the design needs to implemented consistently rather than in piecemeal blocks. Such approach expensive and dangerous. We really don't need curb and gutter or sidewalks unless this area gets over developments by commercial buildings then we will need more for the residents. I do not think traditional curb and gutter are needed for the area, but some sort of drainage is needed. It is a popular biking path that needs more safety for cyclists. 17. When imagining the future of the Northpoint area, how do you want to see 2200 WEST improved or enhanced? Which do you think may be most appropriate to the Northpoint area? (select all that apply) - comments 18. What design elements are appropriate for new business and industrial development in the Northpoint area? 22% Integration of Community Solar or Solar Gardens 22% Integration of Community Solar or Solar Gardens 24% LID/LEED Elements (i.e. Green Roofs) 24% LID/LEED Elements (i.e. Green Roofs) 51% Wildlife-Friendly Lighting51% Wildlife-Friendly Lighting 27% Two-Story Live/Work Industrial Residential 27% Two-Story Live/Work Industrial Residential 29% Increased habitat/Wildlife Buffers 29% Increased habitat/Wildlife Buffers76% Integrated Xeriscape and Native Landscaping 76% Integrated Xeriscape and Native Landscaping 34% Wildlife-Friendly Fencing34% Wildlife-Friendly Fencing 29% Noise Mitigation Design Elements (e.g. textured noise walls) 29% Noise Mitigation Design Elements (e.g. textured noise walls) 22% Thematic Sitting Areas Blended with Landscape 22% Thematic Sitting Areas Blended with Landscape 24% Natural Building Materials24% Natural Building Materials Value Percent Responses Integration of Community Solar or Solar Gardens 22.0%9 LID/LEED Elements (i.e. Green Roofs)24.4%10 Wildlife-Friendly Lighting 51.2%21 Two-Story Live/Work Industrial Residential 26.8%11 Increased habitat/Wildlife Buffers 29.3%12 Integrated Xeriscape and Native Landscaping 75.6%31 Wildlife-Friendly Fencing 34.1%14 Noise Mitigation Design Elements (e.g. textured noise walls)29.3%12 Thematic Sitting Areas Blended with Landscape 22.0%9 Natural Building Materials 24.4%10 ResponseID Response Empyhasis on keeping natural habitat and implementing "green" approaches Wildlife and nature are friendly. dense and limited cars/roads One of the major safety issues would be for the migratory birds, because this area is wetlands that is being destroyed. You would have to put the lights and windows in consideration. Again, all very nice, all of the ideas that have been presented over the last several years get voted down. It seems impossible to present something that people will get on board with. I want the land owners to be able to develop their properties with the highest value and regular farming is just not a viable option economically. Walkable design. Sustainable design. No grass. 19. What design elements are appropriate for new business and industrial development in the Northpoint area? - comments ResponseID Response 5 Place a moratorium on development until the plan is in place. 6 The construction of 2800W to pull traffic off of 2200W 7 3200 West should remain unpaved. There should be a buffer/natural area along the eastern side of 3200 West. 10 Affordable Housing. Salt Lake City is missing a big opportunity to fill the gap in affordable housing by using the acreage in this area. We are in a housing crisis, there is almost no land left to build in Salt Lake, this is a HUGE opportunity that Salt Lake could miss to build more units that are desperately needed. This is not the time for us to complain about open space. Look at the Governor's initiatives and play your part. The mayor and city council of Salt Lake are all about helping the homeless, but if we don't build more housing units the homeless population will only rise. I think the direction that it appears we are heading with this questionnaire needs to be reconsidered to include more, dense residential units for Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County 12 Need to address annexation issues and multi-jurisdictional service coordination issues NEED TO SAVE CROSS E RANCH possibly by having SL County purchase property with funding from a variety of institutional entities including USU, LDS Church, SLCity, Davis County, NSLCity, and Open Lands foundationsl Need 6 mo. moratorium on new development until Northpoint Small Area Plan is completed. 13 Plan is a waste of tax payer dollars. The market will decide the highest and best use of land in the area. 16 Ive researched what has been going on out here over the last few years, with some property owners exploring being annexed into North Salt Lake because of the regulation barriers that Salt Lake City has shown. Find compromise with the landowners or SLC may lose some of this unincorporated land and development opportunity in this area. 19 This is an industrial area and business park zoning already exists and makes sense for this project. There are already protections in place of wetlands and habitats of threatened and endangered species. 2200W is already master planned with a 90' ROW road section. Developers who develop with frontage along 2200W are already required to improve and widen the sections of 2200 W that abut their property. Many of the single family home-owners in this area are already under contract to sell their property to business park developers. There is no reason to plan this area with the preservation of existing single family homes as a goal. 20. What else should the Northpoint Small Area Plan address? 22 The valley and particularly the westside is already saturated with air quality issues. Any commercial development should exclude air pollution inputs. Additionally, water supply and quality are major issues for the state and communities which callks for restrictions on water use and waste. 24 Update the community. 26 density and walkability is best for wildlife 28 Wetlands and the fact that they are endangered. There is becoming less space for wildlife. USDA has programs for Urban Agriculture. 31 Please don't forget about the residents! This survey was focused on business development and none of the questions focused on also preserving the residential zoning in the area. We are already being bullied by developers to sell our land so they can rezone for business. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW REZONING FOR BUSINESSES IN THE VERY SMALL REMAINING RESIDENTIAL ZONED AREAS. There are plenty of open spaces for developers to build that don't require forcing us out of our homes. 33 Setbacks and landscape areas along major roads. 34 Three points: 1. Leave 3200 West unimproved. 2. Restrictions on zoning changes until master plan is complete 3. Set aside buffer/open space lands clustered east of 3200 West. 37 The small area plan needs to think about both sides. There are a lot of neighbors talking about conservation of their lifestyle but I'm pretty sure none of them is making their living from farming. I love this area more than the average person but, I also know the realities of farming and maintaining a farm and or open space. The county could maintain or develop some trails and require certain landscaping. I know that those kinds of requirements exist in all developments. I prefer they allow the land owners the right to sell/develop their properties. There are many options for good development in this area. Residents (37ish houses) along 2200 west have been against a business park development, industrial, and residential. They want it to remain the same as always. However, that cannot happen nor should it. 39 The homeowner and people that own businesses out there 48 Zoning of specific areas to BP or M1 52 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use map. 54 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use map. ResponseID Response 58 This area should be light manufacturing/industrial. With the 435 acres of BP, this whole area should follow suit. More tax basis for city, great area for business, less water usage than farmers, etc. 59 Water use. 60 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use map 61 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use map 63 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use map 64 Designate this land as Business Park and/or Light Industrial 67 With the business park areas that have been approved, it makes the most sense for SLC to default to Business Park zoning for this North Point area. 70 Designate this land as light industrial in the future land use nap 71 Designate this land as light 75 Do we have the water to build more? How will building in this area further impact the Great Salt Lake? Very concerned about maintaining open space and not further taxing our diminishing water systems. ResponseID Response 21. Would you like to stay involved with this planning process? Please leave your email below! APPENDIX C CONSTRAINTS Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend NorthPoint_Boundary -9 to -8 -7 to -6 -5 -4 to -3 -2 -1 0 1 to 2 3 to 4 5 to 7 ¯ Northpoint Opportunity Areas Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 NorthPoint_Boundary ¯ Northpoint Constraint Areas Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Wetlands (-3)Airport Owned (-3)Easements (-2) Airport Influence Zones (-2, -1)Prime Ag Soil (-1) Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Noise Contours (-1) Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Legend 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NorthPoint_Boundary ¯ Northpoint Opportunity Areas Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community Proximity to Services (+3)Underutilized (+2)Vacant (+1) Large Parcels (+1)Access to Transportation (+1) APPENDIX D FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 1 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND FUNDING OPTIONS Northpoint represents an opportunity for Salt Lake City to encourage economic development that is compatible with the unique natural and built environment of the area, including proximity to the Salt Lake City International Airport. This area is best suited for business park and industrial development yet is hampered by the lack of significant infrastructure including transportation options and high-quality fiber broadband to the area. To realize its potential, the area requires substantial infrastructure improvements. Funding options for these improvements are discussed in this section of the report. It is a challenging time to fund infrastructure as construction costs are rising rapidly, along with interest rates. Infrastructure is generally needed before development can occur, which means that revenues generated by the project are not available for funding at the time they are most needed. Rather, other funding means must be identified, with revenue streams generated from development used later as a payback mechanism. Economic development is a key component of generating new revenue streams and is addressed in this report, along with the potential funding mechanisms that such development could enable. MARKET ANALYSIS Northpoint is suitable for industrial and agricultural use, with limited residential. The area is proximate to the Salt Lake City International Airport and, as such, experiences high noise levels that make residential development difficult. The industrial market is strong in Salt Lake County, with a vacancy rate of only 2.2 percent and rising lease rates which have increased from an average (NNN) rate of $0.53 in 4th quarter 2020 to $0.63 in 4th quarter 2021. Total Salt Lake County inventory approximates 135 million square feet, with 9 million square feet of space under construction. In the northwest quadrant of Salt Lake County, the vacancy rate is 2.65 percent, with year-to-date (YTD) absorption of 7.5 million square feet and an average asking rate of $0.60 (NNN).1 Based on vacant acreage in the Northpoint area that the Salt Lake County Assessor’s Office currently classifies as industrial, the area could absorb an additional 650,000 to 1,000,000 square feet of industrial space. This appears reasonable given current absorption patterns and the shortage of industrial space in the market. The biggest obstacles to industrial development appear to be supply chain shortages, rising construction costs and rapidly escalating interest rates. 1 Source: Colliers, Salt Lake County Industrial Market Report 4Q 2021. 2 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 COMBINED COMPONENTS FOR FUNDING OPTIONS The available tools and issuing entities discussed in this report may be combined in a variety of viable options to arrive at the desired funding level for the Northpoint area. Possible funding mechanisms include the following, each of which is discussed in more detail in following sections. Tax Increment Areas o Community Reinvestment Areas (CRAs) o Transportation Reinvestment Zones (TRZs) o Tax Increment Bonds Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs) Special Assessment Areas (SAAs) Impact Fees Municipal Energy Tax TAX INCREMENT AREAS Through the creation of a tax increment area, tax revenues generated within the designated project area are split into two components: (i)Base Revenues – The amount available before the tax increment area is established. Base revenues are shared among a mix of local governments that have the power to assess taxes such as schools, cities, counties, and special districts; and (ii)Incremental Revenues – These are tax revenues in excess of the base revenues that are generated by new growth in the project area. If a project area is created, the incremental tax revenues can flow to the project area for a period of time to encourage economic development. Some states, including Utah, allow incremental local sales tax revenues, as well as property taxes, to flow to a project area for a period of time. By giving exclusive use of incremental revenues to the project area, the creation of a successful tax increment area generates a new revenue stream that can be used to pay for projects, provide incentives to developers, or collateralize tax increment bonds. The most common uses of tax increment have been for infrastructure such as roads, utilities, telecommunications, electrical upgrades and burying power lines, and parking structures. Tax increment has also been used for demolition, tenant improvements, land acquisitions, environmental cleanup, trails, lighting, signage, playgrounds, incentives to developers, economic development activities and housing. Utah currently allows for the enactment of three types of tax increment areas: Community Reinvestment Areas (CRAs) Transportation Reinvestment Zones (TRZs) Housing & Transit Reinvestment Zones (HTRZs) 3 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 Of these three types of tax increment areas, CRAs and TRZs could be used as financing tools for the Northpoint area. HTRZs rely on density of housing and this type of development is not suitable for Northpoint. COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AREAS (CRAS) In Utah, tax increment areas have been known by a wide variety of names over time – RDAs, URAs, EDAs, CDAs, and now as CRAs or Community Reinvestment Areas. As of 2016, the Legislature combined all types of project areas—urban renewal, economic development, and community development into a new single “Community Reinvestment Project Area” (CRA). Existing project areas will be allowed to continue, but all new project areas will be known as CRAs. The CRA Budget may either be approved by a Taxing Entity Committee (TEC) or through Interlocal Agreement with taxing entities, except where the Agency chooses to conduct a blight study to determine the existence of blight and to utilize limited eminent domain powers, which requires the approval of the TEC of both blight and the budget. If there is a finding of blight, 20 percent of the tax increment must be set aside for affordable housing. For all other projects, 10 percent of the tax increment is required to be set aside for affordable housing, if the annual increment is over $100,000. However, housing funds may be spent for affordable housing statewide and are not limited to being spent within a project area. Noticing and hearing requirements apply with the CRA designation. After the tax increment collection period has expired, the tax increment dollars that previously flowed to the CRA will flow to the taxing entities that levy the property taxes within the project area. In most cases, taxing entities receive more property tax revenues annually following expiration of the tax increment collection period than before, as property values are likely to have increased significantly through the redevelopment process. TABLE 1: COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AREAS – ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES Advantages Community Reinvestment Areas Disadvantages Community Reinvestment Areas Creates a new revenue stream.Requires cooperation of other taxing entities. Relatively easy to create.10% of revenues must be directed to affordable housing. Flexible uses of funds.Revenues may take years to build up as development occurs over time. The Northpoint area contains roughly 1,323 acres and five tax districts. All of the tax districts are within Salt Lake City, with the exception of Tax District ACT that is found within unincorporated Salt Lake County. 4 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 TABLE 2: NORTH POINT EXISTING MARKET VALUES AND ACREAGE Property Values # of Parcels Total Market Value Residential Market Value Acres Tax District 13 63 $74,752,600 $30,700,900 666.83 Tax District 13 Q 3 $7,927,300 17.37 Tax District 13 I 3 $51,954,200 27.26 Tax District 13 R 14 $21,076,200 $1,529,600 27.01 Tax District ACT 47 $27,957,700 $12,251,900 584.37 TOTAL 130 $183,668,000 $44,482,400 1,322.84 Although there are five separate tax districts, districts 13 and 13Q include the same taxing entities; districts 13I and 13R also have the same taxing entities. The taxing entities and their tax rates are as follows: TABLE 3: TAX DISTRICTS AND TAXING ENTITIES Tax Rate Tax District 13 and 13Q Figure 1: Northpoint Tax Districts 5 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 Tax Rate Salt Lake County 0.001777 Multi-County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000012 County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000196 Salt Lake City School District 0.004809 Salt Lake City 0.003424 Salt Lake City Library 0.000652 Metropolitan Water District Salt Lake 0.000253 Salt Lake City Mosquito Abatement 0.000115 Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004 TOTAL 0.011638 Tax District 13I and 13R Salt Lake County 0.001777 Multi-County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000012 County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000196 Granite School District 0.007105 Salt Lake City 0.003424 Salt Lake City Library 0.000652 Metropolitan Water District Salt Lake 0.000253 Salt Lake City Mosquito Abatement 0.000115 Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004 TOTAL 0.013934 Tax District - Unincorporated Salt Lake County 0.001777 Multi-County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000012 County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000196 Granite School District 0.007105 Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004 Salt Lake County Municipal-Type Services 0.000051 Unified Fire Service Area 0.001594 Salt Lake Valley Law Enforcement Service Area 0.001973 Salt Lake County Library 0.000474 TOTAL 0.013582 The market value of the property is much higher than the taxable value in the area for several reasons. First, primary residential development is taxed at 55 percent of market value. Agricultural property is in greenbelt status and taxed at extremely low rates, and public properties are tax exempt. Therefore, while the market value is nearly $184 million, taxable value is estimated at roughly $67.9 million. 6 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 TABLE 4: ESTIMATED NORTHPOINT TAXABLE VALUE Estimated Taxable Value Tax Districts 13 and 13Q $37,500,000 Tax Districts 13 I and 13 R $20,400,000 Tax District ACT $10,000,000 Total Taxable Value $67,900,000 Taxable value will increase as development occurs in Northpoint. Of the 1,323 acres in Northpoint, approximately 437 acres are either vacant or held in agricultural use. TABLE 5: VACANT ACRES Vacant Acres Tax Districts 13 and 13Q Tax Districts 13I and 13R Tax District ACT Total Residential 8.34 19.81 28.15 Industrial 17.40 14.19 42.56 74.15 Agricultural 111.68 223.04 334.72 TOTAL Acres 137.42 14.19 285.41 437.01 For purposes of estimating future tax revenues, this study assumes that the residential and industrial vacant acres are developed as residential and industrial respectively and makes no assumptions about future development of the agricultural property. TABLE 6: PROJECTIONS OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Amount Residential Development Undeveloped acres 28.15 Units per Acre 2 Units developed 56 Average market value per unit $600,000 Average taxable value per unit $330,000 Total residential taxable value $18,480,000 Industrial Development Undeveloped acres 74.15 Floor area ratio 0.2* Taxable value per sf $200 Estimated taxable value $129,193,733 *If the floor area ratio (FAR) can be increased to 0.3, then the estimated total taxable value would increase to nearly $194 million For purposes of analysis, this report assumes that the majority of the development takes place in the unincorporated County, as it has the largest amount of vacant acres. The table below shows projections of roughly $2 million per year in additional property tax revenues from this area. 7 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 TABLE 7: PROJECTIONS OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Tax Rates - ACT Incremental Revenues Generated Salt Lake County 0.001777 $262,416 Multi-County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000012 $1,772 County Assessing & Collecting Levy 0.000196 $28,944 Granite School District 0.007105 $1,049,222 Central Utah Water Conservancy District 0.0004 $59,069 Salt Lake County Municipal-Type Services 0.000051 $7,531 Unified Fire Service Area 0.001594 $235,392 Salt Lake Valley Law Enforcement Service Area 0.001973 $291,360 Salt Lake County Library 0.000474 $69,997 TOTAL 0.013582 $2,005,705* *If the industrial development assumptions are increased to a FAR of 0.3, rather than 0.2, then annual incremental property tax revenues generated increase to nearly $2.9 million annually. A portion of these revenues could be allocated to a CRA for a period of time in order to pay for needed improvements and infrastructure in the area. TRANSPORTATION REINVESTMENT ZONE (TRZ) A TRZ is one type of area that can be formed where tax increment can be used to accelerate development within the defined project area. According to Utah Code §11-13-103(22), “Transportation Reinvestment Zone” means an area created by two or more public agencies by interlocal agreement to capture increased property or sales tax revenue generated by a transportation infrastructure project. TRZs are ideal for projects such as Frontrunner, light rail, or major arterials that span multiple jurisdictions. Any two or more public agencies may enter into an agreement to create a transportation reinvestment zone but one of these entities must have land use authority over the TRZ area – in other words, Salt Lake City must be a partner in this endeavor. 8 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 A TRZ is much like a Community Reinvestment Area (CRA) in that a portion of tax increment is pledged to the project for a specified period of time. The agreement between the two or more public entities must include the following, as specified in Utah Code §11-13-227(2): Define the transportation need and proposed improvement Define the boundaries of the zone Establish terms for sharing sales tax revenue among the members of the agreement, if sales tax is to be included Establish a base year to calculate the increase of property tax revenue within the zone Establish terms for sharing any increase in property tax revenue within the zone Hold a public hearing regarding the details of the TRZ Property tax revenues that are shared between members of the agreement are required to be incremental (Utah Code §11-13-227(2)(e). In order to identify incremental revenues, a “base year” needs to be established. The law clearly allows for the sharing of both sales tax and property tax revenue among the members of the agreement. There are advantages to governance with TRZs, as compared to CRAs, for projects that span multiple jurisdictions. In fact, there are only a few redevelopment areas in Utah that currently overlap multiple communities. While such are allowed by law, governance can be tricky. For example, in a CRA spanning two cities, each city would have its own redevelopment agency. Who then governs the project area? Joint RDA board meetings can be held, each agency board can meet separately, or there can be a MOU designating one of the RDA boards as the lead agency. Experience dictates that concerns often arise when more tax increment is generated in one jurisdiction of the project area than in another. There are often concerns about equity in spending funds in the same jurisdiction from which they come. Each redevelopment agency involved has to submit its annual report detailing the increment generated and how funds were spent, further exacerbating this concern. The TRZ overcomes many of these problems. First, with a TRZ, there is no requirement for RDA involvement, and therefore no need for RDA meetings. The TRZ is simply governed by an interlocal agreement signed by the parties. TRZs have proven effective in other states when projects cross multiple jurisdictions. With a TRZ there is no requirement to measure in which community increment is generated and where funds are spent. The purpose is simply to achieve an overall project. And only one annual report has to be filed for the TRZ – not separate reports for each participating entity. Another advantage to TRZs is the ability to obtain the commitment of transportation agencies, such as UDOT or UTA, for specific projects. Interlocal agreements between the public entity with the land-use authority and a transportation agency will identify the specific projects associated with the TRZ. This will add another level of certainty to local planning efforts and will give these public entities some additional leverage in prioritizing needed transportation projects. 9 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 Advantages and Disadvantages The following table lists the advantages and disadvantages of funding transportation projects with tax increment generated in Transportation Reinvestment Zones: TABLE 8: TRANSPORTATION REINVESTMENT ZONES AS A FUNDING SOURCE FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS. Advantages Transportation Reinvestment Zones Disadvantages Transportation Reinvestment Zones Creates a new revenue stream.Revenue directed to transportation projects will not be available to provide other services. Relatively easy to create.Requires cooperation between at least two entities. Projected to produce substantial revenue stream over time. Must find a nexus with transportation projects to justify use of the increment. No affordable housing requirement.Revenues may take years to build up as development occurs over time. TAX INCREMENT BONDS Tax increment Bonds were developed in California in 1952 as an innovative way of raising local matching funds for federal grants. They became increasingly popular in the 1980s and 1990s, when there were declines in subsidies for local economic development from federal grants, state grants, and federal tax subsidies (especially industrial development bonds). Tax Increment Bonds are collateralized by the incremental growth in property taxes within a given project area. They capture the future tax benefits of real estate improvements to pay the present cost of those improvements. It is a financing strategy designed to make improvements to a targeted project area or district without drawing on general fund revenue or creating a new tax. Ratings on tax increment bonds are tied to the performance of the area or district, not to the creating government’s general fund. As a result, the ratings differ from those of the creating entity’s general obligation rating. The rating of tax increment bonds hinges on local economics, trends, and taxpayer diversity, with taxpayer diversity being the most highly correlated statistic. Rating agencies evaluate whether the tax increment revenues could survive the loss of one or more top taxpaying property owners, how debt service could be managed in the case of broad-based decline of assessed value, real estate trends and historical assessed values in the designated area, and the types of properties located or being developed in the tax increment area. The assessed value of hotels is the most volatile, followed by warehouses, commercial, condos, and last residential. Many issuers opt to offer tax increment bonds on a non-rated basis. It is virtually impossible to secure a rating for or sell a tax increment bond before the increment is actually flowing, unless there is recourse to the local government’s credit or some other enhancement. 10 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 Typically, tax increment bonds carry longer terms (anywhere from 10 to 30 years) and are purchased at a fixed rate using larger denominations of $100,000. There is usually no recourse to either the issuer or the developers who may benefit from the bonds. Pledged revenues vary, but a typical pledge is a senior security interest in the tax increment revenues as well as any debt service reserve funds. The bonds are often offered via a limited public offering and most often sold to institutional buyers (primarily mutual funds and occasionally property/casualty insurers) using a limited offering memorandum. It is typical to see interest capitalized for at least two to three years to allow increment to begin flowing before debt service payments are required from that increment. Unspent proceeds, capitalized interest and reserve funds are held by a Trustee. Debt service coverage covenants vary based on type of tax increment revenue and other security features associated with the bonds, but minimum coverage requirements are almost always at least 1.25 times annual debt service. Advantages and Disadvantages The following table lists the advantages and disadvantages of funding with tax increment bonds: TABLE 9: TAX INCREMENT BONDS AS A FUNDING SOURCE Advantages Tax Increment Bonds Disadvantages Tax Increment Bonds Create a new revenue stream that can fund capital improvements and economic development.Tend to carry higher interest and costs of issuance. Creating entity does not have to bear financial burden alone but can share it with other taxing entities within a project area. Often require the cooperation and agreement of multiple taxing entities to generate sufficient incremental revenues to finance the desired infrastructure. Tax increment revenues can be used to pay for administrative expenses. Bonds can’t be sold unless the tax increment is already flowing or is imminent and nearly certain to flow or is enhanced by a government’s credit or other mechanism. Financial and legal liability is limited by having a redevelopment agency.2 Typically take longer from start to finish than other financing types.3 Creating entity may gift tax revenues or property to provide incentives for development. Critics of Tax Increment Bonds sometimes assert that tax increment is just a reallocation of tax revenues by which some municipalities win, and others lose.4 2 An RDA is a separate political subdivision which can enter into agreements with developers and issue the bonds. 3 It is difficult to estimate the time required for the “political” side of the process, which often requires significant information sharing between local government and developers, including a public hearing for approval of the Project Area Plan and Budget. Setting aside the political requirements, the bond issuance process usually takes three to five months. 4 Critics of Tax Increment Bonds sometimes assert that some or all the increment is not attributable to the creation of the tax increment area and that the new property value growth would have occurred anyway. 11 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 Advantages Tax Increment Bonds Disadvantages Tax Increment Bonds Creating entity may be able to encourage or accelerate the timeframe of desired development types through offering tax increment incentives to the developer. Mortgage on the property can also be given as bond security under Utah law in addition to incremental revenue. PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DISTRICTS (PIDs) PIDs are generally most successful in larger, undeveloped areas where there are significant infrastructure needs. Because the unanimous consent of all property owners is required for the creation of a PID, it is difficult to establish PIDs in areas with numerous property owners. However, portions of the study area could be included – especially those areas with larger parcels, fewer property owners, and significant infrastructure needs. If created, a PID can be combined with other revenue sources such as tax increment and those revenues could be used to pay the PID bonds. These funding tools may further facilitate development and increase property values, which may in turn provide for more opportunities to fund basic infrastructure (through tax increment financing or general tax collection). The PID tool allows for creation of a separate taxing entity in order to fund public infrastructure. Ultimate users of the property pay for the improvements via the taxing entity through property assessments. These assessments permit for bonding, allowing for covering upfront infrastructure expenses that are repaid over periods typically near 30 years. This tool results in higher property taxes for property owners/users in the defined district. Consequently, benefits beyond the improved infrastructure can be included in the area. This can be in the form of better landscaping, street lighting, public spaces, parks, trails, finishes, etc. These benefits aid in creating property appeal, property value increases and in attracting top quality businesses. The PID tool also represents a valuable option for cities who are reticent to bond with property tax revenues in a standard tax increment collection area. Bonding permits for upfront infrastructure costs to be covered, oftentimes expediting development that may not have otherwise occurred. A city may create a PID with no increase in the tax rate and use the PID as a conduit to issue bonds. In this approach, the city is not financially responsible for the bond payments, and the bonding does not affect the city’s credit rating. The process for starting a Public Infrastructure District begins with a citywide policy. This represents a “30,000-foot” view of the tool for the municipality and merely outlines the guidelines as to how a developer should submit for a PID. The PID policy may incorporate specific goals and vision statements of the city. Once a policy is adopted, a developer may submit a letter of intent to create a PID. This is reviewed by the city, and if approved, governing documents are required to be submitted and approved 12 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 by the City Council. The simple passing of a general PID policy does not require the City Council to approve governing documents or letters of intent. Consequently, the PID policy represents another tool that can be used when appropriate. As of 2022, several cities throughout Utah have adopted PID policies and multiple public infrastructure districts have been formed. TABLE 10: PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DISTRICTS AS A FUNDING SOURCE Advantages PIDs Disadvantages PIDs Create a new revenue stream that can fund capital improvements and economic development.Tend to carry higher interest and costs of issuance. Any debt issued is not on the books of the local government entity. Cities may feel it limits public support for future tax rate increases or bond elections due to the perception of already-high rates. Can raise a significant amount of revenue with legally- allowed tax rates of up to 15 mils. Requires unanimous support of all taxing entities to put in place. Accelerates development timeframe through upfront funding for capital costs.Ongoing PID governance Can reduce the need for impact fees.Competitiveness of site with other sites given higher tax rates Mortgage on the property can also be given as bond security under Utah law in addition to incremental revenue. Cost is much lower than other development financing. The current taxable value of North Point is approximately $68,000,000. The maximum mill rate allowed by Utah law is 0.015; however, districts are choosing to enact much lower rates. Politically, it would be nearly impossible to obtain the consent of the entire Northpoint area to create a PID. However, smaller sections that are wanting to encourage economic development could be developed as PIDs. The table below shows the amount of annual property tax revenues that could be generated for such a district given varying taxable values and varying tax rates up to the maximum of 0.015. TABLE 11: PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DISTRICT ANNUAL REVENUES BASED ON VARYING MILL RATES AND TAXABLE VALUES Property Taxable Values 0.015 Mill Rate .0075 Mill Rate .004 Mill Rate $10,000,000 $150,000 $75,000 $40,000 $20,000,000 $300,000 $150,000 $80,000 $30,000,000 $450,000 $225,000 $120,000 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREAS (SAAs) Special Assessment Areas (“SAAs”), formerly known as Special Improvement Districts or “SID”s, are a financing mechanism that allows governmental entities to designate a specific area for the purpose of 13 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 financing the costs of improvements, operation and maintenance, or economic promotion activities that benefit property within a specified area. Entities can then levy a special assessment, on parity with a tax lien, to pay for those improvements or ongoing maintenance. The special assessment can be pledged to retire bonds, known as Special Assessment Bonds, if issued to finance construction of a project. Utah Code §11-42 deals with the requirements of special assessment areas. The underlying rationale of an SAA is that only those property owners who benefit from the public improvements and ongoing maintenance of the properties will be assessed for the associated costs as opposed to other financing structures in which all City residents pay either through property taxes or increased service fees. While more information about SAAs is included below, it could be difficult politically for the City to obtain support from a large number of property owners. While not subject to a bond election as is required for the issuance of General Obligation bonds, SAAs may not be created if 40 percent or more of those liable for the assessment payment5 protest its creation. Despite this legal threshold, most local government governing bodies tend to find it difficult to create an SAA if even 10-20 percent of property owners oppose the SAA. Once created, an SAA’s ability to levy an assessment has similar collection priority / legal standing as a property tax assessment. However, since it is not a property tax, any financing secured by that levy would likely be done at higher interest rates than general obligation, sales tax revenue or utility revenue bonds. Interest rates will depend on a number of factors including the ratio of the market value to the assessment bond amount, the diversity of property ownership and the perceived willingness and ability of property owners to make the assessment payments as they come due. Even with the best of special assessment credit structure, if bonds are issued they are likely to be non-rated and therefore would be issued at rates quite a bit higher than similar General Obligation Bonds that would likely be rated. All improvements financed via an SAA must be owned by the City and the repayment period cannot exceed twenty (20) years. Whenever SAAs are created, entities have to select a method of assessment (i.e. per lot, per unit (ERU), per acre, taxable value, market value, by linear foot frontage, etc.) which is reasonable, fair and equitable to all property owners within the SAA. State law does not allow property owned by local government entities such as cities or school districts to be assessed. TABLE 12: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREAS AS A FUNDING SOURCE Advantages SAAs Disadvantages SAAs Bonds are tax-exempt although the interest cost is not as low as a GO or revenue bond Forty percent of the assessed liability, be it one property owner or many could defeat the effort to create the SAA if they do not want to pay the assessment No requirement to hold a bond election but the City must hold a meeting for property owners to be assessed before the SAA can be created Some increased administrative burden for the City although State law permits an additional amount to be included in each assessment to either pay the City’s increased administrative costs or permit the City to hire an outside SAA administrator 5 Based on the method of assessment selected, i.e., acreage, front footage, per lot, etc. 14 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 Advantages SAAs Disadvantages SAAs Only benefited property owners pay for the improvements or ongoing maintenance The City cannot assess government-owned property within the SAA Limited risk to the City as there is no general tax or revenue pledge Flexibility since property owners may pre-pay their assessment prior to bond issuance or annually thereafter as the bond documents dictate – if bonds are issued IMPACT FEES Impact fees are one-time fees paid by new development to offset the capital costs associated with new development for basic utilities such as water, sewer, storm water, public safety, roads and parks/trails. In order to collect impact fees, cities must carefully follow the requirements of Utah Code 11-36a which includes the following major steps. Prepare and pass a resolution authorizing study of an impact fee Conduct an impact fee study to determine the appropriate amount of such a fee Provide public notice of the possible fee 14 days prior to the public hearing Hold a public hearing to take comment regarding the proposed fee Salt Lake City has already established impact fees that could be used to generate revenues on projects developed within its City boundaries. However, Salt Lake County would need to charge impact fees on the unincorporated areas of North Point. Impact fees collected would need to be spent on capital projects listed in each respective entity’s Impact Fee Facilities Plans (IFFPs). Therefore, careful coordination would need to take place between Salt Lake City and the County to ensure that the costs of needed projects are fairly allocated between the two entities. Advantages and Disadvantages The following table lists the advantages and disadvantages of funding projects with impact fees: TABLE 13: IMPACT FEES AS A FUNDING SOURCE Advantages Impact Fees Disadvantages Impact Fees New development pays for its fair share of the costs incurred by new development Adds additional costs to development Impact fees are generally paid when building permits are issued; therefore, funds are often not available upfront when infrastructure needs are greatest 15 Northpoint Small Area Master Plan | DRAFT Economic Development and Funding Options Zions Public Finance, Inc. | May 2022 Advantages Impact Fees Disadvantages Impact Fees Impact fees cannot be used to cure existing deficiencies MUNICIPAL ENERGY TAX Salt Lake City has enacted the municipal energy tax to the full 6 percent allowed by law on all taxable portions of electric and gas bills. Therefore, any development that takes place in Salt Lake City would generate this additional revenue that could be used to assist with economic development and infrastructure costs in Northpoint. The municipal energy tax applies only to development that occurs in Salt Lake City and not in Salt Lake County. APPENDIX E MAJOR STREETS PLAN AMENDMENT 2100 N ~2900 W 3200 W 2200 W 3300 N 3500 N 2950 N Salt Lake Ci ty Major Street Plan Amendm en t for Nor th p oin t A r ea ¯ Legend Designation Arterials Loc al Streets Propos ed Arterial Streets 0 640 1,280 1,920320 Feet 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED The first public draft of the Northpoint Small Area Plan was online and available for public comment from July 26, 2022 – September 19, 2022. The plan received 685 views and 195 total comments during this time. The majority of the comments were left directly on the draft using the software Konveio and can be viewed by visiting this link: https://acrobat.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:9d257aa8-60d8-39d9-ab70- 8aa9c2005923 All other written public comments are included in either the Staff Report published on October 26, 2022 or the Staff Report published for the December 14, 2022 meeting. Public comments that were received following the publishing of those staff reports are included on the following pages. From:cindy cromer To:Norris, Nick; Oktay, Michaela Cc:Martinez, Diana; Gilmore, Kristina Subject:(EXTERNAL) Fw: request to recall: Northpoint Small Area Plan Date:Tuesday, January 10, 2023 7:39:08 AM Please forward to members of the Planning Commission, via their e mail addresses if possible. To Chairman Bachman and Members of the Salt Lake City Planning Commission From Cindy Cromer RE your vote on the Northpoint Small Area Plan, 12/14 I am asking the Commission to recall its vote on the Northpoint Small Area Plan on 12/14 (5-2) prior to approving the minutes at your meeting on 1/11. I have made a similar request once before, in July 2021, but in that case, the Commission had failed to follow the adopted ordinance. I knew that you had to consider my request and you did. In the case of the Small Area Plan, you have not violated any ordinances but have instead set the stage for consequences in the foreseeable future which I doubt that any of you would support and which I know the overwhelming majority of Salt Lake's voters would not support. There are two issues which have led me to ask you to recall your vote. The first issue is the relationship between Northpoint and the Inland Port. Of greatest concern was the Commission's decision to ignore the staff recommendation regarding distribution centers. That change led me to ask about the history of Northpoint relative to the Inland Port. According to people involved for decades, Northpoint was previously part of the Port. Former City Council Member James Rogers was also the City's representative on the Inland Port and had Northpoint removed. He then initiated the Small Area Plan with funding through the City Council. That must have been in 2019. Inserting distribution centers as an allowed use into the Small Area Plan creates the potential for Northpoint to resemble the Inland Port as it redevelops and be annexed back into the Port by the State. Given what has already happened, this possibility is real. Given the resources that the City has devoted over the past 2 Administrations to protecting the City's interests in the Port, it is unconscionable that the Commission would do anything to facilitate the future expansion of the Port. Secondly, in the executive session a member of the Commission speculated that there was rampant cultivation of alfalfa and significant waste of water in current agricultural uses. So far, I have been able to identify 1 property owner growing alfalfa and the water being used is untreated, not water from Salt Lake City Public Utilities. My criticism of your recommendation began 1/3 at the City Council's meeting and is included below (last paragraph). You have failed to protect Northpoint from predictable overreach by the State government, if not now, then in the foreseeable future. You failed to seek information about the basis for the staff recommendation regarding distribution centers and instead dismissed the staff recommendation. You appeared to accept inflammatory, generic statements about the cultivation of a crop which as far as I can determine is not grown commonly in Northpoint. You failed to verify the relevance of those generic statements to a highly specific planning document. These are shortcomings from my perspective which are not prohibited by the City's ordinances. You can of course ignore my cautions, as you did my comments on 12/14, and persist with your recommendation to the City Council. I am writing to let you know that I too can persist in my objections and will continue to ask the members of the City Council to ignore your recommendation of 12/14. From: cindy cromer Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2023 4:07 PM To: Petro-Eschler, Victoria <victoria.petro-eschler@slcgov.com>; alejandro.puy@slcgov.com <alejandro.puy@slcgov.com>; dan.dugan@slcgov.com <dan.dugan@slcgov.com>; Fowler, Amy <amy.fowler@slcgov.com>; Mano, Darin <darin.mano@slcgov.com>; Chris Wharton <chris.wharton@slcgov.com>; Valdemoros, Ana <ana.valdemoros@slcgov.com> Cc: Fullmer, Brian <Brian.Fullmer@slcgov.com>; Pantle, Brian <Brian.Pantle@slcgov.com>; Benson, Jenna <Jenna.Benson@slcgov.com>; Tuuao, Priscilla <priscilla.tuuao@slcgov.com>; Thomas, Blake <blake.thomas@slcgov.com>; Gilmore, Kristina <Kristina.Gilmore@slcgov.com>; michaela.oktay@slcgov.com <michaela.oktay@slcgov.com>; cindy gust-jenson <cindy.gust- jenson@slcgov.com> Subject: Fw: Northpoint Small Area Plan: comment to the City Council 1/3/23 40 Years of Showing Up Late or Not at All: The Northwest Quadrant In the late 1980's, the Northwest Quadrant was the only part of the city without a master plan. At some point during the early 1990's, Doug Wheelwright on the Planning staff wrote a proposed plan with traditional single-family houses. Then, Genevieve Atwood presented the findings of her dissertation (published 2006). I was standing next to Doug at the back of the room during Genevieve's presentation. He only said, "This changes everything." Nothing else. Through the 1990's and early 2000's, Salt Lake City still did not have a plan for the Northwest Quadrant. Then the State started talking about relocating the prison. Once again Frank Gray came to the City's rescue and drafted a plan for the Northwest Quadrant adopted in 2016. The State proceeded with the relocation of the prison any way. And then the State decided to locate the Intermodal Hub near the airport. Once again the City mustered its best arguments after the fact. Then James Rogers got the funding for the small area plan, but the effort stalled with the RFP. I am still trying to piece together the City's response to a proposed annexation. My point is that the City has always failed to plan for this area in a timely manner. It shows up late over and over again. At times, it has had talented planners and attorneys assigned to the task. They have attempted to outmaneuver the State. The City has criticized the State for the Inland Port, but now the Planning Commission appears to put its blessing on a similar redevelopment of Northpoint. I am hoping that someone will explain to me how the development of distribution and manufacturing in Northpoint is different from the Inland Port in any way except that the City would retain, only for the immediate future, receipt of the property taxes. That of course assumes that the State doesn't swoop in and claim them, as it has with the Inland Port. I have no doubt that if Northpoint resembles the Inland Port in the future, the State will intervene again. I am asking you to ignore the recommendation from the Planning Commission. The Commissioners seem oblivious of the predictable outcome. 4858-3336-8894 NorthPoint Small Area Plan Salt Lake City PETITION IN SUPPORT OF THE NORTHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN DATED OCTOBER 2022. The undersigned supports the amended NorthPoint Small Area Plan as presented to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission on October 26, 2022 and request that the Planning Commission approve such plan on the meeting to be held on December 14, 2022 with no additional limitations on distribution uses. The undersigned attests that they are residents of the NorthPoint Small Area located in Salt Lake City, have personally signed this petition on the date indicated, and reside or work at the stated address. Signature: ____________ ___________________ Address: ________________________________ Date: ________________________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: 568F1AB3-E460-43A1-A68A-1E452DE9445C 12/3/2022 2680 N 2200 W Salt Lake City, UT 84116 Krissy Gilmore Salt Lake City Senior Planner kristina.gilmore@slcgov.com Victoria Petro Eschler Salt Lake City District #1 Councilmember victoria.petro-eschler@slcgov.com RE: SUPPORT FOR THE NORHPOINT SMALL AREA PLAN As a resident of the NorthPoint Small Area, I am writing to document my support for the Northpoint Small Area Plan as presented to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission on October 26, 2022. I would highly recommend the Planning Commission approve the plan with no additional limitations to distribution uses in its December 14th meeting and that City Council adopt this plan as currently scheduled in January 2023. The Northpoint Small Area Plan outlines several reasons to transition the land use from agricultural to industrial while allowing landowners to participate in the economic growth of the area. Additionally, to ensure the greatest potential for economic growth in the area, we encourage the Planning Commission and/or City Council remove any limitations on the distribution uses allowed in the area. Not only would these limitations exclude the vast majority of small businesses seeking industrial space, but they would continue to drive rental rates higher for already struggling small businesses. Any limitation imposed on distribution uses would devalue the land, restrict economic growth, and increase rental rates for small businesses in the area. Thank you, Signature: ________________________________ Address: ________________________________ Date: ________________________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: 568F1AB3-E460-43A1-A68A-1E452DE9445C 12/3/2022 2680 N 2200 W Salt Lake City, UT 84116 From:Denise Payne To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) Denise and John Payne 2848 North 2200 West Date:Wednesday, December 14, 2022 2:34:50 PM My husband has lived on 2200 west for 45 years and I have lived here for 33 years. I oppose the transitional land use verbiage in the Master Plan and I oppose the annexation, rezoning or Area Master Plan changes which changes current zoning M1 or BP. This would jeopardize open space along the Jordan River with agriculture becoming industrial areas. Such changes not only significantly impact North Point residents but the residents of surrounding westside neighborhoods. As stated in the Tribune the West side is the highest in air pollution in the area. Industrial zoning around our home condemns is to a lower quality of life, decreases our property value and will force is to move. This does not support new housing at all income levels.” This housing gap/shortage dwarfs the city’s apparent desire for more warehouses and other commercial structures. City Council just approved funding for affordable housing. Approving M1 is going against new affordable housing. Other negative impacts to the entire westside include: Increased air pollution, noise pollution, light pollution Unsustainable traffic Watershed pollution and destruction of natural habitat Reduction of home ownership in the city -- Have an awesome day....... Denise Payne From: To:Planning Public Comments Subject:(EXTERNAL) Northpoint Small Area Plan Comments for Dec. 14 Date:Wednesday, December 14, 2022 3:26:06 PM Attachments:Northpoint Small Area Plan Comments 12-13-2022.docx Hello, FYI, Attached are the comments I submitted yesterday to Krissy Gilmore. I understand that comments will be read to the planning commission if they are under two minutes. Below are the comments I would like to have read at the meeting tonight. Dear Salt Lake City Planning Commission Members, My name is Wayne Martinson. I worked for National Audubon Society for25 years, retiring in 2016. During this period, I worked extensively onissues regarding the Great Salt Lake, including the Gillmor Sanctuary, thenorthwest quadrant plan and the south shore of Great Salt Lake. Last night I submitted comments to Krissy Gilmore. I hope you considerthose comments in full. The following provides three specific comments: 1. I support the Westpointe Board statement on the Proposed NorthPoint Small Area Plan. In particular, I support their statement in theletter dated January 11, 2022, that the Planning Commission is urged“to continue to table action on the North Point Master Plan until suchcitizen input can be incorporated into the plan.” 2. I support the comments made by Heidi Hoven, ConservationSpecialist, Gillmor Sanctuary, National Audubon, in her letter to you,dated Dec. 2, 2022. The following comments in particular should befully addressed: “The wetlands bordering the west side of Northpoint Small Area shouldbe treated delicately and provided a minimum buffer of 300 feet, whichcan be backed by studies that consider ecological preservation and theother functions that wetlands provide. Likewise, the Jordan Rivershould also be treated as highest priority as it is a major source ofwater to Great Salt Lake and its wetlands with a 300 foot buffer(highest quality buffer recommended in Blueprint Jordan River). 3. Regarding the minimum buffer of 300 feet, it could be useful to puttogether a committee that would fully address this buffer. Thiscommittee could work on the wetland buffer during the same timethat citizen input is being incorporated into the plan. Thank you for considering these comments. Wayne Martinson Dec. 13, 2022 Kristina Gilmore, AICP Senior Planner Planning Division Department of Community and Neighborhoods Salt Lake City Corporation kristina.gillmore@slcgov.com Dear Kristina: Subject: Northpoint Small Area Plan Comments Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Northpoint Small Area Plan The following provides Personal Background and then General and Specific comments. Personal background: From 1991 to 2016, I worked for the National Audubon Society, first as Utah Wetlands Coordinator and then as Utah Important Bird Areas Coordinator. Much of my time was focused on the Great Salt Lake, including working with Ella Sorensen regarding the Gillmor Sanctuary as well as the wetlands on the south shore of Great Salt Lake. I have been a resident of Salt Lake City since 1978. General Comments: Some of the first meetings I attended when starting with National Audubon in the early 1990’s were about the Northwest Quadrant Plan. Some of the last meetings I attended in 2016 were related to the completion of the Northwest Quadrant Plan. It can take a long time to complete a plan. One of the major components addressed in the Northwest Quadrant Plan was developing the Natural Areas. These Natural Areas provide a buffer for the wetlands of the Great Salt Lake, including the areas owned and managed by Kennecott Copper (Inland Sea Shorebird Reserve) National Audubon Society (Gillmor Sanctuary) and the duck clubs. Numerous meetings were held between landowners who wanted to develop and landowners who wanted to preserve the wildlife values before an agreement was reached regarding the Natural Areas. The value of natural areas in or adjacent to the Northpoint Small Area Plan is very high. Often when I was asked about the major issues regarding the Great Salt Lake, my response was (and still is) water quantity, water quality, and preserving wetland and upland buffers for the Great Salt Lake. The Northpoint Small Area Plan has similarities to the Northwest Quadrant Plan. One of them is that development is proposed right next to the wetland and upland areas that are managed for wildlife. Every attempt should be made to become familiar with and supportive of these wetland and upland buffers. Specific Comments: 1. I support the Westpointe Board statement on the Proposed North Point Small Area Plan. In particular, I support their statement in the letter dated January 11, 2022, that the Planning Commission is urged “to continue to table action on the North Point Master Plan until such citizen input can be incorporated into the plan.” 2. I support the comments made by Heidi Hoven, Conservation Specialist, Gillmor Sanctuary, National Audubon Society, in her letter to you, dated Dec. 2, 2022. The following comments in particular should be fully addressed: “The wetlands bordering the west side of Northpoint Small Area should be treated delicately and provided a minimum buffer of 300 feet, which can be backed by studies that consider ecological preservation and the other functions that wetlands provide (e.g., groundwater recharge, improved water quality, flood attenuation, dissipation of noise, motion, and light disturbances to wildlife, and many habitat benefits to wildlife). Likewise, the Jordan River should also be treated as highest priority as it is a major source of water to Great Salt Lake and its wetlands with a 300 foot buffer (highest quality buffer recommended in Blueprint Jordan River). 3. Regarding the minimum buffer of 300 feet, it could be useful to put together a committee that would fully address this buffer. This committee could work on the wetland buffer during the same time that citizen input is being incorporated into the plan. In summary, the Northpoint Small Area Plan should be tabled until citizen input can be more fully considered and incorporated into the plan. Also, the wetland and upland areas that are part of and/or are adjacent to the Northpoint Small Area Plan are an important component of the Great Salt Lake wetlands. Every effort should be made to preserve and protect these areas. Thank you for the opportunity to comment: Sincerely, Wayne Martinson Cc: Heidi Hoven, Conservation Specialist National Audubon Society Ella Sorensen, Gillmor Sanctuary Manager, National Audubon Society Dorothy Owen, Westpointe Community Council Board of Directors Jack Ray, Rudy Duck Club 1 Clark, Aubrey From: Sent:Monday, December 12, 2022 10:49 AM To:Gilmore, Kristina Cc:Norris, Nick; Clark, Aubrey; Petro-Eschler, Victoria; Puy, Alejandro; Dugan, Dan; Otto, Rachel Subject:(EXTERNAL) WESTPOINTE BOARD STATEMENT ON PROPOSED NORTH POINT SMALL AREA PLAN-- for submission to Planning Commission for Dec 14 public hearing Attachments:Westpointe Board of Directors Statement regarding proposed North Point Small Area Master Plan .pdf; house with warehouse.JPG; lovelyhome.JPG Importance:High The Westpointe Community Council Board of Directors has now completed their analysis of the residents’ petition and unanimously voted to support their proposed changes to the current draft of the North Point Small Area Master Plan. The attached statement includes this analysis and our comments to the Planning Commission for their Dec 14 public hearing. This augments the Nov 30th email comments previously sent. Since a picture is worth a thousand words, we are also including a few photos—one of a current house at risk and one of a home that reflects the reality of the proposed “transition.” Additional photos are available but did not want to overwhelm people at this time. Thank you for your assistance and for forwarding this information to the Planning Commission members. While we regret that this review and vote could not be completed sooner, we are pleased with the resulting statement and photos. We hope this will clarify the major issues at stake. January 11, 2022 Salt Lake City Planning Commission 451 S. State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Subject: Westpointe Board statement on North Point Small Area Planning effort We had hoped this planning effort would result in a number of planning scenarios generating serious community discussions and eventually, a workable vision for the area. This has yet to occur. Rather, the proposed “vision map” accepts outdated assumptions and planning limitations as a “given” that does not need justification. Planning efforts were instead devoted to developing mitigation strategies to counter this vision’s negative impacts. We concur with Dr. Luke Garrott’s assessment that the proposed plan , if implemented, will result in an “inherently unsustainable and unwalkable land use-a warehouse and trucking ghetto.“ ( https://buildingsaltlake.com/hot-market-for-warehouses-is-driving-a-trucking-ghetto-into- slcs-last-agricultural-land-and-right-through-the-citys-draft-master-plan/ ). The draft plan seeks to soften this result by identifying “transitional” lands, implying that mitigation measures will allow current residents to stay in the area and that any change will be a gradual shift. This blatantly contradicts written developer comments that homes will be gone within five years and that many proposed mitigation efforts will be unnecessary as a result. It would be cruelly ironic for Salt Lake City to now adopt such a “demolition” approach after Councilman James Rogers convinced the Utah State Legislature to withdraw this unique area from the jurisdiction of the Utah Inland Port Authority (UIPA). This allowed North Point to avoid M1 rezoning unlike the remaining UIPA area. Recently, area residents circulated a petition proposing an alternative vision for North Point. After reviewing this proposal (see attachment) the Board of Directors voted to support it. We therefore urge the Planning Commission to continue to table action on the North Point Master Plan until such citizen input can be incorporated into the plan. Sincerely, Westpointe Community Council Board of Directors Dorothy P. Owen Sharon Pohlman Todd Hadden Lynn Skidmore Jessica Esparza Annette Richards ANALYSIS OF RESIDENT PROPOSAL FOR NORTH POINT MASTER PLAN The west side of 2200 West maintain its business park (BP) development zoning while the East side of 2200 W keeps its current AG zoning This allows current residential/agricultural uses as well as future low density residential development. This proposal reflects a factual understanding of the area, and of the families who live there. • The North Point community has about 140 people living in about 60 homes which are entirely single-family housing units. 85 % of these units are owner occupied with an average home value of $438,000. This compares to the $ 346,900 median price for the zip code as a whole. ( Source: Existing Condition Report Dec 2021 pg . 21 Logan Simpson Consulting) • People living in the area tend to work in the services industry, transportation and utilities or manufacturing. They have a higher median household income than the City as a whole. (Source: Current Conditions Report Dec 2021 pg. 21. Logan Simpson Consulting) • Housing is “concentrated east of 2200 West due to environmental constraints and airport impacts. “ The majority of the housing stock supports the agricultural uses surrounding them. Within the area there is a rich agricultural history that the community desires to preserve. (Source: Current Conditions Report Dec 2021 pg. 21 Logan Simpson Consulting) • The Scannell properties in municipal Salt Lake City are zoned BP (business park). The City has already approved up to 20 warehouses in this area. This warehouse development west of 2200 W will encompass approximately 40% of North Point’s total land area. (Source: Current Conditions Report Dec 2021 pg. 16 Logan Simpson Also City Planning) • All of Salt Lake County’s jurisdictional lands in this area are zoned A-2, low-density residential with supporting agriculture as a conditional use. Over 50% of North Point is within unincorporated Salt Lake County. ( Source: Current Conditions Report Dec 2021 Logan Simpson. Pg. 5 & 15) The City should consider adopting the County’s zoning approach rather than zoning for more warehouses. This proposal supports the findings & recommendations of the City’s “Thriving in Place” Displacement Study. Applicable recommendations include: • There are not enough housing units overall in Salt Lake City. It therefore recommends support for new housing at all income levels. • It further recommends efforts to minimize displacement from new development and discourage new development where it will do the most harm. • It supports locally owned businesses, public spaces and cultural institutions that help communities thrive in place. All of these currently exist within North Point area and will be harmed by the proposed vision. This proposal is a workable compromise. It reflects commitments to existing residents and new developers. It allows for preservation and development. It is not based on outdated assumptions. • 2200 W divides the area into “clear sections which suggest an informal development boundary along the roadway. “ (Source: Current Conditions Report Dec 2021 pg. Logan Simpson) The draft plan does not use this demarcation as a source for compromise. • Dr. Robert C. Leachman, professor of industrial engineering & operations research, University of California Berkeley, authored a recent (Sept 12, 2022) report analyzing the prospects for import and export business at the Utah Inland Port Authority (UIPA). His report indicates that a proposed logistics facility is “simply not a value proposition.” As a result, prior development assumptions have been called into question and the multi-million-dollar facility has been put on hold. Instead, he recommends consideration of regional distribution centers on the South side of I-80 near Union Pacific facilities. North Point is located North of 1-80. • UIPA contains 16,000 acres of which 87% is within Salt Lake City’s borders. Most of it is zoned M1. New building within this zoning is primarily warehouses which require less work, time, and money to develop. Recently, UIPA has made significant management and statutory changes as it re-evaluates past efforts and assumptions. A new UIPA Master Plan for the area is being developed. These new trends need to be considered by SLC as it plans for North Point. . We the undersigned residents of North Point, respectfully oppose annexation, rezoning or Area Master Plan changes which in current zoning becoming M1 or BP. This includes opposing the master plan’s proposed “transitional” land use category as well as recent changes which envision open space along the Jordan River becoming industrial areas. Such changes not only significantly impact North Point residents but the residents of surrounding westside neighborhoods. Industrial zoning around existing homes condemns them to a lower quality of life, decreases their property values and will force residents to move. This directly goes against Salt Lake City’s “Thriving in Place” initiative which seeks to reduce housing displacement and support “new housing at all income levels.” This housing gap/shortage dwarfs the city’s apparent desire for more warehouses and other commercial structures. It is the City’s duty to protect residential housing from speculative industrial developers, especially when taxpayers are already paying for an Inland Port that is designed to house such industries. Other negative impacts to the entire westside include: Increased air pollution, noise pollution, light pollution Unsustainable traffic Watershed pollution and destruction of natural habitat Reduction of home ownership in the city Instead, we are proposing the West side of 2200 West maintain its business park (BP) where it is currently zoned while the East side of 2200 West keep its current AG zoning which allow current residential/agricultural uses as well as future low density residential developments. Name Address