►
From YouTube: Redevelopment Agency (RDA) of Salt Lake City - 9/29/2020
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
Project
area
and
we're
going
to
do
two
and
three
somewhat
together,
so
that
because
it's
the
same
people
at
the
table,
the
nine
line,
project
area
and
the
state
street
project
area
so-
and
I
am
gonna-
let
danny
take
it
away
unless,
unless
nope,
it's
all
you
danny.
B
Thanks
for
that
great
introduction,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
we
appreciate
being
here
today,
as
as
madam
chair,
said,
we're
we're
going
to
combine
the
nine
line
in
so
far
as
considering
the
inner
local
agreements
for
both
the
school
district
and
the
city
and
approving
the
ex
the
agency
to
execute
those
with
both
of
those
entities.
We'll
speak
to
the
nine
line
first
and
then
we'll
speak
to
state
street.
B
B
C
Thank
you
danny.
I
will
give
just
a
quick
background
on
what
got
us
to
where
we
are
today
and
some
next
steps,
so
the
rda
carried
out
an
extensive,
multi-faceted
and
multi-year
project
area
creation
process
for
both
nine
line
and
state
street
community
reinvestment
areas
also
called
cras,
and
this
process
included
significant
outreach
with
community
members,
community
council,
local
businesses,
community
development
partners,
taxing
entity
partners,
we
coordinated
with
internal
divisions
and
departments
and
other
partner
agencies.
C
So
there
were
a
lot
of
different
players
involved
in
the
creation
of
these
project
area
plans
and
then,
in
august
of
2018,
the
rda
board
adopted
the
project
area
plans
for
both
state
street
and
nine
line,
and
these
plans
really
act
as
the
guiding
documents
for
the
utilization
of
future
tax
increment
to
be
collected
and
utilized
in
the
two
areas.
But
the
plan
themselves
doesn't
guarantee
the
use
of
tax
increment
that
has
to
be
facilitated
through
the
execution
of
interlocal
agreements
with
each
of
the
participating
taxing
entities.
C
So
since
the
plans
were
adopted
in
the
fall
of
2018,
rda
staff
has
been
negotiating
primarily
with
the
school
district
and
salt
lake
county.
On
the
terms
of
their
participation
for
contributing
tax
increment
in
the
two
project
areas-
and
we
have
also
negotiated
with
you-
this
body
acting
as
the
salt
lake
city
council,
so
where
we're
at
today,
it
was
actually
in
october
of
2019
that
the
salt
lake
city
school
board
approved
the
terms
of
an
interlocal
agreement
for
their
participation
in
bull
state
street
and
nine
line.
C
And
last
week
the
salt
lake
city
of
council
approved
the
terms
of
an
interlocal
on
state
street
nine
line.
So
where
we're
at
today
is
we're
still
having
discussions
with
the
county.
Those
terms
have
not
been
wrapped
up
or
finalized.
They
haven't
committed
to
participate
in
the
project
areas,
yet
we
are
still
having
ongoing
conversations
with
them.
But
we
have
come
to
the
rda
board
today
to
finalize
the
approval
of
the
city's
participation
and
the
school
district's
participation
and
how
that
has
to
happen
pursuant
to
state
statute.
D
A
You
sorry
at
this
point
I
will
just
open
it
up
for
questions
to
board
members.
I
think
that
we've
seen
this
presentation
a
few
times
over
the
several
years,
although
for
a
couple
of
our
new
council
members,
it
may
just
be
this
last
year,
but
we've
seen
it
a
couple
of
times,
but
I
asked
tammy
and
danny
to
have
that
presentation
ready
in
case
it
was
easier
to
explain
some
of
that
via
the
presentation,
but
for
now
I'll
just
open
it
up
to
questions.
E
Darren
thanks,
I
I'm
wondering,
given
that
this
the
county
may
be
a
little
bit
of
a
lag
if
they
do
approve
their
terms
and
the
collection
time
period
is
20
years.
Does
that
mean
that,
like
the
county
would
potentially
start
a
year
later
and
end
a
year
later,
or
how
does
that
do?
Do
they
all
have
to
start
in
the
same
year?
Is
it
okay
for
them
to
be
different?
I
just
wondering
the
details
about
that.
B
It's
it's
actually
a
really
interesting
question
part
of
the
timeline
built
into
how
we've
structured
this
for
approvals
from
both
the
council,
as
well
as
the
board
is
set
up
so
that
we
could
get
these
done
in
time
to
make
the
official
request
as
part
of
our
november
one
report,
which
is
as
per
state
statute,
what
is
essentially
the
the
initiation
of
the
collection
of
tax
increment.
B
The
the
question
you
asked
of
the
timing
of
the
county-
we
don't
know
if,
if
we
got
that
approval
from
the
county
later
or
after
that
november,
1,
if
we
could
still
potentially
include
them
all
together
the
conversation
right
now
with
the
county
that
are
slightly
different
than
what
we
have
included
in
our
agreements
with
the
city
and
the
school
district,
and
so
that
has
been
part
of
what
we
are
trying
to
negotiate
and
discuss
with
the
county.
B
B
As
far
as
carrying
out
the
plan
that
pretty
much
is
already
set
within
the
approved
plan,
and
everyone
seems
to
be
on
the
same
page
as
far
as
what
our
objectives
are
and
then
to
the
extent
that
the
county
has
any
other
issues
that
we're
not
aware
of
or
haven't
discussed
with
them.
Yet
that
affects
that
interlocal.
Then
obviously,
we
always
have
the
opportunity
to
come
back
to
the
other
entities
and
either
amend
the
interlocal
or,
as
I
said,
just
take,
that
into
consideration
as
part
of
the
budget.
D
A
No
thank
you
explained
this
a
minute
ago,
but
I
think
you
know
how
I
like
to
put
things
in
layman's
terms,
and
sometimes
we
speak
rda
jargon
for
board
members,
particularly
maybe
newer,
board
members
that
this
city
and
the
school
board
has
already
signed
their
part
of
the
interlocal.
A
C
Yeah,
just
to
clarify
the
the
what
the
city
council
did
last
week
was
approved.
The
terms
of
the
interlocal
the
mayor
has
yet
to
sign,
but
you,
as
the
legislative
body
have
signed
off
on
executing
that
agreement.
So
this
is
authorizing
the
agreement
to
resolution
on
the
rda
side.
So
we
will
finalize
executing
the
agreements.
C
Most
of
our
project
areas
were
set
up
under
a
format
called
a
taxing
entity
committee.
So
all
the
taxing
entities
formed
a
committee
and
voted
together.
C
So
I
don't
know
what
danny
thinks,
but
this
is
it,
from
my
perspective,
been
a
learning
and
kind
of
coordinating
those
conversations
and
coordinating
the
approvals
by
all
the
taxing
entities
and
the
rda
board.
And
I
think
we've
learned
a
lot
of
lessons
and
we
definitely
want
to
be
good
partners
with
all
the
taxi
entities
and
are
having
ongoing
conversations
on
how
the
process
can
be
streamlined
and
approved.
But
it
is
the
goal
to
try
to
get
all
those
terms
aligned
if
possible.
B
The
the
plan
does
still
move
forward
you,
you
do
still
have
both
the
city
and
the
school
district
who
have
then
agreed
to
share
their
increment
to
carry
out
that
plan.
If
the
county
doesn't
agree,
then,
essentially,
what
you
have
is
your
projected
budget
of
what
you
would
collect
in
tax
increment
is
obviously
less,
and
so
the
amount
of
funds
you
have
available
to
implement
the
plan
and
carry
out
its
mission
is,
is
smaller,
and
so
you,
you
have
essentially
less
money
and
still
the
authority
to
to
go
out
and
execute
the
plan.
E
Okay
and
and
basically
after
you
can
work
with
the
county
as
long
as
possible,
then
that
someday,
maybe
november
first,
you
say:
hey
we're
just
cutting
ties
here,
we're
just
going
with
the
school
board
and
the
city.
B
Yeah
there's
no
set
deadline
by
which
we
have
to
finalize
negotiations
with
the
county
as
much
as
just
ideally
it'd
be
nice
to
get
it
done
sooner
than
later,
so
that
we
can
continue
to
work
in
conjunction
with
the
other
entities,
but
if
it
turns
out
that
they
indicate
they
don't
want
to
participate,
then
at
some
point
you
may
just
cut
off
those
discussions
and
move
forward
without
them.
A
I
I
would
like
to
say
that
we're
looking
for
the
adoption
of
this
tonight
in
the
formal
meeting,
so
just
not
tonight
danny
shook,
said
no.
A
Board
members,
we
are
looking
to
adapt
the
two
resolutions
today,
I'd
be
looking
for
a
motion.
A
D
Them
together,
this
is
katie
and,
yes,
you
can
do
them
together
as
long
as
that's
the
board's
intent.
F
Madam
chair,
I
don't
mean
to
interrupt.
We've
got
a
couple.
E
More
people
in
the
attendees.
F
A
Yeah
we
will
hold
board
member
rogers
or
rogers
is
motion
and,
let's
give
them
a
chance
to
speak,
particularly
if
it's
about
this.
So
thank
you
bobby
and
amanda.
D
Sure
thing
thanks
bobby
and
council
chair,
we
have
two
people,
but
one
is
here
to
listen.
We
do
have
another
column
user.
A
phone
number
has
867,
I'm
going
to
unmute
your
mic
now
and
if
you
could
state
your
name
and
then
your
comment.
A
I
george
at
this
time
the
general
comments
are
for
anything
on
the
agenda
and
we
have
agenda
item
number.
Eight
is
the
proposed
funding
for
the
shoring
and
stabilization
of
the
mattress
company.
So
I'd
be
happy
to
give
you
two
minutes
to
speak
to
that
item.
If
that's
what
you
are
interested
in
speaking
to
george.
D
Okay,
real
quick,
you
already
know
what
I
think
I
already
sent
you
the
comments
but
bottom
line.
I
urge
you
before
you
try
to
spend
867
dollars.
D
D
It
actually
looks
way
out
of
place,
so
I
don't
think
it's
worth
saving.
I
urge
you
to
look
at
what
happened
with
uta
and
the
locomotive
building.
They
tried
to
do
the
same
thing
and
I
think
they
lost
a
few
million
dollars
in
the
process.
So
please
don't
spend
money
on
trying
to
preserve
the
mattress
company,
spend
it
on
preserving
the
rio
grande
station.
A
George
amanda
is
there
anyone
else
it
seems
like
that,
might
be
it
as
far
as.
A
Okay,
great
we'll
go
back
to
these
items,
and
you
know
I
do
want
to
say
before
I
take
board
member
rogers
rogers's.
I
don't
know
why.
I
can't
say
your
name
today.
A
James's
motion
is
that
we
are.
I
know
that
the
rda
staff
and
a
few
of
us
board
members
have
been
meeting
with
the
county
and
those
meetings
have
been
incredibly
productive
and
really
a
good
conversation
to
make
sure
that,
as
we
move
forward
with
project
areas
that
we
understand
what
the
goals
and
objectives
are
of
each
of
those
taxing
entities.
A
As
the
board
members
know,
we
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
benefiting
the
entire
community,
and
that
includes
our
school
district
and
our
school
board
and
the
county
and
their
needs
and
objectives
as
well.
And
so
I
know
that
I
want
to
thank
the
rda
staff
for
continuously
reaching
out
and
making
sure
that
those
conversations
are
happening
and
that
we're
taking
into
account
really
what
the
county
is
looking
for
and
what
their
objectives
are.
And
I
think
it's
important
for
us
as
board
members
to
continue
doing
that,
so
that
we
have.
A
That's
really
what
I
hope
that
we
can
do
with
each
of
the
taxing
entities
is
really
build
up
the
entire
community
and
reach
all
of
those
different
needs
and
objectives.
A
So
I,
before
we
get
to
that
motion
james,
I
just
really
wanted
to
say
thank
you
to
the
staff
and
and
really
thank
you
to
the
county
for
taking
time
out.
I
know
they
met
with
several
of
us,
so
taking
some
time
out
of
their
busy
days
to
meet
with
us
and
and
kind
of
help
inform
us
of
what
their
objectives
are.
So
yeah,
andrew.
F
Sorry
ma'am
chair,
I
didn't
want
to
raise
my
hand
until
you're
done.
I
apologize.
F
No,
I
I
was,
I
was
wondering
if
we
could
do
separate
motions,
I
don't
want
to
make
it
too
honors,
but
in
my
conversations
in
the
county,
as
you
mentioned
before
and
other
people,
I
don't
think
people
are
identifying.
These
are
two
different
project
areas
that
look
very,
very
different,
and
this
may
be
symbolic,
but
I
think
doing
separate
motions
might
be
helpful,
just
to
make
sure
they're
clear
that
they're
different.
A
I
think
that's
fine
I'll
look
for
then.
Let's
do
this.
I
will
look
for
a
motion
on
agenda
items
two
and
three,
which
are
the
nine
line
interlocal
with
both
the
with
both
salt
lake
city
and
the
school
district.
F
Madam
chair,
I
think
that
was
my
initial
intent
was
not
to
include
the
other
project
area
that
we
were
discussing
in
the
motion.
It
was
just
to
include
the
first
two
resolutions
for
the
nine
line
project
area,
so
yes,
that
would
be
my
motion
is
to
to
move
forward
with
that.
A
D
D
F
D
A
Member
morris-
yes-
and
I
am
a
yes
so
that
passes
unanimously
moving
on,
I
would
look
for
a
motion
on
agenda
items
four
and
five,
which
are
resolutions
revol,
involving
the
interlocal
between
salt
lake
city
and
the
interlocal
between
the
school
district
for
this
state
street
project
area.
E
A
F
F
E
A
A
Okay
with
that
we
will
move
on
to
agenda
item
number
six
and
again
before
moving
on.
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you.
These
project
areas
have
been
in
the
works
for
a
long
time.
There's
been
a
lot
of
hard
work
put
into
these
project
areas.
I
look
forward
to
working
with
the
county
and
their
event
their
participation,
and
I
think
that
these
are
going
to
be
really
good
project
areas
and
something
that
we
as
board
members,
can
look
back
20
years
from
now
and
be
proud
of
so
good
work.
A
Everybody
and
and
we'll
look
forward
to
more
updates
on
these.
With
that,
we
will
move
to
agenda
item
number
six,
which
is
an
update
to
the
rda
percent
for
art
policy,
danny
and
tracy
tran.
I
will
turn
it
over
to
youtube.
B
Correct.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
signing
before
the
board
today
is
to
present
a
proposed
update
to
the
agency's
public
art
policy.
Our
purpose
today
is
for
the
board
to
review
and
comment
on
the
policy,
and
our
intention
then,
would
be
to
incorporate
those
comments
into
a
final
round
that
we
would
return
for
approval.
B
So
I
believe
tracy
has
a
slide
that
we
can
put
up.
It
is
included
in
your
packet
as
well,
and
she
will
walk
through
the
structure
of
the
proposed
policy,
how
it
would
be
implemented
both
within
the
different
levels
of
agency
projects
and
participation,
as
well
as
in
conjunction
with
the
arts
council.
So
with
that,
I
will
turn
it
over
to
tracy.
G
All
right,
can
you
see
this
rda
art
policy,
okay,.
G
All
right
all
right
he's
trying
to
get
to
full
screen,
but
that
that
should
work
see
so
just
to
give
some
background.
The
rda
board
adopted
an
art
policy
in
1990
that
follows
the
city's
percent
for
art
provision
in
chapter
2.30
of
the
salt
lake
city
code,
which
designates
one
percent
of
capital
improvement
projects
to
go
towards
art.
G
Historically,
in
addition
to
following
the
percent
for
art
policy,
the
agency
has
included
an
art
requirement
for
land
disposition
projects,
and
the
board
has
also
allocated
additional
art
funding
beyond
the
percent
for
art
policy
to
fund
additional
art
projects
within
project
areas.
An
example
of
this
would
be
the
granary,
murals
project
that
was
done
a
few
years
ago,
so
I'll
quickly
go
over
what
we
are
proposing,
which
is
laid
out
in
this
chart.
G
G
So
basically,
there
are
three
components
to
this
proposed
policy,
so
we
have
an
art
requirement
and
our
incentive
and
an
option
for
the
rda
board
to
allocate
additional
funds
through
our
program
income
fund
to
fund
art
within
our
within
project
areas.
So
art
will
be
required
for
all
infrastructure
projects
and
for
rda
dispositions.
G
So,
where
1.5
of
the
infrastructure
projects
and
up
to
1.5
percent
of
hard
costs
for
rda
dispositions,
as
determined
through
an
rfp
or
rfq,
would
go
towards
art,
and
this
aligns
with
the
city's
percent
for
art
increase
from
one
to
one
point
five
percent
and
specifies-
and
this
further
specifies
just
a
requirement
for
dispositions
as
a
way
to
incentivize
art.
We
are
proposing
a
0.5
interest
rate
reduction.
G
If
a
developer
can
contributes
1.5
of
the
rda
contribution
of
their
project
towards
art,
this
would
be
a
new
addition
within
the
policy
to
incentivize,
more
art
and
so
for
both
the
art
requirement
and
for
the
art
incentive
developers
would
have
the
option
of
either
installing
art
on
site
or
contributing
to
an
overall
art
fund,
and
if
they
are
contributing
to
an
art
fund,
the
funds
would
be
placed
within
a
holding
account
until
funds
are
appropriated
by
the
board.
G
G
G
G
G
So
for
anything,
that's
public
art
within
a
public
right-of-way
that
would
be
led
by
the
arts
council
and
that
would
be
reviewed
by
the
art
design
board.
The
ownership
and
maintenance
would
fall
on
salt
lake
city
corporation
and
in
terms
of
the
fees
we
would
help
provide
up
to
15
of
the
admin
and
up
to
15
of
maintenance
to
help
cover
the
public
art
and
then
for
publicly
visible
art
on
private
property.
G
G
So
we
would
kind
of
mirror
something
like
that
in
order
to
review
the
art
and
the
ownership
and
the
maintenance
would
fall
on
the
private
property
owner
in
those
cases
and
there
wouldn't
be
any
fees
since
we
would
be
running
that
process
and
the
only
difference
and
then
in
some
off
cases
where
we're
partnering
with
a
partner
entities
such
as
like
uta,
we
would
work
some
of
the
ownership
and
maintenance
could
be
with
that
partner
entity,
but
we'll
work
through
those
as
we
as
we
move
forward.
G
So
at
this
time,
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions
or
comments.
As
danny
had
stated,
our
goal
is
to
take
any
feedback
from
the
board
and
come
back
at
the
future
board
meeting
for
potential.
A
potential
adoption
of
a
final
policy.
D
D
Hi
there
I.
D
A
E
Sorry,
I'm
always
asking
questions
the
so.
The
main
difference
is
that
it
goes
on
public,
so
community
improvement
projects
and
land
dispositions.
It
goes
from
one
percent
to
1.5
and
then
also
there's
a
new
thing
on
projects
that
do
not
fall
into
those
two
categories
where,
if
they
use
1.5
percent
of
their
rda's
contribution
for
art,
then
they
get
a
0.5
rate
reduction.
Am
I
understanding
that
correctly.
H
E
B
That's
a
good
question.
I
don't
I
don't
know
the
true
average
off
the
top
of
my
head,
but
you
know
we
have
some
loans
that
have
gone
full
term.
Most
of
those
are
usually
more
geared
towards
either
affordable
housing
or
non-profit
loans,
because
they're
baked
into
what
the
public
benefit
is
or
the
housing
side
of
it
private
loans
we
tend
to
have
a
lower
term.
Our
our
loan
program
is
currently
structured
that
those
loans
are
hopefully
five
years
where
they
can
be
extended
to
ten
years.
E
Tool
seems
like
it's
going
to
be
really
good
for
developers
who
tend
to
intend
to
hold
their
loan
for
multiple
years,
but
actually
maybe
not
very
good.
If
they're
going
to
use
a
construction
loan
and
refinances
so
yeah.
I
like
the
idea.
I
like
the
concept.
I
want
to
make
sure
it's
a
tool
that
works
and
also
a
tool
that
doesn't
I
mean
if
it's
a
30-year
loan
that
would
end
up
costing
us
a
ton
for
that
that
small
initial
our
investment.
E
So
I
like
the
concept,
I'm
just
wanting
to
make
sure
that
that
0.5
reduction
is
thought
through
and
and
that
that's
accurate
and
I
guess
I'll
have
to
just
trust
staff
that
that
it
is,
unless
you
have
some
details
as
to
why
it's
that.
B
I
it's
certainly
something
I
think
we
can
always
review
and
come
back
to
the
justification
for
the
the
0.5
reduction
in
the
loan
is
within
our
loan
program.
That's
what
any
of
those
criteria
get
so,
whether
it's
you
know,
transit
or
public
art,
so
it's
not
specific
to
just
public
art.
It's
kind
of
what
the
norm
is
for
any
of
those
benefits
that
if
the
board
chooses
to
approve
that
they've
hit
that
mark,
then
they
qualify
for
that
reduction.
So.
E
A
B
Yeah,
I
think,
hopefully
we
can
get
felicia
in
the
meeting,
because
I
think
she
can
speak
to
that.
There's
a
there's
a
few
points
there.
I
think
we
we
kind
of
jumped
out
ahead
of
where
I
believe
that
conversation
is
fully
on
the
city
side.
We
one
of
the
reasons
we
jumped
and
tracy.
Please
correct
me
if
I
say
this
wrong.
One
of
the
reasons
we
bumped
ours
up
to
the
one
and
a
half
percent
is
because
it
was
our
understanding.
B
Is
that
the
that's
the
intention
of
where
the
city
program
is
going
to
go?
So
we
wanted
to
be
consistent
with
that
number
one
number
two
in
working
with
the
arts
council
in
felicia,
really
our
biggest
concern
there
was
to
make
sure
that
we
had
that
differentiation
between
what
is
going
to
be
truly
public
art
and
potentially
owned
and
maintained
by
the
city
and
provide
a
structure
for
that.
That
really
doesn't
necessarily
exist
right
now
on
the
city
side,
as
felicia
works
with
different
city
departments
in
implementing
public
art.
B
So
we
kind
of
are
using
this
program
as
an
example
and
a
test
case
for
what
that
could
look.
Like
with
other
city
departments
such
as
when
the
arts
council
coordinates
with
the
airport
or
other
public
infrastructure
projects
and
how
art
is
treated
not
only
within
that
project,
but
also
within
the
budget,
as
well
as
the
maintenance
side
of
things,
so
we
we
may
have
taken
a
little
bit
of
a
creative
step
forward.
B
I
Hi,
I
I
had
a
couple
of
hiccups
in
joining,
but
I
I
think
what
danny
said
it
is
true,
we're
just
trying
to
make
city
policy
a
little
bit
more
consistent
in
that
right.
Now
we
have
the
cip
process
through
the
public
art
program
with
the
arts.
Council
process
doesn't
necessarily
exist
for
necessarily
other
departments
outside
that
process,
for
example
the
art
or
public
utilities.
I
So
I
think
this
is
a
step
in
in
the
direction
of
creating
some
consistency
in
process,
but
it
also
creates
some
clear
definitions
of
you
know:
ownership
of
the
artwork.
If
it
is
public
art
in
the
public
right
of
way,
then
we
we
run
that
process
through
the
the
arts
council
as
it
exists,
but
when
it
may
be
another,
you
know
a
private
developer.
The
the
rda
has
the
flexibility
to
run
that
process
through
their
own
committee,
which
which
also
gives
us
advantage
of
expediting
projects
right
now.
I
I
It
can
be
helpful
and
I
think
we
we
have
a
little
bit
of
you
know
places
for
improvement,
but
this
puts
us
on
a
really
good
route
to
you
know
having
that
policy
in
place
with
the
rda
and
and
helping
them
to
achieve
goals
outside
the
arts.
Council.
A
Excellent,
do
we
have
other
questions
on
this?
I
know
that
we
will
be
hearing
more
of
this
policy
as
we
kind
of
work
out
some
of
those
little
kinks
and
any
of
the
feedback
that
board
members
may
have,
or
as
felicia
mentioned,
that
you
might,
we
might.
The
arts
council
may
come
up
with
as
far
as
kind
of
coordinating
this
as
parallel
as
we
can
with
this
city
and
then
we'll
be
coming
back
with
a
proposed
resolution
I
would
imagine,
is
that
right,
danny
and
tracy.
B
A
Perfect,
so
again,
if
I,
if
you
do
come
up
with
anything
as
always,
I
would
encourage
you
to
reach
out
to
danny
and
his
and
tracy
and
their
team
and
felicia.
If
there's
any
questions
that
come
up
after
this
meeting.
A
Good
to
see
you
if
there
are
no
other
questions
on
that,
we'll
move
to
agenda
item
number
seven.
A
Actually,
before
we
move
to
agenda
item
number
seven,
I'm
gonna
switch
things
up,
keeping
everybody
on
their
toes.
Let's
do
agenda
item
number
seven
and
we'll
go
from
there
with
a
couple
of
things.
B
Okay.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
This.
This
item
is
our
notice
of
funding,
availability
and
recommendations
for
allocation
of
those
funds
to
projects
with
that.
I
appreciate
you
keeping
us
in
order,
because
that
allows
us
to
just
keep
tracy
right
here
and
both
tracy
and
lauren
are
here
to
present
and
speak
to
this,
and
if
you
have
any
questions,
we'll
jump
on
in
at
any
time.
G
G
A
Great
and
tracy
I
we
can
see
that
really
well,
I
can't
see
everybody's
hands
and
so,
as
per
usual,
when
we
have
these
kind
of
presentations,
I
would
just
ask
board
members
if
you
have
a
question
at
some
point
during
tracy's
presentation,
if
it's
okay
with
tracy
just
slightly
interrupt,
you
don't
have
to
ask
me
for
permission,
because
I
can't
see
it
anyway,
but
if
that's
okay,
then
that's
kind
of
how
we'll
run
that
please.
G
Great
thank
you.
So
this
year
we
released
approximately
3.9
million
through
a
notice
of
funding,
availability
or
nofa
for
the
development
of
affordable
housing
within
salt
lake
city.
So
1.3
million
came
from
the
tax
increment
funds
and
2.59
million
came
from
the
funding
our
future
sales
tax
funds.
This
competitive
process
was
released
on
june
17th
of
this
year
with
applications
due
on
august
16th
august
6
2020..
G
So
this
year
we
received
two
applications
with
a
request
of
2.42
million
and
this
year
since
the
nofa
included
two
funding
sources,
both
the
sales
tax
and
the
tax
increment.
G
G
So,
within
the
threshold
requirements
we
looked
at
eligible
applicants,
development
team
experience
eligible
projects,
whether
or
not
they
had
site
control
on
the
property,
design
and
city
code
requirements.
G
Minimum
affordability
requirement
where
at
least
20
percent
of
the
units
are
at
60
percent
ami
or
below
a
funding
maximum
and
project,
and
they
had
to
meet
at
least
two
project
project
priorities.
Excuse
me,
and
this
was
established
by
the
board
within
that
policy.
G
G
Again,
the
experience
of
the
development
team,
the
financial
need
and
viability,
project,
readiness
and
just
the
content
regarding
building
and
site
design
for
the
projects,
so
right
now
I'll
turn
it
over
to
lauren
and
she
can
kind
of
dive
in
a
little
more
with
the
details
of
the
two
applications
that
we
received.
H
So,
as
tracy
just
mentioned,
we
received
two
applications
this
year
and
the
first
1.5
million
dollar
loan
request
came
from
developer
peter
carone
to
accommodate
the
construction
of
a
110
unit
apartment
building
at
144,
south
500
east,
seen
here
on
the
map
and
the
apartment
building
features
some
retail
space
on
the
first
floor
and
co-working
space
for
tenants
on
the
second
floor,
20
or
22
of
the
110
units
fall
at
50
percent
am
ami
or
the
average
area
immediate
median
income,
and
then,
if
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide,.
H
Per
the
the
rda
loan
request
equates
to
approximately
68
000
of
per
affordable
unit
and
around
six
percent
of
the
total
project
cost,
and
this
project
me
did
meet
at
least
two
of
the
nofa
project
priorities
that
tracy
went
over
per
the
primary
lender
or
hud's
loan
requirements.
The
applicant
requested
a
two-year
interest-only
construction
loan
that
would
roll
over
into
permanent
financing
with
a
40-year
amortization
period
and
term
and
cash
flow
repayments
at
one
percent
interest.
H
H
J
Lauren,
I
have
a
question.
This
last
project
said
that
the
commission
well,
first
of
all
the
salt
lake
city,
the
the
house,
it's
the
housing
authority
of
salt
lake
city.
It's
not
related
to
the
city
correct
as
a
separate
entity.
H
Right
because
the
use
just
isn't
permitted
right
now
in
that
rms
35
zone,
and
so
if
they
can
somehow
figure
out
if
it's
a
rezone
or
whatever
it
may
be,
they
they
saw
value
in
the
project
and
and
liked
the
project
and
thought
that
it
meant
the
nofa
criteria.
But
it
was
just
not
meeting
that
zoning
so.
J
E
A
That
does
give
me
some
concern
and
and
not.
A
That
we
haven't
done
it
before
in
some
ways,
but
I
I
do
have
a
little
bit
of
concern,
although
I
love
the
idea
of
this
particular
project
in
this
particular
area,
where
I
do
think
that
we're
seeing
a
little
bit
in
this
area
as
I'm
looking
at
the
the
google
maps
of
it
and
what's
around
there,
we
are
seeing
a
little
bit
more
of
some
opportunity
areas
in
that
area
right
some
opportunity
zones.
A
I
know
it's
not
an
opportunity
zone,
but
there's
a
little
bit
more
access
to
transportation
and
things
kind
of
around
in
that
area,
not
totally,
but
at
least
a
little
bit
more.
So
I
like
the
project
I
just
do-
have
some
concerns
about
the
process
and
and
what
we
need
to
do
there.
I
don't
have
an
answer
for
it,
so
just
throwing
that
out
there
darren.
E
Can
you
sort
of
remind
me
where
we
are
with
the
shared
housing
ordinance?
Is
that
fully
approved,
or
we're
still
waiting
on
that,
because
that
that's
an
entirely
new
ordinance
that
would
need
to
be
approved
for
this
project
to
be
able
to
be
built
right,
or
is
that
already
done?
I
forget
exactly.
E
And
like
anywhere
in
the
city,
it's
not
allowed
right,
so
I
I
think
that
well,
I
agree
with
a
lot
of
things
that
that
madam
chair
said,
I,
I
kind
of
think
it's
putting
the
cart
really
far
in
front
of
the
horse,
and-
and
so
I
would,
I
wouldn't
feel
comfortable
timing
that
money
when
other
projects
might
come
in
that
could
use
that
funding.
In
the
meantime,.
A
I
was
trying
to
be
nice
darren,
I'm
just
kidding
just
kidding.
No,
I
I
appreciate
it
and
and
andrew
I'm
gonna,
get
to
you
real,
quick,
I'm
wondering
if
jen
or
someone
on
our
staff
can
tell
us
where
we
are
with
that
shared
housing
ordinance.
That's
what.
A
D
On
our
the
council's
agenda
in
one
of
the
october
meetings,
I
can't
remember
which
one
we
just
did
we
did
receive
it.
F
Andrew
you,
madam
chair,
I
have
a
quite
it's
probably
an
oh,
a
developer's
question
if
they're
available,
but
why
would
they
apply
this
early
for
the
rda
funding
before
everything
else?
Is
there
an
answer
for.
B
B
That's
why
we
try
to
release
it
right
after
the
budget
is
approved
so
that
housing
developers
can
actually
try
to
secure
nofa
funds
prior
to
them,
applying
for
tax
credits
as
well,
and
so
it
is
set
up
to
where
it
can
be
a
funding
commitment,
subject
to
very
specific
conditions
that
do
allow
them
either
to
continue
to
seek
funding
finalize
some
of
the
issues
with
the
site,
acquisition
or
development,
as
well
as
just
know
that
they
have
that
commitment
moving
forward
and
early
on.
B
F
G
I
think
they
plan
on
applying,
but
I
don't
think
it
will
be.
It
was
in
this
year's
cycle,
so
I
think
it'll
have
to
be
next
year
and
it
does.
I
think
that
was
part
of
the
discussion
with
the
selection
committee
was
that
it
seemed
like
they
did.
They
were
pretty
early
on
and
that
they
would
have
to
seek
some
additional
approvals
and
before
getting
to
a
place
where
I
think
our
funding
would
make
sense.
Okay,.
F
So
the
next
round
of
live
tech
funding
for
the
nine
percent
is
next
september,
so
they
got
about
a
year
so
that
meantime
they
could
go
depending
what
happens
with
the
council
process.
They
could
come
back
to
us
probably
plenty
of
time
to
have
that
lined
up
if
they
wanted
that
to
support
that
application
right.
B
A
And
danny
to
your
point,
sometimes
some
of
this
funding,
especially
when,
when
people
are
doing
affordable,
housing
it,
this
commitment
is
helpful
for
them
to
go.
Get
other
financing.
Is
that
accurate.
G
And
I
just
wanted
to
note
that,
even
with
the
litec
applications,
it
is
required
that
they
have
to
meet
the
zoning
that's
in
place,
so
they
wouldn't
have
been
able
to
meet
that
they
would
have
not
been
able
to
meet
that
requirement,
even
in
this
year's
cycle,
if
they
had
applied
because
they
don't
meet
the
zoning.
A
Okay
and
then
danny,
I
know,
we've
been
trying
to
put
out
a
nofa
twice
a
year.
Is
that
our
goal.
B
Well,
it's
still
pretty
new,
I
think.
Last
year
we
just
did
one,
but
I
think,
as
we've
talked
about
both
with
the
initial
budget
allocation
and
then
potentially
in
years
like
this,
where
we
may
not
spend
all
of
that
with
the
initial
application
that
we
would
then
kind
of
gather
up
those
funds
and
do
another
issuance
of
the
nofa
somewhere
mid-year.
B
And
then
that
would
also
align
with
when
we
may
receive
other
housing
contributions
from
inland
port
or
other
sources
that
we
could
then
put
out
mid-year.
C
I
was
just
going
to
remind
the
board
about
the
conversation
for
the
new
housing
allocation
policy
and
housing
development
trust
fund
program,
so
this
was
kind
of
an
interim
process
that
we
put
together
with
the
joint
selection
committee,
but
ultimately
that
policy.
Those
two
policies
that
will
come
to
you
within
the
next
couple
of
months
will
outline
the
process
more
clearly
in
terms
of
both
how
often
we'll
issue
the
nofas
and
the
selection
committee
process.
A
So
couple
more
follow-up
questions.
I'm
sorry,
do
other
board
members
have
questions
right
now
I
didn't
mean
to
overstep
any
board
members
and
a
couple
more
questions,
tammy
or
danny,
or
whoever
wants
to
answer
them
on
the
rda
stack.
A
Sorry,
my
dog
is
walking
in
here,
so
you
hear
the
click,
click
clap,
but
were
there
other
applications
that
would
maybe
have
a
little
bit
less
complications
in
us
just
giving
them
their
funding
that
were
passed
over
because
of
this
particular
application,
and
it
seems
to
me
that
this
particular
application
would
most
likely
also
qualify
for
our
housing
trust
fund
development
dollars
when
that
came
out
next
year
and
still
be
in
line
with
getting
their
other
financing
and
their
tax
credits.
H
C
And
I
don't
know
if
tracy
or
lauren
have
more
details
on
this,
but
we
did
hear
from
the
development
community
that
developers
are
a
little
bit
gun
shy
with
moving
forward
with
projects
right
now
because
of
kovid,
and
we've
heard
that
the
residential
market
is
still
pretty
hot,
but
people
are
a
little
hesitant
right
now
to
pull
the
trigger
on
finalizing
funding
and
assembly
assembling
funding
sources.
C
So
we
think
that
combined
with
maybe
uncertainty
around
the
election
had
a
lower
application
rate
than
last
year.
Last
year
we
actually
got
20
million
or
25
million
worth
of
applications,
so
this
was
this
year
was
significantly
lower.
C
A
What
is
our
timeline
on
this?
As
far
as
shroud
poll
approval
resolution,
I
don't
gen
somebody
and
will
tell
me
when
I'm
supposed
to.
A
D
G
G
So
I
don't
so
the
neither
one
of
them
applied
for
the
litec,
the
latex,
so
that
we're
they're
not
subject
to
that.
But
I
would
I
believe
that
peter
curran
project
is
looking
to
move
forward
with
him
within
the
next
year
or
so
so,
and
I
think
I
could
see
peter
cronin
on
here
if
he,
if
he
wanted
to
speak
to
that.
D
Sure
so
we
have
a
commitment
from
the
county
already
and
we've
applied
for
the
olin
walker
funds.
That
comes,
I
think,
towards
the
towards
the
end
of
next
month,
and
so
we're
trying
to
get
things
lined
up
as
fast
as
possible.
We've
actually
already
requested
for
this
project
twice
and
been
turned
down,
so
we're
hoping
to
get
it
moving.
E
F
Yeah
again,
I
think
why
don't
we
just
move
forward
with
peter
caronese
development
and
let
it
go
back
to
out
to
notice,
for
the
other.
D
A
Would
maybe
that's
the
motion
on
the
table
or
the
strapple
motion?
Do
you
need
a
motion
or
a
straw,
pull
danny
or
allison
or
katie,
or
whoever
wants
to
correct
me.
A
So
we
have
a
motion
on
the
table
for
approving
the
resolution
for
the
nofa
for
the
first
project.
What
is
the
address
of
that
project?
One
five:
five
south
500
east.
A
E
D
D
D
A
You're
welcome.
Congratulations,
peter
good
luck!
Let's
move
to
the
project!
1725
jefferson
street.
Do
you
have
a
motion
regarding
that
nofa.
A
We
can
also
hold
it.
We
don't
have
to
get
rid
of
it
right
now.
We
can
table
it
and
come
back
to
it.
If
we
had
two
applications
and
only
two
applications,
we
can
certainly
sort
of
put
this
in
a
little
we,
we
can
come
back
to
it
at
a
later
date
in
a
different
agenda
item.
We
don't
have
to
make
a
decision
today.
B
It
doesn't
necessarily
make
any
changes.
I
I
think
it
would
probably
be
better
from
a
clarity
standpoint
for
the
board
to
take
action
on
whether
it's
you're
not
going
to
approve
the
funding
and
or,
if
you're,
going
to
provide
some
type
of
earmark
or
commitment
for
it.
I
should
note
that
I
think
the
motion
that
you
just
took
on
unless
you
separated,
if
you
approved
the
resolution,
then
the
resolution
is
already
just
approving
funding
for
the
first
project.
B
So
whatever
you
do
as
part
of
this
discussion
is
in
addition
to
that,
and
so
it
doesn't
change
anything
on
our
end
other
than
to
what
extent
we
may
or
may
not
earmark
funds
based
on
what
direction
the
board
provides.
As
far
as
a
commitment
to
give.
F
I
hear
you're
saying
that
I'm
sure
I
guess
my
my
gut
instinct
is
to
take
action
and
decline.
It
now
on
my
part
and
then
but
intend
them
to
come
back
to
us,
because
I
think
it's
a
decent
idea,
but
there
seems
to
be
quite
a
few
administrative
hurdles
for
them
to
get
through
and
at
that
point,
if
they
come
back
to
us,
their
funding
model
may
change
slightly
and
they
necessitate
some
changes
in
the
application.
I
don't
know
if
that's
true
or
not.
F
D
Yes,
I
am
in
favor,
wait!
Okay!
I
don't
remember
how
that
question
was
phrased,
but
I
am
in
favor
of
denying
this.
F
I
I
made
the
motion
to
to
support
the
recommendation
from
the
rda
staff
that
we
declined,
that
we
don't
appear
that
we'd
not
approve
this.
E
J
Did
we
did
we
already
passed
the
time
to
for
discussion?
Sorry
or
I
just
have
a
clarifying
question
for
this
motion
from
from
staff?
If
that's
okay,
is
that?
Okay?
Yes,
yes!
So
if,
if
this
is
not
going
to
prove
today
when
they
come
back
in
the
future,
do
they
have
to
go
through
the
whole
process
again
and
submit
a
full
application
again,
and
I
mean
even
if
it's
in
three
months
I
mean
it's
up,
sounds
like
it's
a
lot
of
work
for
something
that
we
want
to
see
in
the
future.
J
G
Sorry,
yes,
they
would
have
to,
and
because
this
is
a
nofa,
it's
a
competitive
process,
it
would
be
required
for
everyone
to
go
through
the
same
process.
I
can
I'm
pretty
sure
it's
very
it's
very
unlikely
that
they
will
have
a
project
ready
within
three
months,
given
the
zoning
issues
that
we
see
and
we
we
do
like
to
see
projects
submitted
in
full,
because
you
know,
if
any
component
of
this
project
changes
it
could
completely
change
their
ask
for
the
rda
could
completely
change
just
their
financial
model
for
them
for
the
project.
G
So,
yes,
I
mean
they
would
have
to
research
it
regardless.
J
Okay,
all
right,
I
think
my
only
request
on
it
would
be
that
if
rda
staff
can
stay
in
touch
with
them,
you
know
to
see
if
there's
in
just
as
they
clear
out
those
little
hard
thoughts
that
they
need
to
go
through,
because
I
think
it's
in
an
area
that
that
native
and
can
use
type
of
housing.
So
thank
you
and
my
my
and
I'm
a
yes,
then,
okay.
A
Thank
you
board,
member
of
all
the
morals.
I
don't
remember
who
I
haven't
gotten
to
now:
board
member
roger
christie
commuting.
Sorry.
A
A
I
see
that
madame
mayer
joined
us.
Thank
you
mayor
for
joining
us
today.
I
am
going
to
see
where
we're
at
on
time.
Give
me
one.
Second,
I
think
what
we
we're
gonna
skip
around
a
little
bit.
I
am.
A
We
do
need
a
a
motion
to
ratify
the
determination
that
the
board
will
continue
to
meet
remotely
and
without
an
anchor
location
under
hb5002,
and
I
am
just
going
to
read
a
declaration
and
then
ask
for
a
motion
out
of
that.
We
probably
that,
as
the
board
the
chair
of
the
board
of
redevelopment
agency,
I
would
hereby
determine
that
conducting
the
board
of
the
redevelopment
agency
meeting
at
an
anchor
location
presents
a
substantial
risk
to
the
health
and
safety
of
those
who
may
be
present
at
that
anchor
location.
A
A
Due
to
the
state
of
emergency
caused
by
the
related
new
strain
of
oh
excuse
me
caused
by
the
global
pandemic,
I
find
that
conducting
a
meeting
at
an
anchor
location
under
the
current
state
of
public
health
emergency
constitutes
a
substantial
risk
to
the
health
and
safety
of
any
of
those
who
may
be
present
at
that
location.
D
Madam
chair,
yes,
I
moved
that
the
board
continued
to
meet
with
out
an
anchor
location.
Second,.
F
A
D
F
D
A
I
think
that
was
a
yes,
but
it
kept
muting.
So
I'm
gonna
take
that
as
a
yes
and
I'm
a
yes
so
that
passes
unanimously.
Thank
you
at
this
time.
I
would
like
we
need
to
go.
I
would
look
for
a
motion
to
enter
into
a
closed
session
regarding
property,
the
potential
property
strategies
for
property
acquisition
exchange
or
lease
and
attorney
client
matters.
D
A
I
have
a
motion
from
board
member
wharton
and
a
second
for
from
board
member
rogers
again
roll
call
this
board
member
mano.
D
D
F
J
A
Yes,
so
that
we
will
enter
into
closed
session
for
anybody
who
is
watching,
we
will
be
back
after
our
closed
session
and
for
those
who
are
participating.
I
would
ask
that
if
you
know
you
don't
need
to
be
in
this
meeting.
Well,
oh,
no!
There's
a
separate
link.
Isn't
there
jen.
D
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
L
So
this
is
looking
from
third
south
south
toward
the
building
in
woodbine
street,
which
we'd
be
standing
on
here,
actually
wraps
around
the
building.
So
our
infrastructure
has
been
designed
around
it
to
preserve
these
new
corridors,
and
the
building
also,
like
I
mentioned
before,
reinforces
the
character
of
this
historic
warehouse
district
next
slide.
L
Our
request
is
for
the
board
to
consider
approving
the
use
of
some
of
the
station
center
funds
that
were
reallocated
as
part
of
the
budget
minimum
amendment
4
to
the
fiscal
year
20
budget.
This
may
to
stabilize
the
structure
with
shoring
and
bracing
until
a
developer
is
selected
for
station
center.
L
The
preliminary
cost
estimate
for
the
stabilization
is
865
dollars,
and
that
includes
365
000
for
construction
of
the
stabilization
system
and
another
500
000
for
the
shoring
equipment
that
will
be
in
place
until
the
building's
renovated.
So
right
now
we're
assuming
that
purchasing
the
shoring
equipment
will
be
more
cost
effective
than
renting
it
on
a
monthly
basis.
But
a
detailed
cost
analysis
will
be
completed
as
part
of
the
design
of
the
stabilization
system
and
we'll
choose
the
lowest
cost
option
for
the
project.
So
that
is
information
we
will
have
further
along
in
the
design.
L
So
I
noted
here
that
the
shoring
equipment
will
stay
in
place
until
the
building
is
renovated
and
we
imagine
there
are
a
few
ways
this
renovation
could
take
place
in
the
future.
So
if
we
could
go
to
the
last
slide,
amanda.
L
A
preliminary
cost
estimate
for
renovating
the
building
to
a
seismically
upgraded
shell
is
3.4
million
dollars.
So
I
think
next
steps
could
be
to
determine
what
the
rda's
role
might
be
in
that
renovation.
We
could
stabilize
the
building
like
we've
discussed
here
and
then
include
it
in
the
larger
station
center
project.
In
the
redevelopment
plans
for
station
center,
we
could
stabilize
the
building
and
issue
a
separate
rfp
for
a
developer
to
renovate
the
building
or
following
stabilization,
we
could
complete
the
renovation
and
then
issue
an
rfp
for
the
renovated
building.
L
So
that
is
my
last
slide
and
I
I
don't
know
if
danny
wants
to
add
anything
or
if
there
are
any
questions.
B
E
So
all
right,
thanks
is
the
3.4
million
estimate
to
re-refer
the
building
to
a
usable
state
or
that's
just
to
do
the
seismic
upgrade
and
then
they'd
still
have
to
do
their
tenant
improvements
and
all
that.
L
It
is
to
do
the
seismic
upgrade
and
then
the
and
then
I
think,
minimal
mechanical
and,
let's
see,
I
think,
just
to
a
shell
state
and
so
the
tenant
improvements
would
still
be
required
after
that,
yeah.
B
Correct,
that's
exactly
what
I
was
going
to
say
is
right.
Now
we're
talking
about
the
865
000
to
just
stabilize
it
and
provide
the
opportunity
to
further
evaluate
what
that
3.4
million
would
be
what
it
would
include,
as
well
as
options
for
how
we
think.
We
could
then
incorporate
that
into
the
project.
E
And
how
much
would
it
cost
to
level
that
building
and
just
build
a
a
very
a
similar
building
of
the
same
shape,
size
and
architecture.
B
We'll
take
that
answer.
Karen
wants
to
stick
with
that
answer.
Yeah,
I'm
not
going
to
speculate
on
what
the
construction
would
be.
Maybe
director
mona
can
jump
in
and
say
what
that
might
be.
As
far
as
you
know,
construction
demolition
would
probably
be
in
the
neighborhood
of
150
000.
If
I
was
just
guessing
and
then
construction
of
a
new
building
would
be
a
couple
million
darren.
B
B
You
certainly
could
look
at
doing
a
facade,
ectomy
or
saving
portions
of
of
the
the
exterior,
but,
but
I
think
obviously,
we'd
prefer
to
do
more
of
an
adaptive
reuse
of
the
entire
building
and
try
to
incorporate
all
of
it
or
as
much
of
it
as
possible,
and
and
we
to
your
point-
I
don't-
I
don't
mean
to
dismiss
the
question-
I
just
don't
have
an
answer
off
the
top
of
my
head,
but
director
doing
we
could
certainly
provide
that
information
when
we
come
back
to
the
board.
B
With
that
further
analysis
of
what
restoration
would
cost,
I'm
more
than
happy
to
say
this
is
what
a
new
building
would
be,
and
then
here
are
the
options
for
restoring
it
and-
and
I
think
that
would
be
a
good
information
to
have
at
that
time.
E
One
more
james,
I'm
all
in
favor
of
remodeling
and
retrofitting
the
old
buildings.
I
love
old
architecture.
I
love
walking
through
europe
and
seeing
churches
and
buildings
from
the
1700s
modernized.
But
when
I
look
at
this
building,
I
go
it's
kind
of
a
square
box
that
doesn't
to
me
has
a
lot
of
personality.
E
A
Okay,
thank
you
dan,
I'm
gonna
go
james
and
then
darren.
We
have
five
minutes
and
still
two
other
things
on
our
agenda,
so
I
hate
to
rush
us
along,
but
I
try
to
hold
these
meetings
as
efficiently
as
possible.
So,
mr
rogers,
if
you.
F
Two
points
that
I've
got
madam
chair,
and
that
is
the
number
one
is.
We
went
on
an
excursion,
a
downtown
alliance
excursion
to
boston
and
we
saw
how
they
were
using
adaptive,
reuse
with
old
buildings
and
new,
so
they
could
go
up
and
do
mixed
use
right.
So
my
question
is,
with
this
warehouse
we're
looking
at
a
whole
new
height
restriction
in
that
area
in
station
center.
Any
anyway,
is
that
something
that
we
should
be
looking
at,
because
I
really
do
like
the
idea.
F
You
look
at
the
celtic
bank
on
third
south,
where
they
save
the
facade
and
then
put
some
residences
up
in
there.
I
believe
it's
residents
as
an
office
space,
but
I
think
that
you
know
board.
Member
dugan
is
on
to
something
here
where,
where
we're
looking
at
height,
let's
look
at
you
know
doing
that
adaptive,
reuse,
but
adding
you
know
old
with
new,
like
what
we
saw
in
boston.
A
E
Yeah,
I
I
I
hear
what
board
member
dugan's
saying.
I
think
it
it
is
a
high
price
tag,
it
you're,
pushing
by
the
time
you
do
the
whole
thing:
you're
pushing
400
a
square
foot.
Maybe
if
it's
a
really
nice
ti,
but
you
can't
rebuild
historic
buildings,
it's
it's
impossible
to
to
save
that
historic
fabric,
and
so
I
I
do
think
it's
worth
putting
the
money
into
to
at
least
so.
It
doesn't
fall
over
tomorrow
and
then
we
can
have
that
discussion.
D
F
I'll
support
the
motion
to
come
before
us
to
stabilize
the
building
right
now,
but
I
agree,
I
think
we've
got
multiple
old
buildings
across
the
city
that
are
stored,
that
we
haven't
put
any
money
into,
and
so
I
would
hate
to
have
a
conversation
from
the
rda
board
about
this
particular
property
and
ignore
everything
else.
We've
ignored
for
so
long
across
the
city,
so
that
discussion
is
going
to
be
much
bigger
outside
of
the
rda.
F
Yes,
I
will,
I
will
move
for
a
straw
poll
approving
the
865
000
for
building
stabilization
of
the
mattress
building,
but
I
may
add
a
contingency
that
this
in
no
way
endorses
that
we
will
invest
money
to
save
the
historic
structure
in
the
future.
A
I
think
that's
fair.
I
don't
need
a
second
on
a
straw
poll,
so
I
will
just
ask
for
a
thumbs
up
and
then
I'll
go
ahead
and
call
it
up.
It
looks
like
I've
got
everyone,
but
darren
has
a
thousand
stuff
okay,
so
that
is
a
unanimous
character
to
go
ahead
and
release
those
funds
for
the
shoring
up
and
stabilization
of
the
mattress
building.
I'm
going
to
skip
agenda
item
number
nine.
F
Madam
chair,
I'm
I
would
like
to
make
a
straw
poll
that
released
the
funds
and
station
standard
for
property
acquisition.
A
Okay,
again
just
a
thumbs
up,
if
you
support
that
and.
A
I've
got
six
out
of
seven
thumbs.
I've
got
seven
out
of
seven
thumbs
up
at
this
point,
so
that
straw
poll
has
it
passes
and
you
can
go
forward
with
that.
I
do
want
to
tell
the
board.
I
know
that
there
are
some
policy
questions
around
different
acquisitions
and
different
properties
and
things
and
I'm
happy
to
put
those
policy
questions
on
an
october
or
november
agenda
so
that
we
can
have
some
of
that
larger
discussion
with
that.
We
are
on
agenda
item
number
12.
reporting
announcements
from
the
executive
director
mayor.
A
Meeting
great
report,
announcements
from
the
rda
staff.
B
Yes,
madame
tariff,
I
may
I
will
be
brief
just
a
couple,
quick
announcements.
The
first
is,
I
think,
due
to
scheduling
issues.
We
have
a
few
personnel
announcements
we'd
like
to
make.
I
think
it's
been
a
while,
since
we've
had
the
opportunity
to
do
this.
Most
of
you
probably
already
know
that
tammy
hunsaker
has
been
promoted
within
our
offices
to
be
our
deputy
chief
operating
officer,
and
we
certainly
appreciate
the
mayor's
confirmation
of
that.
B
I
don't
think
tammy
knew
I
was
going
to
put
her
on
the
spot
because
she
probably
thought
she
was
in
the
safe
zone.
So
I
won't
make
her
say
anything,
but
I
did
at
least
want
to
recognize
that
within
the
meeting
and
and
provide
her
that
embarrassment
so
there
she
is,
we
won't
make
you
do
an
acceptance,
speech
tammy,
unless
you
want
to.
B
And
then
we're
also
pleased
to
announce
the
hiring
of
aaron
keaney,
who
is
here
as
well?
She
has
been
hired
as
our
financial
analyst
aaron
has,
over
12
years,
experience
in
financial
strategic
planning,
ranging
from
american
express
to
small
business
to
even
private
consulting.
B
She
has
also,
as
part
of
all
of
those
roles
been
involved
in
hr
and
I.t
and
generally
comes
to
us
with
a
lot
of
experience
of
solving
problems
and
use.
The
board
should
be
happy
to
know
that,
no
matter
what
tammy
and
I
have
thrown
at
her
in
terms
of
what
work
she
has
ahead
of
her
and
the
scope
of
her
job
duties,
she
continues
to
tell
us
it's
not
the
worst
she's
ever
seen.
So
I
guess
that's
good
for
us,
but
you
know.
B
B
Normally,
if
we're
in
the
the
meeting
room
they,
they
generally
try
to
have
some
questions
and
embarrass
you,
but
I
think
going
easy
on
everyone
today
so
and
then
two
other
quick
announcements
and
chair
we
we
have
had
our
selection
advisory
committee,
choose
the
pieces
of
art
for
the
agency's
art
for
hope,
slc
project.
We
have
selected
42
message
squares
from
several
different
artists.
B
We
are
currently
collecting
all
of
those
digital
files
and
executing
the
necessary
contracts,
and
we
anticipate
installing
this
art
piece
on
the
rda
properties
across
the
city,
hopefully
by
mid-october,
and
then
we'll
also
host
an
online
gallery
on
our
website
of
the
pieces
that
have
been
submitted.
So
we're
excited
to
get
that
project
out
and
provide
that
opportunity
for
artists,
and
then
some
of
you
may
be
aware
or
had
participated
on
september
15th.
B
There
is
a
virtual
ribbon
cutting
for
the
pamela's
place,
affordable
housing
development
over
on
525,
south
and
fifth
west
you'll
recall
that
the
board
last
year
approved
a
five
hundred
thousand
dollar
loan
for
the
100
unit
project.
All
100
units
are
targeted
to
serve
residents,
earning
30
percent
or
less
of
the
area.
Median
income:
the
project
also
includes
a
4
000
square
foot,
medical
clinic
and
common
area
space
and
council
or
director
mono.
A
Excellent,
thank
you.
Tammy,
congratulations
and
aaron.
Welcome
aboard
I'm
excited
to
get
to
know
you
and
work
with
you
and
I'm
sure
you
may
say
you're
excited
now,
but
I
will
annoy
you
at
some
point.
Just
ask
the
rest
of
the
staff
so,
but
welcome
aboard
we're
looking
forward
to
that.
I
don't
have
any
report
from
me.
Anna.
Is
there
anything?
A
Either
so
okay,
I
I
did
want
to
say
thanks
for
those
announcements,
also
danny,
you
know
how
much
I
like
little
feel
goods
to
end
our
meetings,
and
these
were
a
few
little
feel
goods
being
able
to
have
that
very
important
impactful
project
art
project
murals
around
our
city
will
be
great
and
of
course,
pamela's
place
has
is
an
awesome
opportunity
that
we
got
to
be
a
part
of.
So
thanks
for
that,
and
with
that
I
will
adjourn.