SALT LAKE CITY HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes 451 South State Street, Room 326
A roll is being kept of all who attended the Historic Landmark Commission Meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5:35:19 PM. Audio recordings of the Historic Landmark Commission meetings are retained in the Planning Office for an indefinite period of time.
Present for the Historic Landmark Commission meeting were: Chairperson Thomas Brennan, Vice Chairperson Charles Shepherd; Commissioners Sheleigh Harding, Rachel Quist and Kenton Peters. Commissioners David Richardson and Heather Thuet were excused.
Planning Staff members present at the meeting were: Nora Shepard, Planning Director; Michaela Oktay, Planning Manager; Carl Leith, Senior Planner; Katia Pace, Principal Planner; Amy Thompson, Principal Planner; Deborah Severson, Administrative Secretary and Paul Nielson, Senior City Attorney.
FIELD TRIP NOTES:
A field trip was held prior to the meeting. Historic Landmark Commissioners present were Thomas Brennan, Rachel Quist and Kenton Peters. Staff members in attendance were Michaela Oktay, Carl Leith, Anthony Riederer and Katia Pace.
The following sites were visited:
• 454-466 E. South - Staff gave an overview of the proposal.
• 508 E. South Temple - Staff gave an overview of the proposal.
• 740 South 700 East - Staff gave an overview of the proposal.
REPORT OF THE CHAIR OR VICE CHAIR 5:36:31 PM Chairperson Brennan stated he had nothing to report.
Vice Chairperson Shepherd stated he had nothing to report.
DIRECTOR’S REPORT 5:36:38 PM
Ms. Nora Shepard, Planning Director, stated she had nothing to report
Ms. Michaela Oktay, Planning Manager, reviewed the Wall Avenue Time extension request and asked the Commission for a motion.
The Commission asked to approve the February 4, 2016 minutes prior to discussing the Wall Ave Time Extension.
APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 4, 2016, MINUTES 5:37:28 PM
Vice Chairperson Shepherd reviewed amendments to the minutes.
MOTION 5:39:56 PM
Commissioner Shepherd moved to approve the minutes from February 4, 2016 as amended. Commissioner Quist seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
DIRECTOR’S REPORT (continued) 5:40:34 PM
Ms. Michaela Oktay, Planning Manager, reviewed the extension request and asked the Commission for a motion.
The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
• The reason for the projects delay.
MOTION 5:41:51 PM
Commissioner Harding stated regarding the Wall Avenue Time Extension, she moved that the Historic Landmark Commission approve a twelve month time extension for the Certificate of Appropriateness that was issued for construction of a new single family home located at approximately 757 N Wall Street as requested. Commissioner Peters seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD 5:42:38 PM
Chairperson Brennan opened the Public Comment Period.
Ms. Cindy Cromer reviewed the documents regarding Master Plans (attached to the meeting record). She reviewed why it was important to have the base zoning and the protection of historic resources consistent. Ms. Cromer asked the Commission to review the suggestions on how the Historic Landmark Commission could be more involved in the beginning of processes regarding Zoning and Master Plan amendments
Chairperson Brennan closed the Public Comment Period.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
5:44:50 PM
Historic Landscapes Project Briefing - The Planning Division has contracted Landmark Design, Inc. to prepare histories, inventories and design guidelines of certain parks, park strips, cemeteries, golf courses, and other historic open spaces that have historic features or are historic landscapes. The purpose is to provide information and guidance to make informed decisions on design, maintenance, change and historic preservation with regard to historic landscapes in the City. The briefing will be to update the public and the Commission about the project. (Staff contact: Katia Pace at (801)535-6354 or katia.pace@slcgov.com.)
Ms. Katia Pace, Principal Planner, gave an overview of the proposal as outlined in the Staff Report (located in the case file). Ms. Lisa Benson, Landmark Design, reviewed the basis for the project. Ms. JoEllen Grandy reviewed the project and timeline for the guidelines. The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
• The elements included in the plan.
• Who generated the list of thirty eight sights.
PUBLIC HEARING 5:52:17 PM
Chairperson Brennan opened the Public Hearing.
An Audience Member reviewed the walls and staircase in Miller Park that needed to be protected and refurbished.
Ms. Ellie Hardman stated she had researched Salt Lake City’s parks over the years, some of the files left a lot of questions and she would be more than willing to help with the project.
Chairperson Brennan closed the Public Hearing.
ADMINISTRATIVE SESSION
The Commission discussed the next steps for the project.
5:56:04 PM
New Apartment Building and Parking Structure at approximately 454-466 E. South Temple - Chris Huntsman, CRSA Architects, on behalf of owner Garbett Homes, is requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness from the City to construct a new apartment building at the southwest corner of 500 East and E. South Temple. The site comprising two lots is currently vacant. The proposed development would be four stories to South Temple and five stories to the south, 77 apartment units of which six are live-work units, and provision for parking 125 vehicles in a lower parking level, within the side setback and in the south-west corner of the site. In order to build the proposed apartment building a Certificate of Appropriateness for the building must be approved by the Historic Landmark Commission. The site is zoned R-MU (Residential / Mixed Use) and H Historic Preservation Overlay, and is located in the South Temple Historic District and City Council District 4, represented by Derek Kitchen. (Staff contact: Carl Leith, (801) 535-7758 or carl.leith@slcgov.com) Case Number PLNHLC2016-00166
5:58:11 PM
The Commission took a short break.
6:06:14 PM
The Commission reconvened.
Mr. Carl Leith, Senior Planner, gave an overview of the proposal as outlined in the Staff Report (located in the case file). He stated Staff was recommending that the Historic Landmark Commission approve the petition as presented.
The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
• The use of vinyl windows on the upper floors of the project.
• The vertical solar panels depicted on the south elevation.
• When a traffic study was required for a proposal.
Mr. Bruce Baird, Attorney outlined the presentation and introduced the members of the design team. He reviewed the history of the project and the changes made to the proposal and how those changes addressed the Commission’s concerns.
Mr. Wally Cooper, CRSA Architects, reviewed the new design of the building, the setbacks, parking, entrances, reduction in residential units, height of the building and the solar panels that would be installed on the property.
Mr. Baird discussed the use of materials and the language in the ordinance that addressed sustainable materials.
Mr. Brent Magum reviewed the materials, durability and warranty for the proposed windows in the project.
Ms. Brenda Sheer, College of Architecture, reviewed her involvement and support for the proposal. She reviewed how the building complied with the nature of the area and the history of historic preservation.
The Commission and Applicant discussed the following:
• The warranty on the window materials and if it was a lifetime or ten year warranty.
• How the project was still economically viable with the reduction of units when the applicant had previously stated the proposal would not be viable without the additional units.
• The transition into the dark brick on the top of the building and how it made the building appear as if it abruptly terminated.
• Day lighting to the parking other than the entrance.
• Options for visual divisions on the east elevation.
• The landscaping on the east side of the building.
• The property line measurements along 500 East.
• Options for exposing the foundation.
• How the design guidelines apply to the proposal.
• The options for celebrating and accentuating the entrance to the building.
• Issues Staff could address as conditions of approval.
• Options and design for the parapets.
• The massing, scale and setbacks met the standards and addressed the previous concerns.
• Having a small group of Commissioners review architectural details prior to addressing the full Commission.
• The details and operable sections of the windows.
• How the proposed windows maximize the use of the window and provide for safety regulations.
• The way the developers were working with the neighbors on access to their properties.
PUBLIC HEARING 7:10:24 PM
Chairperson Brennan opened the Public Hearing.
Mr. Michael Iverson, Central City Neighborhood Council, stated the general consensus of the residents had been positive and in support of the project. He stated people liked the design and it fit within the South Temple Historic District. Mr. Iverson stated they were desperate for housing in the area and they appreciated three bedroom units were included in the proposal. He stated Garbett homes had been open and engaging with the community and the Council. Mr. Iverson stated they were satisfied with materials, design, windows, and composition of the structure as it fit with the nature of South Temple.
The following individuals spoke to the petition: Mr. Allen Lu, Mr. Phil Carroll, Mr. Bradford Houston, Ms. Marilynn Neilson, Mr. Jim Webster and Ms. Toni Hodge.
The following comments were made:
• Very pleased with the development and the changes to the proposal.
• Solar panels were a benefit.
• Charging stations should be required in the parking area.
• Parking was an issue and concern for the property.
• Needed to have community space within the proposal.
• Building should be moved forward.
• Planter boxes should be moved to the other side of the sidewalk to not separate the public from the shop windows.
• Do not require the upper levels to be stepped back as the building height to street width ration should be similar.
• Ground level should be increased in height and exterior should be detailed to have large windows with no tinting consistent with mixed use buildings.
• Please protect the integrity of the great architecture and guide the new development to fit the historic corridor.
• The building should match the grander of the street on which it resides.
• Proposal should not be approved until the community felt confident that it was the right building for the important location.
• What occurred on the proposed site had the potential to create a vibrant neighborhood and center where residences would walk, shop and live.
• Project fit with the area and reflected historic massing such as HH Richardson’s architecture.
• The windows were appropriate for the proposal and the material would be sustainable.
• Proposal was a step in the right direction.
• Guest parking needed to be addressed for the proposal. Chairperson Brennan read the following comment cards:
Ms. Joan Clissold – I would like the Garbett proposal to be denied or delayed because of new ideas re: Planning Development of a “cluster” of apartments, restaurants, retail, etc. around South Temple and 500 East and because of what we hope for the area.
Renee and Marty Backer- To Whom It May Concern - we would like to see a lovely apartment building next door in the empty lot up until a week ago tents were pitched and people were camping on the lot. A building next door would help to bring an end to the vandalism, graffiti and garbage dumping that we have suffered with the empty lot next door. Regards Ms. Renee Backer and Mr. Marty Backer
Chairperson Brennan closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Baird and Mr. Cooper addressed the following:
• Electric charging stations for the proposal.
• The parking complied with the code.
• The proposed use was one hundred percent compliant with the zoning and it was not within the purview of the Commission to require them to change to a different use.
• The reasoning for the building location and design.
• The common and community space in the proposal.
The Commission and Applicants discussed the following:
• The live/work space and where it was located in the building.
ADMINISTRATIVE SESSION 7:29:51 PM The Commission discussed the following:
• Substantial changes had been made to the proposal and addressing the
Commission’s concerns.
• Public outreach was improved.
• The inclusion of three bedrooms to promote families.
• The color of the brick at the top of the building.
• Front door needed a little more emphasis.
• More emphasis to the store window size.
• Planter boxes being right in front of the shop windows.
• Staff could handle the details of the windows and entrance and specifics could be added to the motion to ensure the issues were addressed.
• The role of an architectural subcommittee in the process and when one could be held.
• Having Staff report on the final version of the proposal.
Chairperson Brennan read the memo from Commissioner Richardson (located in the case file) regarding the proposal.
The Commission asked Staff to address the following items with the Applicant:
• The ground level window size and detailing.
• Design location of the planters with respect to the ground level on South
Temple.
• Design and prominence of the apartment entry.
• Layout and arrangement “flanking” of the live/work unit entries and how they related to the main apartment entry.
• Evaluate the design of the south parking level wall with consideration of day lighting.
• Consider increasing the height of the podium which would tie in with the other issues as stated.
The Commission and Staff addressed the items of concern where Staff had already determined the ordinance was met and the process for modifying the proposal.
MOTION 7:45:46 PM
Commissioner Peters stated regarding PLNHLC2016-00166 New Construction, based on the analysis and findings listed in the Staff Report, testimony and the proposal presented, he moved that the Commission approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for New Construction, subject to the following conditions:
1. That Staff will work with the Applicant to ensure that materials for the building are consistent with the design guidelines.
2. That no mechanical systems/air conditioning units be located on the balconies.
3. That Staff will work with the Applicant to refine the design of the podium level including the overall height of the podium level, window size and design at the podium level, design and prominence of main entry to the apartments and the layout and arrangement of live/work entrances with respect to the main building entrance.
4. Applicant shall work with Staff to evaluate the design of the south wall of the parking with respect to day lighting and ventilation opportunities.
5. That the proposed signage is the subject of separate application and approval.
6. That the approval of all final design details, including parking and landscaping, are delegated to Staff for approval.
Commissioner Harding seconded the motion.
Chairperson Brennan asked to add that Staff keeps the Commission informed through administrative reports of the process regarding the development of the design.
Mr. Neilson stated that would be a direct request to staff and did not need to be part of the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
7:50:40 PM
New Apartment Building and Parking Structure at approximately 508 E. South Temple – Chris Huntsman, CRSA Architects, on behalf of owner Residences at South Temple LLC, is requesting Certificate of Appropriateness approvals from the City to demolish an existing parking structure, construct a new parking garage and a new apartment building above on a corner site in the South Temple Historic District. The development would retain the existing Medical Office building, a Contributing Structure in the South Temple Historic District, on the northern portion of the site. The development would require special exception approvals for rebuilding the current building footprint of the parking structure and exceeding the maximum height for the RO zone district. The proposed development would include a total of 139 apartment units in the current and the proposed buildings, with provision for parking 200 vehicles. The site is zoned RO (Residential/Office) and H Historic Preservation Overlay. The site is within City Council District 4, represented by Derek Kitchen. (Staff contact: Carl Leith, (801)535-7758 or carl.leith@slcgov.com.)
a. Demolition of the Parking Structure – In order to construct the new parking structure and apartment structures, a Certificate of Appropriateness approval is sought to demolish the existing parking structure which falls within the South Temple Historic District. Case Number PLBHLC2015-00953
b. New Construction – Parking Structure & Apartment Building - In order to construct the proposed apartment building a Certificate of Appropriateness for the new parking structure and the new apartment building must be approved by the Historic Landmark Commission. Case Number PLNHLC2015-00952.
c. Special Exception Approval – In order to construct the new parking structure and apartment structures as proposed special exception approval is sought for the following departures from the base zoning dimensional standards. Case Number PLNHLC2015-00954.
i. Construction of the new parking structure on the same footprint as the existing parking structure without compliance with the setback requirements of the RO Residential Office Zone.
ii. Construction of the new parking structure would include new apartment units at street level and at podium level which would exceed the 30 ft setback requirement for the rear yard by 30 ft.
iii. Construction of the new apartment building of 9 stories in height above the new parking structure at a proposed height of 115 ft in the Residential Office zone district, where maximum height for RO is defined at 60 ft, and 90 ft where this district abuts a zone district with a greater maximum building height (the R-MU zone to the west allows a maximum building height of 75 ft). Special exception approval is sought for a building which would exceed the 90 ft building height maximum by 25 ft. or an average across this part of the site of 17 ft.
Mr. Carl Leith, Senior Planner, gave an overview of the proposal as outlined in the Staff Report (located in the case file). He stated Staff was recommending that the Historic Landmark Commission approve the petition as presented with the exception to the height.
The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
• Corresponding the tower to the main building.
Mr. Justin Earl, developer, reviewed the project and the history of the proposal.
Mr. Wally Cooper, architect, stated the proposal was an opportunity to create something better on a very important corner on South Temple and 500 East. He reviewed the existing buildings, how the proposal would enhance the area and the design of the new building. Mr. Cooper reviewed how the proposal met the standards and explained the need for the additional height on the tower portion of the proposal.
The Commission and Applicant discussed the following:
• The height of the proposed structure.
• Why the Special Exception was needed and the benefit of allowing the Special Exception.
o The proposal would preserve the building and the character of the neighborhood.
o The proposal would bring more people to the neighborhood and entice future commercial amenities in the area.
• Why the changes were made from the previous proposal to the current proposal.
• If it would be economically beneficial to build less parking and fewer units.
• How the additional height produced a design that complied with the historic standards and guidelines.
• If there was a separate application for the renovation of the historic building.
• The process of preserving the face of the building
PUBLIC HEARING 8:42:11 PM
Chairperson Brennan opened the Public Hearing.
The following individuals spoke to the petition: Mr. Scott Mayora, Mr. Jason Schatz, Mr. Scott Mayita, Mr. Ryan Mondey and Mr. Richard Davis.
The following comments were made:
• The proposal was out of compliance with the ordinance and standard.
• The proposal would impede on the property values of the neighboring developments.
• The height limits should be kept with the neighboring properties as stated in the ordinance.
• The proposal would impair the views from the west and south sides of the Governor’s Plaza.
• The proposal would impair the reception to the cell towers on the roof of the Governor’s Plaza.
• The neighbors would like the developer to discuss the proposal with the owners of Governor’s Plaza.
• Need to make the proposal fit the area and meet the standards of the ordinance.
• The development would be at the expense of the Governor’s Plaza residents.
• Please allow more time for neighbor input and discussion on the impact to the neighboring properties.
Ms. Patricia Montgomery - I am concerned about a very tall wall casting a giant shadow over 500 East and all the buildings, scale done this project. I am concerned about traffic flow and adverse impacts on an already congested corner (500 East and South Temple).
Mr. Danny Michael Linard - Representing the Piccadilly building some fifty people, 77units at 454 -466 South Temple and 139 units at 508 South Temple over loads the block. Although the planning of these projects appears sound, the reason it should be rejected is it does not fit with the correct character of our neighborhood. It is a peaceful place to live because it is not overcrowded. Approval would reduce the peace and quiet which makes the place so great. We need eateries not more people etc.
Mr. John Roger Guard - I am opposed to agenda item “C Special Exception Approval” including sub items i, ii, and iii. The lack of offsets ruins the look and feel of the neighborhood. The 115 foot height would block the view of Governor’s Plaza (GP) condominium owners on both the west and south faces. GP was completed and peopled in 1983.
Chairperson Brennan closed the Public Hearing.
The Applicants reviewed the public outreach for the proposal and the feedback they received for the proposal. They stated they would be happy to meet with the neighbors about the proposal. They stated the apartments would be built to a condo spec which would bring in a different type of renter to the facility and would eventually look to converting the development to a condo facility.
ADMINISTRATIVE SESSION 8:57:32 PM
The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
• The height allowable in the zone and the history behind the height restrictions.
The Commission discussed the following:
• The analysis of the height was directed towards South Temple and 500 East should be considered as it was part of the Central City Historic District.
• The height for the proposal and if it met the standards of the ordinance.
• Conceptually the proposal was a great project however; the additional height was a concern.
• The Special Exception to extend the residential use into the rear yard made
sense and would improve the area.
• Concerned over the lack of correlation between the historic building and the tower design.
• Whether to deny, table or approve the petition with conditions.
The Commission asked the Applicant what their preferred direction would be for the proposal. The Applicant stated they would prefer the petition to be tabled to allow for further review of the options and ideas that were presented.
The Commission and Applicants discussed if approval should be given for the demolition of the parking structure and table the Special Exception for height. They discussed holding a work session to address concerns from the Commission.
MOTION 9:14:21 PM
Commissioner Shepherd stated regarding PLNHLC2015-00953 Demolition PLNHLC2015-00952 New Construction PLNHLC2015-00954 Special Exceptions, he moved that the Historic Landmark Commission table the petition to be addressed at a future meeting to allow the application additional time to respond to issues that were raised during the testimony portion of the meeting. Commissioner Harding seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
The Commission and Applicant discussed how a work session would be scheduled.
9:15:50 PM
Demolition of Non-Contributing Structures and New Construction at approximately 740 South 700 East – Kimly C. Mangum, architect representing the property owners, is requesting approval and a Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition on non-contributing structures and new construction of a religious building (mosque) at the above listed address in Central City Historic District. The subject property is currently occupied by an existing religious structure and a single-family structure, used for religious purposes. The property is in the RMF-30 (Residential Multi-Family, Medium Density) zoning district, located in City Council District 4, represented by Derek Kitchen. (Staff contact: Anthony Riederer (801)535-7625, or anthony.riederer@slcgov.com.)
a. Demolition of Non-Contributing Structures: In order to build the project noted above the site must be cleared of the buildings currently present. Both buildings are located in the Central City Historic District and are listed as non-contributing. Case number PLNHLC2016-00176
b. New Construction in a Historic District: Applicant is seeking approval and Certificate of Appropriateness for construction of a new religious building (mosque) at approximately 740 S 700 E in the Central City Historic District. Case number PLNHLC2015-0967
Ms. Amy Thompson, Principal Planner, gave an overview of the proposal as outlined in the Staff Report (located in the case file). She stated Staff was recommending that the Historic Landmark Commission approve the petition as presented.
Mr. Kimly C. Mangum reviewed the proposal and thanked the Commission and Staff for their help with the proposal. He stated the stucco was not the normal product people were use to and they would work with Staff on recessing the windows as requested.
The Commission and Applicant discussed the following:
• The details on the wall sections and depth of the stucco product that would allow the windows to be recessed.
• The south wall section regarding the profile up to the parapet and how it would be addressed.
• The timeline for the proposal.
• The materials for the proposal.
• The drive isle under the women’s prayer area.
PUBLIC HEARING
Chairperson Brennan opened the Public Hearing, seeing no one wished to speak; Chairperson Brennan closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION 9:31:00 PM
Commissioner Quist stated regarding PLNHLC2015-00967 – New Construction in a Historic District PLNHLC2016-00176 – Demolition of Non-Contributing Structures, based on the analysis and findings listed in the Staff Report, testimony and the proposal presented, she moved that the Historic Landmark Commission approve the request for new construction and demolition of two non-contributing structures located at approximately 740 South 700 East subject to the following conditions:
1. Depths of window reveals are revised to provide improved façade articulation.
2. The site plan is revised to accord with project review comments received from Salt Lake City’s Transportation Division.
3. The lots are consolidated into a single parcel.
4. The design complies with all applicable building and development codes.
5. Approval of final design details are delegated to staff for approval. Commissioner Kenton seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 9:32:23 PM