SALT LAKE CITY HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Minutes of the Meeting
Held at 451 South State Street, Room 126
The field trip was cancelled.
Present from the Historic Landmark Commission were Wayne Gordon, Magda Jakovcev-Ulrich, William Littig, Elizabeth Mitchell, Orlan Owen, Oktai Parvaz, and Amy Rowland. Sarah Miller, Robert Payne, and Robert Young were excused.
Present from the Planning Staff were Elizabeth Giraud and Nelson Knight, Preservation Planners.
The meeting was called to order at 4:00 P.M. by Acting Chairperson, Wayne Gordon. Mr. Gordon announced that each item would be reviewed in the same order as listed on the agenda. So that there would be no disruption during the meeting, Mr. Gordon asked members of the audience to turn their cellular telephones off.
A roll is being kept with the minutes of all who attended the Historic Landmark Commission meeting. The minutes are presented in agenda order, not necessarily as items were presented at the Historic Landmark Commission meeting. Tapes of the meeting will be retained in the commission office for a period of one year, after which they will be erased.
Ms. Giraud reported that the meeting which was scheduled for July 21, 1999 was cancelled, because a quorum of members was not present; therefore, the cases that were scheduled to be heard, at that meeting, have been postponed until the August 18, 1999 meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Owen moved to approve the minutes from the July 7, 1999 meeting with a small correction. The motion was seconded by Ms. Mitchell. Ms. Jakovcev-Ulrich, Mr. Littig, Ms. Mitchell, and Mr. Owen voted "Aye". Mr. Parvaz abstained. Mr. Gordon, as Acting Chairperson, did not vote. Ms. Miller, Mr. Payne, Ms. Rowland, and Mr. Young were not present for the vote. The motion passed.
BUSINESS
Case No. 013-99. at 358 South 700 East. by Chevy's Fresh Mex Inc., requesting tenant changes to a space in the Fourth South Market development.
Ms. Giraud presented the staff report by outlining the major issues of the case, the findings of fact, and the staff’s recommendation, a copy of which was filed with the minutes of this meeting.
Several questions and concerns were raised by members of the Commission, such as the attachment of the signage to the building, and should the portico and loggia be considered as signage or as additions to the main building. Ms. Giraud responded by saying that the applicants were asked to attach the signage in the least obtrusive manner and that the owner of the building would have something to say about the method of attachment. She said that she was not certain how to consider the portico and the loggia within the context of the zoning ordinance because the people in the permits office did not regard them as signage but as part of the construction of the building. She pointed out that there was no definition in the ordinance that easily related to the portico or to the loggia.
The discussion continued regarding other signage. Ms. Giraud said that the signage section of the zoning ordinance would only allow one sign on the face of the building and one sign per street frontage. The permits office considered the "Fresh Mex" lettering on the proposed portico to be an additional sign beyond the maximum number of signs allowed in the zone. The "Fresh Mex" sign was therefore deleted and this revision was not shown on the drawings included in the staff report.
Mr. Stan Knoles, the applicant, as well as his representative, Mr. Kim Ng from MJSA Architects, were in attendance. Mr. Knoles said that "Fresh Mex" would be in neon lights above the restaurant entrance. He said when it was learned about the limited signage, he said that they were very disappointed that "Fresh Mex" could not be on the portico, so that signage had to be replaced with two lights shining on the awning on the portico. Mr. Knoles said that on other Chevy's, the neon lights and the awning on the portico gives the courtyard a nice "ambience" environment.
The applicants displayed a sample board of the exterior materials and colors proposed for the building. Mr. Knoles indicated that the selected colors were the corporate approved colors for Chevy's Restaurants. Mr. Ng said that the peppery-red is proposed for the patio area, and the color of the synthetic stucco would be a mustard/tan, which is about the same color as the stucco on the new Starbucks in the development.
Mr. Ng said that the concept at Chevy's is to create a cantina-type restaurant. He said the portico is proposed to create a courtyard and the loggia would be for the outdoor dining. Mr. Ng said that the portico would be from twelve to fourteen inches deep and be out about eight feet from the building. He pointed out that those elements would generate shadow lines and depth for the 700 East facade. Mr. Ng stated that the existing awnings on the building would remain.
The following questions, concerns, and comments were made by the Historic Landmark Commission:
• Mr. Littig led the discussion regarding the cornice feature located at the top of the building. Mr. Ng said that the cornice would project out about one-quarter to one half inch and capped with metal. Mr. Littig suggested that some articulation be added to the portico and the loggia, like a small cornice, because those elements are proposed to be very flat. Mr. Ng said that could be done, however the portico and the loggia were designed to be in contrast with building. Mr. Littig inquired about the outside lighting. Mr. Knoles said all the lighting fixtures would be copper sconces that would direct light up and down on the building walls.
• Mr. Parvaz expressed his concerns regarding the portico and the loggia. He inquired if they should be reviewed as additions and complements to the main building. Ms. Giraud said that she did not believe those features would be considered additions. Mr. Parvaz inquired how the portico walls would be capped. Mr. Ng said that the same synthetic stucco system, proposed for the exterior walls, would be used to cap the walls. Mr. Parvaz noted that there would be a lot of dust and dirt from the heavily traveled 700 East Street. He also said that when it rained, the water would wash down the walls of the portico and recommended that the applicant consult with the manufacturer of the exterior wall material about leaving it exposed on top of the walls. Mr. Knoles said that he owns several Chevy's and that did not seem to be a problem. He added that one was on University Parkway in Orem which is also a busy street. Mr. Knoles said that the walls could be easily maintained by hosing them down. Ms. Jakovcev-Ulrich suggested that the portico walls be slightly sloped towards the inside of the courtyard to eliminate any standing water.
• Ms. Jakovcev-Ulrich inquired if there would be an awning placed between the loggia and the courtyard. Mr. Ng said that an awning would be placed over the entrance of the portico. Ms. Jakovcev-Ulrich stated that the entrance into the restaurant would be better if the portico was removed. She said that the design of the building and the design of the portico would be mixed and "speak two different languages." Ms. Jakovcev-Ulrich pointed out that she liked the three-dimensional feeling that the loggia added to the project and she liked the selected colors. Mr. Ng said that the portico creating a courtyard is a corporate logo. Ms. Giraud observed that the Chevy's in Sandy also has a portico and is separate from the building. Ms. Jakovcev-Ulrich talked about the light fixtures on either side of the portico opening. Mr. Ng said they were the standard light fixtures used on the corporate prototype store. She inquired about the material for the awning on the portico. Mr. Knoles said it would be galvanized corrugated sheet metal. He added that after a few months, the galvanized metal would acquire a patina that would reduce its sheen.
• Mr. Gordon referred to the architectural "duck" or "shed" concept that the architect, Robert Venturi, developed. He said that the proposal, with its portico and loggia, would look like a "duck" because it would be easily recognized as a Mexican restaurant by its architecture. Mr. Gordon added that a nondescript building, relying on signage to be recognized, would be considered a "shed." He referred to the comments made by Ms. Giraud that the portico, because of its corporate image, might be considered signage. Mr. Knoles indicated that the corporate architects would integrate architectural elements attained from Mexico and Texas and try to fit them in with the design of the building. Mr. Gordon inquired if trailing plants were proposed to be placed on top of the loggia. Mr. Ng said that they were not planned, but if plants were to be used, they would be on the trellises. Mr. Gordon referred to the selected exterior colors and said that painted surfaces were not a concern to the Commission because they could be repainted if necessary, but the color of permanent materials, such as the E.I.F.S. {Exterior Insulated and Finish System) or masonry was important.
Mr. Gordon opened the hearing to the public and asked if anyone wished to address the Commission. The following questions, concerns, and comments were made by the public:
• Mr. Matt Wolverton, who resides at 555 East 100 South, stated that he was from the Central City Neighborhood Council. He expressed his concerns about graffiti on the walls of the portico and the courtyard being a haven to homeless people. He reminded the applicants that "this is a tough neighborhood". Mr. Wolverton talked about the possibility of incorporating or removing the portico if the building tenant changes. He inquired if the lighting on the portico would be on for twenty-four hours. Mr. Knoles said that the lights would be on just during the hours of operation. Mr. Wolverton wondered if the sidewalk would be going around the entire building. Mr. Wolverton thanked the Commission for giving him an opportunity to comment.
• Mr. Christopher Webb, from Chasebrook Company, said it was his company that developed the Fourth South Market. He said that he was present to show his support to Stan Knoles and for what he is trying to do. Mr. Webb said that the Chevy's idea was appealing to the developers because of the "fresh Mexican food" concept, even though there were other, better known, restaurants looking at the same space. He also said that he appreciated the fact that Chevy's was also willing to work with the provided space, while others wanted to rework the building from the ground up. Mr. Webb said that he believed the proposed project, as presented, would not jeopardize the integrity of the design of the overall development, and added that "we welcome Chevy's and what they are trying to do. We feel good that it is going to impact 700 East and 400 South". Mr. Webb concluded by saying that he also resides in the area and is "excited to have this kind of activity going on".
Upon hearing no further requests, Mr. Gordon closed the hearing to the public, and the Historic Landmark Commission proceeded in the executive session portion of the meeting.
Executive Session
Mr. Owen expressed his concerns about the proposed portico. He said that the size of the portico would be monumental, at sixteen feet high, and the Commission should "absolutely have to consider it as a monument-style sign". Mr. Owen said that the applicants have already admitted that the portico would establish a corporate identity for Chevy's Fresh Mex. He added that the project was over the limit of allowable signage. Mr. Owen pointed out that the criteria in the ordinance stated that the signs should complement the building. He said, "I guess you could argue that it complements it by contrast, but it certainly is not related to the architecture of the building and I think this would be a dangerous precedent-setting problem for us if we allow that portico."
Mr. Gordon said that the City officials do not consider the portico as a sign. He added that many franchised restaurants have some kind of a symbol for identify purposes.
Ms. Giraud said that it does not matter to the Building Permits Counter if the Historic Landmark Commission considers the portico signage; what matters is if the portico had signage, as was first proposed. She suggested that the Commission needed to look at the context of the element within the historic district and the immediate surroundings of the historic district.
Mr. Owen moved that Case No. 013-99 be referred to the Architectural
Subcommittee for some refinement on the portico feature.
Mr. Owen withdrew his motion after a short discussion took place.
Ms. Mitchell said that the portico seemed "awkward" to her and not "fitting-in" with the rest of the building. She noted that she liked the loggia and the proposed signage would be "fine". Ms. Mitchell stated that "given that this is a corporate identity, given that this is not an historic building, and given the context of the neighborhood, I feel a little uncomfortable messing with this". She added that she realized that a mix of styles would be introduced.
Mr. Gordon said the portico apparently would be a freestanding object with metal framing covered with synthetic stucco that could easily removed in the future if necessary.
After some questions arose, the Commission decided to reopen the meeting to the applicants. Mr. Gordon reopened this portion of the meeting. Ms. Jakovcev-Ulrich said that she was aware that several Chevy's, which are located in downtown areas in many large cities, do not have porticos as corporate identities. Mr. Ng indicated that Chevy's started in San Francisco in an older section of town. He said that the first few restaurants opened under a tight budget and the decorations and design were very "crude." He continued by saying that after they became successful, Chevy's started incorporating additional design elements, such as the porticos, and some existing Chevy's are having them added now. Ms. Jakovcev-Ulrich stated that some corporations have different elements for identity purposes for different areas of the cities, such as the suburban or urban sections. She said that with a brand new restaurant in downtown Chicago or San Francisco, a portico such as this would not be allowed. Ms. Jakovcev-Ulrich said that there is a McDonald's in downtown San Francisco without the big arches because they had to do something different. Mr. Ng said that she is probably right, in that respect, because some corporate-type restaurants are targeting a certain area and very seldom going into a downtown
neighborhood.
Mr. Knoles said that there are a number of restaurants where that is being done. He said that he is a former owner of a McDonald's in a historic district. He indicated that was the reason why the portico was considerably reduced in size in this proposal. Mr. Knoles said that he believed that pedestrian traffic was important. He said that a "splash of stucco about the same color as Starbucks would add some flair to the project". Mr. Knoles said that if the Commission did not like the portico, it could be pulled out of the project. He added, that it would be tragic to lose that little courtyard space, but perhaps it could be recreated somewhere else on the site.
Ms. Mitchell inquired if there had been other elements created for Chevy's, on a smaller scale. Mr. Knoles said that several different architectural features were on the drawing boards right now. He said that he realized some communities were very restrictive in how things are done.
The discussion continued regarding the use of the portico as an architectural element to define the courtyard.
As there were no further questions, Mr. Gordon re-closed this portion of the meeting, and the Historic Landmark Commission went back in to the executive session.
Ms. Rowland said that she had difficulty calling the portico a sign. She said that it would be a simple corporate element. Ms. Rowland pointed out that the Commission had reviewed another new building, for a corporation, where the applicants were requesting certain elements to create a corporate image. She added that this could be applied to almost every proposal that the Commission reviewed.
Ms. Mitchell moved that Case No. 013-99 be referred to the Architectural Subcommittee to address issues of the design and scale of the portico in context with the building and review all other elements.
A short discussion followed. Ms. Mitchell amended her motion.
Ms. Mitchell moved to approve the loggia and the signage of the project for Case No. 013-99 and referred the portico to the Architectural Subcommittee to address issues of design and scale in context with the building. The project is to return to the full Commission, as a continuation of the review, at the meeting on August 18, 1999, with the recommendations presented by the Architectural Subcommittee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Owen. Ms. Jakovcev-Ulrich, Mr. Littig, Ms. Mitchell, Mr. Owen, Mr. Parvaz, and Ms. Rowland unanimously voted "Aye". Mr. Gordon, as Acting Chairperson, did not vote. Ms. Miller, Mr. Payne, and Mr. Young were not present for the vote. The motion passed.
• OTHER BUSINESS
The fate of the property at 30 "G" Street, which is owned by the State of Utah.
Ms. Giraud referred to the notice that was sent the Commission members regarding a meeting on August 5, 199 at 9:00 A. M. at the Utah State Building Board to discuss the fate of the house at 30 "G" Street, a copy of which was filed with the minutes of this meeting. She said that the house is directly north of the Governor's Mansion and is owned by the State. Ms. Giraud pointed out that the house is Victorian Eclectic in style and has undergone minimal, if any, exterior alterations. Ms. Giraud stated that about fifteen years ago, the FBI and the Secret Service recommended that the house be demolished because it posed a security risk to the governor.
Ms. Giraud continued by saying that when the people from the State presented their plan to the Avenues Community Council, they met with much opposition and the decision was postponed. State employees explained that when feasible, the State tries to comply with local ordinances, but after learning that the Planning Division Staff would not support the demolition of the house, the Governor's Staff decided not to pursue the City's processes. Ms. Giraud said she believed that they want a parking lot.
Mr. Knight said that he understood that the State bought the property after the Governor learned of the FBI's report of the security risk. Mr. Parvaz said that if the house belongs to the State, why are they worried about it. Ms. Giraud said that the State can control access to the house. Some members said they believed that the State did not want to spend any money on the property for improvements. Ms. Giraud stated, "Where does the security end; would it encompass the entire block."
Ms. Giraud was asked to speak in behalf of the entire Commission at the meeting. Mr. Gordon urged any Commission members who could attend the meeting to show support to Ms. Giraud and the Planning Staff.
Weekend conference offered by the American Institute of Architects (A.I.A.) at the end of September.
Mr. Gordon announced a conference offered by the A.I.A. at Mt. Rainier National Park in Washington State entitled, "Preserving the Wall of the Wilderness of America's Western National Parks". He said that they would be looking at such things as cultural landscapes, extreme snowfall and historic structures, and preservation in the national parks. The Commission members asked if Mr. Gordon would give the Commission an update if he has the opportunity to attend.
Upcoming economic hardship review of the houses on Vernier Place.
Mr. Parvaz inquired about the pending economic hardship review. He inquired who the panel members will be. Ms. Giraud reminded that Commission that they had previously selected Mr. Rob White to be the Commission's representative; Mr. Rich Hall was selected to represent the applicant, Mr. Jeff Jonas; and the third member, selected by Mr. White and Mr. Hall, is Mr. Rick Howa. She said that was voted on last October and the panel is still in place. She reminded the Commission that the Historic Landmark Commission tabled the demolition of the houses on Vernier Court, then there was a possibility of the alternative of relocating the houses, which fell through. Ms. Giraud said that the Economic Review Panel meeting was scheduled for Thursday, August 26, 1999 at Noon. Information was supplied to the Commission members for review.
Avenues Street Fair.
Mr. Knight announced that the Avenues Street Fair will be held on September 18, 1999. He said that the Historic Landmark Commission had prepared a booth in the past to inform the public of the value of preservation. He asked for volunteers to help in the booth. Mr. Littig and Ms. Mitchell volunteered to help.
Election of a Vice Chairperson.
Ms. Giraud said that a Vice Chairperson needed to be elected due to the expired term of the previous Vice Chairperson. The Commission voted by acclamation to elect Orlan Owen to the office of Vice Chairperson.
Adjournment of the meeting.
As there was no other business, Mr. Gordon asked for a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Owen so moved to adjourn the meeting. It was a unanimous vote of approval by the Commission members and the meeting adjourned at 5:35P.M.