SALT LAKE CITY HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes 451 South State Street, Room 326
A roll is kept of all who attended the Historic Landmark Commission Meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5:30:16 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 Charles Shepherd; Vice Chairperson Kenton Peters; Commissioners Sheleigh Harding, Robert Hyde, David Richardson Stanley Adams and Kim Wirthlin. Commissioners Thomas Brennan, Rachel Quist, and Paul Svendsen were excused.
Planning Staff members present at the meeting were: Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director, Michaela Oktay, Planning Manager; Anthony Riederer, Principal Planner; Michelle Moeller, Administrative Secretary and Paul Nielson, Senior City Attorney.
FIELD TRIP NOTES:
A field trip was held prior to the meeting. Historic Landmark Commissioner present were David Richardson, Stanley Adams and Charles Shepherd. Staff members in attendance were Michaela Oktay and Anthony Riederer.
The following site was visited:
• 600 North 300 West – Staff gave an overview of the proposals.
• Artic Court - reviewed the mechanical system that was installed in the building.
Training 5:30:22 PM
Secretary of Interior Standards - Don Hartley, State Historic Preservation Office, will provide training to the Commission relating to the interpretation of the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
Mr. Don Hartley, State Historic Preservation Office, gave a presentation regarding the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
6:03:09 PM
APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 3, 2016 and JANUARY 5, 2017 MINUTES. MOTION 6:05:55 PM
Commissioner Richardson moved to approve the minutes from the November 3, 2016, meetings with amendments. Commissioner Harding seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously
MOTION 6:06:58 PM
Commissioner Peters moved to approve the minutes, as amended, from the January 5, 2017, meetings. Commissioner Harding seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
REPORT OF THE CHAIR OR VICE CHAIR 6:07:31 PM
Chairperson Shepherd reviewed the symposium of Association for Preservation Technology that will be held in March in Salt Lake City regarding historic preservation.
Ms. Coffey asked commissioners to let staff know if they would like to attend the event and we would get them registered.
Vice Chairperson Peters stated he had nothing to report.
DIRECTOR’S REPORT 6:09:03 PM
Ms. Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director, reviewed the status of the Trolley Square project and the Bishop Place demolition request
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD 6:09:11 PM
Chairperson Shepherd opened the Public Comment Period.
Ms. Cindy Cromer- read the following statement regarding information presented at the HLC work session about Trolley Square on December 8, 2016:
This comment is the first installment in a series addressing claims made by the applicant at your briefing in December for Trolley Square Ventures' proposal. In response to a question from Commissioner Richardson about the rest of the block, specifically housing, the applicant responded, "The lower half of the block is not relevant to this discussion."We're not dealing with the lower half of the block."
That is precisely the problem. The block is composed almost entirely low density, historic residential structures and the parking lot owned by Trolley square. The entire block is in the central city Historic District and overwhelmingly the structures on it were identified as contributory in the survey completed in 2013. There is asphalt and there are contributory structures. This block has a lot of both.
The boundaries of the Central City Historic District were not easy to establish. Here is some of the history, not written anywhere, indicating that blocks are literally the building blocks of the District.
1. The original application for historic status made by Scott Larson and the Norrises on 600 E was to protect the landscaped medians in the middle of their street. It was Planning Staff members who suggested adding the blocks on either side extending the protection from 500 E to 700 E.
2. Identifying the boundaries was a challenge. I remember Arla Funk, former member of this Commission and the Planning Commission, championing the "whole enchilada." Including entire blocks formed the "enchilada" of the District.
Why is the concept of a block important? Because blocks define our historic districts. All of them with the exception of City Creek and Exchange Place are the accumulation or permutation of blocks. Conceptually, Westmoreland is the inside of a block.
The City's website identifies the challenges facing the Central City Historic District and notes "greater integrity to the south (particularly south of 600 South)." Contrary to the applicant's claim that the lower half of the block is not relevant, Trolley Square's proposal on 600 S is inconsistent with the scale of the streetscapes to the east and west, inconsistent with the rest of the block extending south, and inconsistent with the Historic District south of 600 S. Blocks do matter in preservation and this brock along 600 s is an edge.
Chairperson Shepherd closed the Public Comment Period.
6:13:27 PM
New Construction of a multi building mixed used development at approximately 600 North 300 West - A request by Kevin Blalock, architect, and Micah Peters (developer of the project) to review a proposal for New Construction of a multi building mixed used development at the above listed address. The subject property is located within the Capitol Hill Historic District and is zoned RMU (Residential Mixed Use). This is a work session only, a public hearing will not be held in relation to the petition and no application will be approved or denied at this meeting. The subject property is located within Council District 3, represented by Stan Penfold. (Staff contact is Anthony Riederer (801)535-7625 or anthony.riederer@slcgov.com.)
Mr. Anthony Riederer, Principal Planner, gave an overview of the proposal as outlined in the Work Session Memorandum (located in the case file). He stated this was a work session to allow the Commission and Applicant to work through any concerns or issues with the proposal.
The Commission and Staff disused the following
• The status of the adjacent town home project on Artic Court.
Mr. Ed Butterfield, Senior Project Manager for the Salt Lake City RDA introduced himself. Mr. Chad Parker, Mr. Kevin Blalock and Mr. Micah Peters, applicants, reviewed the design, layout, height, character, intent, and the history of the project. They reviewed the parking, accessibility. They asked the Commission for direction and clarification for elements of the proposal.
The Commission, Staff and Applicant discussed the following:
• The public walkways on the property.
• Who owned the property and how the easement would be recorded.
• The layout and location of the parking.
• The amount of parking located below grade.
• The commercial uses on the ground floor.
• The size of the live/work spaces.
• How the live/work units interacted with the street.
• The articulation of the building and window recess.
• The importance of finding windows that have the most built in recess and articulation.
• The cost and number of windows in the proposal.
• This was a modern building with a lot of push and pull to the facades that broke up the massing.
• The number of studio, one and two bedroom units in the proposal.
• How the proposal relates to the neighboring historical home.
• How the requested Special Exception for a reduced rear yard setback related to the historic district.
• How the neighborhood had evolved and RDA’s role in the changes.
• Several of the Commissioners voice support for the height of the development on this block.
• How the applicant would address the seemingly blank ground level walls.
• The mechanics needed for venting the parking and the view of the mechanics from the street.
• If the impact to the neighborhood was negative or positive.
• The stairs leading to the podium and if they could be more of an architectural element and more engaging with the street.
• At the next meeting the Commission would like the Applicant to include an elevation showing how the proposal fit the neighborhood as a whole, a wall section, and clarification on the materials and how they relate to each other.
• Massing seemed appropriate for the area.
• The next steps for the proposal.
7:30:09 PM
Mr. Paul Nielson, City Attorney, reviewed the bills currently being reviewed by the State Legislature that affect Historic Preservation. He encouraged the Commission to read the bills and explained he would keep the Commissioners informed on the status of the bills.
The meeting adjourned at 7:37:49 PM