SALT LAKE CITY HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Minutes of the Meeting
Room 326, 451 South State Street
This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the Historic Landmark Commission regular session meeting held on February 7, 2013.
Historic Landmark Commission Meetings are televised on SLCTV 17. Archived video of this meeting can be found at the following link under, “Historic Landmark Commission and RDA”: http://www.slcgov.com/slctv/slctv-videos-demand.
A regular meeting of the Historic Landmark Commission was called to order on Thursday, February 7, 2013 in Room 326 of the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah, at 6:03:06 PM. Commissioners present for the meeting were Chairperson Sheleigh Harding, Earle Bevins III, Charles Shepherd, Arla Funk, Robert McClintic, Stephen James, Bill Davis and Thomas Brennan. Vice Chair Polly Hart and Commissioner Heather Thuet were excused.
Planning Staff members present for the meeting were Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director; Joel Paterson, Planning Manager; Janice Lew, Senior Planner; Maryann Pickering, Principal Planner and Courtney Benson, Senior Secretary. Senior City Attorney Paul Nielson was also present.
FIELD TRIP
The Commissioners present on the field trip were Chairperson Sheleigh Harding, Earle Bevins III, Charles Shepherd, Robert McClintic, Stephen James and Bill Davis. The Staff present were Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director, Joel Paterson, Planning Manager, Nick Norris, Planning Manager, Maryann Pickering, Principal Planner and Elizabeth Buehler, Principal Planner. Commissioners and Staff visited completed projects that had been approved by the Commission. The Commission also visited 268 W. 600 N., the site of the proposed new construction for the Stevig Residence. Staff described the original design and the changes proposed by the applicant following the Architectural Subcommittee Meeting.
DINNER
Dinner was served to the Commission and Staff at 5:30 p.m. The Commission had no substantive business to discuss.
REPORT OF THE CHAIR OR VICE CHAIR 6:03:30 PM
Chairperson Harding stated she had nothing new to report.
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR 6:03:40 PM
Ms. Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Manager, stated this will be Commissioner Bill Davis’s last meeting and thanked him for his service.
APPROVAL OF THE January 3, 2013 MINUTES 6:03:57 PM
MOTION 6:04:19 PM
Commissioner Funk moved to approve the minutes of January 3, 2013. Commissioner Bevins seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS 6:04:30 PM
Cindy Cromer, resident, stated she would like to invite Commissioners and Staff to a party celebrating the donation of the Ladies’ Literary Club building to the Utah Heritage Foundation.
PUBLIC HEARINGS 6:06:06 PM
PLNHLC2012-00624 and PLNHLC2012-00696 - Stevig Residence -- A request by Dave Robinson of City Block for construction of a new single-family residence located at approximately 268 West 600 North. PLNHLC2012-00624 is for the new residence and PLNHLC2012-00696 is a request for a special exception to increase the height of the residence by an additional three feet than what is allowed in the zoning district. The subject property is located in the Special Development Pattern Residential District (SR-1A) and the Capital Hill Historic District and is located in Council District 3, represented by Stan Penfold. (Staff contact: Maryann Pickering at (801) 535-7660 or maryann.pickering@slcgov.com)
Ms. Maryann Pickering, Principal Planner, reviewed the petition as presented in the Staff Report (located in the Case File). She stated Staff recommends the Commission deny this petition.
6:10:30 PM
Mr. Dave Robinson, Applicant, discussed changes that have been made since the first proposal including framing of the windows, decrease in lot coverage, the addition of eaves and the opening of the porch.
Commissioner Shepherd asked for the height of the first level.
Mr. Robinson stated the first level is 10 feet. He stated that two historic homes in the neighborhood are over 30 feet tall and 28 feet is a standard height throughout the City. Mr. Robinson stated the recommended 23 feet would not allow for a two story home and would result in a one bedroom, one story home. He stated he has previously asked Staff if a zone change would be appropriate.
Commissioner Shepherd asked how much cross slope the site has.
Mr. Robinson stated it is four feet. He stated there is a three foot retaining wall and a 6-7 foot fence followed by a large elevation change.
PUBLIC HEARING 6:20:11 PM
Chairperson Harding opened the Public Hearing. Seeing no one wished to speak, Chairperson Harding closed the Public Hearing.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION 6:20:20 PM
Commissioner Harding stated it must be difficult to work with this plot of land. She stated there are challenges coming up with a design that works.
Commissioner Shepherd stated he would like to hear observations from Commissioners who attended the architectural subcommittee.
Commissioner James stated the subcommittee discussed strategies that would help the home fit into the historic neighborhood. He stated the proposed design appears to be a compromise and it does not appear that alternatives were explored. Commissioner James discussed issues he has with the metal siding, eave and roof.
Commissioner Davis made the following comments:
• The size, shape and roof of the proposed structure are similar to other homes in the area.
• One of the main problems with the original design was the closed off porch, which is now more open.
• The structure will not have a negative impact on the neighborhood.
• This design is a reasonable attempt to comply with suggestions made by the subcommittee.
• He is not sure what else the Applicant could have done short of redesigning the house.
• This structure is non-conforming, is on the edge of the historic district and is next to a gas station. The proposed design is a reasonable effort.
Commissioner Bevins stated he is sympathetic to the proximity to the gas station, but has an issue with metal siding. He stated it does not matter that the property is located on the edge of the Historic District, the guidelines still apply. He stated he agrees with observations made in the Staff Report.
Commissioner McClintic stated scale and materials are important to create context in the Historic District and he does not understand why metal siding is used. He stated more can be done to use historically appropriate materials.
Commissioner Davis asked what Commissioner McClintic thought of the shape and form of the building.
Commissioner McClintic stated he still has issues with the side of the porch that was not opened up. He stated the new eave line made a huge difference but thinks more can be done.
Commissioner James asked how the new eave line has impacted the siding and window composition.
Commissioner McClintic stated the eave line needs corner boards and trim and he has seen this done in a modern context.
Commissioner Davis discussed a newly constructed home that was visited on the field trip. He stated that although this home was approved by the Commission and used historic materials, it did not fit in with other homes in the neighborhood. He stated he feels the proposed structure would fit in with the neighborhood. Commissioner Davis stated there is a more liberal standard for materials used when it comes to new construction in historic districts.
Commissioner Shepherd stated he agrees metal siding is inappropriate. He stated the siding and the slope of the lot negatively emphasize the height of the building. Commissioner Shepherd discussed issues he has with the remaining side panel on the porch.
Commissioner James asked if changing the materials used would solve the problems the Commission has with the structure.
Commissioner Shepherd stated changing the materials would help. He stated the large windowless area on the west elevation is a challenge.
Commissioner James stated the addition of eaves make the more modern compositional elements appear out of place.
Commissioner Brennan stated the elevated porch is out of place in this neighborhood. He stated there is only a five foot separation from the neighbor to the east which makes the window placement inappropriate.
Commissioner McClintic stated changes need to be made to the composition, but not to the entire building. He stated the Commission does not need to redesign the entire project.
Chairperson Harding asked the Applicant if he would like to work with an architectural subcommittee.
Mr. Robinson asked if it would take 60 days to appear before the Commission again.
Staff explained noticing requirements and stated it is possible this item would not be able to come before the Commission again until the April meeting.
Mr. Robinson requested that the next architectural subcommittee meeting be recorded.
Ms. Coffey stated the next subcommittee meeting can be recorded. She stated the Commissioners need to give the Applicant more direction on specific problems they have with the structure.
Commissioner James stated it would be useful for the Applicant to come to the subcommittee meeting prepared with options the subcommittee can discuss.
Commissioner Harding asked the Applicant if he would like another subcommittee meeting. Mr. Robinson stated he would like a subcommittee meeting.
Commissioner Funk asked if it would be helpful if the Applicant came up with three new designs to present to the subcommittee.
Commissioner Bevins stated that would be helpful if the Applicant would bring different options to the subcommittee rather than the same design that has already been discussed.
Mr. Robinson stated he feels he might have misunderstood the process and it is not reasonable to have his architects come up with new designs.
Commissioner Davis stated it seems that most subcommittee meetings start with the design that was brought before the Commission. He stated the purpose of the subcommittee meeting is to brainstorm ideas.
Chairperson Harding stated it is up to the Applicant if he would like to bring new designs to the subcommittee meeting.
Commissioner James stated it would be helpful to bring the architect to the subcommittee meeting.
MOTION 7:05:10 PM
Commissioner Shepherd moved that based on the discussion of the Historic Landmark Commission case PLNHLC2012-00624 and case PLNHLC2012-00696 be tabled for further review in the architectural subcommittee. Commissioner Brennan seconded the motion.
Commissioner Shepherd amended the motion to state that the case will come back before the Commission for final review.
Commissioner Brennan seconded the amendment. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioners Bevins, James, McClintic and Brennan volunteered for the architectural subcommittee.
WORK SESSION 7:08:08 PM
PLNPCM2009-00014 Text Amendment to the Demolition Provisions of the H Historic Preservation Overlay District - A request by Salt Lake City Mayor Ralph Becker to improve the language relating to the demolition provisions of Section 21A.34.020 H Historic Preservation
Overlay District of the Zoning Ordinance. The changes would apply citywide if adopted by the City Council. (Staff contact: Janice Lew at 801.535.7625 or janice.lew@slcgov.com)
Ms. Janice Lew, Senior Planner, reviewed the petition as presented in the Memorandum (located in the Case File).
Commissioner James asked for an explanation of the criteria used to determine if a special merit exception is appropriate. He asked if alternatives to demolition such as relocation are considered.
Ms. Coffey stated she would like to clarify that the Historic Landmark Commission will make a recommendation for demolition to the Planning Commission. She stated the City Council is not involved.
Ms. Lew stated page 16 of the Memorandum outlines criteria the Historic Landmark Commission and the Planning Commission should use when considering a special merit exception. She stated this criteria includes considering if a structure can be relocated.
Commissioner Funk stated she is concerned the special merit exception gives the RDA a blank check. She asked what criteria would be used when determining if a demolition is for the greater good. She stated if the City Council is making the determination there would be a conflict of interest.
Ms. Lew stated the Planning Commission would make that decision.
Commissioner Funk stated she still believes it gives the RDA a blank check. She stated there is no way to prevent a demolition if a property has been neglected.
Ms. Lew stated demolition by neglect is not addressed in the current revision and was not something that was being looked at.
Commissioner Funk stated this is something that needs to be looked at. She suggested the City use notifications or fines. She stated securing and boarding the property is not adequate.
Ms. Coffey stated the City is looking at a demolition ordinance. She stated she will look at the ordinance to see if it includes willful neglect. She stated it is rare for demolition to be allowed due to hazardous conditions.
Commissioner Funk stated the language on page 13 stating “It shall be the responsibility of the owner to stabilize and maintain the property” should be moved to page 7, number 5. Commissioner Funk stated there will be a wide variation between the appraisal and assessed valuation of the property. She asked if it would be possible to take an average of the two rather than use one or the other.
Ms. Lew stated this ordinance puts the onus on the property owner to provide documentation but does not dictate what they provide. She stated Staff would need to decide if what the property owner provided was adequate.
Commissioner Funk stated she would like to see something more definitive written in the ordinance. She asked why it would be better for the Planning Commission to determine the greater good of the community rather than the Historic Landmark Commission.
Ms. Lew stated the Planning Commission deals with Master Plans more than the Historic Landmark Commission. She stated if the Historic Landmark Commission would like to make the final decision, Staff could look at that idea.
Commissioner Funk stated she would like the Historic Landmark Commission to make the final decision.
The Commission discussed forming a subcommittee to look at the proposal in more detail. Chairperson Harding, Commissioner James and Commissioner Funk stated they are willing to serve on the subcommittee.
Ms. Lew asked what else she could provide the Commission.
Chairperson Harding stated it would be helpful to divide the proposal and look at it over several subcommittee sessions.
The meeting stood adjourned at 7:33:28 PM