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 March 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, March 7, 2013 in Room 326 of the City and County Building, located at 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah, at 5:34:35 PM. Commissioners present for the meeting were Chairperson Sheleigh Harding, Vice Chair Polly Hart, Earle Bevins III, Charles Shepherd, Arla Funk, Robert McClintic, Heather Thuet and Thomas Brennan. Commissioner Stephen James was excused.
Planning Staff members present for the meeting were Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director; Joel Paterson, Planning Manager; Carl Leith, Senior Planner; Maryann Pickering, Principal Planner; Ray Milliner, Principal Planner and Courtney Benson, Senior Secretary. Senior City Attorney Paul Nielson was also present.
FIELD TRIP
No field trip was taken for this meeting.
DINNER
Dinner was served to the Commission and Staff at 5:00 p.m. The Commission had no substantive business to discuss.
REPORT OF THE CHAIR OR VICE CHAIR 5:34:34 PM
Chairperson Harding stated the first item of business was to honor Bill Davis. She stated Mr. Davis had a straightforward, practical approach that was valuable to the Commission.
Mr. Joel Paterson, Planning Manager, presented a plaque and a letter of appreciation from
Mayor Becker to Mr. Davis. He thanked Mr. Davis for his willingness to serve on subcommittees and devote extra time to the Commission.
Chairperson Harding stated a subcommittee is halfway through working on the new statute for demolition. She stated there is another meeting next week and the subcommittee will report to the full Commission in order to get more input.
Vice Chair Hart stated she would like an update on the Hansen’s Service Station application for demolition.
Mr. Paterson made the following comments:
Members of the Capitol Hill Community Council addressed the Commission a few years ago in order to find other uses for Hansen’s Service Station located at approximately 200 North 200 West.
Until recently the property was a commercial business located in the RMF-35 zoning district, which is a residential zone.
The City used the property as a test case as part of the small neighborhood business project. The City was trying to come up with new zoning standards for small scale commercial ventures.
The City rezoned the property to CN, which is a neighborhood commercial zone. The Hansen’s sold the property and the purchasers are interested in developing multi- family housing on the site and are inquiring about changing the zoning back to RMF-35.
The Capitol Hill survey lists the service station as a non-contributing structure. With that status any demolition requests could be approved administratively. The purchaser had an issue with the CN zoning because the maximum height allowed is 25 feet. He was hoping to develop eight housing units on the site and the height restriction does not work for the purpose. The purchaser has been informed that the City is changing its land use tables and one of the proposed changes that has been recommended to the City Council is to not allow for multi-family structures in the CN zone. Once a lot has been developed as housing the opportunity for small scale commercial areas is list. It is possible an application to change the zoning will be submitted before the City Council approves the change in land use tables.
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR 5:41:07 PM
Ms. Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director, stated the Utah Heritage Foundation’s preservation conference is May 9-11. She stated the City can sponsor any Commissioner who would like to attend.
APPROVAL OF THE February 7, 2013 MINUTES 6:03:57 PM
MOTION 6:04:19 PM
Commissioner McClintic moved to approve the minutes of February 7, 2013. Commissioner Thuet seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS 6:04:30 PM
No one wished to speak at this time.
PUBLIC HEARINGS 5:42:26 PM
PLNHLC2013-00055 Ronald McDonald House - A request by Ronald McDonald Charities represented by Connie Holt, for approval to construct an enclosed bridge to connect the existing Ronald McDonald House to a new building currently under construction at approximately 925 E South Temple (the design of the new building was approved by the Historic Landmark Commission on January 5, 2012). The site is located in the South Temple Historic District and the RMF-35 (Moderate Density Multifamily Residential) zoning district. It is in Council District 3, represented by Stan Penfold. (Staff contact: Ray Milliner at 801-535-7645, or ray.milliner@slcgov.com)
Mr. Ray Milliner, Principal Planner, reviewed the petition as presented in the Staff Report (located in the Case File). He stated Staff recommends the Commission approve the petition.
5:44:45 PM
Mr. Alan Roberts, Architect, made the following comments:
The goal is to make the bridge subordinate to the two buildings. The bridge will be necessary to travel between the old building and the new building. Precedents in the City include the connection between the historic Sarah Daft building and the Kearns building, and the connection between the DNRG Depot and the State Archives building. The bridge will be set far back from the street, is recessed, and the colors are neutral.
PUBLIC HEARING 5:46:56 PM
Chairperson Harding opened the Public Hearing. Seeing no one wished to speak, Chairperson Harding closed the Public Hearing.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION 5:47:14 PM
Commissioner McClintic stated the proposal will be a positive contribution to the streetscape.
Vice Chair Hart stated the bridge defers to the other two buildings and is a good design.
MOTION 5:47:45 PM
In the case of PLNHLC2013-00055 Vice Chair Hart moved that the Commission approve the application based on the recommendations made in the Staff Report and pursuant to the following conditions:
1. All conditions of approval from the February 2, 2012 Historic Landmark Commission approval will remain in effect.
2. Types and styles of materials will be reviewed by Staff for final approval prior to installation.
3. Any changes, modifications or deviations from the approved design shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to construction. Commissioner Funk seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
5:47:45 PM
PLNHLC2012-00624 and PLNHLC2012-00696 - Stevig Residence- A request by Dave Robinson of City Block to allow for the new construction of a single-family residence located at approximately 268 West 600 North. PLNHLC2012-00624 is requesting design approval for the proposed new residence and PLNHLC2012-00696 is a requesting special exception approval to allow the building height of the residence to be increased from 23 feet to approximately 30 feet. The subject property is located in the Special Development Pattern Residential District (SR-1A) and the Capitol 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 approval of the petition subject to the conditions listed in the Staff Report.
Chairperson Harding asked if Staff supported Option A.
Ms. Pickering stated she believed Option A would be the best solution and would address many concerns the architectural subcommittee had.
5:55:35 PM
Mr. Dave Robinson, Applicant made the following comments:
The pitch of the roof seems more appropriate at 30 feet. The historic homes in the area are between 32 and 34 feet. Option A shows a height of 28 feet but does not have the traditional porch. There is an enclosed area on the upper porch and railing on both porches. The home is not a slab on grade, but is only two feet above grade. The appropriateness of the railing on ground level was discussed in the architectural subcommittee. Another option is shown with railing on the upper porch but not on the lower. Option B shows evenly spaced columns that would be consistent with homes on the block. A tempered glass railing on the second floor and no railing on the ground floor is shown.
Designs from a landscape architect are shown. The spacing of the windows have been changed due to the adjustment of the columns.
Commissioner Bevins asked if the vaulted area will be usable space.
Mr. Robinson stated there will be room for a small sitting area in that space.
PUBLIC HEARING 6:02:43 PM
Chairperson Harding opened the Public Hearing. Seeing no one wished to speak, Chairperson Harding closed the Public Hearing.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION 6:02:50 PM
Commissioner Bevins stated the proposal was a vast improvement. He stated his personal preference is Option A because the additional pillar makes the house appear cluttered. Commissioner Bevins stated that filling the area underneath the vaulted ceiling softens the appearance of the house.
Commissioner McClintic made the following comments:
He appreciates the changes that have been made and prefers Option A. The railing on the west side is appropriate on both porches. He does not mind having no rail on the lower level area of the porch facing the street. He likes the window and door placement on the front of the house. He is unsure if the pitch of the roof match the house next door or if it is steeper. He can’t imagine the need for a steeper slope especially with a metal roof. He approves of the metal roof.
Commissioner Shepherd stated he also likes Option A. He stated the asymmetry is stronger. He stated he would also like the Applicant to work with Staff to explore options for the gable end window.
The Commission discussed if Option A was preferred with the 28 foot height.
Commissioner Brennan stated he appreciated the response to comments made in the architectural subcommittee. He stated he likes the steeper roof pitch but is concerned with the 30 foot height. He stated he is fine with removing the lower railing, but there is an opportunity to show some character with the upper railing. He stated he would like the designer to work with Staff to review those details.
Vice Chair Hart stated she is conflicted with this project. She stated the proposed plans have nothing to do with the surrounding homes. She stated the massing and the scale of the home are inappropriate and this home will tower over its neighbors. Vice Chair Hart stated she is not sure if lowering the house by two feet will make much of a difference. She stated she also has problems with the standing seam metal roof and that is not traditionally something the Commission allows. She asked Mr. Paterson if the Commission had ever approved a similar roof.
Mr. Paterson stated he does not remember the Commission ever approving a standing seam metal roof on a residential new construction. He stated the residential design guidelines discourage the use of standing seam metal roofs for residential homes, but if the Commission feels it is an appropriate design, it can be approved.
Vice Chair Hart stated that the main thing that sticks out for her is the height.
Commissioner Shepherd asked if there was a graphic showing the streetscape elevation. He stated it is clear from photographs that there is a significant slope on the block.
Vice Chair Hart stated that if the adjacent house is 23 feet it is possible that the proposed house would not be 7 feet higher due to the slope of the street. She stated she is not sure what the slope is.
Ms. Pickering stated the building heights of the adjacent properties are noted on page 15 of the Staff Report.
Commissioner Bevins asked what the typical height of a two story house with a pitched roof would be.
Mr. Paterson stated zone SR-1A has a limit of 23 feet or the average on the block face. He stated other zones have a height limit of 28 feet.
Commissioner Bevins asked if this house needed to be built on a concrete slab. Ms. Pickering stated that was correct.
Vice Chair Hart stated page 15 does not show the slope of the street. She asked what the difference would be between the top of the adjacent home and the proposed home. She asked if it would be a seven foot difference.
Ms. Pickering stated she did not believe it would be a seven foot difference because there is a significant slope between the two lots. She stated she would guess it would a four or five foot difference.
Commissioner Funk asked why the Hardie board was being placed vertically instead of horizontally. She stated the vertical placement makes the building look tall and older structures have wood siding placed in a horizontal pattern.
Ms. Pickering stated other homes in the historic districts have placed Hardie board vertically. Commissioner Funk stated she is concerned with the appearance of the building and the vertical boards draw the eye up.
Commissioner McClintic stated vertical placement is a traditional application of exterior siding and it is not in the purview of the Commission to question acceptable materials. He stated he is sensitive to the height, but endorses the use of a metal roof which is acceptable.
Chairperson Harding stated it is within the Commission’s purview to recommend changes to design elements that would affect the way the massing appears. She stated it is legitimate to recommend the Hardie plank be placed horizontally.
Commissioner Shepherd stated the renderings show a shadow band corresponding to the west facing windows and he has concerns with the west wall. He stated the wall is sizable and horizontal lines will make the home appear deeper and longer than it is. He stated previous design options explored different combinations of materials that could break up the mass of the wall.
Commissioner McClintic stated there is a precedent for a horizontal board that would separate the top from the bottom.
MOTION 6:23:35 PM
Commissioner Shepherd moved that in the case of PLNHLC2012-00624 and PLNHLC2012-
00696 the Commission approve the plans presented in Option A, which include details such as the metal railing and the 28 foot height requirement. Commissioner Shepherd stated this decision is based on the findings listed in the Staff Report and the Commission discussion.
Commissioner McClintic seconded the motion.
Commissioner Shepherd amended the motion to state that design details will be left to Staff. Commissioner McClintic seconded the amendment.
Commissioner Brennan stated he is fine not having the horizontal line on the west wall and does not believe it would address scale or detail issues.
Commissioner McClintic stated it would add to water penetration issues.
Commissioner Shepherd stated he finds the use of a metal roof acceptable in this location because it is new construction and it is on the border of the district.
The motion passed unanimously.
Chairperson Harding reviewed the appeals process.
WORK SESSION 6:28:51 PM
PLNPCM2012-00870 - Design Guidelines for Apartments and Multi-Family Buildings in Salt Lake City – Draft of New Construction Section - This is an introduction to the first draft of the section addressing the Construction of New Multi-Family Buildings in the city’s historic districts. This section includes discussion on and guidelines for the range of design criteria important to the sensitive and compatible design of a new multi-family building in a historic setting. (Staff contact: Carl Leith at 801-535-7758, or carl.leith@slcgov.com)
Mr. Carl Leith, Senior Planner, reviewed the petition as presented in the Memorandum (located in the Case File).
Chairperson Harding stated the level of abstraction is high in certain parts of the document. She stated the Design Objective section on page 12:53 is difficult to understand. Chairperson Harding stated some areas need to be spellchecked.
Commissioner McClintic stated the draft is an excellent start. He stated he believes there needs to be some direction given towards not trying to duplicate detailing. He stated the best advice for lighting, for example, is to rely on more conservative forms. Commissioner McClintic stated there is nothing wrong with modern interpretations, but it is the manner in which the lights operate as well as their placement that is important. He stated lights should not stand out and do their job with simplicity. He stated this example is more of a direction than a guideline. Commissioner McClintic stated he likes the architectural examples and it may be a good idea if examples were given from places other than Salt Lake City.
Commissioner Shepherd stated it might be useful to use recent projects as case studies. Mr. Leith stated that could be a very useful.
Commissioner Thuet stated it was a great first draft. She stated she is concerned that the height design guidelines might be too restrictive, specifically the statements “vary the building height across the primary façade and/or limit height to part of the plan footprint” and “step back upper floors if a new building would be higher”. She stated these statements might be inappropriate as guidelines and is concerned that alternatives might not be considered.
Commissioner Shepherd asked Mr. Leith how he would like the Commission to respond.
Mr. Leith stated there is a subcommittee reviewing the draft, and anybody not part of the subcommittee is free to send comments to him.
Commissioner Shepherd asked if potential meeting times will be proposed for the subcommittee.
Mr. Leith stated he expects the meeting to take place in the next two weeks.
Ms. Coffey stated there has been a suggestion that the Commission have work sessions on different topics.
The Commission and Staff discussed the best time for the work session to be held.
The Commission and Staff discussed possible topics for the work sessions including looking at past projects approved by the Commission, looking at segments of the Design Guidelines and looking at energy efficiency when restoring historic structures.
Mr. Leith stated analyzing examples would be useful for the Multi-Family Design Guidelines. He discussed updates that are being made to the City’s Historic Preservation website.
The meeting stood adjourned at 7:04:18 PM