SALT LAKE CITY HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
451 South State Street, Room 326
May 3, 2018
A roll is kept of all who attended the Historic Landmark Commission Meeting. The meeting was called to order at 6:00:20 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 and Vice Chairperson Kenton Peters, and Commissioners Stanley Adams, Sheleigh Harding, Victoria Petro-Eschler, Esther Stowell and Paul Svendsen. Commissioners Thomas Brennan, Robert Hyde, Rachel Quist and David Richardson were excused. Planning Staff members present at the meeting were: Michaela Oktay, Deputy Planning Director; Carl Leith, Senior Planner; Kelsey Lindquist, Principal Planner; Deborah Severson, Administrative Secretary and Paul Nielson, Senior City Attorney.
FIELD TRIP NOTES:
•No field trip was held for this meeting.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR April 5, 2018
MOTION
Commissioner Harding moved to approve the minutes for the April 5, 2018 meeting. Commissioner Svendsen seconded the motion. Commissioners Adams, Harding, Petro-Eschler, Stowell and Svendsen voted “aye”. The motion passed unanimously.
REPORT OF THE CHAIR OR VICE CHAIR
Chairperson Shepherd and Vice Chairperson Peters had nothing to report.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Ms. Oktay noted that Historic Landmark Commission meetings at times go past 10:00 pm. Parking tickets are issued after 10:00 pm if vehicles are parked around the perimeter of the City & County Building. Should any Commissioner or a member of the public receive a parking ticket while attending a meeting, the ticket will be waived if they have signed the roll sheet.
Chairperson Shepherd asked that he be reminded to make an announcement around 9:45 pm if it appears a meeting will go past 10:00 pm.
Chairperson Shepherd announced that the south elevator of the City & County Building was not functioning. It was noted that two Commissioners (Commissioner Adams and Petro-Eschler) and two Planning Staff Members (Ms. Oktay and Ms. Severson) were stranded on the elevator from 5:30 to 6:00 pm then rescued by the Fire Department.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Chairperson Shepherd opened the Public Comment Period. No one was present to speak and no written material was presented. Chairperson Shepherd closed the Public Comment Period.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Roof Alterations at approximately 501 E Fourth Avenue – A request by David Richardson, Capitol Hill Construction, on behalf of owners Robert and Annette Becker, to relocate a HVAC unit onto the roof of this building and to replace the principal roof material with standing seam metal roofing. The house is a contributing building in The Avenues Historic District, is on a corner lot and the proposed alterations would face and be visible from Fourth Avenue and G Street. This proposal is being referred to the Historic Landmark Commission for decision because the proposed roofing system is not a material characteristic of residential structures in a historic district and staff is recommending denial. The subject property is zoned SR-1A (Special Development Pattern Residential District) and is located in City Council District 3, represented by Chris Wharton. (Staff contact: Carl Leith 801-535-7758 or carl.leith@slcgov.com) Case Number: PLNHLC2018-00167
Carl Leith, Senior Planner, gave an overview of the proposal as outlined in the staff report (located in the case file). The subject home is a contributing structure in the Avenues located on the northeast corner of Fourth Avenue and G Street. Mr. Leith stated that Staff recommended the Historic Landmark Commission approve the relocation of the HVAC unit on the roof, and deny the request to replace the existing asphalt shingles with standing seam metal roof sheeting. He noted that the standing seam metal roofing is not characteristic of a residential historic district.
The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
•Historic/original roofing material of the subject structure may have been tile, pressed metal bar-tile styled shingles or cedar shingles. The 1911 Sanborn Map shows the structure with a shingled roof.
•Comparisons between different roofing materials. Metal roofing has a life expectancy of 50 to 70 years, asphalt roofing 20 to 40 years and cedar shingles 60 to 70 years.
•The proposal is similar to the Governor’s Mansion which is dark bronze in color with vertical seams.
•Other repairs that are not included in this proposal; chimney bracing and repair to the stucco.
•The HVAC unit will be moved to the flat portion of the roof and will be placed on a new roof membrane. The HVAC unit is about 30 inches in height.
Rob and Annette Becker, Homeowners, were present.
Mr. Becker stated that they purchased the home in 2007, and they have made significant interior improvements. The home needs a new roof, and they prefer using building materials that will last 50 plus years. The pitch nor any other aspects of the roof will be altered. Mr. Becker noted that the roof is not the prominent view from the street; it is the structure itself. Mr. Becker stated they were inspired by the roof of the Governor’s Mansion and presented pictures of the Mansion and other structures in the surrounding area with metal roofing. Metal roofing may be recycled, is energy efficient, durable and easily maintained.
The Commission and Applicants discussed the following:
•Metal shingles verses metal standing seam. The Applicant considered durability when deciding between shingles and standing seam; the standing seam roofing typically preforms much better than shingles over the long term.
•Lack of the visual presentation of the HVAC unit on the roof. Thirty inches is the standard height for roof mounted units which meets code.
•Manufactures that provide photo visualization of different roofing materials. The Applicants went through the exercise with ABC Metal in North Ogden when choosing the roofing style.
•Type of metal the Applicants are proposing. The Applicants are proposing a 26-gage metal with a non-reflective oxidized copper color finish. (Very similar to the Governor’s Mansion.)
•Snow guard systems to protect lower roofs. The Applicants will provide snow guards, but are undecided as to which type.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Chairperson Shepard opened the meeting for public comment. No one was present to speak to the issue. Chairperson Shepard closed the meeting to public comment.
Chairperson Shepard noted that the Commission received copies of comments made by the public before the meeting.
The Commission discussed the following:
•Types of roofing materials that the Commission has approved in the past, and if they have the authority to approve metal roofing materials. The Commission has the authority to determine if metal roofing is appropriate; however, the City has no records that the Commission has ever approved metal roof materials. Staff suggested that metal roofing materials were not approved based on the standards and guidelines.
•The Governor’s Mansion is located within the South Temple Historic District. Guidelines for the South Temple Historic District vary from the Avenues Historic District in which the project is located.
•Street View – The subject roof appears to be less significant than other roofs in the neighborhood because the home is above street level and is 2 ½ stories high.
•Alternative Motion Sheet that the Commission received from the Applicants. It stated that standing seam metal roofing is a historic material and will not destroy significant historical or architectural features of the property (Number 8). Some Commissioners agreed with the statement. Metal panels were typically used on churches and other monumental structures, and metal corrugation was used on agricultural and mining structures. Pressed metal shingles and pressed metal bar tiles also have been used historically. The standing seam evolved as a contemporary improvement to the historic metal roofing (performance and appearance) and is being used on newer, modern structures.
•The existing asphalt shingles are not historic or the original roofing material. The standing seam would be visually appealing, would not negatively impact the community or the overall character of the neighborhood. The reasoning for choosing the standing seam seem admirable and correct.
•Design Guidelines – States that the use of standing seam roofs on contributing structures should be avoided. However, it may not be a blanket statement because some contributing structures do not show a lot of roof. Approving a standing seam may set an unfavorable precedent. Texture on the standing seam would be the utmost issue; smooth and a single vertical line every 16 to 18 inches. The Commission suggested amending the guidelines to allow consideration of standing seam roofing in some cases.
•Materials – The roofs on the Governor’s Mansion and the Cathedral are copper and over time develop a weathered character. Painted metal finishes will not develop a historic character.
•Standards - Staff found Standards 2, 5, 6 and 8 in conflict with the proposal. The Commission debated Staff findings: Standard 6 relating to deteriorated historic materials should be repaired rather than replaced; approving replacement must be substantiated by evidence and not availability of materials. Standard 8 may allow contemporary design for alternations when such alternations do not destroy significant cultural, historical, architectural or archeological material and the design is compatible with the character of the property.
•Discussed other proposals that were denied because the Commission was unable to find a standard for support.
•Discussed other modern replacement materials, and the fact that roofing may be considered not permanent.
•Discussed the progression for approving solar panels on historic structures.
•Relocation of the HVAC unit. The Commission had no concerns relating to the relocation, and the proposed location may be preferable.
MOTION
Based on the information in the staff report, the information presented, the input received during the public hearing and discussions relating to Case Number PLNHLC2018-00167 - Roof Alterations – Commissioner Harding moved that the Commission approve the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness to re-roof the building using a standing seam metal roofing system as proposed in the petition. The approval is based on the following findings outlined in the motion sheet presented to the Commission at the meeting (contrary to Staff recommendations):
Standard 2 – Historic Character of the Property – The existing asphalt roof is not historic and the historic character of the property will not be significantly altered by the proposal in that so little of the roof is showing and will have a minor impact.
Standard 5 – Distinctive features, finishes and construction techniques shall be preserved in that the existing roof material is not distinctive or historic.
Standard 6 – States deteriorated architectural features should be repaired rather than replaced whenever feasible, and identifies materials that should be used – The existing roof material is not historic. The proposed roof material will match the roofing on the historic Kearns Mansion located 800 feet away recognizing that it is in a different historic district, but will be visually compatible. Also, the historic elements that are intact including the soffit, fascia and related elements will be preserved, and the roofing is a temporary element.
Standard 8 - States that contemporary design for alternations and additions to existing properties shall not be discouraged when such alternations and additions do not destroy significant cultural, historical, architectural or archeological material, and the design is compatible with size, scale, color, material and character of the property, neighborhood or environment - Very little roof is visible, and standing seam metal roofing is a historic material and it will not destroy any significant historical or architectural features of the property because it is temporary roofing in the grand scheme. The proposed colors are in keeping with the historic context of the neighborhood.
Relating to the relocation of the HVAC unit, the relocation is approved and all details shall be delegated to Staff regarding its precise placement.
Commissioner Adams seconded the motion.
The Commission further discussed the matter:
Chairperson Shepard voiced concerns relating to scale, color, material, texture and precedents. The Commission discussed the concerns, and Chairperson Svendsen suggested that the motion include a dark non-reflective color that could address the concerns.
Commissioner Harding added to the motion that the roofing material shall be a dark non-reflective color, and Commissioner Adams accepted the amendment and seconded the motion. Commissioners Harding, Adams, Peters, Petro-Eschler and Svendsen voted “aye”. Commissioner Stowell voted “no”. The motion passed with a 5 to 1 vote.
Liberty Square New Construction and Minor Alteration – A request by Chris Zarek, representing the property owner, for approval for the new construction of 8 three-story apartment structures and alterations to the Ensign Floral Building. A new approval is required, due to technical conflicts with the previous design. The proposal is located at 461 S 600 East, 459 S 600 East and 637 E 500 South. The site is zoned TSA-UN-C (Transit Station Area-Urban Neighborhood-Core) and is located within the Central City Local Historic District. The proposal is also located in within Council District 4, represented by Derek Kitchen. (Staff Contact: Kelsey Lindquist at 801-535-7930 or kelsey.lindquist@slcgov.com) Case Number: PLNHLC2017-00266 & PLNHLC2015-00237
Kelsey Lindquist, Principal Planner, gave an overview of the proposal as outlined in the staff report (located in the case file) noting that the proposal was reviewed during the June 2015 and July 2017 meetings. At that time, the proposal was approved, and final details were delegated to Staff. Staff determined that the changes were significant enough to forward to the Commission for review. Ms. Lindquist stated that Staff recommended approval for the proposed new construction and minor alteration subject to the conditions listed in the motion sheet.
The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
•Changes to the main south elevation which included a reduction in glazing and width of balconies on the bricked-volume units.
•Changes to the corner façade of Green Street and 500 South which included suggestions from the Commission at previous meetings, and increasing the glazing on the ground level units.
•Moving forward the buildings facing Green Street.
•Insignificant changes to exterior materials.
Chris Zarek, representing Cowboy Partners in Liberty Square, and Jay Lems, Prescott New Architects, were present.
The Commission and Applicants discussed the following:
•Modifications to the balcony width which now measure 6 feet wide and slightly under 4 feet deep. The original width was about 8.5 feet, and the depth did not change. Mechanical placement is on the roof and not the balconies.
•Additional windows on the north façade which is on the property line. The windows serve as egress windows from bedrooms. The windows are allowed because the Applicants were able to obtain a 20-foot “no build” easement agreement from the owner of the abutting property. The no build easement also serves as another access to the project.
•Garage door design and changes.
Chairperson Shepherd opened the meeting for public comment, no one was present to speak to the matter, and the meeting was closed to public comment.
The Commission had no further discussion.
MOTION
Based on the analyses and findings listed in the staff report, the testimony and proposal presented, Commissioner Svendsen moved for the Historic Landmark Commission to approve the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the minor alteration at 461 S 600 East and the new construction of eight three-story apartment buildings at Liberty Square Apartments; specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed project complies with the review standards. The final plan details are delegated to Staff. Commissioner Peters seconded the motion. Commissioners Svendsen, Petro-Eschler, Peters, Stowell, Adams and Harding voted “aye”. The motion passed unanimously.
Training Session
Ms. Oktay, Deputy Planning Director, noted that new fire codes were adopted by the State which do not give municipalities much flexibility, and affected all aspects of design and technical matters. The previous project (Liberty Square) was one project that got caught up in the more restrictive fire code changes.
Ms. Oktay explained zoning text and maps, zoning classifications and purposes, overlay districts, zoning standards and design guidelines. She reviewed the purposes of master plans and community preservation plans. Ms. Oktay also reviewed approval processes for various projects, and appropriate authority and fundamental reasoning for approvals, and legislative and administrative purposes and processes. Ms. Oktay reviewed future changes to the zoning ordinance.
Ms. Oktay noted that future training will include staff reports and decision making. Ms. Oktay complimented the Commissioners on their focus and intellectual reasonings leading to their decisions on the requests reviewed during this meeting.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:16:12 PM.