SALT LAKE CITY HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Minutes of the Meeting
Held at 451 South State Street, Room 126
No field trip was scheduled.
Present from the Historic Landmark Commission were Wayne Gordon, Magda Jakovcev-Ulrich, William Littig, Sarah Miller, Orlan Owen, Oktai Parvaz, Robert Payne, Amy Rowland, Soren Simonsen, Mark Wilson, and Robert Young. Elizabeth Mitchell was 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 Chairperson, Robert Young. Mr. Young 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. Young 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.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Owen moved to approve the minutes from the October 20, 1999 meeting. The motion was seconded by Ms. Rowland. Mr. Gordon, Mr. Littig, Ms. Miller, Mr. Owen, Mr. Parvaz, Mr. Payne, Ms. Rowland, Mr. Simonsen, and Mr. Wilson unanimously voted "Aye". Mr. Young, as Chairperson, did not vote. Ms. Jakovcev-Ulrich and Ms. Mitchell were not present for the vote. The motion passed.
TRAINING SESSION
Ms. Giraud reported that some members of the Historic Landmark Commission had suggested that staff conduct a training session because there were several new members on the Commission. Ms. Giraud stated that she was going to discuss how issues had evolved over the years with the Historic Landmark Commission; how policies had been made with the Commission; and how previous Commissions approached certain issues, such as window replacements, aluminum siding, or new construction. She encouraged the members to participate in the discussion by asking questions, making comments, and making recommendations for any policies or future meetings. Ms. Giraud said that perhaps there should be some changes in the Policy Document of the Historical Landmark Committee that was implemented in 1984 or in the Design Guidelines for Residential Historic Districts in Salt Lake City that were adopted in 1997.
Ms. Giraud gave a slide presentation regarding projects from the best scenarios to the worst scenarios in terms of historic preservation. She pointed out that in many instances, the Historic Landmark Commission had done a very good job of "holding the line on certain issues" and "that certain consistencies had paid off'.
Ms. Giraud noted that there were approximately 5,000 structures in the city historic districts, which is a large number to administer. She said that there has been some discussion that there should be more historic districts than the six Salt Lake City currently has. She said that this subject would be talked about in the future.
Mr. Giraud spoke about the importance of professional surveys that are completed on each building in an area, and rating it as either "contributing or non-contributing". She said that an "overall" characteristic of a neighborhood is made and recommendations are given for such things as district boundaries. Ms. Giraud commented that a survey is one of the criteria to make a district eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. She also said that all historic districts are listed on the Salt Lake City Register of
Cultural Resources and regulated by the City's ordinance, as well as some individual landmark sites. Ms. Giraud said that these property owners could be eligible for state and national tax credits.
Ms. Giraud referred to the information in the Design Guidelines for Residential Historic Districts in Salt Lake City, a copy of which was filed with the minutes, as she addressed each of the established historic districts, which are Avenues, Capitol Hill, Central City, Exchange Place, South Temple, and University.
Ms. Giraud made the following comments regarding the historic districts: Avenues Historic District: It was established in 1978.
• An excerpt was read from either the minutes of a Historic Landmark Commission meeting or a Planning Commission meeting in 1976, regarding the establishment of the South Temple Historic District, which was the ·first historic district to be established: "The proposal to extend the South Temple district into the lower avenues was discussed. It was felt that there is nothing much to justify an historic district in the lower avenues. The map of historic homes shows only four homes in the avenues area now identified as historic landmarks, as compared with the many homes in the South Temple Historic District. The validity of the objective to 'preserve the quality, character and delightful residential atmosphere of the neighborhood within the avenues community' was questioned. Areas in the lower avenues between 'E' and 'D' need to be improved and upgraded not preserved."
• All one has to do is drive through the lower Avenues to see the value of establishing an historic district
• There is a lot of activity going on in the district. Capitol Hill Historic District:
• It was established in 1984.
• The district is centered around Quince Street and the Marmalade area.
• The Capitol Hill area was on the "chopping block". It was going to be the site for a new housing project, where many historic homes would have been demolished.
• At one time, the 1-15 Freeway off-ramp was going to lead into the Capitol Hill area, and the proposed Bonneville Boulevard expressway from Davis County into the City would have also cut through the neighborhood.
• Stephanie Churchill, the former executive director of the Utah Heritage Foundation, said that it was the revolving loan fund that played a huge roll into establishing the Capitol Hill Historic District. Ms. Churchill said that the Utah Heritage Foundation was able to purchase some structures on Quince Street for $7,000-$8,000 which were rehabilitated, and resold for a profit. The proceeds were put back into the fund then reused.
Central City Historic District:
• It was established in 1991.
• Encompasses one of the oldest neighborhoods of the city.
• The grass median strips in 600 East created the initial interest in making the area an historic district
• There was quite a debate where the boundary lines should be, and it is still going on.
• There are many outstanding features in the architecture in the district.
• The community pointed out some problems that were not being addressed by staff, previous Historic Landmark Commissions, or the City. Some of the issues that came about "drove" some of the policies that were established.
• This district is the most "problematic" district because of the existing land-use patterns, the zoning, and the demographics of the area.
• There are many factors in this district that does not have anything to do with preservation.
• Because buildings were beginning to be demolished on Block 33, it was believed that there would be a large project on that block and the people who lived in the community wanted to make certain that the project would have a design review. That is where the Fred Meyer Store was constructed which was carefully reviewed by the Historic Landmark Commission.
• Exchange Place Historic District:
• It was established in 1978.
• It is the only totally commercial historic district.
• The edges of the district are very "ragged" and at certain times the City has looked at maybe trying to expand the district. No progress has been made with that idea.
• Most of the property owners in this district are cognizant about the historic buildings.
South Temple Historic District:
• It was established in 1976; the first historic district in Salt Lake City.
• It is frequently referred to as Utah's premier residential boulevard.
• Not all the homes on South Temple were mansions and owned by wealthy
• people. There were many smaller, more modest homes, as well.
• University Historic District:
• It was established in 1991.
• This is quite a "silent" district. It does not seem to have much construction activity.
Ms. Giraud discussed the adoption in April of 1995 of the revised zoning ordinance, Title 21A.34.020 H Historic Preservation Overlay District, a copy of which was filed with the minutes. She noted that the revisions strengthened the demolition section of the ordinance, which makes demolition of contributing structure more restrictive and less restrictive for non-contributing structures. Ms. Giraud added that the City's decision surrounded the question, "Why waste so much time on things like a Burger King being demolished." She talked about notifying the members of the Historic Landmark Commission and the surrounding property owners of a subject property that was requested to be demolished. She said that there is a two-week period allowed for
public comment.
Ms. Giraud also said that the ordinance codified the standards of the Secretary of the Interior and defined the criteria for more administrative approvals, such as window replacements, small additions, fences, and so forth. She remarked that the Historic Landmark Commission would have to review all these requests and some meetings would have as many as fifteen items on the agenda, which required a staff report to be written for each case. Ms. Giraud said that the Preservation Staff "signs off' on approximately 400 permits a year.
Ms. Giraud stated that another significant change in the zoning ordinance was the increase in the fee schedule of $200.00 for an alteration of a principal building or signage to be reviewed by the Historic Landmark Commission's review. She noted that earlier in 1999, the fee schedule was revised once again reducing it to $25.00; however there was no change in the $200.00 fee for new construction, demolition, or relocation of a principal building.
Ms. Giraud said that the previous Historic Landmark Commissions believed that people who live in historic districts should be able to accommodate family needs for increased living space, so more substantial additions have been allowed. She showed slides of a variety of additions and other projects.
At the conclusion of the slide presentation, there was much discussion regarding architectural features of structures, signage, and other policy matters.
• Future Training Sessions:
Ms. Giraud said that at the Historic Landmark Commission meeting on November 17, 1999, Mr. Don Hartley from the Utah Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), will brief this Commission on materials and new technology.
Ms. Giraud said that in a few weeks, a member of the National Parliamentarian
Association would address the Commission regarding parliamentary procedures.
OTHER BUSINESS
Nominees for the Historic Landmark Commission Citizens' Awards:
Mr. Knight displayed photographs of thirty-one nominees that were eligible to receive the Historic Landmark Commission Citizens' Award, copies of which were filed with the minutes. The members of the Commission voted on the nominees.
Adjournment of the meeting.
As there was no other business, Mr. Young asked for a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Gordon so moved to adjourn the meeting. It was a unanimous vote of approval by the Commission members and the meeting adjourned at 5:30 P.M.