SALT LAKE CITY HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING
City & County Building
451 South State Street, Room 326, Salt Lake City, Utah
SEPTEMBER 6, 2018
A roll is being kept of all who attended the Historic Landmark Commission Meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5:35:30 PM. Audio recordings of the Historic Landmark Commission meetings are retained for a period of time.
Present for the Historic Landmark Commission meeting were: Chairperson Charles Shepherd, Vice Chairperson Kenton Peters; Commissioners Stanley Adams, Thomas Brennan, Sheleigh Harding, Robert Hyde, David Richardson, Esther Stowell and Paul Svendsen.
Planning Staff members present at the meeting were Nick Norris, Planning Director; Paul Nielson, Attorney; Molly Robinson, Planning Manager; Kelsey Lindquist, Principal Planner; Carl Leith, Senior Planner; Ashley Scarff, Principal Planner and Marlene Rankins, Administrative Secretary.
Field Trip
A field trip was held prior to the work session. Historic Landmark Commissioners present were: Charles Shepherd, Kenton Peters, Esther Stowell and Paul Svendsen. Staff members in attendance were Nick Norris, Kelsey Lindquist, Carl Leith, Ashley Scarff and Amy Thompson.
•1107 E. South Temple- Staff gave an overview of the proposal. The Commission had no
questions but did walk the site.
•265 N. C Street - Staff gave an overview of the proposal.
Q: What activity is currently going on?
A: Utility work.
Q: What interior room will be in the addition?
A: Kitchen and bedroom
Q: Has the garage been approved?
A: Yes
•4th Avenue Pump House – Public Utilities staff gave an overview of the proposal
Q: What alternative locations are there?
A: Utility Staff talked about issues with moving the well.
Q: What are the dimensions of the building?
A: Utility Staff provided the answers.
APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 2, 2018, MEETING MINUTES. 5:38:08 PM
MOTION 5:38:22 PM
Commissioner Richardson moved to approve the August 2, 2018, meeting minutes. Commissioner Peters seconded the motion. All Commissioners were in favor and voted “aye”. The motion passed unanimously.
REPORT OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR 5:38:34 PM
Chairperson Shepherd stated he had nothing to report.
Vice Chairperson Peters stated he had nothing to report.
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR 5:32:03 PM
Mr. Nick Norris, Planning Director, provided updates with upcoming events. He informed the Commission that the Bishop’s Place appeal was heard and stated that no decision has been made as of yet.
PUBLIC COMMENT CARDS
Cindy Cromer – Expressed she would like to see Liberty Park preserved.
Xeriscape Landscape at 1107 E. South Temple, Commodore Apartments – A request by Ira Ashton, The Lawn Guys, on behalf of owners Commodore Apartments LLC, to xeriscape landscape the front yard and the corner side yards of this apartment building, replacing grass with large irregular rock retaining walls and gravel cover along the two street frontages facing South Temple and Q Street. This work has already been carried out without a Certificate of Appropriateness approval and is the subject of an open enforcement case. The matter is being referred to the Historic Landmark Commission for a decision because Staff would conclude that the changes adversely affect the character of this section of the South Temple Historic District and the character of the immediate setting of this contributing building in the historic district, and denial is consequently recommended. The subject property is zoned RMF-35 (Moderate Density Multi-Family 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: PLNHLC2016-00694
Paul Nielson, Attorney, stepped out for the first item due to conflict of interest.
Carl Leith, Senior Planner, reviewed the petition as outlined in the Staff Report (located in the case file). He stated Staff recommended that the Historic Landmark Commission deny the certificate of appropriateness for the current landscaping.
The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
•Sidewalk stones and whether there is any remediation involved in the damage to them
Ira Ashton, Applicant, further reviewed the petition and provided explanation for previous landscape plans and his current plans for landscaping.
PUBLIC HEARING 6:06:48 PM
Scott Anderson – Stated he is opposed of the petition and would like to see the rocks removed.
Michael Westley – Expressed his concern with building maintenance and stated he is opposed to the boulders and would like to see them removed.
Seeing no one else wished to speak, Chairperson Shepherd closed the Public Hearing.
The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
•Appropriate landscape that follows the ordinance
MOTION 6:12:47 PM
Commissioner Richardson stated, based on the information in the Staff Report, information presented, and the input received during the Public Hearing, I move the Commission Deny the request for certificate of appropriateness to landscape this site with large rock and gravel, as proposed in petition PLNHLC2016-00694.
Commissioner Adams second. Commissioners Svendsen, Adams, Peters, Richardson, Harding, and Brennan voted “Aye”. Commissioner Stowell voted “Nay”. Motion passed 7-1.
Chairperson Shepherd stated, Appeal of Historic Landmark Commission Decision: Anyone aggrieved by the Historic Landmark Commission's decision, may object to the decision by filing a written appeal with the appeals hearing officer within ten (10) calendar days following the date on which a record of decision is issued. The applicant may object to the decision of the Historic Landmark Commission by filing a written appeal with the appeals hearing officer or the mayor within thirty (30) calendar days following the date on which a record of decision is issued.
Walton Addition and Special Exceptions at 265 N. C Street - Mark Walton, property owner, is requesting approval of the design of a new rear addition to an existing single family home at 265 N. C Street, which is considered contributing to the character and integrity of the Avenues Local Historic District. The subject property is zoned SR-1A (Special Development Pattern Residential District). The project requires review and approval of the following petitions:
a. Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for a Major Alteration to a contributing structure is required to allow for the construction of the new addition (Case number PLNHLC2017-00772);
b. The applicant has requested two (2) Special Exceptions: one for additional building height for the addition, and one to allow for a reduced separation between the new addition and a new garage, which was previously approved by Staff (Case number PLNHLC2018-00574).
The site is located in Council District 3 represented by Chris Wharton. (Staff contact: Ashley Scarff - (801) 535-7660 or ashley.scarff@slcgov.com.
Paul Nielson, Attorney, rejoined the meeting.
Ashley Scarff, Principal Planner, reviewed the petition as outlined in the Staff Report (located in the case file). She stated staff recommended the Commission approve all requests with the condition that approval of all final details, including any specific direction expressed by the Commission shall be delegated to Staff.
Mark Walton, Applicant, further reviewed the petition.
The Commission, Staff and Applicant discussed the following:
•Floor elevations of the addition and the alignment
•Roof form of the addition and the consideration of the hip room
•Second floor ceiling height
•Type of windows and materials chosen for the addition
•Location of the addition
PUBLIC HEARING 6:49:05 PM
Chairperson Shepherd opened the Public Hearing; seeing no one wished to speak; Chairperson closed the Public Hearing.
The Commission made the following comments:
•The interim design is more appropriate
•In contrast, another commissioner feels the taller design works better
•How the window frame proposal works
MOTION 7:00:28 PM
Commissioner Peters stated, based on the analysis and findings listed in the staff report, the information presented, and the input received during the public hearing, I move that the Commission approve petition PLNHLC2017-00772, a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the Major Alterations of a contributing structure at 265 N. C Street, and petition PLNHLC2018-00574, which is a request for two (2) special exceptions: one for additional building height, and one for a reduced separation between the principal and accessory structures, with the following directions:
Approval of all final design details, including specific direction expressed by the Commission which would be the window frames, shall be delegated to Planning Staff.
Motion was second. Commissioners Svendsen, Adams, Hyde, Peters, Richardson, Stowell, and Brennan voted “Aye”. Commissioner Harding voted “Nay”. The motion passed 7-1
The Commission took a break 7:02:40 PM
The Commission came back from break 7:09:06 PM
WORK SESSION
4th Avenue Pump House - Salt Lake City Public Utilities is proposing to construct a new pump house on the property located at approximately 300 N. Canyon Road. The pump house is necessary to continue to provide drinking water to the community and protect the well that is on the site. The pump house will contain equipment necessary to operate the well and required chemicals to treat the water. This work session is to gain design feedback and to discuss issues. This is not a public hearing and public comments will not be heard during this item. The subject property is located in the OS (Open Space) zoning district and is located in Council District 3, represented by Chris Warton. (Staff Contact: Kelsey Lindquist at (801) 535-7930 or Kelsey.lindquist@slcgov.com) Case Numbers: PLNHLC2018-00557 and PLNHLC2018-00558
Jesse, Public Utilities, provided an overview of proposed project with details of placement and beneficial factors of the water pump.
Kelsey Lindquist, Principal Planner, reviewed the petition as outlined in the work session memorandum.
The Commission and Staff discussed the following:
•Constraints of the proposal
•Are there other option for fenestration
•The proposed materials should reflect the materials seen in the neighborhood
•The interior of the building could utilize CMU and is generally less of a concern
•The exterior needs to reflect the district and the surrounding structures
The Commission reviewed the issues raised within the Staff Memo:
Q: Is the current us and design utilizing the CMU material an issue?
•The proposed Material Should reflect the materials seen in the neighborhood.
•Brick is a traditional material that could be utilized.
•Cast in place concrete is a contemporary material that could also be utilized.
•The interior of the building could utilize CMU and is less of a concern.
•The exterior needs to reflect the district and the surrounding structures.
Q: Is the current design without the integration of openings a compatibility issue?
•The current proposal is in conflict with this specific standard.
The Commissioner offered several solutions:
•Glass block
•Attack proof glass
•Laminated glass
•Shadow box
Q: Does each elevation address the public way?
•This is a great concern
•This needs to be addressed through a redesign and integration of materials, design and landscaping.
Q: Does the design include enough design details to create a smooth transition from the open space to an established historic neighborhood?
•No, the current proposal is not close to achieving a success transition.
o Designs and material, which include the green screens, shadow boxes, artistic or sculptural elements.
o The standards and guidelines need to be utilized when designing and compiling the narrative.
Q: Does the proposal balance the need and manage the change successfully?
•This is a significant change. The change could be minimized.
Q: Are there additional guidelines that can be utilized for the review of this proposal?
•Every applicable design guideline and standards for new construction need to be evaluated and included in the written analysis of the proposal from the applicant.
Q: Could landscaping further be utilized to ease the transition from the open space to a utility structure?
•A landscape architect needs to be involved in the design and evolution of the process to help with the compatibility.
•Berms could also potentially be used.
•Could the generator sink further into the ground?
Q: If the current design is not appropriate what changes to the plan need to be made to bring it into compliance?
•Essentially, back to the drawing board. Both an architect and landscape architect were encouraged to be hired.
Q: What type of renders or plans need to be provided to review the full scope of the proposal?
•Street renderings and 3-D plans.
Additional comments were made:
•Public art could be integrated into this project
•Include the Homeland Security restrictions that are influencing the design
•Could the fence area be reduced?
•Could the generator or the transformer be relocated?
•Is the fence necessary?
•The building is an awkward shape
•The shape/volume and massing should be simplified. The building could be separated into several components
•The room form could take the volume of a historic structure
•Utilize the Liberty Park Pump House as an example
•Approach this as designing an architectural folly
•Driveway could be reinforced turf to reduce the hardscape
•Minimize the number of trees removed and maximize the number that will put back
•Whether a heavily laminated piece of glass be installed
•Insulation of walls
•Use of materials
•Fence material
•Landscaping of exterior
•Material to exterior generators
•Chlorination
Chair and Vice Chair Elections 8:14:38 PM
Kenton Peters was nominated as Chair. All voted in favor, Kenton Peters was named Chair.
Robert Hyde and David Richardson were nominated as Vice Chair. A tally was taken and Robert Hyde won and named Vice Chair.
The meeting adjourned at 8:24:21 PM