Loading...
09/20/2011 - Work Session - Minutes PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2011 The City Council met in Work Session on Tuesday, September 20, 2011, at 4 : 30 p.m. in Room 326, Committee Room, City County Building, 451 South State Street . In Attendance : Council Members Carlton Christensen, Van Turner, Jill Remington Love, JT Martin, Stan Penfold, Luke Garrott and Soren Simonsen. Also In Attendance : Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; Lynn Pace, Deputy City Attorney; David Everitt, Mayor' s Chief of Staff; Wilford Sommerkorn, Planning Director; Joel Paterson, Planning Manager; Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director; Janice Jardine, Council Land Use Policy Analyst; and Scott Crandall, Deputy City Recorder. Councilmember Love presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 4 : 32 p.m. AGENDA ITEMS #1. (TENTATIVE) CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO CLOSED SESSION, IN KEEPING WITH UTAH CODE § 52-4-204, FOR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES: a) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 524-205 (1) (b) ; b) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, OR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY (INCLUDING ANY FORM OF WATER RIGHT OR WATER SHARES) WHEN PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSACTION WOULD DISCLOSE THE APPRAISAL OR ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR PREVENT THE CITY FROM COMPLETING THE TRANSACTION ON THE BEST POSSIBLE TERMS, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205 (1) (d) ; c) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR REASONABLY IMMINENT LITIGATION, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205 (1) (c) ; d) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY (INCLUDING ANY FORM OF WATER RIGHT OR WATER SHARES) IF (1) PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSACTION WOULD DISCLOSE THE APPRAISAL OR ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR PREVENT THE CITY FROM COMPLETING THE TRANSACTION ON THE BEST POSSIBLE TERMS, (2) THE CITY PREVIOUSLY GAVE NOTICE THAT THE PROPERTY WOULD BE OFFERED FOR SALE, AND (3) THE TERMS OF THE SALE ARE PUBLICLY DISCLOSED BEFORE THE CITY APPROVES THE SALE; e) FOR ATTORNEY-CLIENT MATTERS THAT ARE PRIVILEGED, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 78B-1-137; AND 11 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2011 f) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS DEPLOYMENT OF SECURITY PERSONNEL, DEVICES OR SYSTEMS PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE SECTION 52-4- 205 (1) (f) Item not held. #2 . 6:26:46 PM REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING A REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. View Attachments See File M 11-5 for announcements . #3 . 4:33:01 PM RECEIVE AN UPDATE FROM DAVID HART, FAIA, VICE PRESIDENT/REGIONAL MANAGER OF MOCA SYSTEMS, REGARDING PLANS FOR THE CITY' S NEW PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES. View Attachments David Hart briefed the Council with a PowerPoint Presentation and the attached handouts . Councilmember Christensen asked if drainage water from the project could be reused. Mr. Hart said he would research the issue and provide information at the next briefing. #4 . 4:45:08 PM RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP BRIEFING FROM THE ADMINISTRATION REGARDING THE CITY'S HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM. THE PRESENTATION WILL INCLUDE INFORMATION TO ESTABLISH A CITYWIDE PRESERVATION PHILOSOPHY, IMPROVEMENT OF THE CITYWIDE PRESERVATION PLAN AND PRESERVATION POLICY STATEMENTS, AND TOOLS AND PROJECTS TO IMPLEMENT THE CITY' S PRESERVATION GOALS. View Attachments Joel Paterson, Cheri Coffey, Wilford Sommerkorn and Lynn Pace briefed the Council with a PowerPoint Presentation and the attached handouts . Discussion was held on philosophy statements contained in the handouts . A majority of the Council was in favor of removing "reasonable size" language from the statements . Discussion was held on standards and guidelines for structure additions and alterations . Council Members said clear delineation was needed between standards and guidelines . Councilmember Simonsen suggested combining the 3rd and 5th bullet points on Page 2 , to read "Respect that change is part of history and that appropriate additions and alterations must be considered as part of a natural evolution of historic properties and districts but allow flexibility where alterations are less likely to negatively affect the significant character-defining features" . A majority of the Council was in favor. Councilmember Love asked Council Members to let staff know if further changes were needed to philosophy statements . She said an 11 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2011 updated version would be ready for Council review during one of the October, 2011 meetings . Discussion was held on creating historic districts . Comments included understanding current ordinances and requirements; contacting other communities about their processes; determining the appropriate number to create a district; providing a safe method for residents to vote/express their thoughts/intentions; and educating residents/City officials about the process . The Council asked the Administration to gather information from other communities and prepare an ordinance/proposal to bring back for further review/modifications . Councilmember Simonsen requested a copy of current ordinances/requirements and Councilmember Penfold requested an educational component be included in the process . The meeting adjourned at 6 : 30 p.m. UNCIL CHAIR i�ti YUT i S. C ;cry-�. ,. a*4 RECORDER Ok�OR This document along with the digita cording constitute the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held September 20, 2011 . sc 11 - 3 Salt Lake City Council ''"' ,, City& County Building 451 South State Street, Room 304 Ict ar; ' +`E = - P.O.Box 145476 s, !'; Salt Lake City,Utah 84114-5476 -.,, -,` � (801)535-7600 , , CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA REVISED Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:30 p.m.Work Session or immediately following the 2:00 p.m. Redevelopment Agency Meeting (the public is invited to listen to the discussion) PLEASE NOTE: Limited Fo mal Session foflbWi 3 30= Vo.;)l ,-Si tf'°,general.public comment penod will not be ho this ievening .This is the G�onc& n o . y scIi d ec (<itriefing night,However,housekeeping aeifi>��`i�ons�are`inciac�e�d A. WORK SESSION: Approximately 3:30 p.m.in Room 326,City& County Building,451 South State St. (Agenda items scheduled during the Council's formal meeting may be discussed during the work session. Items from the following list that Council is unable to complete in the work session from approximately 3:30 p.m.—6:30 p.m. may be addressed in a work session setting following the consent agenda.) 1. (TENTATIVE) The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session, in keeping with Utah Code § 52-4-204, for any of the following purposes: a)A strategy session to discuss collective bargaining,pursuant to Utah Code§52-4-205(1)(b); b)A strategy session to discuss the purchase,exchange,or lease of real property(including any form of water right or water shares)when public discussion of the transaction would disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration or prevent the City from completing the transaction on the best possible terms, pursuant to Utah Code§52-4-205(1)(d); c)A strategy session to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation,pursuant to Utah Code§52-4- 205(l)(c); d)A strategy session to discuss the sale of real property(including any form of water right or water shares)if(1) public discussion of the transaction would disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration or prevent the City from completing the transaction on the best possible terms,(2)the City previously gave notice that the property would be offered for sale,and(3)the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the City approves the sale; e)For attorney-client matters that are privileged,pursuant to Utah Code§78B-1-137;and f)A strategy session to discuss deployment of security personnel,devices or systems pursuant to Utah Code Section 52-4-205(I)(f). 2. Report of the Executive Director, including a review of Council information items and announcements. 3. The Council will receive an update from David Hart, FAIA,Vice President/Regional Manager of MOCA Systems, regarding plans for the City's new Public Safety Facilities. CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE Salt Lake City Council Agenda Tuesday, September 20,2011 4. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing from the Administration regarding the City's Historic Preservation Program. The presentation will include information to establish a citywide Preservation Philosophy, improvement of the citywide Preservation Plan and preservation policy statements, and tools and projects to implement the City's preservation goals._ FORMAL MEETING B. OPENING CEREMONY: 7:00 p.m. in Room 315, City& County Building,451 South State St. Council Member Luke Garrott will conduct the Formal Council Meetings during the month of September. 1. Pledge of Allegiance. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Redevelopment Agency Board Public Hearing: North Temple Urban Renewal Area(URA) The Redevelopment Agency Board will accept public comment regarding the regarding the North Temple URA. (T 11-4) Staff Recommendation: a. The Council will consider a motion to recess as the City Council; b. The Council will then consider a motion to convene as the Redevelopment Agency Board; c. The Redevelopment Agency Board will accept public comment regarding the North Temple URA; d. The Redevelopment Agency Board will consider a motion to adjourn as the Redevelopment Agency Board; e. The Council will consider a motion to reconvene as the City Council. 2 Salt Lake City Council Agenda Tuesday, September 20,2011 D. POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS: 1. Ordinance: Amending certain Sections of Title 21A,Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to wireless telecommunication antennas Consider adopting an ordinance amending the City's zoning regulations for wireless telecommunications antennas,facilities and equipment. Changes include- encourage co-location,clarify screening requirements, include stealth antennas as permitted use and provide a definition, clarify electrical equipment location,refine area limits for wall/roof mounted antennas, remove conditional use requirement for certain antennas,eliminate performance bond requirement for abandoned facilities and remove utility pole height restriction. Related provisions of Title 21A—Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition.(Petitioner -Mayor Ralph Becker, Petition PLNPCM2010-0045) (O 11-18) Staff Recommendation: Consider options. E. COMMENTS: (None) F. NEW BUSINESS: (None) G. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 1. Resolution: Canvass of the Salt Lake City Primary Election Consider accepting the official canvass of the September 13, 2011, Salt Lake City Primary Election. (U 11-I) Staff Recommendation: a. Recess as City Council and convene with the Mayor as the Board of Canvassers; b. Adopt resolution; c. Adjourn as Board of Canvassers and reconvene as City Council. H. CONSENT: 1. Confirm Date: Ordinance: Parking Ticket Ordinance Amendments Confirm the date of Tuesday, September 27,2011 at 7:00 p.m.to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance amending Section 12.96.020, Salt Lake City Code, extending the period after which unpaid parking citations may result in impoundment of a vehicle from 30 days to 40 days to be consistent with other provisions within the same Chapter and amending Section 12.56.570, Salt Lake City Code, clarifying and revising provisions governing the dismissal and reduction of parking citation fees. (0 10-14) Staff Recommendation: Confirm date. 3 Salt Lake City Council Agenda Tuesday,September 20,2011 2. Set Date: Resolution: Wasatch Hollow Open Space Management Plan Set the date of Tuesday, October 4,2011 at 7:00 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting a resolution regarding the Restoration,Use and Management Plan for Wasatch Hollow Open Space. The goal of the plan is to protect native vegetation,water quality, and aquatic and terrestrial wildlife habitat of Emigration Creek while providing appropriate access and educational opportunities for the public. (T 11-3) Staff Recommendation: Set the date. Aermoaeu Salt Lake City Council Agenda Tuesday, September 20,2011 I. ADJOURNMENT: Dated: September 15, 2011 y• 096c -ity Recorder STATE OF UTAH ) : ss. COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) On or before 5:00 p.m. on September 15, 2011,I also personally(1)posted a copy of the foregoing on the Utah Public Notice Website created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701, and(2) provided a copy of the foregoing to The Salt Lake Tribune or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent. • Ci Recor er Subscribed and sworn to before me this 15th day of September, 2011. ota y Public residing in the State of Utah JANYCE FOWLES b -� h NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF UTAH Y My Comm.Exp.09/08/2014 Commission#602287 Approval: Dgiuty Dir4ctor Access agendas at http://www.slcgov.com/council/agendas/default.htm.People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance of council meetings. We make every effort to honor these requests, and they should be made as early as possible. Accommodations may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids. The City and County Building is an accessible facility. For questions or additional information, please contact the City Council Office at 535- 7600, or TDD 535-6021. Assistive listening devices are available on Channel I; upon four hours advance notice. Please allow 72 hours advance notice for sign language interpreters; large type and#2 Braille agendas. *Final action may be taken and/or adopted concerning any item on this agenda.After 5:00 p.m.,please enter the City& County Building through the east entrance. Accessible route is located on the east side of the building. In accordance with State Statute, City Ordinance and Council Policy, one or more Council Members may be connected via speakerphone. 5 _ . Questions p y .,.��,. - .. ,q , ,..,T yf1S+.$Gtt' k.1. ^ y..,.. ...„..... _ ,. .i. 1 7_ '•,.`',...4 ' .. .T._-_. � v., :2 2,.. :4‘)..' ti sc. J . ; .a _ Y C R ��� ti t -Ar e 1 . P'�3 •ua�="'�' , - - I1_ f _ to I I•�III F�11( _1 % ■ ; tiiriii rill! i 1 :, : iii)1 iiii _/ —L,I-., J / _ ' . t# _ L e y s z , f '-n Salt Lake City Publi 'afety Buildings 7Msys��iECnns • • Overall Budget Update September 2011 • Consulting Fees $ 11,326,887 • Construction Costs $ 77,242,858 • Owner Costs $ 25,219,364 • Contingencies and Fees $ 10,979,000 • Total $124,768,109 Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings mom Bid Update September 2011 Description Initial Estimate Actual Bids Variance CM Fee Construction Manager's Fee 2,948,000 2,948,000 - CM GR Construction General Requirements"Okland" 2,890,222 2,652,614 (237,608) Bid Package 01 Demolition,Tree Services,SWPPP 374,250 351,931 (22,319) Bid Package 02 Elevators 755,250 709,800 (45,450) Bid Package 03 Excavation 3,086,203 2,411,206 (674,997) Bid Package 04 Dampers,Security,Cranes 2,851,270 2,616,942 (234,328) Bid Package 05 Building Concrete&Structural Steel 22,211,173 20,400,336 (1,810,837) Total Bid to Date 35,116,368 32,090,829 (3,025,539) Additional Bids&Costs Bid Package 06 Base Building&Site Improvements(Bids due November 16th) 43,157,000 Budget Oversized Parking Garage-Location TBD 500,000 Additional CM Contingency(3%)and fees 1,495,029 Revised Estimate with Actual Bids 77,242,858 Percent Bid to Date 42% Salt Lake City Publi( rety Buildings 1!Apra { al, T. 0 w ' b. �y L a ?T a.) ro QJ •to iu N, '��,' ,/. to .fr t a 4e�.-4t,1fa ' !,a I'ts t • ..,,••••-wrr-ra"•••^, t I' ,,Wr.77.71. _____ 4„,,,..•,•_,:__ .... • ... • , '. 1: ' , -Tt-t-fl .-- ' e - . "--.. --z-iwwwwy•_ ' — .. .•., ;;.,„,-.1„.4,,....4i .3 • - ___ ,.._• ----1 ;__. -- •....-...-•-, ' • , •-1.,,, .:4•,••.-- T .. '''' — "salgall a - - • - 4:4: -,,4,:- ''‘,Q,,,,,,,,i...„,,, ,,,, ,.,,,, -, - • Ad'..kiest•-•••,•kf'....,,, ---f•-.:-., -,,.•:•••••-,,,,. ...,,',••,;•.,,%-;., •••,..,...,- .. . '''' ,.,,,,Lt„.'1,,,,-4,4141';01•:-.. i.;, ',,r4t114,44,4,,, '•,' t,,ciii\lthi * ,4-:-.41,•0•%., 4,-,.5,01.1...i.,,k,,,,,,,,.;s4‘‘''',.,•.•••„+.4.",4',,,,',.. , ' . ''' • INRP.,,vils,-,r,.i -,, f-4.,; ....,, - „-,7-1,4,,. - •;(...4,,,k, . . ,;-- -. - me- q%1.,;4(tt:f:,,,,,,,,„, A,..4k;;T",,),=';',.kk;';',WV,44",-;41.,i,'i.-.‘,",,k.F.'",1,;4, ,- '. '., ' - . ,, ‘. ' , ' 4 . .,..•..rk4:7'7•WjZnk,W'`", ,.:."T.L't't.'+' ',1'' Ile..),%';i ' ' .-,1J..., ntSti.,,,,,,,,,r*--' *,,t,4---,T7X‘ •.•, Nei--.•,,,;.;,- •3-'.‘4.Z''+17VV.");4•41tVP4VIT4,2,,44,1.";01,1,,,,r-',":T"'4'''', ., ',' . '' '.'. ' '1 'c , •,•'‘' '-' •' . :-.. V'. 0i,f,,'k7••-`,-,:---,,',...:,tk,2,,, r4_,„,...,„ . . ., ttet4::•i:•,,,,,, -., - ..'•, ,•.,,i'-g,,:;,,t',;,,,,,,,-;•,••,••••.." ,••'...'...'7+,..„.-:. :....:1,:-.'`-',! ,., ; ,,,,,,,,,,:t.,*,.. ..„ ,.v,,,,i,. ,,,,z. ,, ,..,,,k,,,,„.., ,,, .,.,, . ., •,,,• ,.•.,,, • - . . . ,. : • .•..A ..„',.,..'-.., :,,,,,,,,...!,`?i,.;:,,-; „),,,08-610,ry.. ' ...,.,..„,‘,z,,,,:$:,,, '• ",,,....,:,,,,7,':'),,,W.13V4ti,'e.,-.1it-N1.4.,,,:,;,/._ ' ., •': :. -1 1. ,/ •4it..4.1...••,s1;"'t'Ali7,.' ''',-' -' -.... ' t , '+'''. ' 1 , l' xt*, • ii . '';1-1-."...'.---,'," .•0. 'lr''T''.... -?„.:E.. ,. , ' , -ni•, - •,, ,, , ,,•:;••,•, .....,-, ',, - '- - :'- ' .-• I"'-120. ' 4.,.'•• iniii lis , aft.; . . _-- ., 4, i 113 ri':-,,"1"... , , '., , ,\,;t431... • .wii,,t,;;;;;?, ' ''I`'2'l':- I I • -.-:.•=------"' ' `., ,,, !',-;A-J,, : '.'z...,''t.'t,4.‘..,*--'• ' • ‘'' . ,1 '',,1-'c., . . . .. , I ' n....- 7aratilf,irrrwrrarlint't ti'i-i;''''t , , . 4, . . - • .• • „:00,4,-;...,..., - ,-- , 1 , ,rp.s-INT7 rf",jiff 1 1 tlir litaPt-ok;,""'`- • Jill i I I L - ,., .; 1,, 001r,41111.'.:.!it: - ,,- r,, `.'il .:, '''''..), •-•4 4' ..t' '' .•', ' ' -• ... , -..1.,,, ,,•; • . .-- ' '',;•: ;,V,:vii,,,",'&'-s'Ai'', .:".. '`"n Vil _ ;'. ' .. . .N• - I - — * "'" . s" --, '.••, i . ••• • __ Mow NV . .-'_'1 '',2•1 ••,,.1 ' •, _ 1 \r I .. , -:••ww,•'it......4.51, -ow \.,, ,,,•,- itimmi I ..t, - 1 - - ; siv,,.--.. . .r".-..... -- s.- .. I .., . ,. :. 7,i ...,,,, :-.r- . .'..": • -,..-: a -. - --,.. -i- :.!-A' ----141 i ro ...... _ , pillk-,.. -..;;. In isdni -_, . . hilti-- 7 1 ...,.. . ;, .. .....1,::.,.. ..;.... „. ,,.:. . , 4,1 ..- • I -4.,.-----,-, - ,•f.- , ...., ... ,. . sir q m .-• . •r r2. i • e - *-..• •••',•i.'.4''- -- ' . *el' • •r V kr; ' l •4••••-.i ihl porn, ir 4- - , oo I.- •. il, it,„ ,,."--..- •. ., • "k64rip.,., ,F-----_______4(41 1 I s-414, ,,i ow I-114V i_ .. ir I -- .. . '. • ' -rip. ik. ....,_..........- ..,1-,,„,,,-,.. ....., . # ,-474 ' 4 I. • • 01111. ,, . - tt 4 1 ! 1 -** J ar 1 „ „. • - , . - ---- - . ,.1 —7.-2-- ' ,'41 L-- ' '. PI . 43 % . le. • __- - - - _- — - . 1 , ,, ` ` ii , . ,fr, - .___-- ._____-•----,__-- ,,..I ,, .,,, 'il 'If R 'iwIll1117,- • ill - --_-------1 ad • 4. ..:A14...U... . -.., I . . -Irrt- / - --',...,.•--Air' - ---:•-="`iirr ----- 442*,,. - -, ...•••-•••••••• -0001 - 1 m rilL . ri t all -rrt. A • - 0 I * •- ..str• •••' ,..„ ..,,,,,...,... _ ., „,... ... lois timoi I *L.- .„,,- • Fegylitttp„,. ... ,tN....%--. 1. -..:7... •- • I:. a, ci....' ,P A•Wit t 4,-s''''s r rz..,,z---'! -., ....',C;;;:.10.'''•il.n..--- --2.,:.. . '' . ( 41 I I. e -91 i . *-Aiiiha*t..,,";-""gto 'ft", -911 --•t.. . '1 g? 1 , , -,,..- ...., I i • • • Forming & Placing Concrete . Sump & Elevator Pits ( 1NRSA, • A.- . - - s-' `-:.:, • •'. , 1. ' 1_. ' , , i. , , . ' \-,,i ,.. 4'ze '... /• '. n !1 ' •,..-i,—,i. 'Is --7 •._ I ,-,t..„'.. "k,—;,::::—. :pr.=. . iii ,Y ;l I !. ' t ' 1 1 49 a� • ' .t . Continued Excavation for North Parking Ramp Entry 11flai 7L • • p t ,' q .1 1 , 1 r •.. "�"�..' 4rr� . ..F `c r. ,ay3n W n 3 -'.r♦ .r 4-I". a d> y '• -.,.. ?- "� tF s 1. - p. & A T ri K -'4 r . r r� .. rA.` / , % ' ,I(/ (/ �. ; r j•-417e ,) i J s eA i e+ . . ifen, °;� Y .d •r.:l dlir ,6n� :'� ,t � �r.�.�i =� .?"- r . � ." .. r West Shoring Wall Looking S :h with Gravel Base Fill pfscosa. , . '' -,-,:titklt,j,....'-:,.----.* - - •,.....,.',,,-__ ,.•-: • •,=1 .. .. ..,.. , , rilpi...--..-.A.`•.,` 1--- re111.1 t:15. i• , 44.4.-Z1 ' • .' ,..-, . •-•:,..;:q ., "%-,‘ •.''.•.;v."-r,;;'•t ,.,,,--77;1 : , .,. „, , . ..r *irmi.......— , . . • 17: , - - , ,. . _ •. ... „,,.... '"' ,. - • 6, - - - 1 Z: aiLk 4:- .',.. ., • „ • • .%ilicilL 'I all linysgpmi.Overall Site — Looking South •�; �" - PROJECT BOUNDARIES ", w Current project boundaries established r'� 9 - ' I. , 1 • .,-p rill with fencing and pedestrian pathways Or I* �" � 'l 1 }+ '' `. WORK COMPLETE : if r 11 ' `�1 TM '" ""• i i tt, 1 Permanent power service for the block •• r completed 7 29 <^ g ,� _' __ �'..- - Fla ' c- rpf p / /11 1' Phased Building Permit Received-8/31/11 _ _ . , tp © Sump pit concrete placed-9/2/11 • Tower crane erected-9 15 11 • WORK IN PROGRESS ' I T 1. * Mass Excavation,shoring,&tiebacks pro- f: _ •-1 .-::, 'r , T gressing as scheduled—May 23—Sept 23 ; �.M� • \ i ,I Shoring&tiebacks complete on west,south, „4 and east.Continues for north parking entry c '. and north elevation. nne ew. _ r ilk 'xv ''A , '"mid ;W ,,n46.0.)• .� __ ' - UPCOMING WORK • Structural Concrete—October 2011 •Dates are approximate and subject to change.Utility connections are tentative&will • Structural Steel—December 2011 be scheduled by the utility companies • Damper Installation—May 2012 Construction Update • Building Dried in—October 2012 • Final Site work—December 2012 • Substantial Completion—April 2013 • ( ) Salt Lake City PublQafety Buildings 1 "' A" / _3 • Construction Photos • Bid - • Overall Project Budget Update - - " 14.c' • _ aA. - - • '101002.1.b1 *4. 4.4414t4:". r Agenda Salt Lake City Public Safety Buildings mysorsA. ,'`p ^ ,,,,, , �� Communication Ill III: rm � • City Council Community&Economic Development Office of the Director To: City Council Members From: Joel Paterson,AICP,Planning Manager Date: September 15,2011 CC: David Everitt,Chief of Staff; Frank Gray,Community&Economic Development Director; Mary De La Mare-Schaefer,Community&Economic Development Department Deputy Director;Wilf Sommerkorn,Planning Director; Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director;Nick Norris,Planning Manager Re: Salt Lake City Preservation Program-Follow-up discussion regarding the Preservation Philosophy Statement BACKGROUND The Planning Staff met with the City Council on August 23,2011 to provide a briefing on the Historic Preservation program and to discuss the development of a philosophy statement that would help define what historic preservation is and how it is implemented in Salt Lake City. This memorandum is a follow up to that discussion as well as information to facilitate continued discussion with the City Council relating to the Preservation Program. The memorandum includes two attachments. The first relates to the suggested revisions to the Philosophy Statement. The second is a list of the Questions to the City Council that were in the Preservation Program Transmittal. The highlighted questions are those that the Planning Division would like the City Council to focus on as a priority to help direct our efforts as we work to finalize the Preservation Plan and create regulatory tools relating to Preservation this fall. AMENDMENTS TO THE PHILOSOPHY STATEMENT A revised document is attached which tracks the changes made to the philosophy statement, based on City Council member feedback,at the August 23rd briefing. The Planning Staff is asking the Council for additional feedback on the document. Salt Lake City Preservation Program Page 1 September 20,2011 At the briefing on August 23rd,the Council provided feedback on the philosophy statement and itow suggested that the Planning Staff amend the document. The following list is a summary of the suggestions: • Provide specific statements that describe how the City will implement the preservation program and define the level of staff review. • Refine the definition of historic preservation in Salt Lake City. • Emphasize neighborhood character, fabric and unique neighborhood details that define a sense of place. • Develop stronger statement regarding the desire to preserve significant historic structures while providing additional flexibility in the implementation of the City's historic preservation program. Focus attention on primary facades visible from the public street. • Consider smaller and more manageable sized new local historic districts. PRIoRITY QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL The Preservation program transmittal that the City Council discussed at the August 23rd briefing included several lists of questions focusing on specific preservation issues. These questions are attached as Exhibit 2. These questions are ,,,,•„ intended to help focus discussion on important topics that the Administration would like to receive direction on from the City Council. The Council Staff asked the Administration to prioritize the top five questions. The prioritized questions are listed below: 1. Does the City Council want Zoning Ordinance standards and design guidelines strictly enforced on all facades of a building or should flexibility be allowed on secondary facades? (Philosophy Statement) 2. How and when should the City gauge the public support for a proposed local historic district? (Local Historic District) 3. Should the Administration consider amendments to the criteria in 21A.34.020.G and H -standards for alteration to Landmark Sites and contributing structures and alteration of non-contributing structures to ensure the standards provide greater flexibility for alterations on secondary facades? (Regulations) 4. Should the City allow Conservation Districts to incorporate demolition provisions? 5. Should the City allow new conservation districts to be created within existing national register districts? Salt Lake City Preservation Program Page 2 September 20,2011 EXHIBIT 1 PRESERVATION PHILOSOPHY Salt Lake City Preservation Program September 20,2011 Salt Lake City Preservation Program Philosophy 000. September 15, 2011 Track Changes Version What is Historic Preservation? Historic preservation is the process of of iden*'1ng a„a protecting local historic history through identification of unique places that tell our"story." One can read this history by observing the historic fabric made up of specific cultural and archaeological resources,character defining features expressed in architecture and architectural details,landscapes and significant spacesreso„rcen i„cludi„g buildi„gn sites la„dscapes „d other„lacs of historical a„d c„ltural n gr+ifica ce. This process embraces-many phasesrincludingmay include the survey and evaluation of historical,architectural, archaeological and cultural resources;development of appropriate measures to protect these resources;identification of public and private funding sources;design for the restoration,rehabilitation,and/or adaptive re-use-of-historic stmeturesl and the-review of ongoing maintenance-of these resources. Why Historic Preservation is Important Amik Historic resources are tangible evidence of the past,helping us to know where we have come from and who we are today. Historic„reser•va io„in im„or to„t because.wen historic resources are lost or allowed to deteriorate,a part of that our history disappears. Historic preservation provides opportunities for residents and visitors to lean-experience and learn about the importance of our past,to live and work in interesting-and-attractive-surroundings that provide a sense of place anchored by collections of older buildings,residential neighborhoods, commercial areas and landscapes. Hinter, uresery tio„ creates u„ig„e se„se of„lace 11.JLp1" This sense of place drives communitypride,pride,encourages neighborhood development and commercial reinvestment and and eco„omit i„vestme„t resultings in a sustainable community with cultural vitality. How we Practice Historic Preservation in Salt Lake City Salt Lake City takes pride in its historic rcsourceshistory. and-The City Council and the Mayor consider historic preservation a priority and commit to pre. enaehieveme„ts by„Zorrtz1g-historic preessery ffor.ts. his is improving the array of tools,programs and incentives intended-available to protect the best examples of the City's architecture,commercial and residential development.cultural landscapese and archaeology as-embodied-by 1 buildings sites and historic la dscapeto preserve our history for future generationss The City C ouncil an Admir+istr.rtio provide strategic guidance to m.,i»tai» st.....-gthen ansl expand tore Historic Preservation program i cor, rt ith b. a City 1 ,1 goals Occasionally when,historic Historic preservation policies conflict wi+l, etb,^r Cit y will be considered when developing an appropriate course of a(`t7�on_is forged whenever pessiblewhen multiple City policies are involved. message-of hist preservatio objecti opport� �ti d b it The City Council a oric vn ren� � and the Mayor have directed the Historic Landmark Commission and Staff to: • Achieve a successful city-wide historic preservation program by clearly conveying historic preservation objectives, opportunities, and benefits while consistently interpreting and applying the City's adopted standards and guidelines and efficiently administering the process. • Support the designation of new National Register historic districts which provide property owners a significant financial incentive for appropriate re-investment. • Respect that change is part of history and that appropriate additions and alterations must be considered as part of a natural evolution of historic properties and districts. • Apply standards in a reasonable manner,taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility. • Focus review of alterations on the primary facades of historic structures that are readily visible from a public street and allow greater flexibility on secondary facades where alterations are less likely to negatively affect the significant character-defining features of the site or historic district. • Allow greater flexibility when considering alterations to non-contributing buildings. • Consider new local historic districts when the focus is on protecting the best examples of an element of the City's history, development patterns and architecture. • Ensure the boundaries of new local historic districts are limited to a reasonable size and reflect logical boundaries based on subdivision plats,physical and/or cultural features and significant character defining features where possible., • Develop and maintain a public outreach program and continue providing training for the Historic Landmark Commission and Planning Staff to ensure that the City's Historic Preservation program remains up-to-date on historic preservation 2 practice and philosophy to meet the goals of Salt Lake City. Collaboration 401, Teeny an Salt i ake Cit■'n growth increases overall densit„ the rites elder both nh nd opport„ni n Th presery n program will foc on • v vrrr-crr�(ZFi t-H�n c-prcacrra�Orrprvgrairi-vrrrrrvcl�S vrr based en the nationally,recognized Secretary efthe interiors Standards for nn importa.�nr.�t}.a.�s�. e.}�� p�..�].� nterent o„r shared cult„re by rer,ie A7T717il7VTCQ1"2C"���.VTVl ` j"` •1"[CGT'I�CVj C'C�Jr1Zl1L•A'CATLIITz� on elements visible from the public w y 1 3 Salt Lake City Preservation Program Philosophy • September 15, 2011 Clean Version What is Historic Preservation? Historic preservation is a process of protecting local history through identification of unique places that tell our"story." One can read this history by observing the historic fabric made up of specific cultural and archaeological resources,character defining features expressed in architecture and architectural details,landscapes and significant spaces. This process may include the survey and evaluation of historical,architectural, archaeological and cultural resources; development of appropriate measures to protect these resources;identification of public and private funding sources; design for the restoration,rehabilitation,and/or adaptive re-use and review of ongoing maintenance. Why Historic Preservation is Important Historic resources are tangible evidence of the past,helping us to know where we have come from and who we are today. When historic resources are lost or allowed to deteriorate,a part of our history disappears. Historic preservation provides opportunities for residents and visitors to experience and learn about the importance of our past,to live and work in surroundings that provide a sense of place anchored by collections of older buildings,residential neighborhoods,commercial areas and landscapes. This sense of place drives community pride,encourages neighborhood and commercial reinvestment and results in a sustainable community with cultural vitality. How we Practice Historic Preservation in Salt Lake City Salt Lake City takes pride in its history. The City Council and the Mayor consider historic preservation a priority and commit to improving the array of tools,programs and incentives available to protect the best examples of the City's architecture,commercial and residential development,cultural landscapes and archaeology to preserve our history for future generations. Historic preservation policies will be considered when developing an appropriate course of action when multiple City policies are involved. The City Council and the Mayor have directed the Historic Landmark Commission and Staff to: • Achieve a successful city-wide historic preservation program by clearly conveying historic preservation objectives, opportunities, and benefits while consistently interpreting and applying the City's adopted standards and guidelines and efficiently administering the process. Salt Lake City Preservation Program September 20,2011 • Support the designation of new National Register historic districts which provide property owners a significant financial incentive for appropriate re-investment. • Respect that change is part of history and that appropriate additions and alterations must be considered as part of a natural evolution of historic properties and districts. • Apply standards in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility. • Focus review of alterations on the primary facades of historic structures that are readily visible from a public street and allow greater flexibility on secondary facades where alterations are less likely to negatively affect the significant character-defining features of the site or historic district. • Allow greater flexibility when considering alterations to non-contributing buildings. • Consider new local historic districts when the focus is on protecting the best examples of an element of the City's history, development patterns and architecture. • Ensure the boundaries of new local historic districts are limited to a reasonable Amok size and reflect logical boundaries based on subdivision plats,physical and/or cultural features and significant character defining features where possible, • Develop and maintain a public outreach program and continue providing training for the Historic Landmark Commission and Planning Staff to ensure that the City's Historic Preservation program remains up-to-date on historic preservation practice and philosophy to meet the goals of Salt Lake City. Salt Lake City Preservation Program September 20,2011 EXHIBIT 2 QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL Salt Lake City Preservation Program September 20,2011 QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL The following questions are from the August 23,2011 briefing transmittal. Questions in bold font have been identified as priority questions which the Administration requests be addressed as soon as possible to allow Staff to incorporate the Council's direction in current preservation projects. Philosophy Statement 1. Does the Preservation Philosophy describe the historic preservation program desired by the City? 2. Does the City Council want Zoning Ordinance standards and design guidelines strictly enforced on all facades of a building or should flexibility be allowed on secondary facades? 3. Does the Preservation Philosophy uphold the principals of historic preservation yet provide the flexibility desired? 4. Should the Historic Preservation Program have an attitude of helping property owners solve design problems or just respond to proposals based on the Historic Preservation Overlay standards? Preservation Plan 1. Should the Planning Staff work with the City Council Staff to propose additional policy guidance and action items for the Preservation Plan? Local Historic District Designation 1. How and when should the City gauge the public support for a proposed local historic district? 2. What level of public support should be demonstrated prior to local historic district designation? 3. Should the criteria for a new local historic district be the same as the criteria used for the creation of a National Register district? 4. Should the criteria ensure that designation of a local historic district is being sought to protect the historic fabric of a landmark site or a neighborhood and not just to encourage rehabilitation or stabilization of an area? Salt Lake City Preservation Program September 20,2011 5. Should limits or guidelines be created for the size a new local historic district? Financial Incentives 1. Should the City eliminate historic preservation application fees (except for demolition)? 2. Should the adaptive re-use provisions be revised to accommodate a broader range of uses and should the criteria be less stringent so the process is more broadly available for any Landmark Site 3. Should the City consider developing other financial incentives such as a revolving loan fund program? If so,how would this be funded? Process-oriented Incentives 1. Should the City implement priority process of building permits for historic preservation projects (except for demolition request?) Regulations 1. Should the Administration consider amendments to the criteria in 21A.34.020.G and H-standards for alteration to Landmark Sites and contributing structures and alteration of non-contributing structures to ensure the standards provide greater flexibility for alterations on secondary facades? 2. Should the Planning Division begin a process to analyze the base zoning,land use and other City goals within local historic districts to determine if the zoning is complimentary to historic preservation, or if not,whether the base zoning in place is intended to support other City goals such as transit oriented development or housing? 3. Should the Planning Division examine the boundaries of the City's local historic districts to evaluate the appropriateness of the boundaries based on the historic resources,land uses and other City goals to determine if the current historic district boundaries are appropriate? Additional Questions 1. Should the City allow Conservation Districts to incorporate demolition provisions? Salt Lake City Preservation Program September 20,2011 2. Should the City allow new conservation districts to be created within existing Amok national register districts? A Salt Lake City Preservation Program September 20,2011 SCANNED TO: Mct �- SCANNED, BY:ji `+ FRANK B. GRAY .+'�,V1 lV �� i DATE: 6 /H�/R KER DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY& ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LI MAYOR OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR IRECEIVED MARY DELAMARE-SCHAEFER ROBERT FARRINGTON,JR. CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR JUN 3 0 2011 Salt Lak City Mayor Date Received: p ay. Everitt,Chief of Staff Date sent to Council: 1 TO: Salt Lake City Council ! DATE: June 29,2011 Jill Remington-Love t - I ) FROM: Frank Gray,CED Director SUBJECT: Salt Lake City Preservation Program—Philosophy,Preservation Plan, Preservation Tools,and Projects STAFF CONTACT: Joel Paterson, Senior Planner 801-535-6141,joel,Paterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Briefing-Information only RECOMMENDATION: No action necessary BACKGROUND For the past several years,the historic preservation program in Salt Lake City has been a very visible topic for residents,property owners and the City. This interest continues with the City Council's review of the city-wide Preservation Plan that will set the vision,direction and policies for historic preservation in Salt Lake City. In addition,the City Administration is reviewing the City's historic preservation program in an effort to create well defined and efficient processes and promote consistency in decision-making by the Historic Landmark Commission and the Planning Staff. Furthermore,there has been renewed interest from various neighborhoods of the City to designate new local historic districts and to create new tools to help protect neighborhood character. As a part of this process the Administration intends to identify and create new tools for the City and property owners to consider while providing a wide range of options,incentives and varying levels of appropriate regulation to satisfy neighborhood needs. The City's recent experience in 2010,with the creation of the Westmoreland Place local historic district and efforts in the Yalecrest neighborhood to identify a unified approach to protect neighborhood interests,highlighted a need to review the City's Historic Preservation program and explore planning tools that will help the City and neighborhoods achieve their goals. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 P.O. BOX 1454E16, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 Preservation Program TELEPHONE:SO1-535-6230 FAX:SO1-535-6005 1 1 P a g e June 29,201 I WWW.SLCDOV.COM/CED ®REEYELED PAPEP • The purpose of this memorandum is to brief the City Council and continue a dialogue that will result in the eventual adoption of the Preservation Plan;adopt a Preservation Program Philosophy statement by resolution that will guide the future of the historic preservation program and identify City Council priorities for further development and implementation of a set of zoning tools relating to preservation and neighborhood stabilization. This transmittal will discuss these issues,identify projects that the Planning Division is pursuing and efforts we are undertaking to improve the Historic Preservation program through education and improved consistency. Preservation Program 2 I P a g e June 29,2011 PRESERVATION PLAN The Administration contracted with Clarion Associates to develop a preservation plan to define the vision,direction and policies of a city-wide historic preservation program. The draft plan has been reviewed by the Historic Landmark Commission and the Planning Commission and is now awaiting review by the City Council. As part of this process of reviewing the City's historic preservation program,the Administration will discuss with the City Council possible revisions to the draft Plan to strengthen the policy direction offered in the Plan. STATUS OF PRESERVATION PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS The Planning Staff has been working on several projects to improve the Historic Preservation program and create other tools that are intended to address neighborhood character. As noted, Staff is preparing various ordinance amendments ranging from Zoning Ordinance fine-tuning to improve the clarity of the Historic Preservation Overlay standards and processes, developing a conservation district process, making greater use of neighborhood-based zoning(similar to the Yalecrest Compatible Overlay district), revising the Residential Design Guidelines and creating new commercial design guidelines and sign guidelines. The Planning Staff has created a Preservation Interpretation Review Team to help improve consistency in ordinance and guideline interpretation.The Planning Staff has also reorganized the Historic Preservation Staff and is clearly defining the roles and responsibilities of the planners who make up the Preservation Team. NEEDED FEEDBACK FROM CITY COUNCIL An important element of this process is for the Planning Division to receive specific feedback from the City Council regarding the various elements of the Historic Preservation program. It is imperative that the Administration and the Council maintain a strong partnership on preservation issues and clearly define the direction of the program. In this regard,the Planning Division is requesting that the City Council consider adopting a resolution supporting the implementation of a Historic Preservation philosophy that is further discussed below. PRESERVATION PHILOSOPHY The Administration believes that it is important to provide an overarching statement that defines what historic preservation is to Salt Lake City,why it is important and how to implement a well managed and efficient program that allows for a predictable and consistent decision-making process. Creating a preservation philosophy that all levels of decision-makers and stakeholders buy into will help set a clear direction for the City's preservation program. Preservation Program ' Rage June 29,2011 It is the intent of the Administration to have a Preservation Philosophy statement adopted by the City Council as a resolution. As an adopted document it will help define the long-term commitment the City has toward historic preservation,clarify how the preservation tools will be used,and guide future decision making at all levels;from property owners seeking design solutions,to Staff interpreting preservation standards and guidelines and providing a clear and consistent framework for the Historic Landmark Commission's decision-making. It is important that the Philosophy statement clearly states the intention of the City and define how historic preservation will be carried out. The Historic Landmark Commission and Staff are often caught trying to determine how strictly the Zoning Ordinance standards and design guidelines are to be applied and whether or not there should be any flexibility when comparing application of standards to the primary and secondary facades. The Preservation Philosophy(below)was drafted and modified by the Planning Staff following review on two occasions by the Historic Landmark Commission. Staff is seeking the input and advice of the City Council to finalize the philosophy statement. Once the final document is adopted,Staff will begin implementing the philosophy as part of our review and decision- making process. Salt Lake City Historic Preservation Program Philosophy What is Historic Preservation? Historic preservation is the process of identifying and protecting historic resources, including buildings,sites,landscapes and other places of historical and cultural significance. This process embraces many phases,including the survey and evaluation of historical,architectural,and cultural resources;development of planning and legal measures to protect these resources;identification of public and private funding sources;design for the restoration,rehabilitation,and/or adaptive use of historic structures;and the ongoing maintenance of these resources. Why Historic Preservation is Important Historic resources are tangible evidence of the past,helping us to know where we have come from and who we are today. Historic preservation is important because when historic resources are lost or allowed to deteriorate,a part of that past disappears. Historic preservation provides opportunities for residents and visitors to learn the importance of our past,to live and work in interesting and attractive surroundings with a foundation of older buildings,neighborhoods,and landscapes. Historic Preservation creates a unique sense of place in residential neighborhoods and commercial settings that set Salt Lake City apart. This sense of place drives community pride,neighborhood development and economic investment resulting in a sustainable community with cultural vitality. How we Practice Historic Preservation in Salt Lake City Preservation Program 2 I P a g e June 29,2011 Salt Lake City takes pride in its historic resources and builds upon its historic preservation achievements by prioritizing historic preservation efforts. This is accomplished by continually improving the array of tools,programs and incentives intended to protect the best examples of the City's culture as embodied by buildings, sites and historic landscapes from its past. The City Council and Administration provide strategic guidance to maintain,strengthen and expand the Historic Preservation program in concert with broader City land use goals. Occasionally,when historic preservation policies conflict with other City goals a unified direction is forged whenever possible. A city-wide preservation ethic can be achieved by conveying a clear and consistent message of historic preservation objectives,opportunities,and benefits. Collaboration extends to community organizations,businesses and special interest groups with which the historic preservation program strives to enjoy a high degree of trust and communication. Today,as Salt Lake City's growth increases overall density,the City's older neighborhoods face increasing pressures for redevelopment and infill,presenting both challenges and opportunities. The preservation program will focus on reasonable and consistent application of the City's adopted standards, which are based on the nationally recognized Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, in order to protect historic resources while taking into account economic and technical feasibility. The preservation program is designed to protect an important aspect of the public interest, our shared culture,by reviewing proposed changes to historic resources and placing the primary emphasis of review on elements visible from the public way. Questions to the City Council 1. Does the Preservation Philosophy describe the historic preservation program desired by the City? 2. Does the City Council want Zoning Ordinance standards and design guidelines strictly enforced on all facades of a building or should flexibility be allowed on secondary facades? 3. Does the Preservation Philosophy uphold the principals of historic preservation yet provide the flexibility desired? 4. Should the Historic Preservation Program have an attitude of helping property owners solve design problems or just respond to proposals based on the Historic Preservation Overlay standards? Preservation Program 3 I P a g e June 29,2011 Amok PRESERVATION PLAN The Preservation Plan has been transmitted to the City Council for review following public hearings before the Historic Landmark Commission and the Planning Commission. Both commissions recommended that the City Council consider adopting the plan. In conversations between the City Council Staff and the Administration,it is apparent that the Plan would benefit from the addition of specific policy statements to strengthen the direction of the Historic Preservation program,in addition to the guidance of an adopted Preservation Philosophy Statement. The Planning Division suggests working with the City Council Staff to prepare additional policy direction and action statements to strengthen the Plan to ensure it provides clear direction. Any proposed amendments would be tracked and a determination would be made whether or not the revised draft would need additional public comment or further review by the Historic Landmark Commission and the Planning Commission. Questions for the City Council 1. Should the Planning Staff work with the City Council Staff to propose additional policy guidance and action items for the Preservation Plan? TOOLS The Preservation Plan identifies several tools that are available for the City to implement as part , of a historic preservation program. Not all of the tools identified are strictly for the preservation of historic resources;the list of tools is broader and incorporates tools generally designed to encourage neighborhood stability. At times,because of a perceived lack of tools available in the City to encourage neighborhood stability,the two approaches often are seen as a single objective. This can cause confusion and frustration for the public and public officials,alike. A recent example addresses this point. The Yalecrest neighborhood was concerned about the rapid change to the character of the neighborhood primarily caused by the demolition of older buildings and the construction of new single family homes that some thought were out of scale and character. As a result,some residents pushed for the designation of a local historic district to deter the threat of demolition. While some smaller areas of the Yalecrest area may support the designation of a local historic district to help preserve the history of the area as expressed in the architecture and surrounding development pattern,the Yalecrest neighborhood as a whole did not support this approach. The Planning Division believes it is important to clearly acknowledge the different objectives of historic preservation and neighborhood stabilization and develop the tools needed for both. LOCAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION Historic preservation is the process of identifying and protecting historic resources,including buildings,sites,landscapes and other places of historical and cultural significance. The City uses Preservation Program 4 I P a g e June 29,2011 the Historic Preservation Overlay zoning district to designate local historic districts and individual Landmark Sites that are of sufficient importance to demand individual designation. The Planning Division has identified several issues regarding the process and criteria used to designate a new local historic district,including the following: Process Issues • Process for designation of a new local historic district. The Zoning Ordinance provisions establishing the authority of the Historic Landmark Commission and the provisions of 21A.50.030 regarding amendments to the Zoning Map and the Zoning Ordinance do not clearly interact and as a result creates confusion about the process,who can initiate a petition for designation of a local historic district and how public input is incorporated in the process. This is being addressed as part of petition PLNPCM2010-00376 which has been considered by the Historic Landmark Commission and the Planning Commission. However,the petition has not been transmitted to the City Council due to the timing of the petition and the controversy of the Yalecrest designation process. • Incentives prior to Regulation? All of Salt Lake City's local historic districts have also been designated as National Register districts. The order of designation (national register vs. local historic district) is not mandated, however,the City recognizes the importance of providing a mechanism for financial incentives to off- set the regulation that comes with a local historic district. In addition,because the financial incentives of the federal preservation program are so great,the City may support the concept that areas are placed on the National Register of Historic Places, without a long term goal of designating the area as a local historic district. Under this concept,property owners may benefit from the financial incentive available for investing in improvements to their properties without the additional regulation of a local historic district. This approach will lead to the goal of neighborhood stability. A good example of this approach is the Gilmer neighborhood west of 1300 East and south of 900 South. • Process for determining public support for designation. Under the current process for designating a new local historic district,the only specified way to determine the level of public support is during the public hearing stage of the process. A significant amount of citizen and City resources can be spent(preparing an historic survey, Staff time doing research and preparing for the public hearings) prior to determining if there is a general agreement on the approach. Issues regarding Criteria • Criteria for designation of a local historic district. The criteria for the designation of a local historic district and a National Register district are the same even though the function and administration of the two types of historic districts are very different. National Register historic districts are honorific and provide an Preservation Program 5 I P a g e June 29,2011 Amok option for property owners to pursue income tax credits. The tax credit programs are administered by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) as incentives for property owners to make appropriate improvements to a property. Designation of a local historic district is a regulatory tool adopted by the City to preserve the historic fabric of an area. Unlike a National Register historic district, the regulations that come with the designation of a local historic district are compulsory and must be adhered to by all property owners. Local historic district designation does not come with many local incentives. This was an issue in the Yalecrest neighborhood which was listed as a National Register district in 2007. When the Historic Landmark Commission was considering the designation of a local historic district for the area it was difficult to recommend a smaller district because the entire neighborhood had already demonstrated that it met the standards for the National Register. • Size of Local Historic Districts. Salt Lake City does not have a standard that limits the size of a local historic district. The Avenues, Capitol Hill and Central City historic districts include thousands of properties while the Exchange Place and Westmoreland Place historic districts are relatively small. The larger a proposed district is the more difficult it becomes to gauge public support and to develop a clear consensus on the appropriate approach or tool to use. Questions for the City Council 1. How and when should the City gauge the public support for a proposed local historic district? 2. What level of public support should be demonstrated prior to local historic district designation? 3. Should the criteria for a new local historic district be the same as the criteria used for the creation of a National Register district? 4. Should the criteria ensure that designation of a local historic district is being sought to protect the historic fabric of a landmark site or a neighborhood and not just to encourage rehabilitation or stabilization of an area? 5. Should limits or guidelines be created for the size a new local historic district? NEIGHBORHOOD STABILITY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION TOOLS One of the major goals of the Preservation Plan is for the City to broaden the array of tools that can be utilized by the public and the City to foster a more diverse preservation program. The Preservation Program 6 I P a g e June 29,2011 Preservation Plan identifies the need to utilize tools that are both regulatory and programmatic. Regulatory tools might include the creation of new local historic districts,conservation districts or other types of neighborhood-based zoning designed to protect specific bulk,scale or development characteristics. Programmatic tools would include the use of historic surveys,use of incentives such as listing properties or neighborhoods on the National Register to encourage renovation through the use of tax credits,etc. There are multiple zoning tools used to protect neighborhoods. Which tool or tools makes the most sense depends on the goals the City has for its neighborhoods. Two tools currently available to the City to preserve neighborhoods are historic overlays and neighborhood-based zoning districts. A conservation district is a third tool the City may wish to consider. CONSERVATION DISTRICT Whereas the purpose of a local historic district is to preserve historic fabric,including design, materials and integrity,a conservation district is used to preserve community character(the character may or may not have a connection to the area's history). This usually means that the two will differ in the standards for designation,the level of regulation and possibly the review process. A conservation district can be customized for a specific area;however many cities choose to use this tool as a way to protect districts that may not meet the strict requirements of the National Register. Usually conservation districts have fewer restrictions than a local historic district, focusing on specific character defining features rather than all exterior modifications,for instance. Conservation districts may also differ in the review process.Some communities choose to allow all applications for alterations in a conservation district to be administratively reviewed while others require approval from a design review body. Review of demolition may or may not be a component of a conservation district. If it is included, the economic hardship process should also be included as an option to a property owner who is denied the ability to demolish a structure and feels that the denial is in some way a regulatory taking of property without just compensation. Some have argued that the public interest of a conservation district would not rise to the level needed to demonstrate an over-riding public interest to allow the prohibition of demolition. Another way that the historic and conservation districts may differ is in the creation of design guidelines. For a local historic district,design guidelines are usually based on the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and customized for a particular area. Conservation districts can have more public input where the community may be charged with defining the characteristics to be preserved and helps write the guidelines to regulate change within the particular conservation district. Preservation Program 7 1 P a g e June 29,2011 To be effective,conservation districts,like historic districts should focus on the character of a district. Issues such as height,setbacks,and lot coverage are the type of issues that might be better dealt with in the base zoning district standards. It is unlikely that a Conservation District would be less time consuming to implement and administer compared to a historic overlay. First,there must be a text amendment process to update the ordinance to allow for and to define conservation districts. Once the ordinance is in place,the designation of a conservation district would require a map amendment,which is the same process followed for the designation of a local historic district. Designation of a conservation district may require more time for adoption than a local historic district,since the City would need to work with the neighborhood to develop a completely new set of design guidelines. With the designation of a local historic district,all of the basic design guidelines are the same for each local historic district in the City with the addition of a few specific guidelines adopted for individual local districts such as the Avenues or Central City historic districts. Each type of district requires a design review process. It is true that a conservation district would likely have fewer actions that would require review than an historic overlay;however,a true comparison would depend on the size of each district,the details of the conservation overlay,the design guidelines for each individual district,and the level of activity for each district. The Planning Division is working on a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to create a process for approving conservation districts. The proposed ordinance amendment is tentatively scheduled to be forwarded to the City Council in by the end of 2011. This text amendment will be a process oriented ordinance. Each new conservation district that is approved by the City Council will require Zoning Ordinance text and map amendments as well as the development of design guidelines for the specific conservation district. NEIGHBORHOOD-BASED ZONING The goal of Neighborhood-based zoning is to ensure that existing development patterns are taken into consideration when constructing a new home or adding on to an existing home.For example,front yard setbacks for new development are calculated from the average of the front yard setbacks of the adjacent homes;additional building height may be obtained if it is consistent with the height of the surrounding structures;and accessory structures may be built as long as the size and location are compatible with the neighborhood. In other words,neighborhood-based zoning is a tool which generally focuses on dimensional regulations,such as,building setbacks,height,exterior wall height,size,grade level,and lot coverage.This tool can be used,not to preserve historic resources,but to maintain some of the character and consistent development patterns of the neighborhood. Preservation Program Wage June 29,2011 BASE ZONING Base zoning represents the general residential zoning created for use city-wide such as the R- 1/5,000 zoning district. This type of zoning is a generic residential regulation designed for broad application throughout the City and is the least regulatory and least representative of specific neighborhood scale and character. A single zoning designation,such as R-1/5,000 has been used in areas as diverse as Rose Park and the Yalecrest neighborhood where the scale, development pattern and character are very different. Base zoning relies on maximum and minimum standards for height,lot size,lot width,setbacks and building coverage to limit development. In many cases neighborhoods developed over time with a specific character and pattern that is not represented by the base zoning district. For example,many neighborhoods developed with a single story character where the ridge heights might average twenty feet or less,even though the base zoning district allows a ridge height of thirty feet. As a result new construction allowed by the base zone may not be compatible with the size and scale of surrounding homes. For this reason,Salt Lake City developed the Yalecrest Compatible Infill Overlay District(YCI) and then adopted city-wide residential infill development standards that were incorporated into all of the single family and two-family base zoning districts. However, because residential infill development standards are applied city-wide,they,too,are not designed with the character of a specific neighborhood in mind and are in a sense"generic". The following graphic illustrates the hierarchy of zoning tools that the City currently has available,or in the case of conservation districts,a tool currently being developed. At the bottom of the inverted the pyramid is Base Zoning which as mentioned above is the least restrictive,progressing to Local Historic District designation which would be the most restrictive zoning tool available currently. See the graphic on the next page Preservation Program 9 I P a g e June 29,2011 Hierarchy of Zoning Tools Local Historic District Conservation District Decreasing Level of Local .r < Regulation Neighborhood-based Zoning Base onin: • ZONING TOOLS MENU It is important to define the characteristics of each zoning tool and provide a.menu to help neighborhoods and Staff to determine which particular approach is best suited to their interests. The following table represents the menu option available and the characteristics of each zoning tool in an effort to provide initial guidance on direction. A neighborhood interested in pursuing new regulatory options for maintaining the character of the neighborhood could review the characteristics of each zoning tool and determine the level of protection that seems appropriate for their needs. For example,if a neighborhood is interested in protecting the representative spacing of homes in the area,design characteristics such as covered front porches and large overhanging eaves,the potential options would be neighborhood-based zoning or conservation district. If the standards to protect the neighborhood character can be administered over the counter,a neighborhood-based zoning district similar to the YCI may be appropriate. Preservation Program 10 I P a g e June 29,2011 Zoning Tools Menu OPTIONAL TYPES OF CHARACTERISTICS NEIGHBORHOOD REGULATION Base Zoning Districts • Typical zoning standards defining dimensional,height and bulk standards • Standards not based on specific neighborhood development patterns • No design review process Neighborhood-Based Zoning • Zoning standards developed for specific neighborhoods-based on the existing development pattern;e.g.,Yalecrest Compatible Infill standards • No design review process or design guidelines Conservation Districts • Preserve Community Character • Extent generally limited to individual or multiple subdivision boundaries • Regulation based on characteristics/needs of individual districts as defined by residents/owners of the area • New ordinance needed for each Conservation District • Design standards in ordinance and potential development of design guidelines for each district • Review could be over-the-counter,administrative or discretionary review by a Commission-HLC,PC or new review authority • No demolition restrictions • No local tax incentives(avoid disincentive for LHD designation) • Potential limited use of preservation incentives(avoid disincentive for LHD designation) Local Historic Districts • Preserve Local History/Fabric • Design Review based on Secretary of Interior standards for all exterior modifications • Demolition Restrictions • Extent generally limited to individual or multiple subdivision boundaries • State and Federal income tax credits(available in LHD if also listed on the National Register) • Potential use of local preservation incentives If the neighborhood would prefer more stringent design criteria,including the use of specific design guidelines,then a conservation district may be the option to choose. In contrast,if the local history and fabric of the area is important,including the retention of existing structures (limit demolition)the neighborhood may wish to pursue the designation of a local historic district. INCENTIVES The Planning Staff has conducted research on incentives that are offered by other jurisdictions across the country. We have found that there is a broad range of incentives available and that many cities employ a variety of incentives to satisfy the needs of the community. The range of incentives includes financial incentives(grants,loans,property and sales tax reductions), Preservation Program 11 I P a g e June 29,2011 process oriented incentives(fee modification/waiver,priority processing),and code incentives (density/parking/building code modifications). FINANCIAL INCENTIVES The federal and state government offer income tax credits as an incentive for rehabilitating historic buildings listed on the National Register.The federal tax credits are available only for major rehabilitation work on"income-producing"(commercial or residential rental)buildings; private residences are excluded. State tax credits are available for rehabilitation of residential properties that are owner occupied or rentals. The credits are calculated as a percentage of the rehabilitation costs,i.e.,20%for buildings listed on the National Register of Historic Places,10%for non-National Register buildings (for commercial but not residential rental purposes)constructed before 1936 that are eligible for listing on the National Register.In both instances,the tax credit is based on a percentage of the rehabilitation costs and does not include the purchase price.The tax credit applies to the building owner's federal income tax for the year in which the project is completed and approved.If it is not all needed in that year the tax credit may be carried back 3 years or forward up to 15 years. Any work on the interior or the exterior of the building which meets the Secretary of the Atioh Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation qualifies for the tax credit A building must be kept at least five years in order to avoid any recapture of the tax credit by the federal government A similar tax credit is available from the State for buildings listed on the National Register which are used as a private (owner-occupied)residence or residential rental.If an owner expends a minimum of$10,000,and the work is approved,20%of the rehabilitation costs may be claimed as a tax credit Twenty percent of all qualified rehabilitation costs may be deducted from taxes owed on your Utah income or corporate franchise tax. All of the proposed,ongoing or completed work must meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and be approved by the State Historic Preservation Office(SHPO).The project must be completed within 36 months. Low Interest Loans: Many cities provide low interest rehabilitation loans for historic resources.Among them are Ogden and Park City. The terms of these loans and what requirements are imposed differ from city to city. Salt Lake City offers some loan programs through the Redevelopment Agency and Housing and Neighborhood Development but these loans are not specifically directed at historic properties. The Utah Heritage Foundation is a non-profit organization whose mission is to preserve, protect,and promote Utah's historic environment through public awareness,advocacy,and active preservation. The Foundation fulfills its mission through a wide range of programs and activities which reach communities throughout the state. Preservation Program 12 I P a g e June 29,2011 One of their programs,the Revolving Fund Loan Program,provides property owners with technical assistance and loans to purchase,restore,and rehabilitate historically significant properties.Loans may be considered for buildings on the local or national registers,or eligible for these registers(whether formally designated or not).In general terms,this means that a building must be at least 50 years old and retains its architectural integrity(A rule of thumb: Would the original owner recognize the building today?) Loan funds can be used for acquisition,restoration,rehabilitation and repair,and project- related costs such as engineering services,architect's fees,and permits. Conditional use for Adaptive re-use of Historic Buildings: The Zoning Ordinance includes a provision to allow for a limited number of non-residential uses to be located in a residentially zoned Landmark site through the conditional use process. The types of uses identified in Zoning Ordinance section 21A.24.010.T are limited to the following uses: • Bed and breakfast establishments • House museums • Offices • Reception Centers While this provision has been utilized in the past,Staff has identified the need to broaden the types of non-residential uses that could be allowed,which may not only encourage preservation of more Landmark Sites but may also increase a more sustainable/livable City by allowing some lower intensive non-residential uses within neighborhoods to provide services within neighborhoods. In addition,the criteria may be modified so more Landmark Sites are eligible for adaptive reuse. Currently,the regulations are fairly strict and just address those structures that otherwise would may have no viable economic use. Modification of this provision will require a Zoning Ordinance text amendment It is important to note that this provision applies only to Landmark Sites and is not available to all contributing structures within a local historic district. Low Application Fees: Development fees for a project can represent a substantial cost to a property owner or developer. Salt Lake City has purposefully kept its application fees for historic preservation projects very low. Historic Preservation projects that can be issued a Certificate of Appropriateness at the Planning Counter do not require an application fee. Other application fees range from approximately$27 for significant alterations of principal structures, to approximately$230 for new construction within a local historic district(all new construction projects are required to be considered by the Historic Landmark Commission during a public hearing). The application fee for demolition of a contributing structure is approximately$450. The conditional use fee for an adaptive re-use of a historic property in a residential zone is approximately$660. Questions for the City Council 1. Should the City eliminate historic preservation application fees (except for demolition)? Preservation Program 13 I P a g e June 29,2011 2. Should the adaptive re-use provisions be revised to accommodate a broader range of uses and should the criteria be less stringent so the process is more broadly available for any Landmark Site 3. Should the City consider developing other financial incentives such as a revolving loan fund program? If so,how would this be funded? PROCESS ORIENTED INCENTIVES Process oriented incentives may be the easiest to implement and can reduce the time required for granting approvals. Granting approvals through administrative processes rather than requiring a public hearing before the Historic Landmark Commission can save a property owner or a contractor a significant amount of time. Currently,less than 10%of CoA applications are considered by the Historic Landmark Commission. This percentage applications that required a public hearing before the Historic Landmark Commission was substantially reduced following amendments to the Historic Preservation Overlay standards in 1995. Most administrative approvals can be granted within a week with many being approved on the spot. Any project that must go to the Historic Landmark Commission for a public hearing generally requires four to eight weeks of processing time. In addition,providing priority processing of building permits(similar to the City's program for priority processing of potential LEED certified projects) is an option to consider. idok Questions for the City Council 1. Should the City implement priority process of building permits for historic preservation projects (except for demolition request?) ADMINISTRATION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM CONSISTENCY One of the most important aspects in gaining and maintaining the trust of property owners, developers,contractors and decision-makers is consistent application of policies,regulations and guidelines. The Planning Division is working on a number of projects in an effort to ensure consistent administration of the Preservation Program. Staff is working on or is planning amendments to the Historic Preservation regulations,guidelines and Staff organization. A new Preservation Interpretation Review Team has been created and training for Staff and commissioners will be on-going. These efforts are further discussed below: Preservation Program 14 I P a g e June 29,2011 Regulations Historic Preservation Overlay Fine-tuning: The Planning Staff have identified various amendments that are needed to the Historic Preservation Overlay section of the Zoning Ordinance. In many cases,the processes,standards and provisions of 21A.34.020 can be clarified to eliminate confusion and conflicting provisions. One issue that was raised recently during the Yalecrest designation proposal was that the Zoning Ordinance has competing provisions regarding who is authorized to initiate an application for a new historic district. The Historic Landmark Commission and Planning Commission have considered an amendment to the local historic district designation process and passed motions to have the City Council consider allowing the HLC to initiate petitions regarding the Historic Preservation Overlay. This petition has not yet been transmitted to the City Council. However,following the Yalecrest designation process,it is evident that broader revisions to the Historic Preservation Overlay provisions regarding the creation of new local historic districts are warranted and amendments to the process will be forthcoming. The Planning Staff is currently preparing text amendments to Chapter 21A.34.020-Historic Preservation Overlay District to resolve these issues. These amendments are scheduled to be forwarded to the City Council by the end of 2011. Demolition and Economic Hardship Amendments: Amendments are also proposed for the demolition provisions to clarify the process and make some changes to the standards,such as, defining a method to deal with demolition by neglect. The amendments to the demolition provisions may be combined with a proposal to make more extensive changes to the economic hardship provision of the ordinance. The purpose of Economic Hardship is to provide an applicant an opportunity to demonstrate that denial of an application for demolition of a structure with local historic designation will result in an economic hardship. All property owners are protected from overly burdensome regulations through the Fifth Amendment to the U.S.Constitution. Economic Hardship provisions provide assurance to property owners that relief is available in situations where the impact of a particular action proves to be especially harsh. It is important to clarify that Economic Hardship relates to the property not the property owner. The particular circumstances of the owner,independent of the property,should be irrelevant to the question of whether the property can realize a reasonable return on investment,or whether a viable use of the property remains. The anticipated amendments will be focused on clarifying the requirements to determine Economic Hardship and to improve the process.The issues have been identified through discussions with current and past Commissioners,Economic Hardship Review panelists,and applicants. The process of amending the Economic Hardship provisions of the Zoning Ordinance will begin in 2012 following the adoption of other Historic Preservation Overlay fine- tuning efforts. Preservation Program 15 I P a g e June 29,2011 osolik Other Amendments to the Historic Preservation Overlay • Creating new standards that regulate proposed changes to historic landscapes,which in Salt Lake City might include historic parks such as Pioneer Park,Liberty Park,Reservoir Park and Memory Grove. Some work has been completed on this proposal but other projects have been given a higher priority. • Creating provisions to deal with demolition by neglect. • Streamlining the process for certain approvals by granting the Historic Landmark Commission the authority to approve certain measures that are appropriate in an historic district,whereas now they would be a recommending body to another Board (such as signage that is approved by the Board of Adjustment). Rezoning Local Historic Districts: The base zoning that underlies the Historic Preservation Overlay districts in the City is quite varied. Although the majority of our local historic districts are residential in nature there is a wide variety of residential,commercial and downtown zoning districts within our historic districts. It is important to revisit the base zoning because it may or may not be a contributing factor to the continued health of the City's local historic districts. If the base zoning is not consistent with the historic development pattern,an inherent incentive may exist for developers to assemble parcels to facilitate new development that often leads to Alow demolition requests. For example,the Central City historic district, especially to the north of 400 South has base zoning districts that allow a much higher density than the existing development represents. This sends an unintended message to the development community that there is potential for redevelopment which may lead to requests for demolition of contributing structures. This evolution is evident on the block bounded by 300 South, 600 East, 400 South and 500 East. The historic development pattern on this block included single family residential development on Vernier Court(approximately 350 S. on 500 East) and along 600 East and some smaller-scale multi-family apartment blocks. In part because of the higher density zoning that existed and even some zoning map amendments that were approved by the City, contributing structures were demolished after going through the economic hardship process. As a result, Emigration Court, a high density condominium project was built where one story single family homes and smaller apartments existed. A similar story could be told about the block which Smith's Market Place now occupies. Analyzing the adopted policies for a geographic area is also important. For example,this portion of the Central City Historic District is also located within the City's Urban Apartment Neighborhood and is in proximity to a fixed transit station. This is an example where policies may conflict and specific analysis needs to be made to determine whether there is a balance between the values of those policies. Similarly, it is important to periodically revisit the boundaries of the local historic districts to ensure that they are still valid. With the exception of the Westmoreland Place historic Preservation Program 16 1 P a g e June 29,2011 district that was created in 2010, all of the existing local historic districts in the City are at least twenty years old. Through time, all developed areas evolve and change is inevitable. During the life of a local historic district, it is possible that the land use and the buildings have changed to such an extent that the local historic district designation no longer makes sense. The Central City historic district provides another example of this type of evolution. The 400 South corridor through this district(between 500 East and 700 East) has no contributing structures. A visitor to this area would be hard pressed to recognize the existing development pattern as a portion of a local historic district. This type of disparity causes confusion for property owners do not understand why they have to go through a Historic Landmark Commission approval process for an alteration or addition to a building located in a fifteen or twenty year old strip mall. From the examples noted above, it is easy to see the importance of periodically reviewing the base zoning and the boundaries of local historic districts. The zoning can provide an incentive to demolish historic structures and improper or outdated historic district boundaries can cause unnecessary process for property owners and degrade support for the City's Historic Preservation program. Questions for the City Council 1. Should the Administration consider amendments to the criteria in 21A.34.020.G and H -standards for alteration to Landmark Sites and contributing structures and alteration of non-contributing structures to ensure the standards provide greater flexibility for alterations on secondary facades? 2. Should the Planning Division begin a process to analyze the base zoning,land use and other City goals within local historic districts to determine if the zoning is complimentary to historic preservation,or if not,whether the base zoning in place is intended to support other City goals such as transit oriented development or housing? 3. Should the Planning Division examine the boundaries of the City's local historic districts to evaluate the appropriateness of the boundaries based on the historic resources,land uses and other City goals to determine if the current historic district boundaries are appropriate? Design Guidelines Since the adoption of the Residential Design Guidelines by the City Council in 1997,the Historic Landmark Commission,Staff and the public have been utilizing the guidelines to make design related decision on projects within local historic districts. The design guidelines reflect the Zoning Ordinance standards in the Historic Preservation Overlay zoning district and the nationally recognized Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. The design guidelines provide a basis for making consistent decisions about the treatment of historic Preservation Program 17 I P a g e June 29,2011 resources and serve as an educational tool for property owners who seek to make improvements that may affect historic resources. Residential Design Guidelines: The Residential Design Guidelines were adopted nearly 15 years ago and have been used extensively during that time period as an educational tool for the public and a policy and decision-making guide for the Commission and Staff. With the evolution of best practices for the creation of design guidelines,it is apparent that the Residential Design Guidelines document needs to be streamlined and better organized to present the information in a more concise and intuitive manner and to clarify that these are guidelines,not standards. In addition,changes need to be made to address appropriate new best practices and the use of new materials. Staff has begun working on this reorganization and this summer will begin discussions with the Historic Landmark Commission about the revisions. Staff anticipates transmitting these revisions to the City Council prior to the end of 2011. Commercial Design Guidelines: Though most of the historic resources within the City are located within residential districts,there are many commercial Landmark Sites outside of a local historic district and commercial sites within local historic districts. The Historic Landmark Commission is currently working on the creation of new commercial design guidelines. The Historic Landmark Commission worked with a consultant who prepared a draft document which is now being reviewed and modified by the Staff and the Historic Landmark Commission in anticipation of forwarding a final product to the City Council for adoption by the end of 2011. Sign Guidelines: The Planning Staff is also working on design guidelines for signs in historic districts. The draft of the Commercial Design Guidelines included a section on signs but the Planning Division believes that additional work is needed on the proposed sign guidelines. The Historic Landmark Commission will begin discussing the concept of the sign guidelines during the July meeting of the Commission. Other Design Guidelines: Other types of design guidelines that would be beneficial to develop include: guidelines for multi-family buildings to address the issues faced with the alteration and new construction of multi-family apartment and condominiums; guidelines for institutional uses such as places of worship or government buildings; and guidelines for historic landscapes such as Memory Grove, Liberty and Pioneer parks. There have been several instances where the Historic Landmark Commission, Staff and applicants could have benefited from such guidelines. Division Organization-Hierarchy With the growth in the Planning Division in the last few years,the Division management team has needed to re-assess the organization within the office to clearly define the roles and responsibilities of each planner. The Planning Division is again evaluating the current organization chart because of the addition of new planners. At times in the past,the Planning Division has relied on a Senior Planner to administer the Historic Preservation program and be the main liaison between the Historic Landmark Commission and the Planning Staff. Because of the growth in the preservation program,with respect to the number of planners actively Preservation Program 18 I P a g e June 29,2011 working on historic preservation projects and the number of historic resources,it is important for the Division to re-evaluate the organization of the program. The Planning Division has written specific role definitions for all Planners involved in the Historic Preservation program. The Staff roles are discussed below and listed in Exhibit 3. Under the direction of the Assistant Planning Director,the administration of the Historic Preservation program will be the responsibility of a Planner Manager. The Planning Manager will provide support and coordination for the Historic Landmark Commission,administer the Preservation Interpretation Review Team(PIRT),provide direction regarding program goals, assign projects and provide advice and direction to the Preservation team regarding the issuance of Certificates of Appropriateness. Senior Planners will primarily be responsible for long-range planning projects related to historic preservation such as implementation of the Preservation Plan,provide preservation assistance on other master planning projects, coordinate education efforts with the public, Commissioners and Staff. Senior Planners will also coordinate and/or prepare historic surveys,administer preservation grants such as the Certified Local Government grant and contracts with consultants. Principal Planners will process applications for Certificates of Appropriateness (CoA), process ordinance amendments, assist with educational efforts and long-range planning and master plan projects. Principal Planners assigned to work at the Planning Counter are the first line of contact for most customers who need a CoA. These planners are very important to the overall success of the Historic Preservation program because they often are responsible for the public's first impression of the program. Their job is to help the public understand the required processes and regulations,process simple CoA applications at the Planning Counter and other more involved applications that may take several days to process. The secretaries are responsible for the preparation and distribution of HLC packets and meeting minutes,record keeping noticing for public hearings and other meetings,assist planners with research and provide basic information to the public. Under this organizational hierarchy,the Planning Division is making a shift from a team of one or two"Preservation Planners"to"Planners who work on Preservation projects". This philosophical shift spreads the workload over a greater number of planners but allows the Staff to be more efficient and to speed up the majority of CoA application reviews that are handled administratively while also creating more time to work on process and ordinance improvements for the Preservation Program. Also,under this organizational hierarchy,the Planning Staff is working to increase the number of CoAs that can be handled at the Planning Counter while the customer waits. Preservation Program 19 I P a g e June 29,2011 Preservation Interpretation Review Team The Planning Staff has created a Preservation Interpretation Review Team(PIRT)to help improve consistency in ordinance and guideline interpretation. The goal of this team is to provide a vehicle to promote consistency between all Staff members who use the design guidelines and the Zoning Ordinance standards for historic preservation. Specific questions regarding the interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance standards and other adopted regulations relating to historic preservation are discussed and decisions made on how the regulations will be interpreted from that point forward. All decisions are being documented on a searchable data base for future reference. The team consists on the CED Director and Deputy Director,Planning Director and Assistant Director,and the Planning Manager responsible for the Historic Preservation program and planners with preservation projects and is regularly scheduled to meet once a week. As Staff reviews interpretation questions,our standards and guidelines can be compared to best practices and the team can identify needed changes to policies,regulations or guidelines. All projects slated to be reviewed by the Historic Landmark Commission are required to be presented at the PIRT meeting,prior to scheduling on the HLC agenda to ensure the PIRT team is in agreement with the Staff recommendation. Training ' The Planning Division believes training is a very important part of our mission and we work diligently to find training opportunities for our Planners and Commissioners. In this age of digital information,training opportunities have expanded tremendously with the advent of webinars and teleconferences. Through the American Planning Association,National Trust and other national organizations,the Planning Division has regular opportunities to attend training seminars presented by national leaders in the field. The Planning Division has purchased access to training videos and taken advantage of local training opportunities such as the Utah Heritage Foundation annual conference. The Planning Division has also implemented a rotating system for sending planners to conferences for training. Within the last year planners have attended historic preservation conferences in Texas and Colorado. In addition,the Planning Division has set up a conference room that enables Staff to participate in webinars and other training formats as well as to work more closely as a team of planners on preservation projects. Discussion with Other Preservation Practitioners The Preservation management team has started a series of discussion with other historic preservation practitioners in the State to investigate how they implement the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and to understand the processes that they require for different types of projects. We have found that Salt Lake City approves a greater percentage of Preservation Program 20 I P a g e June 29,2011 CoAs administratively than many other jurisdictions. Several entities place a higher standard of review for alterations that are readily visible from the street than alterations that occur on secondary facades of buildings such as the side and rear of structures. Some of the jurisdictions have similar struggles of how to handle the replacement of windows,especially in this era of rising energy costs. All of the jurisdictions that we have talked with have expressed the frustration of misinformation spread by companies selling vinyl replacement windows. These companies use the argument of sustainability for replacing original wood windows. However, there is a body of research that indicates that maintaining,and repairing original windows can be energy efficient and is a very sustainable practice. EDUCATION/PUBLIC OUTREACH An increasing element of the City's historic preservation program should be directed at improving public outreach opportunities. The importance of this effort cannot be underestimated because the ability to provide concise and educational information to a broad audience is paramount. In this time of digital information growth,the Planning Division is beginning to implement various new methods to broaden our outreach efforts to the public (see Exhibit 4). Open City Hall is one example of an on-line tool that we have used to great effect on controversial subjects, such as the Yalecrest designation process. This process allows the city to disseminate information and issue documents on-line describing current projects. Open City Hall allows one to provide comments and view comments from others on the same topic. The Planning Division is designing a new Historic Preservation web page that will be easier for the public to find, use and access important information regarding the City's preservation program,standards and educational materials. The Division plans to increase its efforts to create educational materials for various types of historic projects and provide links to informative websites providing historic information. The Planning Division has prepared brochures to help disseminate information to the public. These types of resources can be placed on the Preservation webpage and distributed as hard-copy brochures at the Planning Counter, other City offices and distributed at public meetings (see Exhibit 5). Providing educational materials help property owners to explore the thought behind the regulations and understand the benefit of obtaining permits and ensuring that all construction meets life/safety standards. This year the Historic Landmark Commission is reinstating its awards program (see Exhibit 6) to spotlight good historic preservation projects. Unlike past years where the Historic Landmark Commission made all the nominations and chose award winners,this year a public component will be included. The Planning Division is asking the public for some nominations, similar to a"people's choice"award. Staff will use the occasion of the awards ceremony to publicize the program and try to reach a broader slice of the public by involving the news media. Other types of public outreach that can be beneficial are participation in street fairs such as those held in the Avenues, 9th and 9th and Sugar House. Staff takes the opportunity to meet Preservation Program 21 I P a g e June 29,2011 with other groups such as community groups, contractors,realtors and window and fence contractors when possible. These meetings can be very beneficial and educational and allow for productive dialogue among groups who often do not communicate. GRANTS FOR PRESERVATION Cities and counties can receive matching grants to assist in the administration of historic preservation programs and projects through the Certified Local Government program which is administered by the SHPO.The grants are to assist local governments in documenting and promoting the preservation of historic sites. Examples of eligible projects include conducting architectural surveys, nominating properties to the National Register of Historic Places, printing walking tour booklets,preparing feasibility studies and working drawings for property improvements, and rehabilitation of National Register properties. Local governments can become"certified"by passing a preservation ordinance and appointing a preservation commission.The grant funding ranges typically between$3,000 and$6,000 on a biannual basis. Local governments are required to match the grant amount on a 50/50%basis with local funds, donations, and services. Salt Lake City is a certified local government and has used this grant to help fund historic surveys, award programs and educational opportunities for Historic Landmark Commissioners and Staff. At times other grants may be available that can help finance historic rehabilitation projects, Amok documentation of historic resources and design costs. For example,Salt Lake City has obtained at least two grants to assist with documentation and repair/rehabilitation of the Fisher Mansion. Exhibits: 1. Preservation Tools 2. Historic Preservation Staff Roles 3. Changing Public Involvement 4. Preservation Awards Program 5. Example-Historic Preservation Brochure Preservation Program 22 I P a g e June 29,2011 Preservation Tools TOOLS Other Cities Priority Preservation&Character Policy Preservation Plan &Annual Priorities Charleston,San Antonio,Glendale,Albany,Phoenix Econ Dev&Benefits Study&Program Denver Cultural Resources National Register Historic Districts,Landmark ALL Buildings/Structure Preservation&Conservation Incentives Fed&State Tax Credits&Easements Portland,Nashville,Washington DC Local Property Tax Rebate/Reduction Pasadena,San Antonio Sales Tax Rebate—Rehab Materials Revolving Low Interest Loans Portland,San Antonio Technical Rehab&Pres Project Support Aspen City Grants—Area/Need Targeted Glendale,Portland,San Antonio,Phoenix,Washington DC Funding Sources—National/Regional Portland Expedited Review HP/Zoning/Permits Fee Waivers—Applications&Permits Pasadena,Aspen Zoning Waivers Parking/density/PUDs Pasadena,Portland,Aspen,Seattle Special Bugding Code Provisions Portland,Aspen,Seattle,Washington DC Transferable Development Rights Aspen,Nashville Ordinance Provisions&Regulations Local Historic District&Landmark Provisions ALL Design Guideline Series-City HD/LMs Portland,San Antonio LHD-Compatible Zoning Revisions District Provisions Francisco,Charleston,San Antonio,Nashville,Portland, ConservationPasadena Design Guidelines-Conservation Districts San Antonio Transitional LHD Protection Overlay Context-Sensitive Form Based Provisions Spec Design Review Area Provisions Pasadena,Oklahoma City,Portland,Phoenix Special Area Design Guidelines Pasadena,Oklahoma City,Portland,Phoenix Dimensional Compatible Infill Provisions Pasadena Effective Demolition Definition Cultural Landscapes&Historic Parks Boston TOOLS Current Salt Lake City Tools-In Black Further tools Identified in the Draft City Preservation Plan or used by other cities-In Red , Preservation Program June 28, 2011 PRESERVATION TEAM ROLES Assistant Planning Director • Coordination between Administration, City Council and HLC members and Planning Manager • Policy development and direction for Preservation Team Planning Manager • Manage preservation program and coordinate program goals • Coordinate with Assistant Planning Director regarding preservation program direction from the HLC, Administration and City Council • Administration of the HLC o Scheduling meetings o Setting agendas o Coordination with Chair and Vice-chair o Review staff reports and other work products • Administration/coordination of Preservation Interpretation Review Team (PIRT) • Make assignments/monitor project timelines Amokk • Assist Planners/provide direction • Provide advice and direction on review and issuance of Certificates of Appropriateness (CoA) Senior Planners • Long range planning projects related to historic preservation o Ordinance revisions o Master Plans o Implementation of the Preservation Plan as directed • Education o Public o City Officials o HLC members o Staff • Review of proposed new districts • Coordinate/prepare historic surveys and implement survey recommendations • Design guidelines -creation and major amendments • Administration of Preservation grants (CLG)and contracts with consultants • Monitor webpage content Preservation Program June 28,2011 Principal Planners • Process CoA applications • Process ordinance fine-tuning/minor map amendments • Assist Senior Preservation Planners with education and major projects Planning Counter Planners • First line of contact with applicant and walk-in customers • Basic education of public regarding process, ordinance standards and guidelines • Review and issuance of basic/routine CoAs Secretaries • Preparation and distribution of HLC packets, meeting minutes • Record keeping • Noticing for public hearings and meetings • Coordination and set-up for Commission meetings • Assist planners with research • Provide basic information to the public Preservation Program June 28, 2011 moms. C CHANGING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT I ey hole WaLklrgshaw.PlanntnBPrognrrs Supervtsar The traditional public input process tends to engage the same participants. Salt Lake City is a very diverse community with very active citizens We know there are civically minded groups and individuals that are not participating in the development of public policy, for various reasons. Face to Face interaction is very important to public process development, but it is hard for many people to attend workshops, open houses. and public hearings- Therefore. the City is looking at new ways of engaging the public to participate in important policy development. Social media and technology are changing how we communicate, gather information and engage government. Issues hie; liveability, sustainability, multi-mode transportation, urban farms, buy local etc. are important to various groups in the City. There is a push to localize your physical life, and globalize your community. These movements change land-use policy and we need to adapt and engage if we want to re- main relevant and representative of the values of the conummity How people participate varies especially between generational and cultural lines. - Salt Lake City is building a dynamic platform where people can find out S\41.0 what is happening, state their opinions about specific projects. identify their values. build upon the values of others, broaden their perspective of the community, and engage with their neighbors and people who may or O may not share the same values, but who do share a desire for a better tomorrow. This platform will develop creative online venues that engage citizens' creative and collaborative abilities and target groups often unrepresented in the public process. We are also hopeful that this will introduce new people to the public process and encourage more people to speak up and get involved in issues that affect them. New Tools and Technologies The City is working on ways to emulate the traditional public process of open houses and community meetings pnor to the formal public hearing in a digital way so those who for whatever reason are not able to come to meetings can still participate. There are a few such electronic tools currently in place. The City is trying to emulate, not replace, the face to tir face communications. It is also very important for us to let the people in meetings know what is happening online and the online community to know what is happening in our meetings. Open City Hall Open City Hall is an on-line forum for civic engagement. You can read about certain topics and issues. see what others are saying about it, and then post your own statement. City officials will read the statements and incorporate them into their decision making processes. When you post your Est statement, you will be asked for your name and home address. This confidential information is only used to identify statements from residents in and near Salt Lake City -so that users'mow which statements are from local residents. icontnue7 or Sage q 1 Preservation Program June 28, 2011 Open City Hall is run by keak Den c•cracv, a non-partisan company whose mission is to broaden civic engagement and build public trust in government. Sah Lake City has been using Open City Hall fox almost one year.As of June 13,2011,there have been 5003 visitors,668 participants and 505 subscribers. Unique Visitors loco S000 4000 1 l — 4000 i 3000 - 3000 1000 10600 gAA 2S Sep 30 Dec 2 Feb 4 A 10 .h T Jun 1 • Total Visitors al Vmutore who aso pertnpated ii V+sites ow am particips1sd and subscriml We have been very pleased by the success of the participation and are very impressed by the quality of the statement;being made. bttn;I/www.slcro..com1ooencitvhall UserVoice The Userlroice forums are a new addition to the City's way of obtaining feedback and we will develop forums using this technology for major projects and policy development The UserVoice forums are intended to be more interactive than the Open City Hall forum. It allows dialogue about issues as policy decisions are being made, helps identify important changes that the community wants and allows individuals to participate on their own time. htr, :i iskcplannicg,use:vaice.com forums/110565-sa:t-lake-city-ulanninz Quick Response Codes Do you wonder what are those funny digital squares we are seeing everywhere these days? They are Quick Response or QR codes. A QR code is a matrix barcode which can be read by camera telephones using a barcode reader application.There are several free "apps" available through the I-Tunes store or Android Market Place. The City will be using more of these on signs, agendas and other notices in the future.Our goal is to try and give people quick access for information in a mobile format and allow for civic participation when it is convenient for a person to do so,rather than having to attend a time-specific meeting. You can download a QR App and scan this code to let the City know what you would change in Salt Lake City(right). 0 lsr II. V ❑ a4 '1 Public engagement continues to be a high priority of Salt Lake City,including ri `+4 + �,�1 the Planning Division. If you feel that you would like to get involved but do 1 C Ii,'..D h CI-- not know how, please contact us and we can help direct you. We want " t�l 1,LJ.` everyone who is willing to participate in the public process to do so. Pleaseif :Z know that you are invited,welcome.,and we want to hear from you! t.•_13 -a o Preservation Program June 28, 2011 O Exhibit 4 Example — Preservation Awards Program Preservation Program June 28, 2011 C .VI . li I,f ..\tit CII \ ( 0' .._ i om t.4 II ill 1 1 Wilford'Smerkorn. P _ t g D i . Quarterly Publication of the Salt Lake City Planning Division VOLUME at.,ISSUE s htir-SIIMSMber,Cra, SALT LAKE CITY'S 2011 INSIDE THIS PRESERVATION AWARDS PROGRAM ISSUE Preservatio-n Award 00I ';4+�Y7,_ �� program s o v✓ Opportunities to Serve Y This year, the Salt Lake City Historic Landmark Commission celebrates Changing Public the best of preservation by presenting Preservation Awards to individuals, Involvement -4 organizations and companies whose projects demonstrate a commitment 4.south Livability to excellence in historic preservation. The purpose of the awards is to Project s•es recognize meaningful achievement in Su silo rability City r++ria historic preservation through increased - d' ln-tlaove update ,.e public awareness, appreciation and . , '- 7 * we Salt Lake Master support for historic preservation through- '.* '� •`Plan 4 out the city Planning for Sugar House i ' ' Streetcar ,e.t, Have you noticed improvements to a*„- property in your neighborhood? Have a` .."," '"` Preser.at+on conference you done work on a property you own? Rem 1:`� The Histonc Landmark Commission in- 4 't Planning Meeting vites you to participate in celebrating the %•3--- ,.- e Schedule as - preservation of Salt Lake C►ty's heritage :,,,,,t,- staff sPOtLight se by nominating a preservation project - 1. / . .4,-* a 7l. and/or property owner deserving of,t^'':' SALT UM,crry. recognition with a Preservation Award. : 't PUM W No Presentation of the awards will take place • T DIVt$4ON in mid-August. -' .,- l ant a STAT'a STIIIIIT "' Koori aoe It's not too late! Nominations may be • -I' &ALT LAKU CITY.UT made by completing the nomination form found at wow cicpov comtcedl 114111 alarming or in the Planning Division office. Questions concerning the a01.53e.T7e7 Preservation Awards Program may be directed to Janice Lew at Planning Permlta 80t535J'625 or janice.lewOslcgov-corn. The deadline for submittals is July Counter 8, 2011. 601.535.7700 Preservation Program June 28, 2011 0 Exhibit 5 Example — Historic Preservation Brochure • Preservation Program June 28,2011 UUP ' i|ffl CD | k / U lf | ' ! 1 .} ; k s■! ; |. liii � ' S |- ; HO H „AV 111 II! tilt I /g� ` li S If' ` ' ; �``' -� \ | a 11 /| !ƒ ! ) \ƒ / | �2 : ■ ks ) ' � ) ■{ 1 {| F. If` 7 | ` § |E ! | 5 iI i § I |■ « / ! _ = 3 ... • » . . . . u , »t2 ' :� / — n \6 Elj - §. CD / . k EU � i . 4! 7 R. t , §' 7 \ Preservation Program June 2011 A _ -- 0 ! I ! 1tiiIPI ' 1IIIi ! - ES A : 129111 ; 13 1 / 11 : M ll EgE : ? � ;In o r p INSiiGN� ^ CWI� Z t _w M Q � � Sl at i �" '7 m b N O $ - Q :', nilli fir I{ ' I ' { li . I IllIuhiuIijiiit1ij • S 11 II li I ' 3 i gr) eiii ; ,,) Ci 11119111 02a1 . 2, lillimp l _ ,22 A 1 n Iit; 0 * f " 1 kilf Z 1111 1111k � i i � m aagthu i'�111 ,� i , iI " ( !S s s -1111 ; MP Wit illi ! II . am � 4 a jII ! iru. g A q113 - al 1 g Ti -MR! 0 Preservation Program June 28, 2011 L*;� y►.4'' •tl It? 1 i ki1a r • „frv}r, FF 1 1' 1 't Viiiky401 _ f l r '�Rid { S? • ye \ ri 4 4 'till. 1 . ` a y , / ` • ��.c a Sri r A / 114.--ji a mow . 0t.',4%,, .:,, ; ':- '......---1111.: \ , ; 1-AI ` ,, I i I_,II - iJ' z t,< Will Ell "Ir rt • - ai, : f .' 4`,,, ,. _ .o ,..,,,iie fa, itii)..„. . . ,. . ....mv -. .. -- ,.. -...-4- , -•,,A, ,-,„ 4;4:-,. , -, _ , ...w, 44,.....,_,, ..,),ii , ,, 4. ;A '.'i I - '-' .. .. ' .. �';y�- J A • ¢- .y- "` 1 •rtr , s -:ors atin Cp m a t 1 b l e Design y Creating New Spaces in Historic Homes :•: U TA H A HERITAGE • ® FOUNDATION a , elebrating Coin patible Design • U TA H ®HERITAGE FOUNDATION Author: Rob White Book Committee: Elizabeth Bradley-Wilson,Martha Bradley,Peter Goss,Kirk Huffaker Editor: Lisa Thompson Design: Kinde Nebeker Design and Cynthia Oliver Photography: 111 All photos by Scot Zimmerman unless otherwise indicated. Copyright m 2008. All rights reserved: Utah Heritage Foundation 485 North Canyon Road P.O.Box 28 Salt Lake City,UT 84110-0028 www.utahheritagefoundation.org Cover photo:580 West Capitol Street,Salt Lake City;Photographed by Scot Zimmerman NATIONAL TRUST This project has been funded in part by a grant from the Utah Preservation FOR Initiatives Fund of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. HISTORIC www.preservationnation.org PRESERVATION" This publication was partially funded by a generous grant from the George S.and Dolores Dore Eccles Foundation. (GORGE S.AND DOLORES DORE ECCLES www.gsecclesfoundation.org F OUND ATION Utah Heritage Foundation thanks the voters of Salt Lake County for their •••Z00,ARTS support of the Zoo,Arts&Parks program.One-tenth of one percent of the = a rt. Salt Lake County sales tax goes to support local cultural,botanical,and f.YG zoological organizations.This funding has not only stabilized many of Salt Lake's cultural organizations,but has also funded the construction of new c r recreational facilities,and improved walking trails.ZAP funding helps to `1136 V H03.• provide"free"days,free concerts,reduced ticket prices for students,and provide in-school programs for children in grades kindergarten through twelfth grade. Salt Lake County Zoo,Arts&Parks funding has partially contributed to this publication. • I I I • INTRODUCTION ADDITIONS 11 GROWING GRACEFULLY: SIXTH AVENUE ADDITION 28 DORMERS 31 FORM AND FUNCTION: FIRST AVENUE DORMERS 38 GARAGES 41 NOT YOUR GARDEN-VARIETY GARAGE: THIRD AVENUE GARAGE 48 RESOURCES 50 INTRODUCTION 4\ 111 [ � riii —., s_ . 0 1 a . '', ' 1.--iL l'—' -.4 31' , - . - ;....1... : .4.it:.. 11)1 if, 1 IA let_moliftinibiiiimm, 1 ..,4 i I 1 II II � • r 1 , .)s i.......j:j: _ _._...). )4,___.4 _ ) ___,,,. ,___..i i...--,/—_--,-)4,,i'-..iti'-1"1---°,1_,,,., Ic":.), ra . . .d' -Jl '' ....+f....j% "'"'.`_ r _ /i J / _ ,l `J� '_ Introduction I One of the joys of living in an historic district is watching your neighbors work on their homes.The sweet sounds of skill saws and hammer guns mean other people are investing in your neighborhood. Increased property values are sure to follow. You take heart in the idea that perhaps you weren't foolish after all to commit to a neighborhood in transition. There is always great interest in additions in any neighborhood.To state the obvious,people really care about where they live. Neighbors gossip about every project. For those planning a project the message is clear: "It better be good." Not surprisingly,additions in historic districts are often wonderful. In the 1980's one In this book we Salt Lake City neighborhood held an annual progressive dinner party that featured endeavor to show a dining course in each of the year's newly remodeled or added-on-to homes. For the the range of beauty owners it was a kind of coming out party.For the neighbors it was a chance to satisfy their house-voyeur itch. and practicality This is a book of beautiful home additions in Salt Lake City. It can be an idea of sensitive and book for anyone contemplating an addition, but it is also a general celebration of the compatible additions remarkable residential architecture that has occurred in Salt Lake City over the past to single family twenty-five years. Many,though by no means all,of these homes are within protected historic districts.All of them, however, demonstrate how homeowners can make homes in Salt Lake. substantial investments in their homes that also enhance their neighborhood. The idea for this volume came to us in 2005 during a city-wide discussion regarding "monster homes" in Salt Lake City. Monster houses,tract mansions, garage-mahals,McMansions—whatever you call them—they're springing up all over the country. What is a monster house? Like the definition of a weed as "a plant in the wrong place," a monster house is a "house in the wrong place." Too big,too high, a monster house is too something that just doesn't work in its neighborhood. It is either a new house that dominates an older neighborhood or an addition to an older house that is wildly out of proportion to the original and its neighbors. It looks silly and out of place. It causes unrest among the neighbors,who resent their loss of views, backyard privacy, sunlight, and property values. A sure sign of a monster house is the neighbors asking, "How can that be legal?" Neighborhoods are notoriously conservative places. After all,a house is usually the biggest investment a family ever makes. Property values have to be a big deal to S homeowners.People don't just invest in a home,they invest in a neighborhood. They want assurances that their neighborhood will get better,their investment will be safe, and their property value will rise. Since nobody can give them that kind assurance 2 - r ,p�.� - j„ fir,, P, directly,people look at the neighborhood iv.. Y itself for information. I _._.. �.� Neighbors love to see neighbors +• f1 • / investing in their homes.They intuitively �" }.\'�' -{ .s. believe they will receive a small dividend• on their neighbor's investment through an %4 �,, • increase in their own home's value. One ,P 14� f� of the main reasons monster houses and • �' inappropriate additions cause trouble is _ _ that they set this formula on its head.They • disrupt a neighborhood's cohesion and .""li stability,causing fears about its future and , its future market value. The neighbors next door to a huge addition have not only been harmed _ _ - - — by a loss of privacy or views,they are -' .,' probably correct in assuming their own - property value has been diminished. The monster house Who would want to live next door to that? They have to wonder if they,too,should debate in Salt Lake City began to heat up build something huge or tear down their house.The rest of the neighborhood has with the construction of this house on similar fears. Even worse are the recriminations. Neighborhood feuds tend to feed on Hubbard Avenue. themselves and a bad addition is forever. The frustrating thing is that it is so unnecessary.Wonderful additions add value to IIIa neighborhood and increase civility. Bad ones do the opposite. What caught our attention during the monster house discussion was the claim that they were the only way to accommodate the needs of a modern family. If we don't build these big houses and allow large additions,monster house supporters said, Salt Lake City will not be able to grow and prosper. That didn't sound right to us.Yes,there is long running national trend toward more rooms and more square footage in American housing, but Salt Lake City has been thriving for years without this plague. How? By designing and building elegant and appropriate additions that complement the neighborhood rather than compete with it. //:\• 6 0 GREAT ADDITIONS �_ 1111111 ''4." 11 .i. Utah Heritage Foundation began investing in historic neighborhoods in Salt Lake City in 1979 with the 111 N creation of a revolving loan fund. In addition,we Wok helped create all six of the city's historic districts and .-d_ ;' have given countless workshops on how to rehab old houses. If we've learned anything over the years it is that great new architecture can be compatible with ' • « .ii ` " existing homes.It is a wonderful field of architecture c 4:0) with many worthy practitioners including architects, II builders,craftspeople,and inspired homeowners. 1-Ill In this book we endeavor to show the range of beauty and practicality of sensitive and compatible additions to single family homes in Salt Lake City.The book is organized in three main sections: rear additions, The large addition behind this S Street house is not visible from the street.See page 19. dormers, and garages. Each section is followed by a brief story about one of the projects featured in it. These stories provide a "view from the trenches," showing how homeowners work with architects and contractors to create compatible new spaces for their homes. Along the way we've also included a few III examples to illustrate the perils of ignoring good design principles. 11 IiA word about basements.This is primarily a book r -- '..•.`; of photographs of beautiful exteriors and the exteriors _ of basements are,well,not much to look at. But the inclusion of a basement beneath a rear addition can add an enormous amount of spacestorage, a for guest _ - , bedroom,or that big new TV. , • _________ This addition to a Fourth Avenue home has a - =_ modern sensibility yet respects the mass and -- — scale of the original house.See page 21. E-T iv 4 HOW TO THINK ABOUT ADDITIONS People who are new to historic preservation,who just want to put an addition on 41 their home,are often surprised that there is a large body of knowledge out there about how to do it right. From local historic district guidelines to The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation,there are many resources homeowners can turn to for ideas and recommendations. (See the Resources appendix for more examples.)Though they may differ in some of their specific provisions,similar preservation philosophies tend to underlie local design guidelines and national standards relating to additions. So what is the right way to think about an addition? Here are a few general . principles to consider: --; Is the addition visible from the street? �� � °. • Does it change the original character of the house as seen from the street? • Does it raise the original roofline? �,,1 • Does it intrude upon its neighbors? I -\04.. In general,great additions can answer j "no" to each of these questions.These additions respect the historic character of 1117 4 the original house and the neighborhood. �� 11T��?ri,, Every element of a historic building 111 -\N, 111, combines to create its character.A } I 1!1 f I I I F'; principal goal of renovation should be to " I I preserve the building's character.This is _ only possible by preserving each element that combines to create "character." ions The addition on this Sixth Avenue home is barely Renovations,therefore, should favor repair visible at the rear.See page 22. over replacement. Replacements (windows, for example) should favor original materials over different materials. s 4',,-;•,("r, -L.,•r ,. , �> v0. ti 54 :,'t '• Introduction 5 S" 1(L t T. r P".;t1.I. ....'• , ,,,.i.•'"-- - - _ :. ,..,,;. ., "4 ' il: ,.. —11tringir* J.,' '''..; 4 .1 .:J ice. gAil .1 �' }}F tM , . 1 1 ---4' .) c. Fes;,+^ ` \IVI,- * .lik;, II% t ; '*'' t.,-•it 1• / " >` . • ` � DESIGN GUIDELINES k , I i aw..: y .. ' Many communities' , ;�, y. --� ,:„. design guidelines r. I and preservation '?:"ibk standards include • _ $ recommendations like _ these for constructing additons to historic buildings: The garage of this house on S Street is disguised as a guest cottage. See page 43. • Constructing a new additon so that there is the least possible loss of historic materials It follows,then,that additions should also respect and so that character-defining features are the original. For example,The Secretary of the not obscured, damaged or destroyed. Interior's Standards state: • Locating the attached exterior additon at New additions, exterior alterations, or related the rear or on an inconspicuous side of a new construction shall not destroy historic historic building and limiting its size and materials that characterize the property. The scale in relationship to the historic building. 4111 new work shall be differentiated from the old Designing new additions in a manner that and shall be compatible with the massing,size, makes clear what is historic and what is new. scale,and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its • Considering the attached exterior addition environment. both in terms of the new use and the One way to think about this is the idea of appearance of other buildings in the historic dominance.If an addition calls attention to itself and district or neighborhood. away from the original,then the addition dominates the original and the original's character has been damaged Source:The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. or lost. Most of the design tricks we see on successful Q additions aim to preserve the character of the original by deferring to it.This is the essence of compatibility. A` 4„" may`-' • . Ift .-SdrY• `. 0• Jam ,• a F,wt K 1 A^h $ ! *t., Another way to think about it is to ' ,4404. ask the question "Would an architect A 'f '' `� s design a new house to look like this?" Great additions are so natural and clever that the answer should be "yes." This is a particularly helpful question when looking at second floor additions —additions where an entire story is 1 I added to the house with a new,higher roofline. Often called "pop-tops" or "houses-with-hats," these additions rarely work aesthetically.The original • house invariably looks like something was dropped on top of it. A far more These three new dormers on a Quince Street house add successful strategy is to create dormers tremendous space to the second floor without changing the historic character of the home.See page 33. in the existing roofline to turn attic space into living space. Like individual houses,neighborhoods also have character-defining features. Most neighborhoods have a common pattern,with each house conforming to the general pattern while striving for its own individuality. A "7^ Typically all the houses on a block are the same distance from the street p (the front yard setback) and there is a similar spacing between houses (side A yard setbacks). Providing for garages is usually done in the same way, either by alleys in older neighborhoods or by street-facing garages that are • flush with the house in newer subdivisions. Successful additions respect these patterns and accept their discipline. Unpopular or controversial additions tend to be those that noisily violate the neighborhood patterns. The above ideas tell you what to consider as you design an addition, but it will be your house,yard,and streetscape that tells you what to design. Designing an addition is the precise opposite of starting with a blank slate (perhaps attracting a certain breed of architect). It is all about creating a graceful response to a lot of constraints. This small Tudor-style home Salt Lake City homeowners have made incredible investments in their is overwhelmed by a neighborhoods over the last twenty-five years. We hope this book gives you a sense of • "pop-top"addition. just how worthwhile their investments have been. Following are some sketches and notes to help you think about your own project. Introduction 7 FOLLOW THE PATTERN All the houses on this street conform to a neighborhood pattern. They are similar in height, side setback, front setback, and rear setback. This pattern helps define the neighborhood's character. The owners of the house on the right violated the neighborhood pattern by creating an addition that is both higher and wider than the original house. The addition overwhelms the house and intrudes on its neighbors. STREETSCAPE IN PLAN STREETSCAPE IN ELEVATION - II _1 i I I ifi� I The owners of the • house on the left created additional space at the l I L1 '—ZT— rear of the building while respecting the neighborhood pattern. Notice in the elevation drawing that the ,�•►, addition is not visible �+�✓ from the street. ti r..N—U- _ 8 THE ART OF ADDITIONS Am In addition to respecting neighborhood patterns,good additions �` respond to the mass and scale of the original house to create harmonious proportions. They also seek to preserve as much of the historic character of the original home as possible. • STARTING POINT . 0 . This historic house is two stories high and can support a �i fairly large addition. /` '\ SET APART The small addition is separated from the house by a 3 subservient connector. The connector helps preserve the NI4*1 form of the original house and clearly delineates the new k0 / construction from the old. ,► GOOD, BUT COULD BE BETTER . .,--- The rear addition on this house respects the footprint and /�, height of the original house. Because it is flush with the house on the side, however, it begins to encroach on the // original. A change in materials between the original and the addition,from brick to wood for example, could help \ ' •/ address this issue. ,---" 0 \T,/ / NEW HOUSE IN THE BACKYARD This addition is completely out of scale and dominates the original house. The historic character of the original _,..iii4r` house is compromised. One wonders how the original house is used now. A mudroom,perhaps? ANITA \ 4► Introduction 9 DESIGNING DORMERS The size,number, and placement of new dormers on the roof all contribute to a compatible design. As with additions, respecting the mass and scale of the original house is crucial to preserving its character. — 8 SMALL-BIG-SMALL EFS1The varied sizes and setbacks of the three new dormers on this house create a nice rhythm that relates to the windows in the facade below. (11) FOUR IN A ROW The impact of these four dormers on the original house is [] minimized by their small size and setback from the edge of the roof. r TWO BIG, TOO BIG These two large dormers are out of scale with original house. Their impact is amplified by being set above the iridge of the roof and close to the side eaves. A SECOND STORY? lThis large shed dormer overwhelms the house below. Its AEl size and placement draw your eye away from the house. Notice how you can't stop looking at the dormer? There was no effort here to create an interesting composition or relate the dormer to the original house. ADDITIONS ` r4 ,1- , .....--- \\ ,,,T _ ....: lk • I [L] I ,,,4,104 :,iR L Additions I I In the 1960's and 1970's Salt Lake City's older neighborhoods went through a prolonged decline. Far from dealing with expensive additions,the city found itself dealing with the conversion of large homes into apartments or the tearing down of old homes to be replaced with new apartment buildings crammed into existing neighborhoods. In the Avenues,one legacy of this period is apartments that look like poorly built motels. A back-to-the-city movement began all over the country in the 1970's as young Good additions professionals saw a bargain in low property values and began buying and fixing up old homes.Typical additions during the 1970's and 1980's were back porch enclosures come in all shapes and dormers in the attic. Enclosing the back porch allowed for a larger kitchen and and sizes...they a place for a laundry room.The dormers added a bedroom or two upstairs in a show respect previously unoccupied attic. This kind of modest addition made sense. Anyone who moved into these for the original neighborhoods knew they were taking a risk.Their wager was that if enough people home and for the moved in and fixed up their homes,property values would rise; but it was no sure neighborhood. thing.Urban pioneering was primarily a young person's sport,often a gay couple or a young professional family with small children. Banks often wouldn't lend in rundown neighborhoods,so projects had to be done as the money came in.These homeowners did much of the work themselves, learning how to tile,paint,and drywall as they went. A new kitchen in an enclosed back porch didn't seem so modest if you were doing it yourself. I c To encourage homeowners who wished to invest in their homes,the city made zoning changes and established historic districts. The South Temple Historic District was established in 1976,followed by the Avenues Historic District in 1978 and the Capitol Hill Historic District in 1984.This put a stop to the apartment plague and established a base line of quality design and materials.The city also invested heavily in both schools and infrastructure in the older neighborhoods. Utah Heritage Foundation (UHF),which was formed in 1966 partly in response to the demolition of mansions along South Temple,also got into the neighborhood improvement business. In the late 1970's UHF developed a revolving loan fund program which countered banks' reluctance to lend by offering low-interest loans coupled with renovation advice. It focused initially in the Capitol Hill Historic District, buying houses and reselling them with preservation covenants and a renovation loan. Since then,UHF has made more than 200 loans totaling almost five million dollars. • er.:. , By the 1990's it was clear that the Avenues and Capitol - mu _ Hill were well on their way,not just to stabilization, but IIIII _ to becoming very desirable neighborhoods. Property _ values were now such that the just-out-of-school urban .I, pioneer had to look elsewhere. New buyers were more 1 affluent and were moving to the community because w.a =li` of its newfound attractiveness and stability.They did not look at these homes as "first homes." Instead,they 1.0 moved in intending to raise their children there.The /.` stage was set for substantial additions,many of which , 411. we highlight in this book. This Military Drive addition includes a beautiful pergola. Since the creation of the first historic district in Salt Lake City in 1976,architects,planners,and . neighborhood groups have had over thirty years of r / experience of thinking about what constitutes good practice when planning additions.The work is both 1 theoretical and practical, as the various players f try to apply principles of good design to a specific • // building on a specific street. . Good additions come in all shapes and sizes. They can be modest or grand,traditional or ('' I cutting edge modern,deadly serious or surprisingly l whimsical.They all, however, show respect for the 1 III I ideas discussed in the introduction;that is,they Ildshow respect for the original home and for the neighborhood.As we'll see,it is often possible to t ill add a substantial amount of space while following 1 , these guidelines. seIli The materials and details of 4 ' i f tins S Street addition take i� their cue from the original , - house. See page 19. .��g� r• o , =11 � r 4 :C.4'' has THE ENCLOSED BACK PORCH: 3y • 1111 SMALL ON SMALLA" }` - For decades Salt Lakers have been ✓ ,4 ".' r _ ,,4. - '-- enclosing back porches to gain some •�h'y = t C--' { ^; combination of a larger kitchen,a y, � , breakfast nook,a half bath,or a laundry. .,.{0w f e' ° r I 'ii et. These additions are straightforward,do P t \ £^v it,f:,,• .. : ► k it ' f4t.4. a;' .4.1ti not change the roofline,and are relatively ; T y ?.iv t3 inexpensive. A' Here are two examples of enclosed porches on North Main and Third Avenue. ; r. • , - Porch enclosure on Third Avenue home. North Main Street addition from the rear NORTH MAIN STREET PORCH ENCLOSURE The enclosed porch on North Main Street is completely screened from view from the street by vegetation. From the rear, it opens to an invitingly private back yard. _ it..... ELillF. Y to mu { _ j_rrh 4 q il -". ..- * . THIRD AVENUE PORCH ENCLOSURE This cheerful enclosed back porch on North Main Street from the street, Third Avenue has its own little new back addition not visible 2 porch with stairs to the driveway. • LARGE ADDITIONS ON LARGE HOMES C Large homes with two full stories can gracefully support the largest additions. The roofline is i ` already high so there is no temptation to exceed it and the house is already wide so it is easy to conceal an addition from the street. These homes also give the owner and architect the chance to design a new structure that stakes out its own i' sense of style while harmonizing with the original. 1 'lli, A i,qt 1 1 (41:: �� i,v;�( ; , 1 ; i I F j 0 Street addition from the side yard fix. .�u ty+ ' * ' ' 4 ‘Ji\i' ,1 �/ V., it `• ' 11,'- -- , -- ; -; c 'ro`,.- ,i'',,,t1 01 , 11/7 ff1004 4 0 Street addition Al from the rear 411 i o 0 STREET ADDITION This house on 0 Street is a good To- V.example of a large addition on a large house. From the street the addition is almost invisible. The addition can just j , j' be glimpsed through the sideyard. r' \\ g p g .�''- '1 kr. L C , p,. Additions 15 In the rear the owners have added two-and-one- halfj floors above grade with a lovely back porch. y� The shingle siding complements the red brick. The 7 firrn, .. windows are appropriate to the style and echo the ' ' ''"'� .w -4— double hung windows on the front. The brick bay window completely hides the addition from the . 44.1)1 f // street on this side. d IP ci: li .111 'fir# .. 1 A a_ O Street addition from rear � and original bay window # Pr i i 1 I� • • / t 0 Street from the front - . -..,...,-._._ _ _-.r .. 4 S4� S 1 ; ' y AIM H ,S 'S"R.. Military Drive from the front - ' ' '- i — ' ' . , MILITARY DRIVE ADDITION 40 �, J . ,`� ` , TV ; Because this house on Military Drive sits on a � .. t 3 u t „�" corner and cannot hide a large addition, it relies on • Ai : ,- camouflage and harmony. Note the single gable depth `.:�. h9,,. t �',. ,. _R s' of the neighboring house on the left. ., " .10.= It is easy to see that this house originally had + , - _-_-__,-._-_-,_:-,,, ,„,*" ``' the same single able. While preservationists usuallyII h . discourage such a close copy of the original's color and styling, the addition is subtly delineated by a jg: . change in color in the brick band and a slight step ,.. .. ;; back. The repeating of the original's details tends to fir. _ OP e 1 3 w,yr,: diminish the additions apparent size. The resulting composition is graceful. i 1 -tiltlk1111lflN10 It illIW iC Military Drive with addition on right �� fit.. �.4074K. .4,4. 6 4 ,. II* ar r AS' • r ►• t.:`, •'yam `J � ,,rr, .. tf .,,, *tV kir .4"--1.,';*,,i1 11W-:"' Pi' , '4 4 ,.r. ,,„.. .: .,....,...: .,,., v ,,.. . 4..... .. . . .ir..8::* .die 411.11 • !`" ‘41..'' i f ;�.4 — I ,4 'Ai _F 3. • ' • i Ilholkombi. 1/11111111010 1■ .a r hLhtary Duna/rum the r:,:r 110 The total addition of space is huge, consisting of a two- car garage and family room in the basement, an elegant t.t o living room and breakfast room on the main floor,and a master suite upstairs. On this elevation, the house uses three tricks to diminish the visual impact of the addition. First it steps back the addition a little bit from the original. Second, the rear gable is smaller than the front. The third trick i.?, is the bay window bump-out where the addition begins :, e (visible in lower middle), which stops the eye right at the end of the original. Lon, Military Drive with addition on left 5-41,,,..- • .!!?It''''' -'' *Z -.—.,-. w ,-%' ‘'' t. • ' , ifil4,-....g.4-4114 6 4, e. <, , • f" , ..,,r • "` ...„. 5F.•__ "4-, -.f - ---1774"""Evato.„, , i • t.fir?-i. 3/4 Itk.,..-' '`f ,i jot:, jr; k VI :, ..• -141"- 11-' ' .110,„,..., „..-.,.„. 4.1 ' 10 1, •' A ' .,„0,,, , ),..- , :A y _ , . i .._- Ili . 1 — — , , „.111 --7,---,,,_ --"*" .- -- -- ------:----------- - - , ------------ *o,itw.ftiw •.0,74-1q,i ,'' ' ..,01%.,......di ‘ -rii,TA ' , ,. •,0 . . li., ,- I tt _ . - , South Temple from the front SOUTH TEMPLE _ . ADDITION This Queen Anne style .o/rs home on South Temple 00...°' .411 -'4 '.........."----1 , uses its two-story bay i window to hide a large, • gl ....... -0. ,, modern, and somewhat - L 1- idiosyncratic two-story I addition. The addition's . .s. •igt. - - . i 1 li 'ill • L'''-'"flat roof further conceals ° . i, it from the street. .. ilILL..11111 , South Temple . , addition from the rear ,_ _ _ W ., , 1 1 Additions 19 \ t ' S STREET ADDITION r This house on S Street i . ' i ' \ ,` .;, conceals a large, two- 1 s° \\�; �- - r''-`t story addition. Seen through the side yard, the addition is i i `, , lir,• �' attractively separated der. 4 from the original by a V ` 1 short indentation. 1 ' I tis:, 9 The addition 10041,, harmonizes with the �► ,' 14 original by using similar i•' , • • `AY materials and massing, e p' !"�• ..• �' 4. but it has its own ', S Street side yard from the front modern sensibility. . ? v + o / \\11\\4- /El/1,1 \ .// .. . , , s il+ O ,hi,i1' 11 I :i.. 1 .,„ , . . II 1i: ' ;: S Street from the front nwn .,. '' , ' a.- L .'\ : 1:4„.. ,:, ,, , .. . ... .ik \ _,.. .... S Street addition from the rear ,t-r N, ' :'..1' ' '�i ,+ . 1 , .t r� N. ��j w-- ^:,,•vim►, js .,Y� _44 e j.? .� # tea► LARGE ADDITIONS ON SMALL HOUSES "Afti IA .:). , �; -, t, When people complain about an addition that ,�1:, fr dominates the original,the street,or its neighbors,it � ims- '. is often because a large addition has been made to a small house. Because this kind of project is tricky,it - tb- �f li wits is a surprise and a delight when it is done well. The i " five houses presented in this section have all created beautiful,functional,and large additions by keeping the basics in mind. Lowell Avenue from the front LOWELL AVENUE ADDITION I This house on Lowell Avenue is a typical I small cottage. It is hard to imagine that a large addition would work. But it does. It adds a f master bedroom upstairs with two large gables that ��' might dominate in the front,yet are balanced 41 w and pretty in back. The ^�— main floor of the additionII r.. , is finely detailed with a s _' i., , set of three double hung windows on either side of .." „' the back door and a small bump-out on the side façade. Despite its size, the addition is nearly invisible from the street and Lowell Avenue addition from the rear intrudes minimally into the backyard, respecting bothIII the scale and setbacks of the neighborhood. Additions 21 y % / Alger,*t �/ Milli I , r ji y P .,J 4-4,.IP — FFFE _ 1 �; i it f i --- , -. i A' \ Fourth Avenue from the front 7EMIIMVr://_i: FOURTH AVENUE ADDITION This house on Fourth Avenue is larger than the Lowell Avenue cottage, with one and _ one half stories. It also completely hides an amazing addition. - „�..IA This addition is hip and modern, but " ° "" it keeps the same roofline as the original and echoes the simple styling. The modern sensibility of the addition would have been very disruptive if applied to the front of the house,yet it is a joyful surprise in back. The addition also takes advantage of the slope of Fourth Avenue addition from the rear the lot, which runs down from front to back, to create a grand effect without a disturbing Li' — ____ street presence. , ' \\\ / r ,--.' , \\ ..... . ...„.. . J .. . ... y ,�; y ,. . .. ., . . z , ... ,„,_..... ,.,.,.., . , 11 �:. , ........„ :�i . ,. - -'lii .4i..I Oirir:',:r,1:-17E---7:::::::= NIN ' L a. Sixth Avenue from the front 45,7 kr \ SIXTH AVENUE ADDITION . ' .*0% This house on Sixth Avenue is another one-and-one-half 4 ..r , story house with a substantial addition. This time the slope runs up from front to back. The addition is visible from the street but the large first dormer, above the driveway,partially blocks the view of the new,smaller, set back dormers behind it, diminishing their bulk. nimmFrom the rear it is apparent just how big this w. addition is. Two dormers flank the large gable end ills' H to create a large master bathroom with its own small balcony. Below, a family room opens directly on to a back patio. Here is a case where large dormers that would look ungainly on the front of the house open up aIII Sixth Avenue addition LARGE ADDITIONS from the rear great deal of space unobtrusively because they are placed ON SMALL HOUSES so far to the rear. Additions 23 - < ry r 11111-')r f ',t Compare the Sixth Avenue M .....„._ I house with the next two. In a' • the first, an entire second �` floor was added along with a . P. , _ very tall roof. In the second, „ it appears that a new house has simply been built behind the original. ' All three additions Second floor addition with high new roof created added space, but m in the last two the view s. �A ' . + cr from the street has changed "' e~ dramatically. The character 'Y la of the house and the • ? ' neighborhood have been ;• I AT P.- changed. �'rt . r - r itmwme __ �1 Out-of-scale rear addition 24 ft Lob., .. - C Street from the driveway . , 1 _ r , ,, 11 _... -, i ,.. . ill, F, ,„ s , .11.. ii, 1- Ili ..,,,.. _. e 4' 4 , . i iiirt.:, ' I 1 ,',1 II i1•k i' I V 1 C STREET ADDITION One of the interesting things about a well-hidden addition is that it can be quite different in design from ''I tithe original house, yet still be very compatible through y I 1\s .•- . athe use of scale and color. I This simple cottage on C Street sports an addition that has more detail and texture than the original house, with larger dormers,a wonderful bay window in the rear, and small balcony upstairs. It all works because ,r+ i «�`.4...-, there is an elegant transition from old to new ensuring .., "� ,,, I i, +`' that the new never competes with the old. . t In the transition, the new wall steps back slightly 1 from the original and the material changes from stucco --'-- C Street addition from the rear , to shingle. While there is no �� doubt that this is a modern , structure(note the three cool i�4.. 01.0010 square windows on the main ;;; floor), the similar color and rooflines create an elegant ` ' transition which help it defer to the original until it gets LARGE ADDITIONS around the corner to the rear. ON SMALL HOUSES C Street addition— three small windows or '!.y,, ,�, y �, : Additions 25 • ' �`tio .. . [[ WEST CAPITOL ADDITION • 9 _— The last house in this section on large additions to small fir houses is another one-story cottage on a lot that runs • uphill from front to rear. From directly in front of the house there is no view of an addition,just a bay window popping out toward the rear, suggesting a kitchen nook. iiiii i , ,. •11 ' ;I) 1 , \ I This addition breaks the roofline rule by popping up a little from the original. It works because it is so far from the street and so far up the hill that its apparent size is much diminished. Setting the addition back a few feet from the original house helps hide its bulk. Imagine .a., Am, • how it would dominate if it protruded out from the Y.,. -. . original. The deep lot and steep slope preserve the uphill •' ssK _ neighbors'view. West Capitol Street from the front •y �/ y it ,.k.�' - ,. ;tit jar" i.fr �� :}• ram: 0.. Or /tab. il 0101" r 1� �i ? -" West Capitol Street z.1 1 i J, F I; , 1addition from the re . i -r� HORIZONTAL ADDITIONS In most neighborhoods in Salt Lake City,residential lots are long and III narrow,making additions to the side of the house impossible.Where a wide lot does make a side-addition possible the opportunity for a fine addition opens up.The same ideas about massing and respect for the original still apply, but creative solutions are possible. ELEVENTH AVENUE ADDITION This house on Eleventh 1 /A...... Avenue solved the i problem of a small backyard by adding a shallow addition to the Eli rear o the house and II 1 I 1 then continuing the I II I addition as a wing on the ,....04. '"`4` o III �,1tii -� ' 1i 11-i k side of the house. Because '` �' the addition is only one story and the wing is set n* (S.rs.iftiam. w• • . t 'Ric �: s •'+e• «__ to the rear of the original, 11 r�"�Mra _ _� 131010.' l a • ,�' .-. ^ " the original house 1 preserves its dominance and the wing becomes a • Eleventh Avenue addition graceful addition. a from the front This addition also solves the problem faced by everyone on the uphill side of the street—how to have outdoor space with a view. Note the lovely deck in front of the wing, which also tends to draw the eye away from the size of the wing. Additions 27 • g QUINCE STREET ADDITION r } ,n This house at the corner of Quince and Apricot Streets '= ' in the Capitol Hill Historic District added a very " ` handsome addition on the left, as viewed from the front of the house. Shorter and wider than the original y. t wing on the right, it completes the composition without i I 41. overpowering the original. This house has a much more interesting story than =; `--""~m, just its most recent addition. The original house,a one- story stone building visible on the right, was built in the early 1850's from rocks most likely picked up in '' 'a"i,' ' ' '" , 4- _ the fields around it. A second story, made of brick, was Quince Street addition added in 1857, and a third addition, to the left of the from the front original, was added in the 1860's. The last piece, on the far left, was added in the early 1990's. This addition honors the original with its use of rocks and sandstone, yet is clearly of more recent construction with its crisp roofline and cut sandstone. fittingconclusion It is a c nc usio , i � Ja$ °� . ; ����, � � to this chapter on additions 4, • 't.. hti: 'z 1''- to show that Salt Lakers �' i= ►. ', have been creating a1f g compatible additions for4 4 '.1A i,'1111.:4over 150 years. ",Oi iit tom ' t . ' lip tili ° ` + Quince Street original home .cr. y ' * with modern addition at far left 28 GROWING GRACEFULLY: Michael and Susan Workman's Victorian cottage in the Avenues included a rear SIXTH AVENUE addition, of sorts,when they purchased it.The home had been used as a tri-plex since • ADDITION the 1940's and the addition looked like several rickety sheds that had been randomly tacked on to the main house. Squirrels regularly found their way from the addition into the house to scamper around in the walls at night.The whole addition was about to fall over. _ ,t i ; ; The Workmans decided to replace the addition as part of �' 4tv, 4' a Ilk . _ a larger project to renovate the 4 `•.4 ::?. arentire house. Because the house', I . ', is in Salt Lake City's Avenue's 4;�„ ` `, , Historic District,they knew the ,1161.- ,, ,._�,,;;X.r i addition had to comply with »`., e the city's design guidelines.The _ I I I1111 �w vy,: Workmans hired an architectural j��niô ::^ III III ���' • addition that would both be '. appropriate for the original house ,low -_ - and reflect their own taste. n' i,„ i _ The Workmans were thrilled p I with the work of the designer. W H . I `I His plan created the light, open i i = V Susan wanted .�. -- , and incorporateinteriorspacesd two historic .....imentmomilow NI. • __ 1 - -. leaded-glass windows the couple - discovered in the basement. The second level of the addition The Workmans hired an contains the master bathroom. architectural designer to plan The large dormers on each side make room for a jetted tub and a walk-in closet. an addition that would both be appropriate for the original On the main level,the designer created a spacious family room with French doors house and reflect their own taste. opening onto an inviting patio.While substantial in size,the addition is largely hidden from the street because it respects the original house's footprint and roofline. The addition project also served as an impetus for the Workmans to upgrade the house's mechanical and electrical systems. For example,Michael explains,their decision to install radiant floor heating in the addition provided an opportunity to install radiant floors in several rooms in the original house and encouraged them to S The main floor of the addition created a spacious 29 family room that opens onto an inviting patio. lir d town and left them with a materials G -, lien on their house. I The Workmans'well-planned 111111 project not only helped their addition .®` sail through the approval process with the Salt Lake Historic Landmarks Commission, but also made them F eligible for financial incentives that 4 46- significantly reduced the cost of the addition.They received both a low- interest loan from Utah Heritage undertake a complete overhaul of the plumbing system. Foundation's Revolving Loan Fund Program and Utah While you may shudder at the thought of a plumbing Historic Preservation Tax Credits through the Utah overhaul,the Workmans count the resulting improved State Historic Preservation Office. The Workmans water pressure throughout the house as one of the credit both organizations with contributing to the benefits of their addition project. success of their project. "They were advocates for us, Before launching into the construction of the sources of support and encouragement," addition,Susan spent hours researching successful Susan explains. historic renovations. She attended open houses with her camera in tow and read a variety of books and o . magazines. Confident in their vision based on their 4. ` -t designer's plan and Susan's research,the Workmans worked closely with their contractors to make sure the 3 ' ill 110 construction met their expectations. Over the course "yr A� of the project they developed their "Rules of Three" to " ' F. : i ' 1 ..,help guide their work: e; 1 .11 • Every project will take three times as long and I�� -' � .:�� " I a a. cost three times as much as you expect. j , • Always get three bids on a project,follow up b with references, and ask to see your contractor's license. They learned that deviating from the last rule was an invitation for trouble when a siding contractor skipped The second level of the addition houses a large master bathroom with its own balcony.You can glimpse the jetted tub in the dormer to the right. DORMERS di i — • 4. y 4•1 r1111414811* .--_,..-„,,,„,„,iiiiiii..., , , =/i_,I„ INN* 1 ___._. - -', 1i-4-.'.,.„.,,_.A, . . — .. . a ':; 11''.I .,.A...r t_-. ....,_ . : ---_ t , „ / ,), \I ., 4,.....11,. . ., . . .,... of N.. , I S, t�+�v N a�� : "'11 .K% '4.,..' 4 llililli S• JJ yc ^6 ^:'b,"y�y�•'6 n tyt r �.St' , .�. ,q _ `,, 1 • ��a � �> , `" a1 + r% h r M ',- ay � $ �� a ' '1 ktd .• s ,. r '�' ' F. ff' `1,. t a_ Ie y 3 Dormers 3I Adding dormers can create the functionality of a second story without the expense or visual disruption of raising the roof line and creating a full story. sip'. On the interior of a house,the job of a dormer is to open up attic space, adding both headroom and light to create living space.The resulting interior spaces can be complex and interesting as roof meets dormer to create a nook for a bed,desk,window seat,or shower. On the exterior,the dormer's number one job is to not overpower the façade On the interior below. Size,shape,placement,setback,materials,and window selection all of a house, the job contribute to a compatible dormer. Homeowners who add multiple dormers successfully also think of them as a composition and use rhythm and harmony to of a dormer is to create a graceful grouping. open up attic space. On the exterior, the dormer's A1` ' {�' , � 11 iimik.' 4 ,� ,0 t, , vI, ,. I number one job ,, r� �� ,� ;' is to not overpower , y,,�> tA4 + "'s ,, , • ,,,it the facade below. �� %&,„..., ,\ , " t i i flit , Oak : \ + "il ' j ; 4 • " , I _ IL w i Third Avenue dormers, - , see next page. 1&, , • s r*'�i : •. - •,:;. , ` -" ' +�_ 32 A MODEL FROM THE PAST The original dormers of a house on the corner • of Third Avenue and H Street illustrate the • � j1 principles of compatible dormer design so skillfully that they deserve consideration in '~. ''``".• \ \i some depth as a model of how to think about ' �,(�1►. in adding new dormers. , Pt<_ THIRD AVENUE DORMERS 4_t '�A'` P . r. ',»4 ;Gg " The dormers on this house create a lovely ' ,tea composition. The façade facing the street . y ' third Avenue facing H Street features three dissimilar dormers. The front a from the front dormer(far left in photos on this page) is set back and incorporates the chimney in the front room below. The middle dormer •` >E ;; moves forward and sits flush with the wall i below. It acts as a graceful cap to the more t.,.... .}` prominent element in the façade, the s.. „ cgia, �. bay window. i "'s . , °` ,: 4. ,' The prominent third dormer(far right - IF 1 in photos on this page), near the back of the ii t.Jadif :,. == ,�:-- house, is set back from the wall even further III.,,,„, ..,„, - - r than the front dormer. This allows a much - greater mass and more elaborate detailing. iiimrst. IMF "-- ;;" ''' ' Note how it complements its section of the IR 0 .4 , , .., — '': first floor below—the dormer fancy, the i jt 4, façade plain. Together, these dormers have a " ` rhythm that adds interest to the house while never appearing heavy or lopsided. r,r - Third Avenue facing H Street "'s—/ ti Dormers 33 )11 • '. The side yard of the same house, which is / i much less visible from the street,featues r, a similar rhythm—set back/small,flush/ y _ ;. large, set back/small. It is a pleasing effect =�r ! and there was no need to get fancy on the a less visible elevation. :.,.'.--- -4: This set of six dormers is wonderfully 1 I designed, with alternating setbacks, differing window treatments, and a fine sense of balance. The dormers create a y tremendous amount of living space on the second floor and complement rather than overpower the main floor. Nr 1 Third Avenue side yard RHYTHM & PROPORTION 111111111111 • To the right and on the next page are four examples of more recent dormers that illustrate the importance of rhythm and proportion. µ LARGE IDENTICAL DORMERS Consider this set of three red dormers. The red dormers are of identical size and are flush with the wall below. And they are big! The top of the dormers' * `' roofline appears to be level with the roofline of the house. The dormers look as if they might topple the wall below. Imagine if this house had used some of the tricks employed by the house on Third Avenue. Large red dormers 34 } Fc;. A RHYTHM OF DORMERS ..y This Quince Street home has varied both the size 4 * 'tv „4,4 and setback of the dormers and comes off as lively P. `` i ""'`� �. ,• and interesting. Notice how the dormers relate to the facade below them and compare this with f' i`, � the next photo. In the Quince Street home we can see how pulling dormers away from the edge .� a�� jl o f the roof reduces the apparent mass, while still an cc -` illter I f ] allowing full use of the upstairs. Dormers raise roof fine Quince Street dormers /I r ,tv t.,‘,..' ,..:41:-ii Y t 1:1414' d . j, A I Ili a -' ,' ' 0 II III — \al ` iziir•�/ e. II 0 Ille ,00 0 ... Id j il . : , i'1 'Oi VI a., First Avenuei lit ^t ' LP dormers ' OUT-OF-SCALE DORMERS ic. r_ A.� �.k,:,. s P. _ ,.. Here,just the opposite • h happens. Instead of dormers, PROPORTIONS THAT WORK this house has not one, but two new rooflines, both The new dormer on the side of this First Avenue house sits just higher than the original. behind an original dormer. The new dormer is smaller than the Also notice how close the original, but was designed with a similar style and setback that harmonize with the original dormer and the facade. The new dormers are pushed to the dormer's slightly different proportions and smaller windows flag edge of the roof. it as a modern addition. This is a great example of how dormers can add space and respect the historic character of a house. II i 04. - e pt ` r , ,.�, ,e -. is \ i 2, wear, - - - 10 Y r�,. Y ti-„ I .y i 1 • c=—, : 4 1 ' -- ' '.-- ---.L‘).----L-:i'.\-: '‘'*: k 4 t'' ‘''': 47 r...... ............................ E Street dormer FRONT DORMERS Adding a dormer to the front of a house is tricky. It violates the "Can it be viewed from the street?" rule. .> tr Y Because dormers on the front are often found in certain A. ' kinds of original architecture,especially Craftsman : N bungalows,the right question to ask is "Does it change ii' 4 • • the character of the house?" — �� E & B STREET DORMERS These Craftsman The B Street dormer has `_- bungalows on E Street an especially nice and B Street have similar symmetry with the porch 14 dormers. Both are columns below it. These --- centered over the front two dormers fit well into AI porch,shingled,and the architectural style of .,. carry broad eaves that the house but they also ,'w - .. t. complement the eaves on have a modern note to B Street dormer the house below. them that works. xr r t •. r `� t �i.. ,,,, - '1' .I BIG IN BACK Dormers that might seem 0 inappropriate or overpowering .. if they were near the front of the :: i '' house can work well near the rear. '`aiii;t They are less visible from the street - \ and their distance from the street fi 'Y I 4, s' diminishes their apparent size. r = e 'L, SIXTH AVENUE DORMERS This house on Sixth Avenue shows , ' I - iii H how the use of dormers at the rear WE of the house can be a strategy to add ,X,V really substantial space. The two 1 symmetrical dormers create almost the same amount of space as a full ;.,,r. \I,MI, ,1,J,1 second floor. And the result is far more interesting and lively. ',•�.: II MILITARY DRIVE DORMER 1 The dormer on a rear addition on Military Drive is a delightful `;, 1 little box that harmonizes with the Cill original house but doesn't tryto be anything but fun and new. Military Drive dormer Military Drive dormer from the street 4 F 37 ' 4 4� ori I pi ,-1 -iv ,' - t 4 ' A.,-,,,:', J,:;--.,'„,41 .., J) rii-mni in nfiegit . , s ! IIIII1, : C Street dormers from the front C STREET DORMERS The large dormer on this 40 C Street house is part of a I � substantial rear addition. It picks up some of the more i elaborate detailing of the new , Istructure while the two much m nearh smaller dormers the front complement the original _ p house's relative simplicity. ....- 11111 • ....:., 1 t , C Street dormers from the rear imummimik 38 FORM AND FUNCTION: Jennifer Shaw loves Salt Lake City's Avenues neighborhood. She grew up there and FIRST AVENUE purchased a lovely 1898 Victorian home on First Avenue with her husband,Ken, • DORMERS in 1995.The two-bedroom house suited the Shaw's needs while their children were young. As the two boys grew older,however,the bedrooms became cramped.The Shaws didn't want to leave the neighborhood, so they decided to create some "grown- up sleeping space" in their house. The Shaws explained their needs to an architect with Vk • .,` * F * "` expertise in historic preservation. "Her emphasis was on "� maintaining the integrity of the house so it still belonged in te-44 r j� the neighborhood," explains Jennifer.The architect t.,w', *t • ,'' developed plans for rebuilding an existing rear porch enclosure and adding new space above it for a master 'i,' n `A" bedroom.Theplans also included addinga new dormer on► �' \ ""', either side of the addition. The dormers created much-needed,functional spaces on a i'�\ ,a the second floor. The dormer on the east allowed the Shaws to �1 N,...... transform a tiny closet-sized bathroom into a full bathroom 1 for their boys. The dormer on the west created room for a walk-in closet and modest master bath. A clever opening high in the wall of the master bath allows natural light from the dormer to reach the windowless second-floor hallway. co The exterior appearance of the new dormers required great sensitivity for several reasons.The dormers are located T - within the roofline of the original house and the west dormerII The Shawrebuilt and is clearlyvisible from the street. In addition,the dormers needed to comply with expannddeedd an old rear porch P Y addition and added two new two sets of preservation guidelines since the house is located within Salt Lake City's dormers in the roofline of the original house. Avenues Historic District and the Shaws wanted to apply for historic preservation tax credits. The new dormers are successful because they take their cue from the home's original dormers,incorporating the same cornice returns,shingle style, and window molding.Their smaller overall size and smaller windows help make them subservient to and distinct from the originals.The Shaws had no trouble getting this attractive, compatible design approved by the Salt Lake City Historic Landmarks Commission and the Utah State Historic Preservation Office. The Shaws worked closely with their contractor to complete the project within their allotted budget.The contractor was realistic about the costs of the different . . r aspects of the project and willing to help the Shaws find ways to save money. For example,the Shaws did the legwork on purchasing many materials rather than r having the contractor buy them. They also invested their - own sweat equity in tasks like painting the shingles for P 'Z , the new dormers. Knowing their priorities also helped the Shawsiii stay on budget. "Structural work always came first," frn Jennifer notes.Thus when they discovered the old back 9 porch enclosure never had a foundation, adding a new foundation to support the second-story addition meant cutting back on some aesthetics,like cabinetry for the bathrooms. ;„ 4 A good working relationship between the ti E' homeowners,architect,and contractor helped the Shaws'project proceed smoothly. "Our dog was the biggest problem," laughs Jennifer. "He kept getting out This new dormer on the west side of the house is visible from the street. when contractors left the door open and barking at the However,it doesn't detract from the home's historic character because of mailman who refused to deliver the mail." Fortunately, its placement and compatible design and materials. 1, the Shaws are back on good terms with their mailman since they plan to live in their expanded house for many o years to come. II 0 It 1 MI CI The new dormer on the east side of the house allowed the Shaws to • expand a tiny bathroom into full-size bathroom for their sons. The west dormer opened up previously unused attic space for a master bathroom and walk-in closet.The dormer window is in the spacious new shower. GARAGES . . •..•., ., . • .... . • . ..., • • :• . . , . 1, ' .••••• •• . • . •. . . • • .11k , , .• . . .• . . . .• • • • •, . . •• ..1, . \ . • s, -- -.1. • .• . .. .• • '.. . • • . • • . •1 . lit I .. . i •. • - - .." . . . , , • , .- a - . . le......: . . ,.. . _ 411 .. .• .. ,,‘ ‘I° , •. 1 , • ' .4 " l ..., ... k. I I:,'r,---- ---,---_t. , ix • - _ . ';, , - . . . . w 4; r_. -,—, _-, wr . ,, • • . , t' ,_ ' . ,. a • allinillr° - - • --,,-, . itik" •,i .-..-' - ' i,L,;.-, di '_ , , I , ......... . . . . ' ' r it , -....., _ 74 ,..,,• ., -r ,,,. liti 4. ,m,IC h • _, je- - I s , ..,. , v , • joei._--....?,_- • - '. .t.','4.`. '' ', ... - F, 1,1** . 41''''. -". 7°0 NOME . IBM ••••• - . -*"...1/4....i. , \" \ ' 4 :e.f. ' simmosi 1111111MINIII MEMO - "-'\. , \• \'," - , ..A. • ..- -, - - 4 . ' . • . •..;- . '''' ..s' ' 'e.1,". .7.'••.' °. ..,A...,•;,'S'4.-4414, 1 . -'"... .,........'r.•..k."-1....1--.„..'..-` P-"-..., ---,,' S40.4,-.,- ,.. , ••"TV.Z-"' 'A. . " I4t4' ' '. -- - ••••• .I. .•-•,',.. ---Y:Ik....-‘...' °‘::••-•;.;;.at:0°.'',..'"''.'..••''t "` ...--- ' '- '• :'..• ?' r'r""4.-47.':' ' ' -. -4."2."' k'-'•'N" ...'' -°1'0.-",e° ,-'''.;...;. •f'4144":„. ,'" ' ..: „,. •-'.,I .,.,,'':4;%...,".1, .,..:.-"Ir.,. .,4:. '":4, '''''. ' ..• 424>" ... [ ..4,,f ,., ,,,....----, ..,--.,:: .. • .:.--,......,:,,,,,- -.,. ••• -k,*,,.-.' .iti'-..''',.:;,*:..• _ p b,, .-4 - - - .. . - r . •\ ' 5. . , . . - „, - . - • , _ - .. ' . . s. ----'.:. •-4110ftia. .•- - -.- _., ' -......• - . ----.4. 7';'A. •"; -. , . 1,4t ,- , _. .- , -. . • - " ..._.-s'i -4,-.... Garages 4I Ahh,garages. Ask anybody who lives in an older neighborhood what they covet most and they will mention a garage.What with finding a place to park,clearing snow off your car in the winter, and even the occasional break-in,parking on the street gets old. When we went hunting for great garage additions we had a What makes a pleasant surprise.There are lots of them.We include thirteen of our favorites, but we could have kept going. great garage? What makes a great garage?They are sensitive to their associated They are sensitive house and its site.They look good on their own.There has been to their associated great care taken in selecting the garage door. One of the pleasures of house and its site. garages is that they don't have to be as serious as the house. A garage is a great place for a little whimsy and can add variety and liveliness to the neighborhood. , ,te , • �.:_ fir --,�. �,, ____ 1--�--f ' r— 1[ 111 'II ,__ . ._ _ __.....„ ...... .... r _________ . .„; .tea � _,.., ..... ......, ...p.a. .... . _ This beautiful garage on B Street complements its house and adds charm to the neighborhood. See page 47. ilIMINIIIMIIIII 42 FREESTANDING GARAGES The first two garages have a prominent placement on • 1 their lots;the vt+ first because of a corner location,the second because the house is located to the rear of the A„ lot,while the garage is on the street. It made sense to ," 'ill - design them to hold their own as freestanding buildings. ,c ii.L. , mill I I l ram ::: ,'M- 11 i THIRD AVENUE GARAGE ! $ NI , ,. '7 This garage,at the corner of H Street and Third Avenue, I f: et( faces Third Avenue while the home it serves faces H Street. The fine detailing and the double window on the gable beautifully match the same elements of the main -:'% house and tie the composition together. WEST CAPITOL GARAGE Third Avenue garage The garage tucked into the hill on West Capitol Street . is visually independent o f its master which is almost - , ;-a x, hidden in the trees above and behind it. This building, f with its wonderful Marmalade neighborhood sensibility, ,; I' � ,.�d'': \ f; �s. seems almost too beautiful to be a garage. The upstairs . contains a wonderful studio. . 4_41 y • ill ,,'LL __ z I11h ,_ r, West Capitol Street garage IP West Capitol Street garage interior ie-, b. x .. _ 5��R o/ e�a' �t 6,,. 1 a t `f .s . 1 ! r-^I '>��� Garages 43 j s ,°r % 41 t-* A ,T:`. r'r,1. ''' f ,*—\) .'•'-'' ' ,Ny ,, 1[9,;. ��� it H ..'1 � ��� * _ t� �. It L. ilL - , .. : Ii. ' _ ,.. F. ..4.1 . S Street garage on right ELEGANT ATTACHMENTS S STREET GARAGE The next two garages are attached in different ways The large garage on S Street disguises itself as a guest to their house.The attachments tie the garages to the cottage. It hides its garage door by turning it ninety house visually and provide a nice break from weather. degrees from the street and uses windows in the wall and gable to suggest living space behind. Although • clearly subservient to the grand house, the garage complements it with its own strong design and a graceful connector between the two. • 'frii "'., ANOTHER THIRD AVENUE GARAGE I This small garage on Third Avenue takes its cue from the shingle siding of the enclosed back porch. This p 4; attractive cottage garage fits right in with its attractive ` I ,-, _- cottage. A spiral staircase leads up to a deck on top of the garage, neatly recovering the outdoor space lost by its construction. Third Avenue garage 44 a Not DEEP BACKYARDS When a garage is placed deep in the backyard of a mid- • , block house, usually only the front elevation with the garage door(s) is visible from the street. Naturally, this is the view that should receive the most care. BROWNING AVENUE GARAGE The Browning Avenue garage is tied visually to the house by its shingle gable and by the brick pavers inserted in the driveway. What makes it special in its own right is the gorgeous set of wood and glass garage doors. ROOSEVELT AVENUE GARAGE In contrast, the Roosevelt Avenue garage stakes out its own design turf, with a delightful garage door, white painted wood walls, and a high-pitched roof. Browning Avenue garage COt ` j Browning Avenue garage from the street Roosevelt Avenue garage i y ni�^4 V• -^ , Garages 45 ,_ _ _..-_ ',-�, n n111111i I11 -.3. ` IIIiIi1i;i...�..� II!III 0 _ ; M '" 1 V- GARAGES THAT USE ••----- ;.1 w ELEVATION CHANGE Here are examples of garages that take advantage I _ ,.may of a change in elevation from the front yard to -" the rear. In each case the effect minimizes the North Main Street garage apparent mass of the garage. NORTH MAIN STREET GARAGE '; The first garage, on North Main Street, is built is : .. I,� at the basement level which allowed for a huge AL_ '� . _ _ deck leading out from the kitchen. In addition P. E . to providing much needed garage space, placing J - ' ,. F; ' the deck at the same level as the kitchen made 'k .' 1 ' the backyard much more user friendly. No more �; ;'' carting food down a flight of stairs to the grill. µ Finally, the flat roof preserves the view from the - main floor. Tenth Avenue garage TENTH AVENUE GARAGE Q This garage on Tenth Avenue also takes advantage of an elevation drop. This house sits .,-r on a very steep corner lot. The architect took iii ..,L 1. advantage of the grade by using a stepping effect110' to break up the mass of what is a very large 4 combined house and garage. ! CENTER STREET GARAGE The triangular lot created by Center Street's k4 . 'i , . ,r4 i. ;r diagonal cut through Capitol Hill created an opportunity for this duplex's garages to front on __ Quince Street, while the front door and street Center Street garages address are on Center Street. This is an ingenious use of what had been unusable crawl space. 46 -.1 •1 BEHIND THE FENCE Mtv '� • ,s. %1 Here are three garages designed to blend into the i�a4` 4, �, i -t background and call little attention to themselves.They ti are all modest in size and located outside a fenced yard. Their placement on the lot and simplicity insures they t don't compete with the houses they serve.These ;_ garages represent a great combination of functionality "'+* ""rnomme _ and compatibility. 0 STREET GARAGE j This garage faces the same street as the front facade of O Street garage the home it serves. A fairly large yard, however, visually separates it from the house. The use of the same style v and color shingles on the garage and the house also help Altl- ' the garage maintain a subservient role. 7 4f R STREET GARAGE wThis one-car garage is located behind the home it serves -' ' but is accessed from the street. Its shingles and exposed rafter ends tie it nicelyto its home. Beingset back from h the sidewalk several feet helps minimize its impact on--F. '-...., - . . 411111111‘64- the streetscape. '" SECOND AVENUE GARAGE • R Street garage This garage is completely hidden behind its house in an alley. Alleys are common in Salt Lake's Avenues I neighborhood. They work well for garages because they • eliminate the need for a long driveway from the street, saving the whole back yard for garden or deck. 1 Second Avenue garage I i _ . . , i` d i• I l `i y - •ems: _ -• �, " ___'.r'---,yy�`!( At. �. .. _�. `^' am.-=` "` iiii :r.-- "'�+ 'r . C B Street garage z ; SUI GENERIS - + '': Our final garage is one of a kind. 1 . x . itl *� This garage on B Street has to be the most flamboyant garage in town;however, when viewed ' • in context with its house, it makes perfect sense. • . 4 Only a strong composition like this could hope to "al 11; complement this important historic home. B Street house 48 NOT YOUR The backyard of Paul Boyle's Avenues cottage was not very inviting. GARDEN-VARIETY GARAGE: A small gravel patch at the side of a mid-block alley, the yard was sandwiched S THIRD AVENUE between the house and the neighbor's parking area. When Paul began a major GARAGE rehabilitation project on the house, he and his architect discussed removing an old porch addition, replacing it with a smaller mudroom, and constructing a garage in the backyard. The well-designed new garage is an example of the wonderful solutions that can result from a collaboration between a talented architect and a homeowner with vision. Paul loves to entertain. You may not think building a garage in your backyard is a great way to create outdoor entertaining space, but it can be if you're clever. The slightly sloping roof deck of Paul's small - garage will someday become a rooftop _ garden. Paul had the roof over-built to .41 '=.` support the loads of the garden and the F....... _ snow. He also ran water, gas, and electricity .=-- " to the roof so he can barbecue for his ff guests. A parapet wall encloses the roof f N _ for privacy. Unlike the cramped backyard, I:"` the garage roof has a lovely view to the west and that slightly magical feel all rooftops possess. In addition to the rooftop garden, 3 building the garage created another attractive outdoor space for Paul. A spiral Once a gravel patch,Paul's staircase leads down from the garage roof backyard now houses a new to a small new deck off Paul's bedroom. The garage and the house largely garage with an attractive door,cedar shingles,and shield the cozy deck from view, creating a private space that allows Paul to charming lights. keep the door off his bedroom open in pleasant weather. Paul equipped the garage wall next to the deck with water for a water feature he plans to install. The one-car garage is also a great garage. Its small size is compatible with the scale of the cottage and the streetscape. Paul selected cedar shake shingles for the exterior after noticing the prevalence of the material in his neighborhood. Using the same shingles on the new mudroom at the back of the house helps visually tie the house and garage together. 49 This photo provides a glimpse „'`at,' r : o O of the garage rooftop and a view m_ of the cozy new deck off Paul s '_ .�i .�r bedroom.Paul plans to add " garden features to both spaces. ` ,:11 j ---------- ^z SO '' 31 y 40\NN 1 _,f, The spiral staircase 1 connecting the garage roof oar*''-,, s and new private deck has a sculptural quality. 0 1 The project was not without its challenges. Removing the old .. porch addition exposed a basement level door that posed a drainage ;,; d`tt ,. _ - problem. Paul's architect designed a small breezeway roof between ;, K the house and the garage to help protect the basement entrance from !T / rain and snow. Paul also created a sophisticated drainage system to slop .i. direct water to a French drain on the west side of the house. I' Paul emphasizes the importance of having a good architect and..dain��_ � doing "due diligence" with contractors. He remained very involved i NJ throughout the design and construction process, investing his own I1 ion or - � sweat equity in the project when possible. Paul advises homeowners "' undertaking any project to ask their architect to explain the details I��!�!_ : ® of the plans and then inspect the work of contractors regularly III` \ to make sure it complies with the plans. "Be direct with your +rM contractor," Paul explains. "Ask how many jobs he has going at once. Ask about the cost of change orders. Watch how he deals with iI it t 00. his subs." Because he had good architectural plans, had researched �I +�;i various building materials, and was willing to stick to his vision, of Paul was able to insure that contractors' work met his expectations. I / ��� Paul originally bought the cottage in 2004 intending to flip it quickly and move on. Now he rolls out a landscape architect's plans T i-/ -1 i = for the rooftop garden and explains how he will gradually make it a reality. "I like to think long-range," he says with a smile. RESOURCES UTAH HERITAGE FOUNDATION • One of the best places to start looking for resources is our website http://www.utahheritagefoundation.org/,where you can navigate to a "resources and links" section.Among the most helpful,from local to national: SALT LAKE CITY HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION The Salt Lake City Historic Landmarks Commission administers the city's historic districts.They have a wonderful website with maps and design guidelines for each historic district.There is also a section called"Types of Projects" that includes great advice on additions,windows,dormers, garages and front porches. UTAH STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE (SHPO) The Utah State Historic Preservation Office(SHPO),housed in the Division of State History,administers the state's historic preservation programs.Their website has helpful links regarding the National Register of Historic Places and historic tax credit programs,both federal and state.They also have a listing of historic preservation professionals that • includes architects,builders,and suppliers. It is important to note that the Salt Lake Historic Landmarks Commission and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)are separate agencies,one a creature of the city, the other of the state,and that they have different mandates and responsibilities. This also means that they don't have an identical approach to applying The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation.It is entirely possible for a project to receive approval from the Historic Landmarks Commission while failing to qualify for state tax credits because the city is 5I using design guidelines that look more closely at neighborhood compatibility issues while the SHPO is focused solely on applying the Standards to an individual historic house. If you have a project that could qualify for tax credits, it is imperative to have SHPO review the plans early in the design process. NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC Established in 1966, PRESERVATION Utah Heritage Foundation The National Trust is the nationwide advocate for historic was the first statewide preservation and serves as a leader and coordinator within the movement.They have been very active in the issue of"tear preservation organization in downs" and monster homes. the western United States. NATIONAL PARK SERVICE The foundation's mission The National Park Service administers the Secretary of is to preserve, protect, and the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation.The Technical Preservation Services section of their website has detailed promote Utah's historic advice on all aspects of historic preservation including the do's built environment through and don't of creating compatible additions. public education, advocacy, PROFESSIONAL HELP and active preservation. Homeowners are sometimes frustrated when they are advised to "get an architect," thinking perhaps an addition is too simple to require one.Throughout this book,however,we have tried to show that compatible additions come from combining an understanding of the specifics of a site—house, lot,and neighborhood-with the knowledge of how to artfully navigate these multiple constraints.There is a real art to this and architects who specialize in working within historic districts develop a fine sense for what works well.The same is true of contractors and other trades people.They're not hard to find.It can be as easy as seeing a little sign in the yard of a house being worked on or a company logo on a pickup truck.Helpful suggestions can come from other builders and architects,Utah Heritage Foundation,SHPO,and the SLC Historic Landmarks Commission. • UTAH ® HERITAGE fTf FOUNDATION 0 ISBN 978-Ilq0-615-19891-0 Utah Heritage Foundation III 51000 www.utahheritagefoundation.org 9 780615 198910 ISBN: 978-0-615-19891-0