Estimated read time: 4-5 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — Several changes may be coming to Salt Lake City's historic preservation overlay districts in an effort to improve the process and make it easier for property owners within the districts to make small modifications to their historic buildings.
The Salt Lake City Council is weighing an amendment to its ordinances, which could be voted on next month.
The city's ordinances were first established in 1976 to create requirements that aimed to preserve the oldest parts of the city that remain intact today. Certain buildings or blocks — those with historical significance — have rules that regulate any exterior alterations, as well as any new construction, demolition or relocation, meaning that changes must be approved by the city.
Since its creation, the city has approved 14 local historic districts and 150 landmark sites, which are scattered across the city. Most of these can be found in its Avenues, Capitol Hill, Central City and University neighborhoods, though there are also additional locations along South Temple and closer to its East Bench.
Under the proposed changes, Salt Lake City would add a new applicability section that makes it easier to know which buildings qualify for protection under a historic preservation overlay. There would also be some exemptions tied to certificates of appropriateness, the procedure in which changes to historic buildings are approved, according to Salt Lake City planning manager Amy Thompson, who presented the proposal to the City Council during an informational meeting on Tuesday.
For example, any installation of storm windows, small plaques and mailboxes would not have to go through the certificate of appropriateness process under the proposed changes. The same goes for any utility meters, charging stations or solar panels that are not visible from a public street or sidewalk by the building.
In addition, city staff would be able to review any proposed new solar panels within historic overlays without the need for property owners to go to the city's Historic Landmark Commission. Staff would also be able to deny a certificate of appropriateness if it's clear that standards aren't being kept, which property owners can appeal through the normal city process if they disagree.
"This is essentially a streamlining measure," Thompson said.
The proposed changes would give the commission more jurisdiction and authority — at least in city code. The commission would be able to recommend structures to the board that oversees Utah's nominations to the National Register of Historic Places, and make recommendations to the City Council when it comes to preservation incentive programs. Commissioners are already doing this, but the changes would codify it, Thompson explained.
Other changes include:
- The addition of a period of significance and historic integrity as historic definitions.
- A new requirement to notify residents by mail about the demolition of any nonhistoric building within a historic overlay, including a map and a date of the decision.
- New application fees for the determination of economic hardship, local historic district boundary reduction or the revocation of a landmark site.
It would also add new language for the City Council to adopt historic resource surveys and associated reports that accompany new local historic designations. While "historic" is generally reserved for buildings that are at least 50 years old, Thompson explained that these surveys would help indicate future preservation goals.
"Age alone does not make a building eligible for contributing status, but it's important to acknowledge that resources that are perceived as historic and worth preserving may evolve and change over time," she said.
Members of Salt Lake City's planning and historical landmark commissions both voted in May to offer positive recommendations about the proposal. During those meetings, at least one resident expressed concerns over "a lack of public process for changing a building's status from contributory to noncontributory" among historic zones.
Council members also voiced concerns over ways buildings could fall into noncontributory status during Tuesday's meeting, either through small incidental or intentional modifications or neglect. This sets them up for major alterations or demolition because they don't qualify under the overlay.
"We're losing a lot of those homes," said City Councilwoman Ana Valdemoros. "We're losing them and losing the character. ... I'm not sure where in our process where we're going to start thinking about the ones that have been modified, but not to the point where it's unrecognizable."
These are issues the city could look into in the future; however, members did appear to be supportive of ways to improve the process overall and make it easier for property owners.
The council will hold a public hearing on the matter during its Nov. 7 meeting before any final decisions. The item is tentatively scheduled to be voted on during its Nov. 14 meeting.
