Set a clear historic preservation policy for the city and stick with it
Historic districts have been great successes in some areas of the city, but in other areas, particularly Central City and on the 300 West corridor, they exist without political or private support. This is most evident in the wide disparity between what is allowed by the base zoning and what is allowed by the guidelines of the historic district. This has resulted in contentious and protracted battles over properties in these neighborhoods that have resulted in stagnation. The best examples of this are the Marmalade Commercial Node block on 300 West and the Emigration Court Block on 400 South. In both cases, what was on the site (and in theory protected by the historic district) was not what was envisioned in the master plan or the base zoning, which envisioned high density new development. The resulting battles were bad for the city, bad for the property owners, and bad for the neighborhoods. Nothing has been developed on either site, and the historic buildings are lost. The city's political and administrative leaders need to make choices in these areas - should they be protected as historic districts or should they be redeveloped through demolition and new construction? The goals are not mutually exclusive (it is working all over the city), but are hard to overcome in the areas where there is such a disparity between what is there and what could be built. After this decision is made, the city needs to make boundary changes and/or zoning amendments or it will find itself right back in a similar situation when the economy improves.
As a side note, what ever happened to the City-wide Historic Preservation Plan?
-
Check out the new Residential Guidelines and the changes being presented by the Planning Division, by going to http://www.slcgov.com/ced/planning/preservation/preservation.htm