Appeal - April 15, 2014 Board of Adjustment Staff ReportBoard of Adjustment
Staff Report
Subject: 632 Deer Valley Loop
Author: Anya Grahn, Historic Preservation Planner
Project #: PL-13-02160
Date: April 15, 2014
Type of Item: Quasi-Judicial – Appeal of Historic Preservation Board’s
Determination of Significance
Summary Recommendations
Staff recommends the Board of Adjustment hear the appeal of the Historic Preservation
Board’s (HPB) determination of significance of the historic site at 632 Deer Valley Loop.
The HPB determined that the site meets the criteria for designation as a “Significant” site.
Topic
Applicant: William and Juli Bertagnole
Location: 632 Deer Valley Loop
Zoning: Residential-Medium Density (RM) District
Adjacent Land Uses: Historic Residential-1 (HR1), Historic Residential-Low Density
(HRL), Estate (E), and Residential Development (RD) Districts
Reason for Review: Appeal of the Historic Preservation Board’s determination of
significance of the historic site at 632 Deer Valley Loop.
Background
The Park City Historic Sites Inventory, adopted February 4, 2009, includes four hundred
five (405) sites of which one hundred ninety-two (192) sites meet the criteria for designation
as Landmark Sites and two hundred thirteen (213) sites meet the criteria for designation as
Significant Sites. The existing structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop was added to the
Inventory as a Significant Structure based on a reconnaissance level survey by then-
Historic Preservation Consultant Dina Blaes in 2009. It had been previously identified as
historic in a 1995 reconnaissance level survey, but was not included in the 1982 Historic
District Architectural Survey.
During the reconnaissance-level survey, Dina noted that the Sanborn maps identified the
structure as a “Hall-Parlor” home, but noted that the side addition had likely been added
outside the Mature Mining Era, between 1949 and 1969. Sanborn Fire Insurance maps
were used to determine the original shape of the home. Though the structure has retained
its historic form, much of its historic integrity has been lost due to changes in its exterior
materials. The wood siding material is not original, nor are the aluminum windows and
doors. The porch supports have also been replaced. The second floor window opening
has been lost as well, and a side porch appears to have been enclosed to create additional
interior living space after 1969. (The history of this structure is outlined further in the HPB
Report for November 13, 2013, Exhibit C.)
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 23 of 105
A fire on May 17, 1999, severely destroyed the rear of the structure. Though it had a
negative impact on the rear addition, the remainder of the historic structure remained intact
on the hall-parlor portion of the house. Years of deterioration and exposure to the elements
should have resulted in greater damage and the rapid decline of the exposed walls and roof
joists; however, they are in surprisingly fair condition.
A trust deed was recorded at the Summit County Recorder’s Office on May 2, 2013,
transferring ownership from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to the Bertagnoles,
following decades of litigation with the BLM. On August 21, 2013, a Notice and Order to
Vacate and Demolish the structure was issued by the Building Department due to the fire
damage and dilapidated state of the structure. The property owners would like to demolish
the structure in order to accommodate new development; they do not believe it is
historically significant.
Site visits have been made by the Chief Building Official, Planning Director, and Planning
Department staff.
Because of the limited information available in the HSI, the Planning Director directed staff
to conduct additional research to determine the historic significance of the 632 Deer Valley
Loop site. The Historic Preservation Board (HPB) determined that the structure should
remain on the inventory as a “Significant” site on November 13, 2013.
The Planning Department received an appeal of the HPB’s determination on November 25,
2013, within ten (10) days of the HPB’s determination.
Appeal and Burden of Proof
The specific appeal is to the Historic Preservation Board’s Determination of Significance.
LMC 15-11-10(B)(4) states that the Applicant or any party participating in the hearing may
appeal the Historic Preservation Board decision to the Board of Adjustment pursuant to
Section 15-10-7 of this Code. Appeal requests shall be submitted to the Planning
Department within ten (10) days of Historic Preservation Board final action.
Appeals shall be considered by the Board of Adjustment on the record made before the
Historic Preservation Board. Appeals to the Board of Adjustment will review factual matters
for correctness and determine the correctness of the decision of the land use authority in its
interpretation and application of the land Use ordinance.
Upon appeal, the Board of Adjustment shall conduct a hearing and shall review the matter
under de novo standard review. The BOA, in conformity with the provisions of the Code,
may reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision, or
determination as ought to be made. The Owner bears the burden of demonstrating that the
HPB erred in their findings.
The applicant’s appeal is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The applicant’s basis of appeal is
that:
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 24 of 105
1. There is no historic material or elements that may be significant.
2. It is an old building that retains its c. 1900 footprint, but there is no evidence that
the structure is significant to the regional history, architecture, engineering, or
culture. There is no evidence of significance in the lives of persons associated
with the building.
3. The applicant finds that the structure does not meet the criteria outlined in the
Municipal Code for designation as a “significant” structure.
Analysis
The applicant finds that the structure does not meet the criteria outlined in LMC 15-11-
10(A)(2) regarding the designation of the historic site. The following analysis addresses
their findings.
1. The applicant finds that there are no original log walls or any other elements that
may be significant.
Staff finds that log walls would likely relate to the settlement period of Utah or even the
region, and that the pioneer period is not the only period of significance. The structure
should be considered “significant” as part of the Mature Mining Era (1894-1930).
A single photograph from the late-1930s tax assessment depicts the structure in much the
same form as it exists today. One-over-one double-hung windows framed the central entry
door on the front porch. The front porch had a hip roof supported by turned porch posts.
Horizontal railings framed the porch while vertical siding enclosed the area beneath it. On
the west elevation, a side entry porch covered shielded a side door. The one-story rear
addition is visible behind the porch. An attic entrance or window is provided at the top of
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 25 of 105
the gable on the west elevation. This photograph documents the appearance of the
structure during the Mature Mining Era.
The applicant is correct in that much of the historic character and original features of the
building have been lost. The wood siding material is not original, nor are the aluminum
windows and doors. The porch supports have also been replaced. The second floor
window opening has been lost as well, and a side porch appears to have been enclosed to
create additional interior living space after 1969. No original wood windows remain.
The historic structural system of the building remains and has allowed the structure to
maintain its historic form. The hip roof of the front porch has been preserved, though steel
porch columns have replaced the turned wood columns. The central brick chimney and
wood entry door on the façade are also original elements.
Though many of the original features are not visible, they do remain. The historic wood
siding has been covered by layers of Bricktex and vertical wood siding. The wood trim
around the historic door and window openings exist as well, though their profiles have been
compromised by layers of cladding. If the Bricktex and existing wood siding were to be
removed, the second story gable window opening would likely be exposed or at least
shown to exist through ghost lines.
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 26 of 105
2. The applicant finds that it is an old building that retains its c. 1900 footprint, but
there is no evidence that the structure is significant to the regional history,
architecture, engineering, or culture. There is no evidence of significance in the lives
of persons associated with the building.
In order for a structure to remain “Significant” on the City’s Historic Sites Inventory (HSI), it
must be important in local or regional history, architecture, engineering, or culture
associated with at least one (1) of the following:
(i) An era of Historic importance to the community, or
(ii) Lives of Persons who were of Historic Importance to the Community, or
(iii) Noteworthy methods of construction, materials, or craftsmanship used during the
Historic Period.
As outlined in the Historic Sites Form, staff finds that this structure contributes to our overall
understanding of the history of the community. Along with the other residential structures
that make up the City’s historic districts, these houses provide insight and understanding of
the residential character of mining towns of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century,
including settlement pattern and socio-economic makeup.
Park City is one (1) of three (3) metal mining districts in the state during Utah’s mining
boom period (late-19th Century through early-20th Century). The city is one (1) of only two
(2) major metal mining communities to have survived to the present. As such, Park City has
the largest and best preserved collection of residential buildings of any Utah metal mining
town. As a whole, these structures provide the most complete documentation of the
residential character of mining towns of the period.
The structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop was once part of the larger Red Light District. Many
of the structures that once made up this neighborhood have been lost; however, four (4)
remain in close proximity to one another—632 Deer Valley Loop; as well as 622, 652, and
660 Rossie Hill Drive. The relationship between these four (4) houses demonstrates the
density of the Red Light District and this neighborhood that existed just outside the
congestion of the downtown.
The applicant is correct in that the structure is not historically significant based on the lives
of persons who were of Historic importance to the community. The original builder and
residents of this structure are unknown. It was likely also not designed by an architect but,
rather, by the property owner or a carpenter-builder.
Staff finds, however, that the structure is historically significant due to its methods of
construction, materials, and craftsmanship that reflect the Historic Period. Park City has the
state’s largest collection of late-19th Century and early-20th Century frame houses. The use
and application of simple building materials—including lumbered wood and brick—
represent traditional building patterns. The structure’s lack of foundation and frame
construction also depict a common construction technique in Park City.
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 27 of 105
3. Lastly, the applicants argue that the structure does not meet the criteria for
significance established in the Municipal Code.
Staff and the Historic Preservation Board have found that the structure does meet the
criteria outlined in LMC 15-11-10(A)(2) for Significant Sites. As defined, any buildings
(main, attached, detached or public), accessory buildings and/or structures may be
designated to the Historic Sites Inventory as a Significant Site if the Planning Department
finds it meets all the criteria listed below:
(a) It is at least fifty (50) years old or has achieved Significance in the past fifty (50)
years if the Site is of exceptional importance to the community; and (…)
Complies. The structure was originally constructed circa 1900, and not later than 1910
making the structure 113 years old.
(b) It retains its Essential Historical Form, meaning there are no major alterations that
have destroyed the Essential Historical Form. Major alterations that destroy the
Essential Historical Form include:
(i) Changes in pitch of the main roof of the primary façade if 1) the change was
made after the Period of Historic Significance; 2) the change is not due to any
structural failure; or 3) the change is not due to collapse as a result of inadequate
maintenance on the part of the Applicant or a previous Owner, or
(ii) Addition of upper stories or the removal of original upper stories occurred after
the Period of Historic Significance, or
(iii) Moving it from its original location to a Dissimilar Location, or
(iv) Addition(s) that significantly obscures the Essential Historical Form when
viewed from the primary public Right-of-Way.
Complies.The home retains its original historic form. The 1960s side addition
does not detract or negatively impact the historic form of the structure. It could be
removed if the owners chose to restore the structure as it has not achieved
significance in its own right. Any future panelization or reconstruction will also
preserve the historic hall-and-parlor form of the structure.
(c) It is important in local or regional history, architecture, engineering, or culture
associated with at least one (1) of the following:
(i) An era of Historic importance to the community, or
(ii) Lives of Persons who were of Historic importance to the community, or
(iii) Noteworthy methods of construction, materials, or craftsmanship used during
the Historic period.
Complies.As previously described, the structure contributes to our understanding
of Park City’s Mature Mining Era (1894-1930). The houses within Old Town and the
historic district are the largest and best preserved group of residential buildings in a
metal mining town in Utah. As such, they provide the most complete documentation
of the residential character of mining towns of that period, including settlement
patterns, building materials, construction techniques, and socio-economic make-up.
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 28 of 105
These structures greatly add to our understanding of a significant aspect of Park
City’s economic growth and architectural development as a mining community.
The criteria for designating sites to the Park City Historic Sites Inventory as a Landmark
Site include:
(a) It is at least fifty (50) years old or has achieved Significance in the past fifty (50)
years if the Site is of exceptional importance to the community; and
(b) It retains its Historic Integrity in terms of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling and association as defined by the National Park Service for
the National Register of Historic Places; and
(c) It is significant in local, regional or national history, architecture, engineering or
culture associated with at least one (1) of the following:
(i) An era that has made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our
history;
(ii) The lives of Persons significant in the history of the community, state,
region, or nation; or
(iii) The distinctive characteristics of type, period, or method of construction or
the work of a notable architect or master craftsman.
The HPB has found that the structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop meets the standards for
local “significant” designation, but does not meet the criteria for “landmark” designation. In
order for the site to be designated as “landmark,” the structure would have to retain its
historic integrity in terms of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and
association. Moreover, it would be eligible for the National Register. Due to the alterations,
loss of its historic materials, and changes in window and door configuration, the structure is
no longer eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.
Future Process
Final Actions by the Board of Adjustment on Appeals may be appealed to Third District
Court within thirty (30) calendar days.
Staff Recommendation
Staff requests the Board of Adjustment review the following findings of fact and conclusions
of law and order and consider adopting them and denying the appeal.
Alternatives
1. The Board of Adjustment may reverse the Historic Preservation Board’s
determination of significance.
2. The Board of Adjustment may remand the appeal back to the Historic Preservation
Board to evaluate the new evidence.
3. The Board of Adjustment may direct staff to provide additional analysis and continue
the appeal to a future date.
Findings of Fact
1. 632 Deer Valley Loop is within the Residential-Medium Density (RM) zoning district.
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 29 of 105
2. There is an existing side gable hall-parlor structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop. This
structure is currently listed on the Park City Historic Sites Inventory as a “Significant”
Structure.
3. The existing structure has been in existence at 632 Deer Valley Loop since circa
1900. The structure appears in the 1904 and 1927 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps.
Furthermore, the Historic Site Form contains tax cards of the structure from 1949,
1958, and 1969. A late-1930s tax card photo also demonstrates that the overall
form of the structure has not been altered.
4. The hall-and-parlor structure and later rear addition were both constructed within the
Mature Mining Era (1894-1930) and are historic.
5. Though out of period, the enclosed side porch entrance added in the 1960s does not
detract from the historic significance of the structure.
6. The existing structure is in serious disrepair and is not habitable in its current
dangerous condition.
7. There is very little original exterior materials remaining on the exterior of the home.
The original wood lap siding has been covered by layers of Bricktex and vertical
wood siding
8. The double-hung windows on the façade were removed and expanded to install
larger, undivided rectangular windows after 1969. The original wood double-hung
windows throughout were replaced by aluminum windows.
9. After 1969, the turned wood porch posts were replaced with new decorative metal
columns. A brick chimney was installed above the enclosed side porch that was
later repaired with thick layers of Portland Cement.
10. The structure is a hall-parlor plan and typical of the Mature Mining Era.
11. The rear addition of the structure, dating prior to 1927, was severely damaged in a
fire on May 17, 1999.
12. The site meets the criteria as Significant on the City’s Historic Sites Inventory.
13. Built circa 1900, the structure is over fifty (50) years old and has achieved
Significance in the past fifty (50) years.
14. Though the structure has lost its historic integrity due to the out-of-period alterations
to its historic materials, it has retained its historical form. The out-of-period addition
to the west elevation of the structure does not detract from its historic significance.
15. The structure is important in local or regional history because it is associated with an
era of historic importance to the community, the Mature Mining Era (1894-190).
Conclusions of Law
1. The existing structure located at 632 Deer Valley Loop meets all of the criteria for a
Significant Site as set forth in LMC Section 15-11-10(A)(2) which includes:
(a) It is at least fifty (50) years old or has achieved Significance in the past fifty (50)
years if the Site is of exceptional importance to the community; and
(b) It retains its Essential Historical Form, meaning there are no major alterations
that have destroyed the Essential Historical Form. Major alterations that destroy the
Essential Historical Form include:
(i) Changes in pitch of the main roof of the primary façade if 1) the change was
made after the Period of Historic Significance; 2) the change is not due to any
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 30 of 105
structural failure; or 3) the change is not due to collapse as a result of inadequate
maintenance on the part of the Applicant or a previous Owner, or
(ii) Addition of upper stories or the removal of original upper stories occurred after
the Period of Historic Significance, or
(iii) Moving it from its original location to a Dissimilar Location, or
(iv) Addition(s) that significantly obscures the Essential Historical Form when
viewed from the primary public Right-of-Way.
(c) It is important in local or regional history, architecture, engineering, or culture
associated with at least one (1) of the following:
(i) An era of Historic importance to the community, or
(ii) Lives of Persons who were of Historic importance to the community, or
(iii) Noteworthy methods of construction, materials, or craftsmanship used during
the Historic period.
Order
1. The appeal of the Historic Preservation Board’s determination of significance for 632
Deer Valley Loop is denied.
Exhibits
Exhibit A — Applicant’s appeal (November 25, 2013)
Exhibit B — Applicant’s report on historical significance (March 31, 2014)
Exhibit C — Historic Preservation Board Staff Report 11.13.13
Exhibit D — Historic Preservation Board Minutes, 11.13.13
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 31 of 105
Exhibit A
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 32 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 33 of 105
Exhibit B
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 34 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 35 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 36 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 37 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 38 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 39 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 40 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 41 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 42 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 43 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 44 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 45 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 46 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 47 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 48 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 49 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 50 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 51 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 52 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 53 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 54 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 55 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 56 of 105
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 57 of 105
Historic Preservation Board
Staff Report
Author: Anya Grahn, Historic Preservation Planner
Subject: Historic Sites Inventory
Address: 632 Deer Valley Loop
Project Number: PL-13-02094
Date: November 13, 2013
Type of Item: Administrative – Determination of Significance
Summary Recommendation:
Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Board review the application, conduct a
public hearing and confirm the status of 632 Deer Valley Loop as a Significant Site on
the Park City Historic Sites Inventory.
Topic:
Project Name: 632 Deer Valley Loop
Applicant: Park City Municipal Corporation
Owners: William and Juli Bertagnole
Proposal: Determination of Significance
Background:
The Park City Historic Sites Inventory, adopted February 4, 2009, includes four hundred
five (405) sites of which one hundred ninety-two (192) sites meet the criteria for
designation as Landmark Sites and two hundred thirteen (213) sites meet the criteria for
designation as Significant Sites. The existing structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop was
added to the Inventory as a Significant Structure based on a reconnaissance level
survey by then-Historic Preservation Consultant Dina Blaes in 2009. It had been
previously identified as historic in a 1995 reconnaissance level survey, but was not
included in the 1982 Historic District Architectural Survey.
During the reconnaissance-level survey, Dina noted that the Sanborn maps identified
the structure as a “Hall-Parlor” home, but noted that the side addition had likely been
added outside the Mature Mining Era, between 1949 and 1969. Sandborn Fire
Insurance maps were used to determine the original shape of the home. Though the
structure has retained its historic form, much of its historic integrity has been lost due to
changes in its exterior materials. The wood siding material is not original, nor are the
aluminum windows and doors. The porch supports have also been replaced. The
second floor window opening has been lost as well, and a side porch appears to have
been enclosed to create additional interior living space after 1969.
A fire on May 17, 1999, severely destroyed the rear of the structure. Though it had a
negative impact on the rear addition, the remainder of the historic structure remained
intact on the hall-parlor portion of the house. Years of deterioration and exposure to the
elements should have resulted in greater damage and rapid decline of the exposed
walls and roof joists; however, they are in surprisingly fair condition.
Planning Department
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJH
Exhibit C
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 58 of 105
A trust deed was recorded at the Summit County Recorder’s Office on May 2, 2013,
transferring ownership from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to the Bertagnoles,
following decades of litigation with the BLM. In August 21, 2013, a Notice and Order to
Vacate and Demolish the structure was issued due to the fire damage and dilapidated
state of the structure. The property owners would like to demolish the structure in order
to accommodate new development; they do not believe it is historically significant.
Site visits have been made by the Chief Building Official and Planning Director.
Because of the limited information available in the HSI, the Planning Director has
directed staff to conduct additional research to determine the historic significance of the
632 Deer Valley Loop site. The purpose of this staff report is to have the HPB review
the criteria to determine whether the structure is a “Significant” site.
History of the Structure:
The residential structure constructed at 632 Deer Valley Loop was originally built circa
1900. The 1900 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps did not include this portion of Park City
as it was outside the dense development of Old Town. The structure first appears in the
1904 Sanborn map, however, as seen below, circled in red
The one (1) story, side gable house was constructed as a hall-and-parlor. It appears,
per the Sanborn maps, that the structure did not originally have a front porch.
Nevertheless, it did have a porch on the west elevation, likely over a side entry, as
shown in the 1927 Sanborn Map.
1904 Sanborn Map
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 59 of 105
By 1927, a rear addition had been added across the south elevation of the structure.
The side porch had also been relocated to this rear portion of the structure. A front
porch had not yet been added, or was not identified by the Sanborn map.
A single photograph from the late-1930s tax assessment depicts the structure in much
the same form as it exists today (Exhibit B). One-over-one double-hung windows
framed the central entry door on the front porch. The front porch had a hip roof
supported by turned porch posts. Horizontal railings framed the porch while vertical
siding enclosed the area beneath it. On the west elevation, a side entry porch covered
shielded a side door. The one-story rear addition is visible behind the porch. An attic
entrance or window is provided at the top of the gable on the west elevation. This
photograph documents the appearance of the structure during the Mature Mining Era.
1927 Sanborn Map
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 60 of 105
Over the next four decades, the house suffered from a number of modifications that
have significantly diminished its historic integrity. The 1949 appraisal card notes that
the house was sided with Bricktex and the roofing was a patterned shingle. There was
no foundation. A concrete block or brick foundation was noted in the 1958 tax
assessment. Finally, the 1969 tax card notes a rear porch of about 60 square feet. It is
likely that 60 square foot porch had existed all along as reflected in the Sanborn maps,
but had not been identified on the tax cards.
After 1969, the house appears to have been renovated. The double-hung windows on
the façade were removed and expanded to install larger, undivided rectangular
windows. The original wood double-hung windows throughout were replaced by
aluminum windows. The Bricktex siding was covered with new wood vertical siding,
concealing the attic window. The turned wood porch posts were replaced with new
decorative metal columns. A brick chimney was installed above the enclosed side
porch that was later repaired with thick layers of Portland Cement. The following
c.1990s photograph shows the house largely as it exists today.
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 61 of 105
On May 17, 1999, heavy smoke and flames were seen from the rear of the building. By
the time first responders arrived, the door had been kicked in by bystanders. The back
bedroom was fully engulfed in flames, leaving it scorched from floor to ceiling and
compromising its roof structure. The fire was identified as suspicious with numerous
points of origin; however, the current property owners have explained that the fire was
likely caused by their tenant’s pets knocking over a heat lamp above an iguana
terrarium. Since that time, the Building Department has required the property to be
secured and boarded; however, it has been difficult to secure the structure and there
have been several reports of unauthorized access
Analysis and Discussion:
The Historic Preservation Board is authorized by Title15-11-5(I) to review and take
action on the designation of sites within the Historic Sites Inventory. The Historic
Preservation Board may designate sites to the Historic Sites Inventory as a means of
providing recognition to and encouraging the preservation of historic sites in the
community (LMC 15-11-10). Land Management Code Section 15-11-10(A) sets forth
the criteria for designating sites to the Park City Historic Sites Inventory.
Because the home does retain its historic form, the evidence supports the conclusion
that the home is “Significant”. A reconstruction of the home, which is necessary based
on the structural integrity of the home raised by the Chief Building Official, would also
allow the house and site to remain ”Significant” based on the following definition:
Significant Site. Any buildings (main, attached, detached or public), accessory buildings
and/or structures may be designated to the Historic Sites Inventory as a Significant Site
if the Planning Department finds it meets all the criteria listed below:
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 62 of 105
(a) It is at least fifty (50) years old or has achieved Significance in the past fifty (50)
years if the Site is of exceptional importance to the community; and (…)Complies
The structure was originally constructed circa 1900, and not later than 1910 making the
structure 113 years old.
(b) It retains its Essential Historical Form, meaning there are no major alterations that
have destroyed the Essential Historical Form. Major alterations that destroy the
Essential Historical Form include:
(i) Changes in pitch of the main roof of the primary façade if 1) the change was
made after the Period of Historic Significance; 2) the change is not due to any
structural failure; or 3) the change is not due to collapse as a result of inadequate
maintenance on the part of the Applicant or a previous Owner, or
(ii) Addition of upper stories or the removal of original upper stories occurred after
the Period of Historic Significance, or
(iii) Moving it from its original location to a Dissimilar Location, or
(iv) Addition(s) that significantly obscures the Essential Historical Form when
viewed from the primary public Right-of-Way. Complies.
The home retains its original historic form. The 1960s side addition does not detract or
negatively impact the historic form of the structure. It could be removed if the owners
chose to restore the structure as it has not achieved significance in its own right. Any
future panelization or reconstruction will also preserve the historic hall-and-parlor form
of the structure.
(c) It is important in local or regional history, architecture, engineering, or culture
associated with at least one (1) of the following:
(i) An era of Historic importance to the community, or
(ii) Lives of Persons who were of Historic importance to the community, or
(iii) Noteworthy methods of construction, materials, or craftsmanship used during
the Historic period. Complies.
This structure contributes to our understanding of Park City’s Mature Mining Era (1894-
1930). The houses within Old Town and the historic district are the largest and best
preserved group of residential buildings in a metal mining town in Utah. As such, they
provide the most complete documentation of the residential character of mining towns of
that period, including settlement patterns, building materials, construction techniques,
and socio-economic make-up. These structures greatly add to our understanding of a
significant aspect of Park City’s economic growth and architectural development as a
mining community.
The criteria for designating sites to the Park City Historic Sites Inventory as a Landmark
Site include:
(a) It is at least fifty (50) years old or has achieved Significance in the past fifty (50)
years if the Site is of exceptional importance to the community; and
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 63 of 105
(b) It retains its Historic Integrity in terms of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling and association as defined by the National Park Service for
the National Register of Historic Places; and
(c) It is significant in local, regional or national history, architecture, engineering or
culture associated with at least one (1) of the following:
(i) An era that has made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our
history;
(ii) The lives of Persons significant in the history of the community, state,
region, or nation; or
(iii) The distinctive characteristics of type, period, or method of construction or
the work of a notable architect or master craftsman.
Staff finds that the structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop meets the standards for local
“significant” designation, but does not meet the criteria for “landmark” designation. In
order for the site to be designated as “landmark,” the structure would have to retain its
historic integrity in terms of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling
and association. Moreover, it would be eligible for the National Register. Due to the
alterations, loss of its historic materials, and changes in window and door configuration,
the structure is no longer eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.
Process:
The HPB will hear testimony from the applicant and the public and will review the
Application for compliance with the “Criteria for Designating Historic Sites to the Park
City Historic Sites Inventory.” The HPB shall review the Application “de novo,” giving no
deference to the prior determination. If the HPB finds that the application does not
comply with the criteria set forth in Section 15-11-10(A)(1) or Section 15-11-10(A)(2),
the Building and/or structure will be removed from the Historic Sites Inventory. The
HPB shall forward a copy of its written findings to the Owner and/or Applicant.
The Applicant or any party participating in the hearing may appeal the Historic
Preservation Board decision to the Board of Adjustment. Appeal requests shall be
submitted to the Planning Department ten (10) days of the Historic Preservation Board
decision. Appeals shall be considered only on the record made before the HPB and will
be reviewed for correctness.
Notice:
Legal Notice of this public hearing was published in the Park Record and posted in the
required public spaces.
Public Input:
A public hearing, conducted by the Historic Preservation Board, is required prior to
adding sites to or removing sites from the Historic Sites Inventory. The public hearing
for the recommended action was properly and legally noticed as required by the Land
Management Code. No public input was received at the time of writing this report.
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 64 of 105
Alternatives:
x Conduct a public hearing to consider the DOS for 632 Deer Valley Loop
described herein and find the structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop meets the
criteria for the designation of “Significant” to the Historic Sites Inventory
according the draft findings of fact and conclusions of law, in whole or in part.
x Conduct a public hearing and find the structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop does not
meet the criteria for the designation of “Significant” to the Historic Sites Inventory,
and providing specific findings for this action.
x Continue the action to a date uncertain.
Significant Impacts:
There are no significant impacts on the City as a result of retaining the existing building
described in this report to the Historic Sites Inventory as a “Significant” Structure.
Consequences of not taking the Recommended Action:
If no action is taken, no change will occur to the designation of 632 Deer Valley Loop on
the Historic Sites Inventory. The structure will not be eligible for demolition.
If the Historic Preservation Board chooses to remove this site from the HSI, the
structure will not be a designated historic site and will be eligible for demolition.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Board conduct a public hearing and find
that criteria have been met to continue the designation of 632 Deer Valley Loop as
“Significant” within the Park City Historic Sites Inventory according to the following
finding of fact and conclusions of law.
Finding of Fact:
1. 632 Deer Valley Loop is within the Residential-Medium Density (RM) zoning
district.
2. There is an existing side gable hall-parlor structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop.
This structure is currently listed on the Park City Historic Sites Inventory as a
“Significant” Structure.
3. The existing structure has been in existence at 632 Deer Valley Loop since circa
1900. The structure appears in the 1904 and 1927 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps.
Furthermore, the Historic Site Form contains tax cards of the structure from
1949, 1958, and 1969. A late-1930s tax card photo also demonstrates that the
overall form of the structure has not been altered.
4. The hall-and-parlor structure and later rear addition were both constructed within
the Mature Mining Era (1894-1930) and are historic.
5. Though out of period, the enclosed side porch entrance added in the 1960s does
not detract from the historic significance of the structure.
6. The existing structure is in serious disrepair and is not habitable in its current
dangerous condition.
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 65 of 105
7. There is very little original exterior materials remaining on the exterior of the
home. The original wood lap siding has been covered by layers of Bricktex and
vertical wood siding
8. The double-hung windows on the façade were removed and expanded to install
larger, undivided rectangular windows after 1969. The original wood double-
hung windows throughout were replaced by aluminum windows.
9. After 1969, the turned wood porch posts were replaced with new decorative
metal columns. A brick chimney was installed above the enclosed side porch
that was later repaired with thick layers of Portland Cement.
10. The structure is a hall-parlor plan and typical of the Mature Mining Era.
11. The rear addition of the structure, dating prior to 1927, was severely damaged in
a fire on May 17, 1999.
12. The site meets the criteria as Significant on the City’s Historic Sites Inventory.
13. Built circa 1900, the structure is over fifty (50) years old and has achieved
Significance in the past fifty (50) years.
14. Though the structure has lost its historic integrity due to the out-of-period
alterations to its historic materials, it has retained its historical form. The out-of-
period addition to the west elevation of the structure does not detract from its
historic significance.
15. The structure is important in local or regional history because it is associated with
an era of historic importance to the community, the Mature Mining Era (1894-
190).
Conclusions of Law
1. The existing structure located at 632 Deer Valley Loop meets all of the criteria
for a Significant Site as set forth in LMC Section 15-11-10(A)(2) which includes:
(a) It is at least fifty (50) years old or has achieved Significance in the past fifty
(50) years if the Site is of exceptional importance to the community; and
(b) It retains its Essential Historical Form, meaning there are no major alterations
that have destroyed the Essential Historical Form. Major alterations that destroy
the Essential Historical Form include:
(i) Changes in pitch of the main roof of the primary façade if 1) the change
was made after the Period of Historic Significance; 2) the change is not due
to any structural failure; or 3) the change is not due to collapse as a result
of inadequate maintenance on the part of the Applicant or a previous
Owner, or
(ii) Addition of upper stories or the removal of original upper stories
occurred after the Period of Historic Significance, or
(iii) Moving it from its original location to a Dissimilar Location, or
(iv) Addition(s) that significantly obscures the Essential Historical Form
when viewed from the primary public Right-of-Way.
(c) It is important in local or regional history, architecture, engineering, or culture
associated with at least one (1) of the following:
(i) An era of Historic importance to the community, or
(ii) Lives of Persons who were of Historic importance to the community, or
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 66 of 105
(iii) Noteworthy methods of construction, materials, or craftsmanship used
during the Historic period.
Exhibits:
Exhibit A – Historic Sites Inventory Form, 2008
Exhibit B – Historic photograph, late-1930s
Exhibit C – Letter from Principal Allen Roberts, CRSA
Exhibit D – Photographs from site visits
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 67 of 105
HISTORIC SITE FORM - HISTORIC SITES INVENTORY
PARK CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (10-08)
1 IDENTIFICATION
Name of Property:
Address: 632 DEER VALLEY LOOP RD AKA:
City, County: Park City, Summit County, Utah Tax Number: PC-537
Current Owner Name: BERTAGNOLE WILLIAM T & JULI M TRUSTEES Parent Parcel(s):
Current Owner Address: 1600 LUCKY JOHN DR, PARK CITY, UT 84060-6948
Legal Description (include acreage): 11TH HOUSE S SIDE DEER VALLEY PARK CITY(#632 DEER VALLEY);
ALSO DESC AS BEG S 42*52'44" E 1038.31 FT FROM E1/4 COR SEC 16 T2SR4E SLBM; TH S 76*43' E
116.60 FT; TH S 9*17' W 83.58 FT; TH S 80*29' W 129.40 FT; TH N 14*51' E 51.12 FT; TH N 10*39' E 82.35
FT TO BEG CONT 0.29
2 STATUS/USE
Property Category Evaluation* Reconstruction Use
; building(s), main Landmark Site Date: Original Use: Residential
building(s), attached ; Significant Site Permit #: Current Use: Residential
building(s), detached Not Historic Full Partial
building(s), public
building(s), accessory
structure(s) *National Register of Historic Places: ; ineligible eligible
listed (date: )
3 DOCUMENTATION
Photos: Dates Research Sources (check all sources consulted, whether useful or not)
tax photo: abstract of title ; city/county histories
; prints: 1995 & 2006 tax card personal interviews
historic: c. original building permit Utah Hist. Research Center
sewer permit USHS Preservation Files
Drawings and Plans ; Sanborn Maps USHS Architects File
measured floor plans obituary index LDS Family History Library
site sketch map city directories/gazetteers Park City Hist. Soc/Museum
Historic American Bldg. Survey census records university library(ies):
original plans: biographical encyclopedias other:
other: newspapers
Bibliographical References (books, articles, interviews, etc.) Attach copies of all research notes and materials.
Blaes, Dina & Beatrice Lufkin. "Final Report." Park City Historic Building Inventory. Salt Lake City: 2007.
Carter, Thomas and Goss, Peter. Utah’s Historic Architecture, 1847-1940: a Guide. Salt Lake City, Utah:
University of Utah Graduate School of Architecture and Utah State Historical Society, 1991.
McAlester, Virginia and Lee. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1998.
Roberts, Allen. “Final Report.” Park City Reconnaissance Level Survey. Salt Lake City: 1995.
Roper, Roger & Deborah Randall. “Residences of Mining Boom Era, Park City - Thematic Nomination.” National Register of
Historic Places Inventory, Nomination Form. 1984.
4 ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION & INTEGRITY
Building Type and/or Style: Rectangular or “Hall-Parlor” House No. Stories: 1½
Additions: none ; minor major (describe below) Alterations: none minor ; major (describe below)
Researcher/Organization: Preservation Solutions/Park City Municipal Corporation Date: 12-2008
Exhibit A
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJH Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 68 of 105
632 Deer Valley Loop Road, Park City, UT, Page 2 of 3
Number of associated outbuildings and/or structures: accessory building(s), # _____; structure(s), # _____.
General Condition of Exterior Materials:
Good (Well maintained with no serious problems apparent.)
Fair (Some problems are apparent. Describe the problems.):
; Poor (Major problems are apparent and constitute an imminent threat. Describe the problems.): Vacant. Slightly sagging
roofline, missing shingles, boarded up and exposed window openings, unkempt property, staggered and
missing boards along porch foundation, peeling paint, and missing sections of roofline gutters and boards.
Uninhabitable/Ruin
Materials (The physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time in a particular pattern or
configuration. Describe the materials.):
Foundation: Not visible and therefore its material cannot be verified
Walls: Vertical wooden boards, wooden trim, decorative metal porch supports (no railings)
Roof: Undetermined shingle material (asphalt?) with metal cap endings along roofline edge
Windows: Collaboration of picture windows, aluminum single hung windows, and window openings
(windows missing).
Essential Historical Form: ; Retains Does Not Retain, due to:
Location:; Original Location Moved (date __________) Original Location:
Design (The combination of physical elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style. Describe additions and/or alterations
from the original design, including dates--known or estimated--when alterations were made): Building card indicates side room
addition between 1949-1969. Siding is not likely original, neither are the porch supports. The window
configuration on the primary façade is also not typical of early mining era homes and is not likely original.
Setting (The physical environment--natural or manmade--of a historic site. Describe the setting and how it has changed over time.):
Structure built on a sloped building lot above the roadway. Surrounding grounds and property unkempt and
overgrown with naturally occurring grasses and terrain. Narrow building lot surrounded by what appears to be
newer multi-family housing developments.
Workmanship (The physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during a given period in history. Describe the
distinctive elements.): The physical evidence from the period that defines the typical Park City mining era home--
simple methods of construction, the use of non-beveled (drop-novelty) wood siding, plan type, simple roof form,
informal landscaping, restrained ornamentation, and plain finishes--have been altered and, therefore, lost.
Feeling (Describe the property's historic character.): The physical elements of the site, in combination, do not effectively
convey a sense of life in a western mining town of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
Association (Describe the link between the important historic era or person and the property.): The Hall-Parlor house form is the
earliest type to be built in Park City and one of the three most common house types built in Park City during the
mining era.
The extent of and cumulative effect of the alterations render it ineligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places.
5 SIGNIFICANCE
Architect:; Not Known Known: (source: ) Date of Construction: c. 1900
1
1 Summit County Recorder.
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 69 of 105
632 Deer Valley Loop Road, Park City, UT, Page 3 of 3
Builder:; Not Known Known: (source: )
The site must represent an important part of the history or architecture of the community. A site need only be
significant under one of the three areas listed below:
1. Historic Era:
Settlement & Mining Boom Era (1868-1893)
; Mature Mining Era (1894-1930)
Mining Decline & Emergence of Recreation Industry (1931-1962)
Park City was the center of one of the top three metal mining districts in the state during Utah's mining
boom period of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and it is one of only two major metal
mining communities that have survived to the present. Park City's houses are the largest and best-
preserved group of residential buildings in a metal mining town in Utah. As such, they provide the most
complete documentation of the residential character of mining towns of that period, including their
settlement patterns, building materials, construction techniques, and socio-economic make-up. The
residences also represent the state's largest collection of nineteenth and early twentieth century frame
houses. They contribute to our understanding of a significant aspect of Park City's economic growth and
architectural development as a mining community.2
2. Persons (Describe how the site is associated with the lives of persons who were of historic importance to the community or those who
were significant in the history of the state, region, or nation):
3. Architecture (Describe how the site exemplifies noteworthy methods of construction, materials or craftsmanship used during the
historic period or is the work of a master craftsman or notable architect):
6 PHOTOS
Digital color photographs are on file with the Planning Department, Park City Municipal Corp.
Photo No. 1: Northwest oblique. Camera facing southeast, 2006.
Photo No. 2: Southeast oblique. Camera facing northwest, 2006.
Photo No. 3: East elevation. Camera facing west, 2006.
Photo No. 4: Northwest oblique. Camera facing southeast, 1995.
2 From “Residences of Mining Boom Era, Park City - Thematic Nomination” written by Roger Roper, 1984.
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 70 of 105
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 71 of 105
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 72 of 105
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 73 of 105
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 74 of 105
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 75 of 105
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 76 of 105
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 77 of 105
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJH Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 78 of 105
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 79 of 105
Exhibit B
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 80 of 105
October 18, 2013
To: Anya Grahn, Preservation Planner, Park City
From: Allen Roberts, AIA, Preservation Consultant, CRSA
In response to the City’s request to assess the age of the house at 632 Deer Valley Loop, I provide the
following information:
1) A c. 1940 photograph taken from the same angle as the photo in the City’s 2012 Historic
Sites Inventory shows the house to be a c. 1900 (+/- 10 years) residence. The earlier photo
clearly shows its turned-wood Victorian columns, “novelty” wood siding, small-paned
windows (as used prior to the arrival of the railroad), corbelled brick chimney and simple,
hall-parlor floor plan—all evidence of a c. 1900 structure.
2) A small, shed-roofed room was added to the right, rear corner of the house, much later than
the initial construction.
3) The information on the property’s tax card also indicates that the main residence dates from
the turn-of-the-century period.
4) The building’s exterior has been altered and its architectural integrity compromised, with
newer porch columns, windows and siding, which obscure the original materials and design.
The historic corbelled chimney remains intact, however, as does the basic form of the
exterior massing.
In summary, the house’s exterior materials and design elements were in common use in Park City from
the 1870s until about 1910 when newer materials and styles were introduced. While we have not
discovered an exact date of construction, it is highly unlikely that the residence was constructed after
about 1910, and it could have been built considerably earlier.
Respectfully submitted,
Allen Roberts, AIA
President, CRSA
Exhibit C
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 81 of 105
632 Deer Valley Loop Photographs
Northwest Corner
West Elevation
Exhibit D
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 82 of 105
Northwest Corner
North Elevation (façade)
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 83 of 105
Northeast Corner
Close-up of East Elevation
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 84 of 105
East Elevation (note fire damage)
Southeast Corner
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 85 of 105
South Elevation
Fire Damage on South Elevation
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 86 of 105
Fire damage at southeast corner
Exposed roof eave, showing old growth timber
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 87 of 105
Wood floorboards on porch
Dilapidated vertical wood siding used on porch (as seen in 1930s tax photo)
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJH Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 88 of 105
Bricktex beneath vertical wood siding. The original wood lap siding is likely beneath this layer of
Bricktex.
Original wood trim. Note the reveal. Layers of Bricktex and vertical wood siding have hidden much
of the reveal on this original trim.
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 89 of 105
Original wood trim. Note the reveal. Layers of Bricktex and vertical wood siding have hidden much
of the reveal on this original trim.
Charred ceiling structure, interior
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 90 of 105
Charred bead-board ceiling in kitchen
Antique nail and charred roof structure, interior
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 91 of 105
Fire-damaged rear addition. Note the horizontal lumber atop vertical studs.
Historic paneled wood door with antique hardware.
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 92 of 105
Historic interior wood window trim in front bedroom.
Wall paper applied atop wood wall structure
+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQ%RDUG1RYHPEHU3DJHBoard of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 93 of 105
PARK CITY MUNICPAL CORPORATION
HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD
MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 13, 2013
BOARD MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE: David White, Chair Pro Tem - Puggy
Holmgren, Marian Crosby, John Kenworthy, Gary Bush Hope Melville, Clayton
Vance
EX OFFICIO: Kayla Sintz, Anya Grahn, Polly Samuels McLean, Patricia Abdullah
ROLL CALL
Chair Pro-Tem White called the meeting to order at 5:08 p.m. and noted that all
Board Members were present.
ADOPTION OF MINUTES
August 7, 2013
MOTION: Board Member Holmgren moved to APPROVE the minutes of August
7, 2013 as written. Board Member Bush seconded the motion.
VOTE: The motion passed unanimously.
August 21, 2013
Board Member Bush moved to APPROVE the minutes of August 21, 2013 as
written. Board Member Crosby seconded the motion.
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
There were no comments.
STAFF/BOARD COMMUNICATION & DISCLOSURES
Planning Manager Sintz stated that the HPB would elect a Chair at the next
meeting.
REGULAR MEETING - Discussion, Public Hearing and Possible Action.
1. 632 Deer Valley Loop – Determination of Significance
(Application PL-13-02094)
Planner Anya Graham stated that the Historic Sites Inventory is the go-to
resource in terms of determining whether or not buildings and structures in Park
City are Significant or Landmark.
Exhibit D
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 94 of 105
Park City Historic Preservation Board
November 13, 2013
2
Planner Grahn reported that a question was raised regarding the significant of
632 Deer Valley Loop. The owners had received a Notice and Order from the
Building Department. The property previously owned by the BLM was in litigation
for 30 years. As part of the Notice and Order it was brought to their attention that
the Historic Sites Inventory form for this particular property may not have been as
thorough as it could have been. Planner Grahn clarified that the discussion this
evening was strictly to determine whether or not the structure should remain
significant on the Historic Sites Inventory.
Planner Grahn stated that the building was previously identified as historic in
1995 on a reconnaissance level survey that the City conducted, but it was not
included in a 1982 Historic District architectural survey. The 2009 HSI
recognizes that it is a Hall-Parlor plan that has a compatible but non-historic side
addition, and it has lost much of its historic integrity due to exterior changes to its
materials.
Planner Grahn provided background and history of the site as outlined in the
Staff report, and presented slides showing photos of the original structure and
how it was changed over time. Planner Grahn reiterated that the focus this
evening was on historic significance and not the condition of the building.
Planner Grahn stated that the LMC defines that any building, (main, attached,
detached or public), accessory buildings and/or structures can be designated to
the Historic Sites Inventory as a Significant Site if it meets the following criteria:
a) The site must be at least 50 years old or has achieved significant in the past
50 years if the site is of exceptional importance to the community.
The Staff believed the structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop complies because the
Sanborn maps shows that it was built between 1900 and 1910, making it over a
100 years old.
b) The site retains its essential historic form and that major alterations were not
made to the actual form of the building.
Planner Grahn explained that changes that could alter the significance include
changes to the main roof of the primary façade. She explained why the Staff
believed the structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop retains its essential historic form.
She indicated the side gable that was built with the Hall-Parlor Plan and the rear
addition.
c) Has the site achieved importance in local or regional history, architecture,
engineering or cultural association.
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 95 of 105
Park City Historic Preservation Board
November 13, 2013
3
Planner Grayn pointed out that as implied by the HSI, the structure at 632 Deer
Valley Loop is historically significant to their understanding of the Mature Mining
Era. The building is located in what used to be the red light district and it was of
the few remaining buildings.
Planner Grahn pointed out the difference between the criteria for Significant and
Landmark Designations. To be considered a local landmark the site needs to be
at least 50 years old, retain its historic integrity in terms of location, design,
setting, materials, and workmanship as defined by the National Park Service for
a National Register. It also needs to be significant in local, regional or national
history. Planner Grahn explained that the structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop
would not comply because the loss of materials makes it ineligible for the
National Register of Historic places.
Planner Grahn recommended that the Planning Commission conduct a public
hearing and find that the criteria outlined shows that the building meets the
criteria as defined by the LMC as Significant; according to the findings of fact and
conclusions of law outlined in the Staff report.
Board Member Melville understood that there was not an application to remove
the structure from the Historic Sites Inventory. Planner Grahn stated that when
the Staff was working with the owners to resolve the Notice and Order, the
Planning Director recommended that the Staff should come before the Historic
Preservation Board and reiterate that the structure should be left as Significant
on the HSI because it meets the criteria. Planner Grahn clarified that if the
structure had not met the criteria, she would be making a recommendation to
remove it from the HSI.
Board Member Melville noted that the original exterior siding was underneath a
couple of layers of siding. She asked if that could be removed to bring it back to
Landmark status. Planner Grahn stated that she had asked Cory Jensen with
the State Historic Preservation Office the same question, because many of the
historic homes have the retained historic materials but it is buried underneath
other materials. Mr. Jensen told her that it depends on how much of the historic
material was retained and how much could be salvaged. It also depends on how
much of the historic material stayed intact during remodeling. Planner Grahn
believed that things could be done to possibly return the structure at 632 Deer
Valley Loop to Landmark Status and possibly on the National Register.
Board Member Bush asked why the structure was not on the 1985 survey.
Planner Grahn was unsure. She stated that the reason could be because it was
on BLM land and not within the Old Town core in the area designated as the
Historic District. Planner Grahn remarked that a number of sites are outside of
the Historic District but remain the on the Historic Sites Inventory.
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 96 of 105
Park City Historic Preservation Board
November 13, 2013
4
Board Member Bush asked if anyone knew the shape and size of the parcel that
the house sits on. Planner Grahn replied that there was not a survey with that
information.
Board Member Holmgren noted that the earlier surveys were not very accurate.
One survey shows her house as being built in 1957, but it is substantially older.
Her other house was not even on the survey. She believed the current surveys
are the most accurate.
Madeline Smith, the owner, asked when it was changed from not being in the
Historic District to coming into the Historic District. Planner Grahn replied that it
was included in the HSI in 2009. Ms. Smith stated that as the owner she was
never noticed. Otherwise, she would have dealt with it in 2009. Planner Grahn
asked Ms. Smith if she was the owner in 2009. Ms. Smith stated that she has
owned the property since 1979. Planner Grahn stated that she could not speak
to past notification. She was not with the Planning Department when the Design
Guidelines were revised in 2009 and the LMC was amended.
Board Member Holmgren stated that no one was noticed. The survey was done
and adopted by the City Council. Board Member White concurred. Patricia
Abdullah clarified that every property owner was noticed if their structure was
going on the inventory. She recalled that because this was still on BLM land, the
notice would have gone to the BLM.
Assistant City Attorney McLean stated that one reason why the Planning Director
decided to bring this application to the Board was due to the possibility of a
noticing discrepancy. This process allows the owners the opportunity to have the
determination of significance evaluated by the HPB.
Board Member Vance asked when Ms. Smith took possession of the property.
He was told that it was in 1980. Board Member Vance wanted to know how that
coincided with the BLM owning it in 2009.
William Bertagnole, the applicant, provided a brief history. He explained that in
1980 it was purchased from Mary Dudley. During the process, Ms. Dudley’s
husband passed away and they got a quit claim did from her. Two years later he
received a letter from the BLM and the Mining Company telling them to get off
their property. They had unpatented mining claims, which meant nothing, and
they continued to try to make Mr. Bertagnole leave. He received another letter
from the BLM informing him that he did not own the mineral rights and he needed
to leave. Mr. Bertagnole refused to leave and it ended up in a 33 year court
battle until the Spring of 2013. Mr. Bertagnole always understood that they were
not in the Historic District and the building has been remodeled so much that the
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 97 of 105
Park City Historic Preservation Board
November 13, 2013
5
historic elements and materials were gone. Mr. Bertagnole noted that a renter
had started a fire in the back of the house and it destroyed the interior.
Chair Pro Tem White pointed out that the original structure is still intact. Mr.
Bertagnole agreed that the structure was there but it is not on a foundation and
the house is crooked. Chair Pro Tem White remarked that the T111 siding is
covering the original historic material and it would have to be inspected to know
how much of the original material was retained. Chair Pro Tem White stated that
the basic form, shape, size and mass of the house is still there, regardless of
what occurred on the interior.
Board Member Bush asked what Mr. Bertagnole intended to do with the
structure. Mr. Bertagnole stated that he started the process when he was 30 or
40 years old, and at that time he probably would have rebuilt it. He is now 72
and he would like to sell it. Board Member Bush agreed that the building is badly
damaged because it was left unattended for a long time, and it would be difficult
to salvage any material. However, the form is still intact. If Mr. Bertagnole
wanted to rebuild the form with in-period material, it was something he could
support. Board Member Bush did not believe anyone on the HPB expected Mr.
Bertagnole to make the old wood beautiful. The HPB was interested in saving or
re-creating the form of the historic structure. Mr. Bertagnole replied that at his
age he was not interested in building anything.
Board Member Bush asked if Mr. Bertagnole was looking for a clean lot that he
could sell. Mr. Bertagnole stated that he has had developers contact him
wanting to purchase the property. He pointed out that the fire department, the
police department, and the building inspectors have all said that the structure
was trash. Three or four years ago the former Building Official, Ron Ivie, begged
him to tear it down. However, he could not tear it down because it was his claim
to the BLM since it was sitting on BLM ground. Mr. Bertagnole explained that he
was very young when he purchased the home and was not aware that it was on
BLM ground. His plan at that time was to tear down the house and rebuild. After
spending years of time and money working on the house and he had no interest
in rebuilding it now. All he wants is the ability to sell it so someone else could
rebuild it. He is now faced with the issue of the structure being on the Historic
Sites Inventory.
Board Member Bush understood that Mr. Bertagnole wanted to get the value out
of the home without redeveloping. He also understood that the developers who
approached Mr. Bertagnole were not interested in buying unless they could tear
down the house. Mr. Bertagnole replied that he wants to tear down the house
because it is unsafe and a danger to the neighborhood. Construction people use
the property to store materials and others use it as a dump. There have been
drug and transient problems and the City has been after him to do something
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 98 of 105
Park City Historic Preservation Board
November 13, 2013
6
about it. Therefore, he applied to demolish the house. His other choice is to
cover it up, but plywood can be pried off and the problems return.
Chair Pro Tem White clarified that the issue before the Board this evening was
whether or not to keep the Significant Site designation.
Board Member Bush stated that based on that issue, two of the three criteria
were very clear. The material is gone but the form and age support keeping the
Significant designation. He understood the hazards it poses to the property
owner, but he was unsure how that could be addressed based on the criteria.
Chad Root, the Chief Building Official, stated that like Ron Ivie he had issued a
Notice and Order early last year when it was still BLM property. Mr. Root
clarified that the City has no jurisdiction on federal or state entities. Therefore,
when the ownership transferred to Mr. Bertagnole earlier this year, another
Notice and Order was sent informing him that the structure needed to either be
demolished or repaired. The Building Department later found out that the
structure was listed as historically significant and the Notice and Order was
changed to repair the structure. Mr. Root stated that the Building Department
was looking at a mothballing effort in terms of repairing the damaged areas to
protect from weather; and also boarding up the doors and windows from the
inside to keep out transients.
Mr. Bertagnole could not recall every being told that he could put plywood on the
inside of the windows, and he could not recall ever being told to repair it. All the
documents he read from any of the City entities have been to tear it down. Mr.
Root clarified that the newest Notice and Order took away the option to tear it
down because it is historic.
Planner Grahn stated that per the LMC, the City does not favor demolition of
buildings because it ruins the urban fabric and the history is lost. If restoration is
not an option due to the dilapidated state of the building, there is always
panelizing and reconstruction. She believed that was the only option at this
point.
Ms. Smith did not believe it was right that four years ago things suddenly
changed and the structure was considered to be in the Historic District. She
noted that it was ten years after the fire and it was impossible to repair or restore
the house to its historic form.
Board Member Holgrem concurred with Board Member Bush that the structure
meets the criteria for a Significant designation.
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 99 of 105
Park City Historic Preservation Board
November 13, 2013
7
Board Member Bush pointed out that Mr. Bertagnole was stuck with a liability
regarding safety issues. Mr. Bertagnole remarked that he is unable to insure the
house and he would be personally liable. Board Member Bush stated that a
chain link fence could be installed around the house but people would still find a
way in. He stated that typically an owner wants to redevelop and the HPB would
ask them to incorporate the form into their design, and to use as much material
as possible. However, in this case, the owner only wants to eliminate a liability
and has no interest in rehabilitating the house in any way. He asked if removing
the liability could be tied to a commitment to rebuild that form with the land. The
owner would no longer have the liability and the City could retain the Significant
structure.
Planner Grahn stated that through the Historic District Design Review process
one option could be for the owner to tear down the structure but provide the
financial guarantee and document the historic building. The City would retain the
financial guarantee until the structure is reconstructed or meets what was
approved with the HDDR. Planner Grahn stated that even though it was an
option, the issue before the HPB this evening was determination of significance.
She explained that the City was sympathetic to the liability issue and the
Planning and Buildings Departments have been trying to find a workable solution
for Mr. Bertagnole.
Board Member Melville asked if there was a City program that could assist in
securing the building. Mr. Root stated that the Building Department has an
abatement program, which is a fund to abate certain structures and to assist;
however it is a revolving fund. The City secures the doors and mothballs the
building, and if the owner is not able to pay it back to the City, the money is
recouped through their taxes.
Chair Pro Tem White opened the public hearing.
Bob Martin a resident across the street at 595 Deer Valley Loop, felt this matter
was interconnected with a number of issues. He was unsure of the BLM
situation with the City; however, he understood that the structure at 632 Deer
Valley Loop sits in the middle of the BLM piece. Mr. Martin stated that those four
homes sit across from house and he has been the epicenter of the construction
phase of Deer Valley Drive. Mr. Martin was unsure whether the City intended to
work a deal with the BLM over this piece of property, but he believed the house is
historic. This house and the other three houses that sit on that piece of property
are the only things remaining from the red light district of Park City. Mr. Martin
preferred that the City do something that piece of property rather than sell it to a
developer. His attempts to get answers from the City or the BLM have been
unsuccessful. Mr. Martin thought it was legitimate for the HPB to make a
decision regarding the significance of the structure, but he also felt it was
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 100 of 105
Park City Historic Preservation Board
November 13, 2013
8
important for the City to have a plan. He asked if the property with the other
three houses was settled with the BLM. He noted that someone lives in one of
those structures. Mr. Martin would like the City to put in a historic park rather
than to allow development. His understanding was that the land would be
traded and he could be looking at a large condo development on the last piece at
the entrance to Deer Valley. Mr. Martin remarked that in terms of historic
preservation, it was important to focus on the bigger picture. He has three
ribbons on his fence indicating that his home is historic. His home and another
home are the only two that still exist inside the Loop. Those two and the four
homes on BLM land are the only historic homes in that area.
Sandra Morrison, with the Park City Historical Society and Museum thanked the
City for a terrific job creating the Historic Sites Inventory in 2009. They hired an
extremely well qualified consultant who spent from 2006-2009 identifying all the
historic structures in Park City. She noted that both the Historic Preservation
Board and the City Council held public hearings before the HSI was adopted.
Ms. Morrison welcomed anyone who wanted to do additional research to use the
library at the Park City Museum. Ms. Morrison also commended the City on the
decision to hire Cooper Roberts to conduct an intensive level survey, which she
believed would answer some of the questions raised this evening regarding the
amount of historic fabric remaining on the building. She recognized that some of
the questions could not be answered tonight, but the Historical Society Museum
fully supported the Planning Department and the listing of this house on the
Historic Sites Inventory because it is a historic house. Ms. Morrison was pleased
to hear about the mothballing effort and she believed it was a good interim plan.
She offered the help of the Historical Society Museum and encouraged the
owners to contact her.
Alison Kitching, a resident at 670 Deer Valley Loop Drive, stated that her patio in
the Portico Townhome complex was adjacent to the structure at 632 Deer Valley
Loop. She is single and lives alone and she was uncomfortable having drug
dealers next to her in that home. She has had to call the police twice to report
activity outside the house. Ms. Kitching requested that the HPB do something
with the structure that would help her feel secure. She thought she was moving
into a safe community environment and she still believed that it was a good place
to live. However, it would be better if the HPB could help with that issue. Ms.
Kitching enjoys being around historic homes and that was one of the reasons
why she moved to that area. She preferred that the house not be torn down and
the property redeveloped. Ms. Kitching encouraged a solution where the current
owners could work with a developer to stay within the same footprint and
architecture and redeveloped in a way that fits the area.
Chair Pro Tem closed the public hearing.
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 101 of 105
Park City Historic Preservation Board
November 13, 2013
9
Board Marian Crosby understood that the cost of mothballing the home would be
the responsibility of the owner, and if the owner was incapable of paying for it
that it would be added to the taxes and paid when the property is sold. Mr. Root
explained that the responsibility goes to the owner. If the owner does not follow
through with mothballing and taking care of the property, the City abates it under
the Abatement of Dangerous Building code. At that point, the City hires a
contractor to mothball the structure and cover the windows and doors. He was
told that the burned out portion on this structure was not historic because it was a
shed addition to the back of the house. Mr. Root stated that the main purpose is
to protect the historic structure. The shed may come down because so much of
it is burned out.
Board Member Crosby asked if the burned out shed could be demolished as part
of mothballing. Planner Grahn replied that from the Sanborn map it looks like the
shed or at least a portion of the shed is historic. However, the Staff would have
to research it further to be sure. Board Member Crosby asked if there were cost
estimates. Mr. Root replied that the Building Department had not obtained any
estimates.
Board Member Holmgren reiterated that the HPB was only being asked to
determine whether the structure should remain on the HSI as a Significant
structure. Any other issues were not for discussion this evening. Planner Grahn
stated that if the Board was interested in the abatement issue, she could bring it
back as a work session item to give them a better understanding of the process
as it applies to Old Town.
Board Member Melville understood that part of the process for removing a site
from the Inventory was that the owner has the burden of proving that it did not
meet the criteria and that it should be removed from the list. Assistant City
Attorney McLean explained that this particular issue was more of a hybrid. The
HPB should evaluate it based on the criteria outlined in the Staff report from the
standpoint of whether or not it meets the criteria of Significant. She noted that in
2009 when the structures were listed on the Inventory, all the owners were
noticed. If the owner disagreed with the finding, they had the ability to have the
HPB look more specifically at their structure to determine whether or not it was
significant. Because of the issues with the land and the possibility that only the
BLM was noticed and not the homeowner, the Staff felt it was appropriate for the
HPB to relook at the determination.
Board Member Melville clarified that the issue was unique to this property
because of the BLM and owner dispute. She wanted to make sure the HPB
would not be setting a precedent that all properties on the Historic Sites Inventory
would have to be reconfirmed. City Attorney McLean replied that this was a
unique situation because of the ownership issue.
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 102 of 105
Park City Historic Preservation Board
November 13, 2013
10
Board Member Melville believed the criteria were clear for this structure to remain
a Significant site. The house is 50 years old. In comparing the 1938 photo with
the current photo, it has retained its essential historical form. It also meets the
criteria of local history due to its importance to the mining era.
Board Member Holmgren felt strongly that the structure was significant.
MOTION: Board Member Holgrem moved to keep the property at 633 Deer
Valley Loop listed on the Historic Sites Inventory as a Significant Historic Site, in
accordance with the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law outlined in the
Staff report. Board Member Crosby seconded the motion.
VOTE: The motion passed. Board Member Kenworthy was not present for the
vote.
Findings of Fact – 632 Deer Valley Loop
1. 632 Deer Valley Loop is within the Residential-Medium Density (RM) zoning
district.
2. There is an existing side gable hall-parlor structure at 632 Deer Valley Loop.
This structure is currently listed on the Park City Historic Sites Inventory as a
“Significant” Structure.
3. The existing structure has been in existence at 632 Deer Valley Loop since
circa 1900. The structure appears in the 1904 and 1927 Sanborn Fire Insurance
maps. Furthermore, the Historic Site Form contains tax cards of the structure
from 1949, 1958, and 1969. A late-1930s tax card photo also demonstrates that
the overall form of the structure has not been altered.
4. The hall-and-parlor structure and later rear addition were both constructed
within the Mature Mining Era (1894-1930) and are historic.
5. Though out of period, the enclosed side porch entrance added in the 1960s
does not detract from the historic significance of the structure.
6. The existing structure is in serious disrepair and is not habitable in its current
dangerous condition.
7. There is very little original exterior materials remaining on the exterior of the
home. The original wood lap siding has been covered by layers of Bricktex and
vertical wood siding.
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 103 of 105
Park City Historic Preservation Board
November 13, 2013
11
8. The double-hung windows on the façade were removed and expanded to
install larger, undivided rectangular windows after 1969. The original wood
double hung windows throughout were replaced by aluminum windows.
9. After 1969, the turned wood porch posts were replaced with new decorative
metal columns. A brick chimney was installed above the enclosed side porch
that was later repaired with thick layers of Portland Cement.
10. The structure is a hall-parlor plan and typical of the Mature Mining Era.
11. The rear addition of the structure, dating prior to 1927, was severely
damaged in a fire on May 17, 1999.
12. The site meets the criteria as Significant on the City’s Historic Sites Inventory.
13. Built circa 1900, the structure is over fifty (50) years old and has achieved
Significance in the past fifty (50) years.
14. Though the structure has lost its historic integrity due to the out-of-period
alterations to its historic materials, it has retained its historical form. The out-of-
period addition to the west elevation of the structure does not detract from its
historic significance.
15. The structure is important in local or regional history because it is associated
with an era of historic importance to the community, the Mature Mining Era
(1894-190).
Conclusions of Law – 632 Deer Valley Loop
1. The existing structure located at 632 Deer Valley Loop meets all of the criteria
for a Significant Site as set forth in LMC Section 15-11-10(A)(2) which includes:
(a) It is at least fifty (50) years old or has achieved Significance in the past fifty
(50) years if the Site is of exceptional importance to the community; and
(b) It retains its Essential Historical Form, meaning there are no major alterations
that have destroyed the Essential Historical Form. Major alterations that destroy
the Essential Historical Form include:
(i) Changes in pitch of the main roof of the primary façade if 1) the change
was made after the Period of Historic Significance; 2) the change is not
due to any structural failure; or 3) the change is not due to collapse as a
result of inadequate maintenance on the part of the Applicant or a
previous Owner, or
(ii) Addition of upper stories or the removal of original upper stories
occurred after the Period of Historic Significance, or
(iii) Moving it from its original location to a Dissimilar Location, or
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 104 of 105
Park City Historic Preservation Board
November 13, 2013
12
(iv) Addition(s) that significantly obscures the Essential Historical Form
when viewed from the primary public Right-of-Way.
(c) It is important in local or regional history, architecture, engineering, or culture
associated with at least one (1) of the following:
(i) An era of Historic importance to the community, or
(ii) Lives of Persons who were of Historic importance to the community, or
Historic Preservation Board.
(iii) Noteworthy methods of construction, materials, or craftsmanship used
during the Historic period.
Board Member Kenworthy arrived.
2. 820 Park Avenue, Rio Grande – Appeal of Staff’s Determination
(Application PL-13-02108)
Planner Grahn requested that the HPB review this appeal de Novo. They were
looking at it anew to find whether or not unique conditions exist to move the
building. Planner Grahn emphasized that the discussion should not focus on the
design or what could be built on the site.
Planner Grahn reported that Planning Director Thomas Eddington and Chief
Building Official Chad Root had written a determination letter stating that unique
conditions did not exist for this site. She had provided the Board with a copy of
Director Eddington’s testimony, since he was out of town. Mr. Root was present
to testify for himself.
Chair Pro Tem White asked if any Board member had disclosures related to this
appeal.
Board Member Bush disclosed that he has worked with the appellant, Rory
Murphy, on projects in the past. He did not believe that association would
interfere with his judgment on this appeal. He and Mr. Murphy have no current
business dealings.
Assistant City Attorney McLean stated that if any of the Board members had
anyone speak to them outside of this meeting concerning the appeal, that should
also be disclosed, as well as the content of the conversation, since this was a
quasi-judicial hearing.
Jeff Love disagreed with Board Member Bush’s assessment of his relationship
with Rory Murphy. Assistant City Attorney McLean clarified that Board Member
Bush is entitled under the State Code to make a disclosure how he wishes.
Board of Adjustment April 15, 2014 Page 105 of 105