Commission denies request to remove 19th‑century doors from Beehive House east entrance

The Historic Landmark Commission on the February meeting voted 5‑2 to deny a major alteration application from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter‑day Saints seeking to remove an extant pair of late‑19th‑century entry doors from the east facade of the Beehive House and replace them with a replica of a different 19th‑century door (case PLNHLC20240‑00764).

Noah Elmore of Planning presented the staff analysis and recommended denial, saying the pair of oak entry doors are original to the John W. Young (Victorian) era and carry character‑defining materials and workmanship. Staff cited City policy favoring repair over replacement, standards that discourage creating a false sense of history, and several local standards that staff found the proposal did not meet. Elmore summarized the building’s sequence of alterations: built in 1855 by Brigham Young; remodeled with Victorian additions in the John W. Young era (late 19th century); owned by the LDS Church after 1890s; used as a boarding house 1920–1958; and altered again in a 1959–1961 restoration when the paired south doors were moved to the east elevation.

Representing the owner, Emily Utte and architect Steve Cornell described the broader restoration strategy: the project team is restoring the south (South Temple) facade to an 1870 appearance and the State Street (east) facade to an 1890s appearance. They said the currently installed paired doors were moved to the east facade in the 1960s and, in their view, create a false sense of history for the east facade’s chosen period of significance; the team proposed removing and conserving the doors for museum exhibition and installing a historically compatible single‑leaf door drawn from 1934 HABS drawings and a 1940s photograph. They proposed salvaging the existing doors for the church’s collection and incorporating them into an interpretive exhibit inside the complex.

Public comment: Preservation advocate Cindy Cromer urged the commission to preserve the doors in place, saying they are visible to the public daily and form part of the preservation story of the 1960s. She urged the commission to consider public visibility as a form of preservation.

Commission deliberations were lengthy and divided. Some commissioners argued the Beehive House is an unusual, highly significant landmark whose layered history should be preserved intact; others said the property’s role as a house museum makes restoring specific facades to clarified periods of significance legitimate and that removing the doors for conservation and interpretive display could be appropriate. Commissioners debated whether the existing doors, installed on the east facade for roughly 60 years, had themselves acquired historic significance and whether removing them would create or remove a false sense of history. Several members expressed concern about the possibility that doors removed from the facade might not remain on public view; the applicant repeatedly said the current plan is to include the doors in on‑site exhibits and interpretive material.

Motion and vote: Commissioner Jared Barnett moved, and Commissioner Mike (last name not specified in transcript) seconded, to deny the major alteration application as recommended by staff (case PLNHLC20240‑00764). The motion passed 5‑2 (Babs [Barnett? recorded as yes], Mike: yes; Adrianne DeLay: yes; Carlton Goetz: yes; Jared Barnett: yes; Allen White: no; Chair John Ewanowski: no). The staff recommended denial therefore stands.

Staff and the applicant discussed next steps: the church plans to proceed with restoration work elsewhere on the complex and emphasized a mitigation plan to salvage the doors into the church’s collection and to develop an interpretive exhibit addressing the house’s layered history.

The commission’s denial prevents the proposed removal and replacement of the east‑facade paired doors under the current application; the owner may return with revised proposals that address the commission’s concerns.