HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987 04-28 HPB Meeting Minutes RegularA G E N D A
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 1987, AT 7:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM
I. Approval of the Minutes: March 24, 1987
II. Permit for Site Modification: G¢erjx Al, 6 -;*W Ka000 4400
Retaining wall, entrance columns, sidewalk,
boulevard trees
III. Edina Theatre, 3911 West 50th Street:
Proposed Reconstruction
IV. Minnesota Historical Society:
Conference for Historic Preservation Commissions
April 3, 1987.
V. Resolution of Appreciation for Thomas Martinson
VI. Other Business:
VII. Next Meeting Date: May 26, 1987
VIII. Adjournment
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, April 28, 1987 at 7:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL LOWER LEVEL CONFERENCE ROOM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Gordon Stuart, Cy Stuppy,
David Gepner, Gary Nyberg and John
Metil
STAFF PRESENT: Harold Sand
OTHERS PRESENT: Liaison with the Edina Historical Society
Marilyn Curtis and Jack Curtis
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
Mr. Nyberg moved approval of the March 24, 1987 minutes.
Mr. Stuppy seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried.
II. PERMIT FOR SITE MODIFICATION:
George W. Baird House, 4400 West 50th Street
Mr. Sand said that this item was considered at the March 24,
1987 meeting and the Board requested that the Edina Engineering
Department return with plans and specifications for modifications
to the retaining wall and entrance monuments located within the
West 50th Street right-of-way. The George W. Baird House is
listed on the National Register of Historic Places and is zoned
Heritage Preservation District, therefore, site modifications
require approval of the Heritage Preservation Board. The
Engineering Department submitted a plan that is acceptable to the
property owner Jack and Marilyn Curtis. The plan illustrates
removal of the brick entrance monuments and salvage the brick,
removal of the limestone and fieldstone retaining wall and and
salvage the fieldstone, construct a new lannon stone retaining
wall approximately 2 feet north of the existing location, remove
existing elms, plant 3 Hackberry 6 inches caliper and construct a
new sidewalk 2 feet north of the existing location,
Mr. Sand said the boulevard trees on the north side must be
removed because the City Council determined one way traffic
through the area must be preserved to benefit the merchants at
50th and France and because the storm sewer must be replaced due
to inadequate capacity in the pipe. The new storm sewer will be
constructed with minimum depth catch basins and 0.8 percent slope
yet it requires a 17 foot deep hole for the manhole in front of
the Baird House. the constraint on the right-of-way means the
trees cannot be preserved due to extensive cutting of roots on
both sides of the tree.
Mr. Sand said he met with Mr. and Mrs. Curtis concerning the
proposed changes and they provided new information including
historic photos and notes from an interview with James Vera and
Lois Darr during their visit in 1984. The notes indicate the
retaining wall was constructed from limestone salvaged from the
foundation of the sheep barn. The wall and brick entrance
markers were constructed in 1929 by their father H. W. Darr
shortly after they moved to the property. There is no reference
to the origin of the fieldstone placed in the wall. The brick
entrance markers and brick walk to the house were constructed of
a red St. Louis brick salvaged from the Thomas Lowry Mansion.
The entrance monuments are not part of the original house
construction because the house has thin "Buttered" mortar of
white lime and the monuments have standard beaded mortar joints
of cement. The brick is not an exact match with the house. The
limestone is likely salvaged from the foundation of the old barn
because the barn was demolished previously and its is logical
they would use convenient materials. The foundation for the
house and the windmill are also constructed of a similar
material. The retaining wall was constructed shortly after a cut
made for the reconstruction of West 50th Street by Hennepin
County in 1926 so the date of construction also seems accurate.
Mr. Sand said that Mr. and Mrs. Curtis provided historic
photos of the house that provide new insights to the property.
The photos illustrate the original front porch with intricate
spindle decoration and combing on the roof. A small dormer
window was also originally centrally located on the front
elevation. There are references that the tower roof was colored
slate however, a close examination of the photos indicates it was
wood shingles to match the house and they were painted to look
like slate, a popular roofing material of the period. The photos
also document a fire in the tower around 1930 which was started
by sparks from one of the chimneys. Another photograph
illustrates the new front porch, constructed during the 19301s.
Mr. Curtis explained that the retaining wall is
deteriorating and needs to be repaired, the limestone is flaking
apart and cannot be reused. Therefore they would like to have a
new lannon stone wall which will be more durable and maintain a
uniform appearance with other walls in the City. The fieldstone
will be retained for reuse on other parts of the property. Mr.
Metil asked if the fieldstone could be incorporated in the new
wall to match the existing wall. Mr. Curtis thought that would
create structural problems however he will be willing to contact
some stone construction companies to check the feasibility. Mr.
Nyberg suggested constructing a new wall of fieldstone.
Mr. Sand explained that the board should determine if the
wall was original or if added later, has the wall gained any
historic or architectural significance in its own right., There
are a number of alternatives ranging from preservation and
restoration of the existing wall to replacement with a lannon
stone wall. The monuments can be retained and restored or
removed.
Mr. Stuppy moved that the Board issue a permit to remove the
existing wall and construct a new lannon stone wall in the
proposed location and that the fieldstone should be incorporated
in the wall if possible after consulting with a qualified
person. Mr. Metil seconded the motion. All voted Aye. Motion
carried.
The Board discussed the disposition of the brick entrance
monuments and sidewalk. Mr. Curtis indicated that his preference
is to retain the sidewalk, remove the entrance monuments and
salvage the brick for later use. To his knowledge the brick does
not have any historic association with the property before 1929.
Mr. Nyberg inquired if there was an iron fence between the
marchers. Mr. Sand replied there is no mark on the pillar from
anything attached except a small plaque on the front of the east
marker. After further discussion Mr. Nyberg moved approval of a
permit to remove the brick entrance monuments and to salvage the
brick. Mr. Metil seconded the motion. All voted aye, Motion
carried.
III. EDINA THEATRE, 3911 WEST 50th STREET -1934
Mr. Sand explained that the Edina Theatre is owned by Plitt
Theatres and they were recently acquired by a Canadian
entertainment company Cineplex Odeon Corporation. They proposed
to remove the existing auditoriums which face south and construct
3 new auditoriums facing west. The existing seating capacity of
876 will be increased to 1400 seats. The new auditoriums will
provide better proportions and larger screens for better
seating. The overall height of the building will be
approximately the same, however it will have a flat roof instead
of the existing bowstring arch roof. The auditoriums will be
attached to a substantially remodeled and refurbished facade,
tower, canopy and marquee. The small shops that flank the
theatre lobby will be removed to expand the lobby refreshment,
restroom and office space for the theatre. The brick facade will
be preserved however, the recessed entrances for the shops will
be eliminated in favor of extended flush windows with brick
infill below. the plans also illustrate new doors, glazing and a
projecting ticket booth to replace the modern aluminum entry.
The brick is proposed to be painted to give the facade a uniform
appearance.
Mr. Sand said the Board has gone on record in the past that
the auditorium portion of the building is not significant.
However, the north elevation, the tower, ziggurat, marquee and
sign were identified as architecturally significant because it is
the last building of art deco design in the City and a community
landmark. The Board generally discussed the negative impact
caused by the loss of shops facing West 50th Street and the
exterior materials of the new auditoriums. Mr. Metil inquired if
the decorative concrete block would be visible from the street.
Mr. Nyberg stated it would certainly be visible from across the
street and in the rear from Arby's and the parking ramp. Mr.
Sand expressed a concern about proposed painting of the brick
because of the permanent damage that results.
Mr. Nyberg moved to request that the architect look at
retaining the shops on West 50th Street while returning to the
original architecture of the shop fronts and conforming to the
1150th and France Design Framework". Mr. Stuppy seconded the
motion. All voted aye. Mr. Sand inquired if this was intended to
require cleaning the brick of paint and Mr. Nyberg agreed.
After discussion of the exterior materials on the addition,
Mr. Nyberg moved that the exterior materials on the addition are
brick to match the brick on the north elevation. Mr. Metil
seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried.
Mr. Metil expressed concern that the letter from Kofman
Engineering Company implied that several meetings were held with
the Heritage Preservation Board when in fact no meetings have
taken place and the project has not been presented to the Board.
Mr. Sand said that this may be a misunderstanding between the
local architect, Paul Pink Associates and the Canadian partner.
Mr. Sand said he has had two telephone conversations concerning
preliminary concepts however, there was no formal submission or
discussion of the schematic plans. Mr. Sand indicated he would
clarify this point before the Community development and Planning
Commission meeting tomorrow night.
The Board discussed a need to review the plans before
issuance of a building permit. Mr. Nyberg said it would be
important to review the schematic design or design development
plans rather than the construction documents when it may be too
late to implement changes in materials etc. Mr. Metil moved that
the Board request a presentation of the plans by the architect
prior to issuance of a building permit. Mr., Nyberg seconded the
motion. All voted Aye. Motion carried.
IV. MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY CONFERENCE FOR HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS.
Mr. Stuart said that the conference was held April 3, 1987
at the Fort Snelling Visitors Center and he and Mr. Sand attended
the meeting. The meeting included a slide show of new listings
in Minnesota on the National Register of Historic Places, a
presentation about facade easements, a report on the historic
window conference held in Boston and a video tape about the
certified local Governments program.
V. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR THOMAS MARTINSON
Mr. Stuart expressed his regrets that Mr. Martinson
submitted his resignation after many years of service on the
Board and presented a resolution of appreciation. Mr. Stuppy
moved the adoption of the resolution. Mr. Gepner seconded the
motion. All voted aye. Motion carried.
VI. NEXT MEETING DATE:
May 26, 1987 at 7:30 p.m.
VII. ADJOURNMENT:
Mr. Nyberg moved adjournment at 10 p.m. Mr. Metil seconded
the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Harold Sand
s