HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 HPB Meeting Minutes RegularAGENDA
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, JANUARY 8, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL - COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Concern of Residents," the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak
about something not on the agenda.
• Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an
issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: December 11, 2007
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. December - Survey Progress Report
B. Revised Plan of Treatment
III. JOINT MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL: Tuesday, January 15th at 5:00 p.m.
IV. OTHER BUSINESS:
V. CONCERN OF RESIDENTS:
VI. CORRESPONDENCE:
VII. NEXT MEETING DATE: February 12, 2008
February 25, 2008 Tentative Country Club Neighborhood Meeting
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance
in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-
927-886172 hours in advance of the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, JANUARY 8, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50T" STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Kojetin, Karen Ferrara, Chris Rofidal, Lou
Blemaster, Laura Benson, Jean Rehkamp Larson, and
Sara Rubin
MEMBERS ABSENT: Connie Fukuda and Nancy Scherer
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Preservation Consultant
Kitty O'Dea, 4610 Bruce Avenue
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: December 11, 2007
Member Blemaster moved approval of the Minutes from the December 11, 2007
meeting. Member Benson seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion
carried.
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Survey Progress Report — December
Consultant Vogel reported that the Information on individual houses and
landscape features continued to be compiled in a systematic manner and
reviewed for content, clarity, and accuracy. Each property surveyed is being
evaluated against criteria established by the HPB for determining whether it
should be treated as a contributing or noncontributing resource. A complete list
of contributing and noncontributing properties is expected to be complete by early
January.
Mr. Vogel pointed out that one of the major objectives of the Country Club District
re -survey was to compile the information needed to refine and elaborate the
design review guidelines used for reviewing Certificates of Appropriateness.
Ideally, the plan of treatment should identify the historical, architectural, aesthetic,
and visual relationships that unify and define the district's heritage resource
components; it should also establish policies, procedures, and strategies for
maintaining and enhancing the preservation value of these resources. Since the
beginning of the project, the HPB has identified a number of preservation issues
relating to design review guidelines which provide the basis for integrating survey
data with other information, such as input from homeowners and neighborhood
Minutes — January 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
groups. After the December 11 Board meeting, priority was given to preparing a
revised plan of treatment document which follows.
B. Revised Plan of Treatment
Consultant Vogel presented the following revised plan of treatment for the Board
to review:
1. The primary objective of the Country Club Heritage Landmark District is
preservation of the existing historic house facades and streetscapes.
Certificates of Appropriateness will be required for demolition, moving
buildings, and new construction within the district. By ordinance, the
Heritage Preservation Board is responsible for approving Certificates of
Appropriateness for work in the District that requires a city permit. In
fulfillment of this responsibility, the City has adopted the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as the basis
for the Board's design review decisions. The preferred treatment for
heritage resources in the Country Club District is rehabilitation, which is
defined as the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a
property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those
portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural
values. The standards for rehabilitation are:
a) A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use
that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features,
spaces, and spatial relationships.
b) The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved.
The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features,
spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will' be
avoided.
c) Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time,
place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical
development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from
other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
d) Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in
their own right will be retained and preserved.
e) Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques
or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be
preserved.
f) Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced.
Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a
distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design,
r.
Minutes — January 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of
missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical
evidence.
g) Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken
using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage
to historic materials will not be used.
h) Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place.
If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be
undertaken.
i) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will
not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that
characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from
the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features,
size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of
the property and its environment.
j) New additions and adjacent new construction will be undertaken in
such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and
integrity of the historic property and its environment will be
unimpaired.
2. A Certificate of Appropriateness will be required before any City permit is
issued for the demolition of any principal dwelling or detached garage
within the district boundaries. For purposes of design review and
compliance with City Code §850.20 subd. 10, "demolition" shall mean the
physical alteration of a building such that 50% or more of the surface area
of all exterior walls, in the aggregate, are removed, or that any important
historic character -defining architectural feature visible from the public
street is destroyed. The important historic character -defining architectural
features of a given house may include, but are not limited to, the original
wood or masonry wall siding, roof shape, dormers, chimneys, window and
door openings, vestibules, entrances, porches, porte-cocheres, and
attached garages.
3. No Certificate of Appropriateness will be approved for the demolition, in
whole or in part, of any contributing heritage resource in the district unless
the applicant can show that the subject property no longer contributes to
the historical significance of the district. For design review purposes, a
"contributing heritage resource" is any building, site, structure, or object
that has been so designated by the Heritage Preservation Board on the
basis of its historic associations or historic architectural qualities which add
to the significance of the district as a whole. Contributing heritage
resources may lack individual distinction but must possess historic integrity
of those features necessary to convey their heritage preservation value. An
3
Minutes — January 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
updated inventory of contributing and noncontributing properties in the
Country Club District will be compiled by the Heritage Preservation Board
and maintained by the City Planner.
4. Except in extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public health or
safety, no Certificate of Appropriateness will be issued for the demolition of
an existing home in the district without an approved design plan for new
construction.
5. New home construction will be limited to existing residential lots and their
design will be compatible with the original (1924-1944) Country Club
District deed restrictions relating to architecture. The following guidelines
will be applied by the Heritage Preservation Board to design review of
plans for new houses:
a) New homes should be compatible in size, scale, massing,
orientation, setback, color, and texture with historic buildings in the
District constructed prior to 1945.
b) Traditional materials and exterior finishes (horizontal lap siding,
stucco, brick, false half-timbering, wood shakes, stone) are
recommended for use on facades which are visible from the street.
The use of non-traditional materials (such as Hardi-Plank siding and
steel roofing) should be considered on a case-by-case basis;
imitative wood or masonry finishes should duplicate the size, shape,
color, and texture of materials historically used in the District.
Aluminum and vinyl siding are not appropriate for street facades.
c) Designs reflecting the following architectural periods and styles are
deemed compatible with the historic character of the Country Club
District: Colonial Revival, Tudor, French Eclectic, and Italian
Renaissance. Designs with decorative elements based on Modern,
Neoeclectic, and Contemporary themes are not appropriate.
d) Mechanical equipment, solar panels, air conditioners, satellite
dishes, and antennae should be concealed whenever possible or
placed in an inconspicuous location so as not to intrude or detract
from historic facades and streetscapes.
e) Contemporary designs are acceptable for decks, garages, and
accessory structures so long as they are not visible from the street.
f) Landscaping such as retaining walls, planters, fences, planting
beds, and walkways, should be visually compatible with the historic
character of the District in size, scale, material, texture, and color.
Retaining walls should follow the grade of the lot and blend with the
historic streetscape.
.19
Minutes — January 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
g) Construction of large areas of impervious surface for driveways,
patios, and off-street parking should be discouraged in favor of
permeable pavement systems and other "green" alternatives to solid
concrete, brick, or bituminous paving.
h) Building code requirements should be complied with in such a
manner that the architectural character of the new home is
compatible with the historic character of the neighborhood.
i) New homes should be clearly identified as such by means of a
plaque or inscription (to be placed on an exterior surface) bearing
the year of construction.
6. Contemporary designs for new detached garages will be discouraged.
New detached garages should match the architectural style of the house
on the same lot as well as the historic character of the neighborhood. The
following guidelines will be applied to design review of plans for new
garages:
a) No new detached garage should be taller, longer, or wider than the
house on the same lot or have a roofline that is taller than that of
any adjacent home.
b) No new detached garage should have a gabled or hipped roof with
a pitch steeper than
c) Undecorated exterior walls longer than 16 feet should be avoided
on elevations visible from the street or adjacent properties.
d) Driveways should be compatible in width and material with historic
driveways in the District and should be designed in such a manner
that they do not radically change, obscure, or destroy the historic
character -defining spatial organization and landscape features of
residential lots, yards, and streetscapes. New curb -cuts should be
avoided whenever possible.
e) New garages should be clearly identified as such by means of a
plaque or inscription (to be placed on an exterior surface) bearing
the year of construction.
7. The City will promote voluntary compliance with historic preservation
standards for the rehabilitation of individual historic properties by
encouraging repairs, additions, or alterations which make possible an
efficient contemporary use of older homes in the district while preserving
those features that are historically and architecturally significant.
5
Minutes — January 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
8. The distinguishing original qualities and historic character of the district will
not be damaged or destroyed as a result of any undertaking funded or
assisted by the City. The removal or alteration of any contributing historic
building or landscape feature should be avoided whenever possible.
9. The City will develop and implement plans for the preservation,
maintenance, and replacement of all public infrastructure within the district,
including streets, trees, sidewalks, street lighting, signs, parks, and open
space areas that give the neighborhood its distinguishing character.
10.Although not ordinarily subject to Certificates of Appropriateness, small
additions or minor alterations should be done in such a manner that they
do not destroy historically significant architectural features. New additions
should be differentiated from historic architecture and designed to be
compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the
property.
11. When historic properties are impacted by man-made or natural disasters,
every reasonable effort will be made to avoid total loss. If demolition must
occur, historic buildings should be recorded so that a body of information
about them (photographs, drawings, and written data) will be preserved for
the benefit of the public.
12.The City will arrange for a re -survey of the Edina Country Club District
every ten years to document changes in the appearance and historic
integrity of historic properties; to revise the list of contributing and
noncontributing properties present within the district boundaries; and to
revise the district plan of treatment as needed. The next re -survey will
take place circa 2017.
Consultant Vogel pointed out that the revised plan of treatment addresses the
drawbacks identified in the original plan and will provide a strong direction for
future Certificate of Appropriateness decisions.
Regarding item #2 in the proposed plan of treatment, the question arose as to
whether additions to the rear of a home should be included in the Certificate of
Appropriateness review process. The Board discussed scenarios of possible
additions that are typically built on homes in the district. Member Blemaster
opined that the plan of treatment should focus on additions that affect the
streetscape.
Member Rehkamp Larson pointed out that it is the larger projects on the front and
side street elevations of the homes that have the biggest impact on the character
of the district; she then suggested focusing efforts on the education of concerning
issues which might not be regulated in the plan of treatment - such as additions to
the rear of a home that are visible from the front street. She added that it will be
important that the revised plan of treatment focus on those elements that affect
D
Minutes — January 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
the landmark designation of the district, i.e. the historic character of the
streetscapes.
Discussion ensued regarding the following changes to Consultant Vogel's
proposed plan of treatment:
Item #5 which defines the criteria for when a Certificate of Appropriateness would
be required - under item "e", contemporary designs should not be acceptable for
garages.
Item #6; the term "contemporary" should be replaced with "modern" since many
people confuse the use of the term "contemporary" with an architectural style.
Also, item #6b which would regulate the pitch of new detached garages should be
deleted.
The Board then discussed the cut-off year under which a home would be deemed
"contributing", thus ineligible to be tom down. Consultant Vogel explained that by
using the 50 year standard, (which would stipulate that homes built prior to 1958
would be ineligible to be torn down), the date would be consistent with what is
considered historic under preservation standards. Board members agreed that
they would consider the suggested 50 year date, but added that they looked
forward to discussing this topic with the City Council at the upcoming joint
meeting prior to making a final decision.
III. JOINT MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL — Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Planner Repya explained that the joint meeting with the City Council is scheduled
for Tuesday, January 15th at 5:00 p.m., prior to the 7:00 p.m. Council meeting.
The Council will receive a summary of findings from the survey work completed
thus far as well as a copy of the revised plan of treatment which will reflect the
aforementioned changes. Board members agreed that they looked forward to
discussing the survey work with the Council members.
IV. OTHER BUSINESS: None
V. CONCERN OF RESIDENTS:
Kitty O'Dea — 4610 Bruce Avenue
Ms. O'Dea asked for clarification regarding something she read indicating that the
cloning of historic houses would be discouraged. Consultant Vogel explained'that
historic architectural styles will be encouraged; however the plan of treatment will
discourage one trying to pass -off new construction as original.
FA
Minutes — January 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
VI. CORRESPONDENCE:
Consultant Vogel reported that the 2008 National Alliance for Preservation
Commissions will be held July 10 — 13, 2008, in New Orleans. While it can be
pretty warm in New Orleans in July, the Conference should be well worth it, and
Vogel encouraged the Board to consider attending.
VII. NEXT MEETING DATE: February 12, 2008
VIII. ADJOURNMENT 9:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Joyce Repya
1,7
AGENDA
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL - COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Concern of Residents," the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak
about something not on the agenda.
* Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an
issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: January 8, 2008
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-08-1 4622 Drexel Avenue
Changes to Certificate of Appropriateness
previously approved for new home
2. H-08-2 4629 Bruce Avenue
Construct a new 2 -car detached garage in the
southeast corner of the rear yard
B. January Survey Progress Report
III. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT OPEN HOUSE: Planning Session
February 25, 2008, 5:00 — 7:00 p.m.
IV. OTHER BUSINESS:
V. CONCERN OF RESIDENTS:
VI. CORRESPONDENCE:
VII. NEXT MEETING DATE: February 25, 2008 Country Club District Open House
March 11, 2008
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance
in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-
927-886172 hours in advance of the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50T" STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Kojetin, Karen Ferrara, Chris Rofidal, Lou
Blemaster, Laura Benson, Jean Rehkamp Larson,
Connie Fukuda, Nancy Scherer, and Sara Rubin
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Preservation Consultant
Tom Mason, 4622 Drexel Avenue
Brandon Merrill, MA Peterson Design Build
Joe Sullivan, 4504 Casco Avenue
Cheryl Dulas, 4609 Bruce Avenue
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: January 8, 2008
Member Rofidal moved approval of the Minutes from the January 8, 2008
meeting. Member Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion
carried.
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness (COA)
1. H-08-1 4622 Drexel Avenue
Changes to a COA previously approved for a new home
Planner Repya reported that the subject property is located on the west side of
the 4600 block of Drexel Avenue. The existing home, constructed in 1941 is
identified as a Neo -Colonial. A two stall, front loading garage is located on the
north side of the house.
On October 26, 2006, the Heritage Preservation Board approved a Certificate of
Appropriateness to demolish the existing home and build a new home. Since that
time, the project was abandoned, the property was sold, and a new plan for the
home is now proposed.
r
Minutes — February 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
The subject request addresses new construction which includes removing the
existing attached garage and replacing it with a new attached, front -loading, 2
stall garage; recessed 8.33 feet from the front building wall. The existing hip roof
is proposed to be replaced with a new, higher pitched roof with gable ends on all
four elevations. An 850 square foot, 2 -story addition is proposed to be added to
the rear of the home - set back 3.96 from the south building wall of the existing
home, and 15.46 feet from the southerly lot line; 43 feet from the rear (or
westerly) lot line; and 14 feet from the north lot line.
The property owner has indicated that the plans are influenced by the English
Cottage architectural style; utilizing a massed square ground plan configuration.
The roof pitch is proposed to be changed from low, hip style to a higher pitch with
ridge lines and gable ends, in an attempt to more closely match the pitch of
surrounding homes. The exterior finishes proposed are tumbled stone, cedar
shakes and cedar trim, with asphalt shingles.
Planner Repya observed that an important element when reviewing home
construction in the Country Club District, in addition to the architectural style, is to
determine how the home will compare in size and massing to the adjacent
homes. The following comparison of the elevations at the street, first floor and
ridge line for the subject home and the adjacent homes to both the north and
south were provided:
Address Street 1 st Floor Ridge Line _
4620 - north 887.66 (+9.3') 896.69 (+26.5') 923.22
4622 - proposed 886.53 (+8.3') 894.87 (+27.6') 922.47 (919.98 original)
4624 - south 886.32 (+8.1') 894.42 (+27') 921.48
Note: The difference in grade from street to 1St floor and 1St floor to ridge line is indicated
in parentheses.
Comparisons for the building heights of the subject and adjacent homes demonstrate
the following:
(Measurements taken from grade, not 1St floor elevation.)
Address Highest Peak Eave Line
4620 — north 277' 16'5"
4622 — proposed 287' 177' (original home 25'5" peak, 19'2" eave)
4624 — south 26'4" 20'4"
Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel reviewed the plans submitted with the
Certificate of Appropriateness application and opined that a new COA is required
because the proposed work will obliterate the existing house (while recycling
some of its structural components) and replace it with an entirely new
architectural creation.
2
Minutes – February 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
The design does not attempt to imitate a particular architectural style or period,
but interprets both the Colonial and Tudor styles as well as some notable
Midwestern vernacular themes that are also reflected in older homes in the
district. The overall impression is of a Neo -Eclectic house consciously designed
to be compatible with adjacent historic facades—it certainly makes an interesting
transition between the neighboring homes.
Mr. Vogel explained that the composition of the fagade is based on traditional
rather than modern shapes and textures, and in his opinion, the designer did an
excellent job of integrating the attached, front -loading garage with the rest of the
facade. Vogel noted that the compound plan, with its combination of side and
front -facing gables (a form referred to as "cross -gabled"), is a characteristic
shared by numerous Tudor Revival homes in the district, which also often have
mixed wall cladding materials. The open entry porch is a very nice touch
because it helps offset the mass of the fagade (builders in the 1920s -30s installed
the same porches/porticoes on both Colonial Revival and Tudor style houses
throughout the district). The wood brackets under the eaves are neither Colonial
nor Tudor inspired, at least in an architectural history sense, but decorative
brackets can be seen on Italian Renaissance styled homes in the district (where
many of the Tudors have "colonial" decorative shutters) and here they are placed
in a somewhat inconspicuous location.
Mr. Vogel concluded that he would recommend approval of the COA for new
construction, subject to the plans presented and a 2008 year built plaque be
displayed on the exterior of the home.
FINDINGS:
Planner Repya provided the following findings:
The proposed new construction is architecturally compatible in scale,
building materials, and texture with the nearby historic homes and the
streetscape.
• The historic integrity of nearby historic facades will not be impaired.
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and
scope of the project.
The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of
Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Country Club Plan of Treatment
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Ms. Repya concluded that staff recommends approval of the Certificate of
Appropriateness for the new construction subject to:
• The plans presented, and
• The condition that a year built plaque or sign is placed on the structure.
3
Minutes — February 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Member Blemaster
• Questioned the placement of the garage on the front elevation of the
home; recalling that under the original plan for the district, Samuel Thorpe
required that the garage not be visible from the front street.
• Cautioned the Board to be careful when making suggestions - not to
redesign the home — the homeowner needs to have choices.
Member Scherer
• Reiterated Member Blemaster's concern regarding the placement of the
front loading garage, and added that the front elevation has so many
elements in play that the plan appears hodge-podge to her.
Member Rehkamp Larson
• Observed that the plan demonstrates great scale and massing. The form
also works with the plan. The original house structure will be maintained.
The front facing garage is not a problem — it has been set back from the
front building wall to reduce the impact on the front elevation and sits
below a lower hip roof. And the front entry has good proportion.
• Questioned whether the following details were in keeping with the historic
neighborhood:
1. The eave/overhang on the front gable has a large boxed piece that
might be reduced.
2. The garden gate on the front south elevation is connected to the
eave and could be more connected to the house.
3. Tongue and groove siding — could it be setting a precedence?
• Questioned whether this plan would be setting a precedence for future
requests for new construction from an historic context.
Member Ferrara
• Observed that the Board needs to be sensitive to a homeowner's
preferences for materials and design as long as what is proposed falls
within the suggested design guidelines
• Pointed out that when looking at changes which have taken place in the
district, it is very difficult to determine precedence.
Member Koietin
• Pointed out that it is the responsibility of the Board to evaluate the plans as
they relate to the criteria set out in the plan of treatment.
Member Fukuda
• Observed that the plans appear to meet the criteria of the plan of
treatment.
0
Minutes — February 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Member Benson
• Observed that it is important that the neighbors have had an opportunity to
review the plans and that their concerns have been addressed.
HOMEOWNER COMMENTS: Tom Mason, Spyglass Properties
Responding to questions from the Board, the owner/contractor, Tom Mason
explained the following:
• The existing home has a front loading garage, and because there is not
enough room on the side of the home for a driveway to access a garage in
the rear of the home, we have attempted to lessen the impact of the
garage by recessing it from the front building wall.
• The existing pitch of the roof is very low compared with the neighboring
homes. The new gabled roof was designed to be more in keeping with the
surrounding historic architecture.
• The stone veneer proposed for the facade is a natural tumbled stone.
As the plans for the home were designed, meetings were held with city
staff, preservation consultant, and abutting neighbors.
MOTION:
Member Ferrara moved approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness
application, subject to the plans presented and a year date plaque be affixed to
the exterior of the home. Member Kojetin seconded the motion.
DISCUSSION:
Member Rehkamp Larson stated that she was pleased with the overall design of
the home, however would be more comfortable if the following changes were
considered:
1. Reworking the front overhanging eave and removing the box on
either end.
2. The peak of the rear addition is about six inches higher than the
peak of the existing home. To bring the addition peak in line with
the home would be a refinement to the plan.
Mr. Mason explained that the larger overhang eave was designed to prevent ice
dam problems which can occur with smaller eaves. Also, the higher ridge of the
addition is not visible from the front street due to the grading of the lot. However,
he stated that he could agree to Ms. Rehkamp Larson's suggestions.
VOTE:
Following a brief discussion, Member Ferrara amended her motion to include
Member Rehkamp Larson's two suggestions. Member Kojetin agreed to the
5
Minutes — February 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
amended motion. Members Rofidal, Benson, Fukuda, Scherer, Ferrara, Kojetin
and Rubin voted aye. Member Blemaster voted nay, pointing out that she did not
agree with the front facing garage. The motion carried.
2. H-08-2 4629 Bruce Avenue
Construct a new 2 -car detached garage
Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the east side of
the 4600 block of Bruce Avenue. The existing home is an English Tudor style
constructed in 1935. A 2 -car detached garage is located in the southeast corner
of the rear yard, accessed by a driveway running along the south property line.
The subject request involves demolishing the existing 583.7 square foot detached
garage which was constructed in 1999, and building a new, 583.7 square foot
detached garage in the same location. The plan illustrates the new structure will
continue to maintain 5 foot setback from the rear lot line and 6.4 foot setback
from the south side lot line. A new curb cut is not required since the existing
driveway will provide access to the proposed garage.
Ms. Repya pointed out that the new 2 stall detached garage is proposed to have
the same footprint as the garage to be demolished; 24'2"x 24'2" or 583.7 square
feet in area. The design of the structure is proposed to compliment the
architectural style of the home. Attention to detail is demonstrated on all four
elevations. Stucco siding with trim boards applied in a similar style found on the
front of the home is proposed for the walls, and shake shingles are proposed for
the roof.
The height of the proposed garage is shown to be 21 feet at the highest peak,
15.5 feet at the mid -point of the gable, and 9 feet at the eave line. The ridge line
is shown to be 25.5 feet in length. Furthermore, the lot coverage for the property
with the proposed garage will not change since the proposed garage will be no
larger than the existing garage.
The proponent has provided information regarding characteristics of garages to
the south and east of the subject property. The data indicates that the property to
the south, (4628 Arden Avenue) has a 488 square foot detached garage with a
hip roof measuring 12.75 feet to the peak, set back 5 feet from the shared
property line. The detached garage for the home to the south (4631 Bruce
Avenue) measures 540 square feet in area and 26 feet in height to the peak; it is
situated in the southeast corner of the yard approximately 28 feet from the shared
lot line shared with the subject property.
Preservation Consultant Vogel reviewed the plans and observed that the
drawings submitted with the subject Certificate of Appropriateness application
demonstrate that the new garage will match the 1935 Tudor dwelling very well.
The existing wood fence in back screens the lower part of the east (rear)
elevation, where the texture of the exterior wall finish and the gable -end treatment
X
Minutes — February 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
are sufficient, and will add enough visual character to the only wall that lacks
windows/doors. It is a good design and the shed -roofed dormers are an
interesting touch — Country Club Tudors often have these little shed dormers.
Mr. Vogel recommended approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for the
new garage with the condition that a year built sign or plaque be placed
somewhere on the structure to differentiate it as new construction.
FINDINGS:
Planner Repya presented the following findings:
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and
scope of the project.
• The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of
Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Country Club Plan of Treatment
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Ms. Repya concluded that Staff recommends approval of the Certificate of
Appropriateness for the new garage subject to:
• The plans presented, and
• The condition that a year built plaque or sign is placed on the structure.
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Members Scherer and Blemaster
• Inquired about the upstairs room — what it would be used for and how it
would be accessed?
Member Rehkamp Larson
• Stated that she thought the garage plan was great.
Member Rofidal
• Stated that he liked the plan, however questioned the 21 foot height of the
roof considering the garage to the east was only 14 feet high. Member
Rehkamp Larson explained that she lived in the home to the east and the
7 foot height difference between the two garages did not bother her.
APPLICANT'S COMMENTS: Brandon Merrill, MA Peterson Design Build
• Responding to the questions about the upstairs room, Mr. Merrill explained
that the upstairs will be accessed by stairs — it will not be insulated and will
be used for storage.
7
Minutes — February 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
MOTION AND VOTE:
Following a brief discussion, Member Rehkamp Larson moved approval of the
Certificate of Appropriateness request to build a new detached garage subject to
the plans presented and the condition that a year built plaque be placed on the
exterior of the structure. Member Benson seconded the motion. Members
Ferrara, Blemaster, Kojetin, Rubin, and Fukuda voted aye. Members Rofidal and
Scherer voted Nay. The motion carried.
B. Survey Progress Report — January
Consultant Vogel reported that most of the work during the first half of the month
was spent preparing for the HPB meeting on January 8 and the HPC -City Council
workshop on January 15.
Review and organization of the survey data continued with the goal to assemble
an update the list of all of the homes in the district with each property's street
address, date of construction, architectural classification, and statement of
significance (contributing or noncontributing).
Work also continued to revise the plan of treatment to reflect comments received
from members of the city council and city staff. Some additional research was
required relating to definition of terms and the policy implications of some of the
plan features.
Board members thanked Mr. Vogel for his report.
III. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT OPEN HOUSE - February 25th
Board members discussed the format and information that would be provided at the
February 25th open house. It was agreed that research data should be presented as
well as the possible changes to the plan of treatment. Members emphasized that this
would be an opportunity for the residents of the neighborhood to learn about the
research data and provide a forum for the HPB to listen to resident concerns and vision
for their neighborhood.
All agreed that a notice of the open house should be mailed to all residents as well as
providing a press release. It was suggested that emphasis be made in the notice that
"possible changes to the plan of treatment could have an impact on contemplated
changes to the exterior of the homes." Planner Repya stated that she would ensure
that the notices will be sent no less than 10 days prior to the open house.
IV. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Joint Meeting with City Council — January 15th: Outcome Discussion
Minutes — February 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Board members discussed their reflections of the meeting with the Council
Members.
Member Rofidal
• Received the impression that some of the council members preferred
maintaining the contributing and non-contributing designations for the
properties, but at the same time they would prefer the regulations be the
same for both designations.
• Need to keep in mind that we are entering into a new era — the older
homes are expensive to maintain and it might not always be in the best
interest of the district to have a blanket prohibition of tear downs.
• Have spoken with some residents of the district who do not want a
restriction to the tear down of homes.
Member Scherer
• Four homes have been torn down in the district since the landmark
designation in 2003, which is a small number. However, a large number of
new homes could change the character of the district.
• If the tear down of homes is permitted, the Board needs better guidance
when reviewing the plans.
Member Blemaster
• It may appear the plan of treatment is vague, however it needs to be to
provide individuality and creativity within the historic framework.
• It is through the Certificate of Appropriateness process that the integrity of
the district will be maintained.
• It is encouraging that some of the builders associated with Certificates of
Appropriateness have been very sensitive to the input from the
neighborhood.
• It is important that new buyers in the district are educated about the
landmark designation and the responsibilities associated with that.
Member Koietin
• The responsibility for education about the landmark designation lies with
the HPB, but also the realtors, home sellers and the neighborhood in
general.
Member Rehkamp Larson
• Observed that it is the broader elements of massing and scale that give the
district its character.
• Would like clarification of the design guidelines regarding which elements
are recommended and which are discouraged. It is important to make
expectations clear.
eConsultant Vogel
• It is imperative to know what is being preserved.
9
Minutes — February 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
• Preservation education is a consistent struggle in landmark districts
because the stakeholders come and go. The historic information needs to
be continually available.
• It should not be the HPB job to prohibit change — the to control new
construction to ensure the historic integrity of the district is maintained.
• The concern for a large number of teardowns just isn't there. With the rate
of four tear downs in five years in a district of 550 homes, the rate of
change would take hundreds of years.
• Residents are doing an excellent job of maintaining the character of the
district.
V. CONCERN OF RESIDENTS:
Joe Sullivan — 4504 Casco Avenue
Mr. Sullivan expounded upon a letter to the editor he submitted to the Edina Sun
Current regarding the possible restriction of tear downs in the district, stating the
following:
• Preservation in the district is a difficult job due to its subjectiveness.
• The district has been evolving for 80 years, and has been well maintained.
• He has been a resident for 2 years and was attracted due to the location,
sidewalks and young families, not necessarily the architectural styles of the
homes.
• The regulations need to be pragmatic — the houses are aged and won't last
forever.
• The regulations should not over mandate — the residents should be
encouraged to invest in their properties.
• Some older residents in the district are afraid of change.
• The importance of a neighborhood is people.
• His home has had numerous poorly constructed additions, which over time
will require that he make a considerable investment to create a safe and
more livable home, which will enhance the neighborhood.
• The residents in the district need to be comfortable with the HPB.
Cheryl Dulas — 4609 Bruce Avenue
Ms. Dulas shared the following concerns:
• There are some homes in the district that deserve to be preserved, such as
the 8 model homes built by Mr. Thorpe.
• For the most part, the residents of the district have voluntarily maintained
the historic integrity of their homes when undertaking changes to their
homes. It is the speculative buyer, particularly on the smaller lots on the
10
Minutes — February 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
east side of the district who have demonstrated a disregard for the history
of the district.
• Ms. Dulas questioned the precedence for demolishing homes in the
district.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE: None
VII. NEXT MEETING DATE: March 11, 2008
VIII. ADJOURNMENT 10:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Joyce Repya
11
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Goals & Objectives
2008
Below are the goals & objectives identified in 2007 which remain in the work plan:
• Initiate a city-wide survey of significant properties associated with the heritage of
Edina women.
• Increase efforts to provide city officials with information, education and training
in heritage preservation.
• Work with Public Works, Parks and other city departments to ensure that historic
properties are taken into account in planning for city infrastructure maintenance
and improvements.
• Increase public education and outreach efforts.
Additional tasks include: To be discussed at the meeting
•
r
•
AGENDA
THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL - COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Concern of Residents," the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak
about something not on the agenda.
* Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an
issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: February 12, 2008
II. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Chairman and Vice Chairman
III. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Open House — February 25th: Outcome Discussion
B. Survey Progress Report - February
C. Revisions to Plan of Treatment
IV. 2008 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES:
V. ANNUAL MINNESOTA PRESERVATION CONFERENCE — September 19-20,2008
Northfield, Minnesota
IV. OTHER BUSINESS:
V. CONCERN OF RESIDENTS:
VI. CORRESPONDENCE:
VII. NEXT MEETING DATE:
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance
in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-
927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50"' STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Karen Ferrara, Chris Rofidal, Lou Blemaster, Laura
Benson, Jean Rehkamp Larson, Connie Fukuda, Nancy
Scherer, and Sara Rubin
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bob Kojetin and Nancy Scherer
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
OTHERS PRESENT: Joe Sullivan, 4504 Casco Avenue
Dan & Cheryl Dulas, 4609 Bruce Avenue
Bruce Christensen, 4515 Browndale Avenue
William Horn, 4511 Browndale Avenue
H.L. Saylor, 4900 Bruce Avenue
Ralph Tully, 4619 Bruce Avenue
Request for Addition to the Agenda:
Member Rehkamp Larson advised the Board that the issue of the traffic calming
measures approved for the Country Club District has come to the attention of
residents who are now expressing their disapproval of the measures. Some
residents from the neighborhood were in attendance and would like to address
the Board. Ms. Rehkamp Larson asked that the Country Club District traffic
calming measures be added to the agenda. The Board agreed to hear the
concerns of the residents after the work on Item # I I I C. the Revised Plan of
Treatment.
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: February 12, 2008
Planner Repya asked for approval of the minutes. Member Blemaster moved
approval of the minutes from the February 12, 2008 meeting. Member Ferrara
seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
if. ELECTION OF OFFICERS:
Planner Repya requested nominations for the office of chairman. Member Fukuda
moved to nominate Chris Rofidal to the office. Member Blemaster seconded the
nomination. Member Rofidal offered his philosophy for the responsibilities of the
Minutes – March 11, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
chairman and explained that if the Board was comfortable with his approach, he would
accept the nomination. Board members appreciated Member Rofidal's candor and
unanimously approved Rofidal to become the Board Chairman.
Member Rehkamp Larson moved to nominate Laura Benson to the office of vice
chairman. Member Blemaster seconded the nomination. Member Benson accepted the
nomination. Board members unanimously approved Member Benson's for the office of
vice chairman.
III. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Open House – February 25th
Board members Benson, Rubin, Kojetin and Scherer represented the HPB at the
Open House of February 25th where the results of the research and possible
changes to the district's Plan of Treatment were presented. Members Rubin and
Benson shared their favorable reflections.
Member Blemaster expressed her regrets for being unable to attend however
stated that she was impressed with the favorable emails the Board had received
from the neighborhood.
Member Rehkamp Larson also appreciated the email comments, pointing out that
she saw a call for clarity and specificity in the revised plan.
Chairman Rofidal agreed that the email messages received from the open house
attendees provided good specifics.
B. Survey Progress Report - February
Consultant Vogel was not in attendance, but provided the following progress
report summarizing the project work carried out during the month of February:
I continued to review and organize the survey data so that it can be integrated
into the planning process. The evaluation of individual properties was completed
and a comprehensive inventory of all contributing and noncontributing properties
is forthcoming—probably in April.
A considerable effort was made to prepare for the district open house on
February 25 and the upcoming HPB and Planning Commission meetings
scheduled for March 11 and 26, respectively. I will not be present at the HPB
meeting but will attend the Planning Commission to present a summary of the
survey results.
2
Minutes — March 11, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
C. Revisions to Plan of Treatment
Chairman Rofidal recognized that there were members of the community present
that may wish to speak on this item, and suggested that the public testimony be
taken prior to the Board discussion.
Public Comment:
Joe Sullivan — 4504 Casco Avenue
Mr. Sullivan stated that he understood the historic designation of the district but,
emphasized a concern for basic property rights. He opined that with the HPB
controlling new construction, if a property owner chose to tear down his home, he
should be allowed to do so.
Dan Dulas — 4609 Casco Avenue
Mr. Dulas stated that the reason the district has the heritage landmark
designation is due to the historic architecture of the homes and the manner in
which it was built. If a homebuyer feels that the homes in the district don't fit their
lifestyle, or are ugly, perhaps the historic Country Club District is not the right
neighborhood for them. Mr. Dulas concluded that he understood that not every
home in the district is historic; therefore he would like to see some constraints on
which homes would qualify to be torn down.
Bruce Christensen — 4515 Browndale Avenue
Mr. Christensen stated that he thought it was dangerous to remove homes in the
district. He encouraged the consideration of a peer review system, pointing out
that the current process was unsustainable. He further opined that a homebuyer
in the district should not have a free right to build whatever they want at the
expense of the neighbors.
Cheryl Dulas — 4609 Casco Avenue
Ms. Dulas thanked the Board for the work on the revised Plan of Treatment,
stating that the work thus far demonstrates a significantly stronger plan.
Chairman Rofidal thanked those who spoke for their comments. Member
Rehkamp Larson moved to close the item for public comment. Member Ferrara
seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
Board Discussion:
Chairman Rofidal suggested that since a majority of the revised Plan of
Treatment prepared by Consultant Vogel does not include substantial changes,
3
Minutes — March 11, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
but rather clarifications, the Board should address those issues where change is
proposed. All agreed that was a good idea.
Item #4 — Revised definition of "demolition"
Proposed language —
For purposes of design review and compliance with City Code §850.20 subd.
10, "demolition" shall mean the physical alteration of a historic building that
requires a city permit and where (a) 50% or more of the surface area of all
exterior walls, in the aggregate, are removed; or (b) 50% of more of the
principal roof structure is removed, changing its shape, pitch, or height; or (c)
a front porch, side porch, vestibule, attached garage, or porte-cochere is
removed or destroyed. This demolition does not include removal of existing
siding, roofing, trim, fascia, soffit, eave moldings, dormers, chimneys,
windows, and doors.
Certificates of Appropriateness are not required for demolition, in whole or
in part, of non -historic buildings however, Certificates of Appropriateness
are required for any new construction in the district.
Board members agreed that the demolition definition was very important to the
Plan of Treatment. Discussion ensued regarding whether it was wise to have
separate regulations for historic and non- historic resources. The consensus
opinion was that they should not be treated differently; Member Ferrara then
suggested removing the second paragraph from the demolition definition which
states that "A COA would not be required for a non -historic building." Board
members agreed that would be a good idea.
Member Rehkamp Larson suggested that under item c) which cites the elements
of a home that if removed would be considered demolition; dormers should be
included to the listing. As proposed dormers are not included. She pointed out
that a dormer is structural to a home much like a porch, vestibule or porte-
cochere. Whereas those items not included in the definition of demolition i.e.
roofing, trim, fascia, soffit fall within the classification of routine maintenance for a
home. Discussion ensued regarding the suggestion — opinions varied, thus
members requested a vote. Member Rehkamp Larson made the motion to move
"dormers" into the classification of elements, if removed would be classified as
demolition. Member Benson seconded the motion. Members Benson, Fukuda,
Rehkamp Larson and Rofidal voted aye. Member Ferrara voted nay. Member
Blemaster abstained. The motion carried.
Revised language —
For purposes of design review and compliance with City Code §850.20 subd.
10, demolition shall mean the physical alteration of a building that requires a
city permit and where:
(a) 50% or more of the surface area of all exterior walls, in the
aggregate, are removed; or
0
Minutes— March 11, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
(b) 50% or more of the principal roof structure is removed,
changing its shape, pitch, or height; or
(c) A front porch, side porch, vestibule, dormer, attached garage,
or porte-cochere is removed or destroyed.
This demolition does not include removal of existing siding, roofing, trim, .
fascia, soffit, eave moldings, chimneys, windows, and doors.
Item #5 — When a COA for demolition would be approved
Proposed language
No Certificate of Appropriateness will be approved for the demolition, in
whole or in part, of any heritage preservation resource in the district
unless the applicant can show that the subject property no longer
contributes to the historical significance of the district. For design review
purposes, the terms "heritage preservation resource" and "historic
building" refer to any building, site, structure, or object that has been so
designated by the Heritage Preservation Board on the basis of its historic
associations or historic architectural qualities which add to the
significance of the district as a whole. Heritage preservation resources
may lack individual distinction but must possess historic significance and
integrity of those features necessary to convey their heritage
preservation value. An updated inventory of heritage preservation
resources in the Country Club District will be compiled by the Heritage
Preservation Board and maintained by the City Planner.
Following a brief discussion, Board members agreed that the consultant's
recommendation that "The plan of treatment should give priority to restricting
teardowns to non -historic properties" should be added to this paragraph as the
second sentence.
Item #8 — Detached garages a)
Discussion ensued regarding whether the Plan of Treatment should discourage
front facing attached garages. Member Blemaster felt strongly that such garages
should be prohibited. Upon the request for a vote, Member Rofidal moved to add
that "front facing attached garages are discouraged." Member Blemaster
seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
Discussion ensued regarding the 18 foot maximum height above grade
established for detached garages. All agreed that they would prefer using the
same percentage concept for the height of the garage as is used for the home,
i.e. "The roofline should have a maximum height within 10% of the average height
of existing detached garages on adjacent lots, or the average of the block."
A general discussion ensued regarding layout for the plan. Member Ferrara
pointed out that she would prefer organizing the plan with topic headings rather
5
Minutes — March 11, 2008
Edina Heritage. Preservation Board
then numbers, to assist the reader in finding information. All agreed that would an
excellent idea. Planner Repya agreed to organize the plan by labeling
paragraphs.
Chairman Rofidal than made a motion for the Board to accept the draft Plan of
Treatment as revised. Member Ferrara seconded the motion. All voted aye. The
motion carried.
IV. 2008 GOALS & OBJECTIVES: Continued until April Meeting
V. ANNUAL MN PRESERVATION CONFERENCE: September 19-20, 2008
Northfield, MN
Member Fukuda departed the meeting.
VI. CONCERN OF RESIDENTS: Traffic Calming in Country Club District
Bruce Christensen — 4515 Browndale Avenue
Mr. Christensen explained that he represented a group of neighbors from the
Country Club District who are challenging the traffic calming and streetscape
changes approved for their neighborhood.
Mr. Christensen reviewed the reasons his group was opposed to the plan. He
pointed out that he felt the HPB was complicent in the approval of the project and
asked that the Board rescind the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project.
Chairman Rofidal explained that the Certificate of Appropriateness for the
improvements to the infrastructure in the Country Club District was approved at
the November meeting of the Board. Because the ten day appeal period passed
with no appeals received, the Board's decision stands. That being the case, the
Board can not rescind the Certificate of Appropriateness. He added that because
the HPB is advisory to the City Council, the Council would need to direct the
Board to reevaluate the project.
William Horn — 4511 Browndale Avenue
Mr. Horn opined that the subject traffic calming measures are addressing the
concerns of a handful of residents and going against the will of the community.
H.L. Saylor — 4900 Bruce Avenue
Mr. Saylor stated that he supported a petition being circulated opposing the traffic
calming measures in the district. He stated that due to a heavy work schedule, he
was unaware of the situation and expressed concerns that the proposed traffic
calming measures will cause problems for emergency vehicles and snow plows.
N
Minutes — March 11, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Ralph Tully — 4619 Bruce Avenue
Mr. Tully expressed his opinion that a vast majority of the residents in the Country
Club District don't agree with the traffic calming measures that have been
approved-. He urged the Board to support the cause of those opposing the plan.
Joe Sullivan — 4504 Casco Avenue
Mr. Sullivan explained that he too supported the petition opposing the traffic
calming measures; and warned that changing traffic patterns will redirect traffic
flow to areas of the district which previously had no problems.
BOARD MEMBERS RESPONSES:
Member Ferrara
Member Ferrara explained that the traffic plan was presented as part of the utility
project in the district. The HPB did not weigh in on whether or not the
improvements were appropriate, rather how the improvements would impact the
historic integrity of the neighborhood.
Member Rehkamp Larson
Member Rehkamp Larson stated that the changes proposed in the traffic section
of the project were brought to the HPB as part of the requirements set out from
the NE Traffic Study. The HPB was not given a choice as to whether the specific
elements of the plan (i.e. speed humps, paved crosswalks, chokers, etc.) were
appropriate in the district. The charge of the Board was to address how the
changes would impact the district from an historic standpoint.
Member Benson
Member Benson agreed that the HPB was not asked to weigh in as to whether or
not the proposed traffic calming measures were appropriate in the district; rather
the consultant's wanted the HPB's advice on how the changes could be
implemented with the least impact on the historic streetscapes.
Member Blemaster
Member Blemaster observed that a coalition of concerned residents have been
researching the traffic situation in the district for many years. In 2005, this group
made a presentation to the City Council in which they defined the need for traffic
calming measures and asked that before the streets were upgraded without
taking their concerns into consideration, that a study be done. The NE Traffic
Study identified the traffic problems in the district and the project that was
approved is a result of that research.
7
Minutes — March 11, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Member Rofidal
Addressing the comment that there was inadequate notification of this project,
Member Rofidal recited the list of notifications and meetings which took place
from 2005 until approval of the project in 2007.
Board Discussion
Board members understood that they were not in a position to rescind the
Certificate of Appropriateness that was approved for the traffic calming measures
in the district. However, several members suggested that the Board submit a
statement to the City Council explaining the rationale for approving the COA.
Chairman Rofidal cautioned that a statement from the Heritage Preservation
Board might not be appropriate at this time.
Following a brief discussion, Member Rehkamp Larson moved that the HPB
submit a letter to the City Council explaining that the COA for the traffic calming
measures was approved with the understanding that the measures were required
by the NE Traffic Study which had been approved by the City Council. Member
Ferrara seconded the motion. Members Rehkamp Larson and Ferrara voted aye.
Members Benson and Blemaster voted nay. Chairman Rofidal abstained. The
motion was defeated.
Chairman Rofidal pointed out that while the Board will not be submitting a letter to
the City Council regarding this issue, board members do have to right to express
their opinions to the Council if they so choose.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE: None
VIII. NEXT MEETING DATE: April 8, 2008
IX. ADJOURNMENT 10:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Joyce Repya
0
AGENDA
THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL - COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Concern of Residents," the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak
about something not on the agenda.
* Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an
issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: March 11, 2008
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Plan of Treatment
B. Certificate of Appropriateness Procedures
III. 2008 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES:
IV. 2008 HERITAGE AWARD: Nomination Deadline April 11 t
V. ANNUAL MINNESOTA PRESERVATION CONFERENCE — September 19-20,2008
Northfield, Minnesota
VI. OTHER BUSINESS:
VII. CONCERN OF RESIDENTS:
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE:
IX. NEXT MEETING DATE:
X. ADJOURNMENT:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance
in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-
927-886172 hours in advance of the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chris Rofidal, Bob Kojetin, Karen Ferrara, Lou
Blemaster, Laura Benson, Jean Rehkamp Larson,
Connie Fukuda, Nancy Scherer, and Sara Rubin
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Heritage Preservation Consultant
Dan & Cheryl Dulas, 4609 Bruce Avenue
Kitty O'Dea, 4610 Bruce Avenue
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: March 11, 2008
Member Benson moved approval of the minutes from the March 11, 2008
meeting. Member Blemaster seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion
carried.
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Plan of Treatment
Planner Repya reported that on March 26th the Planning Commission reviewed
the proposed Plan of Treatment for the Country Club District, and unanimously
approved supporting the HPB in requesting adoption of the revised plan from the
City Council at their upcoming April 15th meeting.
Member Scherer stated that as a Planning Commission member, she was
pleased with the reception the revised plan received from her fellow commission
members.
Chairman Rofidal observed that in preparation for the City Council presentation
he wanted to ensure that the HPB members clearly understood and supported
the proposed plan.
Consultant Vogel pointed out that since the Board agreed to revise point c) under
the definition of "Demolition" to include dormers because they affect the
Minutes — April 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
architectural style of the home, perhaps chimneys should also be included in the
list — pointing out that the loss of a prominent chimney can have an impact on the
design of a home. Board members agreed that it would be a very good idea to
include "chimney" in the listing of elements to be considered when defining
"demolition".
Regarding the first paragraph of the "Design Review Guidelines" section, the
question was raised that since the paragraph refers to the original Country Club
District deed restrictions, perhaps the original deed restrictions should be included
in the plan. Consultant Vogel explained that the design review guidelines listed in
the plan were taken from the original deed restrictions, and to list them again
would be redundant. Member Benson suggested that the last sentence be
modified to read, "The following guidelines generally reflect the principles of
the deed restrictions, and will be applied by the Heritage Preservation Board to
design review of plans for new houses:". Board members agreed that Member
Benson's suggestion provided more clarity to that section.
The following questions were then addressed by the Board:
• In the "Landscape" section, should the plan encourage the planting of
Elm trees on the boulevard?
Consultant Vogel pointed out that the City is responsible for the boulevard area,
and added that an educational brochure would be the best place to list trees to be
encouraged in the district.
• In the "City Responsibilities" section, should the plan specify that heritage
preservation shall not take precedence over public safety?
Consultant Vogel explained that as with the previous question, the public safety
over preservation issue would be best served in an educational brochure.
Following a brief discussion, Chairman Rofidal asked for a motion to approve the
Plan of Treatment reflecting the clarifications proposed. Member Scherer moved
to approve the revised Plan of Treatment subject to the minor changes proposed.
Member Kojetin seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
B. Certificate of Appropriateness Procedures
Consultant Vogel observed that as changes are proposed to the Plan of
Treatment, the Board should also review the Certificate of Appropriateness
process. Under the original Plan of Treatment, the process has been no different
for the review of a new detached garage or the tear down and new construction of
a home. Through experience, the Board has found that much more work is
involved with the review of a new home; consequently it only makes sense that a
separate and more intensive review process should be considered.
E
Minutes — April 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
The following proposed requirements for a Certificate of Appropriateness
application which would only apply to the tear down of a home were presented to
the Board:
Increase the COA application fee to ?00.00. (Current fee is $175.00)
2. Increase the amount of time required for design review to two meetings: A
preliminary review at the first meeting, and a final approval at the second
meeting.
1. Preliminary Review - Applicant demonstrates that:
• The subject property is not a heritage preservation resource, or
• The home no longer contributes to the historical significance of the
district because its historic integrity has been compromised by
deterioration, damage or by inappropriate additions or alterations.
• The proposed new construction must receive preliminary approval
prior to moving on to final approval.
2. Final Approval — Plans must include:
• 2 surveys — one of the existing home and one of the proposed
home.
• Detailed exterior elevations of all sides of the proposed home.
• Exterior elevations of adjacent structures detailing grade as well as
the roof and eave lines in relation to the roof and eave lines of the
proposed work.
• A narrative explaining
1. How the proposed home is compatible with, and will enhance the
historic integrity of the district; and
2. Details of the proposed home focusing on the following details:
- Size, Scale and Massing
- Exterior Finishes
- Accessory Mechanical Equipment
- Decks and Accessory Structures
- Landscape Elements, and
- Impervious Surfaces
3. Require the new home builder to hold at least one neighborhood meeting with
adjacent and abutting neighbors after receiving preliminary approval.
4. Require builders of new homes to mitigate the effects of demolition of historic
homes by architectural recordation to the standards and specifications of the
Historic American Buildings Survey.
5. Require the city planner, building official, and engineer to certify to the HPB that
the new construction has been carried out in accordance with the plans
submitted.
3
Minutes — April 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Board members discussed the proposed revised procedures for the tear down and new
construction of a home in the district. All agreed that requiring a more intensive
procedure made a lot of sense. Member Rehkamp Larson recommended under item #3
requiring a neighborhood meeting, that the HPB receive notice of the date and time for
the meeting. The Board agreed that would be a good idea. No formal action was taken.
III. 2008 GOALS & OBJECTIVES:
Consultant Vogel explained that the purpose of adopting annual goals and
objectives is to establish priorities for dealing with special projects and other
discretionary activities; they also provide handy benchmarks for use as
performance measures. Generally, goals and objectives refer to activities for
outcomes that are not mandated by city code section which deals with the
responsibilities of the HPB. Ideally, the Board's ' stated goals and objectives
should also dovetail with the work plan of the city staff liaison and consultant.
The proposed goals/objectives would commit the HPB to taking care of ,a good
deal of "unfinished business" from 2005-2007 and would put the city preservation
program back on track to focus on its primary mission, which is the identification
and registration of significance heritage resources reflecting the broad spectrum
of Edina heritage (all 10,000 years and 12 historic contexts). The goals and
objectives also address important information needs and planning issues raised
by the Board (when it wasn't preoccupied with the Country Club District) during
the past two years. Mr. Vogel pointed out that the work plan is ambitious;
however the resources are available to carry it out between now and the 2009
annual meeting.
Recommendations for 2008:
1) Adopt and implement the revised Plan of Treatment for the Country Club
District.
2) Evaluate the significance of heritage resources along Minnehaha Creek
and issue findings of heritage landmark eligibility.
3) Nominate a minimum of one building or site for designation as an Edina
Heritage Landmark.
4) Begin to compile an inventory of buildings and sites associated with
commercial and industrial development in Edina between the 1930s and
1970s and evaluate their historical, architectural, engineering, and cultural
significance.
5) Begin work on a comprehensive heritage preservation education and
outreach program aimed at property owners, realtors, developers, and
others.
12
Minutes — April 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
6) Work with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to study the feasibility
of reconstructing the Edina Mill and rehabilitating heritage resources
associated with Minnehaha Creek and the Mill Pond.
7) Develop a research design and seek funding for a thematic study of Edina
heritage resources associated with women.
8) Establish closer ties with heritage preservation commissions in neighboring
cities.
Discussion ensued regarding the proposed goals. Consultant Vogel pointed out
that he provided 8 goals which total 1 per month for the remainder of the year.
The Board agreed that the goals proposed were reasonable.
Board members concurred that once the Country Club District Plan of Treatment
has been determined it will be important to focus on educating city staff, district
residents and contractors about the district requirements. Mr. Vogel pointed out
that future workshops on the "care and feeding" of older homes would serve the
community well. Experts on specific topics, such as windows or landscaping
could offer community education type classes for any resident in the city
interested in maintaining their older home. These session would serve the
Country Club District, however would be directed to anyone interested in older
homes. Board members agreed with Mr. Vogel.
On the topic of education, Chairman Rofidal asked that for the May meeting, an
item be added to the agenda regarding educating the Board about their
responsibilities in light of the possible changes to the Plan of Treatment. Planner
Repya agreed to include an education line item to the agenda.
IV. 2008 HERITAGE AWARD:
Planner Repya advised the Board that the deadline for the 2008 Heritage Award
nominations is Friday, April 11 t'. To date, no nominations have been received.
Board members were encouraged to submit a nomination.
Member Benson stated that she was interested in nominating the Edina
Morningside Church, 4201 Morningside Road. Board members agreed that the
church has been well cared for by its congregation, and holds a place of
importance to the historic fabric of the Morningside neighborhood.
Consultant Vogel suggested that with three days remaining for nominations to be
submitted, a committee should be assembled to review nominations. Board
members agreed that Mr. Vogel should serve on the committee. Member Benson
offered to assist Vogel to review the nominations and choose a recipient. The
Board thanked Mr. Vogel and Member Benson for volunteering. Planner Repya
5
Minutes — April 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
added that the Heritage Award announcement would be made at the May HPB
meeting with the City Council awarding the plaque at one of their May meetings.
V. ANNUAL MN PRESERVATION CONFERENCE:eptem d r 19 19-20,2008
Northfi
Chairman Rofidal reminded the Board that the annual Minnesota Preservation Conference is
scheduled for September 19 — 20 this year in Northfield, MN. Because Edina is a Certified
Local Government (CLG) at least one board member is required to attend the conference. The
registration materials will be sent out in several months. Board members were asked to keep
the date in mind.
VI. CONCERN OF RESIDENTS:
Dan & Cheryl Dulas — 4609 Bruce Avenue
Recognizing the upcoming review of the Country Club District Plan of Treatment
by the City Council; Cheryl Dulas inquired about the process for adoption of the
plan. Of particular concern was what would happen if a Council member took
issue with something in the plan.
Consultant Vogel explained several scenarios that could occur at the meeting... if
the Council did not approve adoption of the proposed plan, the original Plan of
Treatment would continue. He added that the Council could also approve
adoption of the plan with changes, or they could continue the item to a future
meeting.
Mr. Dulas stated that he supported the revised Plan of Treatment, but wanted to
know if the Board had a policy to follow up on the construction approved through
a Certificate of Appropriateness permit to ensure that what is built is true to the
plan approved.
Planner Repya assured Mr. Dulas that periodic inspections are conducted by the
building inspectors and planning staff to ensure compliance with the permitted
plan.
Kitty O'Dea — 4610 Bruce Avenue
Ms. O'Dea thanked the Board for the work on the proposed Plan of Treatment
stating that the changes provide clarity. She added that she has been
researching how to best notify residents and prospective residents about the
heritage landmark designation. Including a line item on the purchase agreement
for a property, and a neighborhood association effort were some of the possible
approaches she identified.
9
Minutes — April 8, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
VII. CORRESPONDENCE: None
VIII. NEXT MEETING DATE: May 13, 2008
IX. ADJOURNMENT 9:25 p.m.
•
Respectfully submitted,
Joyce Repya
7
a
AGENDA
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL - COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Concern of Residents," the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak
about something not on the agenda.
* Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an
issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
BOARD MEMBER RECOGNITION
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: April 8, 2008
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-08-3 4622 Drexel Avenue
Certificate of Appropriateness for new construction
2. H-08-4 4600 Edina Boulevard
Construct a new 2 -car detached garage in the
southwest corner of the rear yard
3. H-08-5 4513 Moorland Avenue
Construct a new detached garage in the southeast
corner of the rear yard
4. H-08-6 Country Club District
Changes to Certificate of Appropriateness: H-07-10
Revised traffic plan
B. Revised Plan of Treatment
1. Notice of Changes to Neighborhood
2. Revisions to Procedures
III. PUBLIC EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES:
IV. 2008 EDINA HERITAGE AWARD:
V. OTHER BUSINESS:
VI. CONCERN OF RESIDENTS:
VII. CORRESPONDENCE:
VIII. NEXT MEETING DATE: June 10, 2008
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance
in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-
927-886172 hours in advance of the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50T" STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chris Rofidal, Bob Kojetin, Lou Blemaster, Jean
Rehkamp Larson, Connie Fukuda, Arlene Forrest, and
Sara Rubin
MEMBERS ABSENT: Karen Ferrara and Laura Benson
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
Wayne Houle, City Engineer
OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Heritage Preservation Consultant
Tom Mason, 4622 Drexel Avenue
Don Nygaard, 4513 Browndale Avenue
Cheryl Dulas, 4609 Bruce Avenue
Kitty O'Dea, 4610 Bruce Avenue
BOARD MEMBER RECOGNITION:
Sara Rubin — Chairman Rofidal presented Member Rubin with a Certificate of
Appreciation for her service on the Board as a student member. This was Ms.
Rubin's last meeting, as she has a summer job out of state and will be attending
college in the fall. All Board members thanked Sara for her contributions and
wished her well.
Nancy Scherer — Chairman Rofidal announced that Member Scherer's tenure on
the HPB as a representative from the Planning Commission has come to an end.
Board members signed a Certificate of Appreciation that will be delivered to Ms.
Scherer.
Arlene Forrest — Chairman Rofidal welcomed Member Forrest as the newest
member of the HPB, representing the Planning Commission. Ms. Forrest served
as a regular member of the HPB prior to her appointment to the Planning
Commission.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: April 8, 2008
Member Kojetin moved approval of the minutes from the April 8, 2008 meeting.
Member Blemaster seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
Minutes — May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificate of Appropriateness
H-08-3 4622 Drexel Avenue — New Construction
Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the west side of
the 4600 block of Drexel Avenue. The original home, constructed in 1941 is
identified as a Neo -Colonial. A two stall, front loading garage is located on the
north side of the house.
93
On October 26, 2006, the Heritage Preservation Board approved a Certificate of
Appropriateness to demolish the existing home and build a new home. Since that
time, the project was abandoned, the property was sold, and a new plan for the
home was approved on February 12, 2008, #H-08-1.
The subject request again addresses new construction which includes removing
the existing attached garage and replacing it with a new attached, front -loading, 2
stall garage; recessed 8.33 feet from the front building wall. This is unchanged
from the plan approved in February.
As provided in the previous plan, an 850 square foot, 2 -story addition is proposed
for the rear of the home — set back 3.96 feet from the south building wall of the
existing home, and 14.46 feet from the southerly lot line; 43 feet from the rear
(westerly) lot line; and 14 feet from the north lot line.
The significant changes demonstrated in the proposed plan are evidenced in the
architectural style proposed, thus affecting the rooflines, windows and building
materials. The new construction demonstrates the use of stone veneer and wood
siding; double hung windows, and asphalt shingles.
An important element when reviewing home construction in the Country Club
District, in addition to the architectural style, is to determine how the home will
compare in size and massing to the adjacent homes. The height and setbacks of
the new construction remain unchanged from the previous plan approved for the
home, which had been deemed appropriate.
Preservation Consultant, Robert Vogel reviewed the proposed plan and indicated
that because the proposed new construction does not involve rehabilitation of a
heritage preservation resource, design review only needs to consider the visual
impact of the proposed new construction on the historical integrity of the district.
The proposed roof shape and height meet current preservation standards.
Recycling the existing attached garage is contextual and therefore appropriate:
the district contains several homes built before 1945 with "tuck -under" front-
loading garages. (Recycling architectural components of houses can mean
significant savings in energy, time, materials, and money and is entirely
2
Minutes – May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
consistent with preservation goals.) The stone veneer finish, dentils, six -over -six
sash windows, ornamental shutters, dormers, end -wall chimney, and classical
entry entablature are features commonly seen on historic facades throughout the
district—note that the plan of treatment requires new homes to have facades that
are "architecturally similar to existing historic homes" with features that "relate to
the pattern of existing adjacent historic homes and respect the rhythm and
continuity of similar features along the street".
Vogel added that from a streetscape perspective, the new house appears to be
architecturally compatible in scale, massing, color, and materials with nearby
older homes and the historic character of the district.
Mr. Vogel concluded that he recommended approval of the COA, subject to the
plans presented for the following reasons:
• The existing house at 4622 Drexel Avenue should not be considered a
heritage preservation resource because it is not an example of an
important heritage resource type;
• The home does not contribute to the historical significance of the district;
• The proposed new construction is architecturally compatible with historic
homes in the district and meets the requirements for new home design
that are set forth in the district plan of treatment.
Mr. Vogel recommended that in the interest of historical accuracy, the plaque
recording the date of construction should indicate that the subject property was
originally built in 1941 and rebuilt in 2008—Built 9941/2008 would be appropriate.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION & FINDINGS:
Planner Repya also recommended approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness
request supported by the following findings:
• The proposed new construction is architecturally compatible in scale,
building materials, and texture with the nearby historic homes and the
streetscape.
• The historic integrity of nearby historic facades will not be impaired.
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and
scope of the project.
• The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of
Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Country Club Plan of Treatment
Ms. Repya concurred that the approval should be subject to the plans presented,
and the condition that a year built (2008) plaque or sign is placed on the
structure.
3
Minutes — May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Member Fukuda asked why the owner was proposing the change to the exterior
design. Owner, Tom Mason explained that a potential buyer who currently lives
on the street would prefer the proposed design.
Member Forrest observed that the double hung windows appear larger than those
on neighboring historic houses. Member Rehkamp Larson pointed out that for
egress purposes, current building codes require larger windows than those
installed when the district was developed.
Member Blemaster expressed concern that the stone on the front and side of the
home is not shown on the rear side. Member Rehkamp Larson suggested that
perhaps the stone could be continued on the base of the rear elevation, which
would help in breaking up the long stretch of blank wall on the side/north
elevation.
Consultant Vogel explained that it is not uncommon to see detailing such as
stone on the front and not the rear of homes built in the district. He added that
the home, as proposed is compatible with the district and compatible with the
surrounding homes. He added that through the Certificate of Appropriateness
review, the board should not look for the home to mimic the historic homes, rather
to compliment them.
MOTION & Vote:
Following a brief discussion, Member Kojetin moved to approve the Certificate of
Appropriateness request subject to the plans presented and the conditions
recommended by Staff. Member Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye.
The motion carried.
H-08-4 4600 Edina Boulevard — New Detached Garage
Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the southwest
corner of Edina Boulevard and Bridge Street. The existing home is an English
Tudor style constructed in 1929. A 2 -car attached garage is located on the west
side of the home, accessed by a driveway running along the north property line.
The subject request involves converting the existing 2 -stall attached garage into a
single stall garage/workshop, and building a new, 476 square foot detached
garage in the southwest corner of the rear yard. The plan illustrates the new
structure will maintain 3 foot setback from the rear (west) lot line and 4 foot
setback from the side (south) lot line. A new curb cut will not be required since
the existing driveway will provide access to the proposed garage.
The new 2 -stall detached garage is proposed to measure 20'x 23'8" or 476
square feet in area. The design of the structure is proposed to compliment the
am
Minutes — May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
architectural style of the home. Attention to detail is demonstrated on all four
elevations. Stucco siding with trim boards applied in a similar style found on the
front of the home is proposed for the walls, and asphalt shingles are proposed for
the roof to match the house.
In keeping with the most recent change to the Plan of Treatment regarding how
the appropriate height of a new detached garage should be calculated, the
proponent considered the heights of the detached garages for the following
properties when determining the height for the proposed garage:
4601 Moorland Avenue 20.25 feet + @10% = 22.27 feet
4603 Moorland Avenue 18.1 feet (hip roof) + @10% = 19.91 feet
4607 Moorland Avenue 20.67 feet (hip roof) + @10% = 22.7 feet
Average Maximum Height = 21.6 feet
Proposed Garage Height = 20.9 feet
The height proposed at the midpoint of the gable is shown to be 14 feet, and a
height of 7 feet is provided at the eave line. The ridge line is shown to be 25.5
feet in length.
The maximum lot coverage allowed for the property is 25%. Prior to the
construction of the proposed garage, the lot coverage on the property measures
20.5%. Construction of the proposed 476 sq. ft. garage will create a maximized
lot coverage of 25%.
Preservation Consultant, Robert Vogel reviewed the subject plans and opined
that the proposed new garage meets the basic criteria for appropriateness set
forth in the Country Club Plan of Treatment. The design of the new garage
matches the Tudor style of the historic home, is subordinate to the house, and is
compatible in size, scale and materials with other historic homes in the district.
The garage will not disturb or alter the defining characteristics of the property or
the neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION & FINDINGS:
Planner Repya concluded that staff recommends approval of the Certificate of
Appropriateness request supported by the following findings:
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and
scope of the project.
• The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of
Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Country Club Plan of Treatment
Ms. Repya further recommended approval subject to the plans presented, and
the condition that a year built (2008) plaque or sign is placed on the structure.
5
Minutes — May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
HOMEOWNER COMMENTS: -
Mr. Dan Ilten explained that he has lived in the home since 1983, and is hoping
that with the construction of the proposed detached garage, he will have more
storage, as well as a more efficient use of space. Mr. Ilten, an architect, designed
the proposed garage with the intent of complimenting the house by matching the
pitch of the roof as closely as possible. He added that the 20' 9" height proposed
is six inches shorter than the maximum allowed with the new provision provided
in the Plan of Treatment. However, it would be his desire to add another one foot
of height, creating a 21' 9" height/ 6 inches higher than the Plan of Treatment
would recommend.
Mr. liten added that he shared the plans for the garage with the neighbors who all
expressed their support to him.
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Member Rehkamp Larson observed that the garage plan presented provides a 7
foot eave — an 8 foot eave is much more standard, would be preferable and could
be accommodated with the one foot height addition Mr. Ilten has requested.
Member Blemaster stated that Mr. Ilten presented an excellent design for the
garage, and agreed that the addition of an additional foot would not be
detrimental to the project.
Members Forrest and Kojetin expressed concern that the Board has a
responsibility to uphold the guidelines provided in the Plan of Treatment. Both
questioned whether it would be appropriate to deviate from the guidelines.
Consultant Vogel pointed out that the guidelines in the Plan of Treatment are
prescriptive, not regulatory — if a slight deviation from the guidelines provides a
benefit to the architectural style of a structure, that should be viewed as a
positive.
Members Rehkamp Larson, Fukuda and Blemaster agreed that the additional six
inches in height to the average height proposed would enhance the project and
not have a detrimental effect on neighboring properties.
MOTION & VOTE:
Member Fukuda moved approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness request
subject to the plans presented, with the exception of the height which may be
increased by one foot to 21'9"; and subject to the conditions outlined by staff.
Member Rehkamp Larson seconded the motion. Members Blemaster, Rehkamp
Larson, Fukuda, Forrest and Rofidal voted aye. Member Kojetin voted nay,
stating that while the concept of adding to the height appears appropriate, he did
L
Minutes — May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
not believe it was the place of the HPB to redesign a project for an applicant.
Motion carried.
H-08-5 4513 Moorland Avenue — New Detached Garage
Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the east side of
the 4500 block of Moorland Avenue. The existing home is an English Tudor style
constructed in 1929. A 2 -car attached garage is located on the rear elevation of
the home, accessed by a driveway running along the south property line.
The subject request involves building a new, 572 square foot detached garage in
the southeast corner of the rear yard, and eventually converting the existing 2 -
stall garage into living space. The plan illustrates the new structure will maintain
7.3 foot setback from the rear (east) lot line and 9 foot setback from the side
(south) lot line. A new curb cut is not required since the existing driveway will
provide access to the proposed garage.
The new 2 -stall detached garage is proposed to measure 22' x 26' or 572 square
feet in area. The design of the structure is proposed to compliment the
architectural style of the home with stucco clad walls and wood trim consistent
with the Tudor architectural style. Attention to detail is demonstrated on the west
and north elevations. The east and south elevations demonstrate wood trim and
timber detailing on the upper gable end of the elevations, however from the eave
line to the foundation, no detailing is provided. Cedar shingles are proposed for
the roof.
The height of the proposed garage is shown to be 19" at the highest peak. The
homeowner considered the new height requirement set out in the revised Plan of
Treatment (no taller than 10% of the average height of existing detached garages
on adjacent lots),and clearly demonstrated that at 19' the height meets the new
requirement. The height at the mid -point of the gable is shown to be 14 feet, and
a height of 9 feet is provided at the eave line. The ridge line is shown to be 26'5"
in length.
The maximum lot coverage allowed for the property is 25%. Construction of the
proposed 572 sq. ft. garage will create a lot coverage of 21.9%.
Consultant Vogel reviewed the plans and opined that the proposed garage is
quite a handsome building. He particularly liked the dormers with clipped `jerkin -
head" gables.
Vogel pointed out that the south and east elevations have undecorated walls from
the eave line to the foundation. The Plan of Treatment guidelines recommend
avoiding large expanses of undecorated walls. Perhaps the view from adjacent
properties will be screened by a privacy fence or landscaping, however if that is
not the case, more attention to detail on those elevations should be considered.
7
Minutes — May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
STAFF RECOMMENDATION & FINDINGS:
Planner Repya concluded that staff recommends approval of the Certificate of
Appropriateness request supported by the following findings:
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and
scope of the project.
• The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of
Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Country Club District Plan of Treatment, however details of the south and
east elevations should be clarified.
Ms. Repya added that she recommended approval subject to the plans as
approved, and a condition that a year built (2008) plaque or sign is placed on the
structure.
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Member Forrest questioned why the walls of the south and east sides of the
proposed garage were blank. Property owner Don Nygaard explained that the
south wall abuts the neighbor's single story attached garage, while the east wall
abuts the unadorned wall of the detached garage to the rear. Mr. Nygaard
pointed out that the plan focused detailing on the elevations that are visually
impacted. He then clarified the views from neighboring properties and indicated
that the intent is to also provide landscaping.
Member Rehkamp Larson observed that due to the siting of the structure in
relation to the adjacent properties, the blank walls did not pose a problem for her.
Member Forrest commented about the considerable amount of impervious
surface on the property with the construction of the proposed detached garage.
She added that she would like some assurance that if the proposed garage were
approved, that the impervious surface serving the current attached garage be
removed. Mr. Nygaard stated that he would be agreeable to such a condition.
MOTION & VOTE:
Member Rehkamp Larson moved approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness
request subject to: 1. The plans presented,
2. Staffs recommended conditions, and
3. The removal of the impervious surface serving the
attached garage when the detached garage is constructed.
Member Blemaster seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
0
Minutes — May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
H-08-6 Country Club District — Revised Traffic Plan
STAFF REPORT:
City Engineer Wayne Houle explained that some residents from the Country Club
neighborhood approached the City Council about deleting the traffic calming
portion of the district's street improvement project which the HPB addressed and
issued a Certificate of Appropriateness for in November, 2007.
On April 21, 2008, the City Council held a special public hearing to address the
concerns of the neighborhood group. At that time, the Council approved deleting
all of the traffic calming measures previously approved for the project with the
exception of the pedestrian safety improvements relating to the brick/raised
crosswalks.
Planner Repya explained that although the City Council has already acted on this
revised plan, a new Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) is required for the
changes, as set out in the district's Plan of Treatment.
BOARD MEMBER DISCUSSION:
Board members discussed the changes to the street improvement project and the
ramifications the changes will have on the neighborhood. Concern was
expressed about the loss of signs that identified the neighborhood as an historic
district.
Engineer Houle explained that moving forward, no changes can be made to the
project without getting City Council approval. However, built into the plan is the
replacement of the street signs. He added that he and Planner Repya have been
working on a small logo, or monogram that could be adhered to each street sign,
at no additional cost, to identify the historic district.
Mr. Houle added that if the neighborhood wanted to add a monument pillar, much
like what was proposed on the south end of Wooddale Avenue, they would need
to petition the City Council. He commented that September or October, 2008
would be the optimal time for such a request to be received.
MOTION & VOTE:
Following a brief discussion, Member Kojetin moved approval of the Certificate of
Appropriateness for the Country Club District street improvement project.
Member Fukuda seconded the motion. Members Rehkamp Larson, Forrest,
Rofidal, Kojetin, Rubin, and Fukuda voted aye. Member Blemaster abstained.
The motion carried.
9
Minutes — May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Kitty O'Dea - 4610 Bruce Avenue — Identifying the landmark designation of the
neighborhood
Ms. O'Dea explained that she feels it is very important that the landmark
designation of the Country Club District be clearly labeled, particularly for new
residents whose realtor may not have included that information during the
purchase of the home. Dovetailing on Engineer Houle's explanation of the
Country Club District revised street improvement project, Ms. O'Dea stated that
she is concerned that with the revised plan, the entry signs identifying the historic
neighborhood, which were part of the original plan, have been lost. She
appreciated Mr. Houle's plan to include the historic recognition on the street
signs; and advised the Board that she is interested in pursuing additional signs at
the main entrance to the district along Sunnyside to the north and West 50t
Street to the south which will identify the neighborhood as being a Heritage
Landmark District.
Consultant Vogel pointed out that branding neighborhoods is a good thing, In
addition to the educational benefit, signage also adds to the aesthetics of the
area. In providing a unified plan for the Country Club District, the HPB could
establish a design to replicate for other landmark properties in the city. Planner
Repya reported that she has been working with Communications Director,
Jennifer Bennerotte on creating a logo to be used to identify landmark properties.
She added that at the June meeting she would have several choices of the logo
for the Board to consider.
MOTION & VOTE:
Following a brief discussion in which the Board agreed that they should take a
stance on encouraging signage for heritage landmark designations, Member
Forrest moved that:
The Heritage Preservation Board recommends neighborhood entrance
signage for the historic Country Club District because the City has
designated the neighborhood as a Heritage Landmark District;
The City fund and maintain the signs identifying the district as a Heritage
Landmark, and
The City concentrates on continued public education of the Heritage
Landmark designation.
Member Kojetin seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
Board members thanked Ms. O'Dea for her interest in educating not only the
general public, but future residents of the Country Club District about the heritage
landmark designation. All agreed that they look forward to continued work on the
education piece of the designation.
10
Minutes — May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
B. Revised Plan of Treatment
Planner Repya explained that the City Council adopted the revised Plan of
Treatment for the Country Club District at their meeting on April 15, 2008.
Board members discussed details surrounding implementation of the revised
plan. All agreed that a copy of the approved Plan of Treatment should be mailed
to the Country Club District residents with a cover letter emphasizing the
importance of familiarizing themselves with the plan. Planner Repya explained
that a copy of the plan has been sent to the printer and will be mailed to the
residents with a cover letter from the City Manager at the end of the week.
III. PUBLIC EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES:
Consultant Vogel explained that one of the best ways the city can enhance the
public's understanding and awareness of good heritage preservation practices is
through the development of education projects aimed at property owners,
contractors, realtors, developers, and others who may become directly involved in
preservation undertakings. Heritage preservation education projects generally fall
into one of two categories: active (classes, seminars, demonstrations, hands-on
workshops, etc.) and passive (dissemination of information through publications,
the Internet, and other media). To date, the HPB has emphasized passive
education projects, consisting primarily of press releases, web pages, brochures,
tours, and events aimed at a general audience. The recently completed process
involving the revised Country Club District Plan of Treatment has led the Board to
consider ways in which it might actively communicate preservation concerns and
property management practices to individuals and organizations directly
responsible for maintaining and preserving privately owned heritage preservation
resources.
Mr. Vogel recommended considering the following public education project
concepts which would convey a wide range of specific information about the
preservation, protection, and use of heritage buildings:
Publish an informational brochure about the Country Club Heritage
Landmark District with a brief description of the district's history and the
revised plan of treatment, with a concise explanation of design review
process and a list of sources of additional information. This could simply
be a revised version of the existing Country Club District brochure. A
downloadable version could also be posted on the city web site.
2. Produce a "handbook" for owners of historic and older homes in all parts of
® the city that will provide them with basic information about how to deal with
preservation, repair, and maintenance issues in a logical and historically
sensitive manner. This kind of publication would require a significant
11
Minutes – May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
investment in staff time and/or consultant services—recent examples cost
$5,000 to $10,000, depending on the amount of graphic material that
needs to be produced. As with the Country Club brochure, this publication
could also be made available free of charge on the city's web site, thereby
saving the cost of printing.
3. Assemble a "preservation library" of printed materials for public use at the
Edina Public Library. Ideally, this collection would include duplicate sets of
materials to allow copies of each publication to circulate while maintaining
a comprehensive set of reference (use in library) materials. The types of
materials useful to historic homeowners, contractors, etc. would include:
the illustrated Secretary of the Interior guidelines for rehabilitating historic
buildings, the National Park Service technical guidance publications
(Preservation Briefs, Technical Reports, Tech Notes), and various "how to"
publications. A comprehensive collection of technical and informational
materials should also be placed at City Hall for the use of city staff.
4. Sponsor a series of free, informal workshops focused on "best practices"
for historic preservation, aimed at local realtors, developers, contractors,
and others who deal with heritage preservation resources in the city,
facilitated by members of the HPB and city staff, using preservation
professionals from the private sector or staff from the State Historic
Preservation Office, local colleges and universities, the Minnesota chapter
of the Institute for American Architects, the Preservation Alliance of
Minnesota, and other organizations as presenters. Workshop topics could
include topics such as painting, landscaping, repair and maintenance of
windows, buying and selling historic properties, building architecturally
appropriate additions, and the design of garages in historic districts. While
some presenters may be willing to volunteer their time, most will need to
be compensated; therefore, it may- be necessary to find a non-
governmental partner or sponsor to provide financial support.
5. Partner with a preservation agency, college or university, professional
organization, or knowledgeable individuals to offer "hands-on" classes in
historic building restoration techniques through Edina Public Schools
Community Education. In some cases, the classes could be offered on-
site, i.e., the class would meet at a historic property and participate in an
ongoing rehabilitation project. The usefulness of these adult enrichment
classes will depend in large part on how they are marketed by the school
district (and promoted by the city).
Mr. Vogel explained that organizing, financing, and administering these projects
will require resourcefulness, imagination, and persistence. The members of the
HPB, as individuals and as a group, should expect to be actively engaged in all
phases of project development and implementation.
12
Minutes — May 13, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
General discussion ensued regarding utilizing Edina's Community Education
program to offer classes focusing on the "care and feeding of older homes". All
agreed that would be an important step in fulfilling a major responsibility of the
Heritage Preservation Board as set out in the city codes by "Encouraging the
preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction of significant heritage
resources through public education."
Consultant Vogel observed that the community education program would be the
most effective way to get the preservation message out to the public. Member
Rofidal observed that contractors and realtors would be an important audience to
address. Brainstorming then ensued regarding the goals and objectives of such
a program. All agreed they would come to the June meeting with suggestions of
speakers and topics to consider.
MOTION & VOTE:
Member Kojetin made a motion that City Staff and the Board focus on providing
public education options as a means of enhancing Edina's cultural resource
management. Member Fukuda seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion
carried.
IV. 2008 HERITAGE AWARD:
Chairman Rofidal announced that the 2008 Heritage Award will be awarded to
Edina Morningside Community Church, 4201 Morningside Road, at the May 20th
Council meeting. Rofidal encouraged members of the Board to attend the
meeting in support of the plaque presentation by the Mayor to the church.
V. OTHER BUSINESS: None
VI. CORRESPONDENCE: None
VII. NEXT MEETING DATE: June 10, 2008
VIII. ADJOURNMENT 10:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Joyce Pepya
13
AGENDA
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL - COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Concern of Residents," the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak
about something not on the agenda.
* Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an
issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: May 13, 2008
IL COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-08-7 4633 Drexel Avenue
Construct a new 2 -car detached garage in the rear yard
B. Brochure — Revision
III. EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARK LOGO:
IV. PUBLIC EDUCATION:
V. ELIGIBLE HERITAGE PRESERVATION LANDMARK PROPERTIES:
VI. OTHER BUSINESS:
VII. CONCERN OF RESIDENTS:
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE:
IX. NEXT MEETING DATE: July 8, 2008
X. ADJOURNMENT:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance
in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-
927-886172 hours in advance of the meeting.
AGENDA
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL - COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Public Comment" the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak about
something not on the agenda.
* Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
INTRODUCTION OF NEW STUDENT MEMBER: Elizabeth Montgomery
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: June 10, 2008
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-08-8 4512 Casco Avenue
- Construct a new 2 -car detached garage in the rear yard
- Changes to front fagade
2. H-08-11 4511 Edina Boulevard
- Construct a new detached garage in the rear yard
3. H-08-9 Browndale Bridge
Final Review of Rehabilitation
4. H-08-10 4527 Browndale Avenue
Remove a gazebo structure built in 1995
B. COA — New Home Application Requirements
III. PUBLIC COMMENT:
IV. EDUCATION/LIBRARY INITIATIVE: Update
V. MORNINGSIDE BUNGALOWS: Information
VI. OTHER BUSINESS:
VII. CORRESPONDENCE:
VIII. NEXT MEETING DATE: September 8, 2008 (Monday)
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Benson, Vice Chairman, Bob Kojetin, Karen
Ferrara, Lou Blemaster, and Arlene Forrest
MEMBERS ABSENT: Chris Rofidal, Connie Fukuda, and Jean Rehkamp
Larson
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
Wayne Houle, City Engineer
OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Heritage Preservation Consultant
Dan & Catherine Hollerman, 4512 Casco Ave.
Ryan Smolik, Kuhl Design Build
Steve Swaim, 4511 Edina Blvd.
Kathy Alexander, Alexander Design Group
® 1. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: June 10, 2008
Member Ferrara moved approval of the minutes from the June 10, 2008 meeting.
Member Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
11. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-08-8 4512 Casco Avenue — New Detached Garage &
Changes to the Front Facade
Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the west side of
the 4500 block of Casco Avenue. The existing home was constructed in 1938 and
currently has a 2 -stall, tandem detached garage, measuring 14'x 43' (602 sq. ft.)
in area, and accessed by a driveway on the southerly side of the property.
The subject Certificate of Appropriateness request involves two projects that are
subject to review:
1. Removal of existing detached garage and construction of a new
detached garage
2. Revised front fagade
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
1. New Detached Garage
The proposal includes the demolition of a 14'x 43' tandem, 2 -stall detached
garage that was constructed in 1969 and currently maintains a 1.5 foot setback
from the side lot line; and the construction of a new, 576 square foot, 2 -stall
detached garage. The plan illustrates the new structure will maintain 6 foot
setback from the rear (west) lot line, a 4 foot setback from the side (southerly)
property line. A new curb cut will not be required since the proposed garage will
utilize the existing driveway.
The design of the garage is proposed to compliment the architectural style of the
home utilizing both lap and shake siding, a similar roof pitch, and wood trim and
brackets in the gable area. All four elevations of the structure demonstrate an
attention to detail with windows on the south and north elevations, windows and
wood trim in the gable peak on the west elevation, and an overhead door, service
door, and wood trim and brackets in the gable peak on the east elevation.
Ms. Repya pointed out that the height of the proposed garage is shown to be 16.5'
at the highest peak. The new height requirement set out in the revised Plan of
Treatment (no taller than 10% of the average height of existing detached garages
on adjacent lots) was considered in the design of the garage, which meets the
maximum height allowed when the heights of the adjacent detached garages were
taken into consideration. The height at the mid -point of the gable is shown to be
12', and a height of 7' is provided at the eave line. The ridge line is shown to be
25.4' in length.
The maximum lot coverage allowed for the property is 30%. Construction of the
proposed 576 sq. ft. garage will create a total lot coverage of 2%, within the limits
allowed by city codes.
2. Revised Front Fagade
Planner Repya explained that the changes to the front facade of the home
include removing the front entry overhang that was added to the home sometime
after 1960 or so, and replacing it with a gabled front entry canopy projecting 4.25
feet out from the front building wall. The gabled end will be open with vertical
slats — the design complimenting the gable ends of the proposed garage.
In addition to the front entry, the project also includes the addition of a small shed
roof with brackets at the eave line over the windows on the north and south sides
of the front elevation.
Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel reviewed the subject plans and opined as
follows:
2
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Detached Garage - The existing detached garage lacks heritage preservation
value and demolition does not represent an adverse effect on the historical
significance of the property. The plans for the proposed new garage depict a
structure that appears compatible in scale, building materials, and texture with the
historic home. The design of the new garage meets the requirements of the
Country Club District Plan of Treatment and the Secretary of the Interior's
standards for rehabilitation applicable to construction of new detached garages.
Front Fagade — The proposed alteration of the front entry to the home appears to
preserve those portions of the fagade which are most important to its historical
and architectural values. Similar small entry porches or porticoes are common in
the Country Club District, although in most instances they do not represent a
distinctive stylistic feature in their own right. In the subject case, the original door
opening and steps will be retained; the proposed new sidelight window and door
treatment are appropriate to the property's Colonial Revival style; and the open -
gable porch roof is also appropriate to the building's style.
The proposed shed -roof type dormers and small brackets are details of the Arts &
Crafts movement; and consistent with the mixing of fagade elements from
different period styles common to the district and reflecting the standards and
taste of the neighborhood.
Mr. Vogel concluded that the proposed plan addresses the original home and its
environment with sensitivity. The new work will not destroy significant historic
architectural details and if the addition, dormers, and porch were to be removed
in the future, the essential form and integrity of the structure would be
unimpaired.
FINDINGS:
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and
scope of the project.
• The plans demonstrate design that abides by the requirements of the
Country Club District Plan of Treatment and the Secretary of the Interior's
standards for rehabilitation.
• The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of
Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Country Club District Plan of Treatment.
Planner Repya concluded that Staff recommends approval of the Certificate of
Appropriateness for the new garage subject to:
The plans presented.
The condition that a year built (2008) plaque or sign is placed on the new
detached garage as well as the addition to the home.
3
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Member Blemaster inquired about the materials proposed for the exterior.
Member Kojetin expressed concern about the changes proposed to the front
facade — stating that the look of the home from the street will be changed.
Member Forrest observed that the proposed changes to the front fagade will add
a distinctively different arts and crafts element to the colonial architecture of the
home. She added that the Plan of Treatment while providing guidance, also
allows for homeowners to express creativity with their homes.
Member Ferrara stated that she liked the proposed plan — pointing out that many
homes in the district are made up of a mixture of design elements. She added
that the proposed changes to the front fagade provide distinct features that are a
vast improvement to the home.
Member Blemaster observed that the Board needed to be careful not redesign
plans brought before them. She added that the question to ask is "Does it fit?"
Ms. Blemaster concluded that she believed the design of the project was fitting
for the neighborhood.
Consultant Vogel observed that the changes proposed with this project for both
the front facade and new detached garage are fitting for the district, enhance the
property, and will not detract from the historic integrity of the subject or
neighboring properties.
APPLICANT COMMENTS:
Ryan Smolik, Kuhl Design Build, representing the homeowner clarified the
materials to be used on the exterior of the home and new detached garage. He
added that the intention of the proposed changes to the home and new detached
garage are to enhance the historic integrity of the property within the context of
the neighborhood.
MOTION & VOTE:
Following a brief discussion, Member Forrest moved approval of the Certificate of
Appropriateness request subject to the plans presented and a year built sign or
plaque be affixed to the garage. Member Ferrara seconded the motion. All voted
aye. The motion carried.
2. H-08-11 4511 Edina Boulevard — New Detached Garage
rd
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the east side of
the 4500 block of Edina Boulevard. The existing home was constructed in 1936
and currently has a 3 -stall, single story/flat roof, attached garage, measuring
approximately 757 sq. ft. in area, and accessed by a driveway on the south side
of the property.
The subject Certificate of Appropriateness request involves removing the existing
attached garage (757 sq. ft.), replacing it with a 467 sq. ft. kitchen addition, and
building a new 650 sq. ft. detached garage in the southeast corner of the rear
yard. The new garage is proposed to be set back three feet from the side and
rear lot line and accessed by the existing driveway on the south side of the
property. The new construction will maximize the 25% allowed lot coverage for
the property with 2,250 sq. ft. for the home, and 650 sq. ft. for the detached
garage.
Ms. Repya pointed out that the design of the garage is proposed to compliment
the Tudor architectural style of the home utilizing both brick, stucco, wood trim
and a slate roof. All four elevations of the structure demonstrate an attention to
detail with wood trim and double hung windows in the gable of the front and rear
elevations; carriage overhead doors and brick trim to match the house on the
front elevation; windows, a service door, double hung windows, and a
continuation of the brick trim on the north elevation; and three small windows on
the south elevation.
The height of the proposed garage is shown to be 23'9" at the highest peak.
The new height requirement set out in the revised Plan of Treatment was
considered in the design of the garage, which meets the maximum height allowed
when the heights of the adjacent detached garages were taken into consideration.
The height at the mid -point of the gable is shown to be 16'4 3/8", and a height of 8'
4 3/8" is provided at the eave line. The ridge line is shown to be 26' 8" in length.
Ms. Repya added that the existing 757 sq. ft. attached garage is shown to be
reduced by 290 sq. ft. to ensure that the maximum 25% allowed lot coverage is
maintained with the addition of the proposed garage. The kitchen addition, which
is not subject to the Certificate of Appropriateness review requires a 5.95 foot side
yard setback variance from the Zoning Ordinance for continuing an existing non-
conforming side yard setback on the north elevation, as well as to forgo the
additional setback that would be required for the second story height of the
addition. The Zoning Board of Appeals heard the variance request on August 7rn
and voted to approve the variance subject to the Heritage Preservation Board
approval of the COA for the proposed garage.
Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel reviewed the subject plans and opined that
the proposed new construction meets the requirements of the Country Club
District Plan of Treatment. The plans show a building that is architecturally
compatible with the design, scale, materials and character of the Tudor style
historic house and other nearby historic properties.
5
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Given the vertical emphasis of the fagade detailing, and the proportions of the
house, Mr. Vogel observed that the proposed garage will not detract from the
property's appearance or neighborhood aesthetics.
FINDINGS:
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and
scope of the project.
• The plans demonstrate design that abides by the requirements of the
Country Club District Plan of Treatment and the Secretary of the Interior's
standards for rehabilitation.
• The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of
Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Country Club District Plan of Treatment.
Planner Repya concluded that Staff recommends approval of the Certificate of
Appropriateness for the new garage subject to:
• The plans presented.
• The condition that a year built (2008) plaque or sign is placed on the new
detached garage.
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Member Forrest observed that it is important to consider the impact of massing
the new structure will have on adjacent properties. She added that she liked the
broken facades demonstrated in the design.
Member Kojetin asked if the adjacent neighbors had an opportunity to review the
proposed plans - which they had.
Member Blemaster questioned the height of the garage, but added that she was
pleased the neighbors have seen the plan and have no objections. Ms.
Blemaster added that the design of the garage does compliment the Tudor style
home.
HOMEOWNER COMMENTS:
Homeowner, David Swaim explained that the intention with the proposed plan is
to construct a garage that compliments the home and enhances the property as
well as the neighborhood.
Architect Kathy Alexander observed that the reason the garage is designed with a
14/12 pitch to the roof is to compliment the pitch of the home. She added that to
have a lower pitch to the roof would create a structure that would appear out of
T
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
place on the lot.
MOTION & VOTE:
Following a brief discussion, Member Blemaster moved approval of the
Certificate of Appropriateness subject to the plans presented and a year built
plaque or sign be affixed to the garage. Member Kojetin seconded the motion.
All voted aye. The motion carried.
3. H-08-09 Browndale Bridge — Final Review of Rehabilitation
Planner Repya explained that the project to rehabilitate the Browndale Bridge was
presented to the HPB for preliminary review on March 14, 2006 as well as during the
landmark designation of the site in April 2007. In fact, the Plan of Treatment was written in
consideration of the subject project. Since that time, the City Council has awarded the
construction bids to bridge contractor, Landwehr Construction of St. Cloud, Minnesota.
The timing for rehabilitation of the bridge and dam is controlled by the flow of water in
Minnehaha Creek. Due to the lack of rain over the past months, the flows on the creek are
reduced necessitating the start of the project prior to receiving final approval from the HPB.
Taking into consideration the positive response from the HPB during the preliminary review
process, and the fact that the project is dictated by the flows on the creek, City Engineer,
Wayne Houle with the support of the Planning staff authorized the contractor to start the
project.
Ms. Repya pointed out the following findings to support approval of the project:
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and
scope of the project.
• The plans demonstrate design that abides by the requirements of the
Browndale Bridge Plan of Treatment and the Secretary of the Interior's
standards for rehabilitation.
• The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of
Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Browndale Bridge Plan of
Treatment.
Ms. Repya concluded that staff recommends approval of the Certificate of
Appropriateness subject to:
• The plans presented.
• The condition that a year built (2008) plaque or sign is placed on the
bridge.
City Engineer Houle provided the Board with an update on the bridge project.
Board members complimented Engineer Houle and his staff on the care and
attention to detail taken with this project.
7
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Member Kojetin observed that the new railing is fashioned after the original,
however he noticed that small cast iron rosettes were not replicated on the cross-
sections, and asked if the rosettes could be added to the railings. Mr. Houle
stated that the only drawback would be the cost involved. He added that he
would have his staff research the rosettes and the possibility of the Minnehaha
Creed Watershed District assisting with the funding.
MOTION & VOTE:
Following a brief discussion, Member Forrest moved approval of the final COA to
rehabilitate the bridge, and to investigate adding the decorative rosettes to the
cross-sections of the railing if it is cost effective. Member Kojetin seconded the
motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
4. H-08-10 4627 Browndale Avenue — Removal of a Gazebo
Structure Built in 1995
Planner Repya explained that the subject project entailed demolition of a 20'x 20'
accessory structure from the rear yard. The structure, built in 1995 as a ramada
or gazebo, housed a hot tub. The homeowner requested removal of the structure
to provide a more livable rear yard, and to reduce the impervious surface area on
the property.
The plan also included a remodel of the bonus room over the garage and a
redesigned lean-to shed in the rear of the garage — none of which require COA
review from the Heritage Preservation Board. The 142 sq. ft. lean-to shed was
shown to be removed and replaced with an 85 sq. ft. shed — a 57 sq. ft. reduction
in floor area.
The subject plans demonstrated a 296 square foot reduction to the hardcover
calculation for the property, which had been non -conforming at 26.3% (25%
maximum allowed). The resulting project resulted in 23.5% lot coverage with a
building footprint of 2,460 sq. ft.
FINDINGS:
• The subject accessory structure is a contemporary structure built in
1995, and not considered a historic resource on the property.
• Removal of the structure will reduce the impervious surface on the
property.
• Removal of the structure will provide for a more livable rear yard.
• Removal of the structure reduces the lot coverage on the property from
2,756 sq. ft. — 26.3% (25% maximum allowed) to 2,460 sq. ft. — 23.5%.
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
ACTION TAKEN:
The Certificate of Appropriateness request was approved administratively subject to the
following conditions:
1. Subject to the plans presented.
2. Supply a photo of the structure to be removed which will be added to the
permanent file for the property.
3. No accessory structures will be constructed in the rear yard
without going through the Certificate of Appropriateness process.
BOARD MEMBER DISCUSSION:
Board members briefly discussed the subject project and agreed that the
administrative approval was appropriate. No further action was required.
B. COA — New Home Application Requirements
Planner Repya presented a proposed check list of requirements to explain the
COA process for new home construction in the Country Club District. Board
members made several suggestions and agreed that the document would aid in
clarifying the process. No formal action was taken.
III. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
IV. EDUCATION/LIBRARY INITIATIVE: Continued Until September
V. MORNINGSIDE BUNGALOWS:
Consultant Vogel explained that as the Board addresses designating the
Morningside bungalows on W. 44th Street, he would propose that rather then
creating another landmark district, the Board consider a multiple -property
designation with a single cover document and general plan of treatment for all the
bungalows in Morningside. To take the multiple property approach, homes could
be nominated and designated one at a time, as qualified and willing property
owners come forward. He added that this approach is modeled on the National
Register Multiple Property Documentation Form and it would be more efficient to
implement than a historic district; and among other advantages, there would be
no non -historic or non-contributing properties to deal with.
Mr. Vogel concluded that there are approximately 100 bungalows in Morningside,
of which 15 - 25 would be eligible for the landmark designation under the multiple
property approach. He added that if the Board agreed, he could have the
required documents ready to proceed this fall.
M
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Board member agreed that the multiple property approach for designating the
Morningside bungalows would be a great way to address the valuable and unique
resources in the Morningside neighborhood. All agreed that they looked forward
to proceeding with this project. No formal action was taken.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS: None
VII. CORRESPONDENCE:
2008 Minnesota Preservation Conference — Northfield, MN, September
19-20,2008
Planner Repya reminded the Board that Edina is required to send at least one
board member to the annual state conference to maintain the Certified Local
Government status. The registration deadline is Friday, August 15th. Member
Kojetin stated that he was planning to attend. Members Forrest and Ferrara
offered to check their calendars and let Ms. Repya know if they will be able to join
Mr. Kojetin.
IX. NEXT MEETING DATE: September 8, 2008 (MONDAY)
X. ADJOURNMENT 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
,Joyce Repya
10
AGENDA
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Public Comment" the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak about
something not on the agenda.
* Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: August 12, 2008
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
III. EDUCATION/LIBRARY INITIATIVE: Update
IV. HPB — CITY WEBSITE REVIEW:
V. MORNINGSIDE BUNGALOWS: Information
VI. OTHER BUSINESS:
VII. CORRESPONDENCE:
VIII. NEXT MEETING DATE: October 14, 2008
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance
in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-
927-886172 hours in advance of the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE RESCHEDULED MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50T" STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Chris Rofidal, Laura Benson, Bob Kojetin,
Karen Ferrara, Lou Blemaster, Connie Fukuda, Jean
Rehkamp Larson, Arlene Forrest and Elizabeth
Montgomery
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Heritage Preservation Consultant
1. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: August 12, 2008
Member Kojetin moved approval of the minutes from the August 12, 2008
meeting. Member Ferrara seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion
carried.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
IV. EDUCATION/LIBRARY INITIATIVE:
Member Forrest reported that she researched several the possibilities for
obtaining assistance with the purchase and housing of the historic resource
library proposed by the Board at a previous meeting.
Ms. Forrest discovered that the Edina Library at Grandview Square has merged
with the Hennepin County Library system and changed their policies for
procurement and housing of documents. Due to the change in policies, there is
no guarantee that they would assist with the purchase or housing of the
documents, however we could pursue it through their on line request form.
In a discussion with Dick Crockett from the Edina Foundation, Ms. Forrest learned
of several approaches that could be taken.... First, the HPB could apply for a grant
from the Foundation to purchase the documents which could be housed either at
City Hall or at the Edina Foundation offices (at the Senior Center). Another
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
approach suggested by Mr. Crockett was to request assistance from the Country
Club District Neighborhood Association which the Edina Foundation supports.
Following up on the Country Club District Neighborhood Association suggestion,
Ms. Forrest contacted Bonnie McGrath, Secretary of the Association who
indicated that the mission of their group is social in nature, and funding the
purchase of the historic resources may not fit with their spending criteria.
Following a brief discussion, Member Kojetin moved that the Board pursue the
purchase of two sets of the historic resources (which should total about $900.00)
through a grant request to the Edina Foundation. Member Blemaster seconded
the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Member Forrest agreed to write
the grant for the historic resource funding from the Edina Foundation. Board
members thanked Ms. Forrest for her work on this project.
On a related note, Consultant Vogel reported that he has continued to investigate
options for an active heritage education component through the Edina Community
Education program. Mr. Vogel provided the deadline for submission dates for
both the winter and spring/summer sessions. He pointed out that if he were to
teach a class, he would be paid by the Community Education program, not the
HPB. Vogel added that classes he has taught in other communities have been
very well received. Board members agreed that offering classes highlighting
Edina's heritage resources definitely fits with the mission of the HPB - although
the deadline for the winter classes left little time for planning, they encouraged Mr.
Vogel to plan for the spring/summer session. No formal action was taken.
IV. HPB — CITY WEBSITE REVIEW:
The Board reviewed the Heritage Preservation Board section of the City's website
page by page to look for necessary corrections and discuss possible ways that
the site could become more user friendly. All agreed that the use of photographs
was very important for all the heritage resources. They also suggested that the
individual plan of treatments for the landmark designated properties be provided
in a separate PDF to reduce the amount of text.
Planner Repya recorded the suggested changes which she agreed to share with
the City's Communications Department to determine if making the changes would
be possible. The Board decided to revisit the revised website at a future meeting
to evaluate how the changes that were possible enhanced the site. No formal
action was taken.
V. MORNINGSIDE BUNGALOWS:
Consultant Vogel reported that he was in the process of preparing materials for
the multiple property landmark designation of bungalow style homes in the
Morningside neighborhood, which should be complete later this fall. In the
interim, Vogel suggested that Board members visit the National Park Service
2
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
website www.nps.gov to research the multiple property designation criteria and
forms used for National Register properties. Board members welcomed the
opportunity to become better informed about the multiple property designation
process, and expressed a keen interest in recognizing historic resources in the
Morningside neighborhood. No formal action was taken,
VI. OTHER BUSINESS:
4620 Drexel Avenue — Renovation to Front Facade
Planner Repya reported that the home at 4620 Drexel Avenue is currently
undergoing interior renovations which include the double hung windows in the
living room on front fagade to be replaced with French doors. Ms. Repya
reminded the Board that window replacement is called out in the Country Cub
District Plan of Treatment as not requiring a COA.
Board members reviewed photos and an exterior rendering showing the new
French doors. All agreed that while the new doors do change the front fagade, a
COA would not be required. Board members added that the new doors will not
detract from the historic integrity of the property and will be an enhancement to
the home. No formal action was taken.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE:
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Member Kojetin reported that he sent a letter of thanks to the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District from the Edina Historical Society and the Heritage
Preservation Board to recognize the watershed's generous contribution of
$60,000 ($10,000 for 3 interpretive signs and $50,000 for the bridge
reconstruction). Board members expressed their appreciation for Kojetin
including the HPB on the letter of thanks. No formal action was taken.
IX. NEXT MEETING DATE: October 14, 2008
X. ADJOURNMENT 8:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
,Joyce Repya
AGENDA
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Public Comment" the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak about
something not on the agenda.
* Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: September 8, 2008
II. PUBLIC COMMENT:
III. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-08-12 4623 Drexel Avenue
Construct a new 2 -car detached garage in the
rear yard
2. H-08-13 4517 Drexel Avenue
Remove existing detached garage and construct
a new 2- car detached garage
3. H-08-14 4615 Wooddale Avenue — Preliminary COA
Demolition of house and garage
IV. 2008 MN HERITAGE PRESERVATION CONFERENCE: Report from Kojetin & Forrest
V. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT LIFT STATION: A curious find
VI. OTHER BUSINESS:
VII. CORRESPONDENCE:
VIII. NEXT MEETING DATE: November 10, 2008 (Monday due to Veteran's Day)
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance
in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-
927-886172 hours in advance of the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE RESCHEDULED MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Chris Rofidal, Laura Benson, Bob Kojetin,
Karen Ferrara, Lou Blemaster, Connie Fukuda, Jean
Rehkamp Larson, Arlene Forrest and Elizabeth
Montgomery
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Heritage Preservation Consultant
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: August 12, 2008
Member Kojetin moved approval of the minutes from the August 12, 2008
meeting. Member Ferrara seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion
carried.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
IV. EDUCATION/LIBRARY INITIATIVE:
Member Forrest reported that she researched several the possibilities for
obtaining assistance with the purchase and housing of the historic resource
library proposed by the Board at a previous meeting.
Ms. Forrest discovered that the Edina Library at Grandview Square has merged
with the Hennepin County Library system and changed their policies for
procurement and housing of documents. Due to the change in policies, there is
no guarantee that they would assist with the purchase or housing of the
documents, however we could pursue it through their on line request form.
In a discussion with Dick Crockett from the Edina Foundation, Ms. Forrest learned
of several approaches that could be taken.... First, the HPB could apply for a grant
from the Foundation to purchase the documents which could be housed either at
City Hall or at the Edina Foundation offices (at the Senior Center). Another
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
approach suggested by Mr. Crockett was to request assistance from the Country
Club District Neighborhood Association which the Edina Foundation supports.
Following up on the Country Club District Neighborhood Association suggestion,
Ms. Forrest contacted Bonnie McGrath, Secretary of the Association who
indicated that the mission of their group is social in nature, and funding the
purchase of the historic resources may not fit with their spending criteria.
Following a brief discussion, Member Kojetin moved that the Board pursue the
purchase of two sets of the historic resources (which should total about $900.00)
through a grant request to the Edina Foundation. Member Blemaster seconded
the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Member Forrest agreed to write
the grant for the historic resource funding from the Edina Foundation. Board
members thanked Ms. Forrest for her work on this project.
On a related note, Consultant Vogel reported that he has continued to investigate
options for an active heritage education component through the Edina Community
Education program. Mr. Vogel provided the deadline for submission dates for
both the winter and spring/summer sessions. He pointed out that if he were to
teach a class, he would be paid by the Community Education program, not the
HPB. Vogel added that classes he has taught in other communities have been
very well received. Board members agreed that offering classes highlighting
Edina's heritage resources definitely fits with the mission of the HPB - although
the deadline for the winter classes left little time for planning, they encouraged Mr.
Vogel to plan for the spring/summer session. No formal action was taken.
IV. HPB — CITY WEBSITE REVIEW:
The Board reviewed the Heritage Preservation Board section of the City's website
page by page to look for necessary corrections and discuss possible ways that
the site could become more user friendly. All agreed that the use of photographs
was very important for all the heritage resources. They also suggested that the
individual plan of treatments for the landmark designated properties be provided
in a separate PDF to reduce the amount of text.
Planner Repya recorded the suggested changes which she agreed to share with
the City's Communications Department to determine if making the changes would
be possible. The Board decided to revisit the revised website at a future meeting
to evaluate how the changes that were possible enhanced the site. No formal
action was taken.
V. MORNINGSIDE BUNGALOWS:
Consultant Vogel reported that he was in the process of preparing materials for
the multiple property landmark designation of bungalow style homes in the
Morningside neighborhood, which should be complete later this fall. In the
interim, Vogel suggested that Board members visit the National Park Service
2
Minutes — August 12, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
website www.nps.gov to research the multiple property designation criteria and
forms used for National Register properties. Board members welcomed the
opportunity to become better informed about the multiple property designation
process, and expressed a keen interest in recognizing historic resources in the
Morningside neighborhood. No formal action was taken,
VI. OTHER BUSINESS:
4620 Drexel Avenue — Renovation to Front Facade
Planner Repya reported that the home at 4620 Drexel Avenue is currently
undergoing interior renovations which include the double hung windows in the
living room on front fagade to be replaced with French doors. Ms. Repya
reminded the Board that window replacement is called out in the Country Cub
District Plan of Treatment as not requiring a COA.
Board members reviewed photos and an exterior rendering showing the new
French doors. All agreed that while the new doors do change the front fagade, a
COA would not be required. Board members added that the new doors will not
detract from the historic integrity of the property and will be an enhancement to
the home. No formal action was taken.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE:
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Member Kojetin reported that he sent a letter of thanks to the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District from the Edina Historical Society and the Heritage
Preservation Board to recognize the watershed's generous contribution of
$60,000 ($10,000 for 3 interpretive signs and $50,000 for the bridge
reconstruction). Board members expressed their appreciation for Kojetin
including the HPB on the letter of thanks. No formal action was taken.
IX. NEXT MEETING DATE: October 14, 2008
X. ADJOURNMENT 8:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
,Joyce Repya
3
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50T" STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Benson, Vice Chairman, Bob Kojetin, Karen
Ferrara, Lou Blemaster, Arlene Forrest, Connie Fukuda,
and Jean Rehkamp Larson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Chris Rofidal
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
Jackie Hoogenakker, Planning Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Heritage Preservation Consultant
Shannon Neale, 4623 Drexel Avenue
Sarah Wildman, Lake Country Builders
Doug Johnson, Building Concepts & Design
Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes, Inc.
Sheilagh Ziegwewid, 4615 Wooddale Avenue
Mickey Armstrong, Coldwell Banker Burnet Realty
John McDonald, Edina Realty
Kathy Peterson, 4617 Wooddale Avenue
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: September 8, 2008
Member Kojetin moved approval of the minutes from the September 8, 2008
meeting. Member Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion
carried.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-08-12 4623 Drexel Avenue — New Detached Garage
Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the east side of
the 4600 block of Drexel Avenue. The existing home, constructed in 1930, has a
2 -car attached garage accessed by a driveway on the southerly side of the
property.
The COA request involves building a new, 483 square foot detached garage in
the rear yard, and converting the existing 2 -stall attached garage into living
Minutes — October 14, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
space. The plan illustrates the new garage will maintain 3 foot setback from the
rear and side lot line, the minimum required by code. A new curb cut will not be
required since the proposed garage will be accessed by the existing driveway.
The new 2 -stall detached garage is proposed to measure 21' x 23' or 483 square
feet in area. The design of the structure is proposed to compliment the
architectural style of the home with stucco clad walls, half timber trim and
brackets, consistent with the Tudor architectural style. Attention to detail with
windows and doors is demonstrated on the north, south, and west elevations.
The east facade was intentionally void of windows since it borders a privacy
fence. Asphalt shingles are proposed for the 8/12 pitch of the hip roof.
The height of the proposed garage is shown to be 16.29' at the highest peak, which
is five feet less than the average height of surrounding detached garages. The
height at the mid -point of the gable is shown to be 12.5, and a height of 8.8' is
provided at the eave line. The ridge line is shown to be 4.9' in length due to the hip
roof.
The maximum lot coverage allowed for the property is 30%. Construction of the
proposed 483 sq. ft. garage will create a total lot coverage of 29.5%, within the
limits allowed by city codes.
Consultant Vogel opined that the proposed detached garage qualifies as an
appropriate treatment for construction of a new garage in the district. The design
appears to be compatible with the size, scale, mass, and materials of the historic
house and will not have an adverse visual impact on the historic character of
adjacent properties or the neighborhood. The lack of decorative detailing on the
east (rear) elevation is off -set by the presence of rear -yard fencing and the small
setback between the garage and the fence. Vogel added that the proposed
conversion of the existing attached garage to living space also appears to be
consistent with historic preservation standards.
FINDINGS:
Planner Repya offered the following findings supporting the subject COA request:
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and
scope of the project.
• The plans demonstrate design that abides by the requirements of the
Country Club District Plan of Treatment and the Secretary of the Interior's
standards for rehabilitation.
• The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of
Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Country Club District Plan of Treatment.
Planner Repya concluded that staff recommends approval of the Certificate of
Appropriateness for the new garage subject to:
2
Minutes — October 14, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
• The plans presented.
• The condition that a year built (2008) plaque or sign is placed on the new
detached garage.
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Member Rehkamp Larson commented that she liked the scale of the garage, and
believed it will be a nice compliment to the house. Board members expressed
their agreement with Rehkamp Larson.
Member Kojetin stated that he liked the comparison elevations provided for the
neighboring garages - the information was concise and demonstrated that the
proposed plan was in keeping with the neighborhood.
APPLICANT COMMENTS: None to add to Staff's presentation.
MOTION & VOTE:
Following a brief discussion, Member Forrest moved approval of the
Certificate of Appropriateness request subject to the plans presented and a
year built sign or plaque be affixed to the garage. Member Rehkamp Larson
seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
2. H-08-13 4517 Drexel Avenue — Remove Existing Detached and
Construct a New Detached Garage
Planner Repya explained that the subject property, located on the east side of the
4500 block of Drexel Avenue, was constructed in 1935, and currently has a 2 -car
detached garage in the southeast corner of the rear yard accessed by a driveway
on the southerly side of the property.
The COA request involves demolishing the existing 535 square foot detached
garage and building a new, 598 square foot detached garage in its place. The
plan illustrates the new garage will maintain 4 foot setback from the rear and side
lot line. A new curb cut will not be required since the proposed garage will be
accessed by the existing driveway. The lot coverage for the property with the
new, larger garage will be 29.7% - the maximum allowed is 30%
The new 2 -stall detached garage is proposed to measure 26'x 23' feet in area.
The design of the structure is shown to compliment the Tudor architectural style
of the home with Hardi stucco siding on the walls, and trim boards around the
windows and doors. Attention to detail is demonstrated with double -hung
windows on the north and south elevations. The west elevation, which is visible
from the front street, is shown to have carriage garage doors, a shuttered window
and bracket with bead board trim in the gable peak, and a small gabled overhang
3
Minutes — October 14, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
with brackets and bead board trim, projecting one foot from the building wall, over
the service door on the north side of the overhead doors. The east (rear)
elevation is shown to have bracket and bead board detailing in the gable end to
match the west elevation. Asphalt shingles are proposed for the 6/12 pitch of the
roof.
The height of the proposed garage is shown to be 15.6' at the highest peak. The
height at the mid -point of the gable is shown to be 13.0', and a height of 8.25' is
provided at the eave line. The ridge line is shown to be 24 feet in length.
Consultant Vogel observed that the proposed structure appears to meet the
requirements of the Country Club District plan of treatment for construction of
new detached garages. The garage depicted in the plans appears compatible
with the character of the historic house with respect to size, scale, mass, and
materials. He added that he did not believe the new garage would have an
adverse visual impact on the historic character of adjacent properties or the
neighborhood. The lack of decorative detailing on the east (rear) elevation is not
an issue due to the fact that the new garage backs up to the existing garage on
the property directly to the east of 4517 Drexel --if that adjacent garage were to be
removed in the future, the visual impact of the east -facing blank wall of the
subject property could be mitigated with fencing and/or vegetation.
FINDINGS:
Planner Repya offered the following findings in support of the COA request:
• The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and
scope of the project.
• The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of
Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Country Club District Plan of Treatment.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Ms. Repya concluded that staff recommends approval of the Certificate of
Appropriateness for the new garage subject to:
• The plans presented.
• The condition that a year built (2008) plaque or sign is placed on the new
detached garage.
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Member Rehkamp Larson questioned the use of Hardi-Board stucco siding in lieu of
traditional stucco, pointing out that the product comes in panels with seams which are
visible.
Member Kojetin observed that in the past the Board has approved COA's for
detached garages with "non -authentic" exterior materials that match the house.
0
Minutes — October 14, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Consultant Vogel agreed.
APPLICANT COMMENTS:
Doug Johnson, Building Design & Concepts, representing the homeowner, stated
that the use of Hardi-board stucco siding in lieu of traditional stucco was a cost
saving measure.
MOTION & VOTE:
Following a brief discussion, Member Kojetin moved approval of the COA
subject to the plans presented and a year built plaque or sign be affixed to
the garage. Member Ferrara seconded the motion. All voted aye. The
motion carried.
"Member Blemaster complimented the applicants of both COA applications
heard this evening for the clear and concise plans and supporting materials
provided. She added that the required pre -application meeting with the planner,
when the necessary information is discussed, appears to be providing clear
direction which serves the applicant and the Board very well. Board members
agreed with Ms. Blemaster.
3. H-08-14 4615 Wooddale Avenue — Preliminary COA
Demolition of House & Garage
Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the east side of
the 4600 block of Wooddale Avenue. The existing 2 -story American Colonial
home was constructed in 1930, and is one of the smallest homes in the district
with a footprint of 793 square feet in area. The original single stall detached
garage is located in the middle of the rear yard, '20 feet from the lot line and 29
feet from the north lot line and 22 feet from the south lot line.
The subject request involves a preliminary review of a request to demolish the
existing home and garage with the intention of building a new home/garage that
meets the district's plan of treatment criteria. Because the home was constructed
prior to 1944, and is considered an historic resource, the following standards from
the District's Plan of Treatment apply to such requests:
No Certificate of Appropriateness will be approved for the demolition, in
whole or in part, of any heritage preservation resource in the district unless
the applicant can show that the subject property is not a heritage
preservation resource, or no longer contributes to the historical
significance of the district because its historic integrity has been
compromised by deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate additions or
alterations.
Minutes — October 14, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
• Except in extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public health or
safety, no Certificate of Appropriateness will be issued for the demolition of
an existing heritage preservation resource in the district without an
approved design plan for new construction.
The applicant, Scott Busyn, Good Neighborhood Homes, Inc. provided the Board
with a detailed listing and photographs supporting his assertion that because the
existing home and garage have extensive damage, deterioration, and safety/code
compliance issues, demolition is warranted.
Addressing the subject request, Consultant Vogel advised the Board that they
need to keep in mind the following two fundamental concepts embodied by the
district Plan of Treatment:
1. The Country Club District derives its historical significance from being a
unified entity, reflecting the Thorpe Bros. plan of development that was
implemented in 1924-1944; and
2. The guiding design review principle is rehabilitation, which is defined as
the process of returning a heritage resource to a state of utility through repair or
alteration that makes possible an efficient contemporary use (while preserving
those features which are significant to the preservation value of the landmark
district).
Vogel pointed out that new construction is appropriate in heritage landmark
districts when it is compatible in size, scale, and materials with historic homes
and the character of the streetscape; and while it is true that heritage
preservation resources are not renewable, city policy recognizes that preservation
of every old building is not a responsible preservation practice. The HPB has
been given the responsibility for determining the heritage preservation value of
the house at 4615 Wooddale by considering its individual significance and its
importance in relation to other historic homes and to the district as a whole. The
challenge is to consider how the loss of this particular house will affect the
character of the district and neighboring historic homes --and, if it is decided
demolition of the house is justified, a strategy must be devised for mitigating the
adverse effects of the teardown and ensuring that the new house will be of
greater significance to the preservation of the district than the existing structures.
The findings which could support the approval of demolition include:
1. The subject property does not meet the criteria for individual designation
as an Edina Heritage Landmark.
2. While it meets the minimum criteria for consideration as a contributing
resource in the Country Club Heritage Landmark District, the existing house
is not an outstanding example of the property type, nor is it one of the last
remaining examples of its kind in the District.
M
Minutes — October 14, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
3. The preliminary COA constitutes HPB approval of a concept for
redevelopment of the property based on the developer mitigating the effects
of the demolition of the existing house and garage by undertaking historical
and architectural documentation that meets the pertinent standards
established by the U.S. Department of the Interior.
4. Rehabilitation of the existing house may represent an economic hardship
for the owner; and
5. It is technically feasible to design and build a replacement house and
garage that will maintain the historic character of the streetscape and
demonstrably contribute to the overall historical significance of the Country
Club District.
Furthermore, Vogel recommended that if determined appropriate, approval of the
COA should be subject to the following conditions:
The COA constitutes conceptual approval for a plan to redevelop the
property and shall be in effect for a period of not more than 180 days. The
HPB reserves the right to disapprove any COA application for demolition
that does not meet the requirements of the district plan of treatment..
2. Before the HPB initiates design review of any demolition or new
construction, the applicant will provide the City Planner with the following:
a) A report from a licensed architect or professional engineer as to the
structural soundness of the existing home and its adaptability for
rehabilitation;
b) An independent appraisal of the property's fair market value in its
current condition; and
c) An itemized breakdown as to the economic feasibility or
rehabilitation of the existing house compared with new construction,
including an estimate of the costs that would need to be incurred to
comply with the district plan of treatment and applicable building
code and zoning regulation.
3. No COA for demolition or new construction will be approved until the
applicant submits historical and architectural documentation of the existing
house and garage, said documentation to consist of written information,
photographs, and drawings prepared to the city's specifications and
approved by the city's preservation planning consultant.
Consultant Vogel recommended that before a final decision is made on a COA
for new construction, the applicant should provide the Board and its staff with
7
Minutes — October 14, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
plans, drawings, written information, material samples, and other information
which demonstrate that the new house and garage will substantially match the
architectural style, detailing, character, and mood of typical Colonial Revival
period houses constructed in the Browndale section of the Country Club District
between 1924 and 1944 by adhering to the architectural requirements in the
original Thorpe Bros. deed restrictions, and achieving visual consistency with the
size, scale, color, and materials of adjacent historic homes and the character of
the streetscape of Wooddale Avenue.
Vogel pointed out that if demolition of the existing home is approved, it is
important the design of a replacement house must have the distinctive
characteristics that make up the traditional Colonial Revival style house in the
Country Club District, including but not limited to the two-story rectangular volume
covered by a gable roof, symmetrical and balanced disposition of windows and
doors, clapboard or brick wall cladding, classical detailing in the form of engaged
columns, cornices, entablatures, and double -hung windows and small panes, and
shutters, and a detached garage. Contemporary or Neocolonial designs, street -
facing facade features, exterior finish materials, and color schemes would not be
considered appropriate for either the house or garage.
HOMEOWNER COMMENTS:
Sheilagh Ziegeweid, the current owner of 4615 Wooddale Avenue explained that
she has lived in the home since 1969. During the past 39+ years the Country
Club neighborhood has experienced dramatic changes. Her home has served
her well, but now, at the age of 73, she finds she can no longer afford to live in a
home with $8,000 per year in property taxes, not to mention the mounting home
maintenance issues. Mrs. Ziegeweid stated that she has been attempting to sell
her home for over a year and has not had one offer. She stated that sheds
desperate and in need. of getting out from under this home that nobody wants.
Mickey Armstrong, realtor for Mrs. Ziegeweid advised the Board that at least five
contractors have evaluated the house, and all have determined that it is not a
candidate for an addition out the back, which is the only alternative available if
this request is not granted.
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS:
Member Ferrara stated she has a problem with the assumption that because the
house is "too small" it's easier to just tear it down instead of remodeling it.
Member Forrest questioned the procedure for addressing a request for demolition
of a home classified as a "heritage resource" — particularly since the Plan of
Treatment stipulates that no COA for demolition will be issued without an
approved design plan for new construction.
Minutes — October 14, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Planner Repya explained that this is the first COA request for demolition of a
heritage resource property since the new plan of treatment was approved in April,
2008. The rationale for a preliminary COA is to first determine whether or not the
property qualifies for demolition, as identified in the findings. The recommended
conditions which accompany approval of the preliminary COA make it clear that
no COA for demolition and new construction will be approved without meeting
said conditions, which include an approved design plan.
Reflecting on the listing of building code deficiencies identified in the applicant's
request, Member Rehkamp Larson commented that all homes built in the era of
the subject property will have non-compliance issues with the current building
codes, and she questioned whether that should be included as justification for
demolition.
APPLICANT COMMENTS:
Scott Busyn, the applicant explained that as he understands the Plan of
Treatment, he must first justify the demolition of the property. If and when the
demolition is determined to be warranted, the design concept and ultimately the
plans for the replacement home/garage will be presented for approval. To
present plans for a replacement home at this time would be presumptive and
putting the "cart before the horse".
Mr. Busyn explained that in the evaluation of the home he provided to the Board
he highlighted the damage, deterioration, safety and issues of non-compliance
with the building code, which all address the section of the Plan of Treatment
which would justify the demolition of a heritage resource in the district.
Mr. Busyn added that since the Plan of Treatment was established for the district,
he has worked on several homes in the neighborhood, each time with the goal of
being true to the historic integrity of the area.
John McDonald, realtor for Mr. Busyn explained that he has had years of
experience marketing homes in the Country Club District, and finds this home to
be one of the most challenging.
OTHER COMMENTS:
Member Kojetin questioned if anyone has looked into the current "livability" of the
house, pointing out there could be mitigating factors such as mold that could be
documented supporting the request for a tear down. Member Ferrara agreed
with Kojetin adding the Board should look at this request very carefully before a
final decision is made. Ferrara pointed out the action taken this evening will be
looked at and the Board will need documentation to back up our decision.
Member Ferrara reiterated in her opinion the house could be remodeled.
Board member discussion ensued regarding the recommended findings and
9
Minutes — October 14, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
conditions. Members Forrest and Rehkamp Larson questioned whether it would
be appropriate to include finding #4 which addressed the economic hardship to
the owner of the property; pointing out that the design guidelines do not address
financial hardship. The Board agreed that while they sympathized with Mrs.
Ziegeweid's dilemma, the decision to permit the demolition of the home should
stand on the status of the structures, not the owner's economic situation. Further
discussion continued focusing on procedure with members in agreement that the
requested COA is preliminary, not final, and the applicant will be required to
return to the Board with final plans before a Certificate of Appropriateness is
considered.
Members Rehkamp Larson and Montgomery left the meeting.
MOTION & VOTE:
Member Blemaster moved to grant preliminary approval of the COA for
demolition of the house and garage at 4615 Wooddale Avenue subject to
the recommended findings and conditions, with the exception of item #4
which identifies an economic hardship, and also subject to all of the
recommended conditions.
Member Kojetin seconded the motion. Members Forrest, Kojetin, Blemaster
and Benson voted aye. Members Ferrara and Fukuda abstained. The
motion carried.
IV. 2008 MN HERITAGE PRESERVATION CONFERENCE REPORT:
The annual Minnesota Historic Preservation Conference was held in Northfield,
MN on Friday and Saturday, September 19th and 20th. As a Certified Local
Government, it is mandatory that at least one member of Edina's HPB attend
the conference. The theme for the conference centered on preserving a
communities "Main Street". Members Bob Kojetin and Arlene Forrest attended
both days of the conference. Kojetin observed that Edina's 44th and France
Commercial area would probably most closely represent Edina's historic
commercial district. Member Forrest observed that she saw a correlation
between the presentations on historic main streets with Edina's more recent
mixed use developments which are combining residential, commercial and office
uses.
Kojetin and Forrest agreed that the conference was time well spent, and
encouraged the HPB to consider attending future conferences. Board members
thanked both Bob and Arlene for representing them at the conference and
agreed that attending future conferences should be on their "to do" lists.
10
Minutes — October 14, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
V. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT LIFT STATION: A Curious Find
Consultant Vogel shared with Board Members photo's of "life beneath the
manhole". Vogel explained during Country Club District street reconstruction
workers removed a manhole and found an old "lift station" dating from Thorpe's
original development. Consultant Vogel said it was an unusual, but interesting
find. The subterranean lift station, which was full of water, was drained,
photographed, and then filled in with sand. Board members appreciated the
documentation of the "find", which will be added to the history of the district.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS: None
VII. CORRESPONDENCE: None
IX. NEXT MEETING DATE: November 10, 2008 (MONDAY)
X. ADJOURNMENT 9:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
,Joyce Repya & Jackie Hoogenakker
11
AGENDA
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Public Comment" the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak about
something not on the agenda.
* Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: October 14, 2008
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
H-08-14 4615 Wooddale Avenue — Demolition of house
and garage — Continuation
III. PUBLIC COMMENT:
IV. WOODDALE BRIDGE: Wooddale Avenue at Minnehaha Creek
V. OTHER BUSINESS:
VI. CORRESPONDENCE:
VII. NEXT MEETING DATE: December 9, 2008
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance
in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-
927-886172 hours in advance of the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Chris Rofidal, Bob Kojetin, Lou Blemaster,
Arlene Forrest, Jean Rehkamp Larson, and Elizabeth
Montgomery
MEMBERS ABSENT: Laura Benson, Karen Ferrara, and Connie Fukuda
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
Jackie Hoogenakker, Planning Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Heritage Preservation Consultant
Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes, Inc.
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: October 14, 2008
Member Blemaster moved approval of the minutes from the October 14, 2008
meeting. Member Kojetin seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion
carried.
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-08-14 4615 Wooddale Avenue — Demolition of House &
Garage —Continuation from 10/14/08
Planner Repya explained that at the October meeting, the subject request was
considered and received preliminary approval. At this point, the applicant, Scott
Busyn is researching the history of the property in keeping with the required
conditions for approval, and will present the design plans for the replacement
home at the December meeting. Prior to presenting those plans, Mr. Busyn
asked to share his concepts for the design objectives with the Board.
Applicant Presentation
Mr. Busyn provided the following design objectives for discussion with the Board:
• Size, Scale and Massing — A two story Colonial Revival home, to be
compatible in size with the adjacent homes to the north and south.
• Design compatibility with other Colonial Revival homes in the Brown
Section of the district,
Minutes — November 10, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Exterior finishes, emphasizing the traditional materials found in the Brown
Section of the district,
Landscaping elements, providing the symmetry inherent with the Colonial
Revival style, and
The new garage complementing the style of the home, and meeting the
criteria set out for replacement garages in the district.
Mr. Busyn pointed out that the design objectives were preliminary and an
approximation of the work to be completed. He added that at this point, the
proposal is subject to change as required to be responsive to budget,
governmental, site conditions, and construction constraints.
Board Comments
Member Kojetin questioned if the driveway width could become an issue. Chair
Rofidal commented that if he understands code correctly the driveway width
should not be an issue, adding the width of the driveway can remain as is, it's a
pre-existing condition.
Chair Rofidal asked Mr. Busyn if any trees would be lost to accommodate
construction of the new house. Mr. Busyn responded that it is possible the White
Pine could be lost.
A discussion ensued with Board Members discussing design elements of the
proposed house with Members suggesting the following:
Construct three dormers, not four, as depicted on the plans provided by
Mr. Busyn.
• Eliminate transom over sun porch
• Keep shutters
• 2nd floor/south elevation. Shorten return above window. Return shouldn't
cover entire window
• Re -visit rear elevation. Proportions appear unbalanced
Member Kojetin noted that it appears to him that there is no chimney on the
plans. Mr. Busyn acknowledged that fact, adding chimneys are very expensive to
construct. Board Members agreed "no chimney" is better than a "boxed version".
The discussion continued focusing on procedure. Consultant Vogel pointed out
this is the Board's first application for demolition and rebuild since the revised
Plan of Treatment was adopted, adding in this instance he believes that at least
two more meetings are needed before a COA is granted. Consultant Vogel said
the past meetings could be viewed as "preliminary". Member Forrest pointed out
there isn't anything in the Plan of Treatment that indicates that a preliminary COA
is required. Member Forrest suggested reviewing the wording in the Plan to
ensure that Board actions are procedurally correct.
Minutes — November 10, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Continuing, Members stated they also need to be clear with their conditions in
justifying the issuance of a COA. Board Members agreed that there must be
legitimate reasons in granting a COA for the demolition of an existing house.
Members also indicated they want the immediate neighbors notified of future
meetings and provide neighbors the opportunity to review the new house plans.
In conclusion Members indicated the following rationale in proceeding with
granting the COA:
The house does not meet the criteria for individual designation
• There is physical deterioration of the existing house
The lack of historical significance of this house compared with other
houses located in the Brown Section of the District.
Mr. Busyn told the Board he listened to their discussion and will revise the plans
as suggested.
Board action
No formal action was taken.
III. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
IV. WOODDALE BRIDGE: Wooddale Avenue at Minnehaha Creek
Consultant Vogel explained that in 2006-07, as part of the HPB's annual work
plan, he carried out a survey of Minnehaha Creek to identify and gather data on
heritage resources within and along the Edina reach of the creek. The objectives
of the survey were to document buildings, structures, sites, and objects of
preservation interest and to gather the information needed to plan for the wise
use of these heritage resources. One of the heritage resources identified by the
survey is the bridge that carries Wooddale Avenue over Minnehaha Creek.
Mr. Vogel provided a detailed history and description of the bridge. Identifying
how it meets the Edina Heritage Landmark eligibility criteria, focusing in its
historic significance and integrity. Following are the highlights of his report:
Description
The subject property (commonly known as the Wooddale Bridge and designated
Bridge No. 90646 in the state bridge inventory) is located on Wooddale Avenue
South, a short distance south of 50th Street, upstream from the St. Stephens
Episcopal Church, 4439 W. 50th Street. It is a single -span masonry arch bridge,
21 feet in length, and carries two lanes of traffic over Minnehaha Creek. The
bridge, headwalls, and abutments are constructed of reinforced concrete,
covered with a veneer of locally quarried Platteville limestone laid in random
3
Minutes — November 10, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
courses. The low parapet walls on either side of the roadway are either solid
limestone or concrete ornamented with stone veneer --additional research will be
required to fully document the structure's dimensions and construction materials.
The arch is formed by a galvanized, corrugated iron pipe similar to that used in
culverts and is anchored to the concrete abutments to protect the structure
against stream erosion. The concrete deck is covered by bituminous asphalt e
paving, with concrete curb and gutter. A plaque inscribed WPA 1937 is found
on the downstream parapet wall. The creek bottom at this location is narrow and
rocky, and the steeply sloped stream banks are cloaked with a dense growth of
small trees and shrubs.
Physical History
The bridge occupies a part of the original William Marvin and George Baird farms,
which were settled in the 1850s, and the Baird estate sold the surrounding area
to developers in the 1920s. Village records indicate there may have been some
kind of timber and iron bridge at this location prior to the construction of the
present bridge in 1937. The plans for the Wooddale Bridge were prepared by W.
E. Duckett, a local civil engineer who was employed by Hennepin County as a
highway engineer from 1928 until 1938. (Duckett also worked on the design for
Highway 100 and drew up the plans for the beltway crossing of Minnehaha Creek
as well as the Eden Prairie Road [modern 50th Street] interchange in Edina.) The
project was paid for with Federal funds administered by the U.S. Department of
the Interior, passed through the State Department of Highways (now the
Minnesota Department of Transportation) to Hennepin County's highway agency.
The workers who built the bridge were employed by the local unit of the WPA,
which also provided administrative support, training, and supervision.
Association With the WPA
The Works Progress Administration (WPA) was a federal relief program
established by presidential executive order in 1935; in 1939 the agency was
renamed the Federal Works Agency but continued to be commonly known as the
WPA unit the program was terminated in 1942. Headed by Harry L. Hopkins, the
WPA was one of the centerpieces of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's "New Deal"
designed to alleviate the effects of the Great Depression. The WPA offered work
to unemployed adults by funneling federal funds to a wide range of public works
projects, including highway construction and roadside beautification. (In addition
to transportation projects, the WPA built municipal swimming pools, auditoriums,
airports, post offices, playgrounds, park buildings, sewers, paved streets, and
low-income housing.) The "pump -priming" effect of the WPA was an important
stimulus to the development of public infrastructure along Minnehaha Creek
between 1935 and 1941. The Wooddale Bridge was a typical WPA project in
that it was labor-intensive, utilized locally available construction materials and
craft skills, and produced a structure that was both technologically and
aesthetically impressive. It is unlikely that Hennepin County or the Village of
M
Minutes — November 10, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Edina could have built such a bridge without the massive and unprecedented
federal participation.
Significance
In order to be considered eligible for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark,
a property must meet one of the ordinance criteria for evaluation of historical
significance by being associated with an important historic context and by
retaining historic integrity of those features necessary to convey its significance.
The Wooddale Bridge is significant for its associative and design values (criteria
A and C) within the historic context Minnehaha Creek: From Wilderness Stream
to Urban Waterway," as delineated in the 1999 Edina Historic Context Study.
Built in 1937 under the auspices of the Works Progress Administration, the bridge
is a locally significant transportation structure reflecting the role of the Federal
government in work relief and public construction during the Great Depression. It
best represents the impact of the New Deal public works programs in Edina. In
terms of its design and construction values, the bridge is a notable, well
preserved example of early 20th century highway engineering and illustrates the
"rustic" aesthetic in public works that is recognized as one of the hallmarks of the
WPA. The bridge is particularly noteworthy for its modular, multi -plate arch
construction and the visual impact of its rusticated masonry. Historic integrity is
excellent: the structure has been little altered from its 1937 appearance and
continues to serve its originally intended function.
More information is needed to document the direct links between the bridge and
the federal relief construction program in Hennepin County; to provide insights
into the career of designer W. E. Duckett; and to reconstruct the property's
physical history with respect to maintenance, safety inspections, roadway
reconstruction, and changes in the hydrology of Minnehaha Creek.
The Wooddale Bridge is one of seven structures crossing Minnehaha Creek
within the Edina city limits. The others are: the West 44th Street Bridge, a 32 -
foot long reinforced concrete slab type structure (built in 1986); the Highway 100
Bridge (built in 1970, remodeled in 1981); the historic Browndale Bridge, a
designated Edina Heritage Landmark (built in 1906); the West 50th Street Bridge
(built in 1926, reconstructed in 1976); the West 54th Street Bridge, a 36' concrete
slab bridge (built in 1935, rebuilt in 1948); and the 148 -foot long steel culvert that
carries the creek under France Avenue (built in 1958). This particular type of
historic bridge is known as "multi -plate stone arch" construction and was widely
used for small bridges during the 1930s; it is estimated that less than forty such
structures have survived to the present day in Minnesota. The Wooddale Bridge
has been evaluated as historically significant by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation but has not been nominated to the National Register of Historic
Places.
5
Minutes — November 10, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Recommendation
Mr. Vogel reminded the Board that by ordinance, the HPB may issue a finding of
significance whenever it determines that a particular property appears to be
eligible for rezoning as a heritage landmark. If the Board determines that the
bridge is potentially eligible, they can direct staff to prepare the necessary
landmark nomination documents, or conduct additional survey work to address
specific information needs.
Mr. Vogel recommended that the HPB find the Wooddale Bridge potentially
eligible for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark and issue a Finding of
Significance to that effect.
Board comments
Board Members told Consultant Vogel the information he presented on the
Wooddale Bridge and other area bridges was very interesting.
Board action
Member Kojetin moved to add the Wooddale Bridge to the list of significant
landmarks eligible for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark. Member
Blemaster seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried.
V. OTHER BUSINESS: None
VII. CORRESPONDENCE: None
IX. NEXT MEETING DATE: December 9, 2008
X. ADJOURNMENT 9:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jackie Hoogenakker
0
AGENDA
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Public Comment" the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak about
something not on the agenda.
* Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: November 10, 2008
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
H-08-14 4615 Wooddale Avenue — Demolition and New
Construction of Home and Detached Garage
III. PUBLIC COMMENT:
IV. CLG GRANT APPLICATION: Morningside Bungalows Multiple Property Designation
V. OTHER BUSINESS:
VI. CORRESPONDENCE:
VII. NEXT MEETING DATE: January 13, 2009
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance
in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-
927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM
4801 WEST 50T" STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Chris Rofidal, Bob Kojetin, Lou Blemaster,
Arlene Forrest, Laura Benson, and Connie Fukuda
MEMBERS ABSENT: Karen Ferrara, Jean Rehkamp Larson and Elizabeth
Montgomery
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
Jackie Hoogenakker, Planning Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Heritage Preservation Consultant
Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes, Inc.
Robert Latta, 4612 Wooddale Avenue
Derek Pitt, 4616 Wooddale Avenue
Kitty O'Dea, 4610 Bruce Avenue
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: November 10, 2008
Member Kojetin moved approval of the minutes from the November 10, 2008
meeting. Member Benson seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion
carried.
II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
H-08-14 4615 Wooddale Avenue — Demolition of House &
Garage
Planner Repya reminded the Board that at the November meeting, the applicant,
Scott Busyn shared his concepts for the design objectives of a replacement home
and detached garage for the subject property with the Board. Mr. Busyn has
completed a plan for the replacement home and detached garage which follows
the concepts previously presented, and also incorporates the suggestions made
by the Board.
Applicant Presentation
tMr. Busyn thanked the Board for their consideration of his design concepts for the
subject property at the November meeting which he found helpful in completing
Minutes — December 9, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Member Benson moved approval of the COA for demolition of the existing
home/garage and construction of a new home/garage subject to the plans
presented and the conditions recommended by Consultant Vogel. Members
Fukuda, Blemaster and Benson voted aye. Members Kojetin, Forrest and
Rofidal voted nay. The motion was defeated due to a tie vote.
Further discussion centered on process. Board members agreed that the plan as
presented met the criteria of the District's Plan of Treatment, and all comments
received from affected neighbors have been supportive of the plan. Members
Benson, Fukuda and Blemaster stated that although the understanding has been
that new homes will be reviewed in a 2 -step process, if no changes are proposed,
a delay in voting on the COA would be unnecessary, and could cause a burden
for the applicant. To require the applicant to wait until the January 2009 meeting
for a decision did not seem fair.
Members Rofidal, Kojetin and Forrest pointed out that while there is
neighborhood support for the project, this is the first time the Board has reviewed
the "complete package', pointing out that the intent of the process is to provide
the public adequate time to review the COA proposals.
Board members discussed the idea of holding a special meeting on December
15th or 16th (depending on room availability) which would give the appropriate
time for advertising a special meeting and also provide the second meeting to
review the project as understood in the process guidelines. All agreed that would
be an acceptable compromise. Planner Repya agreed to set the meeting date
and time as soon as possible for the next week and advice the Board, applicant
and those neighbors on the mailing list of the final date/time. No formal action
was taken
III. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
IV. CLG GRANT APPLICATION — Morningside Bungalows Multiple
Property Designation
Consultant Vogel advised the Board that he was in the process of completing the
application to request a CLG grant for a multiple property designation for
Morningside's bungalow properties. He added that the City of Des Moines has
used the multiple property approach for landmark designations that has been
very successful; and he would be reporting on their processes in the near future.
Member Kojetin asked if the bungalow designation would only apply to bungalow
properties in the Morningside neighborhood. Mr. Vogel responded in the
affirmative.
A
Minutes — December 9, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Member Blemaster asked who initiated this process. Mr. Vogel responded that
the City would be the applicant.
Board members expressed their interest in the project, and agreed that they
looked forward to learning more about Morningside's bungalows. No formal
action was taken.
V. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Procedural Guideline Committee
Member Forrest suggested the formation of a committee to draft procedural guidelines outlining
the information required to be submitted with Certificate of Appropriateness applications. Board
members agreed that would be an excellent idea.
Chairman Rofidal then directed the formation of a committee to provide requirement guidelines
for COA applications. Members Forrest, Kojetin, Benson and Rofidal offered to serve on the
committee.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE: None
IX. NEXT REGULAR MEETING DATE: January 13, 2009
X. ADJOURNMENT 9:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
,Joyce R.epya
VA
AGENDA
THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
MONDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2008, AT 6:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TH STREET
During "Public Comment" the Chair will ask to hear from those in attendance who would like to speak about
something not on the agenda.
* Individuals must limit their presentations to three minutes and cannot speak to an issue previously discussed.
* Individuals should not expect the Commission to respond to their comments. Instead, the Commission might
direct the matter to staff or consideration at a future meeting.
I. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT:
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
H-08-14 4615 Wooddale Avenue — Final Review
Demolition and New Construction of Home and Detached
Garage
II. PUBLIC COMMENT:
III. OTHER BUSINESS:
IV. NEXT MEETING DATE: January 13, 2009
V. ADJOURNMENT:
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance
in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-
927-886172 hours in advance of the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2008, AT 6:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50TI STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Chris Rofidal, Bob Kojetin Arlene Forrest,
Laura Benson, Connie Fukuda, Jean Rehkamp Larson
and Elizabeth Montgomery
MEMBERS ABSENT: Karen Ferrara and Lou Blemaster
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
OTHERS PRESENT: Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes, Inc.
John McDonald, Edina Realty
Sheilagh Ziegweid, 4615 Wooddale Avenue
Mickey Armstrong, Coldwell Banker Burnet Realty
I. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-08-14 4615 Wooddale Avenue — Demolition of House &
Garage
Planner Repya reminded the Board that at their regular meeting on December 9,
2008, they agreed that the proposed plan for the new home and detached garage
proposed by Mr. Busyn met the design guidelines of the District's Plan of
Treatment, but needed to follow the procedure of being heard at two separate
meetings. This special meeting was arranged to meet the two meeting criteria.
Applicant Presentation
Mr. Busyn thanked the Board for scheduling a special meeting to address the
Certificate of Appropriateness. He explained the measures he took to share his
plans with the surrounding neighbors and expressed his appreciation for their
support. He then briefly reviewed the plans for the new construction focusing on
the following design objectives:
• Size, Scale and Massing — A two story Colonial Revival home, to be
compatible in size with the adjacent homes to the north and south.
• Design compatibility with other Colonial Revival homes in the Brown
Section of the district,
• Exterior finishes, emphasizing the traditional materials found in the Brown
Section of the district,
Minutes — December 15, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Special Meeting
Landscaping elements, providing the symmetry inherent with the Colonial
Revival style, and
The new garage complementing the style of the home, and meeting the
criteria set out for replacement garages in the district.
Board Comments
Member Forrest
- Asked Mr. Busyn to provide the Board with the type of feedback he
receives from the neighbors when presenting proposed plans. Mr. Busyn
explained that he has rebuilt over 14 homes in the City, and has
neighborhood meetings to present the plans each time. The number one
concern he hears is regarding the ridge height of the new construction, and
the new language in the District's Plan of Treatment goes much further
than the Zoning Ordinance in addressing that issue. Other concerns cited
include, drainage on the lot both before and after construction; whether the
style of the home will fit the neighborhood, preservation of existing trees,
the back yard, and the price point of the new/rebuilt home.
- Inquired if driveways have been an issue. Mr. Busyn said that driveways
have not been an issue; however neighbors make it clear that they do not
want the drainage from the subject driveway to run off onto their
properties.
Member Rehkamp Larson
- Explained that she was unable to attend the December 9th meeting of the
Board, and was pleased with the decision to hold a special meeting to
move the project along. She also stated that she was glad to hear the
positive response to the plans from the neighbors.
- Addressing the proposed design, Ms. Rehkamp Larson stated that the
front fagade of the home feels historic and she appreciated that the sides
of the home have massing that is broken up.
- Expressed her support of the plan, and appreciated the material board
presented. However cautioned Mr. Busyn to pay attention to the
proportions of the front fagade gables.
- Suggested the Board request receiving photos of the finished product from
all four elevations. Mr. Busyn agreed that he would be happy to provide
the Board with photos, adding that he will have a virtual tour to use for
marketing the home that will also be available to the HPB.
K
Minutes — December 15, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Special Meeting
Member Kojetin
Stressed that the HPB needs to let the community know that the HPB does
not want homes in the Country Club District, that have been identified as
historic resources to be taken down. He added that the existing home at
4615 Wooddale Avenue is part of the fabric of the neighborhood, and the
loss of this home will change the longstanding built environment in its
vicinity.
Member Forrest
- Concurred with Member Kojetin's comments; adding that the Plan of
Treatment for the Country Club District is very generous to change
compared with other historic districts in the country, and the HPB needs to
look at each request very seriously as it relates to the entire neighborhood.
Public Comment
Sheilagh Ziegweid - 4615 Wooddale Avenue
Expressed her support of the project stating that the proposed home will
enhance the neighborhood. She pointed out that over the years many
homes in the neighborhood have experienced changes that have not
enhanced the historic integrity of the area.
John McDonald — Mr. Busyn's realtor
- Expressed his support of the project pointing out that Mr. Busyn has
extensive experience rebuilding homes in the Country Club District, he is
well endorsed by the neighbors and will provide a quality product for the
neighborhood and community at large.
Mickey Armstrong — Owner Sheilagh Ziegweid's realtor
- Stated that the proposed project is very positive, will enhance the
neighborhood and is the right thing to do.
Board action
Member Benson moved approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness to
demolish the existing home and detached garage at 4615 Wooddale Avenue
and build a new home and detached garage subject to the following
conditions:
1. The plans presented.
2. Historical and architectural documentation of the existing house and garage
including written information, photographs, and drawings.
3. Photographs of all elevations of the new construction once completed
4. A year built plaque is affixed to the new home.
3
Minutes — December 15, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Special Meeting
Member Fukuda seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion was approved.
Additional Comments
Scott Busyn —
- Expressed his appreciation for the work of the HPB, pointing out that he does
not feel good about tearing down this home. As he has researched its history,
he has grown to know the home.
- Assured the Board that as the home is dismantled, he will treat the property with
respect and take care to ensure that historic elements are recycled through the
Green Institute.
- Shared his desire to build a home that will add energy to the block while
maintaining the historic integrity of the neighborhood.
- Added his belief that the decision of the Board supports the City Council's
desire for a balance between preservation and property rights in the historic
Country Club District.
Member Forrest —
Complimented Mr. Busyn on his participation during this arduous process, pointing out
that this project will serve as an example for future submittals, and adding that he has
set the bar very high. Board members agreed with Member Forrest's summation.
V. OTHER BUSINESS: None
X. ADJOURNMENT 7:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Joyc& Repya.
C!
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2008, AT 6:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM
4801 WEST 50'" STREET
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Chris Rofidal, Bob Kojetin Arlene Forrest,
Laura Benson, Connie Fukuda, Jean Rehkamp Larson
and Elizabeth Montgomery
MEMBERS ABSENT: Karen Ferrara and Lou Blemaster
STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner
OTHERS PRESENT: Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes, Inc.
John McDonald, Edina Realty
Sheilagh Ziegweid, 4615 Wooddale Avenue
Mickey Armstrong, Coldwell Banker Burnet Realty
COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-08-14 4615 Wooddale Avenue — Demolition of House &
Garage
Planner Repya reminded the Board that at their regular meeting on December 9,
2008, they agreed that the proposed plan for the new home and detached garage
proposed by Mr. Busyn met the design guidelines of the District's Plan of
Treatment, but needed to follow the procedure of being heard at two separate
meetings. This special meeting was arranged to meet the two meeting criteria.
Applicant Presentation
Mr. Busyn thanked the Board for scheduling a special meeting to address the
Certificate of Appropriateness. He explained the measures he took to share his
plans with the surrounding neighbors and expressed his appreciation for their
support. He then briefly reviewed the plans for the new construction focusing on
the following design objectives:
• Size, Scale and Massing — A two story Colonial Revival home, to be
compatible in size with the adjacent homes to the north and south.
• Design compatibility with other Colonial Revival homes in the Brown
Section of the district,
• Exterior finishes, emphasizing the traditional materials found in the Brown
Section of the district,
Minutes — December 15, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Special Meeting
• Landscaping elements, providing the symmetry inherent with the Colonial
Revival style, and
• The new garage complementing the style of the home, and meeting the
criteria set out for replacement garages in the district.
Board Comments
Member Forrest
- Asked Mr. Busyn to provide the Board with the type of feedback he
receives from the neighbors when presenting proposed plans. Mr. Busyn
explained that he has rebuilt over 14 homes in the City, and has
neighborhood meetings to present the plans each time. The number one
concern he hears is regarding the ridge height of the new construction, and
the new language in the District's Plan of Treatment goes much further
than the Zoning Ordinance in addressing that issue. Other concerns cited
include, drainage on the lot both before and after construction; whether the
style of the home will fit the neighborhood, preservation of existing trees,
the back yard, and the price point of the new/rebuilt home.
- Inquired if driveways have been an issue. Mr. Busyn said that driveways
have not been an issue; however neighbors make it clear that they do not
want the drainage from the subject driveway to run off onto their
properties.
Member Rehkamp Larson
- Explained that she was unable to attend the December 9th meeting of the
Board, and was pleased with the decision to hold a special meeting to
move the project along. She also stated that she was glad to hear the
positive response to the plans from the neighbors.
- Addressing the proposed design, Ms. Rehkamp Larson stated that the
front fagade of the home feels historic and she appreciated that the sides
of the home have massing that is broken up.
- Expressed her support of the plan, and appreciated the material board
presented. However cautioned Mr. Busyn to pay attention to the
proportions of the front fagade gables.
- Suggested the Board request receiving photos of the finished product from
all four elevations. Mr. Busyn agreed that he would be happy to provide
the Board with photos, adding that he will have a virtual tour to use for
marketing the home that will also be available to the HPB.
2
Minutes — December 15, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Special Meeting
Member Kojetin
Stressed that the HPB needs to let the community know that the HPB does
not want homes in the Country Club District, that have been identified as
historic resources to be taken down. He added that the existing home at
4615 Wooddale Avenue is part of the fabric of the neighborhood, and the
loss of this home will change the longstanding built environment in its
vicinity.
Member Forrest
- Concurred with Member Kojetin's comments; adding that the Plan of
Treatment for the Country Club District is very generous to change
compared with other historic districts in the country, and the HPB needs to
look at each request very seriously as it relates to the entire neighborhood.
Public Comment
Sheilagh Ziegweid - 4615 Wooddale Avenue
Expressed her support of the project stating that the proposed home will
enhance the neighborhood. She pointed out that over the years many
homes in the neighborhood have experienced changes that have not
enhanced the historic integrity of the area.
John McDonald — Mr. Busyn's realtor
Expressed his support of the project pointing out that Mr. Busyn has
extensive experience rebuilding homes in the Country Club District, he is
well endorsed by the neighbors and will, provide a quality product for the
neighborhood and community at large.
Mickey Armstrong — Owner Sheilagh Ziegweid's realtor
- Stated that the proposed project is very positive, will enhance the
neighborhood and is the right thing to do.
Board action
Member Benson moved approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness to
demolish the existing home and detached garage at 4615 Wooddale Avenue
and build a new home and detached garage subject to the following
conditions:
1. The plans presented.
2. Historical and architectural documentation of the existing house and garage
including written information, photographs, and drawings.
3. Photographs of all elevations of the new construction once completed
4. A year built plaque is affixed to the new home.
KI
Minutes — December 15, 2008
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Special Meeting
Member Fukuda seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion was approved.
Additional Comments
Scott Busyn —
- Expressed his appreciation for the work of the HPB, pointing out that he does
not feel good about tearing down this home. As he has researched its history,
he has grown to know the home.
- Assured the Board that as the home is dismantled, he will treat the property with
respect and take care to ensure that historic elements are recycled through the
Green Institute.
- Shared his desire to build a home that will add energy to the block while
maintaining the historic integrity of the neighborhood.
- Added his belief that the decision of the Board supports the City Council's
desire for a balance between preservation and property rights in the historic
Country Club District.
Member Forrest —
Complimented Mr. Busyn on his participation during this arduous process, pointing out
that this project will serve as an example for future submittals, and adding that he has
set the bar very high. Board members agreed with Member Forrest's summation.
V. OTHER BUSINESS: None
X. ADJOURNMENT 7:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jo'c& RePya'
2