HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012 06-12 PB Meeting Minutes RegularAGENDA
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
EDINA CITY HALL — Community Room
TUESDAY, June 12, 2012 7:00 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
IV. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Regular meeting of May 8, 2012
V. COMMUNITY COMMENT
During "Community Comment" the Heritage Preservation Board will invite residents to share new
issues or concerns that haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Board or which aren't
slated for future consideration. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair
may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally
speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community
Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board to respond to their comments. Instead,
the Board might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting.
VI. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. H-12-3 4524 Bruce Avenue— New Home with Attached Garage
2. H-12-4 4624 Bruce Avenue —New Home with Detached Garage
B. Consultant Vogel Reports
1. Southdale Center — Determination of Eligibility for Heritage Landmark Designation
2. West Minneapolis Heights Survey
C. Subcommittee & Working Group Update
I. Tear Down Trend Subcommittee - Recycling Housing Materials
2. Summer Tour — Morningside & Westgate Commercial Area — July 10, 2012
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
1. 2012 CLG Grant Award: Historic Context Study of Residential and Commercial
Development in Edina, 1941 to 1975.
VIII. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
1. Plan for Joint Meeting with City Council on Monday, August 6, 2012
2. Explore Continuing Education Opportunities
IX. STAFF COMMENTS
Aft
X. NEXT MEETING DATE July 10, 2012 (Propose rescheduling due to summer
tour set for that date)
XI. ADJOURNMENT 0
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
Regular Meeting of the
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Edina City Hall — Community Room
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M.
11. ROLL CALL
Answering roll call was Chair Carr, and Members Stegner, Davis, Curran, Moore, Christiaansen, Mellom,
Sussman and Ellingboe. Absent were Members Anger and Copman. Staff present was Planner Joyce
Repya. Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel was also in attendance.
III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
Member Curran moved to approve the meeting agenda. Member Moore seconded the motion. All
voted aye. The motion carried.
IV. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Regular meeting of May 8, 2012
Member Stegner moved approval of the minutes from the May 8, 2012, meeting of the board. Member
Moore seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried.
V. COMMUNITY COMMENT None
VI. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
Planner Repya explained that the Board was hearing two requests for the teardown and new
construction of homes in the historic Country Club District. Both homes were built after the period of
significance (1924-1944) thus the teardown of the homes is permissible. The responsibility of the Board
is to approve the design of the new homes taking into consideration the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards as well as the design guidelines provided in the District's plan of treatment.
Ms. Repya also explained that the process for design review is completed in two meetings; the first
which is this evening entails a presentation of the design proposal by the applicant with comments and
possible suggestions for changes provided by the HPB and interested parties — No vote is taken at this
time.
The second meeting (one month later) involves a presentation of the final design of the new home,
which should take into account the comments and suggestions provided at the first meeting.
It is at the second meeting that the HPB will take action on the Certificate of Appropriateness
application.
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
June 12, 2012
1. H-12-3 4524 Bruce Avenue — New Home with Attached Garage
Planner Repya reported that the subject property is located on the west side of the 4500 block of Bruce
Avenue. The existing home is one of the few remaining Contemporary style homes in the District;
constructed in 1973. A 2 -stall front loading attached garage is located on the south side of the home.
The COA request involves demolishing the existing home with the intention of building a Tudor Revival
inspired home with attached garage at the rear of the home accessed by a driveway on the south side of
the property. Ms. Repya shared the streetscape comparing the proposed home with the homes on either
side; as well as all elevations of the proposed home and detached garage. She then introduced Matt
Hanish, with JMS Custom Homes who provided a detailed explanation of the proposed replacement home
pointing out that the new structure has been designed to complement the size, scale and massing of the
surrounding homes. The attached garage has been located on the rear of the home to not only ensure
that it is not visible from the front street, but to also provide a home that blends with the existing
streetscape. Mr. Hanish added that the exterior finish of the home has been designed in the traditional
Tudor style and color typical with the historic Tudor homes in the Country Club District.
Board Member Comments/Questions:
Member Mellom commented that in her opinion the home is beautiful, but there is too much detailing
and it appears to overwhelm the homes on either side. She questioned the use of diamond shaped
window panes on the front elevation; and added that the proposed stone base and trim board are "a bit
much". Member Mellom suggested deleting the diamond shaped window panes, reducing the height of the
stone base, and eliminating some of the trim.
Member Christiaansen questioned the width of the new driveway; and commented that the material
used on a portion of the front porch roof appears to be some type of metal- adding that typically a roof
like this is copper. She also noted the proposed dormer on the south elevation looks awkward when
viewed from the front street. Concluding, Christiaansen suggested eliminating one of two design trim
elements. Mr. Hanish acknowledged that the new driveway was narrower than the existing driveway, and
agreed copper roofs are seen throughout the District. Hanish said he would consider the suggested
changes.
Member Moore commented that while he likes the intentions, he feels too much is "going on"; adding in
his opinion the exterior design is very busy.
Member Curran agreed with the comment from Member Moore and added that it may be possible for
the applicant to eliminate some of the timbering trim to reduce the "busy" look of the home's exterior.
Member Davis stated that he likes the house; the scale and mass are good.
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
June 12, 2012
Public Comments/Questions:
Leo and Marilyn Pertl, 4525 Casco Avenue, Mrs. Pertl told the Board she lives on Casco directly
behind the subject property and would like the applicant (if at all possible) to save the pine trees that are
located along the common property line. Mrs. Pertl explained that the evergreens provide year round
screening between their homes. Mr. Hanish responded that a decision hasn't been made on all trees;
however he acknowledged some trees would be removed and additional trees planted.
Ann Wordelman, 4522 Bruce Avenue, addressed the Board and informed them she is the northerly
abutting neighbor, adding her comments relate to the guidelines. Ms. Wordelman said she has a concern
with the proposed stucco panels adding in her opinion a "real" stucco finish meets the intent of the
preservation guidelines and is in keeping with the true character of finishing materials found within the
District not stucco panels. Concluding Wordelman said she is also concerned that extensive timbering
would be used to cover the seams, adding she surveyed the area and didn't view excess timbering on
other homes in the District; most notable the sides of houses.
Bruce Leslie, 4526 Bruce Avenue, southerly abutting neighbor told the applicant he has a question on
an encroachment issue and asked to details. Mr. Hanish told Mr. Leslie he would set up a time to discuss
that issue with him.
® Paul Runice, 4624 Bruce Avenue, explained that he lives one block south, next door to the other
COA replacement home the Board will address this evening, but he wanted the Board to know that his
block has had a less than desirable experience with JMS in the past, so there may be a "hangover" effect
with this project.
Kitty O'Dea, 4510 Bruce Avenue, commented that she is concerned with the proposed porch
extension into the front yard setback area, adding in her opinion it's not consistent with the District and
intrudes on site lines. Continuing, O'Dea said she agrees with past comments on timbering adding that the
total look of the proposed house is too busy with too many windows. O'Dea also agreed with previous
comments that the stone base is too much. Concluding, O'Dea suggested that the applicant provide a
scaled "straight on" sketch to be viewed at the next meeting. She pointed out the illustration presented is
angled; reiterating she wants to see the facade straight on.
Chair Carr thanked the public for their input.
A discussion ensued with Board Members indicating that the scale and mass of the proposed home is
good; however, there are some details they would like the applicant to reconsider; such as:
• Remove the diamond shaped window panes on the front elevation
• Shorten the stone base
• Somehow reduce the amount of timbering trim and make the best use of the stucco
panels to reduce the "busy" appearance of the exterior
• Consider using copper on the porch roof extension
3
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
June 12, 2012
Jeff Schoenwetter, JMS Homes, addressed the Board explaining that the proposed home is complementary
to the District. As required in the plan of treatment, this replacement home is not an exact replica, but a
contemporary Tudor Revival Style that complements the surrounding historic homes. Schoenwetter
pointed out that the drivet, hardy board, and stucco panels on the exterior of the home is a product that
has been very successful for him- in fact he has used in on new homes he has constructed in the District;
inviting the Board to view the Tudor style his company built at 4601 Drexel Avenue. Concluding,
Schoenwetter said he would take into consideration the comments heard this evening when designing the
final product for submittal.
Chair Carr thanked the applicant for their presentation and the public for their comments. She added that
the Board looks forward to reviewing the final plan at the July meeting. No formal action was taken.
2. H-12-4 4624 Bruce Avenue — New Home with Detached Garage
Planner Repya explained that the subject property consists of an American Colonial style home
constructed in 1950. A front loading, tandem, attached garage is located on the south side of the home.
The COA request involves demolishing the existing home with the intention of replacing it with a new
home and detached garage and new driveway on the north side of the property.
Ben Nelson, of Nelson Residential Design Inc. explained that Donnay Homes is proposing to construct a
2 story Tudor inspired home that has been designed to complement the surrounding homes, abiding by
the district's plan of treatment. The natural stucco cladding is not aggressive and will not include any
wood timbering. The home will have a long ridgeline paralleling the street with clean, simple lines. The
eave lines are consistent with the neighboring homes. The front entry door will have a 2 inch stone
veneer surrounding the doorway; and the same stone is continued along the front foundation on the
south side.
Addressing the garage plan, Mr. Nelson pointed out that the plan is consistent in materials to the
proposed home and the height provided is the average of the neighboring detached garages — no taller.
Board members responded very favorably to the proposed plan expressing the following comments:
Member Sussman stated that he was impressed with the design providing a creative interpretation of
a Tudor Design. Members Moore, Stegner and Curran were in agreement.
Member Mellom stated that she liked the use of real stucco rather than the stucco panels which
allowed them to forgo the wood trim. She also complimented the plan for limiting the use of stone and
providing a nice transition with the pitch of the roof.
Chair Carr stated that she liked the plan, but questioned the bank of windows on the second story of
the front elevation — commenting that the four windows so close together is not commonly seen on the
original Country Club Tudors. 0
4
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
June 12, 2012
9
Ben Nelson commented that in keeping with the plan of treatments direction to include contemporary
elements in the design of new homes, the placement of the windows adds a stronger graphic feel to the
home, while also providing more daylight to the interior spaces.
Member Christiaansen stated that she liked the plan for the windows but questioned the number of
muntins (panes) on each window. She suggested that by reducing the double hung window's muntin
pattern from six -over -six to four -over -four more light would be provided to the interior, and the
windows would better compliment those on the neighboring homes.
Community Comments were received from the following:
Ms. Repya explained that an email was received from Scott and Katie Peterson, 4626 Bruce
Avenue, the southerly abutting property in which they commented that although unable to attend the
meeting, they had reviewed the plans for the new home and were concerned with the combined impact
of moving the driveway to the north side of the property, and replacing a one story tandem garage
abutting his home with a new 2 story structure. They stressed that with the placement of a taller
structure closer to their home the sky view they currently appreciate would be diminished. The
Petersons stated that they would "withhold their full support for the project" based upon the substantial
impact it will have on their property. They added that if the driveway were to remain on the south side
of the new home, or the profile n the south elevation were amended, they would be more likely to
support the project.
Paul Runice, 4522 Bruce Avenue, the northerly abutting neighbor commented that the new home
proposed appears to compliment the neighborhood nicely. He did have questions regarding the grading
on the property and how the drainage would flow from the driveway. Mr. Donnay offered to meet Mr.
Runice to walk the property and explain the proposed drainage plan which will not impact the abutting
properties. Mr. Runice welcomed meeting with Mr. Donnay.
Kitty O'Dea, 4510 Bruce Avenue commented that she too liked the plans for the replacement
home and was happy to see a detached garage. However, she did question the front setback of the
home which while meeting the average of the homes on either side; the front stoop extends in front of
the neighboring homes. Ms. O'Dea pointed out that she believes a consistent front setback along the
street is important. Mr. Nelson responded to Ms. O'Dea explaining that the home cannot be positioned
further back on the lot because maneuvering space on the driveway would be lost.
Chair Carr thanked Mr. Nelson and Mr. Donnay for presenting their proposed plan for new
construction which was well received from the Board. Mr. Donnay commented that he had taken notes
during the discussion and would take comments made into consideration as they prepare their final plan
for presentation at the July HPB meeting.
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
June 12, 2012
0
B. Consultant Vogel Reports
1. Southdale Center — Determination of Eligibility for Heritage Landmark
Designation
Consultant Vogel provided the Board with a report that analyzed the heritage preservation status of the
Southdale Shopping Center to assist them in evaluating the subject property's eligibility for designation
as an Edina Heritage Landmark, pursuant to City Code §850.20. The technical analysis consisted of a
review of relevant historical records and a series of site visits. Evaluation of the subject property's
historical significance and integrity applied the eligibility criteria of the Edina Heritage Landmark overlay
zoning within the local historic context, "Southdale: Shopping Mall Culture," in accordance with the
policies and procedures set forth in the Heritage Preservation chapter of the City of Edina
Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Vogel explained that the Southdale Shopping Center has been evaluated as historically significant and
should be included in the city's inventory of heritage resources worthy of consideration in community
development planning. For planning purposes, the heritage resource should be classified as a historic
site, encompassing the shopping center building and appurtenant structures, as well as the parking lots
and associated landscape features. It is recommended that the HPB issue a determination of Edina
Heritage Landmark eligibility for the site.
Member Stegner welcomed Mr. Vogel's report noting that the HPB has struggled with recognizing the
significance of Southdale Center for over twenty years. Mr. Stegner then moved to issue a
determination of eligibility for heritage landmark designation for the center. Member Davis seconded
the motion.
Discussion ensued among the Board regarding the impact the determination of eligibility would have on
Southdale. Mr. Vogel pointed out that unlike the actual landmark designation of a property which
requires a property owner's approval; the determination that a property would be eligible for
designation is a step that the HPB may take without the property owner's buy -in. Member Stegner
opined that by issuing the determination of eligibility for Southdale, the HPB is identifying the center as a
historically significant property in the city. He added that the HPB and Edina Historical Society have
been grappling with how to recognize the historical importance of Southdale as the first enclosed,
climate controlled shopping center in the country for decades, yet there have never been findings
identifying the significance of the property. Now, with the determination of eligibility that Mr. Vogel has
prepared, the historical significance of the shopping center is substantiated.
Consultant Vogel added that by issuing the determination of eligibility for Southdale, the Minnesota State
Historic Preservation (SHPO) office is alerted to the historic significance of the property as well.
Chair Carr questioned the wisdom of issuing the determination of eligibility for Southdale at this time
without knowing that the City Council would support such a decision. She pointed out that the City
has been in negotiations with the owners of the property, and she would be more comfortable knowing
the Council supported the eligibility determination.
Responding to a question regarding their opinions on the significance of Southdale Center, the Board
provided the following responses:
• Member Moore pointed out that Southdale is a big part of Edina's history; as well as the history
of the region. It has been on the HPB's radar screen for 30-40 years and a decision needs to be
11
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
June 12, 2012
made. He added that he is most passionate about ensuring that Harry Bertolia's tree sculpture
in the Garden Court is preserved.
• Member Mellom observed that the building has changed so much that she was unsure it would
qualify for designation; however the original art pieces should be recognized.
• Member Chriatiaansen stated that she needed to know more about the process - pointing out
that she has seen how other malls have died over time; and if a potential designation stifled
Southdale's development, that could be detrimental to the mall's health. However, she added
that she would be in favor of preserving original artwork — perhaps partnering with other
groups such as the Edina Public Art Committee.
• Member Curran stated that she would not be in favor of designating the building; however
would like to see the remaining original elements preserved.
• Member Sussman pointed out that the original exterior and interior spaces of Southdale are
unrecognizable from what stands today. He added that he does not agree that the mall would
qualify for landmark designation; however he could support the designation of original artistic
objects.
• Members Stegner and Davis agreed that they would support designating Southdale Center as a
historic cultural resource.
Several Board members requested that prior to the HPB taking any action on this item, Planner Repya
discuss the matter with City Manager Scott Neal to ensure that such a decision would be well received
by the City Council. Member Moore pointed out that the Edina Historical Society sent Manager Neal a
letter in which they expressed their desire to have Southdale Center's history recognized — so this topic
shouldn't come as a surprise to him. Member Stegner then agreed to table his motion until the July
meeting when Ms. Repya could report on her meeting with Mr. Neal. Board members agreed they were
comfortable with that approach. No formal action was taken.
2. West Minneapolis Heights Survey
Consultant Vogel advised the Board that part of his 2012 work plan includes conducting a survey of
heritage resources in the West Minneapolis Heights neighborhood. The West Minneapolis Heights
project was identified as one of the city's highest priority strategic planning goals in the heritage
preservation element of the 2008 comprehensive plan because background knowledge suggested that
important historic properties are likely to be concentrated in this part of the city, which was developed
at an early date. He pointed out that the purpose of the survey is to gather data on the neighborhood's
heritage resources. It includes field survey (i.e., the physical search for and recording of historic
buildings) but also includes planning and background research before field survey begins, organization
and presentation of survey data as the survey proceeds, and development of an inventory of resources
which meet established criteria for historic significance and integrity.
Background research began in January, 2012 with a literature search and records review that has
focused on developing a neighborhood historic context based on theme, geographical area, and time
period. The historic context will provide the framework for organizing information about the
neighborhood's physical development and historic character; it will also guide the field survey by helping
to determine whether identified properties meet defined criteria of historical and architectural
significance.
Mr. Vogel reported that thus far we know that West Minneapolis Heights was one of the earliest (if not
the first) suburban residential subdivisions in Edina, which incorporated as a municipal village in order to
7
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
June 12, 2012
control this type of development activity. The neighborhood (which comprises an area of approximately
12 -block area in the northwestern corner of the city) was platted in 1887 by Charles P. Silloway to take
advantage of the development opportunities afforded by the opening of the Minneapolis Threshing
Machine Company plant alongside the Minneapolis & St. Louis RR in West Minneapolis (modern
Hopkins). Home building was slow at first and the original development project appears to have failed
in the aftermath of the "Panic of 1893" (one of the worst recessions in United States history). The
neighborhood was probably built out before the First World War (1914-18). This part of the city had a
longstanding connection with the Minneapolis Threshing Machine Company, which manufactured
traction engines, threshing machines, and tractors; in 1929 MTM merged with two other companies to
form the Minneapolis -Moline Power Implement Company.
Mr. Vogel concluded that the field survey will be conducted in two phases: a reconnaissance or
"windshield survey" (driving around the neighborhood and noting the general distribution of older
buildings), followed by a detailed pedestrian inspection and documentation of individual properties which
appear to meet the Edina Heritage Landmark eligibility criteria.
A brief discussion ensued, after which the Board thanked Mr. Vogel for the update and shared that they
looked forward to receiving more information as the survey progresses.
C. Subcommittee & Working Group Updates
1. Tear Down Trend Subcommittee - Recycling Housing Materials
Member Davis explained that he had a discussion with a residential builder who shared that when they
are building a new home on a lot with an existing home, rather than tearing the home down, if at all
possible, they attempt to move the home to another location. In the event that the home cannot be
moved, they then work to recycle as much of the home as possible. He added that he was pleased with
that information. Board members agreed with Member Davis pointing out that it is a good idea to
explore the current practices relative to recycling housing materials.
Mr. Davis added that as he gathers more information he will share it with the Board at future meetings.
2. Summer Tour — Morningside & Westgate Commercial Area —July 10, 2012
Planner Repya reminded the Board that they had planned the annual summer tour led by Member
Sussman to take the place of the regular July I Oth meeting. Now that the second meeting for the two
COA's considered earlier this evening must take place in July, and there would not be sufficient time to
complete the tour and transact the required business on the same evening; a new date for the HPB
meeting needs to be set. Ms. Repya explained that the Community Room is scheduled every evening;
however the City Council Chambers is available on Monday, July 9th or Wednesday, July I Ith. The Board
agreed that Monday, July 9th would be the revised date for the July HPB meeting.
July 10, 2012 — Summer Tour of Morningside
The Board agreed to meet at Kojetin Park on W. 44th Street at 6:30 p.m.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS -None
VIII. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
Chair Carr stated that she would like to see the following items included on the July meeting agenda:
•
Edina Heritage Preservation Board
Minutes
June 12, 2012
• Planning for the August 6th meeting with the City Council
• Mid Century Modern CLG grant update
• Recycling of housing materials update
• Morningside Bungalow landmark designation update
Member Stegner added that he would like future discussions of the board to include the following items:
• Edina's 125th year celebration in 2013
• Continuing education opportunities
• HPB's web site presence
Board members then brainstormed potential projects they could undertake in the future, including a
presence in the 4th of July parade (probably for 2013); and sharing the City's history at the Centennial
Lakes Farmer's Market.
IX. STAFF COMMENTS None
X. NEXT MEETING DATE — Rescheduled to Monday, July 9, 2012 due to the summer
tour occurring on the regular meeting date, Tuesday, July I Oth.
• X1. ADJOURNMENT 9:35 p.m.
Member Curran moved the meeting be adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Member Davis seconded the motion. All
voted aye. The motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Joyce Repya
0