Loading...
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