Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014 12-17 HPB Meeting Packets Special AGENDA EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD SPECIAL MEETING EDINA CITY HALL, 4801 W. 50TH STREET WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2014, 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT: A. Evaluation of Policy 13 B. Clarifying Plan of Treatment C. Notification for Events of an Extraordinary Circumstances IV. DAVID FISHER, CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL: Discuss Role of Building Inspections Relative to Managing the Plan of Treatment V. HOW TO ADDRESS BLOG SITES ENCOURAGING CONSTRUCTION OF NEW HOMES IN THE COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT VI. 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. t « MINUTES Special Meeting of the Edina Heritage Preservation Board Edina City Hall — Mayor's Conference Room Wednesday, December 17, 2014 7:00 p.m. I. Call to Order 7:00 P.M. II. Roll Call Answering roll call was Chair Weber and Members, Moore, Sussman, McLellan, Mellom, O'Brien, and Student Member Otness. Absent were members Christiaansen and Student Member Druckman. Staff present was Senior Planner, Joyce Repya, and Chief Building Official, David Fisher. III. Country Club District: Policy 13 - Clarifying Plan of Treatment and Requiring HPB Notification for Events of an Extraordinary Circumstance involving Threats to Public Health or Safety so as to Necessitate Demolition Chair Weber explained that there were several reasons he called for a special meeting of the board: 1. The complete demolition of the home at 4505 Arden Avenue took the HPB by surprise. 2. The HPB expressed the need to establish a notification process to alert the board and surrounding neighbors when a change to an approved COA occurs. 3. The builder of 4505 Arden Avenue had wanted to tear down the home since 2010, and he is now advertising on a blog that he can work through the system to get a house torn down, making way for new construction in the Country Club District. Mr. Weber pointed out that the board recognizes there are homes in the district with deficiencies, and after the miscommunication with 4505 Arden Avenue, now is a good time to establish policies to address potential problems in the future. Member O'Brien opined that it is important for the HPB to immediately establish a policy that provides a process for notification of the board prior an activity occurring that does not comply with that which was approved through the COA process. He added that a comment was made that the issue with 4505 Arden Avenue home was an anomaly; however he disagreed, pointing out that a home is for sale on Bruce Avenue that could easily fall prey to a contractor that will be looking for a way to justify its demolition. Especially since the 4505 Arden contractor is touting his ability on a blog site to work through the District's Plan of Treatment process to provide for new construction. Member O'Brien then presented the following amended Policy #I3 that was revised from the Draft policy adopted at the December 9th HPB meeting: Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 Policy 13: Country Club Heritage Landmark District C a. The Country Club is designated and zoned as the Country Club Heritage Landmark District ("Landmark District"). Pursuant to the applicable plan of treatment, homes within the Landmark District which were built from 1924 to 1944 are heritage preservation resources ("Heritage Resources"). b. The applicable plan of treatment provides, among other things, that: i. The primary purpose of the Landmark District is the preservation of the existing historic house facades and streetscapes. ii. The preferred treatment for Heritage Resources in the Landmark District is rehabilitation defined as the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alteration, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey it's historical, cultural, or architectural values. One of the stated standards for rehabilitation is that deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Certificate of Appropriateness The city mandates that no COA will be approved for demolition, in whole or in part, of any Heritage Resources unless the applicant can show: a. The property is not a heritage preservation resource; or b. The property no longer contributes to the historical significance of the Landmark District because its historic integrity has been compromised by deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate addition or alteration. The city additionally mandates that a certificate of appropriateness (COA) be issued before any city permit is issued for demolition and new construction of any principal dwelling or detached garage within the Landmark District. The city defines demolition to include the physical alteration of a building that requires a city permit under circumstances where: a. 50% or more of the surface of all exterior walls in the aggregate are removed; or b. 50% or more of the principal roof structure is removed changing its shape, pitch or height. Actions I. In the absence of extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public safety, which circumstances result in an order to demolish by the city building official, no demolition, in whole or in part, of any Heritage Resource shall proceed. 2. In the event of an extraordinary circumstance involving threats to public health or safety so as to necessitate demolition, in whole or in part, of a Heritage Resource, the 2 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 applicant shall immediately notify the city and the HPB. The HPB staff liaison/planner, in turn, shall thereafter notify the HPB and surrounding neighbors of the applicant's notice and shall also immediately further notify the HPB and surrounding neighbors of any mandate of the city building official pertaining to demolition of the Heritage Resource. 3. In the absence of extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public health or safety, any change in the scope or amount of work to be performed on a Heritage Resource, shall require submittal of an application for a new COA in accordance with all governing provisions. 4. Neither the HPB staff liaison/planner nor the preservation planning consultant for the HPB/city is authorized to deviate from this policy. Mr. O'Brien pointed out that the proposed policy focuses on the plan of treatment, and restates the language addressing demolitions in the District. He added that he believed it to be incumbent to clearly define the board's stance relative to demolitions. Member McLellan agreed with Member O'Brien, but stated that he would like to see more detail regarding notifications with reference to the timing of the notice prior to a demolition. Mr. McLellan also wondered if an education process between the building official and the HPB could be initiated to help the board better understand facts surrounding a potential decision affecting a property in the district. Member Sussman provided the board with a draft Policy#13 he created entitled "Clarifications Related to Existing Conditions" which included six actions he found lacking in the draft policy adopted on 12-9-14. Mr. Sussman pointed out that Member O'Brien had done a good job of using the plan of treatment as a guide for the policy he was proposing. However, he cautioned that the policy's reference to "no demolition in whole or in part" could become problematic when compared to how the plan of treatment has been interpreted. He also pointed out that it is important the policy not contradict decisions required by the building official. Member Weber agreed with Member Sussman, pointing out that with Member O'Brien's proposed policy, one could interpret the "no demolition in whole or in part" to infer that a window could not be replaced, or a roof may not be replaced, and that was not the intent of the City Council when the plan of treatment was adopted in 2008. He added that he finds the plan of treatment to be contradictory, because while it references that "no demolition in whole or in part" would be allowed, it also provides for removal of existing siding, roofing, trim, fascia, soffit, eave, moldings, windows, and doors which would all be classified as "demolition". Discussion ensued regarding the responsibility of the HPB to interpret the plan of treatment. Board members recognized a need to better define the term "demolition in whole and in part" 3 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 so as not to contradict the portion of the plan that allows for partial demolition of a building's elements without a COA was discussed. Member Moore opined that the plans approved for 4505 Arden Avenue set up a situation that became a slippery slope due to the changes that were allowed on the front facade. He explained that by allowing the front entrance and chimney to be moved, that change became problematic when the foundation too needed to be replaced. Member O'Brien observed that it appears that there are additional issues regarding the details of the notification and definitions that need further discussion. However, he encouraged the board to adopt his proposed Policy#13 which sets out the language from the Plan of Treatment and includes the requirement for HPB and neighbor notification in the event there is a change to an approved COA. The board agreed that although further work relative to the notification details and definition of terms would be helpful, those issues were too involved to be addressed during the special meeting. Planner Repya suggested that a committee of HPB members be formed to take on the task of fine tuning the notification details, definition of terms and consideration of Member Sussman's recommendations for "Clarifications Related to Existing Conditions". Following a brief discussion, Member Moore moved for form a committee to work through the details of the notification process and provide clarity for the definition of"demolition in whole or in part" and "existing conditions". Member McLellan seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Members Sussman, Mellom, McLellan and Student Member Otness agreed to serve on the committee. Member McLellan was chosen to serve as the committee's chair. Getting back to the Policy#I3 proposed by Member O'Brien, Member Sussman raised concerns that the policy does not follow the format of the previous policies; and as the discussion has shown does not address all of the existing concerns. He pointed out that the board has an opportunity to clearly state the policies, but it needs to be done carefully and not in haste. Member O'Brien observed he believed not taking action on the policy was shirking responsibility, since there are other properties in the district that may be in a similar state of neglected maintenance as 4505 Arden; and potential targets for demolition. 4 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 Student Member Otness stated that he understood the reason for the special meeting was to address a lacking notification requirement in the plan of treatment. He added that he did not see a need to rush to a decision on Policy#13 since the "Actions" set out in Policy#5 clearly define that a demolition will not take place in the district unless the HPB has considered a proposal through the COA process. Reviewing the language provided in the proposed policy, Planner Repya suggested that under "Action" 2, the requirement that the applicant notify the city and surrounding neighbors regarding in event of extraordinary circumstances be changed to only require notifying the city - the city will then notify the neighbors. Member O'Brien agreed with that suggested change. Member Weber questioned "Action" #1, pointing out that the language lacked the exact reference from the plan of treatment which provided for a demolition in the absence of extraordinary circumstances and could be misinterpreted. He suggested that as stated in the plan of treatment, "unless the applicant has previously shown that the property has been compromised by deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate additions or alterations" be added to the end of the statement - otherwise the statement would flatly not allow demolitions regardless of circumstances. Member O'Brien agreed to include all of the language from the plan of treatment as proposed by Member Weber. Following a brief discussion Member O'Brien moved approval of the proposed Policy#13 to include the changes proposed by Planner Repya and Member Weber, and to replace the Draft Policy #13 adopted at the December 9, 2014 HPB meeting. Member McLellan seconded the motion. Members Mellom, Moore, McLellan and O'Brien voted aye. Members Sussman and Weber voted nay. The motion carried. (A copy of the approved Policy#13 is included at the end of these minutes.) IV. David Fisher, Chief Building Official - Discuss Role of Building Inspections relative to managing the Country Club District's Plan of Treatment David Fisher explained that among his many duties, he is responsible to ensure that all structures in the City of Edina meet the life and safety requirements of the building code. Relative to the home at 4505 Arden Avenue, he received a structural engineer's report citing that the home's foundation and footings were inadequately constructed, performing poorly, and required full replacement. Prior to making a decision, a site visit was performed which proved the validity of the engineer's report. A letter was then provided to the contractor confirming that the footings and foundation needed to be replaced. The contractor responded that it was his intention to remove what was to have remained of the original framing of the home, which was authorized because the COA approved plans for the rebuilt home were not changing. 5 • Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 A discussion ensued regarding the chief building official's responsibilities as they pertain to the work of the HPB. Several board members opined that even though the plans for the rebuilt home weren't changing, the treatment of the original home was affected, warranting in-put from the HPB. Member Sussman pointed out that he understands that ultimately the HPB must adhere to the chief building official's decisions, however he hoped that in the future a conversation between the board and building official will take place which may not change a decision, but provide the board with an understanding prior to an action such as a demolition takes place. Mr. Fisher agreed that better transparency between his office and the HPB when decisions affecting properties in the Country Club District occur is one of the lessons that can come from this project. He believed that the decision he made relative to the home at 4505 Arden Avenue was a sound one, however he also understands why the HPB would want to be aware of such decisions so they aren't surprised and put in a reactionary mode. Board members thanked Mr. Fisher for attending the meeting and informing them about the chief building official's responsibilities regarding life and safety issues. They also appreciated his understanding their need to be informed when changes to a building permit occur with a Country Club District home subject to an approved COA; and stressed that they looked forward to working more closely with him in the future. V. Address a Contractor's Blog Site Encouraging Construction of New Homes in the Country Club District Chair Weber observed that since the tear down of the home at 4505 Arden Avenue, the contractor has now created a blog site inviting people interested in building a new home in the Country Club District to contract with his company because he can make it happen. The blog includes much of the language from the plan of treatment; however it also provides the contractor's personal interpretation of the plan of treatment which includes misleading and incorrect information. Board members discussed their concern with the inaccurate information encouraging people to look to the Country Club District if interested in building a new home in Edina. Some wondered how the HPB should respond. Planner Repya suggested that responding to the blog directly was not a good idea. However, she suggested that the board create an article for the "The Advisor", a blog of the boards and commissions on the city's web site which could be linked to the Country Club District's page on the HPB site. In the blog article, the board would have an excellent opportunity to educate the public by clarifying the Plan of Treatment 6 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 regulations which provide for the construction of new homes for non-historic resources (built after 1944) or for properties identified by professional documentation as being "compromised buy deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate additions or alterations". Board members agreed that education was an appropriate approach. Chair Weber and Student Member Otness offered to write an article explaining the regulations controlling the construction of new homes in the Country Club District which he would have staff and the HPB review prior to posting. The board thanked Members Weber and Otness for taking on the task. VI. ADJOURNMENT 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Joyce Repya 7 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 Policy 13: Country Club Heritage Landmark District City c. The Country Club is designated and zoned as the Country Club Heritage Landmark District ("Landmark District"). Pursuant to the applicable plan of treatment, homes within the Landmark District which were built from 1924 to 1944 are heritage preservation resources ("Heritage Resources"). d. The applicable plan of treatment provides, among other things, that: iii. The primary purpose of the Landmark District is the preservation of the existing historic house facades and streetscapes. iv. The preferred treatment for Heritage Resources in the Landmark District is rehabilitation defined as the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alteration, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey it's historical, cultural, or architectural values. One of the stated standards for rehabilitation is that deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Certificate of Appropriateness The city mandates that no COA will be approved for demolition, in whole or in part, of any Heritage Resources unless the applicant can show: c. The property is not a heritage preservation resource; or d. The property no longer contributes to the historical significance of the Landmark District because its historic integrity has been compromised by deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate addition or alteration. The city additionally mandates that a certificate of appropriateness (COA) be issued before any city permit is issued for demolition and new construction of any principal dwelling or detached garage within the Landmark District. The city defines demolition to include the physical alteration of a building that requires a city permit under circumstances where: c. 50% or more of the surface of all exterior walls in the aggregate are removed; or d. 50%or more of the principal roof structure is removed changing its shape, pitch or height. 8 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Special Meeting Minutes December 17, 2014 Actions 1 In the absence of extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public safety, which circumstances result in an order to demolish by the city building official, no demolition, in whole or in part, of any Heritage Resource shall proceed, unless the applicant has previously shown that the property has been compromised by deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate additions or alterations. 2. In the event of an extraordinary circumstance involving threats to public health or safety so as to necessitate demolition, in whole or in part, of a Heritage Resource, the applicant shall immediately notify the city. The HPB staff liaison/planner, in turn, shall thereafter notify the HPB and surrounding neighbors of the applicant's notice and shall also immediately further notify the HPB and surrounding neighbors of any mandate of the city building official pertaining to demolition of the Heritage Resource. 3. In the absence of extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public health or safety, any change in the scope or amount of work to be performed on a Heritage Resource, shall require submittal of an application for a new COA in accordance with all governing provisions. 4. Neither the HPB staff liaison/planner nor the preservation planning consultant for the HPB/city is authorized to deviate from this policy. Adopted at a special meeting of the Heritage Preservation Board on December 17, 2014. 9 Effective January 2014 Heritage Preservation Board Roles and Responsibilities Background: The City of Edina has a wealth of heritage resources including numerous historic buildings and sites worthy of preservation. To protect and enhance these non- renewable community resources, since 1974 the City has developed specific policies and procedures that integrate heritage preservation with other community development planning. The mission of the City's heritage preservation program is to preserve Edina's heritage resources by protecting historically significant buildings, sites, structures, objects, and districts. The Heritage Preservation Board ("HPB"), appointed by the Mayor and City Council, advises the City Council, City Manager and other City boards and commissions on all matters relating to heritage resource preservation, protection, and enhancement in the community. The Board safeguards the significant heritage properties of the City by identifying and nominating them for designation by the City Council as Edina Heritage Landmarks. In addition, the Board is responsible for developing and maintaining a comprehensive preservation plan; reviewing applications for City permits in relation to properties designated as Edina Heritage Landmarks; and encouraging the preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction of significant heritage properties through public education. Meetings: The HPB, provided for in City Ordinance Section 2, Article III, Division 5, typically meets at 7 p.m. the second Tuesday of most months (see schedule below). All meetings are open to the public and held at Edina City Hall, 4801 W. 50th St. Roles and Responsibilities: The City of Edina December 2, 2008 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 6 Heritage Preservation provides clear guidance on the goals, roles and responsibilities of the HPB: Goals 1. Ensure that Edina will be a distinctive and recognizable community, committed to preservation of historic buildings and sites that provide physical links to the past and foster a sense of community identity. 2. Preserve historically significant buildings, sites, structures, objects, and districts as functional, useful parts of the modern city so that they will be the focus of important education, edification, recreation, and economic development activities. 3. Provide historic property owners and neighborhood groups with technical assistance and education in historic preservation. 4. Sponsor heritage preservation programs that stress empowerment of individuals and communities through stewardship, advocacy, education, and partnership. Benchmarks The following benchmarks have been established for the City Heritage Preservation Program. By 2020, the Program will achieve the following: a) Fully integrate heritage preservation with other city planning for parks, recreation, community development, public safety, public works, and education. b) Identify and evaluate all buildings within the Country Club District more than 50 years old to determine their heritage landmark eligibility. c) Survey the Morningside, Browndale Park, West Minneapolis Heights, and Minnehaha Creek neighborhoods and Southdale Mall to determine the heritage preservation potential of buildings, sites, structures, objects, and districts. Page 1 of 6 I Effective January 2014 d) Re-survey the Edina Country Club District to refine and update the 1980 survey data. e) Review and update each Heritage Landmark Plan of Treatment every ten years. f) Carry out archaeological surveys of all undeveloped lands within the City limits. g) Develop and implement effective, voluntary, non-regulatory approaches to preserving significant heritage resources. h) Develop historic property interpretation programs for selected heritage landmarks in partnership with property owners and outside agencies. i) Make all pertinent information on preserved heritage landmarks accessible to the general public. j) Make local history and heritage preservation a vital part of K-12 school curricula and lifelong learning programs for Edina residents. Policies Policy 1: Prepare and adopt a Heritage Preservation Plan Actions: 1. The City will adopt and maintain a Heritage Preservation Plan as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. All preservation program activities will be carried out in a manner consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The City will use the Heritage Preservation Plan to establish policies, procedures, and plans for managing the preservation, protection, and use of heritage resources. 4. The HPB will conduct research to augment, refine, and revise the thematic study units outlined in the 1999 historic context study. 5. Heritage preservation planning will be integrated with other city planning for community development. 6. The City will provide the HPB with the resources needed to prepare and implement a comprehensive heritage preservation plan. 7. Because comprehensive planning is a continuous cycle, the HPB will periodically review and update the Heritage Preservation Plan. Policy 2: Identify significant heritage resources worthy of consideration in community planning Actions: 1. The HPB will carry out a comprehensive survey of heritage resources within the city limits and maintain an inventory of all properties recorded. 2. The City will create heritage resource survey plans that advance the goals and priorities of historic contexts. 3. All the information gathered on each property and area surveyed will be placed in the permanent records of the Heritage Preservation Board. Policy 3: Evaluate heritage resources to determine whether they meet defined criteria of historical, architectural, archaeological, or cultural significance Actions: Page 2 of 6 Effective January 2014 1. The HPB will evaluate all properties identified by the ongoing Heritage Resources Survey and issue a finding of significance for those properties that meet defined criteria; some determinations of landmark eligibility may be provisional and it may be necessary for the HPB to conduct additional studies prior to initiating the landmark nomination process. 2. For each property evaluated as eligible for heritage landmark designation the HPB will issue a finding of significance with a report documenting its location, ownership, date of construction, the relevant historic context and property type, and the criteria on which the finding of significance was based. 3. The HPB will maintain an accurate, up-to-date inventory and map depicting the heritage resources evaluated as significant. Policy 4: Rezone significant heritage resources as Edina Heritage Landmarks or Landmark Districts Actions: 1. The HPB will nominate significant historic properties and districts for designation as Heritage Landmarks or Landmark Districts. 2. A landmark nomination study will be completed for each property nominated; the nomination study will locate and identify the subject property, explain how it meets one or more of the landmark eligibility criteria, and make the case for historic significance and integrity. 3. Each landmark nomination study will include a Plan of Treatment that will develop specific approaches to design review and treatment. 4. Except in extraordinary circumstances, the HPB will not nominate a property for landmark designation without the consent of the owner. Policy 5: Protect heritage landmarks through design review Actions: 1. The City will take all necessary steps to ensure that no Significant Heritage Preservation Resource is destroyed or damaged as a result of any project for which a Certificate of Appropriateness has been issued by the HPB. 2. The HPB will work with the Planning Commission to ensure that heritage resources management issues are taken into account in planning for residential, commercial, and industrial development. 3. Every application for a preliminary plat, rezoning, conditional use permit, or variance from the zoning code that may affect an Edina Heritage Landmark or Landmark District will be reviewed by the HPB, which will advise the Planning Commission whether or not the requested action will have an adverse effect on a Significant Heritage Preservation Resource. 4. When demolition or site destruction cannot be avoided, careful consideration will be given to mitigating the loss by moving the affected Edina Heritage Landmark/Heritage Preservation Resource, Landmark District or Historic Building to another location, recording it prior to demolition, or by salvaging architectural elements or archaeological data for reuse or curation. Page 3 of 6 Effective January 2014 5. In cases involving permits that are not subject to design, a reasonable effort will be made to preserve and protect important historical, architectural, archaeological, and cultural features. Policy 6: Carry out public facilities maintenance and construction projects in such a manner that Significant Heritage Preservation Resources are preserved and protected Actions: 1. The HPB and its staff will work with the city manager, city engineer, community development director, and others to ensure that Edina Heritage Landmarks/Heritage Preservation Resources/Landmark District or Historic Buildings are taken into account in project planning. 2. The HPB and its staff will help project planners identify the historical, cultural, aesthetic, and visual relationships between heritage landmarks and their surroundings. Policy 7: Encourage voluntary compliance with historic preservation treatment standards Actions: 1. The City will cooperate with property owners in developing plans for their properties, advise them about approaches used in similar preservation projects, and provide technical assistance in historic property rehabilitation and restoration treatments. 2. The HPB and City staff will review voluntary requests for design review of work that would not ordinarily be subject to the heritage preservation ordinance and issue Certificates of Appropriateness for projects that meet preservation treatment standards. 3. The City will consider development of financial incentives for the preservation, rehabilitation, and adaptive use of heritage resources, such as tax incentives, grants, loans, easements, and subsidies. Policy 8: Preserve Edina Heritage Landmarks/Heritage Preservation Resources, Landmark Districts or Historic Buildings on City property and rights of way Actions: 1. The City will develop strategies and establish priorities for the restoration and rehabilitation of City-owned heritage resources. Policy 9: Provide public education regarding heritage preservation Actions: 1. The City will provide the public with information on heritage preservation activities in the city. 2. The HPB will design and maintain a high-quality heritage preservation page on the City's website. 3. The City will develop facilities and programs that interpret heritage resources for the public. 4. The HPB will make a special effort to reach out to and involve the Edina Historical Society, neighborhood groups, and other community organizations with particular interests in historic properties or community development. Page 4 of 6 Effective January 2014 Policy 10: Participate in the federal-state-local government heritage preservation partnership Actions: 1. The City will continue to participate in the CLG program. 2. The City will cooperate with neighboring cities and other communities in developing their preservation programs. Policy 11: Be prepared to respond to disasters involving heritage resources Actions: 1. Define the City role and responsibilities in disaster preparedness, response, and recovery relative to historic preservation. 2. Perform a risk assessment to identify the types of disasters likely to occur and evaluate the vulnerability of specific heritage resources to disasters. 3. Provide members of the City disaster management team with information on heritage resources and preservation priorities. 4. Encourage owners of historic properties to develop disaster preparedness plans. 5. Establish a disaster response team of experienced preservationists, architects, historians, and planners. Policy 12: Determination of Eligibility as Significant Heritage Preservation Resources (adopted 1/14/2014) Actions: 1. The HPB may issue a Determination of Eligibility that a property meets the Edina Heritage Landmark criteria for historical significance and integrity, is worthy of preservation, and is eligible for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark (Significant Heritage Preservation Resource). 2. The City will avoid any adverse effects to a Significant Heritage Preservation Resource arising from public works and other types of development projects sponsored, funded, or assisted by the City. 3. The City will consider the effects of City projects, including projects that involve City funding, on a property that has been determined to be a Significant Heritage Preservation Resource. City officials, departments, boards and commissions will afford the HPB and its staff a reasonable opportunity to review and comment on such projects. 4. If a Significant Heritage Preservation Resource must be damaged or destroyed as a result of any undertaking by the City, the HPB shall be authorized to make a reasonable effort to recover important historical, architectural, or archaeological data associated with the property. Page 5 of 6 Effective January 2014 Policy 13: Change in Certificate of Appropriateness(COA): DRAFT City Code The Edina City Code provides, among other things, that: a. The HPB shall advise the city on all matters relating to heritage resource preservation; b. The HPB shall review applications for city permits in relation to city heritage preservation landmarks; c. The HPB will make recommendations to the city planner with respect to issuance of a COA. Certificate of Appropriateness The COA is an official document of the city required before any permit can be issued for demolition or new construction in relation to a city heritage landmark. The COA affirms that, in the opinion of the HPB,the proposed activity is consistent with heritage preservation standards and will not have a negative impact on any significant heritage resource. Any change in the scope of the work after a COA is issued requires a new COA. Actions 1. Except in circumstances involving threats to public health or safety, no partial or complete demolition of any home in the Edina Country Club District built between 1924 and 1944 shall proceed except as specifically authorized in a COA. 2. In those circumstances involving threats to public health or safety where partial or complete demolition of any such home is mandated by the city's chief building official, the HPB staff liaison/planner shall immediately notify the HPB and surrounding property owners. 3. Except in circumstances involving threats to public health or safety, any change in work scope/demolition from that specifically authorized in a COA shall require submittal of an application for a new COA with due notice to surrounding neighbors. 4. Neither the HPB staff liaison/planner nor the preservation planning consultant for the city is authorized to deviate from this policy. Page 6 of 6 Policy 13: Change in Certificate of Appropriateness (COA): City Code The Edina CityCode provides, amongother things, that: actera tid )1 -9 -4 a. The HPB shall advise the city on all matters relating to heritage resource preservation; b. The HPB shall review applications for city permits in relation to city heritage preservation landmarks; c. The HPB will make recommendations to the city planner with respect to issuance of a COA. Certificate of Appropriateness The COA is an official document of the city required before any permit can be issued for demolition or new construction in relation to a city heritage landmark. The COA affirms that, in the opinion of the HPB, the proposed activity is consistent with heritage preservation standards and will not have a negative impact on any significant heritage resource. Any change in the scope of the work after a COA is issued requires a new COA. Actions 1. Except in extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public health or safety, no partial or complete demolition of any home in the Edina Country Club District built between 1924 and 1944 shall proceed except as specifically authorized in a COA. 2. In those extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public health or safety where partial or complete demolition of any such home is mandated by the city, the HPB staff liaison/planner shall immediately notify the HPB and surrounding neighbors. 3. Except in extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public health or safety, any change in work scope/demolition from that specifically authorized in a COA shall require submittal of an application for a new COA with due notice to surrounding neighbors. 4. Neither the HPB staff liaison/planner nor the preservation planning consultant for the city is authorized to deviate from this policy. US.55342774.01 Fird---p #A-at Polic 13: Count Club Herita a Landmark District CClub Heritage Landmark a. The Country Club is designated and zoned as the Country icblee plan of treatment,homes District("Landmark District"). Pursuant to the app he Landmark District which were built from 1924 to 1944 are heritage resources within t ("Heritage Resources"). preservation licable plan of treatment provides, among other things,that: b. Th e a pp reservation of the existing i. The primary purpose of the Landmark District is the p historic house facades and streetscapes. ii. The ct is use preferred treatment for Heritage Resources in possible a compatible the Landmark District is rehabilitation defined as the act or process of makingossibreserving those for a property through repair, alteration, and additions while p r values. portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, oorarch to toral features One of the stated standards for rehabilitation is that hi will be repaired rather than replaced. Certificate of A ro riateness of any es that no COA will be approved for demolition, in whole or in p The city mandates Heritage Resources unless the applicant can show: a. The property is not a heritage preservation resource; or b. The property no longer contributes to the historical torical signifcance of f thdLaange Landmark District because its historicorintegrity been ncompromised by deterioration, inappropriat dditon alteration ro riateness (COA)be issued before any principal dwelling ey city The permitd istissuedonally formdemoolit on and new construthat a certificate of ction of any p include the phyridel gar issued dem garage within the Landmark District. The city efunderdcir�lition urristanoces where: g g a city permit alteration of a building that requires are removed; or a. 50% or more of the surface of all exterior walls in the aggregateitch or b. 50% or more of the principal roof structure is removed changing its shape,P height. Actions to public which nary 1. In the absence of extin an iord circumstances involving cin threatsiofficial,safety,no demolition, circumstancesish by result in an Heritage Resoer to lurce shall proceed. in whole or in part, of any 1 US.55342774.03 Joyce Repya From: Ryan Weber<ryanjweb@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 12:35 AM To: Joyce Repya Subject: HPB blog When I got home tonight I decided to get going on the blog post, since the topic was fresh in my mind. I'm a night owl, so I'm usually up late anyway. As I was writing I remembered your comment about the City not responding directly to individuals like the Great Neighborhood Homes blog. As I thought about that, I questioned whether or not they should be referenced in our meeting minutes by name...even though I stated that one of the agenda items was to specifically discuss the Board's response to their blog. I wonder if it would be more proper, and still accurate, to not mention the company by name in the minutes, but just to reference them more generally somehow...like "responding to the discovery of marketing materials promoting complete demolition/new construction in the Country Club District." or something to that effect, but without naming them specifically. Is that even allowable since the meeting minutes are a public record? Or do you think it's OK that we mention them due to their involvement in the Arden demolition?To those aware of the situation, it's probably pretty clear who we are talking about anyway. What do you think? I won't be mentioning them or their blog post in my article. Ryan Weber Joyce Repya From: Robert C Vogel <rcvogel@pathfindercrm.com> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 11:04 AM To: Joyce Repya Subject: HPB special meeting Joyce: I will not be able to attend the special board meeting. If the board was to adopt some version of the proposed policy statement#13 that was discussed at the last regular meeting I am not sure how this would alter any of our procedures, beyond HPB and property owner notification. The HPB should not attempt to respond to anything they've read in the 0 media. They should also resist the temptation to second-guess the building official ,7- 11 Robert Robert C.Vogel Principal/Senior Historian Pathfinder CRM, LLC 319 South Division Avenue P.O. Box 503 Spring Grove, Minnesota 55974 507.498.3810 800.206.8704 (toll free) www.pathfindercrm.com 1 Joyce Repya From: Joseph Druckman <jmdruckman@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 11:26 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: Re: Special HPB Meeting: Dec. 16th or 17th I would love to attend a meeting on Wednesday, but we have finals at the high school and college applications are coming due soon, so I think I've just got too much on my plate to attend. I would have gotten back to you sooner as well, but we had an orchestra concert tonight. Busy week! For what it's worth, here are my two cents on the issue of Policy 13: I would like to echo what other members have said about rushing this policy. I don't think there is any "imminent danger" of GNH tearing a home in country club any time soon(unless, of course, they have another project there that I don't know about). We should take our time to word this policy carefully and meet with the building inspector; we don't want to leave any loopholes like the kind that caused this disaster in the first place. I also forgot to mention it at the last meeting, but in reading the draft of policy 13, I found the term "surrounding neighbors" a little vague. In the original "change in process" that Ms. Repya proposed, notification would only be sent to people on the COA mailing list in case of a demolition. I may have forgotten my terms; are the people on the COA mailing list by choice, or is it necessary for any nearby homes? If it's by choice, then some neighbors might not hear about the demolition or get to participate in any discussions with the HPB if the notification only goes to people on the mailing list. And if it goes to any surrounding neighbors,then how far does it go? 1 house radius? Two house radius?Across the street? Maybe it's not that important, but I think being as specific as possible will help to avoid problems in the future. On all other points I tend to agree with what other board members have already said, particularly with regard to Mr. Sussman and Ms. Christiaansen's comments. I hope we can make this policy as effective as possible to prevent anything like Arden from happening again, and particularly to stop people like GNH from taking advantage of our process. I'm not sure if you need to, but I suppose you could share these comments with the rest of the members. Joe Druckman On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Joyce Repya<JRepya@edinamn.gov> wrote: Hi All—As you can see in the email below, the HPB chair, Ryan Weber has called for a special meeting of the HPB to finalize adoption of Policy 13 regarding the procedures for addressing changes to an issued Certificate of Appropriateness. I have reserved the Mayor's Conference Room for both Tuesday, December 16th and Wednesday, December 17t`'starting at 6:00 p.m. in the event you would like to convene prior to the typical 7:00 p.m. Please respond to me with your date and time preference (6:00 or 7:00). Be advised that a quorum is required to transact business, however if you are unable to attend either date, because this is a "Special Meeting" it will not count against you for the attendance requirements. Joyce Repya, Senior Planner ----71 952-826-0462!Fax 952-826-0389 1 I' Joyce Repya From: O'Brien, Timothy M. <Timothy.O'Brien©FaegreBD.com> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 8:14 AM Joyce Repya y Subject: Special Meeting Joyce. Please communicate my request to the Chair and to the members of the HPB that the Board promptly schedule and convene a Special Meeting in accordance with the HPB bylaws to address the final adoption of proposed Policy# 13. I believe that it is imperative to bring this matter to a head on an immediate basis in order to preserve the city's landmark heritage resources especially in view of the December 10, 2014 posting by GNH entitled Can I Build a New Home in the Edina Country Club wherein the author purports to answer that question in the affirmative and states: This was an issue of occupant and public safety so we proceeded with the replacement of the foundation.We were already replacing most of the original home so it made sense just to replace the deteriorated front wall of the house to allow for the new foundation. In view of this position which, in my estimation, is diametrically opposed to one of the core functions of the HPB, I would intend to offer language amending the proposed policy to further articulate the position of the HPB that demolition is completely outside the norm of rehabilitation and to otherwise place developers, contractors, applicants and the public on notice that the HPB will strictly adhere to the documents under which it operates. Presumably other members would offer additional and likely better language than I am able to craft in that regard. As you know the Chair or a majority of the members can call for a Special Meeting and your notice to them should convey that information.This is a matter of exigency from my point of view and I would anticipate your immediate compliance. Regards.Tim 1 Joyce Repya From: Ryan Weber<ryanjweb@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 5:02 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: RE: Special HPB Meeting: Dec. 16th or 17th Joyce, Please forward this message to the other HPB members: I feel like this particular case is significant and needs special attention. I think this case has exposed a weakness and potential loophole in the HPB policies and Plan of Treatment that needs extra consideration and discussion. I believe the HPB's integrity has been questioned by people on both sides of this case. Although I agree that the best solutions are not reached in haste...I have a hard time believing that meeting once per month shows any urgency at all. I guess I decided to call this meeting also as a response to our board members who live in the Country Club District feeling like urgency is needed. Regardless of our individual perspectives,they are on the front lines, so to speak. It is their neighborhood. There are two topics of discussion I think we should address. The first being policy 13 procedures of notification should unforeseen conditions change the scope of a COA. Secondly, does the City or HPB have a response to potentially false allegations presented in the Blog by GNH as to the intent of our Heritage Preservation policies? It's unfortunate that these events have occurred during the busy holiday time. I know everyone's time is valuable. I'm sorry if calling this special meeting seems like a rash decision. I hope, as a board collectively, we won't be making any decisions without careful consideration. If communication is the means to a thoughtful decision, I hope that the additional time spent communicating with each other will be worthwhile. Best Regards, Ryan Weber Joyce Repya From: Jennifer Christiaansen <jennifer.christiaansen@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 2:35 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: Re: Special HPB Meeting: Dec. 16th or 17th As Architect's (and even for taking my registration exams and not fully licensed) we are trained to be prudent when it comes to issues that involve health and human safety. Much of what happened on Arden was out of our control for good reason, it could have caused injury despite what many believe and unfortunately GNH motives are questionable and this complicates things. With Policy 13 we are merely trying to change the way issues like this will be communicated to the HPB which to me is not reason for haste. It should happen but in a timely fashion. You can forward my original email and bits of this follow up if you would like. On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Joyce Repya<JRepya!,edinamn.gov> wrote: I think you raised some good points, such as 1.This issue is an anomaly and one the HPB has never dealt with before and probably won't deal with in the near future (there's time); 1.The building inspector's input will be helpful, and he is willing to attend a meeting. As you can tell from Peter's email, he to cautions rushing the policy. I always appreciate your voice of reason when issues start spinning!—Joyce Joyce Repya, Senior Planner 952-826-0462 I Fax 952-826-0389 xi 4801 W.50th St.I Edina,MN 55424 JRepya@EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov/Planning ...For Living,Learning,Raising Families&Doing Business From: Jennifer Christiaansen [mailto:iennifer.christiaansen@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 2:27 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: Re: Special HPB Meeting: Dec. 16th or 17th OK. Just hope I don't stop momentum. I do think it's very important. On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Jennifer Christiaansen<jennifer.christiaansen(&,,gmail.com> wrote: 1 r L Joyce. I cannot not attend either of those days next week. I also am not so sure we need to rush the adoption of Policy 13. The incident on Arden was an anomaly and unlikely to happen again soon, despite the GNH quote. I would prefer to see us take time to do this correctly for the long run. Good policy will come from throughout and thoughtful conversation, not hasty actions. In addition, I would personally prefer to have the Building Inspector speak with the board prior to the final drafting of the language, it will most likely encourage new ways of thinking of the language for the Policy. Jennifer On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Joyce Repya<JRepya@edinamn.gov> wrote: Hi All—As you can see in the email below, the HPB chair, Ryan Weber has called for a special meeting of the HPB to finalize adoption of Policy 13 regarding the procedures for addressing changes to an issued Certificate of Appropriateness. I have reserved the Mayor's Conference Room for both Tuesday, December 16th and Wednesday, December 17th starting at 6:00 p.m. in the event you would like to convene prior to the typical 7:00 p.m. Please respond to me with your date and time preference (6:00 or 7:00). Be advised that a quorum is required to transact business, however if you are unable to attend either date, because this is a "Special Meeting" it will not count against you for the attendance requirements. Joyce Repya, Senior Planner 952-826-0462 I Fax 952-826-0389 �mm g '4801 W.50th St.I Edina,MN 55424 JRepyaO.EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov/Planning ...For Living,Learning,Raising Families&Doing Business From: Ryan Weber [mailto:ryanjweb@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 9:54 AM To: Joyce Repya; Timothy.O'Brien@FaegreBD.com Subject: RE: Special Meeting 2 Next Tuesday is prefered for me, but if better for other members Wednesday could also work. Per the rules of the bylaws, we either need a majority vote by the board, or the Chair needs to call the special meeting. For the sake of simplicity, I will call this meeting, since I believe that the cause is well warranted and I think all the board members would agree that we need to respond strongly against any company that would actually promote building new homes in the Country Club District. Here's the link to the Great Neighborhood Homes blog. http://greatneighborhoodhomesblog.com/edina-country-club-new-custom-home/ I think it's important to share this with the other board members as well. Ryan Weber From: JRepya@EdinaMN.gov To: ryanjweb@hotmail.com CC: Timothy.O'Brien@FaegreBD.com Subject: FW: Special Meeting Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 14:46:40+0000 Hi Ryan — As you can see below, Tim has requested a special meeting of the HPB to address the draft Policy#13 in lieu of Great Neighborhood Homes posting on their website a section entitled "Can I build a new home in the Edina Country Club District?". I am available next Tuesday, Dec. 16th , Wednesday, Dec. 17th , or Thursday, Dec 18th evenings (rooms are available for all those dates). We need at least a 3 day notice. With your authorization, I will send out an email to get a consensus for a best date. Note that inability to attend this meeting will not count against one's attendance record, however a quorum is required to take action on a motion. Thanks! 3 Joyce Repya, Senior Planner 952-826-0462 I Fax 952-826-0389 4801 W.50th St.I Edina,MN 55424 JRepya@EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.clov/Planning ...For Living,Learning,Raising Families&Doing Business From: O'Brien, Timothy M. [mailto:Timothy.O'Brien©FaegreBD.com] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 8:14 AM To: Joyce Repya Subject Special Meeting Joyce. Please communicate my request to the Chair and to the members of the HPB that the Board promptly schedule and convene a Special Meeting in accordance with the HPB bylaws to address the final adoption of proposed Policy# 13. I believe that it is imperative to bring this matter to a head on an immediate basis in order to preserve the city's landmark heritage resources especially in view of the December 10, 2014 posting by GNH entitled Can I Build a New Home in the Edina Country Club wherein the author purports to answer that question in the affirmative and states: This was an issue of occupant and public safety so we proceeded with the replacement of the foundation. We were already replacing most of the original home so it made sense just to replace the deteriorated front wall of the house to allow for the new foundation. In view of this position which, in my estimation, is diametrically opposed to one of the core functions of the HPB, I would intend to offer language amending the proposed policy to further articulate the position of the HPB that demolition is completely outside the norm of rehabilitation and to otherwise place developers, contractors, applicants and the public on notice that the HPB will strictly adhere to the documents under which it operates. Presumably other members would offer additional and likely better language than I am able to craft in that regard. As you know the Chair or a majority of the members can call for a Special Meeting and your notice to them should convey that information. This is a matter of exigency from my point of view and I would anticipate your immediate compliance. Regards. Tim 4 Joyce Repya From: Jennifer Christiaansen <jennifer.christiaansen@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 2:19 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: Re: Special HPB Meeting: Dec. 16th or 17th Joyce. I cannot not attend either of those days next week. I also am not so sure we need to rush the adoption of Policy 13. The incident on Arden was an anomaly and unlikely to happen again soon, despite the GNH quote. I would prefer to see us take time to do this correctly for the long run. Good policy will come from throughout and thoughtful conversation, not hasty actions. In addition, I would personally prefer to have the Building Inspector speak with the board prior to the final drafting of the language, it will most likely encourage new ways of thinking of the language for the Policy. Jennifer On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Joyce Repya<JRepya@edinamn.gov> wrote: Hi All—As you can see in the email below, the HPB chair, Ryan Weber has called for a special meeting of the HPB to finalize adoption of Policy 13 regarding the procedures for addressing changes to an issued Certificate of Appropriateness. I have reserved the Mayor's Conference Room for both Tuesday, December 16t"and Wednesday, December 17th starting at 6:00 p.m. in the event you would like to convene prior to the typical 7:00 p.m. Please respond to me with your date and time preference (6:oo or 7:00). Be advised that a quorum is required to transact business, however if you are unable to attend either date, because this is a "Special Meeting" it will not count against you for the attendance requirements. Joyce Repya, Senior Planner 952-826-0462(Fax 952-826-0389 /16 ._ '4801 W.50th St.i Edina,MN 55424 JRepya@EdinaMN.gov i www.EdinaMN.gov/Planninq ...For Living,Learning, Raising Families&Doing Business From: Ryan Weber [mailto:rvanjweb@ hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 9:54 AM To: Joyce Repya; Timothy.O'Brien@FaegreBD.com Subject: RE: Special Meeting 1 Joyce Repya From: peter@sussman-mn.com Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 1:11 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: Re: Special HPB Meeting: Dec. 16th or 17th Joyce, I'd be available to attend a special HPB meeting next Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday evenings. If next Wednesday it would be difficult for me to arrive before 6:30 so I certainly would prefer not starting earlier than that. The meeting has already been called by the Chair so it's too late for me to question the urgency. GNH has made several of these statements in the past and I question whether they can be constrained from doing so in the future. It would be helpful if you could clarify a few related points either prior to or by the time of the meeting: 1. Does the HPB or the City have authority to restrain GNH from misrepresenting CCD requirements and/or mischaracterizing their prior and current projects, including on their website? 2. The merit of December 10 blog wording incuding: "The plan of treatment was never meant to ban new construction in the District." "As you can see, many people mistakenly believe that the plan of treatment prohibits rebuilding a home. This is incorrect. The city council explicily stated when passing the plan of treatment that they wanted a pathway for homeowners to rebuild their homes if they had suffered significant deterioration." "...no COA will be approved for the demolition, in whole or in part, ...unless the applicant can show that the subject property ... no longer contributes to the historical significance of the district because its historic integrity has been compromised by deterioration, damage....". I hope that we can craft the policy on short notice to best define and limit replacement through both the COA process and due to uncovered conditions once construction commences. Please feel free to convey my comments. Peter On 2014-12-12 10:03, Joyce Repya wrote: Hi All—As you can see in the email below, the HPB chair, Ryan Weber has called for a special meeting of the HPB to finalize adoption of Policy 13 regarding the procedures for addressing changes to an issued Certificate of Appropriateness. Joyce Repya From: Joyce Mellom <joyce.mellom@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:10 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: RE: Heritage Preservation Board -4505 Arden Joyce: For the record, and between us,Joe's wife threw him out 4 years ago when he stood in the yard and called her the c*** word. There are witnesses to this. Then they divorced and his wife moved out. In the Pronley tradition,Joe Lichtenberger has since rented the property. He had the house listed for seven figures this fall and is bitter he had no offers. Joe is not a neighbor in the strict sense of the word and he should make this clear. We don't need Joe to recount the "facts" for us, as he is not privy to the meetings, etc. and his"opinion" is therefore not relevant. From:Joyce Repya [mailto:JRer va@EdinaMN.gov] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 2:45 PM Cc:Joe Lichtenberger(Joe LichtenbergerPcargill.com) Subject: FW: Heritage Preservation Board -4505 Arden HiAll— You may be aware that an article ran in today's Star Tribune's Westextra section about the 4505 Arden Avenue house. You will see in the email below that Joe Lichtenberger, a neighbor who was quoted in the article has asked that I send you a follow up to clarify his comments. Mr. Lichtenberger has provided the attached documents for your information. The article is provided in the hyperlink below. http://m.startribune.com/local/west/285264241.html?section ;- Joyce Repya, Senior Planner '' 952-826-0462 I Fax 952-826-0389 4801 W.50th St.i Edina,MN 55424 JRepya@EdinaMN.gov i www.EdinaMN.gov/Planning ...For Living,Learning,Raising Families&Doing Business From: Joe Lichtenberger [mailto:Joe Lichtenberger©cargill.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 8:52 AM To: Joyce Repya Subject: Heritage Preservation Board - 4505 Arden Hello Joyce, Please find two attachments that I would like sent to the HPB and members of the City Council. Please put me on copy when it is sent. The first attachment is a letter I am going to send to my neighbors regarding the Star Tribune article. It is a follow up to comments that were attributed to me in the article, which I believe the author took out of context. 1 Joyce Repya From: Scott H. Neal Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:20 PM To: 'James Hovland'; Joyce Repya Subject: RE: Loss of credibility Jim— With respect, I don't think we need to do anything in response to this comment. The process used to make the decision about taking the house down is defensible on its face. The appropriate expert opinions were sought and accommodated. Yes, if money were no object, the foundation of that house probably could have been saved. But, that's not our standard to for this decision. Scott Scott H. Neal, City Manager 952-826-0401 I Fax 952-826-0390 sneal(a�EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living,Learning,Raising Farnilies&Doing Business Read my blog or follow me on Twitter. From: James Hovland [mailto:jhovland(ahovlandrasmus.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 1:20 PM To: Scott H. Neal; Joyce Repya Subject: FW: Loss of credibility How do you want me to handle this matter? James B. Hovland, Esquire HOVLAND & RASMUS, PLLC Southdale Office Centre 6800 France Avenue S.,Suite 190 Edina, MN 55435 ]hovland@hovlandrasmus.com Phone: (612) 874-8550 Direct: (612) 874-8551 Fax: (612)874-9362 Cell: (612) 961-6192 From: James Hovland [mailto:JHovland(&EdinaMN.gov] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 10:27 AM Subject: FW: Loss of credibility Lynette Biunno, Receptionist ,' 952-927-8861 I Fax 952-826-0389 IbiunnogD_EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...I^orliving,Learning,Raising Families& Doing Business 1 Joyce Repya From: Jennifer Christiaansen <jennifer.christiaansen@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:02 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: Re: FW: Heritage Preservation Board -4505 Arden Joyce, I cannot open the second attachment (the email -- the pdf letter is fine). Can you change the email to a PDF or word format and resend? I was really dissapointed at Joyce M's comments in the article. Honestly she keeps pressing this issue so hard without being open to the explanation that although the house may be standing as is, any modifications may not have been supported by the home's current structural foundation. We deal with stuff like this all the time in the profession and there is rarely a good solution. It is frustrating and I am sure you feel the same. I like Joyce as a person, I like her passion and respect her knowledge but she is a loose cannon on this and saying things like : "This is a test case for the Heritage Preservation Board, and we seem to have failed the test." I feel is really inappropriate and not right for a member of the board to go on record saying this. It was not us that failed, it was the system and frankly this type of thing is bound to happen and instead of banging our head against a brick wall we need to accept it gracefully and make amends to prevent it (i.e. Tim's Policy 13). Please keep this between us. Frustrated and disappointed, Jennifer On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Joyce Repya<JRepya@edinamn.gov> wrote: HiAll— You may be aware that an article ran in today's Star Tribune's Westextra section about the 4505 Arden Avenue house. You will see in the email below that Joe Lichtenberger, a neighbor who was quoted in the article has asked that I send you a follow up to clarify his comments. Mr. Lichtenberger has provided the attached documents for your information. The article is provided in the hyperlink below. http://m.startribune.com/local/west/285264241.html?section Joyce Repya, Senior Planner 952-826-0462 I Fax 952-826-0389 t, 4801 W.50th St.I Edina,MN 55424 JRepvaCu)_EdinaMN.gov(www.EdinaMN.gov/Planning 1 Joyce Repya From: Joel Stegner<joel.r.stegner@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:29 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: Re: Surprise teardown of historic Edina house"a learning experience"for city I Star Tribune Live and learn. It seems that this issue should be considered first and clearly resolved in three possible ways, safe as is, safe with modifications or not safe even with modifications. Then the issue become how much can the HPB reasonably expect the homeowner, perhaps as a percent of total appraised value with the level of historical significance considered. If for example repairing the foundation cost 100% of the appraised values, that would be unreasonable, but if it were 10%that would be reasonable. If a percentage threshold could be identified for unreasonably, the HPB could authorize teardown, or deny them up front. Home owners could choose to spend above the threshold if they valued the property, and could argue for teardown if they were below the threshold, but it would eliminate surprises. In the cases where the % is close to the threshold, neighbors could be alerted, and able to question cost projects that are unnecessarily high in their opinion. Just a thought- maybe helpful? Thanks, Joel On December 10, 2014, at 8:25 AM, Joyce Repya <JRepya(a@edinamn.gov>wrote: Right on,Joel. The new structural engineer's report was much more extensive than the 2010 report the chief building official evaluated the report,visited the site, and agreed with the SE's evaluation that the foundation/footings needed to be replaced. This was a life/safety issue which trumps heritage preservation. A partial demo of each elevation was part of the plan....the total demo came as a surprise to the neighbors& HPB. The board is drafting a notification policy for the future that will insure people are informed prior to the change in the treatment/process. In the end,the plan that was approved is what is being built. ____ Joyce Repya, Senior Planner 952-826-0462Fax 952-826-0389 4801 W.50th St.I Edina,MN 55424 JRepyaEdinaMN.qov I www.EdinaMN.gov/Planning ...For Living, Learning,Raising Families& Doing Business From: ioel.r.stedner(agmail.com [mailto:joel.r.stegnergmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 9:14 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: Surprise teardown of historic Edina house "a learning experience"for city I Star Tribune Seems like the structural issues might have gone back to HPB before demolition permit given? Maybe the process needs to be rewritten a bit? Joel http://m.startribune.com/local/west/285264241.html?section 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF POSTING NOTICE I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting (-36 for the City of Edina, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have on this date posted copies of the attached Meeting Notice, at each of the official City bulletin boards, located at conspicuous places within the City as follows: 1) City Hall, 4801 West 50th Street 2) Municipal Liquor Store, 50th and France Business Area 3) Centennial Lakes Park Centrum, 7499 France Avenue South Date notice was posted 11-1114 1 Time notice was posted: D Signed fficer Posting Notice Signed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, this f (p day of f�C- 7- , 20/L/. ea:T:1 20%`/. 1 AMY T.BACHLER NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA • My Commission Expires January 31,2011 Revised: Jun- "va.<...w.aW�M�^,.sat •.�...,•v.yAp,y.s'i+Y,Y.f«rr+.•.�: ..... f r i3 ? L: " Or:: .-AtM pt.Jt YFt7n1 i IV a•iefR..t/V�rSwlb,i'4hs+.Mia/4�.....n:.:l.p�.',....� .... • (--1$ A'�j'� •INCORPOPA4'9• 1888 HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE DATE: WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2014 TIME: 7:00 P.M. PLACE: EDINA CITY HALL 4801 W. 50TH STREET MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM SUBJECT; FINALTZE ADOPTION OF POLICY #13 REGARDING PROCEDURES FOR ADDRESSING CHANGES TO AN ISSUED CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SENIOR PLANNER, JOYCE REPYA 952-826-0462